Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#5

[Chris_Halkides]

That would never prove that they took drugs on the night of the murder.

If the test for a particular set of drugs came up negative, then it would show that the did not take those drugs at all. If the test came up positive, then it would probably not show what day, specifically.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Thanks - just trying to cover all the literature. So when Fisher says that Mignini "got away with lying to the court", and that the pictures "clearly show blood droplets on her bare breasts" [indicating the bra was off before she died] he is wrong or lying?

He is correct that the blood droplets are there.

 

[aa9511]

In PSs testimony she talks about the hairlike fibers found on Meredith and handfuls of Meredith's hair on the floor, so I would say the hair in her hand was most likely her own.
You can read the testimony for yourself if you'd like, I won't quote it here because its graphic just reading it. She talks about it in the largest paragraph towards the bottom.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Patrizia_Stefanoni's_Testimony_(English)

Ok, let me read that, but just from what I saw that looks clearly like a blonde hair or a yellow hair from something, and Meredith's hair was very dark. The picture clearly shows the color. Let me read and then I'll comment more.

 

[otto]

Thanks - just trying to cover all the literature. So when Fisher says that Mignini "got away with lying to the court", and that the pictures "clearly show blood droplets on her bare breasts" [indicating the bra was off before she died] he is wrong or lying?

I have no idea where someone interested in the case gets ideas. Those involved in the investigation would know the facts of the case. Does the Fisher person provide references suggesting that the source is the coroner or investigators? Is the source a photo? Is it an original photo or a copy?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Ok , so in AKs book, does she publish the story she wrote about someone getting their throat slashed?

Amanda wrote a story about a younger brother who date rapes a young woman and when challenged by his older brother, punches him. The older brother throws him out but realizes that he may have to let him return IIRC. Follain mangled the story in his description of it in one of his articles, changing the younger brother's gender. I have never heard of a story such as the one you are suggesting.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

I have not. I wanted to get more familiar with the case before I read it so I can catch all her lies.

Her book was helpful in finding one or two more falsehoods told by the police/prosecution, of which I was not previously aware. It all makes one wonder at the state of the sub judice laws in Italy.

 

[minazoe]

Well she did lie and send an innocent man to jail, to her own benefit.

 

[whoanellie]

Oh, the trade secret stuff that Vogt wrote about, and the Innocence Project losing funding, etc. Part of the tit-for-tat sparring on both sides. I'm not paying it much mind...

Vogt filed a FOIA request which was denied by University lawyers on multiple legal grounds. As far as I can tell she was on a fishing expedition and has not made any substantive allegations against Hampikian.
Many good scientists doing good work have lost funding in the USA recently due to the sequester etc. There is no reason to believe Hampikian's situation is any different.
On the other hand, two of Amanda's prosecutors are the subjects of legal investigations. Some of the police who investigated the crime are the subject of a third investigation. Those 3 investigations are being conducted by their fellow Italian authorities.
Sorry, I don't see the comparison.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

I don't believe this has to be the case. She would have had to have been scratched or something to where her skin cells would have fallen. If someone is just pushing onto something, how would their DNA fall on it?? It makes more sense that there would be DNA there if while she was holding her, she was scratched so that skin cells fell, or cut to where her blood would have dripped there. I don't think it's true that if you just hold someone, your DNA would necessarily have to be on that person.

One cannot say that DNA will be transferred with absolute certainty. However, fingerprints have multiple sources of DNA, perhaps the principal one being cell-free nucleic acid, as Suzanna Ryan pointed out in an interesting article. DNA can be transferred to a plastic tube just by holding it.

In addition, there have been a few academic studies of simulated strangulation (which, one hopes, were less violent than the real thing), and DNA was transferred, in some but not every case. Link here. It has been some time since I read about this subject; therefore, my memory may be a little rusty. Guy Nathan Rutty has been perhaps the most active worker in this area.

 

[aa9511]

In PSs testimony she talks about the hairlike fibers found on Meredith and handfuls of Meredith's hair on the floor, so I would say the hair in her hand was most likely her own.
You can read the testimony for yourself if you'd like, I won't quote it here because its graphic just reading it. She talks about it in the largest paragraph towards the bottom.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Patrizia_Stefanoni's_Testimony_(English)

It's saying "no text available" on that page?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Well she did lie and send an innocent man to jail, to her own benefit.

Not exactly to her own benefit. She was taken into custody and then remained there for almost four years. This case reminds me a little bit of the false confession made by Frank Esposito in an arson case some years ago. Esposito falsely confessed to starting a fire accidentally, but he was then charged with arson.

Amanda recanted her false accusation in her second memoriale (7 November) and she reiterated that she spent the night at Sollecito's in her letter to her lawyers on 9 November. BTW, Christopher Ochoa (among others) gave a false confession and a false accusation; therefore, I don't try to draw a sharp line between one and the other.

 

[aa9511]

Her book was helpful in finding one or two more falsehoods told by the police/prosecution, of which I was not previously aware. It all makes one wonder at the state of the sub judice laws in Italy.

One or two more falsehoods told by the police/prosecution? Hmmm. And you do realize that's coming from Amanda, right? Her book, I presume she's actually the one who the content came from.

 

[Amber29]

It's saying "no text available" on that page?

Weird I have it pulled up on my iPad. I'm sorry

 

[Yellow]

DNA was turned on it's head and it was demonstrated that DNA has no evidentiary value. That seems to be what is happening in this case too.

I understood that one DNA argument was used: repeated secondary transfer. The prosecution should have had an expert to demonstrate that secondary transfer is unlikely, if not impossible ... especially multiple incidents in one location.

I think in that case the prosecution was so shell shocked that a jury would believe such a ridiculous story - that a hypothetical towel touched by the defendant 5 months earlier in a third parties house - would wind up in the murder house and then coincidentally be used by the killer to clean up the crime scene. And the killer would wipe away all his dna but leave the defendants left on the rag. And that explains like 10 instances or more of DNA transfer, not one or two, many cases in multiple parts of the room. And that the victim took a plate from a third parties house that just so happened to have the defendant's blood on it.

Here the facts are much much different. Here, you only need to believe in the possibility that the technicians were messing w material that had RS DNA in it and the examined the bra clasp. Given the dirtiness of the room, the dirty gloves, the fact that over 20 experts said contamination was a possibility and that there were over 50 violations of protocol (including 2 independent experts) - that is a much much different case that a defense lawyer merely raising the possibility in closing argument without any experts backing up his claim of contamination. Or believe in the possibility given over 50 violations of protocols, that gathering of other evidence was also contaminated. Moreover, here there are 2 cases of transfer not multiple, and perhaps just 1 because there is no evidence that was even the murder weapon

 

[otto]

Considering they took pictures with a strand of hair sticking to her hand, to show the hair strand, I find it incomprehensible that the hair was lost before it was processed.

Meredith's hand was under a duvet. A hair on the duvet could easily be transferred to her hand. It is a piece of evidence that would easily be dismissed, so I don't really see it as important.

That is, the defense would claim that Knox sat on Meredith's bed, her hair fell out and it was transferred to Meredith's hand.

 

[aa9511]

Not exactly to her own benefit. She was taken into custody and then remained there for almost four years. This case reminds me a little bit of the false confession made by Frank Esposito in an arson case some years ago. Esposito falsely confessed to starting a fire accidentally, but he was then charged with arson.

Amanda recanted her false accusation in her second memoriale (7 November) and she reiterated that she spent the night at Sollecito's in her letter to her lawyers on 9 November. BTW, Christopher Ochoa (among others) gave a false confession and a false accusation; therefore, I don't try to draw a sharp line between one and the other.

It would have been to her great benefit if Patrick didn't end up having a solid alibi and they had accused Patrick of the murder. Is there something hidden in all of this that I'm missing?

It's called consciousness of guilt. Not a great mystery that a guilty person will try to deflect the attention off of themselves! And Amanda did that by naming an innocent man!

 

[otto]

He is correct that the blood droplets are there.

Blood droplets are where, and could you please share the references?

 

[SMK]

I don't think it looks like she was grabbing it with her hand at all. That would have left clear finger-sized blood swipes, IMO. MOO. Those swipes don't represent (as in look like) fingers or hand at all.

Hmm, so perhaps I had confirmation-bias by reading Hendry! Thanks so much for this, aa9511.

 

[aa9511]

I think in that case the prosecution was so shell shocked that a jury would believe such a ridiculous story - that a hypothetical towel touched by the defendant 5 months earlier in a third parties house - would wind up in the murder house and then coincidentally be used by the killer to clean up the crime scene. And the killer would wipe away all his dna but leave the defendants left on the rag. And that explains like 10 instances or more of DNA transfer, not one or two, many cases in multiple parts of the room. And that the victim took a plate from a third parties house that just so happened to have the defendant's blood on it.

Here the facts are much much different. Here, you only need to believe in the possibility that the technicians were messing w material that had RS DNA in it and the examined the bra clasp. Given the dirtiness of the room, the dirty gloves, the fact that over 20 experts said contamination was a possibility and that there were over 50 violations of protocol (including 2 independent experts) - that is a much much different case that a defense lawyer merely raising the possibility in closing argument without any experts backing up his claim of contamination. Or believe in the possibility given over 50 violations of protocols, that gathering of other evidence was also contaminated. Moreover, here there are 2 cases of transfer not multiple, and perhaps just 1 because there is no evidence that was even the murder weapon

Please explain how Rudy's DNA was accurately gathered and tested, then? His was apparently handled just fine. No contamination, no dirty gloves, no transfer, no sloppy technicians, no careless technicians, no rookie technicians, no lab problems? Just curious.

 

[SMK]

He is correct that the blood droplets are there.

Is there a photo to refer to? It is upsetting for me to read Fisher saying one thing, Mignini asserting a diametrically opposed scenario, each making the other a liar. I have not seen a photo, so don't know who to believe. So if the droplets are there, how could Mignini show the photo in court and argue the opposite?