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

[otto]

Warning: Graphic

Here we see the bra. Clearly it was worn during the attack.

Here, we can see how much she bled on the bra while she was wearing it

How does Fisher go from this evidence to claiming that there was blood on the skin underneath the bra ... or is that a small detail that is necessary to argue that the body was moved at the same time that the murder occurred and that one person committed the crime?

 

[SMK]

Did PM Mignini argue before Massei that the droplets were only on the bra? The trial evidence is one thing, but what is said about the trial evidence (by the PM, by lawyers, or by the judges) is quite another. Micheli, Massei, and Hellmann have all gotten at least one fact wrong, and I hasten to add that I am not accusing any of them of deliberately slanting things. They are judges, not forensic scientists, and they are human beings.

The paragraph you quoted says "after" but not how long after. My understanding is that the bra was removed after she had been stabbed but before she was dead. She was still breathing when she was moved, as shown by the aspirated droplets of blood on the side of wardrobe. Photos of the wardrobe have been released, but I don't have a link.

Her discussion of the duvet is also confusing. Why is smearing, as opposed to soaking, important? Is she saying that the duvet picked up blood directly from Meredith or from the floor? Someone linked to some photos of the duvet a few weeks ago IIRC, and there was definitely blood on the duvet.

Yes, I was the poster who linked to the duvet photos: In that case, Fisher's assertion matched the photo more than did the prosecution's. However, it was stated that it was smear, and not soak (although it certainly looked like soak to me (pinkish and watery around the edges and seeming deeply soaked into the plush material of the duvet; I would think a smear would be thicker and more paint like, or very faint. But I am no expert re blood stains)

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Blood on the wardrobe corresponds to where she was before she was moved, so how can it be said that blood on the wardrobe demonstrates that she was still breathing after she was moved?

It has to do with where her head was found, relative to where the droplets were found (side panel of the wardrobe). My understanding is that her head was close to the side of the wardrobe, but I am not 100% certain. Do you have a link to an appropriate drawing handy? Link here to one photo of the side of the wardrobe.

 

[SMK]

Warning: Graphic

Here we see the bra. Clearly it was worn during the attack.

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t189/zed0101/knoxbra_zps95534d7a.jpg

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t189/zed0101/knoxbra2_zpsf13dbc16.jpg

Here, we can see how much she bled on the bra while she was wearing it

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t189/zed0101/knoxbra3_zpsf34722e0.jpg

How does Fisher go from this evidence to claiming that there was blood on the skin underneath the bra ... or is that a small detail that is necessary to argue that the body was moved at the same time that the murder occurred and that one person committed the crime?

Yes; thanks for these revealing (if quite sad ) pics: the soaking of the strap revealed, it is said, that she lay in one position for quite some time before being placed on her back in the center of the room. Well, Fisher does support the lone wolf theory; although in fairness to him I did some press for him and I fact-checked him most of the time, and he seemed to be on par, and quite a fine writer. But in this instance, perhaps there is confusion. We obviously cannot see photos of the victim, but the reporter did speak of the stenciling effect described by Giuliano Mignini.

 

[otto]

Possibly you are thinking of her first memoriale (6 November), but she sounds muddled to me. The key passage of her second memoriale is in the trial transcripts and in Follain's book. It absolutely does not affirm her accusation of Lumumba; it withdraws it. If you want to read it, I suggest obtaining her book from the library. The issue of whether or not she lied or was coerced when she named Lumumba (although an interesting discussion in its own right) is not germane to the point at hand, namely that she withdrew the accusation within about 36 hours. Her letter to her lawyers is available, thanks to Andrea Vogt.

Knox introduced Mr Lumumba's name to the conversation, so in what way was she coerced? No one suggested the name to her, she produced his name and accused him of murder all by herself.

I have no interest in reading fiction produced by a known liar about the murder of Meredith Kercher.

Trial Transcripts:

GM: I see. All right. I take note of what you're saying. Now, let's talk about your memorandum from the 7th, still written in total autonomy, without anyone around you. You wrote: "I didn't lie when I said that I thought the murderer was Patrick. At that moment I was very stressed and I really did think that it was Patrick." Then you add "But now I know that I can't know who the murderer is, because I remember that I didn't go home." Can you explain these concept to me?

AK: Yes, because I was convinced that I somehow could have forgotten. So in that moment, I--

GM: So what you had said might have actually been true?

AK: Yes.

http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=80193

 

[geevee]

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

Click on Introduction on the left menu.

 

[otto]

It has to do with where her head was found, relative to where the droplets were found (side panel of the wardrobe). My understanding is that her head was close to the side of the wardrobe, but I am not 100% certain. Do you have a link to an appropriate drawing handy? Link here to one photo of the side of the wardrobe.

It is also my understanding that the attack took place near the closet and that she died on the floor near the closet. There was excessive blood pooling under one shoulder and dried blood on her shoulder. Her body was then moved and she was found lying on her back a few feet from the closet with dried blood on her shoulder that did not match her posture and other blood evidence.

 

[SMK]

It has occurred to me that the top of a bra is not elastic; hence, it is not flush with the skin as the wearer moves.

Therefore, some blood droplets may have flowed down onto the skin of the breasts while wearing the bra. This would explain Fisher's assertion that they are there ---

BUT does NOT negate Mignini's assertion of the stencil effect, which seems to indicate the bra was removed after death.

 

[geevee]

It is in Fisher's book, Injustice in Perugia: A book detailing the wrongful conviction of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito (2011, Bruce Fisher, homicide investigation, Google and Amazon books)

He does say Mignini got away with lying in open court (Mignini saying that no blood droplets on the bare breasts, but on the bra, proved she died with the bra on, and someone had an interest in coming and removing it later , as well as moving her to the center of the room and covering her with a duvet: Fisher claims this is simply not true, and that he does not understand how Mignini got away with this falsehood.)

Now, wouldn't Mignini have been working from a photograph in this case, and the judges could see for themselves if droplets were there or not? This is driving me crazy. Does the autopsy report say that droplets were there? GRRRRRRR

Is the autopsy report available in English?

 

[SMK]

Knox introduced Mr Lumumba's name to the conversation, so in what way was she coerced? No one suggested the name to her, she produced his name and accused him of murder all by herself.

I have no interest in reading fiction produced by a known liar about the murder of Meredith Kercher.

Trial Transcripts:

GM: I see. All right. I take note of what you're saying. Now, let's talk about your memorandum from the 7th, still written in total autonomy, without anyone around you. You wrote: "I didn't lie when I said that I thought the murderer was Patrick. At that moment I was very stressed and I really did think that it was Patrick." Then you add "But now I know that I can't know who the murderer is, because I remember that I didn't go home." Can you explain these concept to me?

AK: Yes, because I was convinced that I somehow could have forgotten. So in that moment, I--

GM: So what you had said might have actually been true?

AK: Yes.

http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=80193

This feeling of "stress" and being "convinced that one could have forgotten" could be argued to be indicators of false confession syndrome. For some reason, this business of Patrick never seemed to be a factor re guilt for me. She is guilty of calumnia, and I hope she pays him what is owed, but I think the business of if the body was moved hours after death is the true torchlight of guilt or innocence. I guess I have Patrick phobia-- I cannot bear to hear his name brought up.

 

[Amber29]

Is the autopsy report available in English?

I don't think it is.

 

[SMK]

Is the autopsy report available in English?

I hope so. I cannot find it, even in Italian

 

[Chris_Halkides]

It has occurred to me that the top of a bra is not elastic; hence, it is not flush with the skin as the wearer moves.

Therefore, some blood droplets may have flowed down onto the skin of the breasts while wearing the bra. This would explain Fisher's assertion that they are there ---

BUT does NOT negate Mignini's assertion of the stencil effect, which seems to indicate the bra was removed after death.

I don't know what the stencil effect is. However, some weeks ago, I was pointed to a photograph at IA which showed blood near the tile grouting in Meredith's bedroom. The discussion around this photo was to the effect that this was responsible for a mark of blood on Meredith's back. I may have posted the relevant information in a comment at Huffingtonpost, but some of the details escape me now. See this link for a photo and some discussion. BTW the other piece of evidence sometimes cited as evidence that Meredith's body was moved long after death was a mark that was at one point thought to be lividity. However, there is a passage in Massei that seems to contradict this.
EDT
There must have been lividity, but the question of whether one particular mark was or was not lividity is the key. Sometimes a bruise is mistaken for being lividity, and I believe that this is what happened here. See p. 121 in Massei.

 

[SMK]

I don't know what the stencil effect is. However, some weeks ago, I was pointed to a photograph at IA which showed blood near the tile grouting in Meredith's bedroom. The discussion around this photo was to the effect that this was responsible for a mark of blood on Meredith's back. I may have posted the relevant information in a comment at Huffingtonpost, but some of the details escape me now. See this link for a photo and some discussion. BTW the other piece of evidence sometimes cited as evidence that Meredith's body was moved long after death was a mark that was at one point thought to be lividity. However, there is a passage in Massei that seems to contradict this.

The stencil effect is merely that the bra blocked blood droplets from getting on the flesh it covered, creating a bare space where it had been worn. Yes, I understand, but lividity must have been present and noted by the coroner? It would be the far best indicator as to how the body had been positioned. Thank you for this photo and pertinent conversation.

 

[SMK]

@Chris:
Thank you for that edit above in your post; I will check out the Massei page.

 

[MichaelSmith]

Please read the following:

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #14

Good catch :wink:

 

[SMK]

Please read the following:

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #14

Thanks so much for this - I had forgotten all about it!

 

[SMK]

Is the autopsy report available in English?

Actually, I just found that the coroner's (Dr. Lalli) report translated into English begins on p 110 of the Massei report pdf found here:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Massei_Report_(English)

Dr. Lalli does speak of the corpse having blood on the neck, face, and hands; and that the shirt was pushed up over the breasts. Also, that there was a "mushroom" of air and blood issuing from the mouth and neck. (sorry for graphic description) but nothing specifically about the breasts. The top was blood-soaked, but he mentions no droplets of blood on the breasts.

 

[geevee]

Actually, I just found that the coroner's (Dr. Lalli) report translated into English begins on p 110 of the Massei report pdf found here:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Massei_Report_(English)

Dr. Lalli does speak of the corpse having blood on the neck, face, and hands; and that the shirt was pushed up over the breasts. Also, that there was a "mushroom" of air and blood issuing from the mouth and neck. (sorry for graphic description) but nothing specifically about the breasts. The top was blood-soaked, but he mentions no droplets of blood on the breasts.

Thanks!

 

[redheadedgal]

Me too, but I have not read any information that her nails were clipped during autopsy. That wouldn't be necessary if they were already very short. Maybe the killers clipped her nails. Who knows.

*Snipped*. It is a whole lot more likely then the coroner clipping the nails without informing the DNA expert. The coroner reports everything he does. There is no evidence that he clipped the nails and threw the clippings away. It doesn't work like that.

you've read the full autopsy report? can you link it? i've looked and looked...