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

[Chris_Halkides]

"According to preliminary forensic investigations Meredith died in the night between Thursday and Friday, and before she was killed may have had a sexual encounter. The corpse of the young woman was in fact found in the bedroom, she was wearing only a T-shirt and was covered with a duvet. The body would have been found, also signs that might be attributable to a struggle. It will still be an autopsy to determine the time of death and to clarify whether or not the student has suffered sexual violence." google translation of this link. Besides news stories (this one is from 3 November) Amanda would also be able to draw inferences about a sexual assault from the questions she was asked. Crini is grasping at straws IMO.

 

[aa9511]

Actually it is also not the defense's job to do anything. They need not raise reasonable doubt, in fact there have been cases where the defense does not even present a case, simply saying that the prosecution has not met their burden and they rest after the prosecution closes. And sometimes they succeed, not even presenting any evidence. The jury finds for the defense saying the state did not meet their burden,

of course, any good defense lawyer is going to want to give the roadmap to reasonable doubt to the jury but it is not required. It is the prosecution's duty to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubts

I believe, in this case, if the defense did not/does not attempt to present reasonable doubt, there is enough there to say the prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt that they are guilty. MOO. This is not one of those cases, IMO, where the defense can just sit back.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

My interpretation of osmotic reasoning is that it means that there are a bunch of things that are weak in themselves but that it is unlikely that they all have an innocent explanation. The problem with the osmotic reasoning of the supreme court and of Crini is this: It circumvents the need to put together a noncontradictory narrative. For example, Crini is apparently saying that the TOD could be either early (prior to about 10:15, I suppose) or late (11:30, I suppose). If one goes with the early TOD, then Curatolo becomes an alibi witness. These sorts of problems become more obvious if one tries to put together a narrative of the crime with a timeline. This is a far more serious problem with the prosecution's conjectures than something we discussed yesterday, namely that Amanda and Raffaele have to be brilliant one minute and stupid the next minute.

The other problem with osmotic reasoning is that it can ignore inconvenient facts. Several lines of evidence independently point to an early TOD, but those don't even get discussed if the prosecution argues post-murder behavior (or something equivalent), instead of making a comprehensive story.

 

[aa9511]

In the US, evidence in a totally separate trial could not be admitted in another trial. For instance, suppose Suspect A has his trial, has evidence. In Suspect B's trial, any evidence in Suspect A trial would need to be reintroduced and you would need to give Suspect B lawyers a chance to cross examine. He would not have had an opportunity to challenge the evidence in Suspect A trial since he was not a party.

it is a basic principle of the 6th amendment to confront your accusers. You cannot just go admitting things as true things that happened in other trials.

Is Italy different? If so all the more reason US will never extradite or ECHR will intervene

So they go through all the evidence again at Amanda's trial....the end result is going to be the same. Rudy could not have done it alone. That is just another piece of the whole puzzle.

 

[aa9511]

Yes Italy is different. You can read about this in the SCC reasoning.
Page 62 covers the simulated break in
Page 73 covers the failure to evaluate RGs final judgement

I don't understand you thinking this is more reason the US won't extradite. The crime wasn't committed in the US, so what her rights would be in a court here doesn't matter. I also doubt this is reason for the ECHR to intervene. Have you ever thought that the US are the "different" ones and a lot of European countries share similarities in the way they run their justice system? Like for instance it's quite the norm for prosecutors to be able to appeal, even though we find it odd and want to call it double jeopardy.

And I will add to this that Amanda was in Italy at the time. Like you said, the crime was committed in Italy. She was not in the U.S.A....when you are in another country, you go by that country's rules and laws....I thought this is just a common-sense thing that everybody knows.

 

[Footwarrior]

The DNA evidence proves that Amanda lived in the cottage. It's the belief that DNA is only shed when crimes occur that we can't accept.

When the investigators took samples from Raffaele's home, several came back with DNA of both Amanda and Raffaele. Does this prove that Amanda killed Raffaele or that both of them spent time in the same apartment?

 

[aa9511]

US will not extradite in a case where they think an American's constitutional rights were violated. I don't buy the double jeopardy argument ( I don't think this violates DJ), but I still think there are multiple instances in which AK constitutional rights were violated as in this instance of the RG evidence being used against her Without her right to cross examine (if true),the fact of the coerced confession was used in the trial against Patrick so it would be impossible for the jury not to consider it in her murder case, and the faulty DNA evidence.

Actually I think that is all part of our extradition treaty with Italy. We have a way out not to extradite,

ECHR also could rule on similar grounds if greater human rights were violated in the process. That is why the Italians would be wise to make this a circumstantial case rather than mess w the DNA or confession evidence which provides her strongest argument for appeal.

A country does not have to extradite, for instances Mexico says it violates their principles to extradite to the US for someone to face the death penalty. The US similarly would not have to extradite if her constitutional rights were violated, and here, I see at least 5th and 6th amendment violations. It would be like a court relying on a lie detector as evidence- the scientific community and US principles says that violates rights and so the US probably would not extradite to such a country.

If Italy wants to establish itself as the country that uses DNA tests the rest of Europe - and the world - discredits then this verdict will likely get overturned on appeal if they use that as a basis for their ruling.

Plus, the media campaign..., people forgot how pro Amanda the American media is. This will be a huge story if it ever comes to it.

Indeed, I read an article that I guess the prosecutor did not even mention the dirty bra clasp today. If that is true they are already distancing themselves from the bad DNA evidence bc they know this case will get thrown out if they rely heavily on it IMO. Daily beast reported that today, that they are distancing themselves from the bra.

But those constitutional rights are for when she is in the U.S.. When she was in Italy, she would be under Italy's constitutional rights, which U.S. has already accepted per the extradition agreement.

 

[otto]

Prosecutor Crini argued that although Guede has no credibility, experience shows that statements of unreliable perps will quite often contain some details and revelations which are true.

He mentions Guede telling of an ‘argument’ between the girls, and asks why Guede would provide this context?

What are anyone's thoughts on this? Also, that he is asserting that Knox's DNA on the knife handle cannot be from casual contact such as sweating?

The prosecutor stated that Knox's DNA between the blade and handle is not due to sweat. He stated that Laura, one of the roommates, spoke of conflict/tension in the cottage because of Knox's lack of cleanliness and Knox failure to complete her chores. He says that there is a prosecution duty to conjecture a motive. The motive he presents is that Meredith came home. Knox brought Guede and Sollecito to the cottage. He suggests that Guede's dirty toilet (which is just off the kitchen) triggered a disagreement between Knox and Meredith. Because Knox, Sollecito and Guede were stoned out of their heads, things got out of hand and Meredith was attacked. He describes how bruises on Meredith indicate that she was restrained, not that she was defensively fighting back. There are two knives used in the attack, a smaller one and a larger one. The size of the cuts on her neck correspond to two different sized weapons. Because Meredith had no defensive wounds, restraint bruising, bruising on her face to prevent her from screaming, and injuries caused be two separate weapons, it cannot be concluded that Guede acted alone.

He stated that testing methods used to identify DNA belonging to Guede are also good enough to identify DNA belonging to Sollecito. Apparently people that know more about DNA analysis, and who present arguments related to DNA analysis, are demanding a higher standard for tests related to Sollecito's DNA analysis, but at the same time accept (without doubt) standard tests regarding Guede's DNA. Essentially, he states that there is no question that Sollecito's DNA is on the clasp and that acceptable methods for Guede's DNA should be acceptable methods for Sollecito's DNA.

Here are related tweets

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Meredith trial, Crini: "For the PM consultant, this is Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp of the victim"

Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki 3m
Sollecito's DNA is certainly on the clasp for the police; Vecchiotti doubts but considers X separately from Y haplotype

Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki 1m
Guede's Y haplotype in victim's vagina alone was used to identify him.

Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki now
Tagliabracci defends Vecchiotti saying the RIS statystical techniques were not used at the time; Crini cites Gill and Balding

 

[aa9511]

So it is not really true that it is "definite" that the SC says there are 3 murderers as one poster says. It is just that they wanted the appellate court to evaluate RG's judgement

Bc frankly it makes no sense how evidence in another case can be used against you without you being able to do anything about it. No way US would ever extradite if that is the case

And Italy knows this, if they are already distancing themselves from the DNA, they would be wise to distance themselves from all these other issues that raise constitutional issues. I mean, they clam their circumstantial case is sooo strong, why risk it being overturned in appeal if you raise issues you don't really need? (I of course disagree - I think they need the DNA to convict here bc they got nothing else).

Because that is per Italy's judicial system. A system which the U.S. accepts.. By signing and saying they accept it, that means that if done according with Italy's laws, then U.S. has to accept it. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this?

 

[SMK]

The prosecutor stated that Knox's DNA between the blade and handle is not due to sweat. He stated that Laura, one of the roommates, spoke of conflict/tension in the cottage because of Knox's lack of cleanliness and Knox failure to complete her chores. He says that there is a prosecution duty to conjecture a motive. The motive he presents is that Meredith came home. Knox brought Guede and Sollecito to the cottage. He suggests that Guede's dirty toilet (which is just off the kitchen) triggered a disagreement between Knox and Meredith. Because Knox, Sollecito and Guede were stoned out of their heads, things got out of hand and Meredith was attacked. He describes how bruises on Meredith indicate that she was restrained, not that she was defensively fighting back. There are two knives used in the attack, a smaller one and a larger one. The size of the cuts on her neck correspond to two different sized weapons. Because Meredith had no defensive wounds, restraint bruising, bruising on her face to prevent her from screaming, and injuries caused be two separate weapons, it cannot be concluded that Guede acted alone.

He stated that testing methods used to identify DNA belonging to Guede are also good enough to identify DNA belonging to Sollecito. Apparently people that know more about DNA analysis, and who present arguments related to DNA analysis, are demanding a higher standard for tests related to Sollecito's DNA analysis, but at the same time accept (without doubt) standard tests regarding Guede's DNA. Essentially, he states that there is no question that Sollecito's DNA is on the clasp and that acceptable methods for Guede's DNA should be acceptable methods for Sollecito's DNA.

Here are related tweets

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Meredith trial, Crini: "For the PM consultant, this is Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp of the victim"

Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki 3m
Sollecito's DNA is certainly on the clasp for the police; Vecchiotti doubts but considers X separately from Y haplotype

Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki 1m
Guede's Y haplotype in victim's vagina alone was used to identify him.

Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki now
Tagliabracci defends Vecchiotti saying the RIS statystical techniques were not used at the time; Crini cites Gill and Balding

Thank you very much for all of this, and for the referring tweets, otto.

ETA: The only questions I have is a. what was their purpose in going there? b. when angry about the toilet, it would seem MK would flush it as she complained about it. I think maybe the argument could have been over something else. (such as maybe Meredith being very annoyed that her peace was disturbed, or missing money, or their being high. And at one point in the argument, Guede used the toilet.)

 

[aa9511]

Tweets from Andrea Vogt and others say that the prosecution is delivering very aggressive closing remarks after 7 hours yesterday.

Speaking of RS, AK, and RG being "smoked" and "high" and causing an argument with MK.

Crini is also saying there was no agreed on plan:

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/download/file.php?id=8786&mode=view

I think this is a wise strategy. I don't know why they went so far with their sex orgy thing. It starting with an argument is much more likely, they should have went that route from the beginning.

 

[otto]

"According to preliminary forensic investigations Meredith died in the night between Thursday and Friday, and before she was killed may have had a sexual encounter. The corpse of the young woman was in fact found in the bedroom, she was wearing only a T-shirt and was covered with a duvet. The body would have been found, also signs that might be attributable to a struggle. It will still be an autopsy to determine the time of death and to clarify whether or not the student has suffered sexual violence." google translation of this link. Besides news stories Amanda would also be able to draw inferences about a sexual assault from the questions she was asked.

It sounds like another excuse to explain something suspecious about Knox. She reported that Meredith screamed, that more than one person was present during the murder, that Meredith was murdered near the closet, that Meredith bled to death and she knew that Meredith had been sexually assaulted.

In order to explain all of this very suspicious knowledge, we have:

• Meredith murdered near closet: Knox said "in", not "near" ... seriously? ... in the closet?
• Meredith bled to death: Luca told this to Knox even though he could not have known this
• More than one person was present during the murder: good guess?
• Meredith was sexually assaulted: Knox simply knew because she knows these things, she doesn't need to wait for the autopsy report to be released
• Meredith screamed: of course Knox knew this, every woman screams when she is raped during a non-burglary or burglary

 

[aa9511]

Prosecutor Demands Guilty Verdict for Knox

I don't think they should pin-point what the argument was about. I think they should give the judges/jury some suggestions, such as rent money, cleanliness, etc.. And their argument could have been a culmination of those tensions, or it could have began with one point. I think prosecutors should just give suggestions and not try to go with one scenario of why or how it started.

 

[SMK]

I think this is a wise strategy. I don't know why they went so far with their sex orgy thing. It starting with an argument is much more likely, they should have went that route from the beginning.

I agree. Sometimes even the pettiest disputes which are simmering can trigger long-buried rage (perhaps at someone else like a parent) - if high or intoxicated, these can escalate beyond any intention.

As you say, this is much more believable than attempting to get Meredith into a group sex thing.

The sexual assault (if any occurred) would have been later, and also as part of the simulation.

 

[SMK]

I don't think they should pin-point what the argument was about. I think they should give the judges/jury some suggestions, such as rent money, cleanliness, etc.. And their argument could have been a culmination of those tensions, or it could have began with one point. I think prosecutors should just give suggestions and not try to go with one scenario of why or how it started.

Yes; I don't think limiting the dispute to Guede's toilet is good, as if Meredith found it, she would probably be angry but also probably flush it as she yelled about it.

 

[aa9511]

Knox mentioned the sexual assault in her 1:45am statement.
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Amanda_Knox's_Confession#Amanda_Knox.27s_1:45_am_Statement

This was before the coroners report was deposited at the court at 8 November.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1568860/Meredith-Kercher-murder-Judges-report.html

Someone (I think Chris_H), posted that some autopsy reports were leaked before her statement. IDK, it sure sounds fishy to me, though.

There are so many things wrong with her statements and what she says in them.

 

[otto]

Thank you very much for all of this, and for the referring tweets, otto.

ETA: The only questions I have is a. what was their purpose in going there? b. when angry about the toilet, it would seem MK would flush it as she complained about it. I think maybe the argument could have been over something else.

Knox, Sollecito and Guede were all stoned out of their minds that night. There is no question about this. There could be many reasons for going to the cottage. Knox used the cottage to socialize with various men, to sing her guitar, to get stoned and to hang out, but she slept at Sollecito's apartment. Perhaps they were in the basketball courts and Guede said he needed to use the toilet, so Knox suggested they go to the cottage since it was close. Perhaps they had the munchies and Sollecito was going to prepare a pasta meal.

Meredith was tired. We know this because she came home around 4-6 AM and slept until noon on the last day of her life. She had borrowed a text book from a friend to study for an exam and had to return the book the following day. She had gone home at 9 PM to study. If she was studying and suddenly three drugheads came to the cottage, that could be enough to finally bring things to a head between Meredith and Knox.

Meredith was upset about Knox bringing strange men to the cottage and she was upset about Knox's lack of cleanliness. If Meredith went to the kitchen to ask the drugheads to keep it down and then noticed the unflushed toilet, I think she would have left it unflushed and asked Knox to explain it, or do something about it. She would have asked Knox why Guede is using Laura/Filomina's bathroom. If that was the moment when conflict errupted, Meredith would not have had a chance to flush.

 

[geevee]

So they go through all the evidence again at Amanda's trial....the end result is going to be the same. Rudy could not have done it alone. That is just another piece of the whole puzzle.

Under that theory, JA couldn't have done it alone either. LOL

I'm not trying to annoy you aa, we're buds, but I think RG certainly could have done it alone, and the more I read, the more I think he did do it alone.

I don't know AK or her typical behavior, but smoking hash was mentioned, which is a lot stronger than regular pot, and if that is what they smoked that night, and she isn't a constant toker then I can see the disorientation about what they did in his apt. when stoned to the gills. I don't think, in that condition, either she nor RS could have been in the room and not left dna everywhere, esp. on the body if they were all holding her down.

 

[SMK]

Knox, Sollecito and Guede were all stoned out of their minds that night. There is no question about this. There could be many reasons for going to the cottage. Knox used the cottage to socialize with various men, to sing her guitar, to get stoned and to hang out, but she slept at Sollecito's apartment. Perhaps they were in the basketball courts and Guede said he needed to use the toilet, so Knox suggested they go to the cottage since it was close. Perhaps they had the munchies and Sollecito was going to prepare a pasta meal.

Meredith was tired. We know this because she came home around 4-6 AM and slept until noon on the last day of her life. She had borrowed a text book from a friend to study for an exam and had to return the book the following day. She had gone home at 9 PM to study. If she was studying and suddenly three drugheads came to the cottage, that could be enough to finally bring things to a head between Meredith and Knox.

Meredith was upset about Knox bringing strange men to the cottage and she was upset about Knox's lack of cleanliness. If Meredith went to the kitchen to ask the drugheads to keep it down and then noticed the unflushed toilet, I think she would have left it unflushed and asked Knox to explain it, or do something about it. She would have asked Knox why Guede is using Laura/Filomina's bathroom. If that was the moment when conflict errupted, Meredith would not have had a chance to flush.

Yes, all of that makes sense, thanks. And yes, I see that Meredith might have suggested or demanded that someone come and flush after themselves.

 

[SMK]

Under that theory, JA couldn't have done it alone either. LOL

I'm not trying to annoy you aa, we're buds, but I think RG certainly could have done it alone, and the more I read, the more I think he did do it alone.

I don't know AK or her typical behavior, but smoking hash was mentioned, which is a lot stronger than regular pot, and if that is what they smoked that night, and she isn't a constant toker then I can see the disorientation about what they did in his apt. when stoned to the gills. I don't think, in that condition, either she nor RS could have been in the room and not left dna everywhere, esp. on the body if they were all holding her down.

Well, it was ruled that one killer could not have inflicted the various 43 wounds alone. With Arias, she was able to immobilize TA in the shower and then chase him and knife him when he was injured.