Why is there no Knox DNA on her own lamp?
Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#5
- Thread starter Harmony 2
- Start date
- Status
Why is there no Knox DNA on her own lamp?
Chris_Halkides
Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 608
- Reaction score
- 12
The blood droplets are on her breast. I don't know of any photos available to the public.
Knox did not make a false confession. In her November 7 note, she affirmed her accusations against Mr Lumumba. Several people have claimed that this letter is in her book and that in that letter she clearly and unambiguously states that she lied when she accused Patrick, but we have yet to see that letter. In trial transcripts, it is documented that she did not state that she lied about Mr Lumumba.
How does AK look physically powerful? I think she is a petite women, and in any event, I think MK would be physically stronger as MK had taken defense lessons
In the other case, the defendant was a 6 foot husky woman who on previous occasions used her "muscle" to intimidate witnesses. That case also probably, IMO, involved the main reason a women murders - jealously over a guy. The victim was the third party's ex and it was alleged that for business reasons w the victims father, the third party got the defendant to kill the victim - but the victim was also his ex girlfiend. The defendants there might have considered the victim a rival.
Even in that case, the defense alleged she as physically incapable of doing the murder bc she was just 40 pounds more than the victim.
Women do kill, but when they do it is often over sex/love or as part of a couple or sometimes in these teen murders you see jealously as a motive, all of which is usually backed up by alot of evidence.
The only case I can think of when a women (teen really) killed for a thrill is when a teen a few years ago killed her neighbor child because she wanted to see what killing felt like. But even in that case, there was alot of evidence the girl was quite troubled before the murder and there also might have been a jealously motive there.
Very rarely (ever?) do you have a middle class normal American girl w no brushes w the law or no history of psychological problems or issues in school to suddenly decide to murder someone and not only that but murder someone with a boyfriend of 7 days and an almost complete stranger,
Chris_Halkides
Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 608
- Reaction score
- 12
His DNA samples are for his lawyers to argue. I have only looked at the egrams casually, but I don't recall seeing any low template samples. One difference between RG and AK is that Rudy had never been to the women's flat. Therefore even if all of the DNA were collected in a sloppy manner, it does not explain the presence of his DNA there. On the other hand poor choices in where to sample or sloppy technique can create a mixed DNA sample. That is one difference between Rudy's DNA and Amanda's DNA. In this respect RS falls in the middle. He did not live there, but he visited there.
The second difference is that the DNA evidence against Guede is just the icing on the cake. Let's exclude 100% of the DNA evidence against all three on the basis of bad technique of one kind or another, just for the sake of argument. If we do so, then Guede is still guilty BARD.
Scientists that are taken seriously obvious provide references. Does the Fisher person do this?
What is BARD?
Chris_Halkides
Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 608
- Reaction score
- 12
This author attended the trial and is fluent in Italian. This is what she reports
Warning: Graphic
"Kercher was found nude from the waist down, her shirt pulled up above her breasts and her bra cut from her body after she had been stabbed twice in the neck—the blood spatter from the attack left a stencil on her chest. She had been killed in front of her armoire but then pulled close to her bed, her hair leaving a macabre trail through her own blood. She had 47 documented bruises and tiny cuts on her body. She had been sexually penetrated, but not clearly raped based on the absence of vaginal tears. Her body had been partially covered with her duvet. An outline of a knife presumably used in the attack (no murder weapon was ever found) left a mark on her bed sheets. No one knows if the duvet was pulled from her bed while the knife was still in someone’s hands or exactly how the knife mark was left on the stripped bed or when the duvet was pulled off. It had no smeared blood on it except where it had sopped up the blood from her wounds, so investigators presumed she was covered long after the blood spots on her body had dried."
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/29/amanda-knox-faces-a-new-murder-trial-in-italy.html
Could you please provide references contradicting this information. I'm completely lost when someone named Fisher is quoted as having disagreed with the trial evidence, there are no references, and then ... we should accept that the trial evidence is wrong and someone named Fisher is right?
Chris_Halkides
Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 608
- Reaction score
- 12
Many false confessors also accuse innocent men. This is true of Karl Fontenot. It is also true of one or more of the navy men in the Norfolk Four case.
IIRC Patrick said or implied that business was slow in his text message, not that there was literally no one in his place. Therefore, Amanda would have every reason to think that Patrick would have an alibi (or at least know that this was possible). If a hypothetically guilty Amanda were worried about taking the fall, she should have named either Rudy or Raffaele. They are men and therefore it does not require great mental gyrations to think that they could have sexually assaulted Meredith. Amanda could claim that one of them (or perhaps both) were guilty and forced her participation. On the other hand, a hypothetically innocent Amanda might well accuse Patrick with the...encouragement...of overzealous police officers. Having a tape of the interrogation would be helpful.
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
I get the impression that we should now view a false confession as the same as a false accusation. It would then be easier to put Knox in the context of people that had a false confession beaten out of them.
False accusations are distinctly different from false confessions.
Accusation: claim that someone has done something illegal or wrong
Confession: a formal statement admitting that one is guilty of a crime
See the difference? Accusations relate to someone else. For example, when the cookie jar is empty, the child that ate the cookies will sometimes accuse another child in order to avoid punishment. Confessions relate to the self. For example, Austin Sigg confessed that he murdered Jessica Ridgeway after he was required to provide a DNA sample. There is a big difference.
Knox did not confess to anything. Approximately one hour after voluntarily going to the police station, Knox accused Mr Lumumba of murder in a detailed statement where she described meeting him at the basketball courts and so on. She has mentioned her interest in CSI, and she probably thought that by implicating another person, she would be released. She knew that her mother was arriving the following morning and she most likely thought that she would be on her way to Germany in no time. Reality is that she overlooked the small detail that making a false accusation where she claimed that she too was at the scene of the murder would change her status from witness to suspect.
She wrote a couple of follow up letters on November 6 & 7, where she attempted to distance herself from the murder, but she did not admit to lying about Patrick.
OK - thanks. Sorry, I don't know; I only know I read that Mignini referred to a photo. Must seek it out.
Chris_Halkides
Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 608
- Reaction score
- 12
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.
Fisher seems to be the person that is perhaps falsely accusing (note: not falsely confessing) the prosecution of lying. If Fisher wants to make that claim, it is his responsibility to provide evidence and references. If he has failed to do this, then it is most likely that his book is fiction.
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?
Thanks for this. This was my understanding, that the bra had left an outline, as it were, of bare skin: Whereas the bra itself was spattered with blood.
Thus was it concluded that she died with the bra on , aspirating blood onto it, and once it was removed, there was no more aspiration (as the victim was deceased).
Why a fine writer such as Fisher (and I have always respected him, and did work with him briefly in 2010-11) would claim this was an out an out falsehood, contradicting the photo, escapes me. There must be a misunderstanding somewhere.
Chris_Halkides
Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 608
- Reaction score
- 12
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.
geevee
Well-Known Stickie
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2013
- Messages
- 17,616
- Reaction score
- 16,549
<modsnip>
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/An_Introduction
I must say, with all of the supposition and conclusions drawn in court I'm surprised they came up with a conviction during the first trial, at all.
The bathmat footprint boggles the mind, I don't find it as compelling as the court (if you're going to say it's a certain person's based on measurements, they should all match, not a couple - metatarsus length and plantar arch width larger than the stain, and neither of them match the big toe width or length.
Too many reasonings of why such is like such when the evidence doesn't fit their theory. I'm still on the fence, but I've only just begun. lol
- Status