Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#6

[SMK]

Keep in mind that the people doing the analysis were self appointed "experts".

Their evaluation has no more weight than that of anyone here, and as you can see there is a divergence of opinion.

Under those circumstances the evidence would have to be regarded as no evidence.

Yes, one would like to believe that a footprint could be positively identified (just as a fingerprint could-- no one hears disputes about a fingerprint found on a gun, for instance.) And this print on the bathmat was in the victim's blood, and looks quite clear. I wish there were a definitive answer (with no refutations possible).

 

[Tugela]

I agree, at least do the testing as the defense wanted. Maybe her boyfriend told the police he made the stain, yet I don't know why they would not have tested it.

If it was RS or RG it would be very damning. If it was RS it would have made their case. Defense would have a hard time explaining that. If RG it would be strong confirming evidence.

By the time the stain was ready for testing the investigators probably had already settled on a scenario, and that stain potentially would have knocked their ideas off. So, they would have not been in a hurry to test it, and in the end it just simply was not done (probably because they felt they had enough evidence already, so why risk throwing a spanner in the works with a potentially unknown result).

 

[otto]

That's false. When Amanda arrived there were two rooms available.

Is it really necessary to use room selection to demonstrate that a convicted murderer is a good person?

 

[otto]

Otto, do you still believe that the footprint can still be attributed to Sollecito? (not being snarky; asking in earnest.)

Absolutely. Who am I to presume that I know better than court experts, jury and Judge?

 

[geevee]

Just because somebody is a friend of a friend does not mean contamination is probable. Guede was friends with Meredith's boyfriend but nobody believes that boyfriend brought Guede's DNA over. Chances of secondary transfer are very small, and tertiary transfer are astronomical small. It is not believable that just because Sollecito has been a few times in the cottage that that means there is a realistic chance that his DNA came on the bra clasp accidentally. I don't see any reason to assume he didn't touch it himself and left his DNA in the usual way. JMO.

How could RS' dna be on the cut bra clasp section (that was left on the floor and not collected for what, 47 days?) and no where else on her body? Or mixed in her blood? That is a near impossibility in my mind. Did he merely hold her by the bra strap while RG and AK did whatever?

What about the gloves the technicians wore that were thrown on the floor? The procedures the technicians used in collecting the samples - no glove changes between samples, thumb rubbing on samples swabbed? I could probably go on but that alone is more than enough to doubt test results weren't compromised.

I almost wish I hadn't looked into this case at all, it's so frustrating seeing the sort of evidence presented in court, with the illogical and unreasonable theories given to a jury. And now the prosecutor can advance another theory?

If AK were your* sister (or RS your brother), would you believe that they received a fair trial? Would you be satisfied the evidence was collected properly, tested correctly and with results you could believe in?

I guess I'm no longer on the fence. :blushing:

*meant generally, not specific to any poster.

 

[Tugela]

Yes, one would like to believe that a footprint could be positively identified (just as a fingerprint could-- no one hears disputes about a fingerprint found on a gun, for instance.) And this print on the bathmat was in the victim's blood, and looks quite clear. I wish there were a definitive answer (with no refutations possible).

The difference is that a fingerprint relies on measurable hard data in the form of lines and intersections, not the general shape. Fingerprints are often incomplete or distorted. To be a match it has to meet a set number of correlations before it is accepted as evidence. If these footprints were entered as fingerprint evidence, they would be laughed out of court.

 

[SMK]

Absolutely. Who am I to presume that I know better than court experts, jury and Judge?

OK, that is a point. They found it acceptable in the first trial. Thanks.

 

[redheadedgal]

That's very true. When Knox arrived at the cottage, one room was unoccupied and she took it. If taking the only room available means that she is not self-centered, it must be true.

from FR's testimony @ feb 7, 2009:

Amanda if I'm not mistaken they were the first of the month
September , the very first of September , it was with
his sister, caught sight of the house, we explained the
what were the terms of the contract because they say
then we still had to put in writing what
that was the contract with the agency, she found herself
agree, we agreed to what room she
should have occupied and in a few days anyway
drove off because he had to go if I'm not mistaken in Germany
and said he would return by the end of the month
September.

Amanda returned at around 20 , 21, 22 now with
I do not remember precisely , but approximately 20 returned
from Germany and settled at home, so
basically and improbably , although Amanda
first saw the house, Meredith was the first to occupy it .

http://www.amandaknox.com/the-meredith-kercher-murder/

 

[SMK]

The difference is that a fingerprint relies on measurable hard data in the form of lines and intersections, not the general shape. Fingerprints are often incomplete or distorted. To be a match it has to meet a set number of correlations before it is accepted as evidence. If these footprints were entered as fingerprint evidence, they would be laughed out of court.

So there is nothing on the sole of the foot which is identifiable as in fingerprints (just thinking of the way they put baby's footprint on the hospital record ). And the footprint with the victim's blood did not leave it's own touch dna material?

 

[Tugela]

Just a roommate gossiping to her friends that AK does not know how to flush the toilet and that she hooked up w a few guys (very common in college, I doubt MK was a prude, she herself was sexually active w a guy she had only been dating a short time. Kids in cottage "hook up" alot, and 2 guys over the course of 2 months is nothing at all. I doubt MK would be so horrified by such actions. She lived in a dorm before, she knew how it works. People who are older on this board may not know how college life is nowadays; bringing guys back to your room is very common, it would only get to be annoying or unacceptable if it was every night or multiple times a week; here there were at most 2-3 instances in 2 months, which is nothing in today's college environment. Indeed, most roommates expect that there roommates bring back guys to hook up as normal college behavior. It is not the 1950s. Kids in college do not date often, they hook up. It is not always sex, though. Kids nowadays want no committment so bringing guys back to your room - even random ones - is quite common in college.

The place they were living in was a sqalid dump, so I doubt MK was that concerned about AK's habits. After all, she was living there too and it is pretty obvious that no effort had been made to make it less sqalid.

 

[Katody]

Is it really necessary to use room selection to demonstrate that a convicted murderer is a good person?

Of course not, but apparently it's necessary to falsify the facts about it for some reason.


The facts are
1. Filomena's testimony, just the first page, confirms that Amanda was first at the cottage and chose her room.
http://www.amandaknox.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Trascrizioni-2009-Feb-7-Romanelli-Battistelli-v-Altieri-Altieri-v-Grande.pdf


2. Amanda is not a convicted murderer. In the light of Italian law she's innocent until and if the Supreme Court confirms the conviction. Using epithets like this is unnecessary an only inflame and distract from the logical argumentation.

 

[SMK]

How could RS' dna be on the cut bra clasp section (that was left on the floor and not collected for what, 47 days?) and no where else on her body? Or mixed in her blood? That is a near impossibility in my mind. Did he merely hold her by the bra strap while RG and AK did whatever?

What about the gloves the technicians wore that were thrown on the floor? The procedures the technicians used in collecting the samples - no glove changes between samples, thumb rubbing on samples swabbed? I could probably go on but that alone is more than enough to doubt test results weren't compromised.

I almost wish I hadn't looked into this case at all, it's so frustrating seeing the sort of evidence presented in court, with the illogical and unreasonable theories given to a jury. And now the prosecutor can advance another theory?

If AK were your sister (or RS your brother), would you believe that they received a fair trial? Would you be satisfied the evidence was collected properly, tested correctly and with results you could believe in?

I guess I'm no longer on the fence. :blushing:

I know what you mean about the bra clasp: It always bothered me that there was not MORE Sollecito DNA (on the rest of the bra, on the floor, etc. - I guess I assumed there should be a profusion of it). I sometimes wish also that I had never become invested in this case, because it is maddeningly confusing and strange in so many of its details.

 

[SMK]

The place they were living in was a sqalid dump, so I doubt MK was that concerned about AK's habits. After all, she was living there too and it is pretty obvious that no effort had been made to make it less sqalid.

I thought I was the only one who thought the place was a dump. :blushing:

 

[Tugela]

I think the prosecution had a better narrative w the sex angle, as that would better explain RS and RG involvement. But w the cleaning story, why would they get themselves involved in that? In fact, most cases where an argument heats up to an out of the blue stabbing, third parties HELP the victim, not join in on the stabbing.you also have to believe RG would not only get himself involved but would also decide to sexually assault her as well.

On logic, the prosecutions case falls apart bc they have no evidence of any preexisting relationship between RG and the couple. They need something, eve texts as friends, evidence they hung out together, something. There is no evidence RG even met RS and RG knew AK just as much as MK. What loyalty did RG have to AK that he would join in on a murder?

The only believable tie between them is drugs, and all that is speculation as there is no evidence the couple did hard drugs together let alone w RG. If they proved that the 3 were somehow involved in drugs, that would be a different story but they are not

You have to believe AK would get so angry about the cleaning that she would kill. To get to that level of anger, IMO, you would have had to have repeated blows in the past about the cleaning, but you have barely any evidence the girls discussed it let alone argue over it

Then you would have to believe RS and RG too are angry about the cleaning and they join in too. This story would be more believable if it involved sex for them bc men do not kill over disputes about cleaning.

You also would have to rule out the scenario that RG is just a local criminal who burglared the cottage when he saw an opportunity, MK interrupts him, locks the door and he is locked inside so he has to confront her. He decides to rape her, she fights back and is stabbed. How do you disprove that scenario? I don't think you can. The evidence fully supports it.

Because the latter situation happens all the time, but is much less lurid and scandalous than the former.

I have a suspicion that this whole case has been in large part driven by the soap opera mentality that the Italians appear to have.

 

[redheadedgal]

If AK were your sister (or RS your brother), would you believe that they received a fair trial? Would you be satisfied the evidence was collected properly, tested correctly and with results you could believe in?

i've asked this repeatedly... and am always told (paraphrased) that since the court accepted the evidence, it's valid and reliable.

:facepalm:

 

[Sigh Sister]

The Florida courts are clearly proinnocence. NC seems to be proguilt regarding spousal homicide.

Sorry if I am being obtuse, but are you agreeing with me?

 

[otto]

from FR's testimony @ feb 7, 2009:

"Amanda if I'm not mistaken they were the first of the month
September , the very first of September , it was with
his sister, caught sight of the house, we explained the
what were the terms of the contract because they say
then we still had to put in writing what
that was the contract with the agency, she found herself
agree, we agreed to what room she
should have occupied and in a few days anyway
drove off because he had to go if I'm not mistaken in Germany
and said he would return by the end of the month
September.

Amanda returned at around 20 , 21, 22 now with
I do not remember precisely , but approximately 20 returned
from Germany and settled at home, so
basically and improbably , although Amanda
first saw the house, Meredith was the first to occupy it . "

http://www.amandaknox.com/the-meredith-kercher-murder/

So apparently Knox is a good person because she chose her bedroom.

 

[sherlockh]

Dr. Balding did not examine the YSTR results in his paper (his methodology is not applicable to it IIUC). However, I have examined the YSTR electropherogram in question. There are between 2-4 additional male contributors (meaning three to five male contributors in total), depending on the size of peaks one accepts and on how one treats possible stutter peaks. For Stefanoni to leave this fact out of her analysis is...astonishing.

Why do you think the prosecutor quoted dr Balding?

 

[otto]

Sorry if I am being obtuse, but are you agreeing with me?

Not really. What I'm saying is that it is ridiculous to label the Italian courts as "proguilt" simply because Guede was convicted of murder. It is also absurd to call the same courts "proguilt" because more people have been convicted of murder. However, if that's the standard, then Florida must be proinnocence and NC must be proguilt regarding spousal homicides.

 

[sherlockh]

I was going by memory when I wrote 5 or 6. Conti and Veccchiotti indicated several. It means 3 or more if I'm not mistaken. Hardly a jump.

Dr. Balding who reviewed and accepted Conti's article seems to not disagree with the assessment.

4 Y haplotype peaks in one locus does mean 4 different males contributed, even if we don't have their full profiles, that's the point.

If the additional DNA is not from touch then how and where did it transfer from? Was it just floating around?

Do you have any proof that these were 4 Y haplotype peaks?