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

[otto]

Why do you think the prosecutor quoted dr Balding?

From tweets last Monday:

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

<modsnip>

https://twitter.com/qn_lanazione

 

[Tugela]

It seems to rain Knox and Sollecito DNA, but when it comes to placing Guede in the bathroom so he can wash his pants and leave half a footprint on the bath mat (which is attributed to Sollecito), it no longer rains DNA.

It doesn't rain Solllecito DNA, there are only a few traces of Sollecito DNA, which is consistent with second hand transfer.

If Sollecito DNA was going to be found through transfer, it would likely be to objects that AK would have routinely touched, and those same objects would have for the most part also been routinely touched by MK. If she then subsequently put her bra on she would have touched the clasp with 100% certainty (that is how bras work) and transferred the DNA there.

So, there is a reasonable explanation as to how his DNA could have got there, you do not have to invoke murder to explain it.

If they were going to make arguments about Sollecito being there they would need a lot more than that. For a start, they should be able to find at least a few fingerprints, something, but there is virtually nothing.

 

[otto]

It doesn't rain Solllecito DNA, there are only a few traces of Sollecito DNA, which is consistent with second hand transfer.

If Sollecito DNA was going to be found through transfer, it would likely be to objects that AK would have routinely touched, and those same objects would have for the most part also been routinely touched by MK. If she then subsequently put her bra on she would have touched the clasp with 100% certainty (that is how bras work) and transferred the DNA there.

So, there is a reasonable explanation as to how his DNA could have got there, you do not have to invoke murder to explain it.

If they were going to make arguments about Sollecito being there they would need a lot more than that. For a start, they should be able to find at least a few fingerprints, something, but there is virtually nothing.

I can't imagine why Knox would be handling Meredith's bra.

 

[Tugela]

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

My understanding is that the first trial in Italy is the equivalent of a grand jury investigation rolled together with the prosecutors trial arguments in the American system. The appeal trial is the equivalent of the defence trial arguments rolled together with the first round of appeals in the US. The conviction is not final until the second trial. The sum result of those two phases was an acquittal.

You can't make judgements about the soundness of the evidence based on the outcome of the first trial, because the defence does not get to present their case until the second trial. I imagine that it is quite common in Italy for people to be convicted in the first trial and acquitted in the second.

 

[Harmony 2]

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

It is written about in this article...

http://www.frontiersin.org/journal/10.3389/fgene.2013.00177/full


Reviewed by:
Joelle Vuille, University of California, Irvine, USA
David Balding, University College London, UK

 

[SMK]

My understanding is that the first trial in Italy is the equivalent of a grand jury investigation rolled together with the prosecutors trial arguments in the American system. The appeal trial is the equivalent of the defence trial arguments rolled together with the first round of appeals in the US. The conviction is not final until the second trial. The sum result of those two phases was an acquittal.

You can't make judgements about the soundness of the evidence based on the outcome of the first trial, because the defence does not get to present their case until the second trial. I imagine that it is quite common in Italy for people to be convicted in the first trial and acquitted in the second.

Yes, it's so different from the US that I often forget this. Acquittals on appeal or overturned convictions here are very, very rare, and mean that the trial was faulty in the first place.

 

[Amber29]

My understanding is that the first trial in Italy is the equivalent of a grand jury investigation rolled together with the prosecutors trial arguments in the American system. The appeal trial is the equivalent of the defence trial arguments rolled together with the first round of appeals in the US. The conviction is not final until the second trial. The sum result of those two phases was an acquittal.

You can't make judgements about the soundness of the evidence based on the outcome of the first trial, because the defence does not get to present their case until the second trial. I imagine that it is quite common in Italy for people to be convicted in the first trial and acquitted in the second.

Come again?? This is not how it works.

 

[Amber29]

Yes, it's so different from the US that I often forget this. Acquittals on appeal or overturned convictions here are very, very rare, and mean that the trial was faulty in the first place.

The equivalent of a grand jury would've been more like Michelis court/ruling. He sent them to trial.

From there the 1st level Massei is normal. The defense appealed that verdict and it was overturned. Now the prosecutors appealed and we are back at the same level Hellmann is.

No verdict is final in Italy until cassation rules.

 

[whoanellie]

I'm assuming that "pro-guilt" means the Italian justice system? Is it really true that the decisions of the Italian courts don't stand up to scrutiny?

You assumption is incorrect.

 

[SMK]

The equivalent of a grand jury would've been more like Michelis court/ruling. He sent them to trial.

From there the 1st level Massei is normal. The defense appealed that verdict and it was overturned. Now the prosecutors appealed and we are back at the same level Hellmann is.

No verdict is final in Italy until cassation rules.

I understand. Thank you. ETA: So after the Jan ruling, there can be one more appeal? Or 2?

 

[sherlockh]

It is written about in this article...

http://www.frontiersin.org/journal/10.3389/fgene.2013.00177/full

Reviewed by:
Joelle Vuille, University of California, Irvine, USA
David Balding, University College London, UK

Ok, I was thinking of y chromosomes. If that was the case then there wouldn't be any discussion about the number of males I suppose. I don't agree that these must all be different males though.

 

[otto]

You assumption is incorrect.

What does term "proguilt" mean in relation to a court finding someone guilty of murder?

 

[otto]

Ok, I was thinking of y chromosomes. If that was the case then there wouldn't be any discussion about the number of males I suppose. I don't agree that these must all be different males though.

Were you able to locate the documents referenced by Crini: Peter Gill and David Balding? ... or the review by Balding?

 

[Tugela]

Come again?? This is not how it works.

In practice, that is how it works, approximately.

 

[sherlockh]

Were you able to locate the documents referenced by Crini: Peter Gill and David Balding?

No, I don't think it has been reported what exactly he quoted. I just thought it was notable that it was the prosecutor quoting dr. Balding while on this board people seem to suggest he is supporting the defense. That doesn't make sense to me.

 

[otto]

No, I don't think it has been reported what exactly he quoted. I just thought it was notable that it was the prosecutor quoting dr. Balding while on this board people seem to suggest he is supporting the defense. That doesn't make sense to me.

I don't know anything about it, but in skimming, I understand that Balding developed software for amplifying DNA. The prosecutor would not quote Balding in response to Vecchioti unless Balding contradicted the methods of Vecchioti.

 

[otto]

In practice, that is how it works, approximately.

The defense was in court throughout the trial and their experts were heard throughout the trial. It is not true that the trial is for the prosecution and the appeal is for the defense.

 

[geevee]

To the right of the L marker, the blood is in an arc. The area to the right of the arc is clean. It looks like something could have been in this area. Probably not explaining it well. I mentioned the K marker because I never noticed what appears to be a shard of glass. Is that actually glass? I never saw anyone talking about it if it is glass (although I'm sure it's probably been talked about).

( I didn't put that emoticon there! This keeps happening and I can't get rid of them! )

Boots and something blue are laying on the floor next to the closet, making that squarish clear area:

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/gallery/image_page.php?album_id=21&image_id=3381

 

[Amber29]

Boots and something blue are laying on the floor next to the closet, making that squarish clear area:

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/gallery/image_page.php?album_id=21&image_id=3381

No the boots and such are on the other side of the closet. We're talking about above the L marker in the floor between the front of the closet and the window, kind of.

 

[geevee]

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

:facepalm:

Sorta makes ya wanna cry, huh?