Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #11

[SMK]

It's shoddy work. And what really opened my eyes was that bra analysis. That bra was ripped up. The straps were ripped apart, and half the back of it was ripped out, which caused the clasp to fall off it. With all that yanking and ripping going on, I don't see how RS's dna, in minute bits, was just on the metal hook--IF he had been one of the ones ripping on her bra.

And to boot, RG's DnA IS on the bra, so we have a scenerio of RG and RS playing tug of war with the bra? It would have been in two pieces if you had two men violently going at the bra. But RG would have won, seeing as RS was only touching the tiny metal hook, supposedly.

Also, of note is the fact that no one needs to touch the metal hook to undo a bra. You can if you want to, but it's the pinch that gets the bra undone. So if RS had been trying to unhook it, and the hooks are inward, more toward the body, he would have HAD to have touched the rest of the bra. It's just not possible to only touch the metal hook.

BUT in the crime scene video, we see gloved techs touching the metal hook with their dirty unchanged gloves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMaTI0SiuLw

Notice not even a minute into the video, two different techs have touched the metal hooks.Then they drop it on the dirty floor, then it appears to stick to the guy's hands as he tries to bag it. So I'm certain RG AND RS's DNA probably got on it during that video. I'm convinced that neither RG or RS ever had to touch it in the first place. Oh, and this video is not to mention whatever touching of it the techs were doing when they FIRST saw the thing 46 days earlier.

It is soooo ridiculous when you contemplate it. 46 days late - it should have been retrieved immediately. And a tiny bit of DNA, and RS was constantly glued to Amanda , who lived there, & he was in the house. The wonder is, why/how were they ever convicted beyond reasonable doubt? Not to mention Guede's DNA/prints all over the crime scene and body.

 

[wasnt_me]

I find the idea that AK or RS brought a knife from his house to the cottage to be ludicras, as well.

If the crime was a one of passion, where they "happened" to meet RG in the square and decide to go to the cottage for some wild night, whose idea is it to run by RS's to pick up the knife and for what reason? "Just in case?"

They couldn't have called RG to RS's house or vice versa because RG had no phone and we do not see calls from any strange numbers on AK's phone. So it had to be a "chance" meeting. That's probably why the prosecution tried to insinuate that AK walked around on the regular with a butcher knife in her purse. Because there's not any other way to explain why she felt the need to retrieve it from RS's that night.

Plus, RS likes to carry knives. He had a whole collection of them. If it were a crime of passion, surely the knife he had on him would have been sufficient. Or if AK was picking a knife for the crime, why the kitchen knife and not one or two from his collection?

Bringing the knife from RS's house means premeditation. It just doesn't make sense to me that these two would leave, already premeditating the need for a kitchen knife, then just happen to run into RG and do this crime. It also makes no sense to me that they'd run into RG, decide to do this crime and go back to RS's just for the knife. Especially when in the company of men who carry knives. I don't get it. If AK needed her own, it's reasonable to just get it from the cottage. If they're stupid enough to put the knife BACK in RS's drawer, then I think they'd be stupid enough to use a knife from the cottage and put it back or put it in RS's drawer afterward.

 

[Nova]

How hard is it to see when something is 'possible' but PROVEN not to have happened? That is what the prosecution did. The court found that the break-in was STAGED. Possible but proven not to have happened- Right!

How on earth would a video by the defense showing how easy it was for a similar sized man as RG to climb up and through the window 'not' help with the court/jurors??? It is just silly not to see that... and telling that it is not.

Why did they get the guy to reach up to the window? Did 'that' have a purpose in your mind?

I don't know when the photo of the guy reaching the window was taken, so I can't say whether it was taken in case it was needed at trial or in order to rebut media claims that the window was inaccessible.

But either way, there was no reason to present evidence that the window was reachable when the prosecution didn't claim otherwise. The prosecution claimed glass shattering showed the break-in to be staged, so the defense addressed that instead.

As Malkmus points out, it is not the defense's job to rebut internet speculation and it doesn't "prove" anything when they decline to do so.

 

[Nova]

Where was the rock? Was it close by where they didn't have to walk on the ground? Is there a link that shows where the rock came from?

Some here claim that LE didn't look at or investigate the ground around the window so we will never know... thereby their footprints were probably all over the ground outside the window. Which will it be?

Maybe she carried it in the bag from RS's with the large knife :crazy: . Ha, that's it... it was part of RS's apt.

You're right, but that's the point: the original location of the rock is just one of the things we will never know because ILE's investigation was so slipshod.

But Mal's point concerned the prosecution's claim that the ground outside the cottage was checked and revealed no footprints. So unless AK was keeping a pet rock in her room, how did she acquire it?

 

[Nova]

Ok Nova

I am still getting the and/or option here so I must be missing something. I don't believe from what I am reading that they must order a retrial. Any thoughts?

I can't remember where I read the reference to a retrial. I don't believe it said "must." But it was noteworthy because it mentioned the appellate court conducting the new trial itself, rather than referring the case back to a lower court as would be done here in the States.

Even in the U.S., an appellate court does not have to order a retrial. It can--and appellate courts on rare occasions have done so--simply declare the defendant "factually innocent" and sent him home. (As you know, "factual innocence" is as opposed to legally "not guilty" because his original trial was flawed.) But appellate courts in the U.S. do not conduct retrials; an appellate judge who finds a defendant "factually innocent" does so on the basis of the original trial record, only one reason why such findings are rare.

 

[Nova]

I find the idea that AK or RS brought a knife from his house to the cottage to be ludicras, as well.

If the crime was a one of passion, where they "happened" to meet RG in the square and decide to go to the cottage for some wild night, whose idea is it to run by RS's to pick up the knife and for what reason? "Just in case?"

They couldn't have called RG to RS's house or vice versa because RG had no phone and we do not see calls from any strange numbers on AK's phone. So it had to be a "chance" meeting. That's probably why the prosecution tried to insinuate that AK walked around on the regular with a butcher knife in her purse. Because there's not any other way to explain why she felt the need to retrieve it from RS's that night.

Plus, RS likes to carry knives. He had a whole collection of them. If it were a crime of passion, surely the knife he had on him would have been sufficient. Or if AK was picking a knife for the crime, why the kitchen knife and not one or two from his collection?

Bringing the knife from RS's house means premeditation. It just doesn't make sense to me that these two would leave, already premeditating the need for a kitchen knife, then just happen to run into RG and do this crime. It also makes no sense to me that they'd run into RG, decide to do this crime and go back to RS's just for the knife. Especially when in the company of men who carry knives. I don't get it. If AK needed her own, it's reasonable to just get it from the cottage. If they're stupid enough to put the knife BACK in RS's drawer, then I think they'd be stupid enough to use a knife from the cottage and put it back or put it in RS's drawer afterward.

Really well laid out! As you probably remember, I have always thought it nearly impossible that RS' kitchen knife was one of the murder weapons. As you point out so ably, it simply makes no sense that AK was running around town with that steak knife in her purse, her hand, or tucked into her belt.

ILE had a problem because their scenario has AK and RS returning to RS' apartment and there should be some trace of the crime there as well. But there just isn't any; and hence, the knife from RS' drawer "became" the murder weapon.

 

[wasnt_me]

In the same token, it makes zero sense to search the whole of Perugia for the perfect rock. if they just committed a murder, and they really don't know when someone can stumble upon it, it makes no sense to go all over tarnation looking for a rock. FR could have come home. She wasn't there far away. She could have had an emergency and come home. Of course she didn't, but the point is that time was of the essence.

Hendry says RG got the rock from that little side hill by the house. ILE could have checked it for a spot where a 9lb rock would have laid. We'll never know if they did or not, but common sense tells us that it wouldn't make sense to go far and wide to find a 9lb rock. If we look at those maps I drew up, the place "appears" to be pretty metropolitan all around the cottage. It "seems" to be the only little haven were you might search for 9lbs rocks with peace and a little success without going on route to the cell phone drop. Looking at it, I'd think they'd be going anywhere, but close to that road, esp when on the opposite side is all the brush. Which makes people seeing the culprits or hearing them running kind of doesn't make sense either.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=e...3.116828,12.389349&spn=0.004511,0.007274&z=17

 

[Nova]

In the same token, it makes zero sense to search the whole of Perugia for the perfect rock. if they just committed a murder, and they really don't know when someone can stumble upon it, it makes no sense to go all over tarnation looking for a rock. FR could have come home. She wasn't there far away. She could have had an emergency and come home. Of course she didn't, but the point is that time was of the essence.

Hendry says RG got the rock from that little side hill by the house. ILE could have checked it for a spot where a 9lb rock would have laid. We'll never know if they did or not, but common sense tells us that it wouldn't make sense to go far and wide to find a 9lb rock. If we look at those maps I drew up, the place "appears" to be pretty metropolitan all around the cottage. It "seems" to be the only little haven were you might search for 9lbs rocks with peace and a little success without going on route to the cell phone drop. Looking at it, I'd think they'd be going anywhere, but close to that road, esp when on the opposite side is all the brush. Which makes people seeing the culprits or hearing them running kind of doesn't make sense either.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=e...3.116828,12.389349&spn=0.004511,0.007274&z=17

Exactly right. And we know from the conversations held the next day that NEITHER RG nor AK knew if the Italian roommates would be coming home that night. For all RG or AK knew, Filomena could have appeared at any minute!

Which is just one more reason why it makes no sense that AK and RS spent the night engaging in an elaborate clean-up. If they had, they would have risked exposure if one of the other girls returned.

No, if AK and RS had been been involved in the murder, their only thought would have been to put as much distance as possible between themselves and MK's body. They already had a trip scheduled; all they had to do was leave town.

 

[wasnt_me]

Nova, you haven't chimed in on the bra clasp yet.

 

[Malkmus]

You might want to read the Judge's report for this trial and the one from RG's trial to help you out. Looking over Perugia Murder File and True Justice for Meredith Kercher sites will also be of high value for your understanding.

Yes, by all means, everyone should read all those things to get what is certainly a unique perspective on the case. Especially the latest article on TJMK, which is basically a long-winded rant that equates to "Leave Mignini alone!!!".
You'll get a good idea of how backwards the thinking is on that site. Their defending of Mignini's illegal actions and ILE's physical abuse against reporters is pathetic, transparent, and immoral. Not to mention the usual conspiracy crap that any reporter questioning the verdict is doing so to profit off Meredith's death.

 

[Nova]

Nova, you haven't chimed in on the bra clasp yet.

What can I say? Once I saw the video of the techs passing it around without changing their gloves and then putting it back on the floor, I excluded it as evidence (at least in my own mind).

Frankly, the fact that it was admitted at trial and actually used in the motivation report is scandalous and makes Italy look like a 19th century banana republic.

 

[dgfred]

Yes, by all means, everyone should read all those things to get what is certainly a unique perspective on the case. Especially the latest article on TJMK, which is basically a long-winded rant that equates to "Leave Mignini alone!!!".
You'll get a good idea of how backwards the thinking is on that site. Their defending of Mignini's illegal actions and ILE's physical abuse against reporters is pathetic, transparent, and immoral. Not to mention the usual conspiracy crap that any reporter questioning the verdict is doing so to profit off Meredith's death.

Ha, why not go there and refute the article in the comments? I feel like you will not and can't. Or even refute it here with some actual facts.

One would think 'Frank' could clear things up quite easily but he has yet to do so. Is there ANY actual evidence of 'ILE's physical abuse against reporters' as you say/claim? Is there somewhere we could see that 'evidence'?

You mentioning 'the usual conspiracy crap' is quite funny too IMO. Where have I heard that kind of conspiracy stuff :waitasec: ?

 

[SMK]

What can I say? Once I saw the video of the techs passing it around without changing their gloves and then putting it back on the floor, I excluded it as evidence (at least in my own mind).

Frankly, the fact that it was admitted at trial and actually used in the motivation report is scandalous and makes Italy look like a 19th century banana republic.

I could not agree more; well, well said.

 

[Malkmus]

Ha, why not go there and refute the article in the comments? I feel like you will not and can't. Or even refute it here with some actual facts.

One would think 'Frank' could clear things up quite easily but he has yet to do so. Is there ANY actual evidence of 'ILE's physical abuse against reporters' as you say/claim? Is there somewhere we could see that 'evidence'?

You mentioning 'the usual conspiracy crap' is quite funny too IMO. Where have I heard that kind of conspiracy stuff :waitasec: ?

Fact: Mignini has launched several lawsuits against reporters who have spoken out against the verdict and him.

Fact: Frank Sfarzo was beat up by ILE.

The open letter sent by the CPJ (Committee to Protect Journalists) outlines the problems associated with both those things. The fact that TJMK sent their own open letter defending Mignini and ILE against these well-known facts is pathetic.

They're promoting censorship. Shame on them.

The conspiracy sounds familiar because it's a common theme in the Massei report

The fact that you think a reporter made up his story of being hospitalized after being abused by ILE is itself just more conspiracy fodder, fyi.

 

[dgfred]

I don't know when the photo of the guy reaching the window was taken, so I can't say whether it was taken in case it was needed at trial or in order to rebut media claims that the window was inaccessible.

But either way, there was no reason to present evidence that the window was reachable when the prosecution didn't claim otherwise. The prosecution claimed glass shattering showed the break-in to be staged, so the defense addressed that instead.

As Malkmus points out, it is not the defense's job to rebut internet speculation and it doesn't "prove" anything when they decline to do so.

Really? Nobody but Malkmus asked about doing it for 'internet posters', and it wasn't the media 'claims' about the window not being the entry point... it was the prosecution's. Since the prosecution proved to the jurors that the break-in was staged (if even they said it was 'possible'), a video would certainly be a strong piece of evidence that someone could. Most would think they would do it for the jurors. Also nobody claimed it would 'prove' anything, just might be a handy piece of video.

The prosecution used computer animation to show the court/jurors a 'theory' of the murder scene. Why would a video not be allowed if it was probative?

A good defense team move might have been to show a person actually performing the act, not scuffing up the wall and climbing through without scraping themselves up.

 

[SMK]

Fact: Mignini has launched several lawsuits against reporters who have spoken out against the verdict and him.

Fact: Frank Sfarzo was beat up by ILE.

The open letter sent by the CPJ (Committee to Protect Journalists) outlines the problems associated with both those things. The fact that TJMK sent their own open letter defending Mignini and ILE against these well-known facts is pathetic.

They're promoting censorship. Shame on them.

The conspiracy sounds familiar because it's a common theme in the Massei report

The fact that you think a reporter made up his story of being hospitalized after being abused by ILE is itself just more conspiracy fodder, fyi.

Bravo; I am certain your apt refutation would only fall on deaf ears if written as comments, as dgfred suggested, on the site of those zealots. You are absolutely on the mark, all the way.

 

[dgfred]

Fact: Mignini has launched several lawsuits against reporters who have spoken out against the verdict and him.

Fact: Frank Sfarzo was beat up by ILE.

The open letter sent by the CPJ (Committee to Protect Journalists) outlines the problems associated with both those things. The fact that TJMK sent their own open letter defending Mignini and ILE against these well-known facts is pathetic.

They're promoting censorship. Shame on them.

The conspiracy sounds familiar because it's a common theme in the Massei report

The fact that you think a reporter made up his story of being hospitalized after being abused by ILE is itself just more conspiracy fodder, fyi.

You calling them 'fact' does not make it so. Where is the evidence of him being 'beat up'? Can he name who was a part of the so-called beating? Has he forgotten or can he not remember like YOU KNOW WHO?

Oh I see pathetic, but it is coming from other directions. I guess desperation calls for desperate measures, fyi.

 

[SMK]

You calling them 'fact' does not make it so. Where is the evidence of him being 'beat up'? Can he name who was a part of the so-called beating? Has he forgotten or can he not remember like YOU KNOW WHO?

Oh I see pathetic, but it is coming from other directions. I guess desperation calls for desperate measures, fyi.

If it were made up, then it would indeed be appalling, and a travesty - neither "side" has a right to make false allegations. I have assumed this was documented by journalists? And if the attack on "you know who" by pro-Knox people were documented, I would find that appalling as well, and roundly condemn it. I am sure M feels the same.

 

[SMK]

Obviously, if this is not true, then it is horrid. But I have reason to believe that FS himself would not allow such serious allegations to be made falsely? Surely this has all been documented by the Journalists' association, if they are professionals worth their salt??????

The harassment reached its peak on September 28, 2010, when five officers of Squadra Mobile forcibly entered Sfarzo’s apartment. They did not produce a warrant or show their badges, Sfarzo told CPJ. Four of the five shoved Sfarzo to the ground, struck him, handcuffed him, and climbed on top of him, crushing his air supply, he told CPJ. They stopped when a neighbor, disturbed by the commotion, showed up, Sfarzo said.

Next, the officers took Sfarzo to the Perugia city hospital, where they claimed he had attacked them; they persuaded a doctor to issue a medical report for the injuries Sfarzo was alleged to have caused. In addition, the Squadra Mobile officers brought Sfarzo before a psychiatrist, demanding that she issue him a certificate of insanity. To prove that Sfarzo was mentally ill, the officers produced Sfarzo’s reporter’s notebook on the Kercher murder case, which they had seized from his apartment. “They told the doctor that I was pathologically obsessed with the case, that I was so fixated on it I must be insane,” Sfarzo told CPJ. The psychiatrist refused to issue the certificate.

From the hospital, the officers brought a handcuffed and injured Sfarzo to their headquarters, where, in the blogger’s words, they “displayed me as a trophy,” referring to him as “the *advertiser censored* who defends Amanda [Knox].” The officers refused Sfarzo’s requests to call his lawyer or his relatives, and put him in a cell for the night.

The next day, the officers brought Sfarzo before a local judge, who validated his arrest and indicted him on several articles of Italy’s penal code for “using violence and threats to resist public officials” and “injuring an officer.” Sfarzo was released pending a trial in May. He faces up to six years in prison if convicted. “The police can count on the complicity of judges,” Sfarzo told CPJ. Police officers, he added, are sure of their impunity.http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2011/04/19/il-mostro-di-perugia/

 

[wasnt_me]

What can I say? Once I saw the video of the techs passing it around without changing their gloves and then putting it back on the floor, I excluded it as evidence (at least in my own mind).

Frankly, the fact that it was admitted at trial and actually used in the motivation report is scandalous and makes Italy look like a 19th century banana republic.

Of course I agree, but I was hoping you'd comment on the article about how ripped up the garment was.