Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #15

[Nova]

Good point! Guede and Knox both confessed to being at the scene. Evidence supported their confessions. By Sollecito placing himself with Knox, he also placed himself at the scene. Evidence supports this as well.

So RS is both with and not with AK at the scene of the crime.

This is the sort of logic that convicted them.

 

[SMK]

I know of no one who claims everything was done right in the prosecution of RG. On the contrary, ILE just got lucky that he left so much evidence they weren't able to miss it.

Quite true....

 

[Nova]

As far as I can recall, on the night that he and Knox were detained Sollecito said that he had told investigators a "load of rubbish". He said that he was misled by Knox into lying for her. Knox did not admit to deliberately lying, instead she claimed that after 2 hours of questioning she was forced to accuse an innocent man of murder. She was found guilty of lying about the investigators. Her parent's trial for repeating those false statements in the UK is set for July 4, 2011.

Sollecito has never changed his statement about being unable to confirm that Knox was at his apartment during the night of the murder.

This is not true. A few posts before this one, Malkmus provided a quote of RS saying he was with AK all night.

 

[otto]

U.S. appeals are NOT re-trials, otto. I don't know where you got that idea, but Ms. Mellas certainly knows better.

U.S. appellate courts look at trials to see if they were conducted fairly and according to current trial rules. If errors were made, the appellate court then decides whether the errors rise to a level requiring remedy. (This does not happen often. It's much more common for appellate courts to rule that yes, there was an error, but it wasn't bad enough to overturn the verdict.)

If so, ordering a re-trial is a possible remedy. (In extreme cases such as those featuring obvious corruption, an appellate court can declare a defendant factually innocent, but that almost never happens.) The re-trial is then conducted in the same circuit as the original trial, not in an appellate court.

That is exactly my point: that a successful appeal in the US means the case will be retried.

 

[Nova]

Knox should be able to relate dinner to other time commitments. If I have to work at 7:30 AM, I know when I have to get up, eat and be dressed in order to arrive at work at the correct time. I have no doubt that Knox was aware of how she had to schedule her evening in order to eat before going to work. I do not see any reason for an employed university student to be completely befuddled about what time she ate dinner when she has to schedule her time in order to eat before work. We are talking about someone who suggested that she was deprived of food and water when she signed a police statement at 1:45 AM even though she ate earlier in the evening at 10 or 10:30 PM. Obviously she needs to eat at regular intervals so I don't see her not planning her pre-work meal, or being all confused about when she ate.

In my considerable experience with college students, they do NOT "eat at regular intervals." Quite the contrary.

And as others have pointed out, restaurant workers often eat on the job, so AK may not have planned a dinner with RS at all that night.

 

[otto]

This is not true. A few posts before this one, Malkmus provided a quote of RS saying he was with AK all night.

Knox said that she was at the cottage when the murder occurred, so that puts Sollecito at the cottage as well. Now we have Guede confirming that Knox and Sollecito were at the cottage during the murder - somehow, I doubt this is what the prosecution expected when the opened the prisoner can of worms.

 

[otto]

In my considerable experience with college students, they do NOT "eat at regular intervals." Quite the contrary.

And as others have pointed out, restaurant workers often eat on the job, so AK may not have planned a dinner with RS at all that night.

In my considerable experience with universities, I have arrived at the opposite conclusion. Students are on a regular schedule due to courses, and it doesn't take long for them to schedule meals, sports and extra-curricular activities around their classes.

 

[Nova]

We know she planned to eat ... because she did have dinner at about 8:20 PM that night.

That she did something does not prove she previously "planned" to do it. Nor does it prove she remembered what she did or planned to do 5 days later. And if she did remember something, that doesn't mean she remembered it correctly.

There is simply no logic in the claim that AK has been "proven" to lie about her dinner time on the night of the murder.

That she was mistaken, yes. That she deliberately lied, we don't know.

 

[Nova]

Well, he says he doesn't know if she went out "for a few minutes". In the early evening we know she answered the door and talked to Jovana while Raf was in the bathroom. Seems like a moment where he may not have been sure exactly where she was or if she stepped outside for a few minutes.

Isn't there also some issue about whether AK was out and on her way to work when she got the text from PL telling her not to come in?

If so, that might be a minor event that RS would have trouble remembering 18 days later when he wrote the journal entry.

 

[otto]

That she did something does not prove she previously "planned" to do it. Nor does it prove she remembered what she did or planned to do 5 days later. And if she did remember something, that doesn't mean she remembered it correctly.

There is simply no logic in the claim that AK has been "proven" to lie about her dinner time on the night of the murder.

That she was mistaken, yes. That she deliberately lied, we don't know.

Are you convinced that she lied about the time that they woke up that morning?

 

[otto]

It's interesting that Knox's friend is now suggesting that the prosecution is responsible for bringing unreliable witnesses to the appeal. I wonder if she suffers the same confusion and memory problems as Knox, or whether she thinks that if she says it, it will be come true?

"Madison Paxton, a childhood friend of Knox's who was in court, accused the prosecution of resorting to unreliable witnesses. "Every time we are doing well in the trial they try something desperate, like caged animals," she said."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/27/amanda-knox-appeal-sex-change

 

[Nova]

Edda is in Perugia ... off for the summer! Her court date is July 4.

Why "... off for the summer!"?

Edited to say that otto explains his choice of wording in post #318.

 

[Nova]

That is exactly my point: that a successful appeal in the US means the case will be retried.

With respect, otto, if that was your point, it was not what you wrote. You wrote:

I think this is where Edda was mistaken shortly before the original verdict as well. I believe that she expected the appeal process to reflect the US appeal process - basically a retrial. Not so. The appeal process began months ago where defense lawyers presented their arguments regarding what they believed should be re-considered during appeal. It more or less looks like they listed all the evidence....

If anything, Italian appeals are more like re-trials than U.S. appeals.

U.S. appeals are rarely concerned with evidence per se, except to the extent that evidence was or wasn't properly introduced. U.S. appeals deal with judicial procedures and whether the correct ones were followed.

 

[Nova]

Knox said that she was at the cottage when the murder occurred, so that puts Sollecito at the cottage as well. Now we have Guede confirming that Knox and Sollecito were at the cottage during the murder - somehow, I doubt this is what the prosecution expected when the opened the prisoner can of worms.

Knox lied when she said that, as we all know since she put LP there with her. Neither she nor RS have ever put RS there during the murder.

If the court believes RG, then it will just be more proof that the whole process is fixed.

 

[Nova]

Right, it was a total waste. He did not even need to appear. All he said has been said before, and the Judge and jury already knew he did not corroborate inmates' testimony. Just a big nothing. Defense did not even bother attacking him.

And from Huffington Post:
Rudy Hermann Guede: Amanda Knox And Ex-Boyfriend Are The Killers

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/27/rudy-hermann-guede-amanda-knox-testimony_n_885005.html
Why did everyone who is pro-Knox act as though getting Guede on the stand was a good thing???:maddening:

I can't speak for "everyone," but I never expected anything useful to come from RG's testimony. I suspect others were just hoping.

His entire life is now controlled by ILE and will be for another decade and a half. Why would he say anything to annoy ILE? He knows he has nothing to fear as long as he says what ILE wants him to say.

 

[Nova]

In my considerable experience with universities, I have arrived at the opposite conclusion. Students are on a regular schedule due to courses, and it doesn't take long for them to schedule meals, sports and extra-curricular activities around their classes.

I believe you, otto, but apparently we have attended very different universities. Large American universities have for decades closed cafeterias and substituted "snack bars" to accommodate the irregular eating habits of students.

 

[otto]

Another source for the day's events:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3662268/Jailed-Guede-Knox-killed-Meredith.html

 

[otto]

Why "... off for the summer!"?

Given your considerable language skills, otto, I have to believe you know that phrase implies a vacation, holiday or other escape from responsibility.

Applying it to the mother of a young woman who is facing life in prison (a mother facing criminal charges herself for speaking out in defense of said daughter) is just cruel.

She's a math teacher, so I'm assuming that school is out for the summer.

 

[SMK]

I can't speak for "everyone," but I never expected anything useful to come from RG's testimony. I suspect others were just hoping.

His entire life is now controlled by ILE and will be for another decade and a half. Why would he say anything to annoy ILE? He knows he has nothing to fear as long as he says what ILE wants him to say.

Well, I wonder why he should be believed over Knox and Sollecito, when his DNA was found inside the victim. I would not believe anything he has to say. I knew he would be self-serving and thus ILE serving, but I thought the Defense has been waiting years to tear him apart on the stand? Maybe they just believe he is a lying fool. :waitasec:

 

[Nova]

Are you convinced that she lied about the time that they woke up that morning?

Not at all. Somebody played some music between 5 and 6 a.m., if ILE's computer techs are right. (Big "if.")

I don't see that that proves anything re when AK and RS went to bed or when they got out of bed.