Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #15

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nova said:
ILE destroyed three out of four hard drives that they investigated. And you want me to take their word on computer usage? I don't think so.
Click to expand...

<modsnip>. Feel free to reject trial evidence, witness testimony and the Judge's summary report. <modsnip>?
 
otto said:
Sure. What we know is that during questioning as a witness between 11:30 PM and 1:45 AM, Knox told a pack of lies (or "rubbish" per Sollecito) to police. She lied to police throughout her questioning as a witness, but the last lie, about Patrick, was the whopper that changed her status from witness to suspect. At 1:45 AM, her statement had been written in English and she signed it. After being detained, she demaned to be heard, so the prosecutor was hauled out of bed and required to hear what Knox had to say. The interpreter that assisted with this Knox-statement testified in court (proving any claims about the absence of an interpreter as untrue). At about 5:30 in the morning, Knox signed another English language statement confirming her earlier statement.

NOTE: Neither of these statements were admissable during her trial.
Click to expand...

BBM1: We know nothing of the kind. <modsnip>.

Per AK's account of the interrogation, she told the truth until it became painfully clear the truth would not be accepted by ILE, so she caved and said what they wanted her to say.

BBM2: This doesn't pass the laugh test. I seriously doubt AK was so intimidated that she put herself at the scene of the crime, but so confident that she "demanded" an Italian prosecutor be summoned at her beck and call. I wouldn't have the nerve to "demand" that and I'm almost three times her age. Mignini was already at the station; once the tag-team got the statement it wanted from AK, Mignini was eager to get involved. Perhaps his involvement was mandated by Italian law re suspects; perhaps he just wanted in on the glory. Either way, it was his decision, not Amanda's.

As you know <modsnip>, the "interpreter" was not a true interpreter, but an interrogator who spoke English. In no way did she function as a neutral facilitator of communication between AK and ILE. On the contrary, per AK, the English-speaking officer only amped up the pressure by insisting that AK had repressed memories of the murder that she should work to recall.

AK's third statement does not confirm the other two, it already begins to back away from them, omitting key details and claiming that AK's memory of the night of the murder was "more unreal than real (to her)". That is NOT a confirmation.
 
otto said:
Of course not. Feel free to reject trial evidence, witness testimony and the Judge's summary report. Out of curiosity, what will you use as a source for fact checking if you reject the facts accepted by the court?
Click to expand...

Frankly, a lot of things about this case will remain a mystery thanks to the incompetence of ILE. It's a shame, but not something to be fixed by blindly accepting the word of obvious incompetents.
 
otto said:
It sounds like you're expecting that everything listed in the defense appeal affidavits is going to be reviewed in this appeal ... but that is not what's happening. There were pages and pages of items that the defense wanted the courts to examine during the appeal process, but only three items were accepted: knife DNA, bra clasp DNA and testimony of the homeless guy. Everything else was rejected.

It is interesting, however, that it is acknowledged that there is a long, long list of evidence that will not be reconsidered; which was decided on during trial ... and not merely 3 pieces of evidence in total.
Click to expand...
Right, this is why I often give up and cannot focus on the different discussions of the facts. I am too aware that Guede and the DNA review are the end of the case. The show is over, and most of the material will not be reviewed or discussed. I have always felt this appeal is not a real review, but a gesture. It brings me down. :razz::mad:
 
Nova said:
BBM1: We know nothing of the kind. <modsnip>.

Per AK's account of the interrogation, she told the truth until it became painfully clear the truth would not be accepted by ILE, so she caved and said what they wanted her to say.

BBM2: This doesn't pass the laugh test. I seriously doubt AK was so intimidated that she put herself at the scene of the crime, but so confident that she "demanded" an Italian prosecutor be summoned at her beck and call. I wouldn't have the nerve to "demand" that and I'm almost three times her age. Mignini was already at the station; once the tag-team got the statement it wanted from AK, Mignini was eager to get involved. Perhaps his involvement was mandated by Italian law re suspects; perhaps he just wanted in on the glory. Either way, it was his decision, not Amanda's.

As you know <modsnip>, the "interpreter" was not a true interpreter, but an interrogator who spoke English. In no way did she function as a neutral facilitator of communication between AK and ILE. On the contrary, per AK, the English-speaking officer only amped up the pressure by insisting that AK had repressed memories of the murder that she should work to recall.

The third statement does not confirm the other two, it already begins to back away from them, omitting key details and claiming that AK's memory of the night of the murder was "more unreal than real (to her)". That is NOT a confirmation.
Click to expand...

I will provide one example to demonstrate that Knox lied on several occassions during her questioning as a witness, and leave it with you to research other examples if you are still unsure about the absence of truthfulness of Knox (suggestions: start with time they woke up day after murder):

Knox said that she ate dinner late. She gave times of: late, possibly as late as 11 or 10 and 9:30. Each of these statements was a lie as the correct time was about 8:20. These false/incorrect/untrue statements were provided during her quesitoning as a witness (she was not asked to clarify this point on the night her status was changed to suspect). Some may prefer to describe these lies as little mistakes, little confusions, quirky Knox being quirky Knox, or whatever, but the bottom line is that she could have determined the correct time based on when she had to work, but instead she lied several times.

<modsnip>

At no time did the police expect her to provide incorrect times (note: plural) for eating dinner. It is not the fault of the police that Knox lied to police.

Knox herself admitted that she had an interpreter, the interpreter testified in court and Knox signed a couple of statements translated by the interpreter, so much as some are terribly unhappy with the translated (Italian to English and vice versa) statements provided, and signed, by Knox, there's nothing to be done. That is, claiming that the interpreter was a translator or trained in criminal justice does not detract from the fact that she was an interpreter that interpreted what was said in Italian such that Knox was able to address the questions in English. If the interpreter made serious errors, we could attack her credentials ... but Knox has not suggested that she made errors, so presumably the translation is accurate.
 
Nova said:
Frankly, a lot of things about this case will remain a mystery thanks to the incompetence of ILE. It's a shame, but not something to be fixed by blindly accepting the word of obvious incompetents.
Click to expand...

If one were to reject the facts of the case, indeed the case would be a mystery. However, to suggest that everyone associated with the case is incompetent, corrupt or ... all those other bad things ... and therefore there is no evidence doesn't seem quite right. It might be worth pointing out that the same investigators, analysts, experts, et cetera collected and identified evidence used to convict Guede ... raising the question of how those same people were competent when working with evidence implicating Guede but incompetent when working with evidence implicating the other two murderers.
 
SMK said:
Right, this is why I often give up and cannot focus on the different discussions of the facts. I am too aware that Guede and the DNA review are the end of the case. The show is over, and most of the material will not be reviewed or discussed. I have always felt this appeal is not a real review, but a gesture. It brings me down. :razz::mad:
Click to expand...

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. The judge ruled on what evidence would be reconsidered during appeal, and the result was many "denied" and three "accepted". The three points are the two DNA samples and the one witness. Regarding the DNA samples, they would be retested if they could be retested and, barring that, the analysis would be reviewed. There was a provision such that the judge could consider other evidence as it arose - and that is where we see the 5 lying prisoners and Guede's testimony being considered during appeal.
 
otto said:
I will provide one example to demonstrate that Knox lied on several occassions during her questioning as a witness, and leave it with you to research other examples if you are still unsure about the absence of truthfulness of Knox (suggestions: start with time they woke up day after murder):

Knox said that she ate dinner late. She gave times of: late, possibly as late as 11 or 10 and 9:30. Each of these statements was a lie as the correct time was about 8:20. These false/incorrect/untrue statements were provided during her quesitoning as a witness (she was not asked to clarify this point on the night her status was changed to suspect). Some may prefer to describe these lies as little mistakes, little confusions, quirky Knox being quirky Knox, or whatever, but the bottom line is that she could have determined the correct time based on when she had to work, but instead she lied several times.

Some people!

At no time did the police expect her to provide incorrect times (note: plural) for eating dinner. It is not the fault of the police that Knox lied to police.

Knox herself admitted that she had an interpreter, the interpreter testified in court and Knox signed a couple of statements translated by the interpreter, so much as some are terribly unhappy with the translated (Italian to English and vice versa) statements provided, and signed, by Knox, there's nothing to be done. That is, claiming that the interpreter was a translator or trained in criminal justice does not detract from the fact that she was an interpreter that interpreted what was said in Italian such that Knox was able to address the questions in English. If the interpreter made serious errors, we could attack her credentials ... but Knox has not suggested that she made errors, so presumably the translation is accurate.
Click to expand...

That AK misstated the time she had dinner five days after the fact is hardly proof she is a regular liar, unless you somehow think the word "liar" means anyone who ever makes an erroneous statement. By that latter standard, we have legions of liars around here (certainly including myself).

I don't believe you are even slightly confused at the objection many of us have to calling an English-speaking interrogator a "translator." The latter term implies a fair and neutral converter of one language into another. Since the woman in question was an interrogator, we have no idea whether she actually aided communication or actually made it worse by mistranslating what was said.

ETA: You know, many of these issues could be cleared up if we had transcripts of the Knox interrogations that night. But oopsies! No such luck. :rolleyes:
 
otto said:
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. The judge ruled on what evidence would be reconsidered during appeal, and the result was many "denied" and three "accepted". The three points are the two DNA samples and the one witness. Regarding the DNA samples, they would be retested if they could be retested and, barring that, the analysis would be reviewed. There was a provision such that the judge could consider other evidence as it arose - and that is where we see the 5 lying prisoners and Guede's testimony being considered during appeal.
Click to expand...
I know. :(
 
otto said:
If one were to reject the facts of the case, indeed the case would be a mystery. However, to suggest that everyone associated with the case is incompetent, corrupt or ... all those other bad things ... and therefore there is no evidence doesn't seem quite right. It might be worth pointing out that the same investigators, analysts, experts, et cetera collected and identified evidence used to convict Guede ... raising the question of how those same people were competent when working with evidence implicating Guede but incompetent when working with evidence implicating the other two murderers.
Click to expand...

If Guede hadn't left so much of himself in the murder room, I'm sure he'd still be hopping rides on trains all over Europe.

And let's remember ILE arrested somebody ELSE for two weeks before finally getting around to RG.
 
otto said:
For another perspective on current case updates, read the last few articles posted here:

http://maundygregory.wordpress.com/
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting this:
Undoubtedly, Monday will see some cat-and-mouse between the lawyers and the bench as to how far from this narrow issue questioning is permitted to stray. But, even if the presiding judge keeps the upper hand, Guede’s appearance could have a sizeable impact. And, although a sting in the tail for the prosecution is not impossible, it looks like it is the defence who have most to lose, assuming they are not privy to some dramatic inside information about Guede’s private thoughts.

For one thing, the simple fact of Guede standing up in the courtroom and speaking, regardless of what he says, will be undermining for the defence. Their line is that Guede committed the murder without the involvement of Knox and Sollecito. In the original Knox/Sollecito trial, they painted Guede as a career criminal, stressing how little he had in common with the other two defendants. A criminal alliance between the three of them was just implausible, they argued.

Although it shouldn’t be, Guede’s race is a significant aid to this line of reasoning. Any Perugia news stand tells you why this should be so: immigration and the petty crimes of African and Eastern European migrants are a key concern of the local media. This is not a society at ease with its cosmopolitan side. Although he has lived in Italy since the age of 5, Guede is Ivorian by birth. He is, therefore, a natural candidate for stereotyping. But less so once you hear him speak: this is no dark-skinned savage. He is articulate and intelligent and delivers his words in a well-spoken local accent. In fact, although his birth certificate might suggest otherwise, he will come across as being as Italian as anyone else in the room.
Click to expand...
http://maundygregory.wordpress.com/
 
Nova said:
That AK misstated the time she had dinner five days after the fact is hardly proof she is a regular liar, unless you somehow think the word "liar" means anyone who ever makes an erroneous statement. By that latter standard, we have legions of liars around here (certainly including myself).

I don't believe you are even slightly confused at the objection many of us have to calling an English-speaking interrogator a "translator." The latter term implies a fair and neutral converter of one language into another. Since the woman in question was an interrogator, we have no idea whether she actually aided communication or actually made it worse by mistranslating what was said.

ETA: You know, much of these issues could be cleared up if we had transcripts of the Knox interrogations that night. But Oopsies! No such luck. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yes, some would prefer to interpret the several lies she told police as 'confused', 'quirky Knox', 'mistaken', "misstated" and so on, but Knox was known for being on time for class, so she is aware of time commitments. On the night of the murder, she had a time commitment to be at work, and she should have been aware of the fact that she ate dinner prior to going to work. She was on her way to work when Patrick said she was not needed. That time commitment enabled her to pinpoint the time of dinner.

During questioning regarding a murder, I'm sure that an innocent person would understand the importance of accuracy and think back to the night of the murder, pinpoint the time in relation to other commitments and provide investigators with accurate information.

What did Knox do? She lied several times, never once giving the correct time. Who gave the correct time: Dr Sollecito.

Soooooooooo ... Knox is in Italy, she's being questioned by police, she can't deal with the Italian language, she is provided with someone that can question her in her native language and ... how is this a problem?

No oopsie ... witness statements are not video taped.
 
Nova said:
If Guede hadn't left so much of himself in the murder room, I'm sure he'd still be hopping rides on trains all over Europe.

And let's remember ILE arrested somebody ELSE for two weeks before finally getting around to RG.
Click to expand...

Dishonest eye-witness testimony resulted in the arrest of an innocent man - that had nothing to do with the collection and analysis of evidence. Evidence that was collected and analyzed at the scene resulted in the conviction of all three suspects however ... supposedly ... in the collection of evidence implicating Guede, all was well, and in the collection of evidence implicating Knox and Sollecito, the claim is that everything was done wrong. How is that possible - especially since the investigators did not know at the time of collection which samples they should imcompetently collect and which they should competently collect?
 
Frank's details:

http://perugiashock.com/

Alessi's story sounds believable to me. I posted earlier how the one downstairs roommate said there had been someone snooping around in the garden prior to this killing.

Then we have alessi saying RG's friend followed MK home.

The only thing that does not jive with it is that we don't know of any unknown DNA on MK's person. And I don't so much know about MK letting them in house.
 
wasnt_me said:
Frank's details:

http://perugiashock.com/

Alessi's story sounds believable to me. I posted earlier how the one downstairs roommate said there had been someone snooping around in the garden prior to this killing.

Then we have alessi saying RG's friend followed MK home.

The only thing that does not jive with it is that we don't know of any unknown DNA on MK's person. And I don't so much know about MK letting them in house.
Click to expand...

"The only problem with Alessi is the fact that he is one of Italy’s most notorious murderers himself, convicted for the 2006 kidnapping and murder of a two-year-old boy. The lawyer representing the Kercher family Francesco Maresca held up a photo of the child and asked Alessi, “Do you know who this is?” “No,” Alessi replied, looking away. “That’s ok, we know who he is,” replied Maresca."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/06/18/amanda-knox-appeal-can-prison-gossip-free-her.html

"Alessi's testimony was interrupted and the hearing briefly suspended when prosecutors reminded the court that the witness was being investigated for false testimony."

http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/...da-knox-innocent/story-fn6ck55c-1226077825180
 
wasnt_me said:
That article is racially offensive. I'm not inclined to thank anyone posting something that assumes black people are "dark skinned savages."
Click to expand...

The article discusses all of the false preconceptions about Guede and tries to set the record straight. Surely you've seen the references to Guede as a street , Ivorian Coast drifter and drug dealer, and etc. The author suggests that people be prepared for an articulate, intelligent, former basketball star who speaks Italian like a Perugian.

For the record, he does not assume that black people are as you describe.
 
about the blood on the window, Nova,

I'm looking for a backup for what this article states, but so far, I have just this picture:

436054ce3e096c4a43.jpg


Someone claiming that this could be blood on the left, smudges scuffs, and a place where ANOTHER nail actually did fall out during RG's climb. Honestly I just see the blood looking smudge on the left. you tell me.I suppose if RG cut himself, he could have touched the wall right there. It's just below the sill. his hand hand received the cuts. This stuff, I dno't know about. Just looking for whatever proves or disproves that statement in the earlier article about blood on the window.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 143 more.
Total: 1,779 (members: 144, guests: 1,635)

Online statistics

Members online
144
Guests online
1,635
Total visitors
1,779
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,112
Messages
18,134,846
Members
231,235
Latest member
craig21876
Back
Top