Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #16

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I cannot imagine that educated and sophisticated persons such as the Sollecitos are known to be, could ever in their wildest dreams, imagine that Aviello's crappy, clumsy concoction of nonsense of a bogus story would help Raffaele and Amanda in any way, shape or form. Only a cretin or a moron would bribe such a boor. It is all gossip. He wants more attention, and he is getting it.

Thank you. I couldn't figure out a way to respond without getting banned.
 
Since contamination cannot be absolutely ruled out in any DNA lab, would you like to see DNA excluded from all murder investigations?

There is a difference between the remote possibility of contamination that attends to every DNA test and the Keystone Kops collection of evidence and deliberate misinterpretation of results we have in this case.

That's why protocols exist: to insure that DNA results are as accurate as possible. That protocols can't provide guarantees of perfection is no excuse to ignore them.
 
Perhaps he picked up lice in prison and had to shave his head ... that seems a little more likely that suggesting that after three years into his sentence, other prisoners thought he was too pretty so he shaved his head.

I got my idea for his motivation from a news report (ETA it was Rolling Stone; SMK linked to the very passage above) that said Sollecito had taken on the "look of a hardened criminal," something he might do for his own protection. But that was perhaps just that reporter's subjective impression and you are right that hygiene (or even convenience) was the motivation.

For his sake, I hope you are right.
 
The agenda of the investigators is to solve the murder of Meredith Kercher. Based on heaps of evidence, three culprits were found guilty and sentenced to a quarter of a century in jail. The agenda of the culprits is to do anything they can to obfuscate the truth, including trying to discredit DNA labs on the basis of claims that contamination cannot be ruled out, parading five lying prisoners through the court, alleging that every single person associated with the investigation is corrupt or incompetent and running a PR campaign to bury any information that reveals the involvement of the lovebirds in the murder.

BBM: as long as there is a stain on MK's pillow that might be semen, the highlighted claim is utter nonsense.

As for the rest, the DNA "claims" of the defense have now been seconded by independent experts appointed by the court. Continuing to call those claims obfuscation of the truth is dishonest.

I could go on, but I'm probably already in trouble.

And BTW, calling two people who haven't shared a private moment in three years "lovebirds" is offensive to those of us who actually do care about the truth.
 
And BTW, calling two people who haven't shared a private moment in three years "lovebirds" is offensive to those of us who actually do care about the truth.

Thank you. I wanted to raise this before but was too chicken :rocker:
 
If they couldn't have imagined his story would help them, then their lawyer should have realized that too. It was a stupid move putting this guy up on the stand. I don't think I've been impressed with any of the defense counsel thus far.

I think the defense counsel may have had an ethical obligation to put alternative claims on the stand. But I agree that Aviello was the weakest.
 
Any thoughts on how the defense is going to get around that staged breakin, other blood evidence and absence of alibi? Even if these two pieces of evidence are placed in question, that doesn't make the rest of the evidence disappear.

What other blood evidence?
 
Eww. I'm sorry, it never occurred to me that they would use the murder knife to cut potatoes with afterwards.

But if they had done that... then the logic would be they doused the knife in bleach, and then sometime later used it to cut potatoes (or some starchy food), and then cleaned it again in such a thorough way that the police's suspicions were raised enough that they thought it was the murder weapon (because it was so clean?)

The WHOLE scenario is that they took the kitchen knife from Raf's house, randomly met Rudy at the basketball court, went to the cottage, killed Meredith, cleaned the knife somewhere, took it back to the cottage. Scrubbed and bleached it. Sometime within the next three days cooked with it (instead of using the other knives), and then thoroughly cleaned it again to a level where the suspicions of the police were raised.

It defies plausibility. JMO. :innocent:
Oh come on, they couldn't care less about Meredith. They went on with their daily business as nothing happened. Why you think they didn't toss the knife in the first place? Why didn't RS toss his knife? He cleaned it and put it back in his pocket. They did exactly that with the kitchen knife. And I am not claiming to know exactly what they ate after the murder. That was my whole point. Maybe this, maybe that. You simply can't say anything absolute about that starch. Nothing. IMO.
 
Firstly, I'm not convinced this is an issue of maturity. Secondly, if it were, I would say that the idea of having to make yourself less of a sexual target in a prison situation is most definitely a 'man' issue rather than one you would associate with a child. Therefore, I don't really get your logic here.

I find it odd that a 25 year old convicted murderer is described with a feminine term like "pretty", and I think the most 25 year old men would prefer to be described as good looking or handsome rather than pretty, but that's just me.

If Sollecito was a sexual target in prison, that would have happened 4 years ago so it doesn't account for his recent haircut.
 
Did it ever occur to anyone that since the letters to the Court went ignored and never investigated in the first trial that the defense was simply doing due diligence?

This should of been investigated by ILE when these started to come forward instead they were ignored thus the defense had to bring them up in the appeals. It does not mean they believed them to be true. That is their job to defend their clients

Exactly. I've been trying to say this ever since the appearances. Thank you for putting it better.
 
I got my idea for his motivation from a news report (ETA it was Rolling Stone; SMK linked to the very passage above) that said Sollecito had taken on the "look of a hardened criminal," something he might do for his own protection. But that was perhaps just that reporter's subjective impression and you are right that hygiene (or even convenience) was the motivation.

For his sake, I hope you are right.

I don't think a buzz cut makes Sollecito look like a hardened criminal. His odd facial expressions give the impression that he is psychologically disturbed.
 
BBM: as long as there is a stain on MK's pillow that might be semen, the highlighted claim is utter nonsense.

As for the rest, the DNA "claims" of the defense have now been seconded by independent experts appointed by the court. Continuing to call those claims obfuscation of the truth is dishonest.

I could go on, but I'm probably already in trouble.

And BTW, calling two people who haven't shared a private moment in three years "lovebirds" is offensive to those of us who actually do care about the truth.

That mark on the pillow is more likely vaseline or makeup, which Meredith was known to use. There is no semen in the room.

I'm sorry you find the term "lovebirds" offensive. That is indeed what this pair is. They met, and a few hours later they were in bed together. They were then inseparable until the arrest. Sollecito brings Knox little gifts of chocolates when they meet in court, so they're still lovebirds.
 
What other blood evidence?

There is blood evidence in the bathroom, hallway and Filomina's bedroom.

For additional information, I suggest you read the court documents that have been translated to English (thanks to some generous professional interpreters that have donated their time and knowledge). The evidence is clearly documented both in the pre and post trial documents.
 
What am I mistaken about? Forensic evidence regarding Guede has been accepted by the court, so presumably there is nothing incorrect about the collection and analysis of the evidence. The DNA on the knife handle was accepted and not considered to be contaminated. The only evidence that is put into question because, hypothetically, contamination could have occurred are the two pieces of evidence that clearly implicate the lovebirds in the murder. I find it interesting that the DNA on the knife handle, which doesn't implicate anyone in the murder, was collected and analyzed correctly.

This is a complete misstatement of facts. See posts above for correct info.
 
I find it odd that a 25 year old man is described with a feminine term like "pretty", and I think the most 25 year old men would prefer to be described as good looking or handsome rather than pretty, but that's just me.

If Sollecito was a sexual target in prison, that would have happened 4 years ago so it doesn't account for his recent haircut.

It's not that odd in my culture. Pretty boy is a standard term and quite widely used. Even so, you clearly understand that the term means the same as good looking or handsome (though with a slightly different slant) so the vocabulary used shouldn't be the issue here.

However, I do see your point about the timing of the haircut.
 
I cannot imagine that educated and sophisticated persons such as the Sollecitos are known to be, could ever in their wildest dreams, imagine that Aviello's crappy, clumsy concoction of nonsense of a bogus story would help Raffaele and Amanda in any way, shape or form. Only a cretin or a moron would bribe such a boor. It is all gossip. He wants more attention, and he is getting it.
So intelligent that they put him on the witness stand in the first place. Everybody knew from the start he was a liar.
 
Here's a new article about the prisoner's love for the "pretty" 25 year old Sollecito, and how he was to be paid for his false testimony with the full knowledge of Sollecito and Knox lawyers. That's a bit of a problem.

http://www.nuovasocieta.it/cronaca/...ho-mentito-perche-amo-raffaele-sollecito.html

I think it's important to keep in mind that no defense lawyer is obligated to parade liars before the court under the guise of presenting a proper defense. It was a serious error in judgement to present the prisoner circus and everyone knew it the day it happened.
 
Oh come on, they couldn't care less about Meredith. They went on with their daily business as nothing happened. Why you think they didn't toss the knife in the first place? Why didn't RS toss his knife? He cleaned it and put it back in his pocket. They did exactly that with the kitchen knife. And I am not claiming to know exactly what they ate after the murder. That was my whole point. Maybe this, maybe that. You simply can't say anything absolute about that starch. Nothing. IMO.

AK, at least, spent more than 40 hours at the police station over the next four days. When, exactly, did they go "on with their daily business as (though) nothing happened"?

What knife did RS clean and put back in his pocket? Is there now evidence that another of RS' knives was used in the murder?
 
I find it odd that a 25 year old man is described with a feminine term like "pretty", and I think the most 25 year old men would prefer to be described as good looking or handsome rather than pretty, but that's just me.

If Sollecito was a sexual target in prison, that would have happened 4 years ago so it doesn't account for his recent haircut.

Some men are pretty. And they don't usually mind being described so by a woman, as in this case.

I just said he was "good-looking" and wouldn't want to look "pretty" in prison.

Can we drop it now? You've called RS far worse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
189
Guests online
1,550
Total visitors
1,739

Forum statistics

Threads
599,763
Messages
18,099,261
Members
230,920
Latest member
LuLuWooWoo
Back
Top