Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #16

[otto]

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?

How many hours did other suspects spend at the police station? All of Meredith's close friends were there as long as Knox on the first day ... was that 12-15 hours? I think we need to keep things in perspective, so mentioning that Knox was questioned for x number of hours means little on its own. What about Sofie? How many hours was she at the police station, waiting to be questioned ... sitting next to Knox? How many times was she asked to come in to clarify her answers? What about the guys in the downstairs cottage that were out of town at the time of the murder ... how many hours were they at the police station?

When did the pair have time to smooch in the lingerie department at the fashion shop?

 

[Nova]

Can you be more specific?

"You're wrong" doesn't do anything for me.

Nope.

 

[otto]

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.

Sollecito is a murderer. He is convicted of murder, just like Scott Peterson and so many other men that are not "pretty".

 

[otto]

Nope. TOS.

I don't understand. Are you saying that the Terms of Service prevent you from explaining why you state that I'm mistaken?

 

[Nova]

How many hours did other suspects spend at the police station? All of Meredith's close friends were there as long as Knox on the first day ... was that 12-15 hours? I think we need to keep things in perspective, so mentioning that Knox was questioned for x number of hours means little on its own. What about Sofie? How many hours was she at the police station, waiting to be questioned ... sitting next to Knox? How many times was she asked to come in to clarify her answers? What about the guys in the downstairs cottage that were out of town at the time of the murder ... how many hours were they at the police station?

When did the pair have time to smooch in the lingerie department at the fashion shop?

It wasn't a "fashion shop" and didn't have a "lingerie department". If AK had worn the same pair of underwear all week, you and the tabloids would have had worse to say.

As for the number of hours, I was responding to a claim that AK and RS just "went on with their lives as if nothing happened". My point was they didn't have time to "go on"--no more than others, I'm sure.

 

[Nova]

I don't understand. Are you saying that the Terms of Service prevent you from explaining why you state that I'm mistaken?

I can't keep correcting the same misinformation time after time and do so politely. Perhaps somebody else will want to try. Or you can read back a few pages.

 

[otto]

Isn't that a great headline: Aviello: "I lied because I love Raffaele Sollecito." Also in the article: According to Aviello, his version of events was not only false, but the false testimony was agreed upon with Sollecito and Knox lawyers. He was to be paid 30 000 euros for a sex change operation by Sollecito's sister. Per the lying prisoner, the false testimony was intended "to create confusion in the process." Not too long ago, posts on this forum defended these liars as being good people, even if they were mafia and child murderers, but the fact that Aviello has been convicted for libel eight times may be the more appealing perspective to take today.

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

 

[otto]

It wasn't a "fashion shop" and didn't have a "lingerie department". If AK had worn the same pair of underwear all week, you and the tabloids would have had worse to say.

As for the number of hours, I was responding to a claim that AK and RS just "went on with their lives as if nothing happened". My point was they didn't have time to "go on"--no more than others, I'm sure.

She spent 82 Euros on one camisole and one pair of panties at a shop called Bubble and she was overheard by the shopkeeper making sexual overtures with Sollecito while they were selecting the lingerie. How far was that supposed to take her ... to the next week? I read the article where Edda claimed that Knox bought underwear at a second hand shop and that it wasn't really lingerie or anything odd ... but it was odd, given the fact that her roommate had just been brutally murdered what ... the day before, two days before? Buying underwear at a second hand shop is odd too, but what happened was odd in a more serious way.

Might have been $82, but that's an awful lot of money to spend on one pair of panties with the excuse that she didn't have access to her things and needed underwear for the next 26 years.

 

[Allusonz]

No ... but I doubt Mr Sollecito cut his hair because he was too "pretty". He's a 25 year old man, not a pretty child.

Since you have no cite for lice it therefore could simply have been a preference of RS which has nothing to do with this murder whether his hais is short or longer

 

[Allusonz]

Someone else made the post about the prisoner being paid by someone on the lovebirds team so that he could have a sex change. I was merely responding. I suggest you have a look at whomever made that post and request the citation.

I have added a link below ...

There is to date no formal charge for this particular accusation is that correct?

 

[Allusonz]

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.

The point I am making is that there is nothing that puts that knife as the murder weapon. If it tests negative for blood that means there should be no DNA of MK on that knife. This particular knife could not of made all the wounds nor did it match the outline on the bed.

No knives where taken from the cottage and tested. None. Yet I am to believe that it makes more sense that while stoned they carried this knife through the streets of Perugia, used it as a murder weapon, carried it back to RS's and used it to cook with when the cottage had a vast array of knives that were never examined.

There is simply no logic to the argument you are trying to make. ILE did not properly investigate this murder

 

[Allusonz]

Someone else made the post about the prisoner being paid by someone on the lovebirds team so that he could have a sex change. I was merely responding. I suggest you have a look at whomever made that post and request the citation.

I have added a link below ...

Until there is evidence which point to this I think this must simply put down to some people attempting to throw red herrings as this has nothing to do with whether AK or RS were involved in the murder

 

[otto]

I can't keep correcting the same misinformation time after time and do so politely. Perhaps somebody else will want to try. Or you can read back a few pages.

My understanding is that Guede's case is closed, so it's not possible to introduce new evidence. It's worth noting that collection of evidence was closed at a certain time prior to trial. This part of the process is done to ensure that the prosecution can't spring new evidence on the accused at the last minute.

It was deterimined during Guede's trial that although he only admitted to being at the scene, there was evidence that he was involved in the assault. Similar evidence led to the conviction of Sollecito and Knox. DNA evidence was matched to all three suspects. If DNA evidence is in question, then it would also be in question with the case against Guede. It's not really possible to argue the lonewolf theory when there is nothing to prove that he was doing anything other than being in the bathroom during the attack and then going to Meredith's aid. His footprints and fingerprints are consistent with his story. If the DNA is to be tossed, then I think the lonewolf theory has to go with it.

The DNA on the knife handle has been a confirmed match with Knox. This evidence is neither here nor there except that the DNA on the blade could hypothetically be contaminated, and Sollecito said it got there during a dinner party that Meredith attended at his apt. In fact, there had never been there. Same story with the clasp. Hypothetically it may have been contaminated. If it wasn't flying DNA in the cottage, it was faulty lab work. Seems to me that if there was something wrong with the collection and processing of the evidence, then both the blade and the handle should be contaminated.

 

[Allusonz]

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.

The prosecution presented no expert witnesses for the alleged "staged" break in thus until they present evidence that directly points to this it is impossible to state with any degree of certainty this was "staged". Thus this theory flies right out the door

This though was not about what I posted about.

 

[Allusonz]

My understanding is that Guede's case is closed, so it's not possible to introduce new evidence. It's worth noting that collection of evidence was closed at a certain time prior to trial. This part of the process is done to ensure that the prosecution can't spring new evidence on the accused at the last minute.

It was deterimined during Guede's trial that although he only admitted to being at the scene, there was evidence that he was involved in the assault. Similar evidence led to the conviction of Sollecito and Knox. DNA evidence was matched to all three suspects. If DNA evidence is in question, then it would also be in question with the case against Guede. It's not really possible to argue the lonewolf theory when there is nothing to prove that he was doing anything other than being in the bathroom during the attack and then going to Meredith's aid. His footprints and fingerprints are consistent with his story. If the DNA is to be tossed, then I think the lonewolf theory has to go with it.

The DNA on the knife handle has been a confirmed match with Knox. This evidence is neither here nor there except that the DNA on the blade could hypothetically be contaminated, and Sollecito said it got there during a dinner party that Meredith attended at his apt. In fact, there had never been there. Same story with the clasp. Hypothetically it may have been contaminated. If it wasn't flying DNA in the cottage, it was faulty lab work. Seems to me that if there was something wrong with the collection and processing of the evidence, then both the blade and the handle should be contaminated.

According to Italian law, and in view of the new developments regarding the collection, handling, and testing protocols/procedures which were not followed yes he can attempt to have the DNA against him reviewed

 

[otto]

Since you have no cite for lice it therefore could simply have been a preference of RS which has nothing to do with this murder whether his hais is short or longer

Sure. Sollecito could have had a buzz cut because he's a 25 year old man and needed a haircut ... nothing to do with looking "pretty" to the other prisoners or lice.

 

[Allusonz]

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.

At what point do you consider that there comes a point of reasonable doubt? I ask this as there simply comes a point in time when a person must realize, including myself, whether there is sufficient or insufficient proof that an individual/s have been involved in a crime.

Thus I must ask at what point must a person state no matter whether you believe someone to be innocent or guilty does the state not prove the case?

 

[otto]

The point I am making is that there is nothing that puts that knife as the murder weapon. If it tests negative for blood that means there should be no DNA of MK on that knife. This particular knife could not of made all the wounds nor did it match the outline on the bed.

No knives where taken from the cottage and tested. None. Yet I am to believe that it makes more sense that while stoned they carried this knife through the streets of Perugia, used it as a murder weapon, carried it back to RS's and used it to cook with when the cottage had a vast array of knives that were never examined.

There is simply no logic to the argument you are trying to make. ILE did not properly investigate this murder

Wasn't it part of a skin cell on the blade? It is believed that there were two knives involved in the attack, which is most likely one of the reasons the Supreme Court ruled that more than one person was involved in the attack. The missing knife could have made the partial print on the bed. Guede admitted that he threw his knife away.

 

[Allusonz]

Sure. Sollecito could have had a buzz cut because he's a 25 year old man and needed a haircut ... nothing to do with looking "pretty" to the other prisoners or lice.

What bearing does RS's current hair style have on the burden of proof in this case?

 

[Allusonz]

Wasn't it part of a skin cell on the blade? It is believed that there were two knives involved in the attack, which is most likely one of the reasons the Supreme Court ruled that more than one person was involved in the attack. The missing knife could have made the partial print on the bed. Guede admitted that he threw his knife away.

Nothing. Nada