Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #16

[For The Kids]

"Francesco Maresca is a lawyer paid by the so-called "dignified" Kercher family. He earns his wealth by following around Knox and trying to protect a civil claim of upwards of 8,000,000 Euros (A ton of cash.)"

So-called "dignified" Kercher family?

Whoa ... what is that supposed to mean?

I was wondering that also nice to know how the families of murder victims are treated i guess. Personally i think the Kerchers have been far far more dignified than Amandas family.

 

[Nova]

But the compensation is not a certainty, winning the case (justice for the parents) is the objective. He is doing a excellent job, with or without compensation coming into the equation.

That's fine, fred. The original point was just that the system itself turns the victim's lawyer into something other than a mere paragon of impartiality.

Yet some posters insist on portraying lawyers with whom they agree as if they were all angels sent from Meredith Kercher in Heaven to defend her reputation. (For some reason this only happens with pro-prosecution posters. Those of us who favor the defense seem ready to believe the DT is composed of human beings.)

The original reference to Maresca's compensation was merely intended to say, "Come on, folks; Maresca is human, too. He isn't the Angel Gabriel."

 

[SkewedView]

Hmmm, this is...interesting, now that I take another look at it...

From this:
http://forensicdnaconsulting.wordpr...perts’-report-in-the-amanda-knox-case-part-i/

(This section is regarding the original knife testing - sample A was from the handle, sample B is the infamous supposed MK sample)



So what does this mean? Basically, Steffanoni came up with negative results for the presence of DNA on sample B, with a non-standard test, and then somehow that no-DNA sample miraculously produces a profile after all sorts of nonsensical concentration procedures - and on top of that, she lies under questioning about the initial test, saying that it was of a type and result that there is zero record for, seemingly to cover up for the real test results that she of course doesn't mention in questioning. :liar:

Wow. Just...wow...wonder if this will be another source of forged documents produced by surprise (against all normal rules of evidence) by the prosecution. Or maybe the dog ate the records. anic:


ETA: Looks like sleight of hand trickery to me - hey wow, it really is a magic show! And here all this time I thought we were talking about science. :doh:

I'm bringing this back up because I managed to pry my wife away from classes/work/her Nook long enough to have her take a look at this, as she has no interest in the case but has worked with all of these techniques in the course of her cancer research. Here's what she had to say:

One - she wanted me to make it very clear that her field is research, not forensics, so she can make no comment on the field work (her own samples are always taken in the lab, under tightly controlled circumstances, a luxury that forensic techs do not have). With that caveat, it should be noted that the thresholds of acceptable work in peer review of both fields is identical.

Two - Shenanigans! That was her first comment. Had to pass that on, as I just found it amusing.

Three - PCR concentrations must always have control concentrations, as the process is extremely open to contamination/tampering. Any tests/studies done with this technique that do not have the control data included are automatically considered invalid. This is universal to all peer review involving the process, and is never optional. No ethical scientist would claim that such control records are 'like a doctor washing his hands'.

Four - She couldn't make heads or tails as to why anyone would use the Flourometer in that manner, as it is not intended for such a use. In addition, she noted that the test is useless unless you 'tag' the cells beforehand. I'm not sure what that last means, just passing it on.

Five - any test/study in which the docs and the statements of the presiding scientist directly conflict with each other automatically fails peer review, for reasons that should be obvious. If possible, the test/study should then be repeated with special attention paid to reporting methodology accurately and truthfully. If not possible, then the presiding scientist is SOL, the high price of unethical behavior.

Six - shenanigans! Sorry, that still cracks me up.

 

[For The Kids]

I don't know. It isn't language I would have used and I don't blame you for questioning it. People should take better care when discussing the families of case principals.

Something one might consider when discussing the Knox and Mellas families.

In my opinion the families arent comparable. The Kerchers have been dignified throughout whereas the Mellas/Knox families to me seem brash and unpleasant/

MOO

 

[Nova]

Every profession has some people of poor character. There are sleezy doctors, dentists, teachers, journalists ... but to assume that all lawyers are sleezy or greedy is bizarre. There are books about unethical doctors, dentists, teachers and journalists. That does not mean that the entire profession is sleezy or greedy.

Furthermore, what is true in the US is not necessarily true in the rest of the world. I think it is very important to keep some perspective. The US is known for ambulance chasing and for everyone being lawsuit happy, so it's understandable that there might be a perception that everyone in the world thinks similarly ... but it is a mistake.

otto is quite right here. Thought I shouldn't miss an occasion to note that he and I agree.

 

[Nova]

I think there's a tendency for people to be cynical and jaded when they don't like the results that lawyers achieve in the courtroom. Occasionally there is a lawyer that is sleezy and greedy, but their career is usually seedy. Maresca did not gain the reputation he has by being sleezy and greedy.

Furthermore, by ensuring that the culprit's conviction are upheld, there is no money. If 20 years go by with Knox and Sollecito in jail, they'll need another 20 years to earn what they owe the victim's family. By that time, Maresca may well be long in his grave. It's absurd to suggest that he has a financial motive to see the convictions upheld as upholding the convictions means there will be no money.

Okay, our agreement ends almost as soon as it began. AK and RS may have book deals, TV interviews and the like that pay fees which can be attached and confiscated in the event of a judgment against them.

Furthermore, as with Jose Baez, participation in such a high-profile case can make one's career and reap benefits far beyond the compensation for that particular case.

And, yes, it's also quite possible (as I have said more than once before) that Maresca was horrified by the murder of Meredith Kercher and wants to do his part to insure the culprits go to jail.

The motives above are not mutually exclusive. They may all apply to Maresca.

 

[For The Kids]

Unlike the US that you seem to look down upon so much, Italy has no laws disallowing convicts from making profits from their infamy, so there really is a good chance that if AK & RS have their convictions upheld, the Kerchers will still eventually get their money, and their lawyer with them.

Maresca has gained his questionable reputation through courtroom theatrics that are undignified, disrespectful of the process and unnecessary. Really, is it not the height of idiocy and rudeness to interrupt a presentation by the court appointed experts when he knew full well that he would have a go at them later that week? Meridith deserves better, IMO. And please don't go trying to peg motives onto me, I already stated that I like the fact that the Kerchers demanded this new round of witnesses.

In fairness what i saw during the C.A trial that happens in Florida also..

Btw im sure the money doesnt mean anything to the Kerchers. Its there daughter they want

 

[Nova]

People are upset with Meredith's lawyer because he requested that additional witnesses be heard regarding the DNA report. The defense and prosecution lawyers were not allowed to make the request, but the victim's lawyer was. That request was granted by Judge Hellman.

Because of this turn of events, there is a lot of backlash against the victim's lawyer. Some people seem upset that the judge is willing to seek out the truth by hearing all the information.

It would appear infantile for anyone to be stomping their feet because all relevant witnesses will be heard, and it's premature to completely trash Judge Hellman, therefore the victim's lawyer is being trashed.

I agree that neither Maresca nor Hellman should be vilified for doing their jobs. I don't care if it was a "loophole" (as some accounts describe it), Maresca was merely honoring his oath as a lawyer by exploiting that loophole.

 

[otto]

I was wondering that also nice to know how the families of murder victims are treated i guess. Personally i think the Kerchers have been far far more dignified than Amandas family.

It's shocking to read things like that, to see them reposted on a "victim friendly" site like this and to see no reaction to the offensive nature of the remarks.

The Kerchers have been extremely dignified. They have neither sought the media spotlight nor criticized anyone associated with the investigation. They have voiced their sincere disappointment in the fact that their daughter's murderers are being made into celebrities and that they have never received any word of condolence from one of the convicted murderers and her family.

 

[SkewedView]

How are convicted murderers going to make a living in jail? I fail to understand why anyone thinks that convicted criminals can earn millions behind bars ... so please enlighten me.

It seems to me that the Italian courtroom circus we saw a few weeks ago with the five convicted prisoners was a bit of a free for all with the lawyers, so why shouldn't other hearings be the same, and why blame the lawyer representing the victim for whatever courtroom order or disorder that occurs?

The bottom line is that Maresca is under attack by anti-verdict/anti-jury positioners because he made a request at the last hearing to have additional witnesses heard regarding the DNA report. That seems to have upset people to the extent that there is a full on attack of him.

Gee, isn't it nice of you to tell us what our motives are, thank you for enlightening us. And here I was going on about how I liked the request being made. Guess I'll bow to your superior knowledge of what I'm thinking. :banghead:

You do realize that lots of infamous convicts have made lucrative publication/movie/tv/interview deals from prison, right? Well, that's why most US states have laws in place to automatically send that money to the survivors of their victims. Italy has no such system in place. Do the math.

During that circus, there was cross examination going on. The independent experts were giving their presentation to the court, with cross scheduled for that weekend. It was utterly inappropriate and unprofesional for Maresca to scream over them in the midst of said presentation, and the Judge made that very clear. As I said before, Meridith deserves to be represented by someone with dignity, not by a buffoon trying to act like he's in some sixties courtroom drama.

 

[Nova]

Bold by me: You must be joking - Italy has shown itself to be even more lawsuit happy in this case than even the US that you hate so much. At least in the US (and all of Europe except Italy) you don't have to worry about being sued for offering testimony in court.

The slander suits in Italy are really out of control. They appear to very nearly bring the justice system to a halt.

And it cannot encourage candor in the courtroom if witnesses know they may be sued for any comment that somebody decides he doesn't like. How terribly discouraging to the processing of finding the truth!

 

[Nova]

I don't see that Italy is lawsuit happy, but I have seen many people charged in connections with the Meredith Kercher murder for violating the law. For example, Dr Sollecito is charged for releasing crime scene footage to the media, the Knox parents have been charged with slander. What personal gain lawsuits have there been other than Patrick suing Knox for destroying his life?

What of Mignini's 20+ lawsuits and counting?

 

[miley]

I agree. someone had said the postal police didn't participate or lead the investigation. I was just pointing out that they did participate by frying the computers. They also did the cell phone "evidence."

-- I wasn't trying to imply the postal police didn't participate, I know they did... just unsure about their involvement, in other words their (investigative) specialty.. I have no idea (besides the cell phones and you said they fried the computers) which makes me think they're in charge of things technical --
the main point I was trying to get across (specifically) was that the Carabinieri (weren't primary) and didn't lead the investigation.

the other point - the quote about Meredith bleeding to death keeps being brought up to imply Amanda knew too much about the crime scene... I was trying to point out (specifically) that Amanda initially, before that remark, said several things which were completely unrelated to the crime scene and proves she had no prior knowledge.

after the door was broken and with everyone screaming in Italian, it's obvious she was picking out the only words she could understand - the same sort of first words learned in any language: foot, closet, blood... with this limited comprehension of their language, I don't understand how anyone can say she knew too much about the crime scene.

 

[otto]

Okay, our agreement ends almost as soon as it began. AK and RS may have book deals, TV interviews and the like that pay fees which can be attached and confiscated in the event of a judgment against them.

Furthermore, as with Jose Baez, participation in such a high-profile case can make one's career and reap benefits far beyond the compensation for that particular case.

And, yes, it's also quite possible (as I have said more than once before) that Maresca was horrified by the murder of Meredith Kercher and wants to do his part to insure the culprits go to jail.

The motives above are not mutually exclusive. They may all apply to Maresca.

Book deals like If I Did It ..., How to Get Away with Murder, Using a Public Relations Firm when Charged with Murder? What sort of book deals can we look forward to? I certainly hope you're not suggesting that Knox can write a book! Surely you've read her disorganized, convoluted short stories about rape and drugs and all that seedy stuff. Who wants to read that trash?

Who is going to be interested in a TV interview in 20 years when they get out? I don't think anyone will care.

 

[otto]

I agree that neither Maresca nor Hellman should be vilified for doing their jobs. I don't care if it was a "loophole" (as some accounts describe it), Maresca was merely honoring his oath as a lawyer by exploiting that loophole.

So are you criticizing the lawyer or the system ... a system that allows a request that witnesses be heard?

 

[Nova]

So you would suggest that when Knox is desperately trying to contact Meredith because she is supposedly worried about her, calling one phone for 3 seconds and the other for 4 seconds is quite normal?

I don't know that Knox was "desperate." Is that what she said?

I think she was concerned. But few college kids that I know keep close track of the coming and going of their friends. And I've already shown how 3 or 4 seconds of recording connection may have seemed like 10, 12 or or more seconds to AK.

AK called MK a few times. It's only suspicious if you assume AK knew MK was dead; if you assume the opposite (benefit of the doubt to the defense), the calls are merely half-hearted attempts by someone who doesn't yet know how serious the situation really is.

 

[Nova]

Nova just said it was probably longer.....

Just to be clear, I said it probably seemed longer to Amanda. I'm not contesting the cell phone records.

 

[SkewedView]

In fairness what i saw during the C.A trial that happens in Florida also..

Btw im sure the money doesnt mean anything to the Kerchers. Its there daughter they want

As to the first, I avoided the CA trial like the plague, so I wouldn't know, but it is Florida, a state whose laws, LE, Courts and Media I have issues with, so it doesn't surprise me to hear this.

As to the second, believe me, I know. I wish that I had a time machine so that I could get her back for them.

 

[otto]

Gee, isn't it nice of you to tell us what our motives are, thank you for enlightening us. And here I was going on about how I liked the request being made. Guess I'll bow to your superior knowledge of what I'm thinking. :banghead:

You do realize that lots of infamous convicts have made lucrative publication/movie/tv/interview deals from prison, right? Well, that's why most US states have laws in place to automatically send that money to the survivors of their victims. Italy has no such system in place. Do the math.

During that circus, there was cross examination going on. The independent experts were giving their presentation to the court, with cross scheduled for that weekend. It was utterly inappropriate and unprofesional for Maresca to scream over them in the midst of said presentation, and the Judge made that very clear. As I said before, Meridith deserves to be represented by someone with dignity, not by a buffoon trying to act like he's in some sixties courtroom drama.

As far as I recall, Knox wasn't allowed to give a jail interview. People that interview her can write a book and profit, as we saw from the politician that was "dreaming" about Knox, but she didn't benefit from that. The math is that no one is going to be allowed to make a movie about Knox in jail so she's not going to get rich by pretending to be a celebrity until she is released.

Meredith and her family have excellent representation in the courtroom ... as evidenced by the criticism from anti-verdict/anti-jury positioners.

 

[otto]

The slander suits in Italy are really out of control. They appear to very nearly bring the justice system to a halt.

And it cannot encourage candor in the courtroom if witnesses know they may be sued for any comment that somebody decides he doesn't like. How terribly discouraging to the processing of finding the truth!

A slander charge is not a personal lawsuit.