Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #20

[ohiogirl]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-st...llecito-s-life-115875-23452085/#ixzz1ZFhFipjD

That's unfair, she didn't change his life, the Italian LE did that.

 

[SMK]

That's unfair, she didn't change his life, the Italian LE did that.

I know; it should read "How Perugian police changed 2 lives"...

 

[Footwarrior]

I just came across an interview with former FBI agent John Douglas about this case. Douglas is often called the father of criminal profiling and should be familiar to the Websleuths community.

Unarresting the Arrested:FBI Profiler John Douglas on the case against Amanda Knox & Raffaele Sollecito

 

[SMK]

I just came across an interview with former FBI agent John Douglas about this case. Douglas is often called the father of criminal profiling and should be familiar to the Websleuths community.

Unarresting the Arrested:FBI Profiler John Douglas on the case against Amanda Knox & Raffaele Sollecito

Thank you - a superb find, truly, and I am going to post this link on JREF now.:clap::clap::clap:

 

[SMK]

From the Douglas interview:

KE: Do you believe more than one person who killed Meredith?


JD: Based on my experience, the crime scene does not indicate the presence of three individuals in the room where Meredith was murdered. What was done to the victim, the way in which the crime occurred, was not the result of three people. This can be concluded without a DNA test.

KE: And third suspect, Rudy Guede?



JD: Guede has the history; he was an experienced criminal, he had the motive (are you listening, Mr. Pisa?) and all evidence points to him. The crime scene does not indicate the presence of three individuals in the room where Meredith was murdered. It was brutal, bloody homicide, and it’s a reflection of his personality. And that behavior was exhibited at the crime scene, that’s his “canvas”; the result is his “artwork” of the subject (victim).

You should be able to find other “canvases” of his like that – not necessarily homicide-but you should find a violent past in this person’s background. I know that he had committed some robberies, but I’ll bet money that there are more cases that he may have been involved with that remain unsolved. I don’t know, maybe before he came to Perugia – whatever he may have been escaping previously. Behavior reflects personality. And that behavior fits only Rudy Guede.

KE: What was the motive?

JD: The primary motive was burglary. But we have an opportunistic offender here. And that opportunity was presented when Meredith came home, and she became the victim of the opportunity.

 

[OldSteve]

Thanks SMK for the Douglas interview quotes - it is what we've been saying all along about MK's room and the scene in that room! (As well as no bruises/cuts on AK/RS.)

Let us hope the appeals judge/jury understand this and are not sidetracked by theatrics and things outside MK's room that can be interpreted so many different ways.

 

[SMK]

Thanks SMK for the Douglas interview quotes - it is what we've been saying all along about MK's room and the scene in that room! (As well as no bruises/cuts on AK/RS.)

Let us hope the appeals judge/jury understand this and are not sidetracked by theatrics and things outside MK's room that can be interpreted so many different ways.

This is what bothers me, Steve. I am afraid they will get sidetracked, and I am very worried about the verdict, which may come as early as Saturday.

 

[SMK]

Am taking this excerpt from JREF:http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=7622386#post7622386

Raffaele and Amanda at the bar
The ruling will go on live TV

http://www3.lastampa.it/cronache/sezion ... tp/422471/

Between Saturday and Monday is expected
the final verdict. Even
CNN book a place in
the front row to film the reactions


Anyone can listen "live" the ruling that will decide the future of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, charged with the murder of the young American Meredith Kercher. Following the numerous requests made ​​by Italian and foreign issuers, today the President of the Court, Claudio Pratillo Helllmann, gave his permission to "live television coverage and photo shoots during the reading of the device." In the front row, to film the reactions of two main suspects, including the likes of CNN networks worldwide. The fateful verdict is expected on Saturday and Monday, but for many the game is not yet closed.


Does anyone think that it's a good sign for Amanda and Raffaele? Or, maybe, Hellmann wants the whole world to see Amanda and Raffaele's reaction when he convicts them?

 

[cjcc]

Hi. I'm a newbie -- been following the case since near the end of the first trial, but only yesterday came across this forum. It's refreshing to see such respectful discussion, even through there are clearly a few here who do not agree that AK and RS are innocent.

I've read all the old postings at such sites as Perugia Shock and Candace Dempsey's blog from throughout the trial and all the woefully inadequate English language newspaper coverage, and the thing that still confuses me about the original trial and the appeal is that I don't remember seeing much in the way of expert testimony by defense psychologists saying Amanda's behavior really wasn't all that weird as there is no set correct way to react, and a thorough examination of the phenomenon of false confessions. Did the defense ever have a behavioral analysis of Amanda done, or have someone testify that it isn't really uncommon for a 20 year old to have had a few sex partners? Did I miss this? I keep getting the feeling that the defense just needs to clarify a lot of the behavioral misconceptions more forcefully than I've seen.

On a slightly different topic, it seems to me that there ought to be some sort of a libel suit against certain websites that continue to knowingly give false and deeply prejudicial information about the case. In the beginning I was swayed by certain sites to see AK and RS as guilty, until I realized that much of the "evidence" still stated there as fact never came out at the trial or was clearly refuted. And considering all the so-called evidence that did make the cut into the trial, the damning stuff that didn't even make it couldn't possibly have a grain of truth.

 

[Rolfe]

From one newbie to another - welcome, cjcc!

 

[SMK]

Hi. I'm a newbie -- been following the case since near the end of the first trial, but only yesterday came across this forum. It's refreshing to see such respectful discussion, even through there are clearly a few here who do not agree that AK and RS are innocent.

I've read all the old postings at such sites as Perugia Shock and Candace Dempsey's blog from throughout the trial and all the woefully inadequate English language newspaper coverage, and the thing that still confuses me about the original trial and the appeal is that I don't remember seeing much in the way of expert testimony by defense psychologists saying Amanda's behavior really wasn't all that weird as there is no set correct way to react, and a thorough examination of the phenomenon of false confessions. Did the defense ever have a behavioral analysis of Amanda done, or have someone testify that it isn't really uncommon for a 20 year old to have had a few sex partners? Did I miss this? I keep getting the feeling that the defense just needs to clarify a lot of the behavioral misconceptions more forcefully than I've seen. You did not miss this, and yes, the defense should be more forceful regarding this.

On a slightly different topic, it seems to me that there ought to be some sort of a libel suit against certain websites that continue to knowingly give false and deeply prejudicial information about the case. In the beginning I was swayed by certain sites to see AK and RS as guilty, until I realized that much of the "evidence" still stated there as fact never came out at the trial or was clearly refuted. And considering all the so-called evidence that did make the cut into the trial, the damning stuff that didn't even make it couldn't possibly have a grain of truth.

:Welcome1::goodpost:

 

[SMK]

From one newbie to another - welcome, cjcc!

I never welcomed you, Rolfe.:doh::anguish::welcome:

 

[Rolfe]

:great:

 

[Malkmus]

There are three former FBI agents who have been critical of the evidence against Amanda and Raf:

Steve Moore

John Douglas

And Clint Van Zandt:

Clint Van Zandt was with the FBI for 25 years where he served as a Supervisor with the FBI's internationally respected Behavioral Science or "Silence of the Lambs" Unit. He was also the FBI's Chief Hostage Negotiator and managed the FBI's Major Case/Crisis Management Program. Prior to this he was an Agent with US Army Intelligence and is a Vietnam War veteran. He has been the primary hostage negotiator for numerous national and international kidnap and hostage situations and he has testified before the US Senate.

Van Zandt on the case:

The simplest way to explain Meredith's death would be that an unknown burglar (and her eventually assailant and killer), in this case Rudy Guede, illegally entered her apartment in an attempt to steal, and was confronted by the victim. He then, like other burglar/rapists before him in similar situations, took advantage of the opportunity to assault his victim, using a knife he was known to carry to force her compliance with his physical demands and then used the same knife to silence the only living witness against him.

http://clintvanzandt.newsvine.com/_...nox-cold-blooded-killer-or-angel-faced-victim

Who knew there were so many "Conspiraloons" in the FBI?!

 

[Steft50]

From one newbie to another - welcome, cjcc!

Semi newbie here too but welcome Rolfe and cjcc.

 

[OldSteve]

"10 Questions About the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito Appeal the Hellmann Jury Should Ask Themselves"

http://www.groundreport.com/World/10-Questions-About-the-Amanda-Knox-Raffaele-Sollec/2941597

 

[cjcc]

Thanks for the warm welcomes.

Does anyone know if there might be a good reason for the defense not to have used psychological experts? Might Italians tend to be hostile toward someone claiming expertise in psychology, in a sort of anti-science, particularly anti-psychology way? I'm thinking of how dismissive some types of American conservatives can be about such things. But it's hard to believe that it would do more harm than good to educate the jury a bit.

 

[Rolfe]

I certainly don't know. I'm sometimes quite surprised by the tricks defence teams miss in that respect. For example, if you look at the eyewitness testimony that convicted Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, it's beyond ludicrous to believe that was a true identification. But the defence barely cross-examined the witness, never mind bringing forward expert testimony to dissect the flaws in the evidence. Three separate expert witness reports have since trashed the identification, but too late by a metric mile.

 

[SMK]

"10 Questions About the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito Appeal the Hellmann Jury Should Ask Themselves"

http://www.groundreport.com/World/10-Questions-About-the-Amanda-Knox-Raffaele-Sollec/2941597

Oh, I hope they do!!! thanks for this link!

 

[SMK]

Thanks for the warm welcomes.

Does anyone know if there might be a good reason for the defense not to have used psychological experts? Might Italians tend to be hostile toward someone claiming expertise in psychology, in a sort of anti-science, particularly anti-psychology way? I'm thinking of how dismissive some types of American conservatives can be about such things. But it's hard to believe that it would do more harm than good to educate the jury a bit.

That is a very good question, and at least the defense did make that attempt in the Casey Anthony case (altho the woman psychologist they used was not very on the ball)---perhaps it is hostility, or maybe it just never became popular in Italy to use psychological experts, although one would think in our era it is the norm in Western countries...