Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox Conviction Overturned #22

[emyr]

"blow up the sample" ... interesting perspective. When a sample of something is found at a crime scene it can be analyzed. During the first reading for DNA, the sample can be weak and require further zooming or cycling. Additional cycling can lead to a DNA reading, although it must be identified as LNC DNA.

As LNC DNA, it can only be used for comparison to a known sample or as an exclusionary tool, not an identifying tool. The DNA sample on the knife could not exclude Meredith Kercher according to the academics and was a match according to the state.

Low count number DNA is widely accepted in Europe, where it was first developed. It was used as an argument during the Casey Anthony trial - because it wasn't done.

Should all research into DNA analysis be parallized and stop in it's tracks because at a certain point there is too much skepticism? That hasn't yet been established, and tests so far (zoomed and recycling to detect lower levels of DNA) have been accepted internationally,

The fact of the matter is that it has not been reported at what magnification the testing was done to return the result of NO DNA (to my knowledge). Either the sample was only rye starch and was magnified at the highest possible level, or it was magnified to some lower level that the prosecution found insupportable. Without that actual information we are all arguing conjecture.

As much as I can understand it, the machine returned the answer "NO DNA" and the prosecution wanted them to run a DNA test anyway and see if the print out looked like Meredith's profile. In other words, despite the fact that the machine stated there was no DNA, they saw a reason to try running the test anyway to see what happened. Maybe there really was DNA at such miniscule levels that the machine could not see it, but a result could be found. (Which seems kind of counter-intuitive to me.)

I don't understand the technology, so I can't argue if it was the right decision. I could see the forensic people saying "This is stupid, they are asking if you can see bigfoot in a four pixel picture. I can't believe people are buying this." Contrariwise "They had a 100 pixel picture, and they didn't bother to see if it even vaguely looked like her? Who cares if the machine said it was just 100 pixels of light leak on the lens."

 

[ohiogirl]

During the appeal, the prosecution tried to introduce a document regarding Vecchiotti and prior serious errors. The judge denied the request. Vecchiotti has a problematic history. The two academics from Rome have been involved in a total of 6 cases. On one case, involving Vecchiotti, two young women (about Knox's age) were raped by three men of wealthy families. A relative of one of the men was known to Vecchiotti. Vecchiotti testified that that particular man was dead based on the DNA identification of another person. It was discovered a short time later that Vecchiotti was completely wrong, and that the man was still alive and well.

That's a good reason to look at the two academics and question what exactly their role was. The big question, obviously, relates to whether their report was impartial or whether water was running uphill.[/QUOTE]

So, we should question these two because of their past history, but not question the prosecutor who has been convicted of abuse of office for another so called "satanic murder"?

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/01/25/could-prosecutors-conviction-help-amanda-knox/
Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini faces a 16-month suspended jail sentence after a Florence court convicted him of abusing his position in a 1985 investigation into the death of a doctor believed to be part of a satanic group. An Italian police investigator was also convicted in the case.

 

[ohiogirl]

I bet nobody went cheering in that thread after CA was acquitted, nor would anyone put up smiley pics of CA and say what a 'sweet little mamma' she is. Also CA was convicted for lesser charges, just like AK.

Sorry, completely different cases and evidence, imo.

There are a lot of people out there that have been misled by ILE in this case, imo.
Most importantly, the Kercher family.

 

[ohiogirl]

snipped from SmoothOperators' post:
"I want to go ahead and make an important point.. All in all what is of importance here is the guilt or innocence of these two in the murder of Meredith Kercher.. Not who or what these two people are, or their behaviors, or their past.. That truly is absolutely irrelevant in the grand scheme of the subject at hand.. But coincidentally I believe that is the exact mistake that was made in many of the Amanda support efforts.. IMO the evidence was not there, period and end of story.. IMO that's what should have and is All that needed to be driven home to prove to us that she wasn't involved(and I am speaking specifically of us, here in the U.S. The Italian court system is a completely separate and scary subject in and of itself).. In this portraying of Amanda, and I can only speak for myself here but it has always come across as fake as fake can be.. This IMO is what has left some people leery of Amanda.. In that feeling there's just something not right.. Almost a feeling of the wool pulled over someone's eyes.. A poster this week made the statement, or better yet inquiry of "why does it feel as tho we've been manipulated and just been railroaded by this woman?" (not direct quote but close).. And IMO I truly believe it is this sense that some are left with in feeling that Amanda is not who the pro-movement has drilled into our heads of a naive, sweet, meek young woman.. Before I get flamed.. Let me reiterate that in the end this is irrelevant, the importance is that these two were rightly freed and proven to not have had involvement in Meredith's murder.. That is what is important and that justice we finally saw earlier this week.. But what I am attempting to explain is why IMO there are those that are left with a feeling as tho they've been manipulated or deceived in who it is that Amanda Knox is.."

IMO, the people were deceived by the ILE early on, believed the press, and are now unable to admit that they were wrong. It is not the Knox "PR machine" that mislead so many observers. It was Mignini and Massei and the police that just knew AK was guilty before they ever had any evidence. They were manipulated and railroaded by the investigators, nothing more, nothing less. jmo

 

[Allusonz]

The infamous Daily Mail article with quotes and all

"And note the picture caption (circled in the screengrab below) …. ‘media scum‘? Don’t they mean media scrum? Oh, maybe not … because look at these quotes from the article, that they claim the prosecution team made as soon as the ‘guilty’ verdict was announced:

Prosecutors were delighted with the verdict and said “Justice has been done” although they said on a “human factor it was sad two young people would be spending years in jail“
​

Only, Amanda Knox wasn’t guilty, was she. Therefore the prosecution can’t possibly have issued those quotes. What’s that you say? The Daily Mail must have made the quotes up?

No. Surely not.

The MSM don’t just make things up …. do they ;-)"

http://www.maxfarquar.com/2011/10/daily-mail-amanda-knox-guilty-story-screengrab/

 

[Allusonz]

"The eyes, it is said, are windows to the soul. They are not. They are organs for converting light into electro-magnetic impulses. But this has never stopped us dreaming of them that way.

Amanda Knox wasn't able to communicate her thoughts and feelings directly, either to the police or to the wider public. Her Italian, at the time of the murder, was poor, and her arraignment meant that she couldn't speak to the media. But there were plenty of pictures to go on. There was, therefore, an even greater emphasis on her expressions and physical behaviour than there would normally be in such a situation, right from the beginning.

It is astonishing how quick we are to draw conclusions about how a person ought to look or behave in circumstances we haven't ourselves even come close to experiencing"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/08/amanda-knox-facial-expressions

 

[Allusonz]

All righty then, argue away (not that you need my permission but I will refasten your straight jacket for you )

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

I have had to TM the spelling of my designer straight jackets

As well my quirky sense of humour recalled an exchange about finger nails and a book deal and finger nails (you have no idea how many threads I had to search for this)

Quote from flourish

"LOL, yeah, I'll be storming the bookstore doors for that one. Right after I pull my own fingernails out with a pair of needle-nose pliers."

I replied that maybe a glass of wine might be more soothing lol

Wonders if flourish will be buying the 4,000,000 copy of her book now :innocent:

I would ask that you dispose of any pliers you may own first :giggle:

 

[OldSteve]

MK was only murdered once.

It appears that some want to murder/ruin AK and RS overAndoverAndoverAndover again. As if being incarcerated for crimes they did not commit (and were not proved) wasn't bad enough.

When the fixation is on a stranger--someone unknown except for a portrayal in the media, it suggests a lot about the obsessed one and highlights some of their issues, to put it mildly.

I can understand despising someone who we know, who may have personally hurt someone we love or even someone in our family, but this level of obsession of a stranger, in which imagined traits are imbued on them....well....I see why personal security teams are necessary.

Great point! Have to repeat it...

 

[SMK]

Great point! Have to repeat it...

I second that, Steve!:great:

 

[emyr]

snipped from SmoothOperators' post:
"I want to go ahead and make an important point.. All in all what is of importance here is the guilt or innocence of these two in the murder of Meredith Kercher.. Not who or what these two people are, or their behaviors, or their past.. That truly is absolutely irrelevant in the grand scheme of the subject at hand.. But coincidentally I believe that is the exact mistake that was made in many of the Amanda support efforts.. IMO the evidence was not there, period and end of story.. IMO that's what should have and is All that needed to be driven home to prove to us that she wasn't involved(and I am speaking specifically of us, here in the U.S. The Italian court system is a completely separate and scary subject in and of itself).. In this portraying of Amanda, and I can only speak for myself here but it has always come across as fake as fake can be.. This IMO is what has left some people leery of Amanda.. In that feeling there's just something not right.. Almost a feeling of the wool pulled over someone's eyes.. A poster this week made the statement, or better yet inquiry of "why does it feel as tho we've been manipulated and just been railroaded by this woman?" (not direct quote but close).. And IMO I truly believe it is this sense that some are left with in feeling that Amanda is not who the pro-movement has drilled into our heads of a naive, sweet, meek young woman.. Before I get flamed.. Let me reiterate that in the end this is irrelevant, the importance is that these two were rightly freed and proven to not have had involvement in Meredith's murder.. That is what is important and that justice we finally saw earlier this week.. But what I am attempting to explain is why IMO there are those that are left with a feeling as tho they've been manipulated or deceived in who it is that Amanda Knox is.."

IMO, the people were deceived by the ILE early on, believed the press, and are now unable to admit that they were wrong. It is not the Knox "PR machine" that mislead so many observers. It was Mignini and Massei and the police that just knew AK was guilty before they ever had any evidence. They were manipulated and railroaded by the investigators, nothing more, nothing less. jmo

I personally think SmoothOperator made a great point that when battle lines are set, the conversation starts to stray from the truth and into buttressing your own argument. I don't know any human being who does the right thing 100% of the time. Everyone makes errors in judgements, behaves badly, is guilty of being self-absorbed.

For instance, I think otto showed that the original knife DNA print out was fairly definitively Meredith's. But most of the people defending Amanda refused to even consider that the DNA matched Meredith's precisely. (The main theme was "there was no DNA, the results were mininterpreted). In fact, I think otto proved to me that on the knife at least, the read out was of Meredith. I think there is either contamination or the evidence was planted. I think the knife was contaminated and the bra clasp was planted. I think the contamination of the knife sealed the duo's guilt 100% in the prosecution's mind, and then someone planted the bra clasp evidence to make sure they "didn't get away with it."

Maybe the best example is the Lumamba accusation. Whenever it gets argued here, one camp tends to only talk about the fact that she accused him, and tries to minimize or pretend she didn't say the part where she was confused and it didn't seem true. The other camp tends to overemphasize the length of time of the interrogation, and create a worst-case scenario interrogation procedure. Rarely does either side stick to the clinical facts.

And whenever someone doesn't stick to the clinical facts the person with the other opinion thinks their entire argument is made through a biased lens.

 

[emyr]

I'll give a few more examples:

The point of entry of the burglary was less ideal than breaking through the balcony. This is true, it's less ideal. You see a lot of people pro-innocence that say it isn't less ideal.

The point of entry of the burglary was ridiciulously improbable. A lot of pro-guilt people espouse this, and it just isn't true. It's not ridiculously improbable.

Contrariwise, those that say it's so implausible that Rudy broke through the window also tend to say that there are plenty of reasonable and probable explanations for bringing a knife from sollecito's to the cottage, murdering Meredith with it, bringing it back, intensively cleaning it, and using it to prepare food. There are not many reasonable or probable explanations for that scenario.

The contamination to the bra clasp seems unlikely from "flying DNA". However, it does seem likely from outright hand to clasp contamination as evidence from the video of the techs acting like fools while handling it.

etc etc

 

[SMK]

I personally think SmoothOperator made a great point that when battle lines are set, the conversation starts to stray from the truth and into buttressing your own argument. I don't know any human being who does the right thing 100% of the time. Everyone makes errors in judgements, behaves badly, is guilty of being self-absorbed.

For instance, I think otto showed that the original knife DNA print out was fairly definitively Meredith's. But most of the people defending Amanda refused to even consider that the DNA matched Meredith's precisely. (The main theme was "there was no DNA, the results were mininterpreted). In fact, I think otto proved to me that on the knife at least, the read out was of Meredith. I think there is either contamination or the evidence was planted, and I lean towards planted. I think the knife was contaminated and the bra clasp was planted. I think the contamination of the knife sealed the duo's guilt 100% in the prosecution's mind, and then someone planted the bra clasp evidence to make sure they "didn't get away with it."

Maybe the best example is the Lumamba accusation. Whenever it gets argued here, one camp tends to only talk about the fact that she accused him, and tries to minimize or pretend she didn't say the part where she was confused and it didn't seem true. The other camp tends to overemphasize the length of time of the interrogation, and create a worst-case scenario interrogation procedure. Rarely does either side stick to the clinical facts.

And whenever someone doesn't stick to the clinical facts the person with the other opinion thinks their entire argument is made through a biased lens.

Much of what you say is on the mark, and well spoken. In so far as the one point SmoothOperator made:

In this portraying of Amanda, and I can only speak for myself here but it has always come across as fake as fake can be.. This IMO is what has left some people leery of Amanda.. In that feeling there's just something not right.. Almost a feeling of the wool pulled over someone's eyes.. A poster this week made the statement, or better yet inquiry of "why does it feel as tho we've been manipulated and just been railroaded by this woman?" (not direct quote but close).. And IMO I truly believe it is this sense that some are left with in feeling that Amanda is not who the pro-movement has drilled into our heads of a naive, sweet, meek young woman.

I do not think Amanda is perfect. (although there is much sweet about her). She reminds me of myself at that age, and I was far from perfect or innocent.

If the intuition that she has railroaded all is coming from an inner knowledge that she has gotten away with murder, that is one thing.

But if it is simply that the "pro-Knox" people have drilled this idea into minds that she is perfect, sweet, etc., that is no one on this forum, for sure; no one here believes her to be Little Miss Goody-Two Shoes. Or perfect. Or naive. Some at PMF sure paint Meredith that way , though, and I am sure Meredith herself would hate it.

I see Knox as fully human, aggressively human, sexual (maybe bi-sexual, from what I have read?), lustful, robust, and having the full range of human traits within her. NOT some sappy, boring, wimpy, wilting, "angel". Ugh. What do you think captivated Mignini , after all? A neuter?

Perhaps Knox HAS gotten away with murder, after all.
But I do not think so, from the evidence. :waitasec:

 

[SMK]

Italy still smarting over Amanda Knox acquittal

As he read the sentence, Judge Claudio Pratillo Hellman faced the terrified defendants, their anxious families and rows of photographers on stepladders behind them. As he said "assoluzione per non aver commesso il fatto" — acquittal for not having committed the crime — Knox's sobs of relief broke the gravity and silence of the moment.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2016448492_knox09m.html

A shame Italy, according to Vogt, cannot respect Hellman's words and their veracity.:furious:

And from Steve Moore, who was in Perugia at the reading of the verdict (supplied by halides1, JREF):

Steve Moore said, "After the ‘impromptu’ demonstration, the men began individual fist-fights with Italian Amanda supporters, (I counted at least five such fights) and generally shamed the town of Perugia at a moment when the city deserved to be basking in the glory of the world spotlight. I want to point out here that the people of Perugia are good, honorable people, by and large."

 

[krimekat]

I bet nobody went cheering in that thread after CA was acquitted, nor would anyone put up smiley pics of CA and say what a 'sweet little mamma' she is. Also CA was convicted for lesser charges, just like AK.

Why always resort to FKC/Anthonys? Let's let it die already . . . MHO, of course, but I am so tired of seeing references to that FARCE in Justice in other threads -- I stay away from any thread FKC/Anthony related, so let's move on from it & not pollute other threads, okay?

No disrespect intended, just tired of all things Anthony . . . other victims need our assistance & attention.

Thank God Amanda is home!

 

[krimekat]

Obviously guilty people that don't lawyer up and are not convicted are not included in any study, so obviously any study cannot be complete.

Wait, "guilty people that [have no representation] & are not convicted . . . " ? Who are these people? How could they NOT be included? There would be legal record of their crime, sentence, outcome, etc. (I assume). Not that it matters to this case . . . but I've been part of many quantitative & qualitative analyses & when there is a "gap" in data collection, it's noted. I don't see that as the case in the studies linked as reference.

But very interested in the data :floorlaugh: oh, and sorry to bring up the past, catching up w/this thread

 

[SMK]

Commentary: Blind justice -- skip the trial, post the verdict

...And why stop there? Once they’ve reached their verdict the 100-million angry men of each side can jump straight to their army of media “consultants” (note the quotes) and Sentencing-with-the-Stars-toll-free telephone numbers to determine life and death verdict and sentence without the mind-numbing encumbrance of an actual trial.

A jury of your peers, humbug. In this self-centered self-indulged click-click world who really believes that anyone is their peer? Much better and more profitably to take your chances in the world of pitchemen, spokesmen, lawyers and lobbyists in the court of public opinion.
Lewis Carroll had the right idea a century ago when he placed Alice in the dock and put his words into the Red Queen’s mouth.

“Verdict first, trial second.”

And major motion picture soon to be in a theater near you.

http://www.masslive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2011/10/commentary_blind_justice_--_sk.html

 

[Madeleine74]

If you haven't had the opportunity to watch CBS's 48 Hrs broadcast, it is excellent and gives a good summary of the case, the forensics, etc. All new, from the time AK and RS were released. You can probably watch it online at cbs.com.

 

[Trvl4Lyfe]

I still cant get over the fact that she was willing to accuse someone innocent of this crime. Hopefully she will get some drug counseling and her parents wake up and see her for not being so innocent.

My thoughts to Meredith's family.

 

[otto]

"What’s more galling? Amanda Knox making out with her co-defendant boyfriend hours after Meredith Kercher was stabbed to death, or Amanda Knox crying tears of self-pleasure after being acquitted of murder despite overwhelming evidence of her guilt?

The most horrifying part of this story is the way it proves our collective stupidity. If a guilty criminal spends enough money on PR, we can be persuaded that up is down, and a murderer is a national hero."

http://www.enterprisenews.com/archi...shadows-facts-in-Knox-acquittal#ixzz1aJhNTolg

 

[SkewedView]

"What’s more galling? Amanda Knox making out with her co-defendant boyfriend hours after Meredith Kercher was stabbed to death, or Amanda Knox crying tears of self-pleasure after being acquitted of murder despite overwhelming evidence of her guilt?

The most horrifying part of this story is the way it proves our collective stupidity. If a guilty criminal spends enough money on PR, we can be persuaded that up is down, and a murderer is a national hero."

http://www.enterprisenews.com/archi...shadows-facts-in-Knox-acquittal#ixzz1aJhNTolg

Cute how the writer complains about people spreading misinformation to slant coverage, then goes ahead and does so herself, by offering things as proof (or examples of behavior that are supposed to be disgusting) without offering context, only innuendo and false comparisons - a classic propaganda tactic.

It's probably not on purpose, however. As a victim's advocate, it is natural to assume guilt and fully trust what the prosecution presents while discounting the defense, not to mention that in that position one deals with a lot of disgusting and pathetic defenses of truly, blatantly guilty people.

Nevertheless, it is her opening paragraph that I find disgusting, with its twisting of perfectly reasonable behavior into something to be loathed.