Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#10

[aa9511]

It certainly doesn't make sense. Why is there hardly any emphasis of this beat up in the transcripts? It's just another one of those things people have latched onto imo that means nothing.....ie, extreme confirmation bias.

Could you use the transcripts to show why this tiny inane detail is of such importance so we can take a look at it?

We have spent plenty of days on here discussing the interrogations, timings of interrogation, etc.. So "hardly an emphasis" is not accurate.

We have discussed the issue of the door before, also.

 

[aa9511]

I think, since we write in English, there is no place for the Italian honorific "Dr" here. It just means something entirely different.
If someone wants to treat Stafanoni extra politely, there's always possibility to write "Ms Stefanoni".

It's an Italian case, the murder occured in Italy, and the trial is in Italy.

No, we don't get to change it to make it more American.

 

[Harmony 2]

A friend of mine who is convinced of Knox's innocence just referred me to this piece (Aug 2013) from the Los Angeles Review of Books, which contains the absolute disputing of all the forensic evidence in the case against Knox and Sollecito.

Asserted also is that the case against Knox is purely psychological, with evidence not mattering to the prosecution.

I think this article is representative of most Americans' view of the case, and it's clear that if the convictions are upheld, more pieces of this kind will appear to decry the travesty.

I wonder why it is, if these points can be refuted empirically, that no counter-pieces have been run in mainstream publications, disputing these points?

<modsnip>

http://lareviewofbooks.org/essay/on-being-off-the-case-of-amanda-knox

Isolating this quote from your article, I did not note this finding in Stephanoni's power point and I was wondering if the mop was in fact tested for dna:

...to find Knox outside with a mop as if she’d cleaned up after the murder (the mop had no signs of Kercher’s DNA)....

Perhaps. But the totality of the wounds - the lesser wounds, the injuries to the face, eyes, gums, teeth - could just as well show multiple attackers.

Also, consistent with a single attacker holding his hand tightly over her mouth and nose from behind.

Page 125
This was considered to be the most important among the causes of death: an obstruction of the airways with compression, and associated with this are the lesions typical of this manoeuvre in the labial area [around the lips], in the area of the tongue and in the area of the mucous membrane of the lips, with compression on the dental arches. Therefore a mechanism of obstruction with compression of the external structures and of the respiratory orifices, which caused the characteristic asphyxiation lesions, represented by the small sub-conjunctival haemorrhages, [which are] typical of asphyxiation mechanisms.
An asphyxial cause [of death], therefore, [which was] composed of three mechanisms: a grasping of the chin and also of the neck, and immobilization; lesions from a pointed and cutting weapon; and compression and obstruction of the external airways (page 29 of the transcripts).

http://truejustice.org/ee/documents/perugia/TheMasseiReport.pdf

On another note, I was looking at the following excerpt from Mark Waterbury's book and he mentions that various residents of the cottage were away due to All Saints day and Rudy may have been aware since he knew the guys downstairs…that night of the month was when rent money was gathered together usually in cash. It was a common night for break ins.

pg 7 & 8

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/sample/read/2940012628664

 

[aa9511]

I was just noting the amount of times I have seen Ron Hendry's name and theory cited on other forums, and on posts which respond to articles

(sorry, was just peeking at another forum while you fought about PhDs and contingency attorneys, and someone had exclaimed, "Read Ron Hendry!) :blushing: )......

I often wonder if Ron Hendry had not written his brilliant "Lone Wolf" thesis, if there would be such a divide in this case, and such absolute scorn and complete dismissal for the Italian investigators.....
With subtitles such as, "A Bungled Investigation: Police altered the crime scene with sloppy procedures that led to a flawed conclusion" it seems he was able to wholly dismiss any consideration, thereafter, for the original investigators and their conclusions. Case closed, as it were.

Yes, ok, that makes sense. If someone comes in and essentially wipes the slate clean, then there is nothing to talk about. Case closed. Everyone go home.

 

[aa9511]

Other civil plaintiffs include the Kercher family. Their attorney, Francesco Maresca, first showed the court on Monday a photo of a smiling Kercher, telling the jurors: "Look at her. She was a beautiful girl in the prime of her life."

Minutes later, he showed images of her dead body covered in blood.

"I don't want to shock you or make a show out of this," Maresca told the jurors. "But this is to show you her suffering."

"We're not in a TV show," he added.

Silence fell in the courtroom as the images appeared on a screen. Knox mostly seemed to keep her head down.

Graphic photos have been shown to the court before, but behind closed doors. In this case the courtroom wasn't cleared and the photos were run repeatedly for a few minutes. Maresca later apologized for not asking that the room be cleared.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/44668677/#.UrOxC04o4iR

The bolded part tells me that he was concerned that at least some would suspect him of trying to shock everyone in the courtroom. Otherwise why would he say those words?

To show people that there was/is a REAL VICTIM. To show that something really awful happened that day, and that justifies seeking answers to get to the truth of what happened and how she suffered that horrific death.

To not let Amanda's 12-year old smiling soccer face cover up the grusomeness of what happened to Meredith.

I don't understand, what is so wrong with showing the truth? With toning the Amanda-show down to let people see the truth of what happened to Meredith.

Of course, it is much easier for us and everyone else to just talk about it and then complain why is Maresca showing the pictures.

 

[aa9511]

Careful. Especially when families of the victims are in court as well and have many times been very upset about seeing their loved one in that way. The Kercher civil lawyer admitted that he did not ask for the courtroom to be cleared before he flashed the photos of Meredith, on loop, for all to see after she was brutally murdered. I expect that the Kerchers themselves were not excited about that, more than likely they didn't expect it either since in the past they were given warning by the lawyer asking for the courtroom to be cleared first.MOO

With all due respect, we have no words from the Kerchers regarding how they felt at that moment or not. Couldn't it have been that Maresca actually did run it by the Kerchers first? I note that the probability of that happening is much higher than the probablility of Maresca doing something against the wishes of his clients.

Sometimes people have to do difficult things to help acheive something. The Kerchers, I assume, want justice. It could have been that they felt that this would bring them closer to acheiving justice for Meredith, and for that, they were willing to go through an excruciating few moments to help them acheive that. Maybe they felt they could suffer for a few minutes to get justice for the prolonged and terrible pain and suffering Meredith had to go through.

JMO. I really do not even want to discuss this point further, but I felt like open statements were being made from people speaking as if they were speaking for how the Kerchers felt and what the Kerchers wanted. And I really do not think it's fair.

 

[aa9511]

aa9511-- today amanda added a comment to her blog stating she only removes spam... which, imo, supports my earlier post ^^ speculating that no comment by michelle moore had been removed. fwiw.

dec 19, 19:11 pm: http://www.amandaknox.com/2013/12/18/with-respect-to-the-kercher-family/#comments

Ok, thanks for letting me know. I wonder what she means by "spam" though? Is that like the comments like, blah blah blah...click on here. You can earn $500....?

Or does she mean the comments that are "against her"?

 

[aa9511]

Do you think Meredith's mother and family wanted photos of her naked dead body shown to the worlds media by their own attorney of all people? I don't.

Was it not for the jury? I'm confused. Did Maresca have a press conference? Or was this in court in front of the jury?

 

[SMK]

Ok, thanks for letting me know. I wonder what she means by "spam" though? Is that like the comments like, blah blah blah...click on here. You can earn $500....?

Or does she mean the comments that are "against her"?

I did see comments from Michele Moore the other day, though.

 

[aa9511]

Isolating this quote from your article, I did not note this finding in Stephanoni's power point and I was wondering if the mop was in fact tested for dna:





Also, consistent with a single attacker holding his hand tightly over her mouth and nose from behind.
http://truejustice.org/ee/docu ments/perugia/TheMasseiReport.pdf

On another note, I was looking at the following excerpt from Mark Waterbury's book and he mentions that various residents of the cottage were away due to All Saints day and Rudy may have been aware since he knew the guys downstairs…that night of the month was when rent money was gathered together usually in cash. It was a common night for break ins.

pg 7 & 8

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/sample/read/2940012628664

bbm

But I thought in the defense's own presentation last week, they stated that the attack could not have been from behind? And that was coming from the defense itself. I don't have time right now, gotta go, but when I come back I will try to find that tweet and then post it on here.

Also, so he's holding her mouth/face with one hand, stabbing with the other....that leaves Meredith's arms and legs open and free. In which case there would have been many more defensive wounds, IMO. Such as, her hands would have had many cuts on them from trying to shield her neck from the knife.

I just do not see how that is possible, given the evidence we have.

I might have to read this Hendry book to see how he explains that.

 

[MichaelSmith]

I did see comments from Michele Moore the other day, though.

Why are comments from a private citizen on a blog even worthy of mention here? I don't understand?

 

[MichaelSmith]

bbm

But I thought in the defense's own presentation last week, they stated that the attack could not have been from behind? And that was coming from the defense itself. I don't have time right now, gotta go, but when I come back I will try to find that tweet and then post it on here.

Also, so he's holding her mouth/face with one hand, stabbing with the other....that leaves Meredith's arms and legs open and free. In which case there would have been many more defensive wounds, IMO. Such as, her hands would have had many cuts on them from trying to shield her neck from the knife.

I just do not see how that is possible, given the evidence we have.

I might have to read this Hendry book to see how he explains that.

No, where did you get that idea? A transcript hasn't been made available yet...just a summary and tweets.

 

[MichaelSmith]

Was it not for the jury? I'm confused. Did Maresca have a press conference? Or was this in court in front of the jury?

A link has been provided as to what happened on page 6.

 

[SMK]

Why are comments from a private citizen on a blog even worthy of mention here? I don't understand?

I'm not making any big deal of it; just noting that I did see some. For all I know, they're still there. Of course anyone may comment and as it is Knox's blog, she has the right to moderate and dismiss or keep comments as she will. None of my business, just wanted to say that Otto was not imagining that Moore had commented.:seeya:

 

[aa9511]

Isolating this quote from your article, I did not note this finding in Stephanoni's power point and I was wondering if the mop was in fact tested for dna:





Also, consistent with a single attacker holding his hand tightly over her mouth and nose from behind.

http://truejustice.org/ee/documents/perugia/TheMasseiReport.pdf

On another note, I was looking at the following excerpt from Mark Waterbury's book and he mentions that various residents of the cottage were away due to All Saints day and Rudy may have been aware since he knew the guys downstairs…that night of the month was when rent money was gathered together usually in cash. It was a common night for break ins.

pg 7 & 8

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/sample/read/2940012628664

Here is the tweet from the presenations about the attack:

The Nation @ qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The victim was attacked from the front, not from behind" # meredithnazione
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More
The Nation @ qn_lanazione 2m

https://twitter.com/qn_lanazione

 

[MichaelSmith]

Here is the tweet from the presenations about the attack:

The Nation @ qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The victim was attacked from the front, not from behind" # meredithnazione
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More
The Nation @ qn_lanazione 2m

https://twitter.com/qn_lanazione

Could you provide the time of this tweet and the orignal Italian please? How did you translate it into English like you did? The transcripts will be available shortly so we can see exactly what was said.

 

[aa9511]

No, where did you get that idea? A transcript hasn't been made available yet...just a summary and tweets.

Since we were all going by tweets, then does that mean our whole last week of discussion should be deleted on this forum?

 

[aa9511]

A link has been provided as to what happened on page 6.

From the link: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/44668677/#.UrOxC04o4iR

"I don't want to shock you or make a show out of this," Maresca told the jurors. "But this is to show you her suffering."

"Their attorney, Francesco Maresca, first showed the court on Monday a photo of a smiling Kercher, telling the jurors: "Look at her. She was a beautiful girl in the prime of her life."

"The jury must make a decision and therefore must understand what really happened," Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini said.

"Maresca and his assistant Serena Perna told the court that Kercher died while desperately resisting a sexual assault and escalating violence"

As we can see, all of this was done in a coutroom, during a trial, in front of jury.

Maresca did not hold a media press conference outside of the courtroom and did this.

 

[SMK]

I hadn't had a chance to go over the totality of Francesco Maresca's argument in court:

Just putting this here for future reference:

Points set down by Andrea Vogt:

(transposed here by SMK)

http://thefreelancedesk.com/front_featured/amanda-knox-appeal-2/


Maresca brought up a lot of points of circumstantial evidence:


* Maresca asked the judges to forget the polemics and controversy "of the Americans" and all the criticism of Italian prosecutors, law enforcement, CSI.
*Points out that the other flatmates and British girls did not get upset during interrogation, why Amanda? ( I do recall reading that Mignini said it was "routine" to question her about the Patrick tests. What was stunning, said Mignini, was her reaction: Tears, trembling, crying, covering her ears, saying "it could be true" that Patrick and she had been at the cottage when MK was murdered. For Mignini, this was not acting, but true trauma which indicated she had been present and was trying to repress memories of the murder.)


He brings up signs of staging, cleanup, lying:

*Amanda&#8217;s black lamp found near the bed of the scene of the crime; pre-dawn call to her mother.
The window of Filomena&#8217;s room ; glass on top of clothes; window was broken after victim was already dead.
The phones were taken to delay the discovery of the body, so that if anyone came home and called her, they wouldn't hear them ring inside the locked room.
*"We have said many times that DNA doesn&#8217;t fly. But Sollecito does not fly either."
" On this point the cassation sentence is crystal clear. There was a cleanup."

*Decries the work of Vecchiotti and Conti . Upholds that Sollecito footprint is on the bathmat; upholds all traces and mixed traces.

 

[aa9511]

I hadn't had a chance to go over the totality of Francesco Maresca's argument in court:

Just putting this here for future reference:

Points set down by Andrea Vogt:

(transposed here by SMK)

http://thefreelancedesk.com/front_featured/amanda-knox-appeal-2/


Maresca brought up a lot of points of circumstantial evidence:


* Maresca asked the judges to forget the polemics and controversy "of the Americans" and all the criticism of Italian prosecutors, law enforcement, CSI.
*Points out that the other flatmates and British girls did not get upset during interrogation, why Amanda? ( I do recall reading that Mignini said it was "routine" to question her about the Patrick tests. What was stunning, said Mignini, was her reaction: Tears, trembling, crying, covering her ears, saying "it could be true" that Patrick and she had been at the cottage when MK was murdered. For Mignini, this was not acting, but true trauma which indicated she had been present and was trying to repress memories of the murder.)


He brings up signs of staging, cleanup, lying:

*Amanda’s black lamp found near the bed of the scene of the crime; pre-dawn call to her mother.
The window of Filomena’s room ; glass on top of clothes; window was broken after victim was already dead.
The phones were taken to delay the discovery of the body, so that if anyone came home and called her, they wouldn't hear them ring inside the locked room.
*"We have said many times that DNA doesn’t fly. But Sollecito does not fly either."
" On this point the cassation sentence is crystal clear. There was a cleanup."

*Decries the work of Vecchiotti and Conti . Upholds that Sollecito footprint is on the bathmat; upholds all traces and mixed traces.

Thank you, SMK.

Let's see what happens.

I am going to give a prediction the the jury will end up upholding the original conviction. JMO.

There is just too much there for Amanda's defense to overcome. IMO.

THe totality of the evidence and everything taken together strongly points towards their guilt.

JMO. I really do not see any way it can come back in any other way.

But let's see, and if the decision is the other way, I will respect it. Eventually, all of this has to come to a stop, so they will have to end up taking one court's decision and sticking with it. They cannot continue this for 20 years, either side. Of course, I do not know what the process is with appeals, etc., so I could very well be talking flubber and it could take literally 20 years!