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

[SMK]

If the defense wants to show reasonable doubt, then they have to show it. I disagree with others on here, that the jury should be able to, by itself, come up with a reaonable doubt scenario. No, that is the defense's entire job.

What better reasonable doubt than lone-wolf Guede?

I also believe that if the jury cannot see lone-wolf Rudy, then of course they have to find Amanda and RS guilty. There is just no other option, IMO. Someone was there with him, if the defense does not try to say otherwise!

That "someone," based on the evidence, cannot be anyone other than Amanda and RS.

I don't understand.

Why is the lone-wolf being debated so much on here and other places, when Amanda's own defense is not even using it?

Well, according to Katody, the defense is saying Guede was a lone wolf. Just subtly: I haven't heard anything such as "There were no multiple attackers! One man committed the crime, Rudy Guede!" but they have said things such as, "Once Guede was arrested, that should have been the end of Knox, Sollecito, and Lumumba.".

 

[aa9511]

TBH, I haven't seen anything that would make me believe the defence agrees with many attackers claim.

From what I understand they argue the evidence points only to Guede. Which means they argue he did it alone.

But have they ever laid out for the jury how Rudy might have done it alone?

 

[SMK]

No, I'm saying in the original trial?

I have always been told that they could not, as Guede had not been charged with burglary or simulation (Knox and Sollecito were ) and Guede was charged as having "acted with others" (Supreme Court ruling) ; Massei also ruled there was proof of "multiple attackers", and Guede himself began to say Knox and Sollecito were involved.
Even when Knox and Sollecito were acquitted by Hellmann, Meredith Kercher's mother said, "I accept the ruling but now I have to wonder, who/where are the others?" - which given the precedents, was quite reasonable for her to ask.

 

[aa9511]

Well, according to Katody, the defense is saying Guede was a lone wolf. Just subtly: I haven't heard anything such as "There were no multiple attackers! One man committed the crime, Rudy Guede!" but they have said things such as, "Once Guede was arrested, that should have been the end of Knox, Sollecito, and Lumumba.".

Hmmm. No, but the jury is going to think "of course they would say that, of course they don't want their clients to be suspects." That does not mean anything.

When did the rulings happen, re: multiple attackers, staged break-in? So was that during Rudy's trial and completed before Amanda and RS trial began?

So are those the rulings that Amanda's defense had to work with from the very beginning....from DAY 1 of their trials?

 

[Katody]

But have they ever laid out for the jury how Rudy might have done it alone?

I haven't seen the transcripts yet, but considering it can be done in few sentences and few minutes it would be odd if they didn't.

 

[Karmady]

I have a question. Is there any chance that if Knox is ultimately found guilty that she will be/be able to be extradited to Italy? In other words, is this whole process more or less an exercise in futility wrt to her ever serving jail time. My assumption has been no way no how she's ever going to jail no matter what happens here. Does anyone know what the general sentiment is on that topic?

 

[SMK]

Hmmm. No, but the jury is going to think "of course they would say that, of course they don't want their clients to be suspects." That does not mean anything.

When did the rulings happen, re: multiple attackers, staged break-in? So was that during Rudy's trial and completed before Amanda and RS trial began?

So are those the rulings that Amanda's defense had to work with from the very beginning....from DAY 1 of their trials?

Yes, the break-in was ruled staged, the cell phones, stolen, and even Guede to this day says, "The Court said I did not rob, I did not simulate".

 

[SMK]

I have a question. Is there any chance that if Knox is ultimately found guilty that she will be/be able to be extradited to Italy? In other words, is this whole process more or less an exercise in futility wrt to her ever serving jail time. My assumption has been no way no how she's ever going to jail no matter what happens here. Does anyone know what the general sentiment is on that topic?

As with everything in this case, there is a division.

The American media, supporters of Knox all say extradition will NEVER happen, EVER.

On the pro-guilt and the Italian side, they says there is an international treaty which must be honored, and she will be extradited or serve US prison time.

 

[Katody]

I wasn't arguing that it was unethical to publish the books, just unwise because:

1. As LJ said (JREF) it may have subconsciously offended the SC judges and led to the overturning of Hellmann (speculation, but it might be true: LJ worded it a bit differently to me)

2. Marecas used the book deal against Knox in court.

3. The pro-guilt sites keep taking Knox to task, citing her book quotes
as in today's post: http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php

I think facing the prospect of financial ruin of whole families, not being able to defend themselves anymore there were some hard choices.

As for your points:
1. I think there was more politics and influence of certain cliques than any personal or emotional factors at the level of SC.
2. Kercher lawyer's full on assault unrelated to evidence can very well backfire.
3. The black-PR campaign would have always found something else to focus on.

There was no attempt to introduce evidence from the books by the accusers. I think this is significant.

 

[aa9511]

I have a question. Is there any chance that if Knox is ultimately found guilty that she will be/be able to be extradited to Italy? In other words, is this whole process more or less an exercise in futility wrt to her ever serving jail time. My assumption has been no way no how she's ever going to jail no matter what happens here. Does anyone know what the general sentiment is on that topic?

I agree about the no way, no how is she going back to jail. I saw an interview with her (sorry, can't remember where), where she said (paraphrasing), well, I don't want to live my life as a fugitive, but if I have to, then that's what I'll have to do. It wouldn't be ideal, but.....

I'm sorry, I do not remember where I saw that.

I think that is what she's going to do if the conviction is upheld. Go somewhere like Caribbean, or some country that doesn't have extradition treaty with U.S..

 

[Amber29]

That's like that saying Soviet era courts ruled this or that. Who cares what they ruled? It's a bankrupt banana republic with kangaroo courts and byzantine legal system.

I couldn't care less if they say Aviello's brother did it with Rudy....This is such a farce, they just might.

I did not say I agree with this. I simply was stating the facts taken from the SCC ruling.

 

[aa9511]

Yes, the break-in was ruled staged, the cell phones, stolen, and even Guede to this day says, "The Court said I did not rob, I did not simulate".

Ok. So in court during Trial 1, did the defense ever give a scenerio to the jury re; Lone-wolf Guede?

 

[Cappuccino]

I agree about the no way, no how is she going back to jail. I saw an interview with her (sorry, can't remember where), where she said (paraphrasing), well, I don't want to live my life as a fugitive, but if I have to, then that's what I'll have to do. It wouldn't be ideal, but.....

I'm sorry, I do not remember where I saw that.

I think that is what she's going to do if the conviction is upheld. Go somewhere like Caribbean, or some country that doesn't have extradition treaty with U.S..

I don't know what Knox will do if she's re-convicted, but the option you outlined would be a bad idea. Knox and Sollecito, if this court convicts them, would be better off making a bee line for a country within the EU. That way they can challenge Italy's attempt to extradite them in the ECHR along with any other challenges they make in the same court.

 

[Amber29]

As with everything in this case, there is a division. The American media, supporters of Knox all say extradition will NEVER happen, EVER. On the pro-guilt and the Italian side, they says there is a treaty which must be honored, and she will be extradited or serve US prison time.

I have seen legal commentators in the US who think she will be extradited. I don't think all the US media has bought into the PR.

We will not know unless a conviction happens. I don't think anyone can really answer this question. It's a we will cross that bridge when/if we get there. IMO

 

[Katody]

I have a question. Is there any chance that if Knox is ultimately found guilty that she will be/be able to be extradited to Italy? In other words, is this whole process more or less an exercise in futility wrt to her ever serving jail time. My assumption has been no way no how she's ever going to jail no matter what happens here. Does anyone know what the general sentiment is on that topic?

My understanding is that Italy will have to ask for extradition. If they do, it's a decision of some political body in US to comply or not. There is no end in sight of this nightmare for Amanda and her family.

 

[SMK]

Ok. So in court during Trial 1, did the defense ever give a scenerio to the jury re; Lone-wolf Guede?

I would say they did not (and this is why even as late as 2011 with the acquittals, Mrs. Kercher was still wondering where were the others who acted with Guede)---if I am wrong, anyone can chime in and correct me.

 

[SMK]

I have seen legal commentators in the US who think she will be extradited. I don't think all the US media has bought into the PR.

We will not know unless a conviction happens. I don't think anyone can really answer this question. It's a we will cross that bridge when/if we get there. IMO

You may be right.

 

[TorisMom003]

Yes, exactly, SMK. Because there would have been evidence of these "others", like footprints, etc.. The only way would be if these "other" friends did a clean-up, and that would be impossible, IMO. Also, why would they leave Rudy's evidence?

So did the defense lay out a clear sole-Rudy theory in the trial?

Isn't this what AK and RS are accused of doing? Cleaning up only the things that pointed to them while leaving the things that pointed to RG alone? So how is it that if it were "others" that did this with RG that it would be impossible? Especially when it has been argued that it is only logical that this is what AK and RS supposedly did?

 

[SMK]

Isn't this what AK and RS are accused of doing? Cleaning up only the things that pointed to them while leaving the things that pointed to RG alone? So how is it that if it were "others" that did this with RG that it would be impossible? Especially when it has been argued that it is only logical that this is what AK and RS supposedly did?

I think the argument from the prosecution would be that the clean up was done later, and that only someone who had key access (Knox) would have motive and opportunity to have returned to stage a cleanup.

 

[TorisMom003]

I think the argument from the prosecution would be that the clean up was done later, and that only someone who had key access (Knox) would have motive and opportunity to have returned to stage a cleanup.

That may be the argument but the evidence shows that did not happen. The luminol testing showed that there was no clean up done, at least in the hall, to get rid of blood. When a clean up has occurred, either with a mop or rags, there will be evidence of it when the luminol is applied. That is not shown in the pictures of the luminol tests. There is NO swiping motion shown at all.

MOO