Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#13

[aa9511]

Yes not only would we expect a lot more prints but I would expect to see some in the living/kitchen area. The prints uncovered were limited to the hallway between Meredith and Amandas room and Amanda's room. If its something in the water, why were there none in those areas of the other roommates?

It's not copper residue, it's not iron residue, it's not cat blood, it's not fruit juice, beet juice, graperfruit juice, orange juice, it's not bleach, it's not some other cleaning product - it is Meredith's blood.

I am very disturbed that so many scientists would ignore reason and the totality of the evidence in order to confirm one point of view.

I guess that is why they are not judges.

However, I would expect scientists to also be able to look at something and make an educated guess as to what it is, based on the totality of the circumstances.

This is very disturbing to me.

Given with the research which shows that science and math skills in America are declining, it is very troubling.

I would hope that the scientific community in the United States would be working to re-establish their standing in the world and improve their standards, as well as focusing on education at the grade-school levels so that the next generation will be properly equipped to handle the "threats" from China and India.

The general scientific conclusions from the supporters of their innocence, in this case, seem to be going the opposite direction.

ALL of the above JMO.

 

[otto]

It's not copper residue, it's not iron residue, it's not cat blood, it's not fruit juice, beet juice, graperfruit juice, orange juice, it's not bleach, it's not some other cleaning product - it is Meredith's blood.

I am very disturbed that so many scientists would ignore reason and the totality of the evidence in order to confirm one point of view.

I guess that is why they are not judges.

However, I would expect scientists to also be able to look at something and make an educated guess as to what it is, based on the totality of the circumstances.

This is very disturbing to me.

Given with the research which shows that science and math skills in America are declining, it is very troubling.

I would hope that the scientific community in the United States would be working to re-establish their standing in the world and improve their standards, as well as focusing on education at the grade-school levels so that the next generation will be properly equipped to handle the "threats" from China and India.

The general scientific conclusions from the supporters of their innocence, in this case, seem to be going the opposite direction.

ALL of the above JMO.

I sincerely hope that no one with any authentic scientific credentials is attempting to run with the "copper in the soil" theory. It should take less than 10 seconds for anyone to realize that if something in the water caused Knox's prints to react with luminol, then the prints of all four occupants of the cottage would similarly react with luminol, as should all the dishes, clothing and plumbing. It is not necessary to look beyond this obvious point before discarding the theory. I would be stunned if there was a scientist that is unable to view the evidence in the big picture, but acknowledge that there is a reason why US college degrees are not accepted in other countries.

 

[SMK]

I sincerely hope that no one with any authentic scientific credentials is attempting to run with the "copper in the soil" theory. It should take less than 10 seconds for anyone to realize that if something in the water caused Knox's prints to react with luminol, then the prints of all four occupants of the cottage would similarly react with luminol, as should all the dishes, clothing and plumbing. It is not necessary to look beyond this obvious point before discarding the theory. I would be stunned if there was a scientist that is unable to view the evidence in the big picture, but acknowledge that there is a reason why US college degrees are not accepted in other countries.

Otto, am just wondering if you have any knowledge on this point, as I want it clear in my mind:

Many weeks ago I had asked about where are the other roommates' footprints and Chris H had told me they would not be found, as they were not "profiled", but Amanda's would be found, as she was profiled. Is this true? It has been bothering me for some time but no one ever seems to answer it.

 

[aa9511]

I sincerely hope that no one with any authentic scientific credentials is attempting to run with the "copper in the soil" theory. It should take less than 10 seconds for anyone to realize that if something in the water caused Knox's prints to react with luminol, then the prints of all four occupants of the cottage would similarly react with luminol, as should all the dishes, clothing and plumbing. It is not necessary to look beyond this obvious point before discarding the theory. I would be stunned if there was a scientist that is unable to view the evidence in the big picture, but acknowledge that there is a reason why US college degrees are not accepted in other countries.

Yes, same thing with iron/rust. Same thing with reasonable theories on how the bleach got on only Amanda's feet in the first place, and how it stayed active for so long that it would react with the Luminol. Also the fact that the time when the bleach was applied to the shower would have to be determined, as to determine how enough residue managed to last through many showers. The juice theories would have to have reasonable explanations as to how it got on her feet, etc..

I am disturbed that it is scientists who say that nothing can be 100% proven, yet even knowing this, they dismiss the Luminol prints because it is not 100% proven to be blood. So that would seem to be to going against a basic tenet of their profession.

I have seen many examples in this case where something like a .000000001% chance of something happening is taken as less than a 100% confirmation, and thus is discarded because, you know, there is this extremely slim chance of such-and-such other thing happening.

That goes against basic tenet of science that nothing is 100% proveable.

 

[aa9511]

Otto, am just wondering if you have any knowledge on this point, as I want it clear in my mind:

Many weeks ago I had asked about where are the other roommates' footprints and Chris H had told me they would not be found, as they were not "profiled", but Amanda's would be found, as she was profiled. Is this true? It has been bothering me for some time but no one ever seems to answer it.

SMK, wouldn't all prints show up with the Luminol? I don't think the Luminol can be programmed to distinguish between people's prints, such as programming it to only recognize Amanda's prints. I know some want to believe such an outlandish thing is possible, but it's not. There is no "secret" control center with futuristic technologies, all developed in the "nail Amanda and Raffaele" conspiracy.

What would happen is that there would be numerous prints found. Of those, Amanda's would be determined, and the rest would be "undetermined" if they were not profiled and so not identified. It would not mean that the prints would not show up in Luminol. In other words, someone cannot go in and program Luminol to "reject" Meredith, Filomena, and Laura's prints.

Maybe the reason people are not answering it is because it hurts their case if they admit that yes, other footprints would have been found.

ADDING: The reason the other roommates' footprints did not show up in Luminol is because THEY WERE NOT MADE IN BLOOD.

The reason that only Amanda's footprints, out of the roommates', showed up in Luminol is because HERS WERE THE ONLY ONES MADE IN BLOOD - MEREDITH"S BLOOD. Not another deceased person's blood - Meredith's blood, the one who died in that cottage.

 

[TorisMom003]

It wouldn't matter how many footprints they found, no one else was tested against the footprints that were found. The footprints that have been attributed to Amanda were not checked against the other three women living in the cottage. Much like the other DNA that was found on the bra clasp was not checked against any one other than RS and RG.

 

[aa9511]

It wouldn't matter how many footprints they found, no one else was tested against the footprints that were found. The footprints that have been attributed to Amanda were not checked against the other three women living in the cottage. Much like the other DNA that was found on the bra clasp was not checked against any one other than RS and RG.

Oh, I'm sorry, I did not know that I have an unknown twin somewhere is the world whose prints are an exact match to mine.

If the footprint matched with Amanda, why would it match with anyone else?

 

[SMK]

SMK, wouldn't all prints show up with the Luminol? I don't think the Luminol can be programmed to distinguish between people's prints, such as programming it to only recognize Amanda's prints. I know some want to believe such an outlandish thing is possible, but it's not. There is no "secret" control center with futuristic technologies, all developed in the "nail Amanda and Raffaele" conspiracy.

What would happen is that there would be numerous prints found. Of those, Amanda's would be determined, and the rest would be "undetermined" if they were not profiled and so not identified. It would not mean that the prints would not show up in Luminol. In other words, someone cannot go in and program Luminol to "reject" Meredith, Filomena, and Laura's prints.

Maybe the reason people are not answering it is because it hurts their case if they admit that yes, other footprints would have been found.

ADDING: The reason the other roommates' footprints did not show up in Luminol is because THEY WERE NOT MADE IN BLOOD.

The reason that only Amanda's footprints, out of the roommates', showed up in Luminol is because HERS WERE THE ONLY ONES MADE IN BLOOD - MEREDITH"S BLOOD. Not another deceased person's blood - Meredith's blood, the one who died in that cottage.

Thanks, and yes this is what I had thought: How could it be otherwise?

But I was not able to get an answer from Chris or from anyone else.

He had made it seem (at least to my understanding) like they simply ignored the other prints: As though Laura, Filomena, and Meredith's bare footprints from prior times (to and from the shower) HAD shown up with the luminol, but they didn't mention them, as Amanda's was the only "profile" they sought. I kept asking for clarification but could not get any.

Do you see why I was confused? :waitasec:

 

[aa9511]

It wouldn't matter how many footprints they found, no one else was tested against the footprints that were found. The footprints that have been attributed to Amanda were not checked against the other three women living in the cottage. Much like the other DNA that was found on the bra clasp was not checked against any one other than RS and RG.

I also have to add, what is the point of obtaining prints or DNA from anyone, if, after they are matched with that person, there is still a chance that it can be matched with any of the other 6 billion people in the world?

Are you proposing that the investigators should have checked those against 6 billion other people, and then after finding no matches, then by process of omission, conclude that they are Amanda's or in the case of bra strap, Raffaele's?

 

[aa9511]

Thanks, and yes this is what I had thought: How could it be otherwise?

But I was not able to get an answer from Chris or from anyone else.

He had made it seem (at least to my understanding) like they simply ignored the other prints: As though Laura, Filomena, and Meredith's bare footprints from prior times (to and from the shower) HAD shown up with the luminol, but they didn't mention them, as Amanda's was the only "profile" they sought. I kept asking for clarification but could not get any.

Do you see why I was confused? :waitasec:

Oh, we would not have stopped hearing about "other" prints if other prints had been found, that I can assure you of.

Why would the suppoters of her innocence have to go to such round-a-bout lengths to explain Amanda's Luminol prints, if the other roommate's prints were also found in Luminol?

No, we would hear about that day in and day out if that was true.

I must say that is verrrryy misleading to suggest something like that is true.

What else have we been misled on?

:rumor::shocked2::censored:

 

[SMK]

Oh, we would not have stopped hearing about "other" prints if other prints had been found, that I can assure you of.

You have a point there.....

 

[aa9511]

:rumor::shocked2::censored:

 

[otto]

Otto, am just wondering if you have any knowledge on this point, as I want it clear in my mind:

Many weeks ago I had asked about where are the other roommates' footprints and Chris H had told me they would not be found, as they were not "profiled", but Amanda's would be found, as she was profiled. Is this true? It has been bothering me for some time but no one ever seems to answer it.

Luminol is used to reveal evidence that cannot be seen with the naked eye. Prints that were matched to Knox were revealed with luminol. Since luminol is used to reveal the activities of people at a crime scene, the luminol would be applied throughout the crime scene, not only at locations where Knox would normally be (her bedroom, bathroom and hallway).

If there were prints in the large bathroom, they would be part of the trial evidence. If there were prints from the bathroom to Filomina and Laura's bedrooms, they would have been discovered. If something in the water at the cottage reacted with luminol, then it would be on the dishes, clothing and in the toilet/shower. That is, the entire toilet bowl and shower should have turned bright blue from luminol.

Laura and Filomina had alibis for the evening of the murder, so they were not there. Knox's alibi changed several times, always with the objective placing her somewhere else between 9PM and 11PM. Investigators attempted to confirm her "alibi" and each time they discovered that she was lying. The footprints in the hallway were a result of someone stepping in blood, as there is no other logical explanation. Therefore, the person that created the prints was in Meredith's bedroom, stepped in the blood, and walked in the hallway. If it was not Knox, then it was someone else, but it was not her roommates. It was not Guede as the prints are too small.

Knox has made every effort to not only implicate Guede as the sole murderer, but to also exclude all evidence outside of Meredith's bedroom. Why would an accused murderer want to exclude all the luminol evidence and broken window?

 

[otto]

Yes, same thing with iron/rust. Same thing with reasonable theories on how the bleach got on only Amanda's feet in the first place, and how it stayed active for so long that it would react with the Luminol. Also the fact that the time when the bleach was applied to the shower would have to be determined, as to determine how enough residue managed to last through many showers. The juice theories would have to have reasonable explanations as to how it got on her feet, etc..

I am disturbed that it is scientists who say that nothing can be 100% proven, yet even knowing this, they dismiss the Luminol prints because it is not 100% proven to be blood. So that would seem to be to going against a basic tenet of their profession.

I have seen many examples in this case where something like a .000000001% chance of something happening is taken as less than a 100% confirmation, and thus is discarded because, you know, there is this extremely slim chance of such-and-such other thing happening.

That goes against basic tenet of science that nothing is 100% proveable.

We have seen questionable, no-name lawyers (Jose Baez) that take a controversial case to make a name for themselves. Scientists would do the same thing. For example, they might use their credentials to mislead by stating only half of the truth. We have Hampikian, who claimed that he is responsible for Hellman's decision, but when asked for more information, he refused to provide information on the basis that it is a "state secret". How can information used at a public trial be a state secret? Clearly something is wrong here, as the scientist claims that his "state secrets" influenced a public trial decision in a foreign country.

 

[SMK]

Luminol is used to reveal evidence that cannot be seen with the naked eye. Prints that were matched to Knox were revealed with luminol. Since luminol is used to reveal the activities of people at a crime scene, the luminol would be applied throughout the crime scene, not only at locations where Knox would normally be (her bedroom, bathroom and hallway).

If there were prints in the large bathroom, they would be part of the trial evidence. If there were prints from the bathroom to Filomina and Laura's bedrooms, they would have been discovered. If something in the water at the cottage reacted with luminol, then it would be on the dishes, clothing and in the toilet/shower. That is, the entire toilet bowl and shower should have turned bright blue from luminol.

Laura and Filomina had alibis for the evening of the murder, so they were not there. Knox's alibi changed several times, always with the objective placing her somewhere else between 9PM and 11PM. Investigators attempted to confirm her "alibi" and each time they discovered that she was lying. The footprints in the hallway were a result of someone stepping in blood, as there is no other logical explanation. Therefore, the person that created the prints was in Meredith's bedroom, stepped in the blood, and walked in the hallway. If it was not Knox, then it was someone else, but it was not her roommates. It was not Guede as the prints are too small.

Knox has made every effort to not only implicate Guede as the sole murderer, but to also exclude all evidence outside of Meredith's bedroom. Why would an accused murderer want to exclude all the luminol evidence and broken window?

Thanks for this, Otto--- Yes, this is what I wanted to be sure of.

Because I had been led to believe:

• there were fruit juice/rust/bleach footprints of all 4 girls in that cottage, (from prior times)
• but only Amanda's were mentioned by the CSI; the others were buried in silence
• and they falsely said it was blood.

So you see why I was completely baffled about the whole luminol issue???

But now you and aa have clarified that what I was told was simply not true, or had been misunderstood by me. Thanks.

 

[otto]

Thanks for this, Otto--- Yes, this is what I wanted to be sure of.

Because I had been led to believe:

• there were fruit juice/rust/bleach footprints of all 4 girls in that cottage, (from prior times)
• but only Amanda's were mentioned by the CSI; the others were buried in silence
• and they falsely said it was blood.

So you see why I was completely baffled about the whole luminol issue? But now you and aa have clarified that what I was told was simply not true, or had been misunderstood by me. Thanks.

I understand now. Luminol would have revealed all prints at the cottage and they would all be part of the trial evidence, as they would indicate the movements of people in the cottage after the murder. This was not a frame up job where evidence was discarded or hidden in order to frame Knox.

I think the easiest way to eliminate any suggestion that something in the water is responsible for the footprints is to look at the absence of luminol reaction in the shower/toilet/bidet. Bleach is excluded because of the 46 day delay between the creation of the prints and application of luminol. Fruit is excluded because Knox forgot to claim that she was wearing turnip shoes on November 2, 2007. She has also failed to tell stories about spilling fruit all over the floor, walking in it, and then walking around the cottage with fruit covered feet. It's not necessary for anyone to create explanations about fruit when Knox herself has no fruit based explanation. Knox simply tells people to focus on the bedroom and ignore the evidence outside of Meredith's bedroom.

 

[SMK]

I understand now. Luminol would have revealed all prints at the cottage and they would all be part of the trial evidence, as they would indicate the movements of people in the cottage after the murder. This was not a frame up job where evidence was discarded or hidden in order to frame Knox.

I think the easiest way to eliminate any suggestion that something in the water is responsible for the footprints is to look at the absence of luminol reaction in the shower/toilet/bidet. Bleach is excluded because of the 46 day delay between the creation of the prints and application of luminol. Fruit is excluded because Knox forgot to claim that she was wearing turnip shoes on November 2, 2007. She has also failed to tell stories about spilling fruit all over the floor, walking in it, and then walking around the cottage with fruit covered feet. It's not necessary for anyone to create explanations about fruit when Knox herself has no fruit based explanation. Knox simply tells people to focus on the bedroom and ignore the evidence outside of Meredith's bedroom.

Yes, it would seem that way. And in her book, she makes the claim that anything outside of Meredith's bedroom "only proves that she lived in the cottage". So you see how all is waved away......

 

[quesarita]

Thanks, and yes this is what I had thought: How could it be otherwise?

But I was not able to get an answer from Chris or from anyone else.

He had made it seem (at least to my understanding) like they simply ignored the other prints: As though Laura, Filomena, and Meredith's bare footprints from prior times (to and from the shower) HAD shown up with the luminol, but they didn't mention them, as Amanda's was the only "profile" they sought. I kept asking for clarification but could not get any.

Do you see why I was confused? :waitasec:

It's not as if they matched a finger print to AK. The blurry foot prints were compatible in size with her feet, and possibly the other roommates' foot size as well, but the others' foot sizes were not compared to see if they also matched.

 

[SMK]

It's not as if they matched a finger print to AK. The blurry foot prints were compatible in size with her feet, and possibly the other roommates' foot size as well, but the others' foot sizes were not compared to see if they also matched.

OK, thanks for this, because I had NO idea how these footprints were specified. Since when babies are born in the hospital , they give you their footprints on the birth document, I thought footprints WERE like fingerprints - so these are simply female sized footprints which are compatible to Amanda's size? And presuming the luminol reacted to blood (in the presumptive luminol test; although not in the confirmatory test???) and Laura and Filomena were away and Meredith was the victim, they point to Knox by process of elimination. :crazy:

 

[quesarita]

This photo (TJMK) was taken just inside Meredith's bedroom door. The A, B and C markers point out 3 bloody shoe prints matching Guede's shoes. There are not pools or smears of blood in this area of the bedroom.

There is no reasonable reason IMO for the police to NOT test the floor here with luminol after they had just found bare foot prints with luminol on the other side of this door.

If the only explanation available is that the police are completely trustworthy and infallible and it was their decision to make, I don't accept that. They wanted very badly to place Amanda on this side of Meredith's door.

There is a very detailed analysis of the partial print on the pillow that they said was compatible with Amanda's shoe size (not her shoe) that matches it to the other prints of Rudy's, but if people will not read sites that don't agree with their point if view, not much point in posting it IMO.