Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#4

[Allusonz]

Don't think I assumed anything about what youve read. I said people don't want to acknowledge it. My apologies if you misinterpreted what I said.

I don't believe i misinterpreted what was stated whatsoever.

 

[otto]

Please supply the link which states they withdrew their signatures. Here are the names of the individuals that agreed with the concerns raised in the original document. Please feel free to contact anyone of them.

Dan Krane, chief executive officer and chairman of the board of directors, Forensic Bioinformatics

Jason Gilder, systems engineer, Forensic Bioinformatics

Joy Halverson, DVM, director, Zoogen Services

Laurence D. Mueller, professor of ecology and evolutionary biology, University of California, Irvine

Marc Taylor, president, Technical Associates

Rick Staub, Ph.D., director of laboratory operations, Orchid Cellmark, Dallas, Texas

Simon Ford, Ph.D., Lexigen Science and Law Consultants

Thanks to everyone that found the signatures! I had been under the impression all this time that they had withdrawn them.

How does this letter relate to the trial?

 

[Allusonz]

Well, some of it was just intuitive. He seemed like a person hiding something, ill at ease in an odd way, especially in some of his denials. He failed an initial voice stress test (detecting deception). Judge Green's findings made sense. Chuck Erikson's recanting had some irregularities from Ferguson's story. One wonders what the chances are of a friend insisting that you and he committed a murder in the first place. Where did that smoke come from, without a fire? Erikson in the first trial pointed at Ferguson and said to the jury, "Because I want you to know what THAT MAN did." Do friends do this because they dreamed something up, from some unknown paranoia? Yes, it was a corrupt prosecution and he was unfairly tried. Long life and happiness to him. Just not sure he is innocent. But it's not for me to say....

Judge Green's decision is full of holes that I won't address here.

Ryan Ferguson was told he failed but passed a subsequent one. Wonders why they are inadmissable in Court?

Erickson was prepared by the prosecution. He went from knowing virtual no detail to everything as he was given all the documents to study. This though is for another thread.

It still does not address what evidence points to Ryan Ferguson, especially when the investigators and prosecutor knew of an African American male that had stated he was responsible.

 

[SMK]

Judge Green's decision is full of holes that I won't address here.

Ryan Ferguson was told he failed but passed a subsequent one. Wonders why they are inadmissable in Court?

Erickson was prepared by the prosecution. He went from knowing virtual no detail to everything as he was given all the documents to study. This though is for another thread.

It still does not address what evidence points to Ryan Ferguson, especially when the investigators and prosecutor knew of an African American male that had stated he was responsible.

OK. Maybe when it comes to Ferguson, my imagination's all afoul. Btw, did they ever determine what caused Erikson to concoct the story in the first place, prior to talking to any police? He was under no pressure from anyone - why did he make up such a story?

 

[otto]

Yes they secured the cottage so well that it was broken into.

To state that no one entered the cottage in the 47 days flies in the face of the investigators themselves stating that they were in there let alone the pictures which show it was not secure.

At the end of the day, this is simply a sidenote, as the PLE showed their incompetence in their collection methods originally.

Why is it a problem that investigators are in a secure crime scene?

 

[otto]

Judge Green's decision is full of holes that I won't address here.

Ryan Ferguson was told he failed but passed a subsequent one. Wonders why they are inadmissable in Court?

Erickson was prepared by the prosecution. He went from knowing virtual no detail to everything as he was given all the documents to study. This though is for another thread.

It still does not address what evidence points to Ryan Ferguson, especially when the investigators and prosecutor knew of an African American male that had stated he was responsible.

I wonder if there is a thread about the case.

 

[otto]

Wonders how a document filed with the Court could suddenly be scrubbed of signatures?
Not that it ultimately is important as I don't believe they have changed their original opinion.

In fact, I believe others from various countries have gone on the record stating the same. It ultimately does not change the fact that there are serious issues and concerns.

I won't even go into the fact that Stephanoni and her perjury during her testimony. That is another facet to an already corrupt investigation.

BBM

When was the letter with all the signatures entered as evidence?

 

[SMK]

I wonder if there is a thread about the case.

of course there is. But as it mirrors the Knox case in many ways, something may germinate from a bit of discussion about it. ETA: Actually, it doesn't mirror the Knox case in far more aspects than it does.

 

[miley]

No it's not a google translation. I'm guessing you haven't read it? Although people want to keep quoting Hellmann and C&V when the cassation court disregarded their findings. That's why we are back at the appeal level after all.

I have read through the Sc ruling Amber but I can't possibly remember it all. It would be helpful if you posted the passage you think supports your point of view.
The Hellmann quote I posted is relevant because it offers insight into Guede and gives a different prespective from those who are trying to pass him off as your everyday typical kid living in Perugia. Rudy has a darker side as Hellmann points out.

 

[Cappuccino]

OK. Maybe when it comes to Ferguson, my imagination's all afoul. Btw, did they ever determine what caused Erikson to concoct the story in the first place, prior to talking to any police? He was under no pressure from anyone - why did he make up such a story?

I think Erikson falls into the category of a delusional false confessor.

Btw, a person doesn't necessarily need to be under any pressure to concoct a false confession. About 600 people contacted LE to confess to the kidnapping of the Lindbergh baby, and its largely due to that case that LE keep details of high profile crimes confidential - to sort out the attention seekers and the delusional from people who have actual knowledge of the crime.

The police did the opposite with Erikson, they fed him details where he clearly knew none.

 

[otto]

It wasn't his foot that had blood on it. It was the pant leg which dripped water and blood mixed onto the floor and his bare foot that then stepped in it before he put his shoes and socks back on.

So his pant leg had blood, water was added, the diluted mixture poured down his leg and onto the floor and formed a perfect foot print? I really don't understand any of this. Did the witnesses that saw Guede state that his pants were so wet that blood was forming puddles with each step that he took? Why would the puddles stop when he put his shoes on, or did he wait for his pants to dry and then he put on his shoe?

 

[SMK]

I think Erikson falls into the category of a delusional false confessor.

Btw, a person doesn't necessarily need to be under any pressure to concoct a false confession. About 600 people contacted LE to confess to the kidnapping of the Lindbergh baby, and its largely due to that case that LE keep details of high profile crimes confidential - to sort out the attention seekers and the delusional from people who have actual knowledge of the crime.

The police did the opposite with Erikson, they fed him details where he clearly knew none.

Thank you for this illumination.

 

[SMK]

So his pant leg had blood, water was added, the diluted mixture poured down his leg and onto the floor and formed a perfect foot print? I really don't understand any of this. Did the witnesses that saw Guede state that his pants were so wet that blood was forming puddles with each step that he took? Why would the puddles stop when he put his shoes on, or did he wait for his pants to dry and then he put on his shoe?

bbm is what I myself had wondered.

 

[Amber29]

I have read through the Sc ruling Amber but I can't possibly remember it all. It would be helpful if you posted the passage you think supports your point of view.
The Hellmann quote I posted is relevant because it offers insight into Guede and gives a different prespective from those who are trying to pass him off as your everyday typical kid living in Perugia. Rudy has a darker side as Hellmann points out.

I'm sorry Miley I'm unsure what we were discussing atm but I have actually quoted from Cassation reasoning a few times. Each time I've been told they are wrong in one way or another.

 

[Cappuccino]

So his pant leg had blood, water was added, the diluted mixture poured down his leg and onto the floor and formed a perfect foot print?

No. It formed a wet patch on the floor, as liquid is wont to. Then someone stepped in it and formed a footprint, as feet are wont to.

Did the witnesses that saw Guede state that his pants were so wet that blood was forming puddles with each step that he took? Why would the puddles stop when he put his shoes on, or did he wait for his pants to dry and then he put on his shoe?

You'd better ask Footwarrior, it was his/her theory. I was just clearing up the misconception about blood being on the bare foot as opposed to the pant leg.

 

[otto]

of course there is. But as it mirrors the Knox case in many ways, something may germinate from a bit of discussion about it. ETA: Actually, it doesn't mirror the Knox case in far more aspects than it does.

Ferguson was arrested as soon as his friend falsely accused him of murder. That's what happened to Patrick when Knox falsely accused him of murder. Same thing. The janitor lied when he stated that he recogized Ferguson as the murderer and the friend testified that Ferguson was involved in a murder, so Ferguson was convicted. The only similarity I see is that the Perugian investigators did everything they could to get to the truth, and Patrick was released after two weeks. In Ferguson's case, the police did everything they could to avoid the truth and Ferguson was sentenced to 40 years in prison.

 

[otto]

No. It formed a wet patch on the floor, as liquid is wont to. Then someone stepped in it and formed a footprint, as feet are wont to.

You'd better ask Footwarrior, it was his/her theory. I was just clearing up the misconception about blood being on the bare foot as opposed to the pant leg.

Okay, so we have a puddle of mixed blood and water, and by stepping in that puddle, it turned into a footprint? That sounds very unusual.

 

[otto]

bbm is what I myself had wondered.

It's amazing how the theory of the crime can change if we introduce facts out of this air. There is no evidence that Guede stopped to wash his pants.

 

[Cappuccino]

Okay, so we have a puddle of mixed blood and water, and by stepping in that puddle, it turned into a footprint? That sounds very unusual.

We don't have a puddle actually, not in my version of the theory anyway. If Guede had any sense he would have wrung out his pant leg inside the shower, leaving not enough moisture behind for a puddle. Enough drips to form a damp patch would be more likely.

And yes if you step in a damp patch of coloured liquid you will leave a footprint behind. Try it yourself at home with food colouring.

 

[otto]

<modsnip>

Who stepped out of the shower?

Guede's bloody shoe prints go directly from Meredith's bedroom straight down the hall to the front door, becoming more faint as he approached the door. Guede was seen running down the street after the murder. He went home to clean up and then went to a club.