Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#7

[geevee]

One more quick question (it seems I really missed a LOT of info in this case - sorry ) :

The towels that Guede claim he used to try and stop MK's bleeding.

What is the real theory on this?

Did someone actually attempt to help MK? Or were the towels just there, and got soaked with blood? To me, it does appear someone was trying to stop the flow.

Had never really heard any ideas about this, other than what Guede himself asserted, which I saw no reason to believe---
See attached (WARNING - Graphic image) http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/PhotoGallery4.html

Thanks for that pic, it seems the towel was under the duvet cover in the other pics (based on its location in this pic)? Guess that's why I hadn't seen it (and only the one on the bed) before and really wondered after reading RG's diary. I don't have a theory yet, I thought he was fibbing about it. lol

 

[sherlockh]

why is GH (and BSU) getting raked over the coals for not handing over info while stefanoni is supported and excuses are made for her not giving to the defence what they asked for? seems another contradiction...

(why wasn't she found in contempt for not complying with a judge's request is another question?!)

and, in the link sherlockh provides above, there is a response from BSU to andrea vogt (not sure how to link the adobe file here - sorry) which also includes the reasoning of attorney-client priviledge. why would anyone want that violated? i would assume no one here would... ??

I don't know if it is that simple. Bloomberg is not some blog site, and Orrick is not some local law firm. If they are reporting on it then maybe there is more behind it than just attorney-client privilege. We will see what comes from it.

As far as Stefanoni goes, there must be facts first. I don't see them. One side is complaining, the other side says there is no problem. Prosecutor Crini explained that all data was available, that the independent experts said they got all cooperation. I am not going to insinuate conspiracy theories just because the defense is complaining. I have no strong opinion on this, so I am more than happy to accept the judges decision.

 

[sherlockh]

That's what I was thinking too, but that means that the paper is covering where the print should be.

Yes but on this pic it looks very clean. I don't know for what reason. I wonder if it was discussed during the trials.

 

[geevee]

According to this (hope this link is okay to post):

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/footprints-02.html

"The shoe prints in the hallway were photographed and scrubbed off the floor less than twelve hours into the investigation. The luminol testing was done much later on December 18, 2007."

 

[sherlockh]

According to this (hope this link is okay to post):

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/footprints-02.html

"The shoe prints in the hallway were photographed and scrubbed off the floor less than twelve hours into the investigation. The luminol testing was done much later on December 18, 2007."

Thanks, so it was done on purpose. I am not sure why this would be a problem. If you leave them there then you only run the risk of contamination. I don't remember if this was ever a problem in court.

 

[MichaelSmith]

Yes but on this pic it looks very clean. I don't know for what reason. I wonder if it was discussed during the trials.

There's another photo on page 6 of Professor Vinci's report.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/Vinci.pdf

 

[aa9511]

I was thinking more along the lines of cleaning agents being on the wet clothes that were in the hallway and then bare feet stepping into the water on the floor. Also since the luminol testing was not done until after the bedroom items had been shoved into the hallway by police there is the possibility of transfer that way as well.

MOO

Wouldn't the clothes have been rinsed already?

Unless the police came in and put blood on the floor in the hallway, I don't see how moving things out of the way would cause the luminol prints to be inaccurate.

 

[aa9511]

Here's an interesting fact: Although scientists in the US seem determined to tell scientists in Italy how to do their jobs, the latest ranking of countries in terms of math/science scores has Italy scoring higher than the US. In fact, it looks like scientists in Asia, Switzerland, or Canada should be advising those in the US about how to do their jobs, and that scientists in the US really are not in a position to set standards.

http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/PISA-2012-results-US.pdf

:floorlaugh:

 

[aa9511]

I don't think that's a problem. I think that blood can be blood without DNA. Also, isn't there a print from Knox in Filomina's bedroom that is definitely Meredith's blood? Knox's DNA is confirmed to be mixed with the blood in that sample.

Well, it might not be a problem to some, but I feel that it's a very big deal to the supporters of her innocence. I have heard that argument many times to refute the supposed Amanda footprints in the hallway.

So I'm surprised that it seems the prosecution has not given a clear answer to this. IDK. Has the prosecution said that blood sometimes doesn't have DNA?

 

[aa9511]

I've never heard that before! Where did you read this?

Yes, link please. I thought there was a long discussion earlier about providing links to facts..........

 

[aa9511]

An interesting fact:

When Scientifica returned to the villa in December, they found someone actually removed the bloody shoeprints in the hallway.
A lot of blood traces in the bedroom were gone, too.

Link please to this fact. I recall some discussion about links from earlier...........

 

[MichaelSmith]

Well, it might not be a problem to some, but I feel that it's a very big deal to the supporters of her innocence. I have heard that argument many times to refute the supposed Amanda footprints in the hallway.

So I'm surprised that it seems the prosecution has not given a clear answer to this. IDK. Has the prosecution said that blood sometimes doesn't have DNA?

Originally Posted by otto View Post
I don't think that's a problem. I think that blood can be blood without DNA. Also, isn't there a print from Knox in Filomina's bedroom that is definitely Meredith's blood? Knox's DNA is confirmed to be mixed with the blood in that sample.

It'd only be a problem if it were true

There was no print from Amanda in Filomena's room and what the luminol did find was TMB negative and the DNA lcn and worthless based on how it was tested.

http://hellmannreport.wordpress.com...ed-by-luminol-with-useful-biological-profile/

During the first-level trial, Dr. Sarah Gino, consultant for the defense, stressed that the quantity was compatible with low-quantity DNA (low copy number), that the analysis had not been repeated to validate the result and that peaks were present, which had not been considered, that could show the presence of other contributors. She also posed the problem of contamination — of non-authenticity of the traces — and consequent irrelevance of the traces themselves.

snip

Professor Tagliabracci, specified, without being refuted (hearing of July 18 2009, p. 174), that the tetramethylbenzedine (TMB) test is very sensitive, so much as to give a positive result even with only five red blood cells present. Dr. Stefanoni herself, moreover, clarified (preliminary hearing of October 4 2008) that, while a positive test result could be deceptive due to reactivity of the chemical [evidenziatore] with other substances, a negative result gives certainty that no blood is present.

 

[Amber29]

Yes but on this pic it looks very clean. I don't know for what reason. I wonder if it was discussed during the trials.

Yes very interesting. I never knew this about the prints but I do wonder after they have been well documented, what the problem is and why they are removed.

I also wonder why in the first pic the bed is so much further to the right, compared to the later pic.

 

[aa9511]

Here is a list of all the things (which after Hellmann was overturned, I read on the Murder Wiki) which convinced me that Knox and Sollecito had some culpability and foreknowledge:

( I leave out Knox's statement and calumnia of PL as those were too familiar to me in conjunction with false confession syndrome. I also leave out kisses, cartwheels, weird talk, buying lingerie, not knowing open door and blood drops meant serious crime was committed---to me all these things are normal and not suspect)

• Bathmat print
• luminol prints
• sink blood droplets and smears
• evidence of multiple attackers
• not calling 112 until after PP arrived
• AK saying MK always locked her door
• AK first call to Mom
• MK moved and bra removed after death
• simulation of robbery
• AK having knowledge of crime she could only know if present
• AK lamp on MK floor
• Quintavalle
• email home
• mixed sample FR room

Here is the list of what is left now (after errors, mistranslations, fabrication has been ruled out) and all of these are now questionable:

• sink droplets?
• inference of multiple attackers?
• 112 calls?
• AK on locked door?
• simulation of robbery?
• AK first call to Mom?
• Quintavalle?
• AK lamp on MK floor
• email home
• mixed sample FR room

Does anyone feel they are sure of more things, or are left with more of a list? And why?

SMK, why did you rule out bathmat prints and luminol prints? I am not convinced those should be so easily tossed out!!

So you think MK was moved by Rudy?

SMK, what about strong evidence of false alibis????????????? (according to laptop records!!)

Why question on mixed sample and DNA samples??? DO you believe some contamination occured?

To be honest, I don't have questions about any of the "leftover" list except for Quintavalle!! I think the answers to explain them away are weak, IMO, MOO, and require one to make hoops and leaps and jumps to get from point A to point B, to fit in with the reason/excuse.

I can take any case I've followed, make an itemized list, and come up with something to excuse each item away. And that's even with guilty cases. So I don't really understand the concept of this list, as we can take any case and do the same for it, it doesn't mean the result we get from our "list" is right. For example, in the "guilty" cases I've followed, if I made a separate itemized list of each evidenve factor, and used the defense reasoning or made up my own "answer" for each, I would end up getting "not guilty" when the person is clearly guilty. It's all the things together that is the case. I don't think you can really itemize it and get an accurate result. YKWIM?

Also, let's say RG is lone wolf. There is some evidence of Something in the small bathroom, no matter which side we're on we can all agree there is evidence in the small bathroom. RG as lone wolf - would you expect such a "cleaned-up" bathroom? Because that bathroom is pretty "cleaned-up" for it to have been used by someone dripping from a bloody bloodbath.

Thank you for your list, SMK. I have given my reasons why I don't agree with all the question marks.

 

[aa9511]

I would ask the person holding the paper to move it to the right so we can see the spot where the print is.
Interesting how the photo with the person holding a paper has most of the red stripped from the photo - note bra strap in photo that is not exactly blood red anymore.

Is there a reference for the photo (other than another forum)? I'd like to see if the original also has the red faded.

I don't think the bra strap is in the December photo - they must have had already collected itfor evidence. Are you talking about the plastic?

 

[aa9511]

Thank you for this.
ETA: I guess the problem with all of this is, how the 2 opposing sides interpret the origin of these traces.

What would the origin of that trace (mixed Meredith/Amanda DNA footprint) be? Would it be Meredith walking around after she was already deceased?

 

[aa9511]

Broken glass was found in MK's room. Here is what Hellmann-Zanetti said:

It will also be recalled that the film, made by the scientific police during the inspection, reveals the presence of a glass fragment next to a footprint in Meredith’s room. Which logically leads one to conclude that the breaking of the window happened before the entry into the room of Meredith Kercher — there being no reason to suppose that after the alleged staging of the burglary, carried out to divert suspicions about responsibility for the crime already committed, the perpetrator had reason to go back into Meredith Kercher’s bedroom, thus leaving behind a glass fragment that had remained attached to the sole of a shoe or the clothing being worn.​

I don't understand that. If Amanda and RS were doing the staging as well as the cleaning-up, does it matter the order? They could have cleaned up some, then gone and done the staged window, then gone back and cleaned up some more. Maybe they forgot to finish up something in Meredith's room.

 

[aa9511]

OT
Very cool thanks... my son attends MIT and will graduate in June then has been accepted into the graduate school.. I see it is ranked 4 and 5 on those lists... sorry proud mama here :blushing:

You have every right to be proud! MIT wow, just getting in is extremely difficult!

 

[sherlockh]

Well, it might not be a problem to some, but I feel that it's a very big deal to the supporters of her innocence. I have heard that argument many times to refute the supposed Amanda footprints in the hallway.

So I'm surprised that it seems the prosecution has not given a clear answer to this. IDK. Has the prosecution said that blood sometimes doesn't have DNA?

The prosecution should give a clear answer to people on the internet who think it is a big deal? It wasn't that big of a deal in court. That is what matters.

 

[aa9511]

One more quick question (it seems I really missed a LOT of info in this case - sorry ) :

The towels that Guede claim he used to try and stop MK's bleeding.

What is the real theory on this?

Did someone actually attempt to help MK? Or were the towels just there, and got soaked with blood? To me, it does appear someone was trying to stop the flow.

Had never really heard any ideas about this, other than what Guede himself asserted, which I saw no reason to believe---
See attached (WARNING - Graphic image) http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/PhotoGallery4.html

To stop the blood from flowing everywhere and making an even bigger mess. That is what I believe. MOO.

They just came to the realization of "omigosh, what have we just done." There must have been a lot of blood draining out. It must have been scary for them, not knowing how much blood would end up seeping out. Quick, stop the blood.