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

[SMK]

Let me see if I understand this train of thought.

The only drug they tested positive for was cannibas, yet I am to believe that 3 people, without any evidence of one ever meeting the other, were able to take directives from AK who was not fluent in Italian, over feces in a toilet?

It sounds too much like Mignini, consulting his psychic in 2 cases, where she came up with a satanic theme.

OK, point taken. But if this case is as absurd as everyone is saying, in your opinion, why did the Italian Supreme Court allow Hellmann to be overturned? It seems all was settled with Hellmann, and the SC might have simply upheld that, and the prosecution offered no further challenges. So, what are they doing, and why?

 

[Sigh Sister]

It's too bad they are in Italian, I'm not interested in machine translations. Too many mistakes and wrong words used. Although I would love to know if the tweets from the courtroom were lies like was insinuated.

I know one of the people that was tweeting is a frequent poster in another forum. I would say he cannot be trusted. In some of his tweets, it was obvious he was adding his special spin. I don't think you can ever totally trust tweets.

I don't like reading translations either. I'm going to wait until someone translates it before I read it.

 

[MichaelSmith]

Filomena or Laura I can't remember which or both worked for a lawyer. Makes perfect sense to me.

Meredith's boyfriend waited at a train station for his professor after hearing about Meredith's murder and hired a lawyer as well before talking to the police. He had a sixth sense for what may lay ahead.

 

[Amber29]

Meredith's boyfriend waited at a train station for his professor after hearing about Meredith's murder and hired a lawyer as well before talking to the police. He had a sixth sense for what may lay ahead.

Perhaps RS and AK should've done the same. I'm surprised RSs father did not insist.

 

[Amber29]

Meredith's boyfriend waited at a train station for his professor after hearing about Meredith's murder and hired a lawyer as well before talking to the police. He had a sixth sense for what may lay ahead.

To add to that I'm surprised the Mellas/Knox didn't insist. I believe if my child was in a foreign country alone and found herself in the midst of a murder investigation, I would be hiring a lawyer from the plane.

 

[SMK]

Meredith's boyfriend waited at a train station for his professor after hearing about Meredith's murder and hired a lawyer as well before talking to the police. He had a sixth sense for what may lay ahead.

Maybe he feared poor Meredith had been killed because someone was trying to get to the pot plants she was watering for him

 

[Cherry]

Meredith's boyfriend waited at a train station for his professor after hearing about Meredith's murder and hired a lawyer as well before talking to the police. He had a sixth sense for what may lay ahead.

I dk that.

 

[SMK]

All my reading here and at the other 3 main sites makes me believe that all the evidence, inconsistencies, etc. are viewed through the lens of either guilt or innocence, respectively. And that this seems to color all: If you begin with the guilty premise, all falls into place for that; if you presume innocence, all is explained away and much vanishes.

I really wonder how the jurors (lay judges) will view all? Which side will they believe has the truth? And are these (6 women, I believe?) all familiar with the case for years, via media, etc.? Or is it new to them? I'm assuming as they are Italian, it cannot really be new for them......

I also am eager to hear how the defense wraps up - was supposed to be Dec 16-17, but now that Maresca still has to speak, it may eat into January.....and the Prosecution rebuttal. That's all that's left before jury deliberations.

Just musing......

 

[Yellow]

OK, point taken. But if this case is as absurd as everyone is saying, in your opinion, why did the Italian Supreme Court allow Hellmann to be overturned? It seems all was settled with Hellmann, and the SC might have simply upheld that, and the prosecution offered no further challenges. So, what are they doing, and why?

The SC cannot fact find, they did not say they agree w the facts of the lower court bc they are not allowed to do that. The SC does care about other cases and does not want this to be a precedent

In Hellmann, maybe there were a legal error committed bc he only really dealt with the DNA evidence and said once you get rid if that the conviction cannot stand. He did not address the issue of whether the other circumstantial evidence could support a conviction

The SC might not want to uphold Hellmann bc they want courts in Italy not just to do piecemeal attacks on the evidence, they want the court to look at the evidence in total to see whether the conviction still stands.

It is simply not true that the SC blessed the trial court's attack of the facts, they only wanted Hellmann to go back and look at the evidence more to see if you can still get to a conviction without the DNA

Without the DNA evidence there is no leg for this case to stand on. no appellate court will uphold a conviction based on DNA discredited by the intl community. It just will not happen. The only way this case will be upheld is if they uphold the circumstantial case without relying on the DNA

Plenty of times courts are limited by the law on what they could do. The SC could very well find this case as absurd as many people think it is yet they want still overrule it bc they want the court to follow a certain procedure when overruling cases. They care about future cases too and if they allow a certain procedure in this case they have to allow it in all future cases.

The sc ruling is based more on a procedural or legal error rather than a substantive one.

 

[SMK]

The SC cannot fact find, they did not say they agree w the facts of the lower court bc they are not allowed to do that. The SC does care about other cases and does not want this to be a precedent

In Hellmann, maybe there were a legal error committee bc he only really dealt with the DNA evidence and said once you get rid if that the conviction cannot stand. He did not adress the issue of whether the other circumstantial evidence could suport a conviction

The SC might not want to uphold Hellmann bc they want courts in Italy not just to do piecemeal attacks on the evidence, they want the court to look at the evidence in total to see whether the conviction still stands.

It is simply not true that the SC blessed the trial court's attack of the facts, they only wanted Hellmann to go back and look at the evidence more to see if you can still get to a conviction without the DNA

Without the DNA evidence there is no leg for this case to stand on. no appellate court will uphold a conviction based on DNA discredited by the intl community. It just will not happen. The only way this case will be upheld is if they uphold the circumstantial case without relying on the DNA

Plenty of times courts are limited by the law on what they could do. The SC could very well find this case as absurd as many people think it is yet they want still overrule it bc they want the court to follow a certain procedure when overruling cases

The sc ruling is based more on a procedural or legal error rather than a substantive one.

OK; thanks for that clarification, and the illuminating info. So you expect: Acquittal, and then no further challenge from the prosecution? (mid January)

 

[Yellow]

OK; thanks for that clarification, and the illuminating info. So you expect: Acquittal, and then no further challenge from the prosecution? (mid January)

I expect acquittal, prosecutor will still challenge it, but they will not succeed unless there is some legal or procedural argument they can make. They will not succeed if they just say "overturn bc our experts should be believed over there's." the sc has no jurisdiction to look into credibility or to weight the evidence

If guilty, it will get overturned bc of the reliance on bad DNA evidence. The SC will not want to set that precedent bc you will have all sorts of other convictions being upheld also based on bad DNA, making Italy look silly that they allow convictions based on DNA standards rejected by the intl community

And the appeals court knows this. Judges hate getting overruled, it is a pride thing for any judge. They know they will get overruled if they base it on DNA. So if guilty the appeals court will make out a circumstantial case without DNA, and SC will uphold unless knox can make out a legal argument. Her best arguments are the DNA or the use of the false confession in the defamation trial at the same time as the murder trial hurt her rights (this would be a solid argument in any American courtroom)

 

[Amber29]

I know this goes some days back in our discussion but it was said that amanda arrived at the cottage and chose her room before Meredith. In looking over John Follain's book he writes that Meredith arrived in late August and chose her room then.

" a couple of weeks after moving in, Meredith's new flatmates told her, another student would be coming to live in the room next to hers"
A Death in Italy

Anyone who knows differently please correct this, it's minor but I'd like to know where the error is. I think Filomenas testimony transcript was linked and maybe the misunderstanding is from the translation.

 

[SMK]

I know this goes some days back in our discussion but it was said that amanda arrived at the cottage and chose her room before Meredith. In looking over John Follain's book he writes that Meredith arrived in late August and chose her room then.

" a couple of weeks after moving in, Meredith's new flatmates told her, another student would be coming to live in the room next to hers"
A Death in Italy

Anyone who knows differently please correct this, it's minor but I'd like to know where the error is. I think Filomenas testimony transcript was linked and maybe the misunderstanding is from the translation.

Nina Burleigh in her book, The Fatal Gift of Beauty: The Trials of Amanda Knox said Laura and Filomena first rented the cottage and wanted 2 more girls to share expenses.

Amanda came first, (end of August) followed by Meredith who phoned about the ad, speaking in excellent Italian. pp 67-8

 

[Amber29]

Nina Burleigh in her book, The Fatal Gift of Beauty: The Trials of Amanda Knox said Laura and Filomena first rented the cottage and wanted 2 more girls to share expenses.

Amanda came first, (end of August) followed by Meredith who phoned about the ad, speaking in excellent Italian. pp 67-8

Hmmm wonder who is correct. I hate seeing little inconsistencies like this because it seems like an easy thing for authors to find out before asserting. How hard is it to find out who traveled to Perugia first?

Maybe the minor details don't matter to them much.

 

[SMK]

Hmmm wonder who is correct. I hate seeing little inconsistencies like this because it seems like an easy thing for authors to find out before asserting. How hard is it to find out who traveled to Perugia first?

Maybe the minor details don't matter to them much.

Yes, it is perplexing.

And I am not sure if Amanda perhaps initially rented the place, and returned to the US, and then came back in September, or just moved right in in August (I only have a limited Google preview of the book).

One other thing I was wondering about:

In the Murder Wiki, there is a section about staging not only the break in and burglary, but of someone returning to the cottage and moving Meredith's body after death, and cutting the bra and pushing up the shirt, to simulate a sexual attack.

I have been reading about staged crime scenes, and it turns out that many crime scenes have both a staged burglary and a staged sexual assault (eg a husband strangles his wife during an argument; then stages things to look as if a burglar broke in, ransacked the place, discovered the wife alone, and attempted a rape).

The question is, as Guede clearly assaulted Meredith (his DNA found on her tampon, and inside her) why would staging of a sex crime be presumed? Can anyone who believes in guilt address this; what the basic premise of a staging of sexual assault after an actual sex assault would be ? (my friend Otto or anyone else?) TIA--would be most appreciated. ETA: I know we have been over the logistics; I just want to grasp the premise better if I can.....

 

[otto]

Let there be no mistake. PLE were looking for a particular person due to the hair that was found. This is once again from the interview with John Douglas.

JD: The police knew that they had negroid hairs at the crime scene. The interrogation tactics were used to have Amanda say what the police wanted. You get people to confess under this psychological torture.

From the same interview which is well worth the read for any interested.



http://www.sciencespheres.com/

Psychological torture? That never happened.

 

[Harmony 2]

I know this goes some days back in our discussion but it was said that amanda arrived at the cottage and chose her room before Meredith. In looking over John Follain's book he writes that Meredith arrived in late August and chose her room then.

" a couple of weeks after moving in, Meredith's new flatmates told her, another student would be coming to live in the room next to hers"
A Death in Italy

Anyone who knows differently please correct this, it's minor but I'd like to know where the error is. I think Filomenas testimony transcript was linked and maybe the misunderstanding is from the translation.

It is written about in the Massei report...

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

page 29
At the beginning of September Amanda Knox arrived and said she was interested in living in the house. She had chosen her own room, the one located between Romanelli’s room and the one that would be Meredith’s room.
Amanda Knox had then left to spend a few days in Germany, where she had an aunt.
Meredith had arrived after this and also expressed interest in the house [16]. She began to live there in mid-September 2007, occupying the room furthest from the entrance, next to Amanda’s and in front of the small bathroom, the second bathroom of this apartment.

Fwiw, the room that ended up being Meredith's was bigger and had a nice view.

 

[Sigh Sister]

Yes, it is perplexing.

And I am not sure if Amanda perhaps initially rented the place, and returned to the US, and then came back in September, or just moved right in in August (I only have a limited Google preview of the book).

One other thing I was wondering about:

In the Murder Wiki, there is a section about staging not only the break in and burglary, but of someone returning to the cottage and moving Meredith's body after death, and cutting the bra and pushing up the shirt, to simulate a sexual attack.

I have been reading about staged crime scenes, and it turns out that many crime scenes have both a staged burglary and a staged sexual assault (eg a husband strangles his wife during an argument; then stages things to look as if a burglar broke in, ransacked the place, discovered the wife alone, and attempted a rape).

The question is, as Guede clearly assaulted Meredith (his DNA found on her tampon, and inside her) why would staging of a sex crime be presumed? Can anyone who believes in guilt address this; what the basic premise of a staging of sexual assault after an actual sex assault would be ? (my friend Otto or anyone else?) TIA--would be most appreciated. ETA: I know we have been over the logistics; I just want to grasp the premise better if I can.....

I've never heard that RG DNA was on a tampon. Is that true?

 

[SMK]

I've never heard that RG DNA was on a tampon. Is that true?

Waterbury asserts this, as does the PDF file of "Monster of Perugia" -

and it was certainly said in the early newspaper pieces, yes:

Guede, who has dual Ivorian and Italian nationality, was detained in Germany on Tuesday after Italian police issued an international arrest warrant for his capture. They began looking for him after a fingerprint found in the house was not that of any of the three suspects in custody at the time.

The test results showed Guede’s DNA matched that found on a tampon which indicated that Miss Kercher had what was described as “violent” sex on the night she died. It also matched the DNA found on toilet paper in the bathroom.

http://metro.co.uk/2007/11/22/tests-reveal-sex-link-with-meredith-546313/

<modsnip> Dempsey says his Y DNA was found on her tampon: (sorry Mods, I was rushing and did not realize Seattle PI was a blog, and not a news site!!!) http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2011/06/26/amanda-knox-accuser-rudy-guede-will-testify-in-cour

Guede admitted that he had, both in his initial statements and in Internet conversations intercepted by police. Investigators say his DNA was found "inside" Kercher's body and on her tampon, and that his fingerprints were on her blood-stained pillow.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/1...oed-seen-dancing-at-disco-hours-after-murder/

 

[redheadedgal]

I think Filomenas testimony transcript was linked and maybe the misunderstanding is from the translation.

i could've linked amanda's book instead of the testimony but would it have taken as truth?

chapter 2: http://books.google.ca/books?id=YWl1n8Ru1E8C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false