Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#9

[otto]

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 49s
Process Meredith, attorney Fabiani (Kercher): "Amanda Knox is not the same sensuality as Meredith"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, attorney Fabiani (Kercher): "Amanda Knox have had extreme sexual experiences"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 3m
Process Meredith, attorney Fabiani (Kercher): "An escalation of violence has led to crime"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, attorney Fabiani (Kercher): "It is not sustainable that Rudy Guede is the only murderer"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Fabiani (Kercher) "Amanda and Raffaele got excited and this triggered the rampage"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, attoney Fabiani (Kercher), "Motive irrelevant, proved the presence of the accused at the scene"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, attorney Fabiani (Kercher), "Amanda knew the mode of the crime because she was present"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, attorney Fabiani (Kercher): "All the elements lead to the guilt of the two defendants"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Meredith process, Next: after the lawyer Vieri Fabiani, avvocatessa Serena Perna, for the victim's family

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Perna (Kercher), "The medico-legal aspects confirm that Rudy Guede is not the only murderer"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Perna (Kercher): "The body of Meredith had 43 ​​injuries "

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Perna (Kercher): "Meredith was restrained by her attackers."

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Perna (Kercher): "On Meredith's body so many different (diverse) injuries. Impossible to inflict by a single attacker."

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Perna (Kercher): "Two knives were used against Meredith."

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 41s
Process Meredith, lawyer Perna (Kercher): "The footprints found at the crime scene are Amanda and Raffaele's"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "Popular judges, forget alignments and controversy outside the courtroom"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 17s
Meredith process, the lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "Forget the declarations of Sollecito in recent hearings"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 17s
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "Forget Amanda's statements on our judicial system"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher), "It's intolerable that Amanda Knox "collects" funds for victim".

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 3m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca: "Forget about those statements on TV of people who have not read the documents"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 4m
Meredith process, lawyer Maresca (Kercher) : "You cannot say that the trace of Meredith's DNA is not there"

https://twitter.com/qn_lanazione

 

[aa9511]

I was surprised that Francesco Maresca went outside of the evidence of guilt in the crime, to what the 2 defendants are doing now in their lives.

As others wondered in various postings elsewhere today, I also wondered what the 6 lay judges might think of this:

Whether they will be more ill-disposed toward the 2 defendants, or whether they will be "put off" and believe Maresca is being petty, or vengeful, or trying to prejudice them (thereby backfiring and making them more open to the defense).

I think Fabiani 's argument about drug and alcohol use allowing an altercation to escalate, and arguing proof of presence and criminal intent at the cottage Nov 1 is more in keeping with what will be the determining factors of upheld convictions versus acquittal.

On the other hand, the judges may find this relevant, and it may flesh-out a picture for them of the power that the defendants have on their side, and this may be counter-balanced by listening more to the prosecution. Just my reflections....

Any thoughts on this?

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/dont-forget-kercher-appeal-told-29842532.html

I think that the judges will probably focus on the evidence the most, evidence during and around the time of the murder.

Just me personally, I find Amanda's website to be extremely distateful. She claims it's for remembering Meredith, that is just her putting a spin on it. It is clearly mostly for getting donations, and to keep her supporters happy and involved in her case, end result being of course, money and good publicity for her. For her. So how is that about Meredith?

No, I don't think it will or should affect the jury, as we've seen in Jodi Arias case, jurors didn't know about her tweets/selling art work/blah blah blah.

But on a personal level, I find it just very weird.

 

[otto]

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 6m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher) : "I do not know whether it is freedom of the press, in some cases, freedom of delirium."

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 7m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "No one speaks of the victim anymore and the pain of her family"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 8m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "Popular judges, remember [other] judgments/sentences"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 10m
Meredith process, Maresca (Kercher), "Only the appeals court in Perugia evaluated differently"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 50s
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca: "Amanda accused Lumumba to throw the murder investigation off track"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 31s
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca: "Amanda Knox said to her mother 'I was there' "

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher), "Simulation of theft is the cornerstone to understanding the defendants' responsibility"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 7m
Meredith process, the hearing has resumed with the second part by lawyer Maresca (Kercher family)

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 6m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "It was a crime not programmed"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 4m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "The motive may be in the fact that they all were known by the victim"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher), "Fake and false alibis of the two defendants"

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 1m
Courtroom nearly empty for closing args of lawyer representing #meredithkercher family. Not much interest in their quiet suffering.

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 11s
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "The two accused had no alibi for the evening [of the murder]"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 24s
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "The footprint on the bath mat is Sollecito's"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 26s
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "As is the DNA on the clasp of Meredith's bra"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 8s
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "The tracks indicate the presence of Knox and Sollecito at the scene of the crime"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 3m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher), "Weaknesses in the expert report on the genetic traces in the appeal process"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 3m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "The experts on genetic traces were met with objections on appeal"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 5m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "The courts of appeals have delegated the experts in motivating the judgment" [?]

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "On the knife found in Sollecito 's house the DNA of the victim "

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "No one remembers Meredith, while the defendants write books and are famous"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher) : "We ask for punishment of Knox and Sollecito in accordance with the laws"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher) cites St. Augustine: "Punishment is justice for the unjust"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Meredith process, the hearing ends. It resumes tomorrow at 9.30 am with the defense closing arguments

 

[Amber29]

I think that the judges will probably focus on the evidence the most, evidence during and around the time of the murder.

Just me personally, I find Amanda's website to be extremely distateful. She claims it's for remembering Meredith, that is just her putting a spin on it. It is clearly mostly for getting donations, and to keep her supporters happy and involved in her case, end result being of course, money and good publicity for her. For her. So how is that about Meredith?

No, I don't think it will or should affect the jury, as we've seen in Jodi Arias case, jurors didn't know about her tweets/selling art work/blah blah blah.

But on a personal level, I find it just very weird.

The most distasteful part is adding a donation fund in Meredith's name, as pointed out today by the Kerchers lawyer.

She should've gotten permission from the Kerchers before doing so but considering they have released a statement that they find her completely culpable I doubt they would've approved.

 

[otto]

I had never heard of the injuries to the eyes and gums, etc. Really horrible.

I hadn't either. It was obviously a brutal, violent assault. It's sad that some have tried to minimized the attack by suggesting that Meredith decided not to fight back, contradicting her father's words: that Meredith would have fought with everything she had. Anyone in that position would have fought to defend life, if it was possible.

I learned on this forum that Meredith's lawyer documented the crime scene and injuries for the court. There has been quite a strong criticism from Knox's defense, suggesting that it simply wasn't a nice thing to do. Now, knowing that Meredith had such vicious injuries to her face, I understand why Knox's defense wants to keep that information out of the public eye.

 

[SMK]

The most distasteful part is adding a donation fund in Meredith's name, as pointed out today by the Kerchers lawyer.

She should've gotten permission from the Kerchers before doing so but considering they have released a statement that they find her completely culpable I doubt they would've approved.

Yes, it seems an unwise thing to do. If she is guilty, then's it's just outrageous. But even if she is innocent, it seems a bold and arrogant thing to do, (over-compensating) and I would think her lawyers would have advised against it.

 

[SMK]

I hadn't either. It was obviously a brutal, violent assault. It's sad that some have tried to minimized the attack by suggesting that Meredith decided not to fight back, contradicting her father's words: that Meredith would have fought with everything she had. Anyone in that position would have fought to defend life, if it was possible.

I learned on this forum that Meredith's lawyer documented the crime scene and injuries for the court. There has been quite a strong criticism from Knox's defense, suggesting that it simply wasn't a nice thing to do. Now, knowing that Meredith had such vicious injuries to her face, I understand why Knox's defense wants to keep that information out of the public eye.

Yes, and it certainly does bolster the multiple-attackers/2 knives used theory:

Maresca/Fabiani said that these facial injuries were to "control the victim" and that definitely makes you think that others were restraining her at the time.

 

[aa9511]

The most distasteful part is adding a donation fund in Meredith's name, as pointed out today by the Kerchers lawyer.

She should've gotten permission from the Kerchers before doing so but considering they have released a statement that they find her completely culpable I doubt they would've approved.

Ugh, just disgusting. You know, a shrewd business move on her part. Now she had made it to where, if people had any qualms about donating to her, well, here ya go....see, you're not only helping me, poor litle innocent me, but you're also doing something for Meredith, the real victim. Two benefits rolled into one. So see how she, I'm sure upon some advice from some consulting company as to how she could boost her profits.....see how she has just widened the net and can now catch more people this way to donate to her?

 

[otto]

The most distasteful part is adding a donation fund in Meredith's name, as pointed out today by the Kerchers lawyer.

She should've gotten permission from the Kerchers before doing so but considering they have released a statement that they find her completely culpable I doubt they would've approved.

I'm stunned. I had no idea that Knox was using Meredith's murder to solicit funds for an "unspecified" project. What's she going to do, draw stick figures with crayons and tape them to light posts?

It looks like the Kerchers need to patent Meredith's name to protect their daughter from being re-victimized, again and again, by those involved in the murder. Even if Knox wasn't involved in the murder, she has no right to use Meredith to solicit funds. Nasty! The fact that Knox doesn't know better and doesn't care reveals much about her personality.

 

[aa9511]

Yes, it seems an unwise thing to do. If she is guilty, then's it's just outrageous. But even if she is innocent, it seems a bold and arrogant thing to do, (over-compensating) and I would think her lawyers would have advised against it.

I don't think she is messing with piddly little lawyers anymore and their legal mumbo-jumbo. She has moved on to bigger and better things - the business world.

 

[otto]

Yes, and it certainly does bolster the multiple-attackers/2 knives used theory:

Maresca/Fabiani said that these facial injuries were to "control the victim" and that definitely makes you think that others were restraining her at the time.

The injuries to Meredith have always indicated that two knives, of different widths, were used. The injuries were from both the right and the left, with two different blade sizes.

 

[aa9511]

I'm stunned. I had no idea that Knox was using Meredith's murder to solicit funds for an "unspecified" project. What's she going to do, draw stick figures with crayons and tape them to light posts?

It looks like the Kerchers need to patent Meredith's name to protect there daughter from being re-victimized, again and again, by those involved in the murder. Even if Knox wasn't involved in the murder, she has no right to use Meredith to solicit funds. Nasty! The fact that Knox doesn't know better and doesn't care reveals much about her personality.

Oh, she knows, Otto. She knows exactly what she's doing. This is just business for her.

Who knows, maybe she's going to school for her MBA now?

Is it any wonder her true character would show eventually? Can't keep it in hiding too long, being the "public figure" that she is.

She has, IMO, some serious character issues. People like that don't change.

I expect many more revealing things like this to come out as long as she's in the public eye.

 

[otto]

Yes, it seems an unwise thing to do. If she is guilty, then's it's just outrageous. But even if she is innocent, it seems a bold and arrogant thing to do, (over-compensating) and I would think her lawyers would have advised against it.

Agreed. Whether Knox is guilty or not, deliberately and blatantly going against the wishes of Meredith's family is simply wrong on every level. It makes me wonder if she is angry with Meredith and her family, whether Knox perceives that they are to blame for her lot in life, whether this is a passive/aggressive decision where she can benefit from Meredith's murder and cause psychological harm to the family at the same time. Either way, Knox seems to have skipped the ethics classes at the university.

 

[otto]

Oh, she knows, Otto. She knows exactly what she's doing. This is just business for her.

Who knows, maybe she's going to school for her MBA now?

Is it any wonder her true character would show eventually? Can't keep it in hiding too long, being the "public figure" that she is.

She has, IMO, some serious character issues. People like that don't change.

I expect many more revealing things like this to come out as long as she's in the public eye.

Exactly. Just business, with a bit of role playing - something she mastered over the years with her interest and participation in drama.

I've always believed that when people are young, it's fairly easy to hide the true self. However, as people age, that inner self becomes etched on the face - making it far more difficult to hide. For Knox, it's just a matter of time.

 

[SMK]

• 3 attorneys for the Kercher family highlighted and translated points of summation:(very concise and good for reference)
• Also, Kercher family will be present in Florence court for verdict Jan 15

http://thefreelancedesk.com/front_featured/amanda-knox-appeal-2/

 

[otto]

This article provides a good summary of the case trials:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...da-knox-trial_n_4452447.html?utm_hp_ref=world

 

[otto]

"A lawyer urged an Italian appeals court on Monday to convict Amanda Knox of murdering British student Meredith Kercher and denounced as "unbearable" that the American was soliciting donations in Kercher's memory.

... Knox is soliciting donations on her website for her defense as well as a separate, as yet-unspecified project in Kercher's memory.

... He sought damages of 25 million euros ($34 million) for the family.

Maresca blasted the ruling overturning the convictions, calling it "a rundown shack razed to the ground by the high court," and said the defendants' alibis "were all failed and false." He also tore into the expert DNA testimony on the appellate level, saying the first court's finding that Kercher's DNA was on the presumed murder weapon stands, that there was no contamination of DNA attributed to Sollecito on Kercher's bra clip."

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/victims-lawyer-seeks-knox-conviction-murder-21230989

 

[SMK]

This article provides a good summary of the case trials:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...da-knox-trial_n_4452447.html?utm_hp_ref=world

Thanks for posting that link; good material,

~ and always good to have a more detailed idea of upcoming dates:

WHAT'S NEXT

• The lawyer representing Kercher's family, Francesco Maresca, will sum up his arguments on Monday.
• Amanda Knox's defense makes its final arguments on Tuesday,
• while Raffaele Sollecito's defense is scheduled to close on January 9.
• Both sides will have a chance for rebuttals on Jan. 10.
• The panel of 10, two professional judges and eight lay jury members, will begin deliberations on Jan. 10 or Jan. 15. A verdict is likely the same day of deliberations, but there is no telling how long they might go on.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...da-knox-trial_n_4452447.html?utm_hp_ref=world

 

[Amber29]

I was surprised that Francesco Maresca went outside of the evidence of guilt in the crime, to what the 2 defendants are doing now in their lives.

As others wondered in various postings elsewhere today, I also wondered what the 6 lay judges might think of this:

Whether they will be more ill-disposed toward the 2 defendants, or whether they will be "put off" and believe Maresca is being petty, or vengeful, or trying to prejudice them (thereby backfiring and making them more open to the defense).

I think Fabiani 's argument about drug and alcohol use allowing an altercation to escalate, and arguing proof of presence and criminal intent at the cottage Nov 1 is more in keeping with what will be the determining factors of upheld convictions versus acquittal.

On the other hand, the judges may find this relevant, and it may flesh-out a picture for them of the power that the defendants have on their side, and this may be counter-balanced by listening more to the prosecution. Just my reflections....

Any thoughts on this?


http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/dont-forget-kercher-appeal-told-29842532.html

I am impressed with Marseca's closing. He brought alot up that needed to be brought up. I have always felt the books/money/press were all premature. The rightful thing to do would've been to wait until there was a definate ruling. Especially when you are going to embellish the story and stray from the facts in evidence.

He is after all representing the civil side.

He mentioned to the court a lot that needed reminding of. I think what the defendants have been up to is relevant. When it includes a pr firm and bad mouthing the Italian justice system, all while you are still part of it.

Spouting off that there is no evidence and such, I liked his line about comments made without seeing all the documents.

Anyways just a few of my thoughts.

 

[SMK]

I am impressed with Marseca's closing. He brought alot up that needed to be brought up. I have always felt the books/money/press were all premature. The rightful thing to do would've been to wait until there was a definate ruling. Especially when you are going to embellish the story and stray from the facts in evidence.

He is after all representing the civil side.

He mentioned to the court a lot that needed reminding of. I think what the defendants have been up to is relevant. When it includes a pr firm and bad mouthing the Italian justice system, all while you are still part of it.

Spouting off that there is no evidence and such, I liked his line about comments made without seeing all the documents.

Anyways just a few of my thoughts.

Good thoughts; thanks for your input - and yes, "premature" does seem to describe the whole publishing thing for both (as they knew in Italy, the rulings were far from finalized).