British student murdered in Perugia, 3 suspects

[SleuthyGal]

BTW, all evidence is 'circumstantial' in a case except for

1. eyewitness to the crime as it's being committed
2. valid confession
3. video or recording of the crime


Those are considered 'direct evidence.'

Blood/DNA is circumstantial evidence.

As such, 95+% of all evidence in crimes is "circumstantial" since most crimes do not have eye witnesses, are not video taped, and do not have (valid) confessions.

 

[jjenny]

I'm not going to argue the merits of the Peterson case. It's a completely different case with very different evidence.

The point I'm making is that I don't KNOW if the DNA evidence is valid or not. Some of it probably is, but I don't trust the bra clasp since I know it was left for 6 weeks and passed around. So that one I can discard. As for the knife, which DNA and other tests were run? Were they repeated? If no, why not? Was bleach confirmed to have been used on the knife? I don't have the info and that's what I'm asking for...the info!

The discarded phones that were MK's: were they tested for fingerprints? What were the results? Was there any DNA on the phones? I have no info on this.

I 'heard' there was a combined spot of MK's blood + AK's DNA found in the roommate's room--the one with the broken window. Is this true? Rumor? Again, I don't know.

This is why I'd like to see a comprehensive list of each item of evidence, rather than the bits and pieces that are mentioned in the news/media. I feel like I'm only seeing a few puzzle pieces and I'm craving the whole picture so I can decide for myself.

Scott Peterson's is a different case sure. But my point is-the behavior of the suspect makes a lot of difference.
It isn't just forensic evidence that makes a difference. It's how the suspect behaved after the crime that could influence the jury.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Good sites for research on this case,
{snip}

There is a lot there to keep you busy.

Thank you!

I'm not questioning the Italian system, or how they conduct their courtroom, etc. It has nothing to do with anyone's heritage or skin color or religion or nationality. I'm just not sure that *I* can conclude whether AK and/or RS are guilty or not guilty based on what I've seen so far in terms of the evidence....actually I can't conclude anything thus far since I only know about some pieces of the evidence. While the rumors are certainly interesting to read and the hearsay is also entertaining, that isn't what I use to determine whether I think a person is guilty or not guilty. I'm pretty much a "just the facts" type of person. A 'Jill Friday' type if you will. I try not to use my 'feelings' or 'opinions' to determine guilt. I stay focused on examining facts and evidence as much as I can.

 

[Tizzle]

The phones were both in Meredith's possession...stolen from her...

and thrown away in a neighbor's yard...


one was her own British phone...one a phone lent to her by one of her Italian roommates

The elderly neighbor saw the phones and called the "postal police"....who brought them to the house at 12:30 PM ....they were apparently able to "trace" the italian phone to that address......and there they saw Amanda and Rafaelle standing around outside....and so with went from there

the fact is that Amanda never called the police

I totally understand all of this and that it was a misunderstanding between myself and other posters about "discarded phones". Pretty basic, actually, but my bad. Anyway, earlier reports said AK & RS exchanged numerous texts right after the murder, now it is said that their phones were turned off....why'd the story change? It's only not ok to change stories when Amanda does it?

Also, Amanda's parents were on Larry King tonight and said that there actually is evidence that was submitted in court of computer activity on RS' computer that night. Yet another conflicting detail because I found reports where it's said that their hard drives were fried by forensic "experts". I suppose it would be easy to verify if we had a list of evidence submitted in court. I don't think her parents would lie about a detail that would be easily verified. So, it sounds to me like there actually was some movie watching going on at RS'. Apparently, also submitted as evidence was testimony of eye witnesses placing her at RS' that evening, without a doubt. Her parents also say RS verified AK's whereabouts of the evening in question. So why has it been said that he wasn't sure where she was? Do we know for a fact that he actually said this? Or is it just another careless leak? More details that can be easily verified by court documents, I suppose. We've heard there was activity, no activity and that they fried the drives. We've heard she was there and she wasn't. We've heard he said she was there and she wasn't. Which is it?

links about fried hard drives...

http://clintvanzandt.newsvine.com/_...nox-cold-blooded-killer-or-angel-faced-victim
Police also seized the hard drives from computers belonging to the victim, Amanda and Raffaele and in their attempt to examine the contents of the hard drives. Unfortunately computer forensic experts hooked them up in the wrong manner, therefore frying the circuit boards and rendering the drives unreadable.

and this one...

http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/archives/138524.asp
Police had claimed Knox and Guede called each other on their cellphones before and after the murder. Guede didn't have a cellphone with him that night, his lawyer revealed.
6. Amanda's computer was damaged in police custody, so they can't evaluate her hard drive.

Seems to me, the biggest problem with this case were the leaks of bad information and bad reporting by the ill informed, throughout. It's just really sad to see people basing their opinions on gossip, basically. Justice was served, but not when AK & RS were found guilty. JMO

 

[jjenny]

Thank you!

I'm not questioning the Italian system, or how they conduct their courtroom, etc. It has nothing to do with anyone's heritage or skin color or religion or nationality. I'm just not sure that *I* can conclude whether AK and/or RS are guilty or not guilty based on what I've seen so far in terms of the evidence....actually I can't conclude anything thus far since I only know about some pieces of the evidence. While the rumors are certainly interesting to read and the hearsay is also entertaining, that isn't what I use to determine whether I think a person is guilty or not guilty. I'm pretty much a "just the facts" type of person. A 'Jill Friday' type if you will. I try not to use my 'feelings' or 'opinions' to determine guilt. I stay focused on examining facts and evidence as much as I can.

Well presumably the jury heard all that evidence and they convicted her. And since the ex-boyfriend was convicted also, it doesn't make sense that Amanda was convicted just because of anti-American sentiment in Italy.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Seems to me, the biggest problem with this case were the leaks of bad information and bad reporting by the ill informed, throughout. It's just really sad to see people basing their opinions on gossip, basically. Justice was served, but not when AK & RS were found guilty. JMO

Yes! Thank you for summarizing some of the problems. Bad info, inaccurate info, rumors...we just don't seem to have good/definitive info and in my mind that is a problem. Hey, if the evidence is solid and it was tested correctly and it points to AK and RS as being there are doing the crime, then yes, I agree with the verdict. But we don't know the real story.

 

[jjenny]

Yes! Thank you for summarizing some of the problems. Bad info, inaccurate info, rumors...we just don't seem to have good/definitive info and in my mind that is a problem. Hey, if the evidence is solid and it was tested correctly and it points to AK and RS as being there are doing the crime, then yes, I agree with the verdict. But we don't know the real story.

We aren't on the jury either. The jury convicted her, and they would have heard all the evidence.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Well presumably the jury heard all that evidence and they convicted her. And since the ex-boyfriend was convicted also, it doesn't make sense that Amanda was convicted just because of anti-American sentiment in Italy.

Did they hear it all? You're making an assumption they heard it all and not just what the prosecution posited. I can't assume anything. Several media outlets/newspapers reported that the defense was barred from challenging the DNA evidence by bringing their own expert witnesses to the stand. If that's true...well...that would not be a fair trial in my mind.

 

[jjenny]

Did they hear it all? You're making an assumption they heard it all and not just what the prosecution posited. I can't assume anything.

Oh give me a break.
She had defense lawyers, did she not?
How would it be possible for the jury to only hear the prosecutions side?
Somehow I doubt Amanda's defense lawyers were mute.

 

[SleuthyGal]

The difference here is that I'm not assuming anything. I'm not assuming she's guilty and I'm not assuming she's innocent. I do know there have been conflicting reports of the evidence, some of which has been highlighted by Tizzle above. So which evidence and which version am I to believe when there are 2 differing stories about the an aspect of the case?

 

[jjenny]

Did they hear it all? You're making an assumption they heard it all and not just what the prosecution posited. I can't assume anything. Several media outlets/newspapers reported that the defense was barred from challenging the DNA evidence by bringing their own expert witnesses to the stand. If that's true...well...that would not be a fair trial in my mind.

What reports? I have seen plenty of reports regarding defense challenging DNA evidence.

 

[Tizzle]

...I also wonder if americans would doubt the italian system so much if Amanda Knox was a black american male...I doubt it.
...I also think if the same thing would have happened in the states and Amanda's victim would have been a pretty american girl the same people that are speaking out against the italian justice system now would put Amanda on the same level as casey anthony...they would want her to "fry"...

Given the same evidence and circumstances, NO, I'm sorry, I wouldn't want her or anyone to "fry".

I gotta say, I'm getting kind of tired of the accusations of racism and racist remarks. That is so far outside of what my beliefs are. SOME Americans might not doubt the Italian system if the person were a black american man, but not me or anyone I surround myself with. I would be just as upset, regardless of the individuals heritage, as many would. Not ALL Americans are racist, just like not ALL Italians are. And further, racism is not just an American problem, it's a problem WORLDwide. JMO

 

[jjenny]

The difference here is that I'm not assuming anything. I'm not assuming she's guilty and I'm not assuming she's innocent. I do know there have been conflicting reports of the evidence, some of which has been highlighted by Tizzle above. So which evidence and which version am I to believe when there are 2 differing stories about the an aspect of the case?

I have no idea. There are a lot of contradictory reports. Personally I am not convinced "poor Amanda" is innocent so I don't plan on contributing to Amanda Knox defense fund.

 

[LogicalMinds]

The difference here is that I'm not assuming anything. I'm not assuming she's guilty and I'm not assuming she's innocent. I do know there have been conflicting reports of the evidence, some of which has been highlighted by Tizzle above. So which evidence and which version am I to believe when there are 2 differing stories about the an aspect of the case?

The info posted there is from 2 PRO Amanda blogs...one from a private PI in Seattle

at this point no matter what....Italy ran the trial....from Jan to Dec (2 days a week....with the month of August off for "Holidays" LOL)

She had defense attorneys....a translator sat right beside her...

and they didn't give her the "max"....they also have not one but two appeals

 

[jjenny]

I think this is a reasonable article.
"But even the prosecution admits the evidence is largely circumstantial.
That said, Knox and Sollecito's behavior after the killing is hard to explain away."
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/12/07/knox.trial.analysis/index.html

It seems to me that if Amanda and her boyfriend were just the two innocent people who spend the night together in his apartment it should have been easy enough for them to tell the same story and stick with it.

 

[Nova]

I beg to differ Isabella. In my opinion, some of the rags in the UK are comparable to some in the US and just as bad. Paparazzi in England are well known to stalk celebrities, politicians and the Royals including wiretapping them.
Princess Diana was stalked..day and night.

Or to put it another way, British tabloids used to be much worse than American ones. But I'm pretty sure ours have caught up, or rather, down.

 

[Nova]

I wish there were a place where EACH POINT of evidence was available and discussed. I understand there are lots of opinions about Italy, the Italian system, feelings, etc. However, I just want to dissect each piece of evidence and see what there really is that points to AK and/or RS at the end. I have snippets of evidence info but nothing that is officially listed.

I would like to separate out the behavior of the defendants and first look at the physical evidence because if the physical evidence doesn't clearly point to AK and/or RS as being involved then in my mind it doesn't matter if they acted correctly or not. There needs to be forensic evidence that is clear and convincing.

I've heard about the knife found in Sollecito's apt. Some say it was cleaned by bleach. Is that a fact? Was it tested for bleach? If yes, then how did ANY DNA survive on that knife?

I want to separate fact from fiction and from inferences and from rumor. I want to know if these 2 were involved. Without looking at all the evidence and keeping out rumors and feelings and opinions, we won't really know.

So....is there any place (if not here on this forum) where the evidence that the prosecution presented, item by item, exists?

I couldn't agree more. I'd love to find a source that filters out subjective claims about the civilization level of Italians and the weirdness of the defendants after the body was discovered by police.

 

[Brwnigirl]

We have the NYPost and Daily News here. They are not all like that in England, I would believe. Isabella may be able to name the credible ones.

I didn't mean to say they were so sorry if I gave that impression. I was saying that there are tabloids in England that are just as bad as the one in the US. I believe both countries have credible journalism because I read that too.

 

[Nova]

Here are a couple examples of what gets all twisted around.

1. The police see that Patrick Lumumba & AK texted each other and because AK texted, "Okay see you later" when told she didn't have to come to work, they think that means she will see him later...like at the house...to commit murder. So they grill her over and over and over. "Why are you protecting him?" "Admit that he was there!" "If you were to IMAGINE what might have happened, what in your imagination do you think could have happened during such a crime?" So it's not that AK thought she'd throw P.L. under the bus...the polizia TOLD HER he must be involved then had her spin a story in her imagination of what might have happened after 14 hrs of interrogation. So she used his name because they told her he was there! Now it becomes a 'fact' where AK has 'confessed and fingered P.L.' welll....not really, but that's how they spun it. She recanted that statement. But here the rest of the world is repeating this story without any of the context and as if this edited version is the gospel truth. I want the truth exactly as it went down!

2. AK was said to be "doing splits and cartwheels" in the police station. But WHY? WHY was she doing this? I heard that the police saw her stretching her back out after sitting for hours waiting for R.S. to be released after questioning. Supposedly one of the polizia asked her if she was a gymnast and/or if she could do a cartwheel and she said yes, she could. Then she did one to show she could. Well if that's how it really went down then she wasn't "turning cartwheels" the way the media portrays it, as if she was in a gleeful/joking mood. Sure it was stupid to do it, but if she was asked by the police to do it or asked if she *could* do it, then she was answering them back by demonstrating. Stupid? Absolutely, yes. Proof of her being a murderer or a cold-blooded killer? Nope!

This is why we need to get the entire truth out of exactly how each of these things went down. I'm not saying she's innocent (I surely don't know), but what I am saying is there is more rumor being spun than cold/hard facts. If I'm going to respect this verdict then I need to learn about each facet of the evidence and of the REAL story behind each of these 'tales' told. I want the entire context! And you all should want that too!

I want the scientific DNA stuff, I want each piece of evidence in a list, I want to know the story behind each behavior that the prosecution points to as hinky or as some proof of her guilt. I want to see for myself what the real deal is! Right now all I see are rumors flying to and fro. Not good enough!

SleuthyGal, do you remember where you encountered the info in Numbers 1 and 2 above?

I'm not questioning your memory or, God forbid, your integrity. I'm asking because when I mentioned that CBS has reported #1, I was told here it never happened and there was no evidence to that effect.

 

[Brwnigirl]

We aren't on the jury either. The jury convicted her, and they would have heard all the evidence.

In between their naps, lol