Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #12

[otto]

Yet another straw man argument, otto? One would think the room was already crowded with them.

Nobody has said that Mignini knowingly set out to convict innocent people, but that he made a snap judgment and is too arrogant to consider that he may have made a mistake.

I don't doubt that many prosecutors care very much about the victims of the crimes they prosecute. I'm also sure many feel great pressure to achieve justice for crime victims. Neither fact negates a common refusal to admit their mistakes; in fact, concern for the victim may only make the prosecutor more rigid in his judgments.

BTW, the comparison of trial attorneys to college professors is inexact because professors rarely have to face an opposing expert who contests their every word. Sure, professors have egos, but the job doesn't require the same level of confidence.

Are you kidding? I've never taught a class without at least one person that wanted to challenge the expertise of the professor. That's one of the challenges that all professors face into todays post-secondary classes ... the self-entitled student that presumes to already know everything and expects an A for making an appearance.

For prosecutors, achieving justice is the objective, not winning. If the evidence isn't there for a first degree conviction, it isn't there. They are not going to fake it to get an unjust conviction. I suspect that we have had very different experiences with prosecutors ... so it seems we will continue to have different opinions about the reasons they do their jobs, and the lengths to which they will go to prosecute the guilty.

 

[SMK]

Are you kidding? I've never taught a class without at least one person that wanted to challenge the expertise of the professor. That's one of the challenges that all professors face into todays post-secondary classes ... the self-entitled student that presumes to already know everything and expects an A for making an appearance.

For prosecutors, achieving justice is the objective, not winning. If the evidence isn't there for a first degree conviction, it isn't there. They are not going to fake it to get an unjust conviction. I suspect that we have had very different experiences with prosecutors ... so it seems we will continue to have different opinions about the reasons they do their jobs, and the lengths to which they will go to prosecute the guilty.

I see your points, Otto, and they are extremely well taken. However, you forget 2 things in this case:
1. Mignini had already announced all to the press, and would have suffered a terrible embarassment if he had backpedaled.
2. After the MOF indictment and convictions, the temptation on Mignini's part must have been VERY strong, to prove that THIS time, he really HAD caught sex killers, and been correct about his orgy theories.

 

[Allusonz]

Regarding HIV positive tests and from personal experience with my daughter following a blood transfusion it is MANDATORY to list the people you have come in contact with sexually.

It is a harrowing time waiting for the followup test results which take approx 2 weeks. To downplay what anyone goes through whether it be HIV, cancer results etc is heartless

ETA It does not stop with sexual partners it includes the families they have been in contact with. in her case the school was notified, friends of hers were notified this was before the actual test results were returned as the donor had been diagnosed. The only saving grace is that they had 2 blood supplies on hand and she did not receive from the person which had HIV

 

[Allusonz]

There are rules here (at least they were clearly spelled out during the Brad Cooper trial) about sleuthing and posting personal information about people associated with a case. I'm assuming that it is beyond the TOS to post personal information about the Prosecutor in any case discussed here, but perhaps one of the moderators can offer clarification.

Fortunately that is why we have moderators that one can contact by hitting an alert if a person has an issue with a post. I don't believe we as regular posters should be involved in that process

 

[OldSteve]

I have always held the believe, based on my understanding of the circumstances of the murder of Meredith Kercher, that this was borderline thrill kill. Knox and Sollecito both have some aspects of their personalities that tend to the very dark side. Together, that dark side may have been the bond that grew. I think it's possible that they included Guede because he may have had some drugs, and I think that going to the cottage with Rude (rather than Sollecto's apt) was because that was a place where Amanda was familiar with indulging her drug abuse. I think it's quite possible that on the Night of the Dead, Sollecito (who still suffered emotional problems regarding his mother's death - see his online blogs) and Knox decided to explore hard drugs (for which Sollecito had prior documented use). Knox was the common bond between Sollecito and Guede, and as a manipulative person (see Berlin myspace notes), they would have been vulnerable to female manipulations due to the mutual absence of a strong female roll model in their lives.

The rest is history.

Your theory is well thought out and more believable than all I've read about a sex orgy gone wrong. Bringing in "the Night of the Dead" is most interesting.

If I were on the jury, and you were the prosecutor, you certainly would have gotten my attention with this as your opening statement!

Now what needs to be done is to show that AK and RS were in the room with MK - blood smeared in the room with their finger prints, foot prints, bodily fluid, something unique to the night of the crime, but not DNA that could have migrated onto things since AK, RS had use of the cottage. Also would be helpful - any marks or busing on AK or RS.

 

[Nova]

The evidence has not yet fallen to dust, but that may well happen. Thus far, three points of evidence are being reviewed under appeal. DNA has been tested, and there are problems with retesting because there simply is nothing left of the two reviewed samples to test. Will that mean that the original DNA results will be removed from the evidence list, or will that mean that the original DNA results will be upheld? I don't know ... but I suspect we'll have to wait until the fall to find the answer. Until it falls to dust, it still stands as evidence in the case justifying the jury's finding of guilt.

That evidence may remain standing legally, but that doesn't mean we have to pretend it stands logically, nor more than we have to pretend juries are infallible.

 

[Nova]

Are you kidding? I've never taught a class without at least one person that wanted to challenge the expertise of the professor. That's one of the challenges that all professors face into todays post-secondary classes ... the self-entitled student that presumes to already know everything and expects an A for making an appearance.

Oh, come on. What you say is correct about wiseass students, but you know it's a very rare undergraduate who can hold his or her own with a professor. I encouraged students to challenge me at every turn and, yes, once or twice there was a student who changed my mind. Once or twice is very different from being challenged by an opponent with equal training, skills and abilities.

For prosecutors, achieving justice is the objective, not winning.

Yes, indeed, in the land where unicorns eat rainbows. In real life. prosecutors convince themselves that winning IS justice, and it is extremely difficult for them to change their minds.

If the evidence isn't there for a first degree conviction, it isn't there. They are not going to fake it to get an unjust conviction.

This is demonstrably false, in the Amanda Knox case, in the West Memphis 3 case, in every third or fourth case broadcast on programs such as 48 Hours and Dateline. (Obviously, wrongful convictions make good TV so I'm not saying these programs represent the correct frequency of wrongful convictions, but they certainly demonstrate such miscarriages of justice are all too common.)

I suspect that we have had very different experiences with prosecutors ... so it seems we will continue to have different opinions about the reasons they do their jobs, and the lengths to which they will go to prosecute the guilty.

My personal experience with DAs has been fine, but then I'm a white, middle-class male who has never been accused of a crime. Nonetheless, I do read.

 

[Nova]

Regarding HIV positive tests and from personal experience with my daughter following a blood transfusion it is MANDATORY to list the people you have come in contact with sexually.

It is a harrowing time waiting for the followup test results which take approx 2 weeks. To downplay what anyone goes through whether it be HIV, cancer results etc is heartless

ETA It does not stop with sexual partners it includes the families they have been in contact with. in her case the school was notified, friends of hers were notified this was before the actual test results were returned as the donor had been diagnosed. The only saving grace is that they had 2 blood supplies on hand and she did not receive from the person which had HIV

Thank God.

 

[SMK]

@ Otto: When I first heard about this case in 2008, and heard reports that :
1. the break-in was staged
2. there was a strong smell of bleach
3. clothes had been put in the washing machine
4. Knox and Sollecito had been holding a mop, and seemed chagrined at the arrival of the Postal police
5. AK and RS had failed to call 112 until after they lied and said they already had
6. AK resented her flat mate MK almost to the point of hatred
7. A shop owner had come forward saying Amanda had been there in the wee hours of that morning, buying cleaning supplies.
ETC., ETC. , I had no problem believing they were guilty, and assumed the wheels of the Italian courts would grind swiftly toward justice. I even wrote quasi-Freudian blog posts speculating that Amanda may have been sexually abused, and Raffaele as well, and they were striking back at "the mother" who had "set them up for it" in Meredith. In my theory, Mignini was "the good father" that both of them had been missing, and his arresting them was a kind of "liberation" for them. In my excitement, I assigned to Mignini the role of the "Neo-Classic Father Archetype" whom all of Generation X was secretly starved for.
Imagine, then, my horror, when points 1-7, one by one, went hurtling down into nothing. I had to delete all my blog posts; I had to temper my admiration for "Father Mignini"; I had to start to imagine that this Freudian fairy-tale was not so enchanting as I had imagined. Do not imagine for a moment that I enjoyed turning on Mignini. He still haunts me.

 

[Nova]

20-30 years ago, prior to advances in technology and DNA evidence, tunnel vision was a problem in criminal investigation. Through education and profiling, investigators have become educated on the problems of tunnel vision. Through technology, police forces established communication tools that widened the suspect pool. The development of DNA evidence has established methods to elliminate cirucmstantial suspects that looked good for a crime. Tunnel vision is not nearly the problem is was 20 years ago, but memories are long and innocent people are still in jail due to convictions based on antiquated investigative methods.

I would agree that once it was established that the break in was staged, the suspect pool in Meredith's murder was drastically reduced. The defense has been unable to refute the obvious signs that the break in was staged. I realize that people unconnected with the crime, people that have never been to the crime scene, attended the trial or set foot in Italy, have tried to argue that the broken window was not staged, but those people have not been appointed as witnesses, they are not experts in the court-appointed expert context, and their theories are really nothing more than speculations based on looking at some photos. At this time, no expert has successfully testified (that I'm aware of) that the break in was not staged.

Two points re this post:

1. Again we've gone to the land of unicorns and cotton-candy rainbows. DNA precludes tunnel vision? Obviously not, as the Perugia case is a classic example of a decision reached via tunnel vision following by an attempt to get the DNA evidence to confirm the decision already reached.

2. I've yet to hear from any forensic expert that the break-in was staged. It's unfortunate Hendry had to work from photos, true, but he remains more of an expert than anyone presented by ILE. Filomena the helpful roommate is not an expert on shattering glass.

 

[Nova]

I'll await clarification from moderators, but my impression is that in the Brad Cooper case the Prosecutors were not on trial - they were doing their jobs - and it was not acceptable to be dragging them through the mud in order to argue that Cooper was suffering malicious prosecution.

The prosecutor of AK and RS has been CONVICTED of misuse of his authority. It isn't we who have dragged him "through the mud." Mignini laid down and rolled around in it. If you ask me, he continues to do so.

 

[SMK]

Two points re this post:

1. Again we've gone to the land of unicorns and cotton-candy rainbows. DNA precludes tunnel vision? Obviously not, as the Perugia case is a classic example of a decision reached via tunnel vision following by an attempt to get the DNA evidence to confirm the decision already reached.

2. I've yet to hear from any forensic expert that the break-in was staged. It's unfortunate Hendry had to work from photos, true, but he remains more of an expert than anyone presented by ILE. Filomena the helpful roommate is not an expert on shattering glass.

I too found Hendry's professional analysis - which he did meticulously, after hundreds of hours of poring over photos and making diagrams - to be very convincing. Even if Perugia Murder File calls him, "that old koot". :snooty:

 

[Nova]

@ Otto: When I first heard about this case in 2008, and heard reports that :
1. the break-in was staged
2. there was a strong smell of bleach
3. clothes had been put in the washing machine
4. Knox and Sollecito had been holding a mop, and seemed chagrined at the arrival of the Postal police
5. AK and RS had failed to call 112 until after they lied and said they already had
6. AK resented her flat mate MK almost to the point of hatred
7. A shop owner had come forward saying Amanda had been there in the wee hours of that morning, buying cleaning supplies.
ETC., ETC. , I had no problem believing they were guilty, and assumed the wheels of the Italian courts would grind swiftly toward justice. I even wrote quasi-Freudian blog posts speculating that Amanda may have been sexually abused, and Raffaele as well, and they were striking back at "the mother" who had "set them up for it" in Meredith. In my theory, Mignini was "the good father" that both of them had been missing, and his arresting them was a kind of "liberation" for them. In my excitement, I assigned to Mignini the role of the "Neo-Classic Father Archetype" whom all of Generation X was secretly starved for.
Imagine, then, my horror, when points 1-7, one by one, went hurtling down into nothing. I had to delete all my blog posts; I had to temper my admiration for "Father Mignini"; I had to start to imagine that this Freudian fairy-tale was not so enchanting as I had imagined. Do not imagine for a moment that I enjoyed turning on Mignini. He still haunts me.

Worth repeating.

 

[SMK]

Worth repeating.

Thanks, Nova!

 

[Nova]

I too found Hendry's professional analysis - which he did meticulously, after hundreds of hours of poring over photos and making diagrams - to be very convincing. Even if Perugia Murder File calls him, "that old koot". :snooty:

I'm open to the possibility that Hendry could be wrong. After all, he was forced to work from the photos available. Even HE says he didn't have all the info he would have liked.

But it doesn't not appear that ILE assigned any forensic expert of their own to the issue of the break in. They simply saw a bit of glass on top of something (and didn't even bother to take careful photos of what was underneath the clothing) and made their decision.

This is Don Knotts of Mayberry work at best.

 

[SMK]

I'm open to the possibility that Hendry could be wrong. After all, he was forced to work from the photos available. Even HE says he didn't have all the info he would have liked.

But it doesn't not appear that ILE assigned any forensic expert of their own to the issue of the break in. They simply saw a bit of glass on top of something (and didn't even bother to take careful photos of what was underneath the clothing) and made their decision.

This is Don Knotts of Mayberry work at best.

I agree. And also, Hendry claims that as an accident reconstruction engineer, he often worked from photographs. It may not be the ideal, but it is not completely without a foundation. I too wish the prosecution had had an expert write out a detailed report on the stage break in, and present it.

 

[SMK]

PROLOGUE BY HENDRYIn order to convict Amanda and Raffaele, the Prosecution relied upon a convoluted theory to connect Amanda and Raffaele with Rudy in the commission of the murder. This convoluted theory hinged upon being able to almost summarily dismiss the broken and open window in Filomena Romanelli’s room as a staging of a break-in instead of an actual break-in by a known burglar by the name of Rudy Guede. A host of rationales and other supposed factors and witness observations have been put forth by the prosecution to offhandedly promote what happened to Filomena’s room and her window as being a staged event. These flimsy rationales for a staged break-in have also been promoted by Judges in their justification of a wide range of opinions adverse to Amanda and Raffaele.

The early posturing of the break-in as a staged situation without a rigorous investigation and sound factual evidence to back it up resulted in the murder investigation being turned upside down from the beginning. The threshold for proving it was other than a burglary break-in as it outwardly appeared should have been very high. Instead the threshold for proving it was a burglary break-in was set very high and seriously handicapped by the failure of the police to perform due diligence in promptly investigating and fully documenting the inside and outside areas as a break-in.

Simply put, if Rudy Guede had gained entrance to the cottage through Filomena Romanelli’s room, then Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are innocent of any involvement. Additionally they should never have been considered suspects and would never have been subjected to all they have endured for almost the past three years.

This four part analysis is intended to provide a rigorous examination of the physical evidence associated with the found condition of Filomena Romanelli’s room and window.http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/RonHendry------2.htmlSEE ALSO Part one of four - How was Filomena’s window broken?
By Ron Hendry

 

[SMK]

I guess the defense expert who essentially said the same thing during the first trial was not able to persuade:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529951,00.html

Prosecutors say Knox and Sollecito killed Kercher, 21, after she refused to take part in a drug-fuelled sex game.
They also allege Knox smashed a window in the house where Kercher lived in Perugia to make her death look like a botched break in.
But retired police forensic officer Vincenzo Pasquali will use a video and ballistic measurements to tell the court the window was smashed from the outside and was not simulated.
Pasquali will also tell the court how it was possible for someone to enter the house through the broken window, which was 13 feet above ground.

 

[Allusonz]

I guess the defense expert who essentially said the same thing during the first trial was not able to persuade:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529951,00.html

Prosecutors say Knox and Sollecito killed Kercher, 21, after she refused to take part in a drug-fuelled sex game.
They also allege Knox smashed a window in the house where Kercher lived in Perugia to make her death look like a botched break in.
But retired police forensic officer Vincenzo Pasquali will use a video and ballistic measurements to tell the court the window was smashed from the outside and was not simulated.
Pasquali will also tell the court how it was possible for someone to enter the house through the broken window, which was 13 feet above ground.

The reason his testimony was not accepted is that he was merely a ballistics expert not a "rock throwing" expert according to the Motivational Report

 

[Allusonz]

Google statement re: Perugia Shock

When reached for comment, a Google spokesperson said:

After receiving an Italian court order, we have been forced to take down this blog. In an effort to protect free expression, we take care to narrow all court takedown orders. Unfortunately, in this case, we would face criminal noncompliance charges if we refuse to comply.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...enced-by-google/2011/05/16/AFofFp4G_blog.html