Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #13

[SMK]

"finding 1: present in the bedroom of Amanda Knox; this is the print of right foot, most likely imprinted in a deposit of haematic substance, in which are clearly visible (cf. attached [to the report], following perspective correction): the big toe or 1st toe (which measures 22mm in width); the 3rd toe or middle toe (17mm in length); the metatarsus (80mm wide); a portion of the plantar arch. This finding was considered useful for negative comparisons and the comparison led the technicians to express an opinion of compatibility with Amanda Knox’s right foot"

Within their experts opinions, and the fact that the prints left by Rudy (who admitted being there at the time of the murder) were similarly described, I think its fair to assume the experts are correct.

If the experts are mistaken about prints for Knox and Sollecito, then they are also mistaken about the prints and evidence used to convict Rudy. If Knox, Sollecito and Guede were not involved in the murder ... then who?

OK, this makes a certain amount of good sense. Someone else will have to refute it. Your point about Guede is well taken (although RG insists consistently that he WAS there and DID have sex with MK---not so the others) :waitasec:

My problem is with the whole tapestry of the case: The plethora of articles - perhaps too many? - which I have read which refute the prosecution; the many questions and holes, such as TOD, computer activity, why were there no bruises or cuts on AK and RS, how did they clean up the blood, why did it turn out that they did infact call 112 in a timely fashion, etc. ???

Believe me, I would feel better if they were guilty, as it really upsets me to think (as I am inclined to do for a myriad of reasons as stated ) that they are innocents in prison.

 

[SMK]

OK, this makes a certain amount of good sense. Someone else will have to refute it. Your point about Guede is well taken (although RG insists consistently that he WAS there and DID have sex with MK---not so the others) :waitasec:

My problem is with the whole tapestry of the case: The plethora of articles - perhaps too many? - which I have read which refute the prosecution; the many questions and holes, such as TOD, computer activity, why were there no bruises or cuts on AK and RS, how did they clean up the blood, why did it turn out that they did infact call 112 in a timely fashion, etc. ???

Believe me, I would feel better if they were guilty, as it really upsets me to think (as I am inclined to do for a myriad of reasons as stated ) that they are innocents in prison.

@Otto:

The reason I am quoting myself above is that I want to continue this train of thought: OK, one of the things that bothered me was How did AK and RS manage to not have blood all over themselves and their clothes? And there had been talk of Amanda's shirt missing, and I had thought, "Gee, it was blood-spattered and she washed it"---only to have them find the shirt later, flung on a bed, unwashed and with no blood on it. :furious: Otto, I earnestly beseech you to give YOUR explanation of this.

 

[SMK]

Addendum: In fact, I just Googled this matter of blood on Knox and Sollecito, and numerous articles and discussions popped up about how implausible it is that there was no blood found on their clothes or shoes ; additionally, that Guede's DNA & prints were all over the room, and not theirs. IMPLAUSIBLE that they were there , involved in a bloody struggle and slashing, and yet came out pristine.

 

[otto]

OK, this makes a certain amount of good sense. Someone else will have to refute it. Your point about Guede is well taken (although RG insists consistently that he WAS there and DID have sex with MK---not so the others) :waitasec:

My problem is with the whole tapestry of the case: The plethora of articles - perhaps too many? - which I have read which refute the prosecution; the many questions and holes, such as TOD, computer activity, why were there no bruises or cuts on AK and RS, how did they clean up the blood, why did it turn out that they did infact call 112 in a timely fashion, etc. ???

Believe me, I would feel better if they were guilty, as it really upsets me to think (as I am inclined to do for a myriad of reasons as stated ) that they are innocents in prison.

Rudy has indeed accepted some responsibility for the murder of Meredith Kercher, and the evidence - the same experts, investigators and forensic analysts that collected and analyzed evidence to support Rudy's admissions - has identical language to that used to explain the evidence against Knox and Solecito.

I'm curious why you accept information published by people that have no association with the investigation, trial, or murder. No cuts or bruises on Knox and Sollecito when they were examined by a doctor several days after the murder? Who knows. Brad Cooper murdered his 5'9", fit, healthy wife and didn't have a scratch on him. Why not? Why should three people that murdered someone have scratches and cuts when it doesn't happen to one person committing murder? Questions are posed for the purpose of casting doubt, but they simply beg the question.

That is, one has to assume that everyone that commits murder will have injuries as a result of that murder. Only then is it possible to say that because Knox and Sollecito did not have scratches and injuries days after the murder, they must be innocent. The problem is that it is not true that all murderers have injuries due to committing murder, so the absence of injuries does not imply innocence. In fact, it is meaningless.

The time of death, in every murder, is a big question that can only be narrowed down to a time frame of several hours. In the case of Nancy Cooper, the combined testimonies about stomach contents, bug activity and the medical examiner placed the time of death between the time that Nancy was alive and well at a party to the following day at noon. Why should it be different in this case?

Computers were analyzed and when back up copies were made, something went wrong and the originals were wiped. It happens, but the data was extracted and presented in court.

Don't forget about the mop that Amanda claimed she took to Raffaele's apt on the morning of Nov 2. The pair said there was a water spill at 8:30 the night before and, according to them, they left the spill on the kitchen floor until the following day at noon. Why did no one see Amanda walking through Perugia with a mop that day? The mop was by the front door when the pair were startled by the Postal police.

 

[SMK]

Rudy has indeed accepted some responsibility for the murder of Meredith Kercher, and the evidence - the same experts, investigators and forensic analysts that collected and analyzed evidence to support Rudy's admissions - has identical language to that used to explain the evidence against Knox and Solecito.

I'm curious why you accept information published by people that have no association with the investigation, trial, or murder. No cuts or bruises on Knox and Sollecito when they were examined by a doctor several days after the murder? Who knows. Brad Cooper murdered his 5'9", fit, healthy wife and didn't have a scratch on him. Why not? Why should three people that murdered someone have scratches and cuts when it doesn't happen to one person committing murder? Questions are posed for the purpose of casting doubt, but they simply beg the question.

That is, one has to assume that everyone that commits murder will have injuries as a result of that murder. Only then is it possible to say that because Knox and Sollecito did not have scratches and injuries days after the murder, they must be innocent. The problem is that it is not true that all murderers have injuries due to committing murder, so the absence of injuries does not imply innocence. In fact, it is meaningless.

The time of death, in every murder, is a big question that can only be narrowed down to a time frame of several hours. In the case of Nancy Cooper, the combined testimonies about stomach contents, bug activity and the medical examiner placed the time of death between the time that Nancy was alive and well at a party to the following day at noon. Why should it be different in this case?

Computers were analyzed and when back up copies were made, something went wrong and the originals were wiped. It happens, but the data was extracted and presented in court.

Don't forget about the mop that Amanda claimed she took to Raffaele's apt on the morning of Nov 2. The pair said there was a water spill at 8:30 the night before and, according to them, they left the spill on the kitchen floor until the following day at noon. Why did no one see Amanda walking through Perugia with a mop that day? The mop was by the front door when the pair were startled by the Postal police.

OK, thank you for the lengthy and thoughtful reply. I am processing it & reflecting on it.... Thanks once more for taking the time to answer.....

 

[otto]

Addendum: In fact, I just Googled this matter of blood on Knox and Sollecito, and numerous articles and discussions popped up about how implausible it is that there was no blood found on their clothes or shoes ; additionally, that Guede's DNA & prints were all over the room, and not theirs. IMPLAUSIBLE that they were there , involved in a bloody struggle and slashing, and yet came out pristine.

We know that Rudy went to the bathroom next to Meredith's bedroom after the murder to get towels. Those towels were present at the scene, and Rudy requested that the towels be forensically analyzed during appeal. They were not. If the assumption is that immediately after the murder, everyone involved should be covered in blood, why is there no bloody evidence of Rudy's shoes going from the bedroom to the bathroom and back? After Rudy got the towels, he stepped in the blood and the shoe print evidence indicates he ran down the hall and out the front door - with increasingly faint footprints.

There is no reason to think that as Meredith slowly bled out, Knox and Sollecito waited for the blood to pool and then stepped in the blood. The evidence indicates that there is one shoe print compatible with Amanda's foot in the bedroom, and which has been identified as belonging to a female. The shoe could not be found. There is additional barefoot print of Knox and Sollecito suggesting that they removed their shoes and staged the scene. That evidence was invisible until revealed by luminol several weeks after the murder .... luminol is always used several weeks later as that is the time required for luminol testing to be successful.

 

[SMK]

We know that Rudy went to the bathroom next to Meredith's bedroom after the murder to get towels. Those towels were present at the scene, and Rudy requested that the towels be forensically analyzed during appeal. They were not. If the assumption is that immediately after the murder, everyone involved should be covered in blood, why is there no bloody evidence of Rudy's shoes going from the bedroom to the bathroom and back? After Rudy got the towels, he stepped in the blood and the shoe print evidence indicates he ran down the hall and out the front door - with increasingly faint footprints.

There is no reason to think that as Meredith slowly bled out, Knox and Sollecito waited for the blood to pool and then stepped in the blood. The evidence indicates that there is one shoe print compatible with Amanda's foot in the bedroom, and which has been identified as belonging to a female. The shoe could not be found. There is additional barefoot print of Knox and Sollecito suggesting that they removed their shoes and staged the scene. That evidence was invisible until revealed by luminol several weeks after the murder .... luminol is always used several weeks later as that is the time required for luminol testing to be successful.

Thank you. Am taking well under advisement. More grist for the mill....

 

[SMK]

I have been wondering a lot if it is a good idea to have Luciano Aviello testify, and now see on IIP that many others are horrified at this as well. Like myself, they believe this obscures the alleged truth of Guede as lone wolf killer, and actually detracts from the defense. It is interesting to me that it has been proposed that this move may be simply to get Guede to take the stand.

http://www.injusticeinperugiaforum.org/why-have-luciano-aviello-testify-t951.html

 

[otto]

I have been wondering a lot if it is a good idea to have Luciano Aviello testify, and now see on IIP that many others are horrified at this as well. Like myself, they believe this obscures the alleged truth of Guede as lone wolf killer, and actually detracts from the defense. It is interesting to me that it has been proposed that this move may be simply to get Guede to take the stand.

http://www.injusticeinperugiaforum.org/why-have-luciano-aviello-testify-t951.html

I haven't followed the latest new suspect info closely because on the surface it strikes me as people trying to get their 15 minutes of fame. However, since the defense has put forth 5 claims made by people that they have info about the real killers, it seems the judge has no choice but to entertain this new information. I too think it was a mistake for defense lawyers to introduce this evidence ... but they have, and now we can hear ridiculous claims that Meredith was a super drug dealer who was murdered for drug debt ... and the murderers were paid a hefty sum. It's absurd ... and it seems to me that the decision by the defense to introduce this to the court proceedings tells us that they will stop at nothing, not even the absurd.

 

[otto]

Thank you. Am taking well under advisement. More grist for the mill....

This is something that was recently pointed out by Sherlock, and it makes perfect sense.

 

[SMK]

I haven't followed the latest new suspect info closely because on the surface it strikes me as people trying to get their 15 minutes of fame. However, since the defense has put forth 5 claims made by people that they have info about the real killers, it seems the judge has no choice but to entertain this new information. I too think it was a mistake for defense lawyers to introduce this evidence ... but they have, and now we can hear ridiculous claims that Meredith was a super drug dealer who was murdered for drug debt ... and the murderers were paid a hefty sum. It's absurd ... and it seems to me that the decision by the defense to introduce this to the court proceedings tells us that they will stop at nothing, not even the absurd.

Well, it sure does seem risky, and down-right ill-conceived on their part, doesn't it? NO ONE is going to buy that Meredith ran up high drug debt. I really think this is absurd, the whole thing. I wish they were not doing it, and cannot imagine what they are thinking of, unless they are hoping to force Guede onto the stand and rip it all to shreds???

 

[SMK]

And here is where it all began with Aviello, over one year ago:

A jailed Italian man claims in a legal deposition that convicted killer Amanda Knox is innocent, and accuses his own brother of killing Knox's roommate Meredith Kercher, Knox's legal team told ABC News.

Luciano Aviello, who is tied to the Italian Mafia and currently serving a 17 year prison sentence, told Knox's lawyers in a video-taped prison interview in March that his brother Antonio showed up at his house in Perugia wearing a bloodstained jacket the night of Nov. 1, 2007, the night that Kercher was murdered.

Aviello claims his brother told him that he broke into a house and killed a woman.

Antonio Aviello then asked his brother to hide the bloody knife and the keys to the Perugia apartment where Kercher and Knox lived, he claimed in the deposition.

"I hid everything under a little wall behind my house and covered it with soil and stones. I am happy to stand up in court and confirm all this and wrote to the court several times to tell them, but was never questioned," Luciano Aviello said.

Knox's legal team told ABC News, "The alleged location of the murder weapon and the keys to Kercher's house has yet to be investigated, and we hope the court will look into it." http://abcnews.go.com/US/Media/mafia-informer-amanda-knox-guilty-brother-killer/story?id=10865516

OK, were these items recovered? Why does the defense have faith in this?

 

[otto]

Well, it sure does seem risky, and down-right ill-conceived on their part, doesn't it? NO ONE is going to buy that Meredith ran up high drug debt. I really think this is absurd, the whole thing. I wish they were not doing it, and cannot imagine what they are thinking of, unless they are hoping to force Guede onto the stand and rip it all to shreds???

I don't think Guede has any obligation to testify about things that other people have put forth.

 

[otto]

And here is where it all began with Aviello, over one year ago:

A jailed Italian man claims in a legal deposition that convicted killer Amanda Knox is innocent, and accuses his own brother of killing Knox's roommate Meredith Kercher, Knox's legal team told ABC News.

Luciano Aviello, who is tied to the Italian Mafia and currently serving a 17 year prison sentence, told Knox's lawyers in a video-taped prison interview in March that his brother Antonio showed up at his house in Perugia wearing a bloodstained jacket the night of Nov. 1, 2007, the night that Kercher was murdered.

Aviello claims his brother told him that he broke into a house and killed a woman.

Antonio Aviello then asked his brother to hide the bloody knife and the keys to the Perugia apartment where Kercher and Knox lived, he claimed in the deposition.

"I hid everything under a little wall behind my house and covered it with soil and stones. I am happy to stand up in court and confirm all this and wrote to the court several times to tell them, but was never questioned," Luciano Aviello said.

Knox's legal team told ABC News, "The alleged location of the murder weapon and the keys to Kercher's house has yet to be investigated, and we hope the court will look into it." http://abcnews.go.com/US/Media/mafia-informer-amanda-knox-guilty-brother-killer/story?id=10865516

OK, were these items recovered? Why does the defense have faith in this?

If it was my daughter in prison, I'd be out there with a shovel - not waiting for police to do something about it. Instead, no one has done anything about it. It gives the impression that not even the defense considers this valid.

 

[SMK]

Just keeping track, since apparently the man is going to testify:

Aviello told the lawyers that his brother said he and an Albanian man broke into the house and found "the poor English girl," Kercher and the drifter, Rudy Guede. Aviello said when Kercher saw them she "started screaming like mad"

The brother "stabbed her in the throat then he tried to stifle her screams," Aviello said. "Meredith defended herself like mad, scratching and hitting out at him."http://victimsheartland.forumotion.com/t3156-jailed-mobster-luciano-aviello-claims-he-can-prove-amanda-knox-is-innocent

 

[SMK]

If it was my daughter in prison, I'd be out there with a shovel - not waiting for police to do something about it. Instead, no one has done anything about it. It gives the impression that not even the defense considers this valid.

Right! So what on earth are they thinking of, letting this man testify? Had they found the items he mentions, AK and her family would be dancing a jig now, and they are not.

 

[SMK]

I don't think Guede has any obligation to testify about things that other people have put forth.

Right, I imagine Guede will NOT testify under any means. He is the silent type (except according to some of the inmates, apparently)...

 

[Nova]

Reading Mignini's take on Interrogation night and though is story is definitely incomplete, some interesting points come out.

1. He must have been sleeping somewhere in the building at police headquarters and not at home.

2. He claims that AK's questioning as a person with facts meant she didn't have to have an attorney, but that ended at 145am.

3. He claims the he was called and awakened when RS said AK wasn't at home with him the night of the murder. If I understand his story correctly, (because he does ramble, I'm sorry--he just does.) he was called into someone office or called somewhere to see how to proceed with the case.

4. according to him, he was not in the room for the questioning of either, but he says AK did not become "incriminated" until 145am. At that time, he was called again. He claims he went there to tell her that he would NOT ask her questions, but she could make a spontenious declaration. If he asked her questions, she'd be required to have an attorney. So he said he just let her talk freely.

5. He says the minutes for the first part ended at 1am. The minutes for the declaration began at 545am and lasted 30 minutes. They drew up the documents etc and so on at 8am and she was arrested about 9am.

My first question is what were they doing all those hours between 1am and 545am?

Then, he apparently went down there to the interrogation area the moment they called him to say RS had bailed on AK. So he says they'd called AK in to ask her about it. AK reports being called back there about 10:30--1045pm, right?

So I'm to believe that Mignini, who admits to even seeing RS sitting in an interrogation room, NEVER participated in ANY OF IT until, what--about 5am? Because he says he sat down to tell AK that she could make this spontenious declaration, which began at 545am. He had to take the time to tell her, so I say 5am or 530am, he comes in to talk to her.

I don't believe it. I don't believe the man who showed up on DAY ONE of this investigation was just sitting somewhere else talking to others for hours without directing that interrogation.

So I guess Mignini just told what otto would call "a whopper lie."

 

[SMK]

Ah HAH: I just found this piece about using Aviello's testimony as part of the defense in the Appeals trial, and I think I can grasp the strategy now:

Why I believe a Mafia supergrass will help clear Foxy Knoxy's name


In almost two years since I began investigating this murder for a documentary, I have learned to be intensely sceptical of the many 'new' developments that have occurred. And this latest is no exception.
Indeed, we have more than the usual cause to be intensely suspicious - not to say dismissive - of Aviello's testimony.

There are, after all, a multitude of dubious reasons why a Mafioso might choose to rat on his brother. But Aviello's lurid and flawed account - which incidentally fails to tally with any of the mountain of forensic evidence at the crime scene - is nonetheless significant.

Aviello, 41, who is in prison for his involvement in the Naples Camorra Mafia syndicate, claims the murder was carried out by his brother and a second man, an Albanian identified only as Florio, after a burglary went wrong.

However Knox, Sollecito and Ivorian drifter Rudy Guede have already been jointly convicted of killing Meredith, who was found semi-naked with her throat cut in the house she shared with Knox in the hilltop town of Perugia in 2007.
First, let me make my own allegiance clear: I do not believe that Knox or Sollecito were guilty of killing Meredith.

Yet why should we consider Aviello's evidence when it is so palpably flawed? After all, he could merely be returning a favour for an underworld associate, or doing a deal. In short, he is likely to have been instructed to give his version of events.

Yet Aviello's story will be used by Knox's lawyers to form a vital part of their appeal against her conviction for murder, which begins in October this year. It will be produced by her defence team, not necessarily because they believe what he says, but because they are supremely grateful to him for inadvertently highlighting the laxness of the first trial.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1286011/Why-I-believe-Mafia-supergrass-help-clear-Foxy-Knoxys-name.html#ixzz1N7bYhyhO

 

[otto]

Right! So what on earth are they thinking of, letting this man testify? Had they found the items he mentions, AK and her family would be dancing a jig now, and they are not.

Also, if this man really had the items, why didn't he dig them up and take them to the police station.

It makes no sense to introduce these crazy claims.