Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #13

[Nova]

I gave an example of a thrill kill in the same paragraph where I mentioned it.

This one? "a teenager that killed her sister's friend to see what it felt like"

You can imagine why I might have trouble tracking down that case to see if it is comparable.

The Kerchers had their own lawyer who represented Meredith in the trial. They were not reliant on the prosecution for any information ... try again.

Are you claiming the Kerchers' lawyer was psychic? Because otherwise he was dependent on the prosecution for his information.

 

[Nova]

You think some CNN talking head is more familiar with the facts of this case than the family? ... or perhaps some character in who knows where that attached themselves to the case ... perhaps a cooking/travel blogger knows more about the trial of Meredith Kercher than her family? I don't think so.

The investigation began with no suspects, and within the first few days a couple emerged. Why should the victim's family doubt the integrity of the investigation?

I think it's important to remember the victim in this discussion. I am not the one that dragged the Kerchers into this, that would fall on the shoulders of Knox, Sollecito and Guede. All anyone here seems to want to discuss is that woman from Seattle that murdered Meredith Kercher, always treating the murderer as though she is the victim. The murderer is not the victim, she is the woman that was found guilty by a jury in a court of law and sentenced to 26 years in prison. Any attempt to even discuss a recent article published by the victim's father is met with resistance. Why is that?

BBM: You're kidding right? Of the three (three, not a couple) suspects who emerged in those first few days, one had an airtight alibi and, as we have discovered, there is ilttle to no forensic evidence linking the other two to the crime.

You brought up Mr. Kercher's remarks as if by virtue of being the victim's father, Kercher somehow has omniscience re this case. It was a phony "appeal to authority," yet another logical fallacy commonly applied in this case

If there is something new in his statement that bears consideration, by all mean, bring it up.

 

[SMK]

BBM: You're kidding right? Of the three (three, not a couple) suspects who emerged in those first few days, one had an airtight alibi and, as we have discovered, there is ilttle to no forensic evidence linking the other two to the crime.

You brought up Mr. Kercher's remarks as if by virtue of being the victim's father, Kercher somehow has omniscience re this case. It was a phony "appeal to authority," yet another logical fallacy commonly applied in this case

If there is something new in his statement that bears consideration, by all mean, bring it up.

Right, with all due respect to Mr. Kercher as the victim's father, his piece said nothing new, and brought nothing to light which has not already been stated many times and which cannot be refuted.

 

[SMK]

For instance, from the Sun link above:

myView
By JOHN KERCHER
Meredith's Father
THERE has been talk that the convictions against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are weak - and that their first appeal to the court in Perugia could possibly succeed.

However, the talk has only centred on the DNA evidence which was originally found on the alleged murder weapon, a knife found at Sollecito's apartment which is said to have had Knox's DNA on the handle and Meredith's on the tip.

There is also a bra clasp which was said to contain an abundance of Sollecito's DNA.

The defence have argued that as it was found six weeks after the crime was committed it was not valid. This ignores the fact that people have been convicted on DNA discovered up to 17 years after a crime.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3592844/THE-Suns-probe-into-Amanda-Knox-case-reveals-evidence-that-may-undermine-conviction.html#ixzz1NyIFR94p

This is OK as far as it goes.
But DNA is collected 17 years after the fact in cold cases, not cases which are current, and in which LE leaves a bra/clasp for 47 days on the floor and fails to collect it.And is there actually "an abundance" of Sollecito's DNA?

 

[otto]

This one? "a teenager that killed her sister's friend to see what it felt like"

You can imagine why I might have trouble tracking down that case to see if it is comparable.



Are you claiming the Kerchers' lawyer was psychic? Because otherwise he was dependent on the prosecution for his information.

I'm not inclined to suggest that all the lawyers representing different parties were dependent on the prosecution for their arguments, but I would agree that the prosecution disclosed their information to all legal parties.

As for information about the thrill kill, look up "thrill kill US teenager" on google for starters. It is a motiveless murder ... other than the thrill.

 

[otto]

Right, with all due respect to Mr. Kercher as the victim's father, his piece said nothing new, and brought nothing to light which has not already been stated many times and which cannot be refuted.

I thought it did. Here, it has been suggested that Knox and Sollecito have alibis. Mr Kercher suggests that they've changed their alibis 9 times between the two of them. That strikes me as different. Here, it is repeatedly argued that if DNA is collected 6 weeks after the murder, it must be contaminated. Mr Kercher states that DNA recovered 17 years after the fact has been proven valid.

That's quite a different take on the case than what we read here.

 

[otto]

For instance, from the Sun link above:


http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3592844/THE-Suns-probe-into-Amanda-Knox-case-reveals-evidence-that-may-undermine-conviction.html#ixzz1NyIFR94p

This is OK as far as it goes.
But DNA is collected 17 years after the fact in cold cases, not cases which are current, and in which LE leaves a bra/clasp for 47 days on the floor and fails to collect it.And is there actually "an abundance" of Sollecito's DNA?

We don't know anymore if there was an abundance of DNA. We were led to believe that in the first round of DNA testing, there was an abundance of DNA on the clasp. That clasp was improperly stored, and now it is too corroded to retest. I suppose we'll have to wait for the appeal results to know for sure whether there was an abundance of DNA or not.

I've provided an example where DNA was collected 4 months after the fact from a mostly skeletonized person. That DNA is understood to be valid at this time, particularly since it is connected with a violent sex offender and the victim was probably kidnapped and assualted prior to the murder. If DNA is valid after 4 months in the winter weather, why would DNA in a closed bedroom not be valid after 6 weeks? It's not like the cottage was covered with Sollecito's DNA and it was easily transferred. In fact that only DNA from Sollecito was on a cigarette butt in the kitchen. How could it be transferred to something that was found in a closed room 6 weeks later ... especially since the butt was collected at the time of the murder?

 

[SMK]

I thought it did. Here, it has been suggested that Knox and Sollecito have alibis. Mr Kercher suggests that they've changed their alibis 9 times between the two of them. That strikes me as different. Here, it is repeatedly argued that if DNA is collected 6 weeks after the murder, it must be contaminated. Mr Kercher states that DNA recovered 17 years after the fact has been proven valid.

That's quite a different take on the case than what we read here.

But not different to what the prosecution has stated numerous times, and what has been said in various media venues.

 

[otto]

But not different to what the prosecution has stated numerous times, and what has been said in various media venues.

I hadn't read that the pair changed their alibis 9 times between the two of them. I was aware of changing alibis, but not that many times. I had also never fully considered examples of DNA collection well after the fact to counter the argument that DNA that sat 6 weeks in a closed room is not compromised simply because it was 6 weeks. I have never heard that argument from the prosecutor. Perhaps I missed all those media reports during and after the trial ... but I did follow the trial in the news, so it's unusual that I completely missed those points.

Are you able to find links stating that the pair changed their alibis 9 times and the prosecutor countered the 6 week argument with other examples of delayed DNA collection?

 

[SMK]

I hadn't read that the pair changed their alibis 9 times between the two of them. I was aware of changing alibis, but not that many times. I had also never fully considered examples of DNA collection well after the fact to counter the argument that DNA that sat 6 weeks in a closed room is not compromised simply because it was 6 weeks. I have never heard that argument from the prosecutor. Perhaps I missed all those media reports during the after the trial ... but I did follow the trial in the news, so it's unusual that I completely missed those points.

Are you able to find links stating that the pair changed their alibis 9 times and the prosecutor countered the 6 week argument with other examples of delayed DNA collection?

Well, I am not sure about finding links right now - HOWEVER: I knew the prosecution believed their alibis had changes many times, so 9 between them does not surprise me. Moreover, I knew that when it was argued by the defense that it was "47 days!!!"---the prosecution somehow still got their convictions on all counts. So it must have been seen by them, as insignificant. What would "WOW" me, is if John Kercher said something such as "I found in my daughter's diary written during a brief home visit, that Knox had threatened her" or something similar which would have given me stern pause. He is only saying what the prosecution has told him, and everyone else. Believe me, the man has my sympathy. But he and they MAY be - MAY be - wrong.

 

[otto]

Well, I am not sure about finding links right now - HOWEVER: I knew the prosecution believed their alibis had changes many times, so 9 between them does not surprise me. Moreover, I knew that when it was argued by the defense that it was "47 days!!!"---the prosecution somehow still got their convictions on all counts. So it must have been seen by them, as insignificant. What would "WOW" me, is if John Kercher said something such as "I found in my daughter's diary written during a brief home visit, that Knox had threatened her" or something similar which would have given me stern pause. He is only saying what the prosecution has told him, and everyone else. Believe me, the man has my sympathy. But he and they MAY be - MAY be - wrong.

The prosecution has said that the 2 DNA items accepted during appeal are a small part of the total evidence ... that's what he says. This is true, we all know that.

So ... maybe everyone is wrong except the pseudo experts that don't speak Italian and didn't attend the trial ... on the other side of the pond?

 

[SMK]

The prosecution has said that the 2 DNA items accepted during appeal are a small part of the total evidence ... that's what he says. This is true, we all know that.

So ... maybe everyone is wrong except the pseudo experts that don't speak Italian and didn't attend the trial ... on the other side of the pond?

:waitasec: ...... ..... :razz: ..... :slap: Let's hope not. or hope so, as it may be :tears:

 

[Nova]

I'm not inclined to suggest that all the lawyers representing different parties were dependent on the prosecution for their arguments, but I would agree that the prosecution disclosed their information to all legal parties.

As for information about the thrill kill, look up "thrill kill US teenager" on google for starters. It is a motiveless murder ... other than the thrill.

No thank you. If you have a link to a comparable case, please post it and I will be happy to look at it. Otherwise, I'll continue to assume the "sexual prank gone wrong" is merely a figment of Mignini's perverted imagination.

 

[Nova]

I thought it did. Here, it has been suggested that Knox and Sollecito have alibis. Mr Kercher suggests that they've changed their alibis 9 times between the two of them. That strikes me as different. Here, it is repeatedly argued that if DNA is collected 6 weeks after the murder, it must be contaminated. Mr Kercher states that DNA recovered 17 years after the fact has been proven valid.

That's quite a different take on the case than what we read here.

As you know perfectly well, quoting a victim puts the rest of us in an awkward position since Mr. Kercher has our full sympathy and nobody here wishes to appear to criticize him.

So I'll just ask a question: what are the 9 alibis and how does Mr. Kercher know about them?

As for the DNA, it isn't just that 6 weeks passed before the clasp was collected, it's that the room was processed, things were moved and still the clasp was missed. So we don't know whether it was deliberately contaminated or merely accidentally contaminated as it was passed around. But either way, it isn't much in the way of evidence.

 

[SMK]

I'm not inclined to suggest that all the lawyers representing different parties were dependent on the prosecution for their arguments, but I would agree that the prosecution disclosed their information to all legal parties.

As for information about the thrill kill, look up "thrill kill US teenager" on google for starters. It is a motiveless murder ... other than the thrill.

Otto, I did just Google "thrill-kill US teens" and a bunch of stories came up. But I do not see Knox and Sollecito as being alienated teens - they were successful students in their 20s, enjoying romance. OK, just look at how DIFFERENT these creepy kids are from Knox and Sollecito:

Prosecutors allege the men lured Sorensen to the Canton Township home of Orlewicz's grandfather.
"They lured him in the garage where they prepared a space to kill him," Worthy said.
A tarp had been spread on the garage floor, and Sorenson was stabbed multiple times in the back. His head was sawed off and his body wrapped in the tarp, authorities said.

There, on a tarp they allegedly spread out for the attack, they slit Sorensen's throat with a knife and repeatedly stabbed him before cutting off his head with a hacksaw, prosecutors said.
They allegedly used a blowtorch on his hands and feet in an attempt to remove his fingerprints, officials said.
His torso was driven in a pickup truck and dumped in a Northville Township cul-de-sac where it was set on fire with gasoline. A utility crew found it the next morning, police said.
His head was dumped in the Rouge River near the border between Dearborn Heights and Detroit. It was found Saturday.
"They made plans on how they were to clean up the blood," Worthy said. "They made plans on how they were going to dispose of the body. No matter how malicious we all think it may be, it was very thought out and very methodical."


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,310578,00.html#ixzz1NyoTIgBH

 

[SMK]

As you know perfectly well, quoting a victim puts the rest of us in an awkward position since Mr. Kercher has our full sympathy and nobody here wishes to appear to criticize him.

So I'll just ask a question: what are the 9 alibis and how does Mr. Kercher know about them?

As for the DNA, it isn't just that 6 weeks passed before the clasp was collected, it's that the room was processed, things were moved and still the clasp was missed. So we don't know whether it was deliberately contaminated or merely accidentally contaminated as it was passed around. But either way, it isn't much in the way of evidence.

:clap::clap::clap:

 

[SMK]

<mod snip>
For me, the problem with talking about the appeal, is that I to this day have never been able to determine what they are reviewing besides the DNA and witnesses. To me, the timeline, the time of death, the computer activity, Guede's past, the untested semen stain, the 112 call made BEFORE the arrival of the postal police, Kercher's boyfriend and his friendship with Guede, and many other things are simply being ignored in this appeal. Hence, I am just sort of hoping Providence will do the right thing......

 

[Malkmus]

For me, the problem with talking about the appeal, is that I to this day have never been able to determine what they are reviewing besides the DNA and witnesses. To me, the timeline, the time of death, the computer activity, Guede's past, the untested semen stain, the 112 call made BEFORE the arrival of the postal police, Kercher's boyfriend and his friendship with Guede, and many other things are simply being ignored in this appeal. Hence, I am just sort of hoping Providence will do the right thing......

SMK, IIRC, Hellman has decided to first review the two pieces of DNA evidence and if those prove to be worthless he will open up other aspects of the evidence. In the wake of Stefanoni's foot-dragging re the raw data he has agreed to hear some of the inmate testimony. Someone on here, Otto possibly, made the claim that only the two pieces of DNA evidence will be reviewed and that's it. This may be what has you confused, and so I wouldn't say that those things are being ignored, just that it isn't the time yet. Apologies if it wasn't Otto who made that claim.

 

[SMK]

SMK, IIRC, Hellman has decided to first review the two pieces of DNA evidence and if those prove to be worthless he will open up other aspects of the evidence. In the wake of Stefanoni's foot-dragging re the raw data he has agreed to hear some of the inmate testimony. Someone on here, Otto possibly, made the claim that only the two pieces of DNA evidence will be reviewed and that's it. This may be what has you confused, and so I wouldn't say that those things are being ignored, just that it isn't the time yet. Apologies if it wasn't Otto who made that claim.

Thanks! Oh, yes, there are the 5 inmate witnesses as well. I recall weeks ago Nova and I both said we were confused as to how total a review this would be, and many sites limited it to Toto and the DNA. Got me frustrated, as there is SO much to look at, and the defense made excellent points in their lengthy appeals documents.

 

[RR473]

I haven't researched this case in depth but I see a number of similarities between this case and the case of Casey Anthony.

In both cases the defendants have changed their story numerous times, thrown innocent people under the bus, taken the investigation as a joke and both have serious lack of remorse.

Ok these symptoms are no evidence of crime but are telling a lot.