Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #13

[Malkmus]

Amanda's DNA mixed with Meredith's blood in Filomina's room means that Amanda was in Meredith's room and Filomina's room after the murder. I don't think it means anything about anyone else.
(snip)

So only AK's DNA in the sample is incriminating, but anyone else's is irrelevant? It seems that same flawed logic is how ILE perceived it too. As long as our suspect's DNA is in that sample, it doesn't matter if the other roommates is too because we know Amanda is guilty. Tunnel vision.

 

[Malkmus]

I guess Migini was not in his very comfy bed and called in it appears that he was down the hallway

11’03’’ CNN: No one hit her?
11’06’’ Mignini: No, look, absolutely not. I can state this in the most positive way, and then, let’s say… I wasn’t there when she was being questioned by police, the rooms are quite far away… you don’t know but I was… it’s quite far, there’s a corridor, and I was with the director, Dr. Porfazio, and she was being questioned in a different place. I also remember that passing through, I also saw Sollecito who was alone in a different room; he was also being questioned, as I recall. I don’t exclude…well…it’s clear that I wasn’t there, but I don’t believe that anything whatsoever happened, and in my presence absolutely not.

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

Good find!
That does finally put to rest the rumor that circulated for sooooooo long that Mignini was at home and demanded to be called in by Amanda. Sheesh, you don't know how many people fought tooth and nail insisting that was the case. To be honest, I'm thankful for things like the massei Report and the mignini interview because they have dispelled so many rumors propagated by sites like PMF and TJMK. I've always found that especially with this case the disclosure of information has been much more helpful in understanding their innocence than the other way around.

 

[Malkmus]

Looks like the CNN transcript has also revealed a second version of why the interrogation wasn't taped.
In an earlier interview he said it was because there wasn't enough time to set up the camera. Now it's budget problems:

12’51’’ CNN: Why wasn’t there any video or transcript of those hours?

13’00’’ Mignini: Look, that’s, I was at the police station, and all the…let’s say…when I made investigations in my own office, I taped them. I taped them, we have an apparatus for that, and I transcribed them. For example, there’s the interrogation of the English girls, Meredith’s friends, it was all taped. The interrogations of Amanda in prison were taped, and then transcribed, and we have the transcripts of… But in a police station, at the very moment of the investigation it isn’t done, not in the confrontations with Amanda or with anyone else. Also because, I can tell you, today, even then, but today in particular, we have budget problems, budget problems that are not insignificant, which do not allow us to transcribe. Video is very important…I completely agree with you that videotaping is extremely important, we should be able to have a video recording of every statement [verbale di assunzione di informazioni] made Because what is said is very important, but it’s maybe even more important how it is said, the non-verbal language. Because from the non-verbal language you can [missing words].

 

[SMK]

Looks like the CNN transcript has also revealed a second version of why the interrogation wasn't taped.
In an earlier interview he said it was because there wasn't enough time to set up the camera. Now it's budget problems:

Yeah, I was noticing that, too......Not a very good excuse to circumvent important policy....

 

[Allusonz]

Looks like the CNN transcript has also revealed a second version of why the interrogation wasn't taped.
In an earlier interview he said it was because there wasn't enough time to set up the camera. Now it's budget problems:

Ummmm wonders how you transcribe a video. If they can't afford to transcribe the audio to it then just show the video

Ok am dying of laughter here at all of what I am reading

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

ETA Especially considering that they brought in 12 detectives for an overnight interrogation. :giggle:

 

[SMK]

1. He clearly says "blood" and not mere dna, which would have a different inference. WHICH was it???
2. I don't grasp the connection between the brief relationship and the knife?

And then there were the results... well, fingerprints ... footprints, the footprints on the rug of the bare foot stained with blood, an especially important detail which I see many have not talked about but which is extremely important, is the mixed stains of blood in the small bathroom close the scene of crime, those of the defendant and the victim.
31'00'' CNN: In the room [missing words]
31'05'' Mignini: But let’s say I may reverse the issue: how do you explain the DNA, the genetic profile of the victim on the knife found in Sollecito's house, together with the genetic profile of the defendant located at the area of the blade [possibly meaning: handle] where force is applied, not where you cut...
31'40'' CNN: Are you sure that one was the knife?
31'44'' Mignini: That it was for us, I can say this: first you have to start from a premise: Amanda and Sollecito knew each other only since October 25. That is, we think, because this detail is very significant with respect to the relevance of this finding, since we [may just] think it was a relationship, usually we don’t think of the fact that actually they had known each other for a week. And thus this knife was never touched in conditions ... I tell you what we found in the investigation, I am talking about what we ascertained during the investigation - this knife was never touched by Meredith under normal circumstances. It was never brought to Meredith’s home, this is what the two Italian housemates say, and so why, [since] Meredith had never been to Sollecito's house, why was Meredith’s genetic material found on the blade by the forensic police, and the genetic profile of the defendant on the spot of the handle that is where the hand would press not as you apply pressure from top down, but from back to the front, that is in a condition similar to that when you strike a blow, like this.

 

[Malkmus]

1. He clearly says "blood" and not mere dna, which would have a different inference. WHICH was it???
2. I don't grasp the connection between the brief relationship and the knife?

There's no question it was just her DNA and not blood. You can believe Otto that because Meredith was murdered 4 years ago, he forgot and just said that by mistake, or you can believe he had ulterior motives for bending the truth on national television.

From what I can tell, he's saying that because they only knew each other for 6 days she never would have touched the knife for innocent reasons, you know, such as helping him cook. More b.s.

ETA: Which is a more ridiculous premise? That a couple who have been dating for 6 days would cook together, or that after a day or two of dating a guy would give his girlfriend a 12 inch kitchen knife to carry in her purse for protection?

 

[Malkmus]

You especially will be interested in comparing what he actually said... to what was presented on the show. Very telling IMO.

Yes, we're discovering just how telling :great:

If I were Mignini I wouldn't open my mouth anymore. CNN did him a favor by only airing a small portion of the interview.

 

[SMK]

There's no question it was just her DNA and not blood. You can believe Otto that because Meredith was murdered 4 years ago, he forgot and just said that by mistake, or you can believe he had ulterior motives for bending the truth on national television.

From what I can tell, he's saying that because they only knew each other for 6 days she never would have touched the knife for innocent reasons, you know, such as helping him cook. More b.s.

Well, see, this is maddening. Because mixed blood would surely point toward involvement, whereas DNA could be saliva, from brushing teeth, it could be skin cells, from washing hands, or even touching something. And then they say Bruce Fisher has lied RE DNA, and I would like to know where the truth is. But forgetting would not be a reason for saying "blood"; I am sure Mignini as a seasoned professional has an excellent memory for pertinent details of his cases.

 

[Malkmus]

Well, see, this is maddening. Because mixed blood would surely point toward involvement, whereas DNA could be saliva, from brushing teeth, it could be skin cells, from washing hands, or even touching something. And then they say Bruce Fisher has lied RE DNA, and I would like to know where the truth is. But forgetting would not be a reason for saying "blood"; I am sure Mignini as a seasoned professional has an excellent memory for pertinent details of his cases.

I don't have the judge's report in front of me since I'm at work, but it's in there.

 

[wasnt_me]

Is it preponderance in Italy or reasonable doubt? I've seen both claimed in posts here.

I don't know about Italy, but I guess I was referring to the USA, where the prosecution by the perponderance of the evidence, while the defense "only" has to raise reasonable doubt.

 

[SMK]

I don't know about Italy, but I guess I was referring to the USA, where the prosecution by the perponderance of the evidence, while the defense "only" has to raise reasonable doubt.

Yes. That puts the burden of proof on the prosecution, though even in the US it often does not seem that way. Really do not know RE Italy.

 

[wasnt_me]

OK, I really had read that it was a mushroom, and Hendry even has in his analysis that she comes home and picks a mushroom out of the fridge. (or was it an analysis I read on Perugia Shock? May have been the latter.)But okie, it maybe is not true.

I understand, but it's just another piece of misleading and inappropriately investigated evidence. Just as the footprint belonging to RG has legendarily become RS's.

If you need me to (and I probably will anyway) I'll find you the exact sources about the apple, but she ate some apple dessert. It was a piece of that in her throat. They assumed it was a mushroom, and NEVER kept the specimen for testing. there is no proof that she ever ate a mushroom that day, and with the TOD being when she got home, there was no time to eat it.

Additionally, where are the dishes she used to prepare it? Where are the other mushrooms because she didn't just get one at the store. They come in a bundle. Why do we not hear the evidence of her preparing this snack? What is the reason for preparing this snack when she just ate a couple hours prior? The prosecution wants it to be a mushroom because that makes the TOD later.

ETA: why is she more concerned about putting one mushroom in her mouth than calling back her mother or than getting her wet clothes out of the wash?

 

[SMK]

I understand, but it's just another piece of misleading and inappropriately investigated evidence. Just as the footprint belonging to RG has legendarily become RS's.

If you need me to (and I probably will anyway) I'll find you the exact sources about the apple, but she ate some apple dessert. It was a piece of that in her throat. They assumed it was a mushroom, and NEVER kept the specimen for testing. there is no proof that she ever ate a mushroom that day, and with the TOD being when she got home, there was no time to eat it.

Additionally, where are the dishes she used to prepare it? Where are the other mushrooms because she didn't just get one at the store. They come in a bundle. Why do we not hear the evidence of her preparing this snack? What is the reason for preparing this snack when she just ate a couple hours prior? The prosecution wants it to be a mushroom because that makes the TOD later.

I believe you. I just never thought I would read something like that in so many places - including pieces by Frank - and it would be a falsehood or error. Thanks very much for the clarification. You would assume they would keep the specimen for testing.

 

[wasnt_me]

So my question RE the above: How can a seasoned investigator be wrong about something so clear cut? If we believe his objectivity, and he certainly conveyed sincerity within the 36 pp., then what is with his insistence on mixed blood? DNA obviously could have been from Knox's prior usage of the bathroom to brush her teeth, etc.??:waitasec:................. :anguish:

Without reading the whole thing, all I can say is something might have been wrong about the translation into English.

 

[wasnt_me]

Ah hah, that explains it! Whenever anyone says "Well, according to p. 271 of the Motivation report...." I have been assuming they were a very learned scholar of Massei, and had more or less memorized chapter and verse......

All right, I'm ordering you a straight jacket and wine hat for thinking that.:blowkiss::coffeews::bananalama:

 

[Allusonz]

I believe you. I just never thought I would read something like that in so many places - including pieces by Frank - and it would be a falsehood or error. Thanks very much for the clarification. You would assume they would keep the specimen for testing.

Everyone must remember that initially Frank believed that AK and RS were guilty. It was only as the evidence or non-evidence started coming out that Frank realized there were issues with the forensics etc.

ETA I believe you must also take into consideration with respect to the DNA first they did not receive full disclosure. Only after the defense experts started questioning the supposed DNA evidence did it become clear that there were serious issues. Why Mignini is still stating these falsehoods considerening he was the lead prosecutor in the first trial and has somehow wiggled his way into consulting with the prosecution in the appeal I believe should tell you much about the type of person he is.

 

[SMK]

Without reading the whole thing, all I can say is something might have been wrong about the translation into English.

Yes, perhaps Mignini was saying an Italian word which translates dubiously into English. Had not thought of that, as I kept thinking perhaps he could speak decent English (as many Europeans can, to their credit.)

 

[SMK]

All right, I'm ordering you a straight jacket and wine hat for thinking that.:blowkiss::coffeews::bananalama:

:floorlaugh::great:

 

[wasnt_me]

[

I'm new on this thread and I appreciate all the info all of you have provided as I have not heard many of the things mentioned here. I was on the fence before but the main thing (before now) that gave me pause was when Knox and BF were outside the apartment the day investigation was going on and they were making out and she was doing something we used to call handstands or such. Who does this at the scene of the murder? MOO.

:wagon::wagon:

welcome, but it's incredible that RS giving AK a peck on the lips and AK doing yoga meditation are the only things to give you pause in this wild case.