Consciousness of innocence: Mayhap she did not KNOW a murder had occurred? I told the story once of the doctor out in Pittsburgh who found his door wide open at 5 a.m., coins and a necklace on the stairs, spots of blood in the hall----did not pay it any mind, til he went to use the shower, and his roommate, another resident doctor, was dead in the tub with his throat slashed. Consciousness of innocence.
Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #13
- Thread starter fran
- Start date
- Status
Allusonz
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2010
- Messages
- 4,679
- Reaction score
- 17
I do not believe that any of the DNA experts actually tested the DNA. What they worked with and reviewed was the data (reports) from her testing. They could only go so far as they did not have the .fsa files or the "raw data" to further evaluate these reports
ETA The Italian court would not as well allow foreign DNA experts so they consulted with the Italian ones for her defense. I hope this makes sense as it has been a long day. I could be wrong
ETA The Italian court would not as well allow foreign DNA experts so they consulted with the Italian ones for her defense. I hope this makes sense as it has been a long day. I could be wrong
My guess is that Hampikian was looking at the results on paper, but I honestly don't know for sure.
(ETA Allusonz says this better in the preceding post.)
We've been over this 100 times. This is more "non-evidence" like the cartwheels and smooching. The door had been left unlocked before, the blood was just a few drops (not enough to assume someone had been murdered). Etc., etc., and so forth.
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2004
- Messages
- 42,927
- Reaction score
- 126,901
If anything, he may have reviewed some pre-trial paperwork, but clearly he did not know enough to be qualified as a defense expert - since he wasn't.
I just flipped on the news - I nominate Casey Anthony Queen of the Whopper Lies.
Do you believe all females who make claims that their fathers molested them are lying? It is a truism and a truth of psychology that the apple, as Baez said, does not fall far from the tree. I am amazed that Casey Anthony (guilty or not, obnoxious or not) and Knox stir up such massive hatred. It puzzles me. I am just neutral on CA.
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2004
- Messages
- 42,927
- Reaction score
- 126,901
What you say about CA - leaving the water meter guy out - is not so far fetched as you think. I do not think Knox needs any such story, nor has she ever made claims of being molested.
*Heavy, heavy sigh*. We have been over that a thousand times. It was ILE who suggested him, not AK. She immediately recanted. As for the other, Jose Baez did overstep the bounds and did his own brilliance a disservice.
Yes, apparently the qualification he lacked is his ability to speak Italian. His research is still being used by the defense so there's seems to be no problem with his qualification as an expert in DNA analysis.
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2004
- Messages
- 42,927
- Reaction score
- 126,901
I see, so he was allowed to testify, but he couldn't speak Italian? Doesn't the Judge have to decide whether he qualifies as an expert? I don't recall that happening. Why didn't he just get an interpreter? If his testimony is so important - surely he would be willing to do what everyone else does when they don't speak a particular languge ... or was the Judge only allowing interpreters for other people?
No, I had read SPECIFICALLY that that was the ONLY thing which disqualified him, and they are using his report.
He did not testify, because he is an American, so could not be a witness. Does not matter that he did not speak Italian, and most people not from Italy don't. In any case he did not need an interpreter because was not called to testify. He is deemed an international expert. Go check his credentials if you like. They ARE using his report and analysis.
This piece speaks of the open letter which he and other forensic scientists signed. It names him as an official consultant and scientific advisor to the Knox defense.
It also says:
A professor of genetics at the University of Boise, Idaho, Dr Hampikian’s role with the Innocence Project is voluntary, but one he takes seriously. [. . . ]
“I can’t tell who is telling the truth or who is lying, but the DNA can tell,” he says. “Sometimes the Innocence Project is a bit of a misnomer. In two of the four exonerations, I developed evidence that led to the arrest of somebody new for the crime, so for some people we are the Guilty Project – and that’s an important part of what we do.”
This documents that Dr. Hampkian, like Dr. Johnson, is a consultant for the Knox defense team.
And further...Do the defense team and the experts it consults have a right to obtain the data in electronic form? Release is clearly routine in the United States, consistent with the principle of transparency, enunciated by Keith Inman and Norah Rudin. Good science does not change when one crosses the border between nations.
http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/04/prosecutions-failure-to-release.html
An interesting piece on problems with forensics:
DNA’s Dirty Little Secret
A forensic tool renowned for exonerating the innocent may actually be putting them in prison.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/1003.bobelian.html
DNA’s Dirty Little Secret
A forensic tool renowned for exonerating the innocent may actually be putting them in prison.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/1003.bobelian.html
New piece this morning from Candace Dempsey on Seattle blogs:
Inside Amanda Knoxs Appeal: The Emperor Has No Clothes
The evidence is burning off, says U.S. writer Zachary Nowak, direct from the Italian courtroom where former lovers Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are appealing their murder conviction. Its like that mist you see every morning, way down in the valley between Perugia and Assisi. It just disappears. This astonishes me. Its so clear.
Indeed, lack of proof is as obvious as the colossal crucifix that hangs over Judge Claudio Pratillo Hellmann in the age-old Hall of Frescoes. For reporters, thats the big difference between this new slow-motion spectacle and the 11-month circus that ended in the conviction of the two college students for the slashing of British scholar Meredith Kercher. Smalltime crook Rudy Guede, to whom the evidence points as the lone killer, was convicted in a fast-track trial of his own choosing. Hes fresh out of appeals.. . .
A Rolling Stone reporter was at the hearing. Whatd he have to say?
He talked to me about the banality of incompetence. Not that the local police are idiots or stupid, but that they dont have the training to investigate a murder. These people are rusty because they dont do murder cases a lot. Im sure theyre expert investigators in tracking down lost dogs and things like that. I dont know if these people went to college or to the police academy. Now theyre expected to solve a complicated murder case. This is not a complex murder, in my opinion, its simple, but if you make it complicated, then you have to investigate it right. Most of the investigation was ex post facto, after people were arrested. Before that, the police basically did depositions. You cant really call that investigating.
[. . . ]
Mignini recently changed the crime theory in a CNN interview. Now Amandas not the stabber. Shes outside the murder room, instigating the murder. Are we going to see a new motive at the end of this trial?
With Mignini, its like choose your own adventure. You know, those books where, after a couple of pages; they ask if you want to go through a different door. The starting point is different but the outcome is always same, the victim is always dead in a pool of blood.
http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2011/05/25/inside-amanda-knox%E2%80%99s-appeal-the-emperor-has-no-clothes/
Inside Amanda Knoxs Appeal: The Emperor Has No Clothes
The evidence is burning off, says U.S. writer Zachary Nowak, direct from the Italian courtroom where former lovers Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are appealing their murder conviction. Its like that mist you see every morning, way down in the valley between Perugia and Assisi. It just disappears. This astonishes me. Its so clear.
Indeed, lack of proof is as obvious as the colossal crucifix that hangs over Judge Claudio Pratillo Hellmann in the age-old Hall of Frescoes. For reporters, thats the big difference between this new slow-motion spectacle and the 11-month circus that ended in the conviction of the two college students for the slashing of British scholar Meredith Kercher. Smalltime crook Rudy Guede, to whom the evidence points as the lone killer, was convicted in a fast-track trial of his own choosing. Hes fresh out of appeals.. . .
A Rolling Stone reporter was at the hearing. Whatd he have to say?
He talked to me about the banality of incompetence. Not that the local police are idiots or stupid, but that they dont have the training to investigate a murder. These people are rusty because they dont do murder cases a lot. Im sure theyre expert investigators in tracking down lost dogs and things like that. I dont know if these people went to college or to the police academy. Now theyre expected to solve a complicated murder case. This is not a complex murder, in my opinion, its simple, but if you make it complicated, then you have to investigate it right. Most of the investigation was ex post facto, after people were arrested. Before that, the police basically did depositions. You cant really call that investigating.
[. . . ]
Mignini recently changed the crime theory in a CNN interview. Now Amandas not the stabber. Shes outside the murder room, instigating the murder. Are we going to see a new motive at the end of this trial?
With Mignini, its like choose your own adventure. You know, those books where, after a couple of pages; they ask if you want to go through a different door. The starting point is different but the outcome is always same, the victim is always dead in a pool of blood.
http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2011/05/25/inside-amanda-knox%E2%80%99s-appeal-the-emperor-has-no-clothes/
Just dowloaded the second version of the translation of the CNN Mignini transcript, which is somewhat clearer in this section:
Mignini: The magistrate, the prosecutor has an obligation, let’s say, in the current legal system, to seek, he is an impartial body, that has the obligation to seek the truth and if new evidence emerges which make [a person] appear to be credible, which make a person appear to be unrelated to a crime, [then the prosecutor] has the obligation to request that all charges be dropped or, if during the trial, [to ask for an] acquittal. I myself have come across many times, during a trial, in light of witnesses, new witnesses, who were produced again in other cases, I asked for an acquittal. Anyone who knows me knows that this has occurred many times.
But in this case I had, let’s say, during the investigation phase and during the trial, I made, we made our requests, we explained them, we justified them, and the court gave, acknowledged the validity of this case. Then there is an instance of appeal. There is the appellate level. Now, I will not discuss this because it is on-going.
49'11'' Mignini: The phone call, for example, another thing that had a considerable influence on the investigation was the phone call that Amanda had with her mother in the middle of the night in Seattle, even before [the body] was discovered. This is another thing that comes to mind, even before the body was found.
19'52’’ There is a call that is made in an hour, now I do not remember, it was I think, I do not remember exactly, I think it was 3 AM in Seattle, I think.
Mignini: The magistrate, the prosecutor has an obligation, let’s say, in the current legal system, to seek, he is an impartial body, that has the obligation to seek the truth and if new evidence emerges which make [a person] appear to be credible, which make a person appear to be unrelated to a crime, [then the prosecutor] has the obligation to request that all charges be dropped or, if during the trial, [to ask for an] acquittal. I myself have come across many times, during a trial, in light of witnesses, new witnesses, who were produced again in other cases, I asked for an acquittal. Anyone who knows me knows that this has occurred many times.
But in this case I had, let’s say, during the investigation phase and during the trial, I made, we made our requests, we explained them, we justified them, and the court gave, acknowledged the validity of this case. Then there is an instance of appeal. There is the appellate level. Now, I will not discuss this because it is on-going.
49'11'' Mignini: The phone call, for example, another thing that had a considerable influence on the investigation was the phone call that Amanda had with her mother in the middle of the night in Seattle, even before [the body] was discovered. This is another thing that comes to mind, even before the body was found.
19'52’’ There is a call that is made in an hour, now I do not remember, it was I think, I do not remember exactly, I think it was 3 AM in Seattle, I think.
Otto, my comment was tongue in cheek and not to be taken literally, sorry that wasn't clear. I have no reason to believe he was disqualified in any manner other than what SMK has provided. Unless you can bring evidence to the table that states otherwise, personal incredulity isn't going to score any points.
- Status
Similar threads
