Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #13

[SMK]

Am loathe to bring in other forums, but sometimes one finds information. Just was reading on IIP that the Italian Supreme Court ruled on the Sabrina Misseri case, that she must stay and serve out her full prison term. I was somewhat familiar with the case, but a poster there, who is also a big poster on PMF, has said that the father was harassed into naming his young daughter as an accomplice during an interrogation (his niece and the girl's cousin was murdered) and that it seemingly cannot now be reversed or taken back. I am wondering if anyone here knows of the case, and whether this bodes ill for Knox and Sollecito? http://bari.repubblica.it/cronaca/2011/05/17/news/sarah-16388217/?ref=HREC2-8

 

[wasnt_me]

Of course she'd found the front door unlocked, assumed one of the roommates was running a short errand and so left the door unlocked while she showered.

So for all she knew, she would come to face-to-face with a roommate (and even that roommate's friends or boyfriend) when she left the bathroom. I might not be so brazen about nudity under those conditions.

That's where we differ! :woohoo:

Seriously, the bathroom wasn't a mile away. I think she could have made it. someone might have seen some pink buns when she closed the door. I would have cracked and called out. If I heard no answer, I would have run for it.

but picking up a nasty bathmat and shielding yourself does not a murderer make. It does prove that AK didn't look at cleanliness like the others in the house. That's about it.

 

[wasnt_me]

Yes, his brother is Antonio Aviello, and he fled Perugia and is a fugitive from justice. I actually had a bit of hope until I read that article about all of his constant stories..... As Nova says, he likely simply enjoys the attention..................

He SAYS he has a brother, but no one has paid his story an investigative attention, so I wonder if they've even investigated enough to know that he really, seriously has a brother. Know what I'm saying? Just like RG claimed to have an affair with MK. They looked into it to see if it was true. Just wondering if they looked into it to see if he really did have a brother named Antonio.

 

[SMK]

Great article, SMK! I knew there was a problem with the odds given on DNA matches, but I didn't really understand the math. That article explains it quite clearly.

ETA: I saw a "48 Hours" program about a Michigan undergrad who was killed and dumped in a cemetery in the 1970s. They found bodily fluids in a few places and a single drop of blood on her body. Thirty-some years later, a lab matched the fluids to one man and the blood drop to another. The latter was only four-years-old at the time of the crime. The former was convicted of murder, even though he was a happily married accountant with no history of violence; his DNA was in the database because he had been convicted of embezzling from an employer. The prosecution couldn't even place him in the same county as the corpse at the time of the murder; an eyewitness had mentioned a particular car, but the prosecution couldn't prove the defendant ever had a car of that type.

There was literally nothing to convict him but the DNA testing that also fingered a four-year-old, yet lab worker after lab worker took the stand to testify there was no possibility that the results were in error.

DNA is indeed a double-edged sword in the search for truth. But it works quite well in cases such as those of AK and RS, where the DNA can be used for purposes of exclusion.

OMG, yes, a two-edged sword for certain, yikes!!!

 

[wasnt_me]

.

A Rolling Stone reporter was at the hearing. What’d 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 don’t have the training to investigate a murder. These people are rusty because they don’t do murder cases a lot. I’m sure they’re expert investigators in tracking down lost dogs and things like that. I don’t know if these people went to college or to the police academy. Now they’re expected to solve a complicated murder case. This is not a complex murder, in my opinion, it’s 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 can’t really call that investigating.

This is precisely why I was questioning Mig's credentials earlier. It's precisely why I'd asked what kind of police investigative training he'd had, but then I'd been "told" that I wasnt "allowed to sleuth" him.

 

[SMK]

This is precisely why I was questioning Mig's credentials earlier. It's precisely why I'd asked what kind of police investigative training he'd had, but then I'd been "told" that I was "allowed to sleuth" him.

Well, knowing his background should be par for the course. But I imagine his bio is in Italian.

 

[wasnt_me]

It's funny how a phone call like that can be construed to be ambiguous and suspicious by saying it was made before the body was discovered and that it was 3 in the morning for her mother. The phone call was made at 12:47, just three minutes before Rafaelle would call his sister asking her for advice and she then told him to call the police. So basically Amanda had returned to the cottage with Rafaelle, seen the broken window and blood, called their relatives and then immediately called the police. But of course, we can make this suspicious by simply reducing it to "nothing had happened yet" as if there was no reason to call her mom, but as usual we then have to ignore the context of the other calls immediately afterward.

The strange thing is that Something HAD happened. She'd already been in contact with FR about the strangeness. FR had already instructed her to go back to the house. She'd seen blood, a broken window, feces in the toilet, and couldn't get into MK's room. I'd probably call my momma, too, if I didn't know how to call the police.

 

[wasnt_me]

A DNA expert working for the defense is having lunch with a family member of a defendant and a family friend. Not exactly watergate. What exactly do you think this photo proves? Now if this was a photo of the independent experts dining with family of the accused I could see some sort of point here.

At least the photo is out in the open, not "untranscribed" because the police's budget is too low.

 

[wasnt_me]

Interesting piece in relation to all of this here: Excerpt, and then continues at link:


The Independent DNA Experts and the Electronic Data Files
Part 28 in the Knox/Sollecito case

Judge Hellmann appointed two independent experts to review the DNA forensic evidence in Amanda Knox’s and Raffaele Sollecito’s appeal. Recently, the experts asked for more time, and reports suggested that they did not yet have access to documents the felt were necessary to carry out this task.

According to Candace Dempsey, forensic scientist under whose supervision the tests were carried out, Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni, turned aside this request. She wrote to Judge Hellman, “In reference to the request of acquisition of CD RAW DATA, one is obligated to explain that the information in the form of this file in the sequencer is never an integral part of the technical report, as far as the object being tested by the forensic geneticist, namely the DNA profile, and that it is already reported in the electropherogram printout, connected to the technical report on which all of the useful date and an evaluation of the genetic profile are reported… Finally, the request asked for by the expert consultants relative to the acquisition of the CD RAW DATA appears incomplete in so much as the name of the ‘sample file’ requested was not specified…”

To help me consider Dr. Stefanoni's refusal refusal, I have consulted with DNA forensics professionals Dan Krane and Jason Gilder of Forensic Bioinformatics, and I gratefully acknowledge their help. The continued lack of file release with respect to the DNA profiling of this case has been a recurring theme of this blog.

Her arguments against releasing further information are essentially:
(1) All of the necessary data are already in the paper printouts of the electropherograms.
(2) The request for data files is insufficiently specific.
http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2011/05/independent-dna-experts-and-electronic.html

This article gives an excellent explanation about why the defense needs what it needs to evaluate the DNA. Though I don't understand it technically, I get the gist of what's important about those files, an to say the defense doesn't need them is ludicras. To say the defense should know the names of the files is equally crazy since the techs have kept said files AWAY from the defense. If they can't get access, if the techs won't turn them over, how can the defense know the file names?

That's like my boss asking me for the files I keep on all the clients, and for me to say he has to give me specific file names. he might know I keep payment plan information, credit card information, but he does not know that I name the file PPA or CCA. he also doesn't know i that I might have to name it "client name, file number PPA 1" and then if the client has two, that I name it the same thing but add PPA 2 at the end. So for him to have to name every single file I have in order for me to turn it over....?

Crazy.

 

[wasnt_me]

Yep, just read it, and of course this had occurred to me as well. Professionals will do pro bono work in the hopes that if it succeeds, it will raise their publicity and credibility, and if it fails, it will, as Fiona says, "go quietly away". Believe me, that had crossed my mind. We shall see which way it goes. Of course even if it fails, he can still maintain that in his expert opinion, there was no DNA to convict...............

Why else do it, besides for the love of the job? Doing pro bono work to help elevate your career is certainly not evil, has no underhanded motives to it, and in no way invalidates his findings. So I'm not sure how this makes him an unbelievable or unqualified expert.

 

[wasnt_me]

"Guess who's back, back again? Frankie's back...tell a friend...Guess who's back; guess who's back, guess who's back?"

(--Parodied from eminem, "Slim shady!")

Frank's back with a new post. Sorry if it was posted before.


http://perugiashock.com/2011/05/22/award-for-busting-knox-sollecito-and-lumumba-2/

 

[wasnt_me]

I was just reading IIP, where a poster claims to have a letter from RS. I think you have to be registered to see this post:

http://www.injusticeinperugiaforum.org/the-computers-from-raffaele-s-recent-letter-t953.html


If you can't see it, then I'll put it on my google docs. I didn't think I should paste it all in here, but RS goes into great detail about his computer. It's very interesting, if it is really a letter from him. I don't know because of course we don't see the actual document. So take it with a grain of salt.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/...nTrbE4dp9ac38c/edit?hl=en_US&authkey=COTf0MAM

ONCE AGAIN. DO NOT KNOW VALIDITY and I WILL NOT DEBATE IT. This is just fodder for the discussion.

The letter states that they had 4 computers, of course 3 got fried. According to the letter, the police had his computer November 6th and during his interrogation, they were apparently accessing the mac to corroberate his story. The mac must have run out of battery and went dead. So when it came back up, according to the letter, all the files had resaved over with Nov. 6th date.

But it says that the police ignored:

Again on my computer I had a keyboard light which switches on when someone uses the keyboard and switches off when someone is not using it after a few minutes ( 2 or 5, I don’t remember). Well every keyboard switch is “quoted” (reported) by the OS (in this case MAC OS X) on a log file named “XWINDOW.LOG”. This file was completely ignored by the postal police. It shows that on the 1st November my key board was never switched off for more than 10 minutes and in 10 minutes no one can leave his home, go to another, kill and come back with such a distance between those houses.
On the other hand, the keyboard light can also be blocked by a video viewer. If you would think that I’ve premeditated the murder, building such a weird alibi, then everything is possible but the truth is that I was at home with Amanda, watching videos and often simply together without taking any notice of what was happening on my computer.

So that's his story. Either videos were playing or music was playing, and once those files ended, I guess he opened another one. In the meantime, they cooked, ate, cleaned up the water on the floor, I guess.

 

[SMK]

I was just reading IIP, where a poster claims to have a letter from RS. I think you have to be registered to see this post:

http://www.injusticeinperugiaforum.org/the-computers-from-raffaele-s-recent-letter-t953.html


If you can't see it, then I'll put it on my google docs. I didn't think I should paste it all in here, but RS goes into great detail about his computer. It's very interesting, if it is really a letter from him. I don't know because of course we don't see the actual document. So take it with a grain of salt.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/...nTrbE4dp9ac38c/edit?hl=en_US&authkey=COTf0MAM

ONCE AGAIN. DO NOT KNOW VALIDITY and I WILL NOT DEBATE IT. This is just fodder for the discussion.

The letter states that they had 4 computers, of course 3 got fried. According to the letter, the police had his computer November 6th and during his interrogation, they were apparently accessing the mac to corroberate his story. The mac must have run out of battery and went dead. So when it came back up, according to the letter, all the files had resaved over with Nov. 6th date.

But it says that the police ignored:

Again on my computer I had a keyboard light which switches on when someone uses the keyboard and switches off when someone is not using it after a few minutes ( 2 or 5, I don’t remember). Well every keyboard switch is “quoted” (reported) by the OS (in this case MAC OS X) on a log file named “XWINDOW.LOG”. This file was completely ignored by the postal police. It shows that on the 1st November my key board was never switched off for more than 10 minutes and in 10 minutes no one can leave his home, go to another, kill and come back with such a distance between those houses.
On the other hand, the keyboard light can also be blocked by a video viewer. If you would think that I’ve premeditated the murder, building such a weird alibi, then everything is possible but the truth is that I was at home with Amanda, watching videos and often simply together without taking any notice of what was happening on my computer.

So that's his story. Either videos were playing or music was playing, and once those files ended, I guess he opened another one. In the meantime, they cooked, ate, cleaned up the water on the floor, I guess.

Wow. I have no doubt that this is authentic, because on IIP they have a keen interest and a great method for people to contact Raff and Amanda, and they encourage members to do so often - when I wrote to Amanda, I had it confirmed by her family that she had read my email. I hope RS is telling the defense to factor this all in!

 

[SMK]

"Guess who's back, back again? Frankie's back...tell a friend...Guess who's back; guess who's back, guess who's back?"

(--Parodied from eminem, "Slim shady!")

Frank's back with a new post. Sorry if it was posted before.


http://perugiashock.com/2011/05/22/award-for-busting-knox-sollecito-and-lumumba-2/

Oh, wow--:great:so Frank still posts and gives them to IIP??? Hope this does not get him in (gulp) trouble with his slander suit?

 

[otto]

This is precisely why I was questioning Mig's credentials earlier. It's precisely why I'd asked what kind of police investigative training he'd had, but then I'd been "told" that I wasnt "allowed to sleuth" him.

There's a difference between a prosecutor and someone that claims he was approved as an expert in an Italian trial even though there is no record of him being qualified.

In the Brad Cooper trial, people that the defense believed would be qualified as experts were only partially qualified. In the case of DNA in Merdith's murder trial, since LNC DNA was introduced, I would expect that someone could be partially qualified, but not fully qualified if they were not an expert in LNC DNA. Those that were qualified, or partially qualified, as experts most certainly make their CVs public during trial as that is the foundation of their expertise. The CV of a public official is not public information as they've been qualified as officers of the court long before they enter the courtroom.

Anyone that is presented as an expert in court has to present their CV to justify that they are an expert, but a prosecutor does not. The expert's CV is part of court testimony. Snooping the personal history of a prosecutor, like the three prosecutors in the Brad Cooper trial, is outside of what is relevant to the trial.

 

[Nova]

The strange thing is that Something HAD happened. She'd already been in contact with FR about the strangeness. FR had already instructed her to go back to the house. She'd seen blood, a broken window, feces in the toilet, and couldn't get into MK's room. I'd probably call my momma, too, if I didn't know how to call the police.

Or were reluctant to call police because they didn't speak your native tongue. I don't meant to harp on this, but I think it was key to AK's behavior that morning. What has been called "flakiness" was really being intimidated by trying to report a crime in a language in which she wasn't fluent.

 

[Nova]

There's a difference between a prosecutor and someone that claims he was approved as an expert in an Italian trial even though there is no record of him being qualified.

In the Brad Cooper trial, people that the defense believed would be qualified as experts were only partially qualified. In the case of DNA in Merdith's murder trial, since LNC DNA was introduced, I would expect that someone could be partially qualified, but not fully qualified if they were not an expert in LNC DNA. Those that were qualified, or partially qualified, as experts most certainly make their CVs public during trial as that is the foundation of their expertise. The CV of a public official is not public information as they've been qualified as officers of the court long before they enter the courtroom.

Anyone that is presented as an expert in court has to present their CV to justify that they are an expert, but a prosecutor does not. The expert's CV is part of court testimony. Snooping the personal history of a prosecutor, like the three prosecutors in the Brad Cooper trial, is outside of what is relevant to the trial.

Yet for purposes of discussion you frequently insist on the authority of the Perugia prosecutor and judges. Questioning their expertise is entirely fair.

 

[otto]

Or were reluctant to call police because they didn't speak your native tongue. I don't meant to harp on this, but I think it was key to AK's behavior that morning. What has been called "flakiness" was really being intimidated by trying to report a crime in a language in which she wasn't fluent.

Amanda, upon seeing the blood and other irregularities in the cottage, could have called Filomina or Raffaele and report the situation. According to her, she got the mop, walked through Perugia with a mop at noon (no one reported seeing someone with a mop), had lunch and supposedly mopped a water spill from 16 hours earlier, then mentioned the situation to Raffaele, then called made some phone calls.

That doesn't strike me as someone that was intimidated. Surely she was sensible enough that if she arrived home in Seattle to find the front door open and blood on the bathmat, she would have known what to do.

 

[otto]

Yet for purposes of discussion you frequently insist on the authority of the Perugia prosecutor and judges. Questioning their expertise is entirely fair.

I suppose it depends on whether the discussion is about the trial, and trial evidence (like the CV of qualified court experts), or whether the discussion is about the people that are merely doing their jobs. For example, in the trial of Casey Anthony, the neighbor's (shovel) personal history is not relevant, nor is the prosecutor's CV. If there is an expert, his or her CV is entered into trial testimony and part of the trial discussion.

Do you think that the personal details of the prosecutors in the Anthony trial should be open for discussion and criticism?

 

[Nova]

Amanda, upon seeing the blood and other irregularities in the cottage, could have called Filomina or Raffaele and report the situation. According to her, she got the mop, walked through Perugia with a mop at noon (no one reported seeing someone with a mop), had lunch and supposedly mopped a water spill from 16 hours earlier, then mentioned the situation to Raffaele, then called made some phone calls.

That doesn't strike me as someone that was intimidated. Surely she was sensible enough that if she arrived home in Seattle to find the front door open and blood on the bathmat, she would have known what to do.

Not necessarily. You've been given numerous examples of people who didn't recognize a violent crime had taken place because they weren't expecting one. You simply ignore anything that doesn't fit your narrow and highly biased (against AK) scenario.