Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #13

[Allusonz]

This next thing, I don't understand at all, so anyone who knows what they are referring to, let me know.

Also in RAF'S APPEAL:

From what I can understand, they are contending that RAF was disallowed access or had delayed access to counsel. From what I can glean from the document they are saying that the court apparently recognized this but did not provide documentation validating the reason for it. Apparently, without detailed reasoning and a "good excuse" for it, it's illegal. This is about 30 or so pages into the appeal.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/15HcqNZWrCPMyMfOBfHMuVpOmcFrteW82Xh5Fw-gmlWs/edit?hl=en_US

Someone please help me to understand this.

I am going on memory here but IIRC AK, RS, and PL were denied access to a lawyer until their first hearings. Like you have often pointed out RS tends to get ignored in many of the discussions as so much emphasis is put on AK but both did not get to see a lawyer till they went to the first hearing after they were arrested.

 

[wasnt_me]

And according to the appeal of RS, they were denied a right to an attorney upon arrest, then.

Thanks Allusonz.

RS's appeal is an incredible read. A few things I don't agree with, but overall, I feel it really does make a strong case for dismissal and not just based on the knife and the bra clasp either. It's a riveting read for anyone invested in the case.

I'm at the part now, where the defense discusses the cherry picking of statements by the witnesses that night. The half deaf lady, the woman who lived below her, the passengers of the stalled car on the street, the tow truck guy and the homeless guy VERSUS themselves and how their stories do NOT match the time frames, DOT, etc.

I had always wanted to put this together, but it was hard, considering everyone's times are all over the place, esp the homeless guy's.

I might have to read it a couple times before I can write it out here and explain to everyone what the problems are with the statements.

I'm reading this and doing a pirates of the Caribbean marathon. I need to just go to sleep at this point. "Captain Jack, Johnny Depp, Davie Jones, Giant Squid!" (from the new Michael Bolton parody.)

 

[otto]

I am going on memory here but IIRC AK, RS, and PL were denied access to a lawyer until their first hearings. Like you have often pointed out RS tends to get ignored in many of the discussions as so much emphasis is put on AK but both did not get to see a lawyer till they went to the first hearing after they were arrested.

Different country, different laws.

The victim's family has no objections to the judicial process in Italy. They believe that justice was served.

 

[Allusonz]

Different country, different laws.

The victim's family has no objections to the judicial process in Italy. They believe that justice was served.

I believe that the Kercher's have more class than to believe that an individual should not have the fundamental right to legal representation which is the LAW in Italy. This was in response to another posters question with respect to RS's appeal.

You simply weaken your position with comments such as this and I don't believe this accurately portrays the Kercher's position

 

[Allusonz]

And according to the appeal of RS, they were denied a right to an attorney upon arrest, then.

Thanks Allusonz.

RS's appeal is an incredible read. A few things I don't agree with, but overall, I feel it really does make a strong case for dismissal and not just based on the knife and the bra clasp either. It's a riveting read for anyone invested in the case.

I'm at the part now, where the defense discusses the cherry picking of statements by the witnesses that night. The half deaf lady, the woman who lived below her, the passengers of the stalled car on the street, the tow truck guy and the homeless guy VERSUS themselves and how their stories do NOT match the time frames, DOT, etc.

I had always wanted to put this together, but it was hard, considering everyone's times are all over the place, esp the homeless guy's.

I might have to read it a couple times before I can write it out here and explain to everyone what the problems are with the statements.

I'm reading this and doing a pirates of the Caribbean marathon. I need to just go to sleep at this point. "Captain Jack, Johnny Depp, Davie Jones, Giant Squid!" (from the new Michael Bolton parody.)

I agree!! It continues to astound me the number of holes in the Motivation Report that allowed for so many items on appeal. Although appreciative of the document the reasoning behind it still amazes me.

 

[SMK]

I believe that the Kercher's have more class than to believe that an individual should not have the fundamental right to legal representation which is the LAW in Italy. This was in response to another posters question with respect to RS's appeal.

You simply weaken your position with comments such as this and I don't believe this accurately portrays the Kercher's position

I think also that the Kerchers had enough to handle with their tragedy and their grief, and cannot be expected to probe deeply into AK and RS's position. But Italy grants them the right to the appeal process.

 

[Allusonz]

QUOTE=SMK;6578300]Oh, I understand, no problem - I just hope there is nothing in all this which could make things worse (make the independent panel feel antagonized or pressured and consequently angry or defiant)....just wonder about the wisdom of the timing.....[/QUOTE]


Maybe this will help. They don't feel this will hurt her case

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/43209006#43209006

 

[otto]

With recent references to Knox as the neo-hippy ... here's a visual of Knox weeks before the murder.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...oxy-Knoxys-role-Meredith-Kerchers-murder.html

"... posted to MySpace ... captioned it "the Nazi"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/04/two-faces-of-amanda-knox

 

[otto]

I believe that the Kercher's have more class than to believe that an individual should not have the fundamental right to legal representation which is the LAW in Italy. This was in response to another posters question with respect to RS's appeal.

You simply weaken your position with comments such as this and I don't believe this accurately portrays the Kercher's position

Knox had legal representation per the laws in Italy. The fundamental right to legal representation that you are expecting, and referring to, is US law.

The victim's family are satisfied with the legal process and verdict.

 

[otto]

I think also that the Kerchers had enough to handle with their tragedy and their grief, and cannot be expected to probe deeply into AK and RS's position. But Italy grants them the right to the appeal process.

The Kerchers had a lawyer representing them in court throughout the trial. Being aware of the case, laws and decisions has nothing to do with having time to probe into the murderer's "position". They are aware of the complaints made by Knox and Sollecito, and do not support them. They attended some of the court proceedings and their living daughter is fluent in Italian. They have had full access to all the information that they want and need, and I don't believe for a moment that they buried their heads in the sand due to grief ... especially given the antics we have seen from the culprits.

 

[otto]

I agree!! It continues to astound me the number of holes in the Motivation Report that allowed for so many items on appeal. Although appreciative of the document the reasoning behind it still amazes me.

The list of items that were appealed was very lengthy indeed. The result of the appeal is that three items from that very long list were considered for appeal ... the rest of the items were denied.

 

[Nova]

I was reading Raf's appeal, and I didn't know that it was the defense who originally discovered the semen stains.

They discovered them in the fall of 2009 and the court refused to test them. You guys know why, but of course it's absurd to:
1. refuse to test stains in a sexual assault case.
2. say the victim was sexually active with her bf and would therefore sleep on semen stained pillow cases for days.
3. make the above statement in light of the fact that the stained substance is also dried into RG's bloody footprint.
4. Say that the sperm cannot be dated due to MK's sex life, but then turn around and say that "RS'S" alleged DNA on the bra clasp is admissible though it cannot be dated, either.

The defense thinks it might lend credence to the jail house informant's story that RG said he and his friend were there, and the friend murdered MK.

If a dot of DNA on a bra clasp is all it takes to remove RS from society, then semen stains belonging to a new suspect should be enough to cast reasonable doubt to bra contamination and to AK and RS's presence.

It still makes zero sense that RS and AK would aid anyone in forcing sex out of MK.

I don't see why they couldn't test the sperm against RS, RG, and MK's bF. And ask the BF when he and MK last had sex. Did they ask him that at least? the appeal does not say.

It just goes to show that ILE had WORSE than tunnel vision: they actively avoided testing anything that might point to a perp other than AK or RS.

 

[otto]

It just goes to show that ILE had WORSE than tunnel vision: they actively avoided testing anything that might point to a perp other than AK or RS.

How do you figure that? Semen stains underneath evidence that can be dated to the night of the murder cannot be narrowed down in terms of a date. Raffaele's DNA on Meredith's bra cannot have happened at any time other than the night of the murder ... especially since Raffaele maintains that he has never been in Meredith's bedroom prior to the night of the murder.

 

[Nova]

With recent references to Knox as the neo-hippy ... here's a visual of Knox weeks before the murder.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...oxy-Knoxys-role-Meredith-Kerchers-murder.html

"... posted to MySpace ... captioned it "the Nazi"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/04/two-faces-of-amanda-knox

I think even otto realizes there's no actual evidence against Amanda Knox--since he has yet again trotted out the photo of her posing with a machine gun as a joke.

 

[Nova]

Knox had legal representation per the laws in Italy. The fundamental right to legal representation that you are expecting, and referring to, is US law.

The victim's family are satisfied with the legal process and verdict.

They are not on trial.

This retreat to claiming to speak for the victim is just one more admission on your part that the evidence against AK and RS doesn't stand on its own.

 

[Nova]

The list of items that were appealed was very lengthy indeed. The result of the appeal is that three items from that very long list were considered for appeal ... the rest of the items were denied.

Do you have a link for that claim? TIA.

 

[Nova]

How do you figure that? Semen stains underneath evidence that can be dated to the night of the murder cannot be narrowed down in terms of a date. Raffaele's DNA on Meredith's bra cannot have happened at any time other than the night of the murder ... especially since Raffaele maintains that he has never been in Meredith's bedroom prior to the night of the murder.

What is YOUR logic here?

If the semen stain belongs to MK's boyfriend, I'll agree it could have been deposited at any time prior to the murder. But if the stain belongs to RS, say, then the same principle applies as the bra DNA. And if the stain belongs to someone other than RS OR RG, then we have a whole new set of questions to ask.

Your smug satisfaction with sloppy police work and miscarriages of justice in Italy does you no credit.

 

[SMK]

With recent references to Knox as the neo-hippy ... here's a visual of Knox weeks before the murder.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...oxy-Knoxys-role-Meredith-Kerchers-murder.html

"... posted to MySpace ... captioned it "the Nazi"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/04/two-faces-of-amanda-knox

I know, Otto, but this was taken by her Aunt in a museum, at the request of her Aunt. She really was a neo-hippie. :razz:

 

[SMK]

Do you have a link for that claim? TIA.

In response to:

Originally Posted by otto
The list of items that were appealed was very lengthy indeed. The result of the appeal is that three items from that very long list were considered for appeal ... the rest of the items were denied.

This is all I have ever seen:

 

[otto]

They are not on trial.

This retreat to claiming to speak for the victim is just one more admission on your part that the evidence against AK and RS doesn't stand on its own.

Quite true, the victim and her family are not on trial. It is important to respect that victim and her family. They are confident that the legal system in Italy proceeded as it should and that the end result was a just verdict.

The evidence against the murderers was accepted by a jury and the unanimous decision of guilty was decided. This decision does not imply that the jury retreated, it implies that there was overwhelming evidence of guilt. The victim's family has said that it is an offense to them for the murderers to be cheered on and treated like celebrities.

Suggestions that I know what Knox thinks, or speak for the victim's family, are absurd. The victim's family has spoken for themselves, and I think it is important for us to pay attention to the victim and her family. This site seems to be all about the poor little murderers, so obviously someone has to mention the victim once in a while - to restate their position regarding the guilty parties. Is that a problem?