Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #13

[Malkmus]

The father of the victim, who probably knows more about this case than everyone, has said that between the two, they provided 9 alibis. Would you doubt the father of the victim? Would you suppose that he is making things up, or is it quite possible that he knows exactly whereof he speaks?

Yes, I doubt him when he says "It is said" that AK and RS had nine alibis.

Apparently Mr Kercher is aware of cases where DNA was collected years after the fact and it was accepted as evidence.

The late collection date is only one of many problems surrounding the bra clasp.
And I think the victim's family should be left out of the discussion in general after this. They shouldn't be used as a barometer for the quality of evidence in this case.

Does any motive for murder make sense?

Murder is a nonsensical act. But the reasons for doing so have to be grounded in reality. Killing someone over money or a lover's spat are very real situations that happen every day. Helping a man you've met once or twice have sex with your roommate and then recruiting your boyfriend of one week into stabbing her because she refuses to participate is practically unheard of.

 

[Malkmus]

I don't think that the handful of people that think the jury got it wrong has any bearing on the legal case ... at least I hope not.

You missed my point completely, I'm afraid.

The victim's family, on the other hand, had a legal representative in the courtroom during the trial. If anyone knows what happened during the trial, it would be the victim's family ... not some people in another country. On that basis, I would give the family's conclusions about the trial far more weight.

See my above post re the family's opinion.

 

[otto]

Yes, I doubt him when he says "It is said" that AK and RS had nine alibis.



The late collection date is only one of many problems surrounding the bra clasp.
And I think the victim's family should be left out of the discussion in general after this. They shouldn't be used as a barometer for the quality of evidence in this case.



Murder is a nonsensical act. But the reasons for doing so have to be grounded in reality. Killing someone over money or a lover's spat are very real situations that happen every day. Helping a man you've met once or twice have sex with your roommate and then recruiting your boyfriend of one week into stabbing her because she refuses to participate is practically unheard of.

I don't really understand why some would prefer that the voice of the victim (the family) be excluded from the discussion. I have never seen it suggested that Sharon Rocha's comments should be excluded from the discussion of Laci's Peterson's murder, or that Cindy Anthony's comments should be excluded from the discussion of Caylee's murder. Is there any particular reason why we should exclude discussion of articles published by Meredith's father? He is a journalist, just like any other journalist, commenting on the case ... with the added benefit that he has all the facts of the case.

Why isn't the late collection date of DNA in the case of Morgan Harrington a problem? That evidence connects directly to a violent sex offender, so it's quite likely that the DNA (that was exposed to the elements for four months) is from the murderer. Why would DNA in a closed room for six weeks be a problem? If snow, rain, wind, melt and exposure to the elements doesn't interfere with DNA evidence, how does a closed bedroom interfere with DNA evidence?

You forgot to mention the motive that we are seeing in today's youth and young adults: the thrill kill, the drugged up murder that has no explanation. No one can make sense out of that, not even drugged up murderers that have sobered up.

 

[Nova]

Meredith's family believes that justice has been served. They do not agree that the murderers should be treated as celebrities and victims. The Kerchers do not believe that the Italians are corrupt, incompetent, or prone to conspiracy theories.

If justice for Meredith is the objective, and the victim's family - who speak for the victim - believe justice has been done, then why so many suggestions that there is something wrong with the justice system and the verdict?

Victim's families almost always identify with and support the prosecution, as we've discussed here before. It's only significant in cases such as the West Memphis 3 where the relatives of victims break from the official, prosecution position.

 

[Nova]

Would you ever say that about Laci Peterson's mother? That she is simply wrong? What about all the other victims where the guilty parties complain that their sweet little angel couldn't have committed murder? Is it reasonable to suggest that after the verdict, the victim's family is simply wrong and the guilty parties are the victims?

It is when they are wrong.

 

[Nova]

Would you prefer if I copied all the news links from the Meredith Kercher website appeals page and post them here?

No, you could answer an honest question in a straightforward way.

Or not.

 

[Nova]

The same logic that applies to the semen stain should apply to the bra clasp. How in the world do we know that RS and MK DID NOT have a chance encounter that caused his DNA to get there? If it is in fact truly his DNA on it. If they say they cannot date the semen, then it should hold true that they cannot date the DNA on the bra clasp, whether it's his or not. This must be true since they discounted the other dna that was also found on the clasp. they didn't identify whose that was either. Why?

Because they disregarded any piece of evidence that didn't narrowly support the case they were trying to make.

For all we know, RS helped the AK and MS do their laundry earlier in the week.

But given that a live broadcast was scheduled in advance for the discovery of the bra clasp, I think there's a very good chance RS' DNA was planted there.

 

[otto]

No, you could answer an honest question in a straightforward way.

Or not.

I provided a link that contained most of the news reports about the appeal, added a link with information about the appeal process and then added some information about the "de nuovo" trial process in Italy. I'm not sure how else I can respond to your comment that you are unable to find any information about the appeal.

Could you perhaps clarify what you mean with your comment above?

 

[Malkmus]

I don't really understand why some would prefer that the voice of the victim (the family) be excluded from the discussion. I have never seen it suggested that Sharon Rocha's comments should be excluded from the discussion of Laci's Peterson's murder, or that Cindy Anthony's comments should be excluded from the discussion of Caylee's murder. Is there any particular reason why we should exclude discussion of articles published by Meredith's father? He is a journalist, just like any other journalist, commenting on the case ... with the added benefit that he has all the facts of the case.

Why isn't the late collection date of DNA in the case of Morgan Harrington a problem? That evidence connects directly to a violent sex offender, so it's quite likely that the DNA (that was exposed to the elements for four months) is from the murderer. Why would DNA in a closed room for six weeks be a problem? If snow, rain, wind, melt and exposure to the elements doesn't interfere with DNA evidence, how does a closed bedroom interfere with DNA evidence?

You forgot to mention the motive that we are seeing in today's youth and young adults: the thrill kill, the drugged up murder that has no explanation. No one can make sense out of that, not even drugged up murderers that have sobered up.

We've already acknowledged Mr. Kercher's sentiments, and we empathize with him. Beyond that, adding his views to the debate over the validity of the evidence is unnecessary and irrelevant.

I've told you there are other problems with the DNA on the clasp. It also has the profiles of other unidentified people on it, we know it was moved from its original location, as well as being manhandled by multiple members of the forensic team on a (for some odd reason) live broadcast. And now it's been destroyed, preventing further testing. Several problems.

Otto, if you can cite a murder case that bares a similar motive to this one where the dynamic between the victim and accused are also similar, by all means show us. This has been attempted in the past and there have always been huge differences.

 

[Nova]

I will have to think about this.

I guess what srtikes me about this case is that we have a number of people discussing in this thread. I think everyone would say that their opinion is based on the facts of the case, correct? Yet there are two very different opinions that have formed.

So my question for everyone is:

What evidence, either brought into or removed from the case, would cause you to change your opinion as to whether RS and AK should be found guilty by the Italian courts? This is a different question from innocence/guilt.

For me, I believe that the prosecution did not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Things that could convince me that the decision was sound would be new items that could be forensically linked to RS and AK and the murder scene.

1. The "Semen" stain: if it was tested and found to belong to RS, it would be pretty damning.

2. Meredith's keys and/or the murder weapon: If they were found with both Meredith's blood and DNA or firgerprints from RS or AK -- would be pretty convincing.

I should note that I am not impressed with the quality shown so far in the case, however. I would want more transpanency on the forensics.

Something that would give me pause? If ILE found the tape of AK's interrogation and it was shown to have happened the way LE described andnothing like what AK has said happened. The interrogation should not count as evidence against her, however, so it wouldn't change my mind on guilty/not guilty even though I might be less inclined to believe her innnocent.

Well put, Monzoo. I think I'd have to see some clear forensic evidence placing AK or RS in the room with MK when she was murdered.

 

[otto]

We've already acknowledged Mr. Kercher's sentiments, and we empathize with him. Beyond that, adding his views to the debate over the validity of the evidence is unnecessary and irrelevant.

I've told you there are other problems with the DNA on the clasp. It also has the profiles of other unidentified people on it, we know it was moved from its original location, as well as being manhandled by multiple members of the forensic team on a (for some odd reason) live broadcast. And now it's been destroyed, preventing further testing. Several problems.

Otto, if you can cite a murder case that bares a similar motive to this one where the dynamic between the victim and accused are also similar, by all means show us. This has been attempted in the past and there have always been huge differences.

I disagree. When Sharon Rocha publicly stated when she shifted her support away from Scott, it was significant in terms of how others perceived the big picture. I think that this situation is no different. The fact that Meredith's family shifted their suspicions onto their daughter's roommate is relevant. The victim's family has more information about this case than any CNN talking head, dateline reporter, author or others that have attached themselves to this case, and their views are significant.

I'm curious why you want to exclude discussion of the victim's voice when discussing her murder ... is it because the discussion her goes directly against the victims' family's beliefs?

I'll await the appeal results to hear about the DNA, but at this time I don't see contamination as a problem.

I've got too much work to do to go searching for copycat cases ... but feel free. Thrill kill happens in the US ... with the case that first comes to mind being a teenager that killed her sister's friend to see what it felt like. There was no motive, no reason, no logic, no argument ... nothing more than a curiosity about death and an absence of a soul.

 

[Nova]

I provided a link that contained most of the news reports about the appeal, added a link with information about the appeal process and then added some information about the "de nuovo" trial process in Italy. I'm not sure how else I can respond to your comment that you are unable to find any information about the appeal.

Could you perhaps clarify what you mean with your comment above?

Yes, you did. Thank you. My response above was written before I saw your specific answer.

 

[Nova]

I disagree. When Sharon Rocha publicly stated when she shifted her support away from Scott, it was significant in terms of how others perceived the big picture. I think that this situation is no different. The fact that Meredith's family shifted their suspicions onto their daughter's roommate is relevant. The victim's family has more information about this case than any CNN talking head, dateline reporter, author or others that have attached themselves to this case, and their views are significant.

I'm curious why you want to exclude discussion of the victim's voice when discussing her murder ... is it because the discussion her goes directly against the victims' family's beliefs?

I'll await the appeal results to hear about the DNA, but at this time I don't see contamination as a problem.

I've got too much work to do to go searching for copycat cases ... but feel free. Thrill kill happens in the US ... with the case that first comes to mind being a teenager that killed her sister's friend to see what it felt like. There was no motive, no reason, no logic, no argument ... nothing more than a curiosity about death and an absence of a soul.

Can you give me an example of a "thrill kill" in which neither of the killers has any criminal history?

As for the opinion of the Kercher's, they are forced to rely on the prosecution for information. So their opinion can't be any better than the work done by ILE, and we all know the latter was a mess.

 

[Malkmus]

I disagree. When Sharon Rocha publicly stated when she shifted her support away from Scott, it was significant in terms of how others perceived the big picture. I think that this situation is no different. The fact that Meredith's family shifted their suspicions onto their daughter's roommate is relevant. The victim's family has more information about this case than any CNN talking head, dateline reporter, author or others that have attached themselves to this case, and their views are significant.

I'm curious why you want to exclude discussion of the victim's voice when discussing her murder ... is it because the discussion her goes directly against the victims' family's beliefs?

I'll await the appeal results to hear about the DNA, but at this time I don't see contamination as a problem.

I've got too much work to do to go searching for copycat cases ... but feel free. Thrill kill happens in the US ... with the case that first comes to mind being a teenager that killed her sister's friend to see what it felt like. There was no motive, no reason, no logic, no argument ... nothing more than a curiosity about death and an absence of a soul.

You're entitled to your opinion of Mr. Kercher's views on the case. I will acknowledge his view but I'm not going to debate with you further over whether he is an expert on the case or not. Of course it's significant when family members "shift" their view, but that didn't happen here, so implying that the Kercher's view shifted from viewing AK and RS as innocent to guilty is insincere on your part. And you're comparing the views of someone who knew the suspect to a family who never met the suspect and your failure to acknowledge such basic differences is a major part of why I don't want to discuss the Kerchers with you. I feel, personally, that the motive for dragging the Kerchers into this debate is to provoke more than to have honest discussion, so I won't be a part of it.

And I'm busy too, Otto, so I'll wait for you to produce a (specific) case that has is similar enough to this one. Otherwise such claims on your part are pointless.

 

[Nova]

You're entitled to your opinion of Mr. Kercher's views on the case. I will acknowledge his view but I'm not going to debate with you further over whether he is an expert on the case or not. Of course it's significant when family members "shift" their view, but that didn't happen here, so implying that the Kercher's view shifted from viewing AK and RS as innocent to guilty is insincere on your part. And you're comparing the views of someone who knew the suspect to a family who never met the suspect and your failure to acknowledge such basic differences is a major part of why I don't want to discuss the Kerchers with you. I feel, personally, that the motive for dragging the Kerchers into this debate is to provoke more than to have honest discussion, so I won't be a part of it.

And I'm busy too, Otto, so I'll wait for you to produce a (specific) case that has is similar enough to this one. Otherwise such claims on your part are pointless.

otto has been searching for an authority to "prove" the guilt of AK and RS in the absence of convincing forensic evidence.

He's been through Massei and Mignini and we've pointed out where they go wrong.

So now otto's moved on to Mr. Kercher.

 

[otto]

Can you give me an example of a "thrill kill" in which neither of the killers has any criminal history?

As for the opinion of the Kercher's, they are forced to rely on the prosecution for information. So their opinion can't be any better than the work done by ILE, and we all know the latter was a mess.

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

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

 

[otto]

You're entitled to your opinion of Mr. Kercher's views on the case. I will acknowledge his view but I'm not going to debate with you further over whether he is an expert on the case or not. Of course it's significant when family members "shift" their view, but that didn't happen here, so implying that the Kercher's view shifted from viewing AK and RS as innocent to guilty is insincere on your part. And you're comparing the views of someone who knew the suspect to a family who never met the suspect and your failure to acknowledge such basic differences is a major part of why I don't want to discuss the Kerchers with you. I feel, personally, that the motive for dragging the Kerchers into this debate is to provoke more than to have honest discussion, so I won't be a part of it.

And I'm busy too, Otto, so I'll wait for you to produce a (specific) case that has is similar enough to this one. Otherwise such claims on your part are pointless.

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?

 

[otto]

otto has been searching for an authority to "prove" the guilt of AK and RS in the absence of convincing forensic evidence.

He's been through Massei and Mignini and we've pointed out where they go wrong.

So now otto's moved on to Mr. Kercher.

Don't speak for me.

I posted a link to Mr Kercher's article published on May 21, 2011. That happens to be current information related to this case. I'm shocked at how quickly everyone wants to sweep him, his article and the family under the carpet. Is it difficult to bash the case when we are reminded that the victim's family stands behind it? What exactly is the problem with discussing the victim, her family and this recent article?

 

[SMK]

Don't speak for me.

I posted a link to Mr Kercher's article published on May 21, 2011. That happens to be current information related to this case. I'm shocked at how quickly everyone wants to sweep him, his article and the family under the carpet. Is it difficult to bash the case when we are reminded that the victim's family stands behind it? What exactly is the problem with discussing the victim, her family and this recent article?

Can you repost that link, Otto? NEVER MIND, I JUST FOUND IT.

 

[SMK]

I read the whole thing, and I think this poor grieving father has understandably swallowed all that the prosecution has told him. He closes with:
It is not up to me to ascertain guilt. I only want justice for Meredith. Who can blame him? Justice would be justice even if Guede were the lone wolf killer. He misses his daughter, and wants true justice.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3592844/THE-Suns-probe-into-Amanda-Knox-case-reveals-evidence-that-may-undermine-conviction.html#ixzz1Ny6KN86d