Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #14

[wasnt_me]

Maybe I missed it but did the prosecution even present any experts stating that it was a staged break in? For some reason I do not recall any testimony presented by the prosecution in this respect

Filomina, the expert in glass on top of clothes investigator.

 

[Nova]

There is also something else that has always stood out like a sore thumb to me and that is that it appears that the break in on the door window was by using a tool for cutting windows. It is in a perfectly circular dimension

I noticed that too and thought it odd the program didn't mention it. I've seen the sort of devices that produce a perfect circle cut in movies, but I wouldn't know where to get one in real life.

 

[dgfred]

Nice try, but there's no inconsistency in the use of the conditional here.

Hendry's report remains the only expert and detailed examination of the room that I've read. He says the evidence most likely shows a legitimate break-in.

But if Hendry is wrong, AK isn't the only one who might benefit from a staging. RG was also known to the occupants of the cottage, knew his DNA would most likely be found, and may have felt a need to leave some indication of an intruder.

Oh, I see. 'Nice try' :floorlaugh:

So if there WAS a staged break-in... RG staged it, but if the prosecution claims AK staged it = it WAS NOT staged. :innocent:

Hendry might have reported on it... but not likely the jurors chose his 'report' over prosecution and actual defense experts. Or it doesn't seem like it.

Hendry is wrong IMO, but I don't understand this ambiguity here with whether it is staged or not. Hedging your bets is what it kind of looks like. Both ways just doesn't work out.

 

[dgfred]

How will we ever know whether the break-in was staged? That room was never properly investigated.

<modsnip>. We don't have to know... since the jury decided and will likely keep the same opinion thru appeal that it was a fake/staged break-in. After looking at all the evidence (minus Hendry's 'report') of/in the room and circumstances around the event they decided that.... they KNOW to a reasonable certainty.

 

[dgfred]

Maybe I missed it but did the prosecution even present any experts stating that it was a staged break in? For some reason I do not recall any testimony presented by the prosecution in this respect

Don't worry, the judges/jurors heard the evidence presented of staging... it is mentioned in the judge's report.

 

[SMK]

Surely you jest. We don't have to know... since the jury decided and will likely keep the same opinion thru appeal that it was a fake/staged break-in. After looking at all the evidence (minus Hendry's 'report') of/in the room and circumstances around the event they decided that.... they KNOW to a reasonable certainty.

They may, it is true. But remember, this is a different judge and jury; there was a higher standard of education requirement in choosing this jury; they are more particular about the forensics. Time will tell.

But while the arguments are not expected to be new, they will be falling on a different set of ears. The presiding judge, Claudio Patillo Hellmann, has a reputation for overturning convictions, and the five women and one man who make up the new jury are required by law to have a higher minimum standard of education than those who sat on the original trial, which could make a difference when it comes to evaluating contentious DNA evidence.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2036395,00.html#ixzz1OnKBadhz

 

[OldSteve]

sniped

They may, it is true. But remember, this is a different judge and jury; there was a higher standard of education requirement in choosing this jury; they are more particular about the forensics. Time will tell.
------------------------------------------

My hope is that this time they will focus upon MK and her room and what real evidence there is to conclusively place people in her room at the time of the horrible and brutal taking of her life.

It should not be about who has better, more clever ways looking at things and events that can be looked at in different ways (each with their own merit) depending upon how you are predisposed in wanting to maintain a previous verdict.

 

[SMK]

sniped



My hope is that this time they will focus upon MK and her room and what real evidence there is to conclusively place people in her room at the time of the horrible and brutal taking of her life.

It should not be about who has better, more clever ways looking at things and events that can be looked at in different ways (each with their own merit), depending upon how you are predisposed in wanting to maintain a previous verdict.

:clap::clap::clap:

 

[Allusonz]

I noticed that too and thought it odd the program didn't mention it. I've seen the sort of devices that produce a perfect circle cut in movies, but I wouldn't know where to get one in real life.

They have a variety of uses from crafts to businesses dealing with windows. My father whom owned his own glass company used them

 

[Allusonz]

Don't worry, the judges/jurors heard the evidence presented of staging... it is mentioned in the judge's report.

hmmmmmmm no expert testimony though

 

[Allusonz]

sniped



My hope is that this time they will focus upon MK and her room and what real evidence there is to conclusively place people in her room at the time of the horrible and brutal taking of her life.

It should not be about who has better, more clever ways looking at things and events that can be looked at in different ways (each with their own merit) depending upon how you are predisposed in wanting to maintain a previous verdict.

One other thing that must be looked at closer is the TOD as the prosecution slipped in the later TOD during closing arguments thus I hope this is looked at closer as well

 

[Allusonz]

They may, it is true. But remember, this is a different judge and jury; there was a higher standard of education requirement in choosing this jury; they are more particular about the forensics. Time will tell.

But while the arguments are not expected to be new, they will be falling on a different set of ears. The presiding judge, Claudio Patillo Hellmann, has a reputation for overturning convictions, and the five women and one man who make up the new jury are required by law to have a higher minimum standard of education than those who sat on the original trial, which could make a difference when it comes to evaluating contentious DNA evidence.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2036395,00.html#ixzz1OnKBadhz

I have to agree with SV that there are some aspects to the Italian system that find to be quite interesting that could be incorporated into other systems

 

[dgfred]

hmmmmmmm no expert testimony though

Well, I guess good old common sense must have won the day then.

 

[Malkmus]

Well, I guess good old common sense must have won the day then.

Common sense tells us that when you have a glass pattern spraying into the room that the rock was thrown from the outside, and that if one of the prime suspects has a history of b&e - including scaling second floor walls - then it was probably real and probably him.

What do we have to counter this? Filomena's hazy memory of closing the shutters but not completely and disturbing the crime scene before it could be investigated, and a bunch of assumptions regarding a nail on the wall, and lack of footprints/glass on the lawn. Massei's common sense logic also includes finding it perfectly ordinary for a young woman to carry a large kitchen knife in her purse for protection, so if that's supposed to be reassuring no thanks.

Maybe this "higher education" jury won't be so gullible.

 

[Nova]

Oh, I see. 'Nice try' :floorlaugh:

So if there WAS a staged break-in... RG staged it, but if the prosecution claims AK staged it = it WAS NOT staged. :innocent:

Hendry might have reported on it... but not likely the jurors chose his 'report' over prosecution and actual defense experts. Or it doesn't seem like it.

Hendry is wrong IMO, but I don't understand this ambiguity here with whether it is staged or not. Hedging your bets is what it kind of looks like. Both ways just doesn't work out.

I don't believe the break in was staged, fred. I think MK came home and surprised RG in the middle of a burglary (and probably in the middle of using the toilet).

But if I (along with numerous experts) am wrong about the break in, there is more than one person who might benefit from staging.

BTW, if my "nice try" seemed snotty, I apologize. I didn't mean it to be so.

 

[Nova]

<modsnip>. We don't have to know... since the jury decided and will likely keep the same opinion thru appeal that it was a fake/staged break-in. After looking at all the evidence (minus Hendry's 'report') of/in the room and circumstances around the event they decided that.... they KNOW to a reasonable certainty.

Based on little to no evidence. Sorry, but I'm not impressed with a jury that draws conclusions out of a couple of vague recollections.

 

[SMK]

Common sense tells us that when you have a glass pattern spraying into the room that the rock was thrown from the outside, and that if one of the prime suspects has a history of b&e - including scaling second floor walls - then it was probably real and probably him.

What do we have to counter this? Filomena's hazy memory of closing the shutters but not completely and disturbing the crime scene before it could be investigated, and a bunch of assumptions regarding a nail on the wall, and lack of footprints/glass on the lawn. Massei's common sense logic also includes finding it perfectly ordinary for a young woman to carry a large kitchen knife in her purse for protection, so if that's supposed to be reassuring no thanks.

Maybe this "higher education" jury won't be so gullible. (emphasis by SMK)

Yes, this is the hope! I think they were wise to set such a standard. I think the US ought to as well, in cases where there are complicated forensics (and these are increasing with the new forensic evidence technology and testing ).

 

[wasnt_me]

I was reading somewhere, and I can't remember where, that AK and RS's lawyers didnt have experience in criminal cases and certainly not murder cases.

Wow, is all I can say about that.

 

[wasnt_me]

Have we discussed the letter to President Obama about this matter?

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/ConsularFailureKnox.pdf

I might feel like printing this off and co-signing and mailing it, too! I'm concerned because we I travel, I'm not trying to be wrongfully convicted and trapped in a foreign prison without my country lifting a finger to help me.

The thing is, to not know Amanda's situation, Obama had to have been living in a cave, waiting on Osama to return.

 

[Nova]

Have we discussed the letter to President Obama about this matter?

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/ConsularFailureKnox.pdf

I might feel like printing this off and co-signing and mailing it, too! I'm concerned because we I travel, I'm not trying to be wrongfully convicted and trapped in a foreign prison without my country lifting a finger to help me.

The thing is, to not know Amanda's situation, Obama had to have been living in a cave, waiting on Osama to return.

I'm sorry to sound cynical, but U.S. relations with Italy are complex (and generally positive). I don't think Amanda Knox is a big factor there.