Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #15

[otto]

The prosecution has "experts"? Where have they been hiding them?

Hopefully not in some other country!

 

[dgfred]

This snippet is a reflection of what I myself had noticed :

orums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=196814&page=354

I see NO prospect of acquittal, but possibly a reduction in sentence tho I don't think that would be the 'right' decision either. RGs reduction in sentence was due to taking the fast track trial, but I have no problem with their sentences being reduced to being similar to his final sentence. I don't think judging guilt believing people in all the same ilk is correct, especially from just looking at the 'hard-core' believers on a certain website or two. Not that it matters one bit what I think anyway. :crazy:

 

[otto]

I had to post this exchange I came across...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Originally Posted by LEDrexel
My whole personal belief is that Knox did kill her daughter. From what I've seen on the news, she has no emotion, I know that if I were going on trial for killing a child I would be in scared out of my mind. You don't even see fear in her eyes, her face, in her anything. I hope they find her guilty and give the death penalty. If you kill a child, you know exactly what you are doing. That's one of the most hanous crimes anyone could do. If you kill someone else's child you deserve to die. If you kill your own child...... No words can express the discust I have. There's a very special place in hell for people like her.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HumanityBlues
I agree, and the fact that Knox did not report her baby missing for a month does not bode well.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=196814&page=353

So you're saying that some people posting comments on other forums have no idea what they're talking about?

 

[SMK]

I see NO prospect of acquittal, but possibly a reduction in sentence tho I don't think that would be the 'right' decision either. RGs reduction in sentence was due to taking the fast track trial, but I have no problem with their sentences being reduced to being similar to his final sentence. I don't think judging guilt believing people in all the same ilk is correct, especially from just looking at the 'hard-core' believers on a certain website or two. Not that it matters one bit what I think anyway. :crazy:

You're right. It doesn't. :razz::laugh:

 

[mdana]

Posted again for those with limited reading comprehension.

I have to think it is satire, to contemplate it as an honest post is too frightening. However, one of the posters thinks the LED post is not satire due to other absurd posts by LED. I am still clinging to LED's whole schtick is a parody of an extreme internet ignoramus.

 

[otto]

Regarding the bra clasp:

Within the 145 pp report, they referenced a study regarding household dust and "traveling DNA" :

"The artifact was recovered 46 days after the crime, in an environment highly suggestive of contamination . The risk of incorrectly interpreting environmental contaminants such dust could be minimized only by having the foresight to establish very strict control procedures, including analysis of extracts from sterile cotton swabs soaked in sterile buffer passed to pick up on environmental surfaces dust samples, a procedure that has not been implemented;"

Toothman, Kester , and Champagne's 2008 study, "Human DNA and Environmental Factors" , is thus sited, which makes clear that the bra clasp sitting for 46 days is indeed significant.

Despite claims that "dna does not fly" it has been found that it can in fact fly via household dust: http://pubget.com/paper/18420364

The big mystery must be: Where did it fly from? Did it fly from Sollecito's apartment into a locked bedroom in the cottage?

 

[otto]

Posted again for those with limited reading comprehension.

I'm curious ... is there any particular reason why you don't respond to comments posted on other forums directly on those forums?

 

[SMK]

The big mystery must be: Where did it fly from? Did it fly from Sollecito's apartment into a locked bedroom in the cottage?

Yes, mayhap it even flew through the streets of Perugia!:slap:

ETA: But it is obvious, that his being in the cottage that day with the police, something he touched attach to dust moved around by the investigators during that month, and it never made much sense that one spot of his dna would be on the clasp, with naught elsewhere....

 

[SMK]

I'm curious ... is there any particular reason why you don't respond to comments posted on other forums directly on those forums?

For my part, I don't know.....

 

[emyr]

It's a good thing, then, that Knox an Sollecito didn't confess to murdering Meredith!

Pointing the finger at Lumamba, taking a shower at the crime scene, being inconsistent about when they ate dinner, and not acting appropriately grief-stricken would be enough for many people to convict them both. I disagree strongly with that, but it is true.

Is my understanding of the remaining facts correct?

Homeless guys testimony: Is everyone in agreement that it is not useable?
Shopowner testimony: not useable?
Kokamani testimony: not useable?
Footprint on pillow: not useable?
Placed call to carbineri after police showed up: not true?
Mop: had zero to do with crime, not useable?

Remaining evidence, strongest version presented:

Staged break-in, little stolen, doors locked, phones disposed of: No one has ever duplicated the break-in. Specifically no one has climbed through the window to prove it could be done. If Rudy acted alone, why didn't he steal more? Why would he lock Meredith's room? Why would he take the phones and throw them away?

Luminol footprints: Only one foot flouresced. No one else's foot flouresced including the many people tromping through the house who could have stepped in the same things Amanda stepped in (except, notedly, the shower). Meredith's DNA found in some of those footprints.

Bloody footprint in bathroom: Rudy's shoe prints, both right and left, present in the bedroom and hallway. How did he get a bare footprint in the bathroom?

Murder necistates multiple people: What murderer switches his attack from right to left? How could you strip someone and murder them at the same time? With no evidence that they fought?

Bloody bathroom: No DNA presented of Rudy's or anyone else besides Amanda and Meredith in bathroom.

Lack of alibi: Raf states he was on his computer, but his computer does not reflect this. He stated he got up late when his computer indicates he got up early. IMPORTANT NOTE: I am not positive about this, but I think the internet records indicate zero incoming data in those night hours, which means neither of them was surfing the internet. Please confirm.

Suspicious behaviour: Amanda said nothing was stolen, Meredith usually locked her door. She placed herself at murder scene when Raffaelle's testimony changed and said she might have left, cartwheel at police station. She wasn't concerned her door was open. She showered there (perhaps the most damaging among all these). Raf wrote in his journal that maybe what happened was he cooked for Meredith and pricked her with a knife. Amanda wrote in her journal that maybe Raffaelle went to her house killed Meredith and came home and planted her fingerprints on the knife while she was sleeping, Amanda did not strenously fight to have Lumamba freed from jail for the two weeks he was in jail. They were supposed to go to Gubbio that day and by 11am they hadn't gone yet. They smoked pot.

Did I miss anything?

The aggregate of the above could, in my view, free Raffaelle and convict Amanda of being an accessory. Because there is now zero evidence besides a bloody male footprint that proves he was there.

 

[emyr]

Yes, mayhap it even flew through the streets of Perugia!:slap:

ETA: But it is obvious, that his being in the cottage that day with the police, something he touched attach to dust moved around by the investigators during that month, and it never made much sense that one spot of his dna would be on the clasp, with naught elsewhere....

Although, I think of the evidence collected 46 days later (or even after that) it was the socks and the bra clasp. Is that right? The vast majority of the evidence tested was collected in the first few days. Am I right?

But I did find it troubling that he was so randomly unlucky that his DNA ended up there. The report stating that the identification is also flawed, especially the part about the Y DNA shows he might not have been that unlucky after all.

I did think it was a bit amusing seeing the video of the collection of the bra clasp. Apparently the standard is to pick it up with disposable tweezers, put it in a bag, and dispose of the tweezers. Most definitely NOT looking at it, and putting your gloved finger on the metal.

 

[wasnt_me]

It really is stunning when you list all the evidence that was denied to the defense. And you didn't even list the possible semen stain on MK's pillow!

AK and RS should be freed simply because they were denied a fair trial. But the almost complete lack of evidence also argues strongly that they are factually innocent.

yep, I did forget that. I was thinking about it.

Additionally I forgot how they chose the prosecutions reports about the cell phones instead of the defenses--even AFTER the prosecution's studies WRONGLY placed PL in range of the cottage!!!!

 

[wasnt_me]

I had to post this exchange I came across...





http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=196814&page=353

WHAT THE HELL??????????:waitasec:

 

[otto]

Pointing the finger at Lumamba, taking a shower at the crime scene, being inconsistent about when they ate dinner, and not acting appropriately grief-stricken would be enough for many people to convict them both. I disagree strongly with that, but it is true.

Is my understanding of the remaining facts correct?

Homeless guys testimony: Is everyone in agreement that it is not useable?
Shopowner testimony: not useable?
Kokamani testimony: not useable?
Footprint on pillow: not useable?
Placed call to carbineri after police showed up: not true?
Mop: had zero to do with crime, not useable?

Remaining evidence, strongest version presented:

Staged break-in, little stolen, doors locked, phones disposed of: No one has ever duplicated the break-in. Specifically no one has climbed through the window to prove it could be done. If Rudy acted alone, why didn't he steal more? Why would he lock Meredith's room? Why would he take the phones and throw them away?

Luminol footprints: Only one foot flouresced. No one else's foot flouresced including the many people tromping through the house who could have stepped in the same things Amanda stepped in (except, notedly, the shower). Meredith's DNA found in some of those footprints.

Bloody footprint in bathroom: Rudy's shoe prints, both right and left, present in the bedroom and hallway. How did he get a bare footprint in the bathroom?

Murder necistates multiple people: What murderer switches his attack from right to left? How could you strip someone and murder them at the same time? With no evidence that they fought?

Bloody bathroom: No DNA presented of Rudy's or anyone else besides Amanda and Meredith in bathroom.

Lack of alibi: Raf states he was on his computer, but his computer does not reflect this. He stated he got up late when his computer indicates he got up early. IMPORTANT NOTE: I am not positive about this, but I think the internet records indicate zero incoming data in those night hours, which means neither of them was surfing the internet. Please confirm.

Suspicious behaviour: Amanda said nothing was stolen, Meredith usually locked her door. She placed herself at murder scene when Raffaelle's testimony changed and said she might have left, cartwheel at police station. She wasn't concerned her door was open. She showered there (perhaps the most damaging among all these). Raf wrote in his journal that maybe what happened was he cooked for Meredith and pricked her with a knife. Amanda wrote in her journal that maybe Raffaelle went to her house killed Meredith and came home and planted her fingerprints on the knife while she was sleeping, Amanda did not strenously fight to have Lumamba freed from jail for the two weeks he was in jail. They were supposed to go to Gubbio that day and by 11am they hadn't gone yet. They smoked pot.

Did I miss anything?

The aggregate of the above could, in my view, free Raffaelle and convict Amanda of being an accessory. Because there is now zero evidence besides a bloody male footprint that proves he was there.

True ... no human activty with the computer could be confirmed from 8:40 until about 6 AM. Knox said that she had a shower at the cottage, but we don't know that - she has been untruthful throughout the investigation. We also have eyewitness testimony from Guede confirming that Knox and Sollecito were at the scene and committed the murder.

Regarding DNA, at this time, it is my understanding that the clasp has DNA that can be connected to Sollecito. However, I look forward to reading the translated report to get a better understanding of the findings.

 

[otto]

Interview on CNN with Barbie Naeau spelling out the current status of the case:

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2011/06/29/exp.nr.dna.amanda.knox.cnn?iref=allsearch

 

[mdana]

Awesome!

The same people who don't understand or refuse to accept false confessions are now going to do the same with false readings. I am joining SkewedView in the lurkers' balcony until it is safe to come back down to the mezzanine.

 

[SMK]

Interview on CNN with Barbie Naeau spelling out the current status of the case:

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2011/06/29/exp.nr.dna.amanda.knox.cnn?iref=allsearch

The 2 pieces are not valid, and it is up to the appellate court what they will do with this. Seems there would be only one just thing, to disregard, and look to what remains behind...

 

[Nova]

IMO there is none, I was just pointing out the one I described was more likely (more logical) than the one the guilters glommed onto as their reasoning. The fact AK allowed MK to pick the room of her choice (my recollection as well) doesn't demonstrate a selfish person only concerned with her own desires. Which is why I believe other much more ridiculous motivations were promoted, because they reinforced the AK as "other" (outside "our" tribe behavior) narrative much more readily.

MK has to be a beautiful brilliant studious chaste angel that was a million times the woman that AK ever hoped to be. While AK has to be portrayed as a homely dull lazy demon that had to take from this world what she could never be herself. Which is believable, only if you disregard everything known about both woman to fit some preconceived morality play.

I have seen the same sort of extremism by some of the fringe of the FOA supporters as well. I remember reading some insane praise about Amanda's statement when the appeals process began, about how it was the most magnificent piece of writing for someone of such young age the writer had ever seen. Apparently, AK is the new Stephen Crane or Anne Frank of the falsely convicted. I don't share that assessment.

I don't really like the demonizing of RG, Massei, and Mignini either, which I have probably contributed. They are all flawed individuals (as we all are) that have made mistakes (some momentous) that I hope I have pointed out by attacking their flaws and not them as individuals.

Beautifully put. Canonizing the dead (especially if they were young) and demonizing the violent is a longstanding human inclination.

But you are right that it isn't very helpful to a search for the truth.

 

[dgfred]

'Maybe' not valid according to these analysist, not so according to the prosecutions testers and analysist. So it is not definate by any means that the evidence in both pieces will be disregarded... tho your hope.

 

[SMK]

'Maybe' not valid according to these analysist, not so according to the prosecutions testers and analysist. So it is not definate by any means that the evidence in both pieces will be disreguarded... tho your hope.

what would be an appropriate response to this???:waitasec:
..........................:waitasec:.................:razz: