Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #15

[dgfred]

bbm
I believe he was given a deal .. in exchange for a reduced sentence.

the reduced sentence had nothing to do with the fast-track..
I feel pretty confident making this claim (and in the past, cited several sources to back it up)

I know this isn't popular w/ everyone (I'm still open) but no one has proven otherwise

This isn't popular either... but AK and RS should have taken the same 'deal' aka a fast track trial.

 

[SMK]

Well, June 30 is DNA Review report. July is Knox-Mellas trial and also Lifetime Movie trial. August review and September Verdict. Best to keep moving on...

 

[SMK]

Was just reading on JREF forum that Sky News has put out a falsification of Amanda's statement to the court. Took her original statement:

I want to state simply to the Court that the only times that Rudy Guede, Raffaele, and I have gotten together in the same place have been in a courtroom. We don't have any means of contact and...I'm shocked and distressed by these statements, really, because....He knows that we weren't there. He knows that we weren't involved and...I don't know what happened that night...I'm sorry that I can't even say to him "look...the way mistakes get fixed is by telling the truth"...and....so....this [is what I wanted to say], thank you.

and changed it to: (in the translation)

Every time Rudy Guede, Raffael, and myself have come together, it's always in the same space, the same courtroom. We have no means of contacting each other. He knows we weren't there. He knows we all got drunk that night. But I don't know what happened to him that evening. I just don't know what he did. I am after the truth.

I am glad they are calling Sky to report an error and violation.

Here is Umbria's video coverage of court today:
All raw and best coverage I have ever seen in Perugia, without endless voiceovers. So odd to hear Rudy speaking perfect Italian, as I look at him and picture those in the US ; his Italian is oddly impressive, and Amanda responds to him in very, very fluent Italian: Robed Mignini there as well:

YouTube - ‪Meredith, Rudy accusa Amanda e Raffaele, ecco le dichiarazioni dei tre‬‏

 

[otto]

I guess this had to be expected. If the defense wants to rely on convicted prisoners in order to find truth, the truth that emerges is bound to be strange:

"A fellow inmate of Aviello's called by the prosecution on Monday said mafia member had told him he had been offered €70,000 (62,400) by Giulia Bongiorno, an Italian MP and lawyer defending Sollecito, to invent the story. Cosimo Zaccari – who is in jail for fraud, libel, criminal conspiracy and receiving stolen goods – said Aviello had confided that he was "contacted to create confusion in the trial".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/27/amanda-knox-appeal-sex-change

 

[SMK]

I guess this had to be expected. If the defense wants to rely on convicted prisoners in order to find truth, the truth that emerges is bound to be strange:

"A fellow inmate of Aviello's called by the prosecution on Monday said mafia member had told him he had been offered €70,000 (62,400) by Giulia Bongiorno, an Italian MP and lawyer defending Sollecito, to invent the story. Cosimo Zaccari – who is in jail for fraud, libel, criminal conspiracy and receiving stolen goods – said Aviello had confided that he was "contacted to create confusion in the trial".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/27/amanda-knox-appeal-sex-change

If this is true, it is lurid and disturbing; Otto did you check out the Umbria video? For some reason , i was stunned to hear both Rudy and Amanda's perfect Italian!

 

[otto]

If this is true, it is lurid and disturbing; Otto did you check out the Umbria video? For some reason , i was stunned to hear both Rudy and Amanda's perfect Italian!

I haven't heard it yet ... but it shouldn't be a surprise that Rudy, who has lived in Perugia since the age of 5, is completely Italian. I understand that Amanda's Italian is still that of a foreigner.

 

[SMK]

I haven't heard it yet ... but it shouldn't be a surprise that Rudy, who has lived in Perugia since the age of 5, is completely Italian. I understand that Amanda's Italian is still that of a foreigner.

I wasn't thinking of him as Italian. I wish he had lived a better life, he seems so much nicer with his Italian softness. I embedded Umbria video up above in my other post. Knox is far more fluent than in December of 2009 but that makes sense as well. Here it is once more:

YouTube - ‪Meredith, Rudy accusa Amanda e Raffaele, ecco le dichiarazioni dei tre‬‏

 

[SMK]

From Rolling Stone magazine, June 27, 2011:

The Neverending Nightmare of Amanda Knox

How a naive kid from Seattle was coerced into confessing to a brutal murder and wound up sentenced to 26 years in an Italian jail

There are many theories, but the most persuasive scenario goes as follows:

Guede stakes out the cottage after dark. He breaks into the girls' apartment and makes himself comfortable. He swigs orange juice from a carton he finds in the refrigerator — he had a spicy kebab for dinner — and then uses the bathroom. While he's on the can, Kercher enters the apartment, locking the door behind her. Guede is trapped. He can't exit through the window without alerting Kercher, and he can't use the front door, because you need a key to open the lock from the inside. (Kercher's keys would be stolen, along with cash, credit cards and phones.) Guede rises from the toilet without flushing, so as not to make a noise. He walks to Kercher's bedroom. Perhaps he tries to explain himself — "Sorry, the door was open, I let myself in, I'm a friend of Giacomo's downstairs" — or perhaps she starts screaming before he can speak. He grabs her by the mouth (there were bruises on Kercher's face) and threatens her with the knife. He assaults her and, realizing that Kercher can identify him, he panics and kills her. The missing scene.

 

[otto]

What a mess the appeal is for the defense!

 

[emyr]

We have the ILE techs on tape passing the fragment of bra clasp from person to person and then putting it back down on the floor. That's a half-dozen or so different sets of gloves touching the clasp. Where had all those gloves been, is the question, not whether the defense can prove theoretical contamination?



We already know AK saw the broken window, but didn't call police. I think she was intimidated by the prospect of trying to report a break-in in a language she didn't speak. So she turned to RS and FR, both fluent in Italian.

Obviously, her right foot stepped in something her left foot missed. I don't know what. I believe there has been a vehement argument as to whether it was blood.

I don't know why you find this a "smoking gun." AK has admitted to showering and wandering around the apartment on the morning after the murder.



I agree this needs to be explained, but I don't see how any of it is incriminating to AK or RS.

I think if those three pieces of evidence can be disproved then there is nothing left of substance to say they are guilty. That's actually a pretty small amount of information to disprove, compared to where it started (where in fact, there was nearly a dozen pieces of evidence that indicated they were guilty, which were then proven completely untrue... such as a clean up).

1) As with Otto, I cannot claim to be an expert on DNA. But the report reads that they collected cigarette butts, which had a high concentration of Sollecito's DNA, the butt of which was adjacent to another cigarette, and none of the DNA got jumbled in this scenario. They also said that shed cells, which is what gets floated around in dust, cannot show a fresh sample like it did on the bra clasp. The amount of DNA, and the quality, indicated that this DNA came from non-shed skin cells that arrived on the metal. This as indicated by some socks found in the same place that had no migratory DNA on it. Therefore, if it occurred from contamination, it would have to be something like (my best guess) turning a door handle sollecito touched, then handling the clasps in such a manner that it would transfer to the clasps. In addition, this would have to have occurred only in this instance and in no other. That's my best understanding of it, and I will fully admit I'm not sure I know what I'm talking about. I'm hoping someone who really knows what they are talking about will come on and explain to me why I should dismiss it.

2) The luminol evidence did reveal evidence of cleaning, though it was clearly prior to the murder (regular cleaning). When did this cleaning occur? If just prior to all this, we wouldn't expect to see anything that had occurred until the cleaning took place. We also know (from Meredith's own words) that Amanda didn't keep the bathroom clean. If you read the report, it does say that luminol testing is done 6 weeks after specifically so things like bleach won't flouresce. But if it WAS blood, then we would expect Meredith's DNA to show up in every footprint. I mean it is a whole footprint left from blood, instead of a tiny bit on the tip of a knife. I would assume that she had stepped in bloody water residue, but I'm not sure that's enough to flouresce (she stepped into residue underneath the bathmat, that was still damp?). I actually know a CSI guy and he told me that would never happen, but I'm not sure I explained it properly.

3) I think the break-in can be explained as a true break-in. But if the evidence indicates Rudy left, and someone else stayed and cleaned themselves up, and locked the doors, then that's a big problem. If we can say it's very suspicious that there is no DNA of Amanda or Raffaelle in the murder room (though there is one piece still in play actually), then it would follow that it is very suspicious that there is no DNA evidence of Rudy in the bathroom. NOW, contrariwise, my neighbor did say that water is the best way to get rid of DNA, so maybe bathrooms are in general a poor place to retrieve DNA. And the only reason Amanda and Meredith can be found everywhere is because it is their bathroom.

 

[SMK]

What a mess the appeal is for the defense!

Beginning with the 5 inmates testifying, and now to Guede, it simply has stopped making sense. I thought Napoleani was going to be called today??? Wasn't she on the list? :waitasec:

 

[otto]

Beginning with the 5 inmates testifying, and now to Guede, it simply has stopped making sense. I thought Napoleani was going to be called today??? Wasn't she on the list? :waitasec:

I thought she was on the list. My understanding was that she was going to testify that about 6 discos were open that night - not sure what she was going to say about the bus.

 

[SMK]

I thought she was on the list. My understanding was that she was going to testify that about 6 discos were open that night - not sure what she was going to say about the bus.

Yes, she was going to say that some buses were running and some discos open. But I guess she did not show.....

 

[dgfred]

I thought she was on the list. My understanding was that she was going to testify that about 6 discos were open that night - not sure what she was going to say about the bus.

JREF poster says that happened on May 21st.

 

[SMK]

JREF poster says that happened on May 21st.

 

[otto]

JREF poster says that happened on May 21st.

That clears that up ... thanks! I remember that she was supposed to testify way back, but then rumors were flying that she didn't show.

 

[miley]

I guess this had to be expected. If the defense wants to rely on convicted prisoners in order to find truth, the truth that emerges is bound to be strange:

it appears you hold the defense to a higher standard

"A fellow inmate of Aviello's called by the prosecution on Monday said mafia member had told him he had been offered €70,000 (62,400) by Giulia Bongiorno, an Italian MP and lawyer defending Sollecito, to invent the story. Cosimo Zaccari – who is in jail for fraud, libel, criminal conspiracy and receiving stolen goods – said Aviello had confided that he was "contacted to create confusion in the trial".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/27/amanda-knox-appeal-sex-change

the next paragraph from your article above:

Francesco Maresca, a lawyer representing the Kercher family, called the statements "extremely credible" but Bongiorno said: "We are beyond the realms of the reasonable," adding: "Not even the prosecutors appear to believe this story and I will be reporting this libel."​

anyway this helps prove another point. . deals aren't unheard of or out of the realm of possibility

btw, I think Maresca is projecting (ha)

 

[otto]

it appears you hold the defense to a higher standard


the next paragraph from your article above:

Francesco Maresca, a lawyer representing the Kercher family, called the statements "extremely credible" but Bongiorno said: "We are beyond the realms of the reasonable," adding: "Not even the prosecutors appear to believe this story and I will be reporting this libel."​

anyway this helps prove another point. . deals aren't unheard of or out of the realm of possibility

btw, I think Maresca is projecting (ha)

Are you saying that because a prisoner alleges that Sollecito' lawyer offered money to provide false testimony, plea deals are part of the Italian legal system?

His lawyer plans to file charges against the prisoner that has accused her of bribery.

 

[Nova]

I think this is where Edda was mistaken shortly before the original verdict as well. I believe that she expected the appeal process to reflect the US appeal process - basically a retrial. Not so. The appeal process began months ago where defense lawyers presented their arguments regarding what they believed should be re-considered during appeal. It more or less looks like they listed all the evidence. The judge ruled on what evidence would be reconsidered during appeal, and the result was many "denied" and three "accepted". The three points are the two DNA samples and the one witness. Regarding the DNA samples, they would be retested if they could be retested and, barring that, the analysis would be reviewed. There was a provision such that the judge could consider other evidence as it arose - and that is where we see the 5 lying prisoners and Guede's testimony being considered during appeal.

U.S. appeals are NOT re-trials, otto. I don't know where you got that idea, but Ms. Mellas certainly knows better.

U.S. appellate courts look at trials to see if they were conducted fairly and according to current trial rules. If errors were made, the appellate court then decides whether the errors rise to a level requiring remedy. (This does not happen often. It's much more common for appellate courts to rule that yes, there was an error, but it wasn't bad enough to overturn the verdict.)

If so, ordering a re-trial is a possible remedy. (In extreme cases such as those featuring obvious corruption, an appellate court can declare a defendant factually innocent, but that almost never happens.) The re-trial is then conducted in the same circuit as the original trial, not in an appellate court.

 

[Nova]

Dishonest eye-witness testimony resulted in the arrest of an innocent man - that had nothing to do with the collection and analysis of evidence. Evidence that was collected and analyzed at the scene resulted in the conviction of all three suspects however ... supposedly ... in the collection of evidence implicating Guede, all was well, and in the collection of evidence implicating Knox and Sollecito, the claim is that everything was done wrong. How is that possible - especially since the investigators did not know at the time of collection which samples they should imcompetently collect and which they should competently collect?

I know of no one who claims everything was done right in the prosecution of RG. On the contrary, ILE just got lucky that he left so much evidence they weren't able to miss it.