Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #15

[Allusonz]

While it is true that the defense team had the technical right to decide Alessi & Co. were not credible and therefore keep them off the stand, apparently that isn't how the defense saw them.

Yes they did. I did though find it interesting to see the faces of the lay judges in the various newspaper photos. I think they spoke volumes

 

[Allusonz]

I have to agree with that. I see his assignment as just as bizzare as running the civil trial with PL and AK concurrently witht the criminal trial of AK and RS. I thought that was just how they did things, but I saw something very wrong with having the same jury on those two cases at the same time.

Amazing is it not that he actually went against the ruling of the Italian Supreme Court. It simply should never of been allowed and probably would of been overturned at the next level dependent on the outcome of this appeal

 

[Allusonz]

True. Mic just held the opinion that he didn't believe it, because he didn't believe the entry way and he didn't believe also that RG would use the front door, or something crazy like that?

Anyways, he also contended that RG should have just jumped back out the window instead of having to go out the front door. As we saw from the youtbe antics of others, RG probably COULD have gotten back out the window, but the judge talks as if MK's presence in the house didn't change the dynamics of escape.

The judge doesn't believe that the door being locked from the inside precluded RG's escape, which led to the confrontation. He says that even if it were locked, RG should ahve just gone out the window.

The judge does not take into accoun that MK might have been in the kitchen, the hallways, or standing in front of FR's room, freaking out because the window is broken.

The judge doesn't take into account that MK could have entered, saw a light on ONLY in the bathroom, and went over there and opened the door and saw RG on the toilet.

The judge does not take into account that RG could have successfully gotten all the way back to FR's room, made a noise, or somehow alerted MK before he actually got out the window.

I don't understand why this judge dismissed these possibilities. There's probably several more things that COULD have occured which would cause RG to have to confront MK rather than sneak back out the window.

The judge even has in his report that incident where RG had to threaten a man with a knife to get out of his apartment. And at that crime scene, guess what was stolen? Money and credit cards, same as at MK's.

That scenerio proves that not only will RG confront a homeowner with a knife, but he has no problem being in your house with YOU in it, too!

I have always believed that if it started in another area of the house we would of seen some sign of it but that is simply MOO

ETA Alot of this information is rarely brought up but it is extremely important to understand the dynamics involved and the potential that MK could still be alive today if he had of been arrested

 

[Allusonz]

I would ask that you, and anyone else that is so inclined, refrain from putting words in my mouth or discussing me. I'm here to discuss this case and I can assure you that if I were to have little discussions about another poster on the public board, the subject of those discussions would not be happy about it. It is rude, presumptuous, condescending and disrupts the discussion and atmosphere of the board. If you object, or require clarification, regarding something I post, I will be happy to clarify. I enjoy the debate, but not when it disintegrates into personal remarks.

If a lawyer expects to be taken seriously, then the requirement or expectation is to be consistent. Lawyers are free to respond to each piece of evidence with whatever story they like, but as soon as those stories are in conflict, the credibility of the defendant is placed in doubt. On the one hand Knox argues that Guede is the culprit, and on the other she claims that she would like to see the real murderer found. Inconsistencies like this are problematic for her defense. Witnesses presented by the defense should strengthen their legal position, but when the defendant privately disagrees with what they have presented in court, one wonders what exactly they are presenting to the court and why.

The same holds true for prosecutors. One that comes to mind is Mignini. It works both ways but amazing how often that is overlooked....

 

[otto]

The same holds true for prosecutors. One that comes to mind is Mignini. It works both ways but amazing how often that is overlooked....

Mignini was consistent enough regarding the prosecution of Knox and Sollecito for eleven long months that the jury found the pair guilty.

 

[otto]

It still continues to amaze me the extremes some posters will go to especially when the facts do not back up the post.

<snipped>

A reading light is turned on by a switch. It is well documented that AK spent her evenings with RS. If you were to turn on a reading lamp would you touch the shade? or the little switch. This one is truly tough

Could I have a cite please that states AK was missing an earing

Could I have a cite please that states that DNA does not fly. Hint if you sneeze does it travel on the ground or through the air

I didn't say that Knox was missing an earring, I said it was speculated that this was the reason for her lamp in Meredith's bedroom. There was no DNA anywhere ... not the lamp shade, not the light bulb, not the switch.

Flying DNA sounds like something out of Dr Seuss, doesn't it?

 

[otto]

Does anyone remember the primary reason that the pair were found guilty? As far as I can remember, it wasn't the DNA. I think it was something they said, perhaps something Knox said ... it might have been her deceptive nature in general and that, combined with the evidence, caused her to be found guilty. I don't think any of the jurors bought the claim that she was deprived of the necessities of life for two hours, after having just eaten, was bopped on the head and the lies just came pouring out. Most people, when bopped on the head after a good meal do something about the bop ... they don't crumble into telling whopper lies. Knox has no credibility because of her accusations against Patrick. Everyone is still raising their eyebrows about Sollecito's claim that Meredith's blood was on the knife in his apartment because he pricked her during a dinner party at the same apartment. Funny thing too, he voluntarily added this to his diary after learning about the DNA through the media. That means neither Knox or Sollecito is credible. Add in their alibi problems and odd behavior the following morning, and the DNA is not needed to prove guilt.

 

[sherlockh]

Conclusions in the judges report start with..."All of the elements put together," which is what this case is all about and so it should be. I don't know which element is the strongest. There are several pieces of evidence that are conclusive enough to convict them by themselves. Leaving one or two out does not mean that the whole framework will come tumbling down. Understandibly this is the hope of the defense but I don't see it happening at this stage. We will see

 

[otto]

Conclusions in the judges report start with..."All of the elements put together," which is what this case is all about and so it should be. I don't know which element is the strongest. There are several pieces of evidence that are conclusive enough to convict them by themselves. Leaving one or two out does not mean that the whole framework will come tumbling down. Understandibly this is the hope of the defense but I don't see it happening at this stage. We will see

The defense has been very hopeful, and the US TV has somewhat picked up on this: the story is that the convicted murderers will be released from prison by Christmas because the forensic lab was criticised. This argument has been on obscure TV since the Knox/Mellas activites regarding their slander charges and Knox's complaints about releasing fictional movies about the murder. Everyone wants to get out of their predicament because they were just being Amanda or Amanda's parents. The story about getting out for Christmas first started after desperate attempts by the pair to get our of jail failed ... and it has not had nearly the TV covereage it had prior to the lying prisoners. The family (Knox, Mellas, Sollecito) are hopeful and may have to rely upon the likes of Anne Bremner to say "it's not a big deal" (think she said that in relation to the Anthony trial) in order to convince people that Rudy Guede does not know who was at the cottage. The facts are that the Supreme Court has determined that Rudy Guede was not alone at the time of the murder, and he has pointed at Knox and Sollecito as being with him. If it's not Knox and Sollecito, why would Guide say it was ... what does he have to gain by lyiing after all his legal options are exhausted?

Maybe the convicted murderers could spruce up their wanderings on the eve of the murder and ever changing alibis.

When will the Knox parents publicly acknowledge that their daughter has spent the last four years in an Italian prison for murdering an English student in Perugia? Amanda Knox is not a victim of circumstance, bad forensic, or legal blunders. She and her two accomplices are in prison because they have failed to uphold even the most basic tenants of human nature. I only hope that when Knox is hauled back to her safety of the United States that the media does not turn her into a celebrity, like a kidnapped child. She has been convicted of the most horrendous of murders and saying that she was stoned and doesn't remember does not excuse the evening.

 

[Nova]

Mignini was consistent enough regarding the prosecution of Knox and Sollecito for eleven long months that the jury found the pair guilty.

So apparently consistency is not as important as you have claimed. Especially not when the prosecutor has "poisoned the well" with leaks to the press.

 

[Nova]

The defense has been very hopeful, and the US TV has somewhat picked up on this: the story is that the convicted murderers will be released from prison by Christmas because the forensic lab was criticised. This argument has been on obscure TV since the Knox/Mellas activites regarding their slander charges and Knox's complaints about releasing fictional movies about the murder. Everyone wants to get out of their predicament because they were just being Amanda or Amanda's parents. The story about getting out for Christmas first started after desperate attempts by the pair to get our of jail failed ... and it has not had nearly the TV covereage it had prior to the lying prisoners. The family (Knox, Mellas, Sollecito) are hopeful and may have to rely upon the likes of Anne Bremner to say "it's not a big deal" (think she said that in relation to the Anthony trial) in order to convince people that Rudy Guede does not know who was at the cottage. The facts are that the Supreme Court has determined that Rudy Guede was not alone at the time of the murder, and he has pointed at Knox and Sollecito as being with him. If it's not Knox and Sollecito, why would Guide say it was ... what does he have to gain by lyiing after all his legal options are exhausted?

Maybe the convicted murderers could spruce up their wanderings on the eve of the murder and ever changing alibis.

When will the Knox parents publicly acknowledge that their daughter has spent the last four years in an Italian prison for murdering an English student in Perugia? Amanda Knox is not a victim of circumstance, bad forensic, or legal blunders. She and her two accomplices are in prison because they have failed to uphold even the most basic tenants of human nature. I only hope that when Knox is hauled back to her safety of the United States that the media does not turn her into a celebrity, like a kidnapped child. She has been convicted of the most horrendous of murders and saying that she was stoned and doesn't remember does not excuse the evening.

Convicted murderer Alessi is not to be believed because he is a murderer.
Convicted murderer Guede words are to be taken as gospel. (Guede's possible reasons for lying have been explained, <modsnip>.)

<modsnip>.

 

[otto]

So apparently consistency is not as important as you have claimed. Especially not when the prosecutor has "poisoned the well" with leaks to the press.

Leaks to the press? Would you like to take some time to complain about the DNA Report leak, or is that an okay leak?

 

[Allusonz]

Mignini was consistent enough regarding the prosecution of Knox and Sollecito for eleven long months that the jury found the pair guilty.

Which motive was that? Is it now the motive where she directed everything from another room or the one where she is stabbing the victim with the knife that has been tested and is not the murder weapon?

 

[Allusonz]

Does anyone remember the primary reason that the pair were found guilty? As far as I can remember, it wasn't the DNA. I think it was something they said, perhaps something Knox said ... it might have been her deceptive nature in general and that, combined with the evidence, caused her to be found guilty. I don't think any of the jurors bought the claim that she was deprived of the necessities of life for two hours, after having just eaten, was bopped on the head and the lies just came pouring out. Most people, when bopped on the head after a good meal do something about the bop ... they don't crumble into telling whopper lies. Knox has no credibility because of her accusations against Patrick. Everyone is still raising their eyebrows about Sollecito's claim that Meredith's blood was on the knife in his apartment because he pricked her during a dinner party at the same apartment. Funny thing too, he voluntarily added this to his diary after learning about the DNA through the media. That means neither Knox or Sollecito is credible. Add in their alibi problems and odd behavior the following morning, and the DNA is not needed to prove guilt.

Maybe it was the supposed earing falacy where they crawled all over a crime scene after bringing in her bedroom reading lamp to look for a non missing earing without leaving DNA in the room

Or the wet towel one where the towels were soaked in blood but left to rot in plastic bags by ILE thus could not be tested

These are now very defunk argument and again I can only state my disappointment

 

[Allusonz]

Conclusions in the judges report start with..."All of the elements put together," which is what this case is all about and so it should be. I don't know which element is the strongest. There are several pieces of evidence that are conclusive enough to convict them by themselves. Leaving one or two out does not mean that the whole framework will come tumbling down. Understandibly this is the hope of the defense but I don't see it happening at this stage. We will see

You of course mean the judge that now has "no comment" beside his name and so he should for never making one ruling in the search for justice

 

[otto]

Convicted murderer Alessi is not to be believed because he is a murderer.
Convicted murderer Guede words are to be taken as gospel. (Guede's possible reasons for lying have been explained, <modsnip>.)

<modsnip>.

The bottom line is that it's not a good idea to be relying on the testimony of a known liar and child murderer when appealing a murder sentence. No one is relying on the word of Guede to convict the murderers, as his statement is after the fact.


<modsnip>.

 

[Allusonz]

The bottom line is that it's not a good idea to be relying on the testimony of a known liar and child murderer when appealing a murder sentence. No one is relying on the word of Guede to convict the murderers, as his statement is after the fact.


<modsnip>.

The bottom line is there is not enough evidence to convict

 

[otto]

Which motive was that? Is it now the motive where she directed everything from another room or the one where she is stabbing the victim with the knife that has been tested and is not the murder weapon?

My remark: "Mignini was consistent enough regarding the prosecution of Knox and Sollecito for eleven long months that the jury found the pair guilty."

What do you mean "which motive was that?"

The prosecutor was consistent in his statements for at least 11 months, and we know it was longer, so why do you suggest that he makes things up or is inconsistent? The jury, no different than any highly respected US jury, concluded that the pair were guilty. If the prosecutor was wishy washy, surely they would have noticed?

Give it a rest ... prosecutors can say anything they want, or nothing at all, after the trial ... as their job is over. Whether Knox caused the fatal blow or stood in another room with her fingers sticking in her ears - it makes no difference in terms of complicity and guilt ... or do you mean to argue that because Knox may have been in the next room with her fingers stuck in her ears, that she should be excused from the murder that happened in the next room?

 

[Allusonz]

Leaks to the press? Would you like to take some time to complain about the DNA Report leak, or is that an okay leak?

It is not a leak. Look at the PDF file. It was filed with the Court and like most documents unless sealed can be obtained. One though has to look at it to see the stamp first though

 

[otto]

The bottom line is there is not enough evidence to convict

That is perhaps where you are mistaken.

There is in fact enough evidence to convict and the conviction has been dealt - along with a 26 year sentence. Much as the parents wish it were not so, it is so.