Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #15

[Allusonz]

Right, whether she got special permission or not, I wonder if that will hold up under the scrutiny of the expert report? Know what I mean? After this report, I wonder if Hellman will be like "To hell with your 'special' permission. Shouldn't have happened this way!"

The worst error I see was that they themselves wiped up the dang on floor after photographing and swiping the prints in the hallway. They said they did it so blood wouldnt be trampled from room to room, but if they kept changing footies as they say, then that wouldn't have happened anyway, right?

At the threshold of MK's room, before you go in the hallway, change footies. Put them in a clear bag labeled "MK's room footies, John doe, pair one." Then put on some new footies. When you get to the living room threshold, change footies and repeat bagging.

Or lay down plastic over the whole floor to protect what's beneath it in the hallway. Or use something that can left the prints intact off the floor. Maybe I'm asking too much? But to scrub them off the floor? I never heard of such a thing, and it seems they introduced cleaning agrents to the crime scene.

Oh, I was saying all this to say that PS didn't do the footprint analysis at least. someone else did it, who erroneously cited that it was RG's right foot print on the pillow when it was really his left. I think the reason it happened is because when you turn a shoe over, the right shoe now looks like the left shoe if it were stamped onto the floor. Know what I mean? Simple idiotic error, but I figured it out, looking at IIP, where they have a link to the shoeprint report.

Looking at that pillow, there's blood spatter on it, so MK had to be on it or near it, meaning it had to be on the floor during the attack. So I wonder how the pillow go on the floor with bra clasp eventually beneath it.

I wonder about this whole footprint in MK's room thing because anyalyzing those footprints and the ones that go out the front door give an indication of what RG did in the room and the house.

I'll explain in another post, but in that post will probably be my observances and I might need help putting those pieces together.

No it won't stand up unless you believe the latest at TJMK which made me chuckle at the pile of incorrect info provided.

It does make you wonder with the fact they scraped prints off then tried to replace them. How would you know the correct tread? What would they use to put them back with? Blood? Ketchup? Were they put back accurately? How could anyone then state that they belonged exlusively to one individual? So many questions

Such horrific forensics collection

 

[otto]

They would be victims precisely because not her murderers. Did you really fail to grasp this point? And did you think we were saying, "AK and RS murdered Meredith. Ergo, they are victims and should be set free?". :waitasec::sick:

Yes, I fail to grasp that the three convicted murderers are in fact not murderers, but instead victims. That goes way over my head.

 

[SMK]

Yes, I fail to grasp that the three convicted murderers are in fact not murderers, but instead victims. That goes way over my head.

Well, look at how throngs of people refuse to believe that Casey Anthony is NOT a convicted murderer. The jury has spoken, and yet they do not hear.

 

[Allusonz]

I'm agreeing with you on the garden, but I'm taking for granted that the lady and her daughter who found the phones and also received the bomb threat were probably prudent enough to search their grounds themselves, esp since the case was in the media so much. I'll bet that were out there with metal detectors themselves! So for me, I'm confident the keys weren't in her garden, but logically, I'm thinking they should be, know what I mean?

UNLESS, RG kept them, intending to go back later that night to steal more stuff. I know the front door was wide open, but maybe he thought he locked it well on the way out. Because why else would the keys be missing unless he attempted to lock the door on the way out? We know they had a trick door, but seems...

Oh, well, maybe the other reason he took them but left the front door unlocked could be that he was just making sure the key to MK's room wasn't lying about for someone to easily open the door, I guess.

How would they know what to look for though? Would they be looking for another cell phone since 2 had been found? If it had of been searched properly maybe we would have the answers to the keys and cards. Since it was not done properly we don't know. As well it is not the people that own the properties responsibility, it is ILE responsibility. They may of taken a cursory glance but I would seriously doubt they took alot of time looking for any of the other missing items

 

[Allusonz]

Right. His case if on appeal, but shouldn't he be prohibited to conduct trials and investigations until his appeals are exhausted? I mean, AK and RS were convicted in the first round and they are not free, so why should he, also convicted, be free to roam around doing the VERY thing that he was convicted for?

This is simply MOO but I believe anyone convicted in the Judicial System especially a prosecutor should not be involved with respect to any judicial proceedings until, and as is the case in Italy, the appeals have been exhausted. It looks and smells bad for the system in general

 

[Allusonz]

How's this for contimination?

All he/she has to do now is go walk in RF's room.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ihEV4dCAwIc/Tg9CKv1NzOI/AAAAAAAAABw/t-9I5QiKdAI/s1600/In+Blood+2.jpg

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

oh my this tickled my funny bone. Now multiply this by the number you see in the video. Gotta love this picture it speaks volumes

 

[Allusonz]

I'm very busy trying to stay neutral in the Caylee forum after a very surprising verdict was handed down. So maybe I'll just add a reminder here also because we are getting so close - NO bashing the decision maker(s) no matter what the final outcome is in this case, okay?

Keep in mind that the judge/jury doesn't necessarily care what the popular opinion is - oh my! :innocent:

Salem

Salem must really be hoping :giggle: Hate to tell you this but it is only the report of the DNA experts being presented and questioned at the next hearing not the verdict. Not sure if I should send a wig or a bottle of rubber wine

 

[SkewedView]

Suspicion that something is not right does not justify viewing the murderers as victims. Suspicions that something is wrong in the investigation into Knox and Sollecito should also justify viewing Guede as a victim. Is it reasonable to excuse all three murderers of the murder of Meredith Kercher because there are suspicions?

As I've said before, I think any discussion of false convictions has to be divided into two categories: pre-DNA and post-DNA (post 1995). I think post-DNA false convictions are very rare, and that pre-DNA false convictions are slowly being corrected. Since pre-DNA false convictions are being corrected post-DNA, many seem to argue that those false convictions are contemporary problems. I don't think that's true.

Regarding any suggestion of a false conviction regarding Knox, Sollecito and Guede, that ball was rolling well before the verdict. Any thoughts on why?

I will endeavor to re-find my research material on modern false convictions for you. I too thought as you do, until I saw to my horror that bad forensics has made the problem even worse! This is why author and celebrated Forensic Anthropologist Kathy Riechs is at the forefront of a growing movement to require a strict certification process for forensic experts, and more thorough vetting of expert witnesses, particularly ones working for the state.

To be honest, I can't offer an opinion of the early commentary with regards to this case, as I didn't come to any conclusions myself until relatively recently. I will freely admit, however, that I have biases from traumatic personal experience that likely color my view of how this case has been handled.

 

[Allusonz]

Hmmmmmm ... there were mushrooms in the fridge, there were mushrooms in her stomach contents (IIRC) and the autopsy report states that there was a mushroom in her esophagus but hey, maybe it was an apple. Luminol reveals blood at crime scenes everywhere in the world but, in Perugia, luminol does not work. If it reveals anything, it was the turnip.

There were no mushrooms in the stomach contents

"Massei notes that the state of digestion of Meredith’s stomach contents provided significant additional information towards establishing a more accurate estimate for the time of death. Meredith’s stomach contents included apple, cheese, and floury fragments of the apple crumble she ate while visiting friends, which had not yet entered into her the small intestine"

 

[Allusonz]

Otto's link also showed the TMB test to be a presumptive test as well. The TMB test was negative. My understanding is the TMB test was done after the luminol test. The TMB test is a narrower test (reacts to fewer agents), but the luminol is a more sensitive test (reacts to more dilution). As I understand it. No confirmatory tests shown in Otto's article were done (that I know of.)

The only way, therefore, that the footprints can be from blood is if the footprints were made between the band of sensitivity of the two tests.

From a prosecuterial standpoint, you would have to say that the footprints were made from highly diluted blood. Since they cover the entirety of the foot, and there is no evidence of clean up (smeared footprints from the highly sensitive luminol test), then the assumption would have to be that this person stepped in a puddle of highly diluted blood with their bare foot.

I have read several places that both TMB and Luminol were used. Luminol reacted and TMB was negative. I feel pretty confident accepting these as facts, and a google hunt for TMB results agrees with the randi poster in terms of test sensitivity.

I have not found confirmation that the forensic team saw a "strong" reaction to the luminol. However, the image posted appears to be a strong glow. I am not a forensic scientist, so that's just my opinion. I await facts.

TMB was used. Stephanoni perjured herself on the stand in July of 2009 but from the report of the experts that seems to be the least of her problems right now. The 25th should be interesting if nothing else

 

[Allusonz]

And if someone is a victim of that supposed quest for justice, what then? Or are the servants of the State always to be held faultless for their actions?

My understanding is that many places/individuals have been documented for some time now. I would suspect for future lawsuits

 

[Allusonz]

Even if she wins, she really has lost so much at this point...

True OS but like many survivors like Jaycee Dugard etc., they pull on those experiences and become stronger for that. I would hope that would be the case here as well

 

[Allusonz]

(snip)

lol, no, you have it backwards... the judge denied the testing so mignini could call it a mushroom

So right miley!!! I truly cannot think of anything in which the judge ruled in the defense's favour.

 

[SkewedView]

My feeling is, Knox/Sollecito should be freed with a just verdict at the end of the appeal, or at this point they may as well kill themselves. I think all those who work on behalf of them, believing them to be innocent, such as Candace Dempsey, Bruce Fisher, Doug Bremmer, et al, would feel that freed some years down the line would be a total and devastating defeat, and a victory for the prosecution.

Anyone who is falsely accused of a serious crime is defeated from the start - they can never regain the lost time, reputation or emotional equilibrium that accompany even dropped charges, let alone a false conviction. Really, they have to just try to appreciate what they do have going for them. It's just like being the victim of a more traditional crime - except that they can't look to the State to seek justice for them in most cases.

Really though, house arrest isn't nearly as bad as it sounds - sure, AK won't see as much of her loved ones as she would like, but she will be able to live a relatively normal existence between court dates. RS will have it even better, since his family and friends live in Italy. That is, assuming that there is an acquittal in this appeal, and that the Judge doesn't rule in favor of the Prosecution's inevitable motion to maintain the precautionary incarceration until the appeals run through in their entirety.

 

[Allusonz]

"The sentiment in the room was optimistic. If she wins her appeal she could be home before October, and celebrate her 25th birthday in Seattle."

Knox Fundraiser: http://www.westseattleherald.com/2011/07/12/news/update-slideshow-amanda-knox-benefit-raises-15395

I see no quote from any particular individual that states they expect her home then in this article and I as well know of no one from her family that has stated this. As Nova said they have been very cautious in their comments with respect to this

 

[Allusonz]

Suspicion that something is not right does not justify viewing the murderers as victims. Suspicions that something is wrong in the investigation into Knox and Sollecito should also justify viewing Guede as a victim. Is it reasonable to excuse all three murderers of the murder of Meredith Kercher because there are suspicions?

As I've said before, I think any discussion of false convictions has to be divided into two categories: pre-DNA and post-DNA (post 1995). I think post-DNA false convictions are very rare, and that pre-DNA false convictions are slowly being corrected. Since pre-DNA false convictions are being corrected post-DNA, many seem to argue that those false convictions are contemporary problems. I don't think that's true.

Regarding any suggestion of a false conviction regarding Knox, Sollecito and Guede, that ball was rolling well before the verdict. Any thoughts on why?

Then you are mistaken as I have myself posted links from the Innocence Project regarding false convictions based on sloppy forensics

"Unvalidated or improper forensic science is a leading cause of wrongful convictions. In more than 50% of the DNA exonerations nationwide, unvalidated or improper forensic science contributed to the underlying wrongful conviction"

http://www.innocenceproject.org/fix/Crime-Lab-Oversight.php

 

[flourish]

Hi guys! Just stopping by for a check-in and a "hello" :wave:

I tried to read through to get a quick "what's new" but since the thread is so... um, ... :razz: and :slap: and :slapfight: :bigfight: ...it's hard to wade through it. Anyone kind enough to offer me a few quick "bullet-points" of the latest news/appeal status? Pretty please? :gift:
You know I'd rather hear it from you guys rather than try to decipher media coverage and blogs. :innocent:

 

[otto]

Hi guys! Just stopping by for a check-in and a "hello" :wave:

I tried to read through to get a quick "what's new" but since the thread is so... um, ... :razz: and :slap: and :slapfight: :bigfight: ...it's hard to wade through it. Anyone kind enough to offer me a few quick "bullet-points" of the latest news/appeal status? Pretty please? :gift:
You know I'd rather hear it from you guys rather than try to decipher media coverage and blogs. :innocent:

We're waiting for the expert report to be reviewed in court on July 25. There are three days set aside to debate the validity of the report.

 

[emyr]

The simple truth is that Stephanini fudged it. After getting a negative on the TMB, she decided to hide it and fake that the luminol test was conclusive, rather than to do the confirmatory tests in the lab. I'm sorry, but the subjective impressions of the technician with regards to the strength and speed of the reaction are no substitute for verifiable lab tests. Period. What Stephanini did with her testimony was unethical at the very least. It is in fact the same thing that the FBI lab used to do, before it was discredited and forced to completely change the way that it trained and regulated its people.

From a Judicial standpoint, the Prosecution stating that something must be blood, when it in fact may or may not be blood, is good grounds to toss the whole mess of testimony in the trash - if you are in a court that understands that that is what indeed happened, that is. Good luck finding a Judge that understands Scientific Method well enough to do so :banghead:.

Actually you bring up a good point. If they said it did not strongly flouresce, then the presumptive results mean you cannot RULE OUT heavily diluted blood. However, there is no confirmatory test, so you must not use this as evidence because now you have 3 inconclusive results.

If it DID strongly flouresce, then it is NOT blood, since whatever material is there is significant, and TMB would therefore react to it.

Either way, without further testing, this evidence should not be used to find guilt. It also fits within the scenario of showering in a bathroom where the murderer cleaned up.

EDITED TO ADD:
Amanda's story is she showered in the bathroom. It is highly plausible in this scenario to get diluted blood on your foot.

However, if in fact, this is evidence of Amanda at the murder scene, then the scenario would be as Massei suggested... except that the bottom of her feet did not initially have blood on it. She would be washing off her leg, and the residue would then transfer to the foot.

Either that or she showered with someone who had blood on them.

 

[SMK]

Hi guys! Just stopping by for a check-in and a "hello" :wave:

I tried to read through to get a quick "what's new" but since the thread is so... um, ... :razz: and :slap: and :slapfight: :bigfight: ...it's hard to wade through it. Anyone kind enough to offer me a few quick "bullet-points" of the latest news/appeal status? Pretty please? :gift:
You know I'd rather hear it from you guys rather than try to decipher media coverage and blogs. :innocent:

Hi, Flourish, good to see you back!:seeya: Sorry about my :razz: but that is my way of having fun with fred and otto. :laugh: I think the Casey Anthony case proves that a jury can get it wrong, and I hope it can be conceded that there is some logic to believing also that an Italian jury may have gotten it wrong.....The latest is that the 2 DNA pieces were rejected by the independent panel. Until July 25, this is all we really have to work with.