Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #16

[otto]

No, what he pointed out is that the Kerchers' lawyer only collects large fees if the defendants are convicted. That means his vested interest is not in the truth, but in securing convictions, regardless of the guilt or innocence of those charged.

This is an insane system. And not the fault of the Kerchers' lawyer personally. He may genuinely believe AK and RS are guilty, just as you do. But we will never know whether his ability to collect large fees influenced that belief; he may not even know himself.

I don't know how anyone can arrive at that conclusion. Meredith, the victim, has the right to be represented during the trial. Maresca is her representative. He is there to ensure that her rights are observed. He would be there regardless of whether there was any financial award. Furthermore, the fines that the culprits are required to pay will not likely be paid unless some US Media decides to reward Knox was buckets of money - a la Casey Antony style.

It has never been the goal of Meredith Kercher's lawyer to seek financial compensation from the culprits.

 

[SMK]

It is quite detailed and well-done, and also contains all the misinformation we've come to expect from the pro-guilt side.

I know. I was trying to think of a polite way to work in the misinformation. I was just amazed at whenever I clicked a button to try and exit, more and more photos and text popped up.

 

[Nova]

I don't know how anyone can arrive at that conclusion. Meredith, the victim, has the right to be represented during the trial. Maresca is her representative. He is there to ensure that her rights are observed. He would be there regardless of whether there was any financial award. Furthermore, the fines that the culprits are required to pay will not likely be paid unless some US Media decides to reward Knox was buckets of money - a la Casey Antony style.

It has never been the goal of Meredith Kercher's lawyer to seek financial compensation from the culprits.

BBM: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :great:

Apparently, you have never met a lawyer.

Now I don't know this particular attorney; he may genuinely care about justice for the Kercher family. SV's point, however, was that the system is set up so that the lawyer has a vested interest in something other than the truth.

 

[otto]

I know. I was trying to think of a polite way to work in the misinformation. I was just amazed at whenever I clicked a button to try and exit, more and more photos and text popped up.

I rather enjoyed seeing the conflicting alibis given by Knox and Sollecito ... in their own words ... in one report. I also rather enjoyed seeing the crime scene as limited to the bedroom per Knox/Mellas versus the ample evidence throughout the cottage per investigation. The break in information was also very interesting, making it rather obvious that the window is clearly visible from the road - something that has been denied in comments here. How do you toss all those out the window as misinformation?

 

[otto]

BBM: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :great:

Apparently, you have never met a lawyer.

Now I don't know this particular attorney; he may genuinely care about justice for the Kercher family. SV's point, however, was that the system is set up so that the lawyer has a vested interest in something other than the truth.

Why do you find it so funny that Meredith has a lawyer representing her rights, and why do you assume that the only reason for the victim to be represented is for financial gain?

 

[SMK]

I rather enjoyed seeing the conflicting alibis given by Knox and Sollecito ... in their own words ... in one report. I also rather enjoyed seeing the crime scene as limited to the bedroom per Knox/Mellas versus the ample evidence throughout the cottage per investigation. The break in information was also very interesting, making it rather obvious that the window is clearly visible from the road - something that has been denied in comments here. How do you toss all those out the window as misinformation?

Well, I have come to the conclusion that there are 2 divergent views of AK and RS in relation to the crime: The Hendry et al view, and the TJMK and PMF view. I have rarely seen anyone stay in the gray zone. If Hellman is human, he will tip one way or the other; ditto the jurors. If they tip toward TJMK, AK and RS perish. They perish.

 

[miley]

Investigators originally thought the assailant(s) had escaped through a broken window in Kercher's room?! This is the first I've heard that one MK's windows may have been broken. Anybody know anything about this?

the early articles incorrectly said it was Meredith's window that was broken (instead of FR's window)

I can't remember exactly... but I think it's one of the arguments written in RS's appeal - pointing out Rudy implicated himself by referring to FR's window when the press had (at that point) only referred to Meredith's window.

 

[otto]

Well, I have come to the conclusion that there are 2 divergent views of AK and RS in relation to the crime: The Hendry et al view, and the TJMK and PMF view. I have rarely seen anyone stay in the gray zone. If Hellman is human, he will tip one way or the other; ditto the jurors. If they tip toward TJMK, AK and RS perish. They perish.

It's rather difficult to claim that the pair have an alibi when we see their conflicting stories in their own words. It's rather difficult to believe that anyone could climb in through Filomina's window when no one else has been able to do it. Seriously ... if the defense could demonstrate that it was possible, they would, yet all they can demonstrate is that when someone stands on the window grate in the floor below, they can touch the base of the window ledge with an outstretched arm. It's rather difficult to claim that the bedroom is the crime scene when there is evidence throughout the cottage. It's rather difficult to deny that Meredith is the victim and that she is entitled to have a representative in the court, yet some prefer to believe that the Kercher family employs Maresca because they are money grubbers.

 

[Nova]

It's rather difficult to claim that the pair have an alibi when we see their conflicting stories in their own words. It's rather difficult to believe that anyone could climb in through Filomina's window when no one else has been able to do it. Seriously ... if the defense could demonstrate that it was possible, they would, yet all they can demonstrate is that when someone stands on the window grate in the floor below, they can touch the base of the window ledge with an outstretched arm. It's rather difficult to claim that the bedroom is the crime scene when there is evidence throughout the cottage. It's rather difficult to deny that Meredith is the victim and that she is entitled to have a representative in the court, yet some prefer to believe that the Kercher family employs Maresca because they are money grubbers.

BBM: Please stop misstating what other posters have written. It's the same as lying and we all know how you feel about that.

 

[SkewedView]

Otto, stop insinuating that I don't care about the rights of the victim and her survivors - it's insulting, hurtful, childish behavior...FYI, I've been in their shoes - it was my fiance, whom I had been with since the first grade, not my child, and the murder weapon was a vehicle, but the situation is very similar otherwise...so believe me when I say that my heart breaks for them...and stop with this passive aggressive BS...

Alright, I'm going to go to work and cool off...

 

[otto]

BBM: Please stop misstating what other posters have written. It's the same as lying and we all know how you feel about that.

In what way am I misunderstanding the clear statements suggesting that the victim's lawyer is in it for the money? What makes anyone think that the lawyer representing Meredith and her family is going to get a portion of the money awarded to the victim's family members?

Posts here regarding Maresca (representative for the victim Meredith Kercher):

wasnt_me: "Isn't that the lawyers job? I didn't realize it was his job to be just one more prosecution attorney. I think that's unfair, and the court shouldn't even allow him to act in that capacity. Anything civil ought to be separate from the criminal, and settled after the criminal has been settled."

Skewed_View: "The problem is that the Kercher's lawyer stands to lose his share of two million euros if AK & RS are acquitted - remember the terms of the civil trial verdict - one million from each defendant found guilty in the criminal trial (after all appeals, this is the Italian System). It's standard for lawyers in such cases to take a hefty chunk of anything their clients get, so that's one heck of a powerful motivator for him to cheer lead the prosecution no matter what."

Nova: "No, what he pointed out is that the Kerchers' lawyer only collects large fees if the defendants are convicted. That means his vested interest is not in the truth, but in securing convictions, regardless of the guilt or innocence of those charged. This is an insane system. And not the fault of the Kerchers' lawyer personally. He may genuinely believe AK and RS are guilty, just as you do. But we will never know whether his ability to collect large fees influenced that belief; he may not even know himself."

Nova: "(lots of laughing icons) Apparently, you have never met a lawyer. Now I don't know this particular attorney; he may genuinely care about justice for the Kercher family. SV's point, however, was that the system is set up so that the lawyer has a vested interest in something other than the truth."

 

[otto]

So, we've seen everyone involved with the investigation criticized. The prosecutors have likewise been trashed. The jury has been considered no good because they were not sequestered. Judge Hellman is on the fast track to being seriously trashed - particularly if he doesn't close his eyes to anything refuting that contamination cannot be excluded. Now the lawyer for the victim is motivated by self-interests and money.

Is there anyone, anywhere associated with seeking justice for Meredith Kercher, that has not been trashed?

 

[sherlockh]

So, we've seen everyone involved with the investigation criticized. The prosecutors have likewise been trashed. The jury has been considered no good because they were not sequestered. Judge Hellman is on the fast track to being seriously trashed - particularly if he doesn't close his eyes to anything refuting that contamination cannot be excluded. Now the lawyer for the victim is motivated by self-interests and money.

Is there anyone, anywhere associated with seeking justice for Meredith Kercher, that has not been trashed?

Mmhh..the independent experts maybe? Although, admitting that Meredith's full DNA profile is on the knife!!...how dare they???

 

[Nova]

In what way am I misunderstanding the clear statements suggesting that the victim's lawyer is in it for the money? What makes anyone think that the lawyer representing Meredith and her family is going to get a portion of the money awarded to the victim's family members?

Posts here regarding Maresca (representative for the victim Meredith Kercher):

wasnt_me: "Isn't that the lawyers job? I didn't realize it was his job to be just one more prosecution attorney. I think that's unfair, and the court shouldn't even allow him to act in that capacity. Anything civil ought to be separate from the criminal, and settled after the criminal has been settled."

Skewed_View: "The problem is that the Kercher's lawyer stands to lose his share of two million euros if AK & RS are acquitted - remember the terms of the civil trial verdict - one million from each defendant found guilty in the criminal trial (after all appeals, this is the Italian System). It's standard for lawyers in such cases to take a hefty chunk of anything their clients get, so that's one heck of a powerful motivator for him to cheer lead the prosecution no matter what."

Nova: "No, what he pointed out is that the Kerchers' lawyer only collects large fees if the defendants are convicted. That means his vested interest is not in the truth, but in securing convictions, regardless of the guilt or innocence of those charged. This is an insane system. And not the fault of the Kerchers' lawyer personally. He may genuinely believe AK and RS are guilty, just as you do. But we will never know whether his ability to collect large fees influenced that belief; he may not even know himself."

Nova: "(lots of laughing icons) Apparently, you have never met a lawyer. Now I don't know this particular attorney; he may genuinely care about justice for the Kercher family. SV's point, however, was that the system is set up so that the lawyer has a vested interest in something other than the truth."

And from those posts, which discuss a systemic problem in which a lawyer is paid based on convictions rather than the revelation of the truth, posts in which each of us went out of his way to caution that we weren't impugning the ethics of the individual attorney, you concluded the following:

...some prefer to believe that the Kercher family employs Maresca because they are money grubbers.

I think that's what you like to call a "whopper lie." None of us criticized or even mentioned the motives of the Kerchers. We didn't even say their lawyer was a bad guy. SV merely stated the obvious, that if the victim's attorney gets paid upon conviction, then that attorney becomes a de facto member of the prosecution, not a seeker of the truth.

But since you use the word "employ," I assume you are now conceding that perhaps the Kerchers pay Maresca in some manner. In some posts you seemed to take offense at the notion that Maresca might get paid for doing his job.

 

[Nova]

Mmhh..the independent experts maybe? Although, admitting that Meredith's full DNA profile is on the knife!!...how dare they???

Are the pro-guilties seriously complaining about criticism of PLE, even after the Court's own experts spent hours highlighting PLE's incompetence and perjury?

I can understand perhaps that you still believe the remaining evidence is sufficient to prove AK's and RS' guilt. But demanding that we pretend this investigation was anything but badly botched is absurd!

 

[otto]

And from those posts, which discuss a systemic problem in which a lawyer is paid based on convictions rather than the revelation of the truth, posts in which each of us went out of his way to caution that we weren't impugning the ethics of the individual attorney, you concluded the following:



I think that's what you like to call a "whopper lie." None of us criticized or even mentioned the motives of the Kerchers. We didn't even say their lawyer was a bad guy. SV merely stated the obvious, that if the victim's attorney gets paid upon conviction, then that attorney becomes a de facto member of the prosecution, not a seeker of the truth.

But since you use the word "employ," I assume you are now conceding that perhaps the Kerchers pay Maresca in some manner. In some posts you seemed to take offense at the notion that Maresca might get paid for doing his job.

Maresca is paid just like any lawyer. Being paid has nothing to do with whether the family were awarded compensation, as it is believed by the family that the fines were symbolic.

"In asking for what he called "symbolic" damages, the lawyer, Francesco Maresca, told the court here that he believed the case against the two young people was "crystal clear" and enough for the jury and judges to find them guilty.

...

A civil trial in Italy occurs at the same time as the criminal trial. If the jurors and the judge find Knox guilty and award the damages requested today, she will be ordered to pay $12 million to the Kercher family. The sum would be divided among the parents and Kercher's three siblings.

Sollecito would also be liable for $12 million.

After summing up the main evidence discussed in the course of the trial, Maresca said Kercher's family was asking the court for "justice and truth" in the death of their loved one."

http://abcnews.go.com/International/amanda-knox-civil-trial/story?id=9191557

"The Kerchers were awarded £3.96million compensation from Knox and Sollecito, but Miss Kercher's brother Lyle said the figure was 'symbolic' and no amount could make up for their loss."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ary-Clinton-called-jailing.html#ixzz1TwiOcwZZ

 

[otto]

Are the pro-guilties seriously complaining about criticism of PLE, even after the Court's own experts spent hours highlighting PLE's incompetence and perjury?

I can understand perhaps that you still believe the remaining evidence is sufficient to prove AK's and RS' guilt. But demanding that we pretend this investigation was anything but badly botched is absurd!

The pro-verdict/pro-jury people seem to be a little surprised that absolutely everyone associated with seeking justice for Meredith Kercher has been criticized for one thing or another. Never, in all the time I've been on this forum, have I ever seen anything like it.

 

[sherlockh]

Are the pro-guilties seriously complaining about criticism of PLE, even after the Court's own experts spent hours highlighting PLE's incompetence and perjury?

I can understand perhaps that you still believe the remaining evidence is sufficient to prove AK's and RS' guilt. But demanding that we pretend this investigation was anything but badly botched is absurd!

No, the independent experts admitting that Meredith's full profile was on the knife means that you were totally wrong and still keep going on about how wrong everybody else was. But I guess I got that totally wrong?

 

[otto]

I really don't understand why anyone would suggest that the lawyer for Meredith would be motivated by money. The belief is that the three culprits are guilty and that they will spend a good portion of their lives in prison. There is no expectation that any of the guilty parties will ever have the kind of money they have been ordered to pay. That assumption is, of course, based on the belief that murderers are not rewarded with celebrity status and million dollar deals upon release, but they are instead shunned and pushed to the sidelines of society for the remainder of their lives.

The family and their lawyer have no expectation of the money actually being paid, so to suggest that the lawyer's actions and statements in court are motivated by money makes no sense.

 

[Nova]

Maresca is paid just like any lawyer. Being paid has nothing to do with whether the family were awarded compensation, as it is believed by the family that the fines were symbolic.

"In asking for what he called "symbolic" damages, the lawyer, Francesco Maresca, told the court here that he believed the case against the two young people was "crystal clear" and enough for the jury and judges to find them guilty.

...

A civil trial in Italy occurs at the same time as the criminal trial. If the jurors and the judge find Knox guilty and award the damages requested today, she will be ordered to pay $12 million to the Kercher family. The sum would be divided among the parents and Kercher's three siblings.

Sollecito would also be liable for $12 million.

After summing up the main evidence discussed in the course of the trial, Maresca said Kercher's family was asking the court for "justice and truth" in the death of their loved one."

http://abcnews.go.com/International/amanda-knox-civil-trial/story?id=9191557

"The Kerchers were awarded £3.96million compensation from Knox and Sollecito, but Miss Kercher's brother Lyle said the figure was 'symbolic' and no amount could make up for their loss."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ary-Clinton-called-jailing.html#ixzz1TwiOcwZZ

If Maresca is "paid just like any lawyer," then he gets a percentage of the damages awarded in a civil suit. I appreciate the additional info on Italy's convoluted judicial system, but what you write seems to confirm precisely what Skewed View said in the first place. A civil judgment must coincide with the criminal verdict, so Maresca indeed needs convictions in order to get his cut. That's the system and not his fault, but it does tend to make him a member of the prosecution rather than an independent seeker of truth.

This is not to say I believe Maresca himself to be corrupt. I have no knowledge of him.

But surely you can see the problem with this system. That's what some of us were discussing.

I believe the Kerchers would happily forego 4 million pounds or 12 million pounds to have Meredith back. Nobody here said otherwise. (That doesn't mean they won't take whatever damages they can collect. Your quotes don't say that. I for one won't blame them: even though I think they are mistaken, I understand they believe the defendants killed their daughter/sister.)

The Kerchers did not choose this court case, it was thrust upon them.