Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #17

[Malkmus]

Everything in context. She never took a shower that morning. I don't believe a word of that. Then she says she uses the bathmat to dry her feet, yet used it to shuffle to her room because she is afraid of slipping with her wet feet. Then after 2 years she starts stepping on and off after questioning from RS's lawyer. If that is not an obvious planned defense strategy then I don't know what is.

Still, I find this bathmat shuffle thing so strange that I do wonder if there is some truth in it. Therefore I think it is possible that indeed there was no towel (RG used them) in the bathroom after they washed up. That they didn't want to leave any trace with their wet feet and therefore did do some kind of shuffle. Just speculating of course.

So I guess I stand somewhere in the middle

Sherlock, you keep forgetting that only two days after the murder she mentioned stepping on the bathmat that morning and that it was bloody. That right there is all the excuse you need to make any prints and circumvents any "planned defense strategy". Regardless, it doesn't explain cleaning the prints up. Incredulity that she would take a shower, and an inability to explain how the bathmat shuffle would deposit then remove bloody footprints does not trump the fact that the prints tested negative for blood, and that they don't lead from the murder room to the bathroom.

 

[wasnt_me]

Yes, malkmus, nor does it explain the need for the "shower story" in the first place. I don't even know why she needs to lie about a shower or a bathmat when all she had to do was say she walked into the house, FR's door was wide open, and bam! she saw the break-in. No need for a shower, no need to go get RS, because they could have just said they arrived together, esp since it's obvious they were done with said "staging" at noon. Because noon is when they voluntarily made the first calls. So no one was caught. No one had to come up with a story on the fly. There was no need for all this shower mess if it were a lie.

I still see no explanation of why she needed to tell such an elaborate lie about a shower, etc. Why not stage the scene right after the murder and then go on your day trip? Very simple. Let FR find the body when she gets home. That would have confused the TOD even more, if you think about it.

And, I'd like to know, why turn your phone off all night if you killed your roommate and returned to your BF's house for a good night sleep before staging a crime scene at the crack of dawn?

I guess I gotta start thinking as a guilter to understand, but it's hard to do so. When following the logic of it, my questions make me disbelieve guilty conclusions.

 

[sherlockh]

Sherlock, you keep forgetting that only two days after the murder she mentioned stepping on the bathmat that morning and that it was bloody. That right there is all the excuse you need to make any prints and circumvents any "planned defense strategy". Regardless, it doesn't explain cleaning the prints up. Incredulity that she would take a shower, and an inability to explain how the bathmat shuffle would deposit then remove bloody footprints does not trump the fact that the prints tested negative for blood, and that they don't lead from the murder room to the bathroom.

I don't forget a thing. I already explained all that. It is the defense insinuating that stepping on/off the bathmat would have left the luminol footprints. Apparently they don't agree <modsnip> that just stepping on the bathmat is all the excuse you need, as they kept adding details to that story.

I said I speculated about the possibility if their could be some truth in that bathmat shuffle. This does not necessarily include stepping in blood in the murder room and any cleaning of the footprints.

 

[Malkmus]

I don't forget a thing. I already explained all that. It is the defense insinuating that stepping on/off the bathmat would have left the luminol footprints. Apparently they don't agree <modsnip> that just stepping on the bathmat is all the excuse you need, as they kept adding details to that story.

I said I speculated about the possibility if their could be some truth in that bathmat shuffle. This does not necessarily include stepping in blood in the murder room and any cleaning of the footprints.

The defense has always denied that the prints were made in blood, <modsnip> they argued she made the prints when she slid on the bathmat? <modsnip>.

 

[Malkmus]

Yes, malkmus, nor does it explain the need for the "shower story" in the first place. I don't even know why she needs to lie about a shower or a bathmat when all she had to do was say she walked into the house, FR's door was wide open, and bam! she saw the break-in. No need for a shower, no need to go get RS, because they could have just said they arrived together, esp since it's obvious they were done with said "staging" at noon. Because noon is when they voluntarily made the first calls. So no one was caught. No one had to come up with a story on the fly. There was no need for all this shower mess if it were a lie.

I still see no explanation of why she needed to tell such an elaborate lie about a shower, etc. Why not stage the scene right after the murder and then go on your day trip? Very simple. Let FR find the body when she gets home. That would have confused the TOD even more, if you think about it.

And, I'd like to know, why turn your phone off all night if you killed your roommate and returned to your BF's house for a good night sleep before staging a crime scene at the crack of dawn?

I guess I gotta start thinking as a <modsnip> to understand, but it's hard to do so. When following the logic of it, my questions make me disbelieve guilty conclusions.

Yes, there's no sense to any of it. As I said before, if one of the roommates had seen Amanda sneeze in the bathroom on November 2nd we'd be hearing how she deliberately did it to explain her DNA being in the sink. Everything gets interpreted into guilt.

 

[sherlockh]

The defense has always denied that the prints were made in blood, <modsnip> that they argued she made the prints when she slid on the bathmat? <modsnip>.

Yes, by now they are all in full attack of the investigation and we don't hear of the bathmat shuffle anymore. At first, they tried to come up with an 'innocent' explanation for the footprints. That is what the shuffle story is all about.

 

[Malkmus]

Yes, by now they are all in full attack of the investigation and we don't hear of the bathmat shuffle anymore. At first, they tried to come up with an 'innocent' explanation for the footprints. That is what the shuffle story is all about.

The defense never argued that Amanda made those prints after stepping in blood. <modsnip>

 

[Salem]

Respectful debate is welcome at WS, as it fosters an often-helpful exchange of ideas. Bickering is not welcome, as it fosters a spirit of divisiveness and discord."


And this thread is full of divisiveness and discord. Hint, hint!

Salem

ETA: Name calling is not allowed. Name variations are not allowed. And dividing into groups such as the "guilters" and "innocenters" will get this thread closed.

Stop with the us against them attitude. Everyone is allowed to have their opinion. I am getting frustrated with all the times I have had to remind the many posters in this thread that everyone may interpret the evidence as they see fit and it is NOT your job to try to convince them otherwise or attack them because they don't see things your way.

Seriously - this is getting old. If you can't be nice, then don't respond to the post!

 

[Malkmus]

I would hate for Sherlock to think that because my post was snipped what I wrote contained any sort of name-calling or anything resembling telling him I don't appreciate his opinion, as it didn't. Unfortunately these snips have a tendency to make things appear much worse.

 

[SMK]

Excerpted from a CNN piece today - talks of interview with Nina Burleigh:

CNN Radio's John Lisk spoke with journalist Nina Burleigh about her new book, "The Fatal Gift of Beauty: The Trials of Amanda Knox" (Broadway), which takes a look at why this case has captured the attention of so many people.

"Fatal Gift" is not the first book to examine the case and its popularity &#8211; and it certainly won't be the last. Talk of possible movies has dominated headlines, too.

Burleigh explains how the culture in Italy and how Knox&#8217;s actions after the murder may have played into her portrayal in the press during the early days of the case. In those first weeks of the investigation, Knox&#8217;s face was splashed across the front pages of newspapers across Italy. And in 2008, Knox was voted the country's Woman of the Year, surpassing even Carla Bruni (the Italian-born wife of French President Nicolas Sarkozy) and Angelina Jolie, Burleigh recalls.

&#8220;The macabre nature of it, the lurid nature of this tale, combined with her prettiness, made the story irresistible and it became a sensation," Burleigh told CNN. "And that definitely played to her disadvantage.&#8221;

How has that culture played into Knox&#8217;s conviction inside the courtroom and in the public speculation?

&#8220;I think that we in our society, not just in Italy &#8230; all of us have to sort of stand back and say why is it that we are so fascinated by the occasionally evil female and not so interested in the run-of-the-mill, garden-variety, much more common male,&#8221; she said.

Listen to Burleigh describe what she&#8217;s learned about the woman at the center of the trial and other key players, the theories about what happened on the night Kercher was murdered, how the case may have played out if it had been tried in a U.S. courtroom and where the appeals process stands.

Click here for the complete story:

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/1...ssion-with-what-happened-that-night-in-italy/

 

[dgfred]

A blog piece with a good summary of the evidence in my opinion:

http://perugiamurderfile.typepad.co...-trace-of-them-in-meredith-kerchers-room.html

 

[SMK]

A blog piece with a good summary of the evidence in my opinion:

http://perugiamurderfile.typepad.co...-trace-of-them-in-meredith-kerchers-room.html

Really nice pictures of Meredith Kercher and the two defendants.

Amazingly, 70-75% of cases reveal no usable DNA! And it's far from uncommon for there to be no hair,nails or bodily fluids either. But what about fingerprints, surely we should expect to find those? Apparently, there are problems with those too, as stated in this paper Chemist contributes to development of novel method for recovering old fingerprints:

"Despite fingerprinting being a foundational technique of modern forensic science, only a fraction of all the fingermarks at a crime scene are actually detected."

Interesting, but I think the last sentence in this section below would be considered dubious by many:

There's a myriad of reasons for this. Often, prints are too smeared or too partial to be of any use. Others are on surfaces that don't render prints very well and others become damaged by their environment or time. As a case in point, Knox had lived in the cottage for over two months, yet only ONE of her fingerprints was found in the WHOLE apartment and that was on a glass in the kitchen. Are we then supposed to wonder that none of her fingerprints were found in a room that she's accused of being in for less then half an hour? It also must be considered that the public are highly aware of forensics such as fingerprints, so when people commit crimes they tend to be careful what they touch and how they touch them and wipe things they do touch off afterwards, or even wear gloves so they don't leave prints. A little awareness is all it takes. It should also be pointed out that there were at least 16 prints found in the room and also parts of footprints that were too smeared or partial to identify, including the bloody handprint on the wall above Meredith's bed. Any of these could potentially have belonged to Sollecito or Knox.

and from the other blog piece, regarding the upcoming Sep hearing: This will be a very nail-biting wait for the Oct./Nov. verdict, obviously: And I am not at all sure as many of the pro-innocence authors and bloggers are, that Hellman will necessarily be pro-defense, or that this is "case closed" in any way:

Things may get worse for the independent experts September 5, as they are set to be cross-examined by the victim's lawyer Claudio Maresca (in the Italian system, the victims are also legally represented and full access to the process) and Dr Stefanoni is set to take the stand once again, this time to defend her work and from reading Tom Kington's article, she has a good few things to say.

After all of this, one could be forgiven for thinking that the clasp and knife are the only evidence standing against Knox and Sollecito and were they to be rejected be the court, the case against the ex-lovers would be over. The problem is, that couldn't be further from the truth, since they constitute only a fraction of the evidence against the pair.

 

[SMK]

Some compelling points, but I find it extremely bizarre that he should blame strangers rather than Knox and Sollecito, until such time as the ILE and media gave him reason to mention the two other defendants::waitasec: Also, the print he attributes to Sollecito has been disputed, and the explanation for bathroom blood as well....

But, it's what Guede did AFTER the attack and the victim had been stabbed and the other two did not do, that primarily explains the forensic evidence in the room. Whilst under arrest in Germany awaiting extradition to Italy, he wrote a diary where he spoke of some of the events that took place at the cottage that night. He admitted being at the cottage the night of the murder to see Meredith, but claimed he was on the toilet in the bathroom when she was attacked. He emerged from the toilet on hearing a scream, to see Meredith lying bleeding on the floor, her attacker standing over her with a knife who then fled on seeing Guede. He claimed he then went to Meredith's aid, using towels to try and stem the bleeding from her neck. On realising how serious the injury was and that he couldn't help, he fled in a panic, fearing he'd be accused of the crime.

His story of being an innocent bystander in the attack is of course nonsense and disproven by the evidence, but liars and criminals tend to mix lies and truth. The evidence in fact supports his story of trying to help staunch the wound with towels, as there were blood soaked towels on the floor of the room. It would also explain how he got so much blood on his hands, in order to leave the handprint and fingerpints on the pillow and handbag. He claimed he moved the handbag so he could grab Meredith's pillow to place it under her to make her comfortable. Fluids, provide the best medium for transferring DNA. Unless there is friction, it's actually very difficult to transfer DNA in dry conditions. Spending such time so close to her as she bled out, would also explain how the soles of his shoes became coated with enough blood to leave trainer prints leading out the cottage. His applying pressure to the victim's neck with the towels, may also explain her broken hyoid bone. In contrast, Knox and Sollecito, immediately after the stabbing and before there was too much blood, headed straight for the little bathroom in order to wash up, as demonstrated by the blood on the sink and bidet and bloody bare footprint of Sollecito on the bath mat.

Shortly after cleaning up they also fled the scene, only to return later to perform a partial clean-up and staging after the blood had dried and in so doing, they interacted with Meredith's room as little as possible and if they did so, they did so carefully. Guede's diary, known as 'the German Diary', has been translated from the Italian into English by Perugia Murder File and can be downloaded here: RUDY HERMANN GUEDE'S TRANSLATED GERMAN DIARY

http://perugiamurderfile.typepad.co...-trace-of-them-in-meredith-kerchers-room.html

 

[SMK]

As I said above, why not mention AK and RS outright, and all of this seems very self-serving.......

https://docs.google.com/gview?url=http%3A%2F%2Fperugiamurderfile.net%2Fdownload%2Ffile.php%3Fid%3D25&chrome=true&docid=732c562ad698b5743fba48e90c4ce4e9&a=bi&pagenumber=6&w=800

 

[SMK]

In the Appeals Summaries there is indeed a push for a lone wolf scenario, and it still accommodates all of the facts:

It has always been their contention that Meredith Kercher was murdered by Rudy Guede and Rudy Guede alone, in a 'Lone Wolf' attack.

This is despite the fact that the evidence at the crime scene clearly demonstrates the presence and invlovement of multiple people. This is also in direct contrast to the strategy of Knox and Sollecito's defence, who have never pushed hard for a lone wolf scenario and who very recently put forward some rather shady witnesses to testify that there were in actual fact, several persons present and involved on the night of the murder.

 

[wasnt_me]

We've already done over why they chose to present the prison witnesses, and I didn't think it was the defense's job to present any scenerio, only to disprove the prosecution's?

The burden of innocence shouldn't be on the defense in the first place.

I still to this day do not understand what people mean by evidence of multiple attackers. I just don't see any evidence, but RG's. What is the evidence of multiple attackers? Even if I don't agree with it, what is it?

 

[SMK]

We've already done over why they chose to present the prison witnesses, and I didn't think it was the defense's job to present any scenerio, only to disprove the prosecution's?

The burden of innocence shouldn't be on the defense in the first place.

I still to this day do not understand what people mean by evidence of multiple attackers. I just don't see any evidence, but RG's. What is the evidence of multiple attackers? Even if I don't agree with it, what is it?

I know, w_m, I am just trying to keep the ball rolling....bored, I guess:waiting:

I have never understood, either, what the evidence of multiple attackers was. I recall it being said that lack of defensive wounds indicated she had been held down. Then there are the supposed footprints and mixed DNA....none of it stands up under close scrutiny.

Guede as self-serving lone wolf is the boring and most true to life scenario. But as Burleigh clearly states: It does not sell books and open forums and projects, and titillate like Knox did. Nor does it allow one to vent one's scorn on what Knox represents (to some).

I have tried to find good cause to find her guilty so I could remove myself from all, but have been disappointed. I think PMF and their blog and forum are highly intelligent, articulate, and scholarly, but somehow, still off the mark....

 

[OldSteve]

snipped:

I have never understood, either, what the evidence of multiple attackers was..

I never understood how there could be no evidence that all these people were in the same room with MK when she was attacked... is levitation possible in this case?
Actually, since AK was said to have no soul maybe she could float around in the room!?

 

[SMK]

snipped:


I never understood how there could be no evidence that all these people were in the same room with MK when she was attacked... is levitation possible in this case?
Actually, since AK was said to have no soul maybe she could float around in the room!?

:laugh::laugh: Seems so.....

But of course the PMF blog, once more, states that:

Amazingly, 70-75% of cases reveal no usable DNA! And it's far from uncommon for there to be no hair,nails or bodily fluids either. But what about fingerprints, surely we should expect to find those? Apparently, there are problems with those too, as stated in this paper Chemist contributes to development of novel method for recovering old fingerprints:

"Despite fingerprinting being a foundational technique of modern forensic science, only a fraction of all the fingermarks at a crime scene are actually detected."

http://perugiamurderfile.typepad.co...-trace-of-them-in-meredith-kerchers-room.html

And as in my other above-quoted excerpts, they do give a somewhat plausible explanation for why Guede's DNA and prints would be more prevalent than his co-attackers. If one believes intuitively that the 3 were involved, than it can be backed up. I would say that logic points to their being not involved. Reasonable doubt is there, for sure, but does not seem to figure strongly in Perugia.

 

[dgfred]

snipped:

I never understood how there could be no evidence that all these people were in the same room with MK when she was attacked... is levitation possible in this case?
Actually, since AK was said to have no soul maybe she could float around in the room!?

But Steve:

Evidence that AK handled the knife.
Evidence that RS handled the bra clasp.
Bruising consistant with being held by the arms and neck.
Several different knife wounds = multiple knives.
No evidence of defensive wounds = possibility of being unable to resist.
Possibility the towels/other were used to wipe some evidence of others.

*Did you notice the six crime techs in the room during the collection videos?