Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #18

[Chris_Halkides]

It seems that some people actually believe that Knox was a suspect because she flipped a cartwheel and that she was interrogated for 56 hours straight ... I wonder what websites the author has been reading.

"Knox’s family was practically turning cartwheels over the development — just as Knox herself was reported to have turned cartwheels at the police station when first brought in for questioning over her roommate’s murder.

It was this weird behaviour that instantly got her pegged as a prime suspect by Mignini. And, oh yeah, there was a signed confession too, squeezed out during some 56 hours straight of interrogation in which Knox admitted that she had been in the flat when Kercher was killed, had heard the victim’s screams but stuck her fingers in her ears, and knew the identity of the murderer."

otto,

From the link you provided, "She did, after all, alter her story repeatedly and changed her alibi at least nine times." This is no more true than the claim about the length of the interrogation, and there are other errors. Someone should have fact-checked this article more carefully.

 

[SkewedView]

It seems that some people actually believe that Knox was a suspect because she flipped a cartwheel and that she was interrogated for 56 hours straight ... I wonder what websites the author has been reading.

"Knox’s family was practically turning cartwheels over the development — just as Knox herself was reported to have turned cartwheels at the police station when first brought in for questioning over her roommate’s murder.

It was this weird behaviour that instantly got her pegged as a prime suspect by Mignini. And, oh yeah, there was a signed confession too, squeezed out during some 56 hours straight of interrogation in which Knox admitted that she had been in the flat when Kercher was killed, had heard the victim’s screams but stuck her fingers in her ears, and knew the identity of the murderer."

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1052267

Certainly not the main pro-guilt or pro-innocence sites, as half of the info in there seems to have been made up whole cloth for the sake of drama (neck nearly sawed off? huh?), and much of the rest is confused (vegetable matter on the bra clasp? What?).

Really, associating this kind of crack-pot commentary with the larger pro-innocence crowd is like associating Coulter with the larger pro-guilt crowd...

 

[SMK]

Coulter is One to Talk

In condemning the media and liberals for their questioning of the validity of the conviction of Amanda Knox, Ann Coulter referred to them as “judges of the universe.” Was she looking in a mirror when she wrote that?

This is the woman who wrote that mothers of children born out of wedlock should be prosecuted for child abuse for raising them in single-parent homes!

Ann has appointed herself supreme judge of everyone and everything and her vitriol betrays her self-proclaimed Christianity.

http://www.sj-r.com/opinions/x219212701/Letter-Coulter-is-one-to-talk


and also Bremner's piece:

Response to a Chowder Headed Article by Ann Coulter on Amanda Knox Case
Posted by Doug Bremner

http://www.speakwithoutinterruption...d-article-by-ann-coulter-on-amanda-knox-case/

 

[SMK]

It seems that some people actually believe that Knox was a suspect because she flipped a cartwheel and that she was interrogated for 56 hours straight ... I wonder what websites the author has been reading.

"Knox’s family was practically turning cartwheels over the development — just as Knox herself was reported to have turned cartwheels at the police station when first brought in for questioning over her roommate’s murder.

It was this weird behaviour that instantly got her pegged as a prime suspect by Mignini. And, oh yeah, there was a signed confession too, squeezed out during some 56 hours straight of interrogation in which Knox admitted that she had been in the flat when Kercher was killed, had heard the victim’s screams but stuck her fingers in her ears, and knew the identity of the murderer."

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1052267

All true. But I wonder why it is, that so many articulate, educated, intelligent people find this does not persuade them of her guilt? :waitasec: Are ALL self-deluded victims of the vast PR conspiracy? Is this even believable anymore?:waitasec: On the other hand, I am appalled at headlines I am seeing, such as "Should Knox return to Seattle when she is freed?" and "Knox believes she will be home for Thanksgiving". This is the kind of pride which goeth before a fall. We have NO indication that Hellman is definitely against the prosecution; no proof that the convictions will be overturned. I am taking nothing for granted, and I wish the media would not proclaim a victory before it is certain. It may be antagonizing Hellman. It sure would me, if I were in his place.

 

[otto]

otto,

From the link you provided, "She did, after all, alter her story repeatedly and changed her alibi at least nine times." This is no more true than the claim about the length of the interrogation, and there are other errors. Someone should have fact-checked this article more carefully.

Quite true, but if people fully realized that Knox accused an innocent man of rape and murder after a mere 2 hours of questioning as a witness, and not 56 hours straight of severe interrogation, they will more seriously question her character. That interferes with the "Knox is innocent" line, so they reprint the initial statements provided by Knox through her lawyer about 54 or 56 hours of severe interrogation while being beaten and deprived of the necessities of life. I suppose it all depends on the agenda. It's unfortunate that Knox, through her lawyer and parents, provided this false information in the first place.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Quite true, but if people fully realized that Knox accused an innocent man of rape and murder after a mere 2 hours of questioning as a witness, and not 56 hours straight of severe interrogation, they will more seriously question her character. That interferes with the "Knox is innocent" line, so they reprint the initial statements provided by Knox through her lawyer about 54 or 56 hours of severe interrogation while being beaten and deprived of the necessities of life. I suppose it all depends on the agenda. It's unfortunate that Knox, through her lawyer and parents, provided this false information in the first place.

otto,

Your statement is not the whole truth. Knox was questioned for an estimated 20 hours over the course of several days, and Laura's testimony indicates that Amanda was yelled at before the night of the 5th. One should also factor in that this interrogation was at night at in a foreign language (Knox's Italian was relatively simple at this point). Do you think that the police are free of an agenda in this case? If so, how do you explain their multiple false statements. They weren't even being interrogated.

 

[otto]

All true. But I wonder why it is, that so many articulate, educated, intelligent people find this does not persuade them of her guilt? :waitasec: Are ALL self-deluded victims of the vast PR conspiracy? Is this even believable anymore?:waitasec: On the other hand, I am appalled at headlines I am seeing, such as "Should Knox return to Seattle when she is freed?" and "Knox believes she will be home for Thanksgiving". This is the kind of pride which goeth before a fall. We have NO indication that Hellman is definitely against the prosecution; no proof that the convictions will be overturned. I am taking nothing for granted, and I wish the media would not proclaim a victory before it is certain. It may be antagonizing Hellman. It sure would me, if I were in his place.

I too am a little surprised at the reporting on the case that gives the impression that Sollecito and Knox have had their verdicts overturned and there's nothing more to do than complete some paperwork. However, the media isn't making this up out of thin air. They are getting this information from somewhere, and it wouldn't surprise me if it's coming from the family.

 

[otto]

otto,

Your statement is not the whole truth. Knox was questioned for an estimated 20 hours over the course of several days, and Laura's testimony indicates that Amanda was yelled at before the night of the 5th. One should also factor in that this interrogation was at night at in a foreign language (Knox's Italian was relatively simple at this point). Do you think that the police are free of an agenda in this case? If so, how do you explain their multiple false statements. They weren't even being interrogated.

The questioning of Knox as a witness, when she accused Patrick of rape and murder, lasted two hours. An interpreter was made available, and Knox's formal statements were written in English. Those statements could not be used against her. I think we all know that the only statement used against her was the voluntary statement she gave the next day ... but that is another point that is ignored by some media, especially media that are confused about who is the victim in this murder.

The parents claimed that she was interrogated for 54 hours, beaten, deprived of food and drink, that she was deprived of an interpreter and that she was coerced or forced to implicate Patrick. Knox admitted in court that she had an interpreter, that she introduced Patrick's name through her witness statements. It's not surprising that some people think there was a huge conspiracy surrounding the arrest of Knox and Sollecito since false statements originated with Knox and that is what Knox and her family want the public to believe.

You do realize that a police tactic used in all parts of the world is to tell witnesses and suspects things that are not true. Prosecutors will release false information to the media in efforts to gather evidence and information. These are facts of life.

 

[emyr]

The questioning of Knox as a witness, when she accused Patrick of rape and murder, lasted two hours. An interpreter was made available, and Knox's formal statements were written in English. Those statements could not be used against her. I think we all know that the only statement used against her was the voluntary statement she gave the next day ... but that is another point that is ignored by some media, especially media that are confused about who is the victim in this murder.

The parents claimed that she was interrogated for 54 hours, beaten, deprived of food and drink, that she was deprived of an interpreter and that she was coerced or forced to implicate Patrick. Knox admitted in court that she had an interpreter, that she introduced Patrick's name through her witness statements. It's not surprising that some people think there was a huge conspiracy surrounding the arrest of Knox and Sollecito since false statements originated with Knox and that is what Knox and her family want the public to believe.

You do realize that a police tactic used in all parts of the world is to tell witnesses and suspects things that are not true. Prosecutors will release false information to the media in efforts to gather evidence and information. These are facts of life.

I thought she was interrogated for over 50 hours over 4 days? Is that not true? I would like to know what the accurate interrogation time was. Did they include time waiting in their calculation? Is that the issue?

I thought she was deprived of food and drink until she named Patrick at the last interrogation? Not true?

I thought her parents claimed she was slapped on the head? Not true? Did they actually use the word beaten? I thought we had resolved this that they never used the word beaten.

I thought it was a proven fact that the police showed her a text of Patrick's and encouraged her to name him as the murderer. She stated that in court, did she not? Isn't that considered coercion? (Edited to add: I know they did not use his name, but pointed to the text and said something like "Who were you going to meet?")

I do think you are right that the parents said she was denied an interpreter. I believe they were operating off of incorrect information, and once they were corrected, they never repeated the statement again. I could be wrong. Am I wrong?

 

[Fulcanelli]

Welcome Fulcanelli.

Quoting from the C&V report (bolding mine):

- The quantification of the extracts obtained from the samples obtained from item 36 (knife) and item 165B (bra clasps), conducted via Real Time PCR, did not reveal the presence of DNA.
- In view of the absence of DNA in the extracts that we obtained, with the agreement of the consultants for the parties , we did not proceed to the subsequent amplification step.

Too funny. Now they want a redo.

Hi Rose,

Thanks...you've helped prove the point that their report isn't worth the paper it was written on. They found things which in their report they claimed not to find or didn't bother mentioning it then claimed it existed on the stand.

The first example, they claimed to have found no DNA on the knife blade (as you cite from their report). It then transpired in court the other day that thet did find DNA on the blade, but didn't bother testing it. Their claim in court was, they didn't bother testing it to extract a profile because they deemed it 'too small' to be valid. However, their machines (which have advanced since the knife was originally tested in 2007) was actually quite capable of extracting a profile from samples of that volume. Indeed, Meredith Kercher's expert was actually present as an observer during these tests and asked them why they didn't test the DNA , despite having the capability...they told her they'd decided not to. She testified to this on the stand during the appeal. Therefore, their claim there was no DNA on the blade in their report was a 'lie'. Being one to follow this case as closely as you do, I'm surprised you didn't know this? Did you not follow the latest bout of appeal hearings?

The second example. On the stand the independent expert claimed she found as many as 17 profiles on the bra clasp "although I did not mention this in my report". In other words, she considered that important enough to claim on the stand, but not to even mention in her report, much less provide evidence in it to support it. So, what we are left with from her is an unsupported claim from her, not mentioned in her report, of finding 17 profiles on the clasp that no other expert who had looked at the clasp could find. As for the claim she could see her own alleles on it, that was flat out deceit designed for people who don't understand DNA...one cannot construct the profiles of whoever one likes from a bunch of stray alleles found on a sample...DNA profiling doesn't work like that.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Indeed, and I'm not sure what the prosecutor's pay would have to do with experts being compensated for their testimony anyway.

They are compensated for their 'time', not their testimony.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Ignoring for the moment that there is growing, alarming evidence that LCN testing was introduced into the global court systems very prematurely (the science of interpretation in these tests is in its infancy - that's why PS is correct in stating that there are no true international standards for this field, as disturbing as that is).

There is 'Low Count', and then there is 'extremely low count', which means samples where the non-amplified amount of genetic material is so low that it is indistinguishable from contamination and nearly impossible to ethically interpret the typing from.

The sample from the blade falls in this category, and as has been pointed out, PS and the other representatives from the state that where observing the Independent Experts' procedures were in agreement with their decision...until the experts gave an opinion they didn't like, that is. Funny how the State is now calling foul on something that they themselves endorsed up until this point - guess they assume that the Court has a short memory or something.

No, LCN testing has been used in the European system for years and since it's the Europeans that pioneered it and are at the cutting edge of the field, I would suggest that they know best regarding it's use...being the experts and all.

There is no such thing as 'extremely low count'. There LCN DNA and it is either LCN or it isn't, there are not catagories of LCN. Although, I see some commenters who don't understand the first thing about it are trying to arbitrarily introduce them.

 

[Fulcanelli]

It still does not help if the judge guiding them does not have the knowledge required or chooses to come up with a different reasoning than is even presented in court by either the prosecution or defense.

Since he has many years of experience in investigating murder cases, I would hazard he has all the experience required...especially considering that he's classed as the 'expert of experts'.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Actually, it is in RS's appeal

So? Raffaele's and Amanda's defence have claimed lots of things. It don't make it so.

It's old by the way. They were trying to claim about the cartoon way back in the pre-trial with Micheli. It didn't wash then (just like most of the things they argued) and it won't wash now.

It seems that people seem to think the content of the Raffaele's and Amanda's appeal documents is 'new'. Most of it, is simply repeating what they have argued/presented already in the pre-trial and trial.

 

[Fulcanelli]

I gather then that the experts testimony that slippage between 2-3 hours and by 4 hours should stand then?

Or that arguments for TOD based on stomach content should not be considered seriously in a court at all...just as all the published literature on the subject strongly maintains.

 

[otto]

I thought she was interrogated for over 50 hours over 4 days? Is that not true? I would like to know what the accurate interrogation time was. Did they include time waiting in their calculation? Is that the issue?

I thought she was deprived of food and drink until she named Patrick at the last interrogation? Not true?

I thought her parents claimed she was slapped on the head? Not true? Did they actually use the word beaten? I thought we had resolved this that they never used the word beaten.

I thought it was a proven fact that the police showed her a text of Patrick's and encouraged her to name him as the murderer. She stated that in court, did she not? Isn't that considered coercion? (Edited to add: I know they did not use his name, but pointed to the text and said something like "Who were you going to meet?")

I do think you are right that the parents said she was denied an interpreter. I believe they were operating off of incorrect information, and once they were corrected, they never repeated the statement again. I could be wrong. Am I wrong?

Knox and Sollecito had just finished eating pizza with Sollecito's friends at 10 PM before Sollecito was asked to go to the police station to answer a couple of questions. Knox went along for fun and to do her stretchy splits and cartwheels. She was questioned from about 11:30 until 1:30 after Sollecito admitted that he told police a load of rubbish and lied because Knox asked him to lie. So ... no ... she shouldn't have been starving when she first accused Patrick of rape and murder.

The parents initially used the word beaten, and I've posted that quote here in the past. I don't have time to look for it. Knox still claims that the only reason she accused Patrick is because she was bopped on the head twice, and out popped Patrick's name. Last Friday, through her lawyer, she claimed that she no longer remembers why she accused Patrick.

Police asked her about a message on her phone. They did not introduce Patrick's name to the conversation, and they certainly didn't ask her to accuse her boss of rape and murder.

Regardless of whether many of Meredith's friends and acquaintances were kept waiting at the police station while they were interviewed, one after the other, that does not constitute 54 hours of interrogation for anyone. Liars, like Knox and Sollecito, were obviously asked to return to the police station to explain the discrepencies between their statements and the facts. If that required several interviews, so be it. If they had been truthful and innocent at the outset, they would not have been asked to return to answer more questions.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Strange. I could of sworn the one expert called was Stephanoni's boss yet what was stated is that prosecution experts do not get paid but the defense experts do.

Yeah, they get paid by the hour like most people.

Since the Italian system has functioned well for many years with the roles of experts never being the issue in any other cases, I find it strange that some who have little or no knowledge about the Italian system are trying to insinuate (with no evidence it should be said) that it has suddenly just become one and only for this case. If you have any evidence there is a problem other than smear via innuendo, I'm happy to hear it. If not, I see no purpose in continuing with this line of discussion. <modsnip>.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Yes he was there were the disco busses and everyone were in costumes and masks. That would then make it the 31st

But there were buses. Who cares if they were disco buses or not? The guy was a tramp, not a disco bus expert.

As for the date, <modsnip>. They don't do Halloween the same way over there, primarily because it's an imported tradition and it also joins on to the Italian holidays (Saints Day...Day of the Dead), so it is treated like an extended event, rather then one limited to a single night. There were people in costume on the night of the 1st, according to people who were in Perugia at the time.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Except the experts and the appropriate representatives determined NOT to test it.

The representatives determined not to test it, despite that being their task. The 'representatives' did not determine not to test it. Were you familiar with what took place in the actual gearings, you would know this.

 

[Fulcanelli]

If you go back a few pages in this thread an article was posted stating that luminol grows the brightest at 6 weeks

ETA I was simply stating I don't believe that forensics should wait 6 weeks to be collected and allow the bad guys to stay on the streets simply for the argument that luminol glows the best at 6 weeks.

Only the bad guys weren't on the streets, they'd been arrested and were sage in custody.