Meredith Kercher murdered - Amanda Knox convicted, now appeals #5

[dgfred]

I'm convinced that those who decided AK and RS were guilty wouldn't believe anything they said.

They could be hooked up to polygraph machines and it still wouldn't help.

Once a mind has been closed, it tends to stay as closed as an oyster and will simply not consider that it might be wrong.

Lets see which side is oyster like:

*AK was coerced into confessing to be at the crime scene.
*Patrick was accused only because of LE pressure/interrogation tactics.
*The dna evidence on the knife is faked, wrong or planted.
*The dna on the bra-clasp is from contamination, just wrong or planted.
*RG's dna evidence is perfectly fine... but not in AK's or RS's case.
*Witness statements are not valid unless recorded or taped.
*RS's was either with AK at a friends party, with AK early but then she left,
with AK all night (movies, sex, sleep), or on the Internet all night.
*AK was either with RS all night (dinner, movies, sex, sleep) or could not remember (which is normal for everyone).
*AK did not leave RS's home regardless of cell phone evidence that she did.
*AK's contact with a cocaine dealer both before and just after the murder is not relevant to the murder case.
*Patrick was perfectly satified with AK's work at the bar and didn't want to fire her.
*AK wasn't upset with Patrick over just handing out flyers, or Meredith making drinks at his club... Patrick was mistaken.
*AK didn't storm off after Patrick told her these things... he is mistaken again.
*Patrick is lying in his interviews with the Daily Mail or the reporter misunderstood what he was saying.
*Meredith and AK were good friends, they never had any sort of problems.
*AK only smoked a little bit of pot and didn't do cocaine at all.
*RS did not have a cocaine 'problem'.
*Both RS and AK turned off their phones even though neither had done this in the previous months because they only wanted to have a quiet night in.
*The mixed blood drops with AK's blood and Meredith's dna are 'normal' because she just happened to be bleeding the night/morning after the murder.
*AK's dna mixed with Meredith's blood in drops is normal because she lived there in the cottage.
*The bare footprints found in luminal can not be AK's or RS's.
*The luminal prints were not in blood just outside of a bloody crime scene.
*The barefoot bloody print on the bathroom mat is not RS's just because the defense expert could not prove otherwise. LE experts are mistaken.
*Though no evidence of RG taking his shoes off, but he must have to make the bathmat print.
*AK's naked 'bathmat shuffle' seems like a perfectly normal thing for a young woman that just discovered an open front door, blood on the floor/sink/wall and poo in the toilet.
*It is normal for a flatmate/friends to check their car for evidence of murder after AK and RS get out of the car.
*RS never claiming to be on the internet all night will still be an alibi, and cell activity in the very early morning does not mean they didn't sleep until 10am.
*Kissing, flirting, sticking your tongue out, etc with your boyfriend is normal behavior for someone in a police waiting room just after a murder of your friend.
*Being told by a policewoman that this is inappropriate behavior is just the policewoman being a fuddyduddy. Only AK being AK.
*The prosecutor is an evil mastermind of convicting innocent people.
*It doesn't matter that there were 2 prosecutors, one was such a powerful influence that the other had no say in the prosecution's case.
*RS was worried 'that the Ivorian might say strange things' after RG's arrest only because... well because.
*Every witness for the prosecution is lying, mistaken, a police informant or all three.
*It is perfectly understandable why AK lied about what time they ate dinner- she didn't look at a clock.
*RG broke in thru Filomena's window although there is no evidence whatsoever of it.
*A burgler would throw a rock through a window (Filomena lied about the closed shutters), climb a wall and crawl through when there was a much easier route in over the balcony in back.
*A burgler was planning to steal from college students instead of a big, nice home because... no real reason really.
*A defense lawyer climbed within reach of the window sill, but he didn't crawl through the window... still shows how easy it would be to do so.
*There was no disturbances below the window or on the wall only because investigators didn't look or hid the evidence of it.
*There was no glass on top of the clothes because Filomena was lying/mistaken or the Investigators disturbed the scene or were mistaken.
*AK statements and trial testimony is confusing, ambiguous, mixed up, and
contradictory only because 'it is just AK being AK'. Not on purpose.
*RS did not testify only because it is his lawyer's advice.
*RS made up the 'pricking Meredith' story only because he was thinking of how it could have happened... even though it never did.
*RS cooked with Meredith 'somewhere' even though nobody testified to this and nobody was a witness to it happening.
*Beastiality is normal for a young male to look over. No matter that he needed monitoring over the fact.
*Alot of people leave a water spill all night (even if it could be cleaned up with towels, toilet paper or rags) until they can procure a mop.
*AK's 'Marie Pace' story is not relevant, and she 'might' not have even written it regardless of the family's and the prison's verification.
*AK's trial behavior/attire was not innappropriate, again only AK being AK.
*RG 'fancied' AK, but it has no bearing on the case in any way.
*Just because AK smoked pot with RG and the boys downstairs before, saw him at the club and around the basketball courts doesn't mean she knew who he was.
*All three accused changed their alibis as evidence was found against them because they were confused and misunderstood by LE.
*Laughing, smiling, giving candies, t-shirts, singing, and not answering the questions directly are not a problems for the defense in a murder trial.
*TOD estimate is wrong because Meredith did not eat anything when she got home and the coroner, and prosecution experts are wrong. Posters are better equiped to figure this out than experts for the prosecution.
*Although defense experts could not convince the Jury the bathmat print was RG's instead of RS's... it was.
*LE is responsible for every story the media puts out regarding guilt or negative aspects of the accused.
*Pictures released of a luminal-type pink covered bathroom misled everyone into thinking the bathroom was absolutely covered in blood.
*Each piece of the vast amount of evidence against AK and RS can be explained innocently. It doesn't matter how unreasonable the explanation is.
*Over 20+ Judges found the case solid enough to hold both AK and RS in jail and find them guilty only because they didn't want to 'rock the boat' in the framing of them.
*All the Jurors that looked over ALL the evidence for such a long period are just mistaken... they didn't know how to look at the evidence and were swayed by the prosecution to only believe their take on the case.
*This is an injustice with a conspiracy throughout the Italian system-from LE, the testing, the people doing the testing, the courts, the Judges, the mistaken Jurors, the trial experts, the witnesses, the media, etc... ALL of them.

###There are more, but my fingers are aching.

***Good grief, how could anything be proven without a doubt in any case using these views and reasoning... no evidence is good enough??? :banghead:

 

[kemo]

While Henry’s account of the actual murder seems plausible (although I am not up on all the minute details) there are other issues he does not deal with. The evidence of "staging" (including the "forced entry" itself), the lying and very strange behavior on the part of Amanda and Rafaele all point to something going on that is not consistent with a couple of young people who happen to find themselves on the periphery of a murder. Amanda was in a foreign country and not proficient in the language. It might be possible that she "broke" under pressure. This could account for her lying, particularly about Patrick. Rafaelle on the other hand, was Italian, he was upper class and his sister was a cop. He should have been able to deal with the pressure of a police investigation. I find it inconceivable that someone like Rafaelle, confronted with the "fact" that Meredith's DNA was on his knife, would make up a lie to explain it. An innocent person might deny it was possible, be at a loss as to how it got there, accuse the police of setting him up or demand a lawyer but never make up a lie on the spot. That in only consistent with guilt.

I suspect the defense is taking a different tack now. They are going to try to argue that the actual murder was committed by Rudy alone. Whatever Amanda and Rafaelle did or saw or went that night and the next morning is irrelevant to the actual murder so they must be found innocent.

 

[Nova]

Raffaele had a leak under the sink while doing the dinner dishes, and the water spilled, or "flooded" (per Amanda), all over the kitchen floor. The spill was so significant that they decided they needed a mop to clean the spill, and then ... did nothing about it. Maybe they were too stoned and out of it to understand that the water needed to be cleaned up immediately for obvious safety reasons. Under normal circumstances, an intelligent young man like Raffaele, who came from a good home, would know to clean up the mess. Under normal circumstance, I would expect Amanda to know that the spill needed to be cleaned up. Instead, between the two of them, they decided to do nothing until the next day ... a very unusual decision ... unless their brains were soup.

otto, kids who are raised in households where there is maid service or where mom does everything will often surprise us in terms of what they are willing to ignore. Personally, I wouldn't dream of even having food in the bedroom, but lots of people not only do, they leave half-eaten food laying around in there. (My perspective was probably formed by growing up in the tropics, where almost any food stuff will attract bugs unless it is sealed away somehow.)

The other things we really don't know is how bad was the supposed "flood." In various places, it is also translated as "spill" or mere "leak." Was RS' place a ground floor apartment? 'Cause that would at least tell us whether the spill was bad enough to leak down to the floor below.

But I agree that what they smoked may have also played a part.

 

[Nova]

While Henry’s account of the actual murder seems plausible (although I am not up on all the minute details) there are other issues he does not deal with. The evidence of "staging" (including the "forced entry" itself), the lying and very strange behavior on the part of Amanda and Rafaele all point to something going on that is not consistent with a couple of young people who happen to find themselves on the periphery of a murder. Amanda was in a foreign country and not proficient in the language. It might be possible that she "broke" under pressure. This could account for her lying, particularly about Patrick. Rafaelle on the other hand, was Italian, he was upper class and his sister was a cop. He should have been able to deal with the pressure of a police investigation. I find it inconceivable that someone like Rafaelle, confronted with the "fact" that Meredith's DNA was on his knife, would make up a lie to explain it. An innocent person might deny it was possible, be at a loss as to how it got there, accuse the police of setting him up or demand a lawyer but never make up a lie on the spot. That in only consistent with guilt.

I suspect the defense is taking a different tack now. They are going to try to argue that the actual murder was committed by Rudy alone. Whatever Amanda and Rafaelle did or saw or went that night and the next morning is irrelevant to the actual murder so they must be found innocent.

kemo, I understand the sentiment, but forensic literature is full of suspects telling much bigger lies than that. (I agree that RS was probably better able to deal with the pressure than AK, but then his testimony isn't nearly as vague and changeable.)

But put yourself in his place: you are told the science is undeniable. You don't know how the DNA got there, but police are demanding you explain it. So you make up a silly little lie. Bad idea, we'll agree, but far less than proof of guilt. (ETA: I assume I can use the word "you" here because the usage is hypothetical.)

 

[trillian]

my responses in blue

Lets see which side is oyster like:

*AK was coerced into confessing to be at the crime scene.
*Patrick was accused only because of LE pressure/interrogation tactics.
*The dna evidence on the knife is faked, wrong or planted.
*The dna on the bra-clasp is from contamination, just wrong or planted.
*RG's dna evidence is perfectly fine... but not in AK's or RS's case.

I think it's obvious the story about Patrick was fed to Amanda because of the text msg.
The DNA evidence is so sketchy the way it was handled. It may be a matter of how it was interpreted. RG doenst even need dNA. We have his feces, bloody handprint, and bloody shoeprints in her room. All visible. There is nothing like that for RS or AK.

*Witness statements are not valid unless recorded or taped.
*RS's was either with AK at a friends party, with AK early but then she left,
with AK all night (movies, sex, sleep), or on the Internet all night.
*AK was either with RS all night (dinner, movies, sex, sleep) or could not remember (which is normal for everyone).

A murder suspects admissions in a highly publicized crime should absolutely be taped. Why wasnt it? I'm talking about AFTER she was declared a suspect.
RS was where he originally said he was...with Amanda at his home. He was presented with "facts" that tested his memory. Those facts were wrong. Look up Kevin Fox or the Guilford four to see how it happens. RS and AK were played against each other with bogus information.

*AK did not leave RS's home regardless of cell phone evidence that she did.
*AK's contact with a cocaine dealer both before and just after the murder is not relevant to the murder case.
*Patrick was perfectly satified with AK's work at the bar and didn't want to fire her.
*AK wasn't upset with Patrick over just handing out flyers, or Meredith making drinks at his club... Patrick was mistaken.
*AK didn't storm off after Patrick told her these things... he is mistaken again.
*Patrick is lying in his interviews with the Daily Mail or the reporter misunderstood what he was saying.

What cell phone evidence? When did she leave? I recall the cell phone evidence that said MK's phone was already dumped just after 10 was explained away because sometimes the towers changed.
Cocaine dealer? Please show the records and names please.
People get hired and fired all the time. Seems like Amanda was happy not to have to work that night and was quite cordial with Patrick. Are you saying this is motive?

*Meredith and AK were good friends, they never had any sort of problems.
*AK only smoked a little bit of pot and didn't do cocaine at all.
*RS did not have a cocaine 'problem'.
*Both RS and AK turned off their phones even though neither had done this in the previous months because they only wanted to have a quiet night in.

Well mk gave her a fake tattoo the day she died they certainly did not hate each other. I have a big problem with my boyfriend leaving wet towels in our hamper and his dishes all around the house but he isnt going to kill me for it.

*The mixed blood drops with AK's blood and Meredith's dna are 'normal' because she just happened to be bleeding the night/morning after the murder.
*AK's dna mixed with Meredith's blood in drops is normal because she lived there in the cottage.
*The bare footprints found in luminal can not be AK's or RS's.
*The luminal prints were not in blood just outside of a bloody crime scene.

I believe it was MK's blood and AK's DNA - not blood (and if so why was she bleeding and where did it come from? She had no cuts). It was in their bathroom they shared. Seems normal to me.
The bare footprints are odd. It looks like the prints go from the bathroom to Amandas room like she stepped out of the shower. It might not even be amanda-- could be someone who lived there before. How else do you explain how she stepped in blood but hopped to the outside of the door without leaving a print? And backwards? And what could clean up the blood evidence but not DNA?
The luminol prints were either negative for blood or not tested. The tiles were not removed and bagged. Terrible police work.

I might see if I can get to the rest later. If I got anything factually wrong, please let me know!

 

[trillian]

My response in Blue.

*The barefoot bloody print on the bathroom mat is not RS's just because the defense expert could not prove otherwise. LE experts are mistaken.
*Though no evidence of RG taking his shoes off, but he must have to make the bathmat print.
*AK's naked 'bathmat shuffle' seems like a perfectly normal thing for a young woman that just discovered an open front door, blood on the floor/sink/wall and poo in the toilet.
*It is normal for a flatmate/friends to check their car for evidence of murder after AK and RS get out of the car.

The barefoot print is RG's. IMO he went to clean himself and stepped on a piece of his own bloody clothing that he had removed. He was barefoot so he could clean the top of his shoes or try to clean his pants. The footprints out the door dont happen until after he does this. He goes back in the room, moves the body, covers it, gets the keys and cell phones and bank cards and leaves.
The bathroom looks fairly normal in the police video. The postal police were there for 25min or more, heard everything, saw everything, and were not even alarmed enough to break down the door themselves without permission of the owner.
I dont know what you mean about checking the car. What is that about?

 

[dgfred]

Wouldn't RG's defense be able to use the same tactics of saying his dna/prints were contaminated, wrong, or planted also? Why is testing and evidence of his accepted, but not the other two?

They were recorded once they were suspects instead of witnesses. Of course they were 'played' against one another. When two persons are using the same alibi and found at the crime scene it is common practice IMO.

Cell records show the contact with Patrick was away from RS's home nearer the center square.

The cocaine dealer has not gone to trial yet, only the lawyer's name is known.
Nobody around or near AK will divulge his name. If he is just a friend... why not??? Why was she calling him both before and in the few days before the murder? If he was such a good friend maybe he should have testified in her defense.

I suggest reading the daily mail interviews with Patrick in Nov 2007 to see just how 'cordial' AK was at work and with Patrick. Motive doesn't need to be proven, it only shows state of mind at the time of Meredith's murder. Patrick claimed that AK 'stormed off' when told about Meredith working at the bar.

Nobody said anything about one 'hating' the other.

Meredith's blood dna was in the mixture in the bathroom with AK's blood. Wish we did know where AK's blood came from... might clear up alot of things.
Some have speculated it was from an infected ear-ring hole or a ear-ring getting torn out in a struggle. AK's dna was mixed with Meredith's blood in other spots and in Filomena's room... but that is explained away by her living there.

The barefoot print on the bathmat is a male's. Nobody ever claimed to clean up any type of fluid in the hallway while barefooted and with a barefooted male. Where is the other bloody footprints leading up to the bathmat print? They must have been cleaned by someone. Odd there is a male's barefoot print in blood in the bathroom... but somehow the male's barefoot prints in the hallway are not supposed to be in blood. :waitasec:

Why would RG leave fingerprints, poo, dna, and bloody shoeprints... but take off his shoes to leave barefoot prints that are then cleaned up?

*Same old thing, no evidence seems to be good enough with regards to AK and RS.

 

[Allusonz]

*Patrick was accused only because of LE pressure/interrogation tactics
*AK was coerced into confessing to be at the crime scene.
*Being told by a policewoman that this is inappropriate behavior is just the policewoman being a fuddyduddy. Only AK being AK.
• Fear, on the part of the suspect, that failure to confess will yield a harsher punishment
*Witness statements are not valid unless recorded or taped.

About 25 percent of the over 240 wrongful convictions overturned by DNA evidence in the U.S. have involved some form of a false confession. Yet it’s virtually impossible to fathom why a person would wrongly confess to a crime he or she did not commit. Researchers who study this phenomenon have determined that the following factors contribute to or cause false confessions:

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/False_Confessions__Recording_Of_Custodial_Interrogations.php

• Real or perceived intimidation of the suspect by law enforcement

• Use of force by law enforcement during the interrogation, or perceived threat of force

• The entire interrogation – during the time in which a reasonable person in the subject’s position would consider himself to be in custody and a law enforcement officer’s questioning is likely to elicit incriminating responses – should be electronically recorded. This is simply the only way to create an objective record of what transpired during the course of the interrogation process.

• In cases where law enforcement failed to make a recording, at minimum, a mandatory instruction should be given to the jury, directing them to disregard the confession if they believe it was coerced. Ideally, the judge should suppress "confessions" that were not recorded or improperly recorded so that they are not heard by jurors.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/False_Confessions__Recording_Of_Custodial_Interrogations.php


• Compromised reasoning ability of the suspect, due to exhaustion, stress, hunger, substance use, and, in some cases, mental limitations, or limited education

• Devious interrogation techniques, such as untrue statements about the presence of incriminating evidence

The use of false evidence (including statements such as, "Your fingerprints are on the gun") in interrogation is implicated in almost every false-confession case, but American courts have upheld the practice. This is not to say that police intentionally ensnare the innocent. Kassin notes that detectives are trained to believe they can make accurate judgments about a suspect's truthfulness, though "there's a level of overconfidence in the initial judgment, and they begin the interrogation with a presumption of guilt."

Gudjonsson agrees: "Police officers need to know that they can elicit a false confession even if they don't intend to."

A particularly vulnerable defendant may begin to doubt his or her own memory when presented with false evidence. Children and the mentally handicapped, or people whose recollections are clouded by drugs or alcohol, are particularly susceptible. Interrogators may suggest that a suspect has repressed the memory. They then offer false evidence to fill in the gaps. After intense interrogation, these suspects become sufficiently convinced of their own guilt and accept an "internalized" false confession

 

[Malkmus]

My response in Blue.

*The barefoot bloody print on the bathroom mat is not RS's just because the defense expert could not prove otherwise. LE experts are mistaken.
*Though no evidence of RG taking his shoes off, but he must have to make the bathmat print.
*AK's naked 'bathmat shuffle' seems like a perfectly normal thing for a young woman that just discovered an open front door, blood on the floor/sink/wall and poo in the toilet.
*It is normal for a flatmate/friends to check their car for evidence of murder after AK and RS get out of the car.

The barefoot print is RG's. IMO he went to clean himself and stepped on a piece of his own bloody clothing that he had removed. He was barefoot so he could clean the top of his shoes or try to clean his pants. The footprints out the door dont happen until after he does this. He goes back in the room, moves the body, covers it, gets the keys and cell phones and bank cards and leaves.
The bathroom looks fairly normal in the police video. The postal police were there for 25min or more, heard everything, saw everything, and were not even alarmed enough to break down the door themselves without permission of the owner.
I dont know what you mean about checking the car. What is that about?

I find it very obvious that the print is RG's. For one the way that it was concluded that the print belonged to RS was via "the grid of L.M. Robbins". Louise Robbins is notorious for making anyone's print match whoever the prosecution wants it to:

Stephen Buckley is free three years after the statements of an expert witness landed him in jail. But Dennis Ferguson of Bellwood is serving a life sentence in prison largely because the same expert testified that a shoe print near a murdered woman was his.

The expert is Louise M. Robbins. And last month, a national panel of anthropologists and lawyers concluded that Robbins' unique method of shoe-print identification simply doesn't work.

The panel's conclusion raises troubling questions about the convictions of Ferguson and at least 11 other people across the country and in Canada against whom Robbins testified.

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-3814292.html

Here is a photo of the bathmat print alongside RS's and RG's reference prints. The print is clearly RG's (the one on the right).

 

[Allusonz]

*Every witness for the prosecution is lying, mistaken, a police informant or all three.

Erroneous eyewitness testimony — whether offered in good faith or perjured — is the single greatest cause of wrongful convictions in the U.S. criminal justice system.

Yet the extent of the problem — and, for that matter, the extent of any of the myriad other problems known to lead to wrongful convictions — can never be known, for the simple reason that it is visible only when innocence is clearly established; erroneous eyewitness identifications in cases in which innocence cannot be proved are permanently out of sight

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/False_Confessions__Recording_Of_Custodial_Interrogations.php

 

[dgfred]

My response in Blue.


The barefoot print is RG's. IMO he went to clean himself and stepped on a piece of his own bloody clothing that he had removed. He was barefoot so he could clean the top of his shoes or try to clean his pants. The footprints out the door dont happen until after he does this. He goes back in the room, moves the body, covers it, gets the keys and cell phones and bank cards and leaves.
The bathroom looks fairly normal in the police video. The postal police were there for 25min or more, heard everything, saw everything, and were not even alarmed enough to break down the door themselves without permission of the owner.
I dont know what you mean about checking the car. What is that about?

The Judges/Jurors believed the print on the mat to be RS's. Why would he clean up the blood and prints around the bathmat print... but leave so much other evidence of himself in the cottage? Why would he lock Meredith's door, and how would he with his prints leading straight down the hallway? A reverse behind the back lock?

Filomena gave permission and took responsibility with breaking the door. From the Judge's report it seemed everyone was worried about the locked door, except AK at that particular time.

IIRC once RS and AK got out of the car, they checked the car for evidence because of how suspicious the two were acting.

Should there have to be soooo many excuses for the accused in any case?

I call 'oystering'.

 

[Allusonz]

*The prosecutor is an evil mastermind of convicting innocent people.
*It doesn't matter that there were 2 prosecutors, one was such a powerful influence that the other had no say in the prosecution's case.

a court in Florence said Mignini was guilty of abusing the considerable powers of his office


According to the Italian newsmagazine Panorama, investigators discovered that Mignini maintained computer lists entitled "Attacks to Remember" and "Orgy of Attacks." The lists contained names of journalists, government officials, and members of the Italian Parliament.

Mignini was convicted of launching investigations into his critics in the media, the police, and the government. The prosecutor illegally wiretapped phones and cell phones in his ambition to end the "orgy of attacks."


Because he violated the public trust, the Florence court banned Mignini from holding public office for the rest of his life. But, during his appeal, the prosecutor gets to remain in office. Mignini has not been called on to resign either

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_1...ag=mncol;lst;4

He was convicted of:

1.) Illegally investigating journalists who had criticized him with the "intent to harass or deter them from pursuing their legitimate profession". Specifically the court found that Mignini had targeted Italian journalists Vincenzo Tessandori, Gennaro De Stefano, and Roberto Fiasconaro, because they had criticized his investigations into the
death of Narducci.


2.) Ordering an illegal investigation of the Florentine ex police chief Giuseppe De Donno.


3.) Ordering illegal investigations of two officials of the Viminale, the Ministry of the Interior in Rome, including an illegal investigation of the Roberto Sgalla, ex-director of the office of external affairs

 

[dgfred]

I wish someone here would have helped the Judges and Jurors decide which print it was. They seemed to decide it was RS's... so I'd rather go with that.
Maybe someone could also write the defense team quickly and get them to bring this up at appeal, since the decision on the print went against them at trial.

 

[Allusonz]

I wish someone here would have helped the Judges and Jurors decide which print it was. They seemed to decide it was RS's... so I'd rather go with that.
Maybe someone could also write the defense team quickly and get them to bring this up at appeal, since the decision on the print went against them at trial.

as per my post in a previous thread

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/RonHendry100.html

 

[Allusonz]

*The dna evidence on the knife is faked, wrong or planted.
*The dna on the bra-clasp is from contamination, just wrong or planted.


The knife was a common kitchen knife. The knife was retrieved from the kitchen of Raffaele Sollecito based on the "investigators intuition". The knife was chosen from the drawer because it looked clean. No other knives were taken to be tested. Was this an extraordinary case of good luck by the detectives or was this knife not the murder weapon after all?


The prosecution claimed that Amanda's DNA was on the handle and Meredith's DNA was on the blade.


When the knife was tested, Amanda's DNA was found on the handle. This was expected because Amanda often prepared meals and Raffaele's apartment. She used the knife for cooking. A sample was taken from the knife blade and was tested for blood. The result was negative. There was no blood on the knife. This needs to be repeated, THERE WAS NO BLOOD ON THE KNIFE.


What was left of the sample from the blade was tested for DNA. The results were negative.There was no DNA on the blade. This is when all guidelines for testing DNA were thrown out the window. The machine parameters were over-ridden. The tests kept coming back "too low." Then machine parameters were pushed far past the level of reliability finally producing the result they needed. Keep in mind, the test was done in a lab using large amounts of Meredith's DNA. No negative controls were used. The result was extremely low, measuring in trillionths of a gram of DNA. The procedures used to get the result they needed were deeply flawed. The DNA found on the knife came from the lab. The knife had no

DNA from Meredith Kercher on the blade when it arrived for testing. The DNA sample was so small that only one test could be performed. No additional testing will ever be available

 

[Allusonz]

*There was no disturbances below the window or on the wall only because investigators didn't look or hid the evidence of it.
*RG broke in thru Filomena's window although there is no evidence whatsoever of it.
*A burgler would throw a rock through a window (Filomena lied about the closed shutters), climb a wall and crawl through when there was a much easier route in over the balcony

in back.
*A burgler was planning to steal from college students instead of a big, nice home because... no real reason really.
*A defense lawyer climbed within reach of the window sill, but he didn't crawl through the window... still shows how easy it would be to do so.


in spite of Filomena testifying that she did not think she had actually closed the shutters. This conclusion, trivial on the face of it, is the first of many sequential and improbable conclusions – improbable conclusions culminating in convictions and years in prison.

Remember that the shutters were at about the same height as a basketball net, and Rudy was an accomplished basketball player. It would take only a second or two to accomplish. Yet the court regards this simple possibility as highly improbable

Strangely, however, no close up photos of the wall appear to have been taken. No good photos of the wall or of the ground below seem to exist. Only a limited investigative effort was made on one of the most important sites in the case.

“She said: ‘We observed…. no traces on the wall.’”P – 50

A picture would have been nice. Why are the Court’s conclusions reached entirely on the basis of their investigator’s reported observations rather than on the basis of actual, recorded images or other documentation?

 

[Allusonz]

Perhaps the most improbable conclusion of all is the remarkable assertion that the rock went through the window in the wrong direction. This is Improbable Conclusion #4: that the rock was thrown from the inside. In arriving at this conclusion, tremendous weight was attached to the lack of pieces of glass outside the window on the ground below. We will never really know if there were no pieces there, however, because no proper documentation of that area was performed – only the visual observations of the Polizia. Did they miss pieces because the glass sifted down under leaves? Who knows? Can we take their word for it? Who knows?

The glass from the broken window was scattered about inside the room and on the window sill, exactly as one would expect if the rock were thrown from the outside. This was explained by defense expert Sergeant Pasquali, but his testimony was dismissed because he is merely a ballistics expert, not a rock throwing expert (ballistics being the study of bullets flying about, not rocks

 

[Allusonz]

I find it very obvious that the print is RG's. For one the way that it was concluded that the print belonged to RS was via "the grid of L.M. Robbins". Louise Robbins is notorious for making anyone's print match whoever the prosecution wants it to:



http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-3814292.html

Here is a photo of the bathmat print alongside RS's and RG's reference prints. The print is clearly RG's (the one on the right).

more importantly what every one seems to miss is that RS has only 4 digits not 5 on his foot, as i have previously posted

 

[Allusonz]

I wish someone here would have helped the Judges and Jurors decide which print it was. They seemed to decide it was RS's... so I'd rather go with that.
Maybe someone could also write the defense team quickly and get them to bring this up at appeal, since the decision on the print went against them at trial.

Judges are trained in a Court of Law that is their area of expertise that is why we have specialists in the area of forensics, but they again should be well trained

 

[Malkmus]

more importantly what every one seems to miss is that RS has only 4 digits not 5 on his foot, as i have previously posted

Well, to be clear, he's not missing his second toe, it's just raised and the bathmat print doesn't show a second toe either. I believe the prosecution argued that the blotch next to the big toe was part of his unusual "hammerhead" big toe, which is still silly because it doesn't match his print either way. That it took the method of a shyster like Louise Robbins to obfuscate the prints to look like RS's is egregious.