Meredith Kercher murdered - Amanda Knox convicted, now appeals #7

[otto]

Dr. Greg Hampikian DNA expert

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vEFPZgW9HA

That's the third time you've posted that particular knife image. Any reason? Is it easier to assess length in metric?

The article I posted is about the bra, not the clasp, and although the links you provide agree with Professor Vinci: that Rudy's DNA was found on the bra, there is nothing to contradict the complete findings of Professor Vinci: that Knox's DNA was also on the bra.

 

[otto]

She was asked whom sent the text message she responded PL what is your point?

In fact not sure what most of the points being introduced of late are about. We know she said PL and that is backed up in the testimony

One of the points being discussed is the upcoming controversial movie, and the other is in regards to the libel.

... and there are always other points because someone is unfamiliar with the case, believes the verdict was based on one tipping point piece of evidence,etc.

 

[Allusonz]

That's the third time you've posted that particular knife image. Any reason? Is it easier to assess length in metric?

The article I posted is about the bra, not the clasp, and although the links you provide agree with Professor Vinci: that Rudy's DNA was found on the bra, there is nothing to contradict the complete findings of Professor Vinci: that Knox's DNA was also on the bra.

Yes there is a reason i posted that as it was the defense experts suggestion to request the handle be taken apart and that was objected to by the prosecution he also states that AK's DNA is not on the bra

I already supplied links re the bra do you want more that was simply the first page?

 

[otto]

Yes there is a reason i posted that as it was the defense experts suggestion to request the handle be taken apart and that was objected to by the prosecution he also states that AK's DNA is not on the bra

I already supplied links re the bra do you want more that was simply the first page?

Any thoughts on why someone on Raffaele's team would write a 14 page report that included that information?

What could be under the handle and relate to Meredith's DNA on the blade?

 

[Allusonz]

Any thoughts on why someone on Raffaele's team would write a 14 page report that included that information?

I would suspect that since your quote is from 2008, that would of been prior to the prosecution disclosing .fsa files of which i have discussed endlessly here. The were not disclosed by the prosecution after numerous requests and that is prosecutorial misconduct.

 

[otto]

I would suspect that since your quote is from 2008, that would of been prior to the prosecution disclosing .fsa files of which i have discussed endlessly here. The were not disclosed by the prosecution after numerous requests and that is prosecutorial misconduct.

Are you suggesting that the information that the expert had in 2008 indicated that Knox's DNA was on the bra, but after 2008 ... what happened?

 

[Allusonz]

Are you suggesting that the information that the expert had in 2008 indicated that Knox's DNA was on the bra, but after 2008 ... what happened?

are you suggesting that if the prosecution knew it was on the bra they would not of brought it up at trial?

 

[otto]

are you suggesting that if the prosecution knew it was on the bra they would not of brought it up at trial?

No. I think there are many things the prosecution chose not to test. Apparently there was blood on the towel and Rudy wanted it tested, but that was denied. I got the impression that Italian police introduced or obtained enough evidence to implicate all three suspects, but that they didn't seek to duplicate evidence. They already had plenty of samples of mixed Amanda DNA, why duplicate? Why introduce redundant information in court? Why say that Knox's DNA was on the bra or in the bedroom? It seems to me that the obvious explanation is that the DNA got there in the laundry, and Knox's DNA got in the bedroom because they were roommates. No need to introduce redundant and ineffective evidence in court.

Was Rudy's DNA on the bra raised at any point by anyone else - other than Raffaele's expert?

 

[claudicici]

I have a few questions,since I did not read too much into this case.
I always trusted the system and thought Amanda and Rafael are just as guilty as Rudy.
I know she lied and I know about her strange antics but that may be where my prejudice comes into play.
I was wondering what is the concrete evidence that Amanda and Rafael were present at the time the murder happened?
Is it true that the assumed murder weapon (the kitchen knife with Amanda's DNA on the handle) does not match the actual cut in Meredith throat?
I thought there was video footage of Amanda returning to the cottage at the time of the murder (I don't think Rafael was on it),is that not so?
Were Amanda's and Rafael's cell phones really found in some yard? What is the explanation for that?
Sorry about all the questions,I'm just getting interested in this case I want to know some things because I'm planning on watching the movie in a couple of days and I may have had the wrong assumptions about this case.

 

[trillian]

I think it's called "striking while the iron is hot." Mignini has no way of knowing whether AK would retract her statements re PL if the matter were dropped until morning.

That he was called in in the middle of the night ought to tell you something about the process.

I agree. No way would Mignini wait until morning. In the morning he would have to notify the American consulate and she would get a lawyer. They really needed to interrogate her to get as much info as they could before that happened. Before they formally arrested her.

I'm sure they thought they were correct in suspecting her given what evidence they "thought" they had. As it turns out, they had ZERO evidence at that point.

Mignini doggedly goes after his theories, evidence to the contrary be damned. He'll find some other corroborating clues...somehow.
(Thinking Narducci/Monster investigation...man oh man, he has some imagination. Satanists conspiracies are lurking everywhere to him. I cannot believe people take him seriously!)

 

[otto]

I agree. No way would Mignini wait until morning. In the morning he would have to notify the American consulate and she would get a lawyer. They really needed to interrogate her to get as much info as they could before that happened. Before they formally arrested her.

I'm sure they thought they were correct in suspecting her given what evidence they "thought" they had. As it turns out, they had ZERO evidence at that point.

Mignini doggedly goes after his theories, evidence to the contrary be damned. He'll find some other corroborating clues...somehow.
(Thinking Narducci/Monster investigation...man oh man, he has some imagination. Satanists conspiracies are lurking everywhere to him. I cannot believe people take him seriously!)

The town of Perugia, with a high student population, cheered when the verdict was announced. People take their laws and judicial system seriously.

 

[trillian]

The town of Perugia, with a high student population, cheered when the verdict was announced. People take their laws and judicial system seriously.

Perhaps you pressed the wrong quote button as your response has nothing to do with my post. Mignini is NOT the judicial system. In fact, he is a convicted criminal under appeal, no?
Do you take his satanic cult theories seriously? Do you see any reasonable evidence of why he comes up with these fantasies? He seems a bit obsessed with it dont you think?

 

[otto]

Perhaps you pressed the wrong quote button as your response has nothing to do with my post. Mignini is NOT the judicial system. In fact, he is a convicted criminal under appeal, no?
Do you take his satanic cult theories seriously? Do you see any reasonable evidence of why he comes up with these fantasies? He seems a bit obsessed with it dont you think?

There were two prosecutors, and they were officers of the court ... representing the judicial system.

Don't mix Douglas Preston's crazy theories with the murder of Meredith Kercher.

 

[Nova]

She was asked whom sent the text message she responded PL what is your point?

In fact not sure what most of the points being introduced of late are about. We know she said PL and that is backed up in the testimony

The point of late is that otto seems to believe AK brought up PL's name out of nowhere simply for the purpose of falsely accusing him.

The fact is PL was suggested as a suspect by ILE even before they knew his actual name. ILE falsely assumed the "see ya later" text message was an agreement to meet on the night of the murder. They asked AK who she was texting and she told them.

 

[Nova]

Any thoughts on why someone on Raffaele's team would write a 14 page report that included that information?

What could be under the handle and relate to Meredith's DNA on the blade?

To throw AK under the bus and disassociate his client from the doomed-by-pre-trial-publicity Miss Knox?

MK's blood could be under the handle, which would put MK's blood on the knife for the first time. Or MK's DNA might NOT be on the handle, making it even less likely that the knife was used to stab her.

 

[otto]

are you suggesting that if the prosecution knew it was on the bra they would not of brought it up at trial?

I'm wondering what happened to the evidence after 2008. You suggested some .fsa files were withheld until 2008. The report includes that Knox's DNA was on the bra, and then a later report didn't include that information? What happened? The 14 page report says that Knox DNA was on the bra.

I am also saying that I do not believe the prosecutor introduced evidence during trial that was duplicious or redundant.

 

[Nova]

No. I think there are many things the prosecution chose not to test. Apparently there was blood on the towel and Rudy wanted it tested, but that was denied. I got the impression that Italian police introduced or obtained enough evidence to implicate all three suspects, but that they didn't seek to duplicate evidence. They already had plenty of samples of mixed Amanda DNA, why duplicate? Why introduce redundant information in court? Why say that Knox's DNA was on the bra or in the bedroom? It seems to me that the obvious explanation is that the DNA got there in the laundry, and Knox's DNA got in the bedroom because they were roommates. No need to introduce redundant and ineffective evidence in court.

Was Rudy's DNA on the bra raised at any point by anyone else - other than Raffaele's expert?

BBM: you are kidding, right? While it's true that some small amount of Knox DNA might be explained by laundry or common use of the residence, large amounts of Knox' DNA, particularly on the victim and the clothes she was wearing, would go a long way toward proving the prosecutor's claim that she was present at the murder. And if Knox's DNA was found there in conjunction with RS' DNA. the prosecutor would practically have a slam dunk.

AK's and RS' DNA isn't there, of course, which is why we heard nothing about their DNA in the room.

All of which is why I am amazed to hear you speak of a "mountain" of forensic evidence implicating AK.

 

[Nova]

I have a few questions,since I did not read too much into this case.
I always trusted the system and thought Amanda and Rafael are just as guilty as Rudy.
I know she lied and I know about her strange antics but that may be where my prejudice comes into play.
I was wondering what is the concrete evidence that Amanda and Rafael were present at the time the murder happened?
Is it true that the assumed murder weapon (the kitchen knife with Amanda's DNA on the handle) does not match the actual cut in Meredith throat?
I thought there was video footage of Amanda returning to the cottage at the time of the murder (I don't think Rafael was on it),is that not so?
Were Amanda's and Rafael's cell phones really found in some yard? What is the explanation for that?
Sorry about all the questions,I'm just getting interested in this case I want to know some things because I'm planning on watching the movie in a couple of days and I may have had the wrong assumptions about this case.

I'm hoping someone more knowledgeable than I will come along to answer your questions. In the meantime, I don't want to see your post ignored.

I don't know what concrete evidence there is of AK's or RS' presence at the time of the murder. I asked and was told there was a mountain of evidence. Thus far, not even a pebble has rolled by.

There is rough footage of someone approaching the cottage around 9 p.m. Whether or not the footage is of AK seems to be very much in dispute.

I don't understand MK's various wounds. Let's hope someone will explain the major ones to both of us.

It wasn't AK's and RS' cell phones that were located, but Meredith Kercher's. (She had one phone for local calls and another one for international calls.) They were found discarded in somebody's garden. One source I read said the garden was near Rudy Guede's residence, but posters here have assured me that all the locations in this case are fairly near to one another, so the proximity to RG's house is meaningless.

I hope this helps a little. As I said, I'm pretty new to the case myself.

 

[otto]

BBM: you are kidding, right? While it's true that some small amount of Knox DNA might be explained by laundry or common use of the residence, large amounts of Knox' DNA, particularly on the victim and the clothes she was wearing, would go a long way toward proving the prosecutor's claim that she was present at the murder. And if Knox's DNA was found there in conjunction with RS' DNA. the prosecutor would practically have a slam dunk.

AK's and RS' DNA isn't there, of course, which is why we heard nothing about their DNA in the room.

All of which is why I am amazed to hear you speak of a "mountain" of forensic evidence implicating AK.

Abundance, actually.

Let's start simple ... how do we explain the broken window? The idea is not to debate one piece of evidence and then decide guilt or innocence (and then pursue that line of thought while debating other evidence in isolation) but to look at the totality of evidence; to set aside each piece of evidence as indicating one or the other. After it's all been looked at, then it's easy to see how the scales of justice balance.

 

[otto]

I'm hoping someone more knowledgeable than I will come along to answer your questions. In the meantime, I don't want to see your post ignored.

I don't know what concrete evidence there is of AK's or RS' presence at the time of the murder. I asked and was told there was a mountain of evidence. Thus far, not even a pebble has rolled by.

There is rough footage of someone approaching the cottage around 9 p.m. Whether or not the footage is of AK seems to be very much in dispute.

I don't understand MK's various wounds. Let's hope someone will explain the major ones to both of us.

It wasn't AK's and RS' cell phones that were located, but Meredith Kercher's. (She had one phone for local calls and another one for international calls.) They were found discarded in somebody's garden. One source I read said the garden was near Rudy Guede's residence, but posters here have assured me that all the locations in this case are fairly near to one another, so the proximity to RG's house is meaningless.

I hope this helps a little. As I said, I'm pretty new to the case myself.

Those that followed the investigation prior to the trial were probably running after dead donkeys, similar to the missing woman in Aruba. That was when the video of the basketball court area and parking video was discussed. Did that play a part in the prosecution, or was that crazy-making US media hype? It was not evidence in the trial.

Both phones were found, close together, a little further out of town than the cottage.