WARNING:GRAPHIC PHOTOS Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #8

[Nova]

Sheesh ... you want me to search articles from 4 years ago to clarify that defense experts were invited to the DNA testing? When I have loads of time, I'll do that. For now, all I can do is reference the fact that it seems to be accepted that defense experts were invited ... with the added usual criticism that someone (Dr Stefanoni?) did something wrong and didn't provide enough lead time. Out of curiosity, are defense experts that are observing the ongoing DNA test evaluation from Rome, or from somewhere else?

As for people with agendas ... yes, a doctor has an agenda, perhaps better stated as a responsibility, to diagnose illness. A stepfather has an agenda to protect a child regardless of what is going on. Both have agendas ... only one can be viewed as an objective agenda.

That's a slightly different meaning of the word "agenda" in English. You are referencing the more formal meaning; I was using the slang usage wherein "agenda" means "bias" or "prejudice." In this sense, being a professional is no guarantee of objectivity. Frankly, almost EVERYONE has at least one bias: they like to think their own opinions are correct.

***

No, you don't have to go back to research anything for me. As others have pointed out, even if the defense could have had people standing behind a glass partition watching the test, they still might not have been able to verify the test's authenticity. Allusonz has quoted AK's stepfather as saying the defense wasn't given enough notice; sounds quite possible to me, but not to you and dgfred.

I think we can leave it at that.

 

[Nova]

'Appears to imply'

'Could have said'

proof 'evidence to the contrary' of my statement: It is the Italian Law that the defense has everything the prosecution uses to find guilt. It is silly to claim otherwise IMO.

'may believe him or not'

'unfair to Allusonze' :waitasec: (by asking for a legitimate cite insteaded of unfounded rumors?)

'simply discard everything from anybody with whom we disagree' Pot/Kettle

*for instance the example of the prosecution in the statement 'consistant with the behavior of prosecutors in this case'??? hdear:

Pardon me for attempting to qualify my statements to better insure their accuracy. Needless to say, I am deeply ashamed.

 

[Nova]

Wow Nova, I find it hard to believe you want someone to cite a contrary source to an unfounded (wouldn't this be a major issue at appeal if so?) rumor basically. Would the prosecutor or the lab NEED to counter the impression made from a rumor? :shakehead:

Same for the 54 hours malarky.

I don't expect the prosecution to respond to every rumor.

However, in this case, the prosecutor(s) is accused of misconduct by the defendant's stepfather. I would think some response might be forthcoming.

If not, so be it.

 

[Nova]

That makes her a bit ice cold though, doncha think?

Or frightened and afraid to be alone.

 

[otto]

Good and fair question:

1. RG's case is different because the quantity of his DNA found is so much greater.

2. I do not believe that ALL his DNA was used up in testing; there was simply too much of it.

3. AK and RS, on the other hand, were convicted in large part on the basis of infinitesimal amounts of DNA.

We don't know how much DNA was found around Meredith, so it's not possible to say that there was so much more. He admitted using the toilet, denied murder.

 

[otto]

I don't expect the prosecution to respond to every rumor.

However, in this case, the prosecutor(s) is accused of misconduct by the defendant's stepfather. I would think some response might be forthcoming.

If not, so be it.

I haven't read that. Is there a court date set?

 

[otto]

Or frightened and afraid to be alone.

Sorry, the only way I can interpret a woman that wants to smooch at the moment the murder of her roommate is discovered is cold. Somehow, I don't see smooching as a natural reaction to fear.

 

[Malkmus]

Good and fair question:

1. RG's case is different because the quantity of his DNA found is so much greater.

2. I do not believe that ALL his DNA was used up in testing; there was simply too much of it.

3. AK and RS, on the other hand, were convicted in large part on the basis of infinitesimal amounts of DNA.

Not to mention it would be pointless to argue against rudy's dna evidence. He's admitted to being at the scene of the crime and doesn't dispute his presence in Merediths bedroom that night.

 

[otto]

Not to mention it would be pointless to argue against rudy's dna evidence. He's admitted to being at the scene of the crime and doesn't dispute his presence in Merediths bedroom that night.

True. Rudy admitted to using the bathroom. I doubt that DNA evidence convicted him of murder.

Also, we mustn't forget, Amanda admitted to being at the scene of the crime and described hearing a scream, knew that multiple parties were involved (confirmed by footprints from different parties) and knew that Meredith bled to death before a medical examiner examined the body. Arguing the DNA evidence also seems pointless ... but here we are, with some pretending that the original DNA tests (done 4 years ago) are negated because they cannot be reproduced. We have Amanda's confession, and Rudy's confession ... why bother with debating the DNA evidence? Amanda claims she was in the kitchen when the murder occurred, but I hardly think that is a significant difference given all the other evidence.

 

[Nova]

Sorry, the only way I can interpret a woman that wants to smooch at the moment the murder of her roommate is discovered is cold. Somehow, I don't see smooching as a natural reaction to fear.

Actually, sexual intercourse is a pretty common reaction to the death of others.
Freud wrote about how sex is life affirming and a rejection of thanatos, the death principle. Drama and literature are full of characters who respond to the death of a loved one by having sex, often to their shame. Fiction is fiction, of course, but cliches in fiction often come from real-life observations.

 

[Nova]

We don't know how much DNA was found around Meredith, so it's not possible to say that there was so much more. He admitted using the toilet, denied murder.

Well, unless he merely spat into the toilet, already that is considerably more DNA than was supposedly detected on the knife or bra clasp.

 

[Nova]

I haven't read that. Is there a court date set?

I doubt that failure to give sufficient notice of DNA testing would rise to a level of misconduct that requires a court hearing (though one never knows about Italy). Nonetheless, denial of the defendants' rights by neglecting to give adequate notice (if deliberate) is misconduct.

Mellas has made the accusation. I will be surprised if Mignini has said nothing in response.

 

[Nova]

True. Rudy admitted to using the bathroom. I doubt that DNA evidence convicted him of murder.

Also, we mustn't forget, Amanda admitted to being at the scene of the crime and described hearing a scream, knew that multiple parties were involved (confirmed by footprints from different parties) and knew that Meredith bled to death before a medical examiner examined the body. Arguing the DNA evidence also seems pointless ... but here we are, with some pretending that the original DNA tests (done 4 years ago) are negated because they cannot be reproduced. We have Amanda's confession, and Rudy's confession ... why bother with debating the DNA evidence? Amanda claims she was in the kitchen when the murder occurred, but I hardly think that is a significant difference given all the other evidence.

AK was badgered into making a false statement. We know this for a fact because she placed PL at the scene (providing herself no benefit in the process) and he has an airtight alibi. Cherrypicking only those parts of a false statement that support your case is the weakest form of evidence.

Since you make the assertion, I think you should PROVE that AK had no innocent way of knowing how MK died. PROVE she never overheard the police talking, PROVE the roommates said nothing in the car, PROVE she heard nothing on the subject at the police station.

 

[otto]

Well, unless he merely spat into the toilet, already that is considerably more DNA than was supposedly detected on the knife or bra clasp.

That DNA certainly confirms he used the bathroom by the front door ... no where near the bedroom.

 

[otto]

I doubt that failure to give sufficient notice of DNA testing would rise to a level of misconduct that requires a court hearing (though one never knows about Italy). Nonetheless, denial of the defendants' rights by neglecting to give adequate notice (if deliberate) is misconduct.

Mellas has made the accusation. I will be surprised if Mignini has said nothing in response.

I don't believe that happened. Right now we know that defense experts were invited to attend the initial DNA testing and that they neglected to attend. We are waiting for a valid citation to give credence to the Knox family's claim that they were not given sufficient notice.

 

[sherlockh]

Well, unless he merely spat into the toilet, already that is considerably more DNA than was supposedly detected on the knife or bra clasp.

Lol...I don't want to make this too detailed but there was no DNA in the deposit he left in the toilet. Bacteria ate it or something. The DNA found in the toilet was on the toilet paper (skin cells probably).

 

[otto]

AK was badgered into making a false statement. We know this for a fact because she placed PL at the scene (providing herself no benefit in the process) and he has an airtight alibi. Cherrypicking only those parts of a false statement that support your case is the weakest form of evidence.

Since you make the assertion, I think you should PROVE that AK had no innocent way of knowing how MK died. PROVE she never overheard the police talking, PROVE the roommates said nothing in the car, PROVE she heard nothing on the subject at the police station.

We've been through this. On Nov 5, after 2 hours of questioning, Knox confessed to being at the scene at the time of the murder. For all we know, Rudy was questioned for 2 hours and made the same confession. Is his confession any different than her confession?

Amanda, by her own admission, didn't know enough Italian to understand police during questioning without an interpreter, so clearly she didn't understand what police and Italians were saying at the scene. Laura and her boyfriend were so suspicious of the lovebirds that they searched the car after driving them to the police station ... should we believe that they were suspicious and fed them information? Who knew that Meredith bled to death? She was covered with a duvet ... only her foot was visible. How did Amanda get it all so right?

 

[claudicici]

Sorry, the only way I can interpret a woman that wants to smooch at the moment the murder of her roommate is discovered is cold. Somehow, I don't see smooching as a natural reaction to fear.

I agree,I do think A comes across as very uncaring and superficial.That's actually another reason that to ME points more towards her innocence than guilt.When I read Rudy's account it is full of passion,of emotion ,of anger of his past,of growing up ,of rejection.....I can see how all this rage can lead to this brutal murder....AK on the other hand is in lala land ,I can't see her having the anger and rage necessary to commit a brutal crime.

 

[minazoe]

I agree,I do think A comes across as very uncaring and superficial.That's actually another reason that to ME points more towards her innocence than guilt.When I read Rudy's account it is full of passion,of emotion ,of anger of his past,of growing up ,of rejection.....I can see how all this rage can lead to this brutal murder....AK on the other hand is in lala land ,I can't see her having the anger and rage necessary to commit a brutal crime.

Amanda, was in puppy love and probably just wanted to get out of there... She seems detached, but many people cannot deal with something like this...she had nothing to to with it...she was not that close to her roomie...
she probably just wanted to get away and go be with her boyfriend.

She was unaware that she was being watched or her actions noted...because she did nothing wrong.

I don't get why her personality plays into this...

its almost like the prosecution is trying to judge and condemm her regardless of her innocence...just for being a twit.

I say she walks.

:skip:

 

[otto]

I agree,I do think A comes across as very uncaring and superficial.That's actually another reason that to ME points more towards her innocence than guilt.When I read Rudy's account it is full of passion,of emotion ,of anger of his past,of growing up ,of rejection.....I can see how all this rage can lead to this brutal murder....AK on the other hand is in lala land ,I can't see her having the anger and rage necessary to commit a brutal crime.

Which of Amanda's and Rudy's writings are you comparing?