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

[OldSteve]

I can see why her family wasn't exactly thrilled w/ the movie - there were some scenes that definitely came from a guilty perspective. Malkmus posted an article that had a list of facts that were completely wrong (so I won't rehash) .. but overall, it could have been a lot worse..

I thought it was interesting when Patrick Lumumba sat down in the interrogation room, he had a swollen eye and a wide open cut across his cheek bone..



You think Amanda may have known details about Meredith's room because she went back to the cottage and stumbled across the crime scene? or you think she was there all along? I'm just trying to understand..

Good point about PL's swollen eye and cut --- I wondered about that too, but forgot about it till you mentioned it.

To answer your question - Not sure about AK being in MK's room. But because the lived in close proximity, finding AK's DNA on anything in the cottage should not be a surprise. Based on that, and because there is nothing esle that shows AK killed MK, had I been on the jury, I would have found AK innocent.

 

[Nova]

I don't know if it is the director's theory or what, it is interesting - but how is it damning for Amanda?

In the film, a coroner or equivalent is shown opining that the body was moved three hours after death. It's hard to imagine RG hung around for that long after killing MK.

So who moved the body and why?

Or is there a problem with the forensic conclusion that the body was moved so much later?

I was surprised that this issue hadn't been discussed here at length, since, if true, it seems key.

 

[Nova]

I'm confused: what it is about Amanda specifically that initiated and perpetuates the idea that she was the one with the sex orgy idea???? This seems like such a strange fiction to make up - first, men are typically sexual aggresors and second, I have not found any evidence that AK was a participant and fan of drug fueled orgy activity. I think she was latched onto RS like a young girl completely infatuated and not very experienced in relationships; maybe a bit needy. That kind of girl does not go out on a limb and suggest these types of things to her boyfriend!

The "idea" that the investigator imagined reminds me of Satanic panic...think of a salacious scene and then make the evidence fit...found up the villians, make them out to be evil and secure your job and the confidence of the community.

So what would lead one to believe AK would initiate a sex orgy again?

(Response removed because, as usual, Malkmus beat me to it. And with a cite, of course. )

NOTE: I HAVE NO IDEA WHETHER THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE:

ziggy, the film showed either the lead investigator or the prosecutor saying a "woman" must have been involved because "only a woman" would have had the compassion to cover the victim's body with the duvet.

Of course, we know the argument is absurd, but if the scene represents what was believed, it may explain the early focus on AK.

 

[OldSteve]

In the film, a coroner or equivalent is shown opining that the body was moved three hours after death. It's hard to imagine RG hung around for that long after killing MK.

So who moved the body and why?

Or is there a problem with the forensic conclusion that the body was moved so much later?

I was surprised that this issue hadn't been discussed here at length, since, if true, it seems key.

BBM
Please elaborate Nova on this. It's been my feeling that AK might have seen MK's body after she was killed, and may have even covered it with the blanket, and I could even imagine her or RS moving it...
But as I've been saying - I don't see any evidence at crime scene that shows AK killed MK.

 

[Nova]

I can see why her family wasn't exactly thrilled w/ the movie - there were some scenes that definitely came from a guilty perspective. Malkmus posted an article that had a list of facts that were completely wrong (so I won't rehash) .. but overall, it could have been a lot worse..

I thought it was interesting when Patrick Lumumba sat down in the interrogation room, he had a swollen eye and a wide open cut across his cheek bone....

I'm sure both families would rather the public focus on the actual facts, rather than on a fictional representation that necessarily alters details for purposes of time, narrative arc, etc.

 

[Nova]

I've mentioned this before, but it's worth noting as part of this topic. The lawyers are expected to argue the presence of unknown female DNA in those mixed samples. "Unknown" probably because they never collected DNA samples of the housemates.

Do you mean the defense lawyers or the prosecution? At first glance, I don't see how the defense benefits from "unknown," untested female DNA. I assume the prosecution would just claim that must be AK's.

 

[Nova]

Good point about PL's swollen eye and cut --- I wondered about that too, but forgot about it till you mentioned it....

Speaking of interrogations, it was very brief, but I thought the film gave us at least a glimpse of the process that produced AK's false statements (even while refusing to confirm or deny that she was struck in the head).

On the other hand, the interrogation of RS seemed like Mary cuddling her little lamb. Maybe RS got special treatment...

 

[SleuthyGal]

I think using the Lifetime movie for any beliefs about the case is a dangerous thing. Sure, they may have gotten some things correct, but we know they also took "artistic license" as well. This case hinges on getting all the details exactly correct--one nuance can change the meaning.

Since we've already seen a list of things they got wrong, it makes me question them as a reference point for anything in the case.

 

[Nova]

BBM
Please elaborate Nova on this. It's been my feeling that AK might have seen MK's body after she was killed, and may have even covered it with the blanket, and I could even imagine her or RS moving it...
But as I've been saying - I don't see any evidence at crime scene that shows AK killed MK.

I can't elaborate beyond my gut feeling that Rudy Guede didn't spend more than three hours with a dead body in that flat. Even assuming he knew the plans of the flatmates (and I haven't seen evidence he knew them that well), he had no way of knowing when AK and RS might return from an evening out. I don't know that he raced for the door (as the Motivation Report seems to conclude), but I assume he spent as little time as possible in the apartment after MK died.

So a moving of the body three hours after death--IF TRUE--seems to support the prosecution's idea that AK (with or without RS) was in the flat after midnight rearranging the scene.

Which begs the question (as does your conclusion): why would AK tamper with evidence unless she was culpable in the murder? Why wouldn't she just call the police?

One theory I've seen floated here is that AK and RS invited RG over to the cottage (perhaps to score drugs), left him flirting with MK, and retired to their room to have sex. While AK and RS were otherwise engaged, RG made advances on MK, was rebuffed and then raped and killed her in anger. AK and RS were alerted by MK's final scream, only to find her dead or dying as RG raced out the door.

Fearing they would be convicted as accomplices for inviting RG in, the same theory continues, AK and RS then proceeded to stage the break-in, clean up the hallways, move the body, etc. (This wouldn't be the first time that innocent people had tampered with evidence because they feared they would be found guilty.)

Of course this theory doesn't explain how AK and RS managed to rearrange MK's body and bedroom without leaving significant quantities of DNA behind, or how they managed to remove their own DNA while leaving that of RG; but most of us agree the DNA testing was subpar.

Personally, I wonder why, if this theory is accurate, neither AK nor RS has said anything by now. Obviously, both were pressured into making statements by LE. How is it neither "broke" and accused RG? AK's statement accusing Lumumba incriminated her no more than this theory's "truth" re RG. (The most obvious answer is that neither knew Guede was involved until the forensics implicated him.)

 

[Nova]

I think using the Lifetime movie for any beliefs about the case is a dangerous thing. Sure, they may have gotten some things correct, but we know they also took "artistic license" as well. This case hinges on getting all the details exactly correct--one nuance can change the meaning.

Since we've already seen a list of things they got wrong, it makes me question them as a reference point for anything in the case.

You are correct, of course, and I am to blame here.

But I have tried to be careful in the extreme to label anything I take from the film as speculative. If we look at the lists of factual errors, it seems to me most of them come from some media claim at some point in time.

So I am assuming the same is true of representations in the film: by and large, they weren't invented out of whole cloth, but came from some claim published or broadcast somewhere.

And I am merely mentioning them in that context (as onetime media reports) to ask if those of you who know the case better than I have heard these claims before and know what became of them. I assume it really doesn't matter whether I know which tabloid or other media outlet published which claim.

 

[dgfred]

I remember the moving of the body hours after death was a theorized early on and I don't know what was finally determined. That being said, I've always thought that it was certainly possible that Rudy probably got no sleep that night, was extremely paranoid after he left the cottage, and that he could have returned hours later and seen that no one had come home yet and thus decided to do some additional things. Just a thought.

Yeah, the body had been moved as her shoulder had laid in the pooled blood.

I think you got it right about the 'no sleep'... only it was AK and RS doing those 'additional things'. They look quite sleepy (or maybe in shock) in those pics on the day of the murder.

*Just wondering what the ladies here think on this... Does her hair look recently washed to y'all, about 2 hours ealier?

 

[Nova]

This blog:

http://investigation.discovery.com/blogs/bizzare/april23/april23.html



quotes Joe Tacopino (AK's American lawyer at the time and known to most of us from the Natalee Holloway case) as saying the body was moved and then moved again (ETA: by LE) before the room was processed for forensic evidence.

I'm speculating here: maybe that's why this issue of moving the body hasn't been more prominent. Once the body was moved by LE, it may have been impossible to go back and argue it was moved by the defendants.

 

[OldSteve]

Out of context -

Which begs the question (as does your conclusion): why would AK tamper with evidence unless she was culpable in the murder? Why wouldn't she just call the police?

What you say is logically true if it was me, and I presume you... But, Amanda is Amana ... the quirky things she did speaks (at least to me) of her naivety, and perhaps the influence of smoking pot.

 

[Nova]

Out of context -


What you say is logically true if it was me, and I presume you... But, Amanda is Amanda ... the quirky things she did speaks (at least to me) of her naivety, and perhaps the influence of smoking pot.

Point taken. It wouldn't be the first time that innocent people tampered with evidence because they feared they would be blamed for something.

But if we assume AK might be responsible for the staging but NOT the murder, that changes the game, so to speak. Because the evidence of staging (even if we set aside any moving of the body) is the strongest evidence against AK, IMO.

(ETA: On the other hand, if AK (with or without RS) did the staging but not the rape and murder, I'm surprised she didn't say so when she "broke" on the Night of a Thousand Statements. Telling the "truth" (if that is the truth) wouldn't have been much more compromising than what she did say.)

 

[Malkmus]

Do you mean the defense lawyers or the prosecution? At first glance, I don't see how the defense benefits from "unknown," untested female DNA. I assume the prosecution would just claim that must be AK's.

Yes, the defense lawyers claim there is the DNA of an unknown female in those mixed samples. Meaning, in addition to Amanda's DNA and Meredith's blood. If it turned out to belong to either of the other two roommates it would cast even more doubt on the DNA evidence. Which is their point.

 

[miley]

This blog:

http://investigation.discovery.com/blogs/bizzare/april23/april23.html

quotes Joe Tacopino (AK's American lawyer at the time and known to most of us from the Natalee Holloway case) as saying the body was moved and then moved again (ETA: by LE) before the room was processed for forensic evidence.

I'm speculating here: maybe that's why this issue of moving the body hasn't been more prominent. Once the body was moved by LE, it may have been impossible to go back and argue it was moved by the defendants.

in the article.. Tacopina said Meredith's body had been moved before the police took measurements so they put her back in the original position. Is this the moving of the body they are talking about - what makes them think she was moved three hours after death then, I wonder when they decided this ..

Quote from article above:

The lead investigator, Giacinto Profazio, succinctly summed up the case as it stands at this point by saying: "There are so many elements that just don't add up. This crime may only be solved with a confession."​

hey, wait a second, I thought they already had a confession...

 

[Allusonz]

There are a few points I would like to mention here

One is that PL lawyers wanted a 2nd autospy to be performed and that was rejected

Another is it is very possible that bruising seen postpartum could very well have occured either when the door was broken down and 2 witnesses stated an ILE officer did go into the room

Also just in the process of removal this could of happened (sorry i am trying to phrase this as delicately as i can)

 

[SleuthyGal]

PL lawyers wanted a 2nd autospy to be performed and that was rejected

Patrick's lawyers wanted a 2nd autopsy?

Why?

 

[Nova]

Yes, the defense lawyers claim there is the DNA of an unknown female in those mixed samples. Meaning, in addition to Amanda's DNA and Meredith's blood. If it turned out to belong to either of the other two roommates it would cast even more doubt on the DNA evidence. Which is their point.

Got it. Thanks. I thought you meant they were trying to insert a "mystery woman" into the crime. I'm not saying it's impossible some unknown woman was involved, but it strikes me as a big reach to suddenly make that argument on appeal.

But the presence of DNA from the other flatmates, whom we know weren't there for the murder, would certainly drive home the point that AK's DNA being there probably has nothing to do with the crime. To my ear, THAT sounds more like an appellate argument.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Mixed DNA being in a bathroom sink that both MK and AK shared would not be out of the ordinary.

They really should have gotten DNA profiles from all the flatmates to have as full a picture as possible in looking at evidential DNA samples.