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

[dgfred]

What test were run on them... at least 4 days later?

And what about alchohol?

 

[Allusonz]

What test were run on them... at least 4 days later?

And what about alchohol?

If the time was actually taken to review the extensive posts here on this subject this question has been addressed not once, or twice, or three times, but numberous times

I believe when individuals choose not to review information objectively then there becomes an agenda. Oft times these agenda's do not reflect the facts but instead misrepresent or distort the facts

Propaganda - Definition

The primary target of propaganda is people's opinions rather than their knowledge. Therefore, the information conveyed is often presented in an emotionally loaded way and with other means of affecting the opinions of people.

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Propaganda

doublespeak

Definition Intentionally deceiving language. Not an outright lie or a tactful euphemism, but systematic use of ambiguous, evasive words and sentence structures to say one thing but mean something else.

distort reality by making the bad, negative, or unpleasant look good, positive, or pleasant, and vice versa,

 

[dgfred]

Exactly. Since we don't know exactly what they were 'on' (they admitted smoking a joint) our understanding is limited. They were tested at least 3 days after the murder. Cocaine should have been out of their system, hair wasn't tested IIRC, they didn't admit to anything else so anything can be debated regarding what exactly 'was' wrong with them. We can be certain that memory loss (for such a long period) for both was not possible from one joint of just reefer, and it is interresting that both but some blame on the pot smoking in later writings for what had happened to them. :waitasec:

 

[Allusonz]

Lets look at some FACTS

Stephanoni's boss reviewed her work. Much like i review the work of individuals in my employ. I trust that they have followed the standard procedures and protocols and this pertains not just specific to DNA, but is reflected in every facet of our life. Including our children!!!

When you have 11 Experts just in DNA alone from the UK, Italy, and the United States saying WE HAVE A PROBLEM everyone should stop and take a second look.

The following 11 experts were directly involved in just items to do with the trial itself not others that have spoken out independant of the trial stating the same thing.

Yet these people are NOT CREDIBLE in certain individuals eyes. My question is how long does it take for people realize that the problem is not with the experts but with ILE

Elizabeth Johnson, Ph.D. forensics biology and DNA expert

Greg Hampikian, Ph.D., director of the Idaho Innocence Project and professor in the Department of Biology at Boise State University

Dan Krane, chief executive officer and chairman of the board of directors, Forensic Bioinformatics

Jason Gilder, systems engineer, Forensic Bioinformatics

Joy Halverson, DVM, director, Zoogen Services

Laurence D. Mueller, professor of ecology and evolutionary biology, University of California, Irvine

Marc Taylor, president, Technical Associates

Rick Staub, Ph.D., director of laboratory operations, Orchid Cellmark, Dallas, Texas

Simon Ford, Ph.D., Lexigen Science and Law Consultants

Chris Halkides, associate professor of chemistry and biochemistry at the University of North Carolina

Mark Waterbury, Ph.D., a scientist

Sarah Gino, who has appeared in court before, called out the prosecution for providing amplified DNA samples with the dates missing.

Adriano Tagliabracci

David C Anderson Expert

 

[Allusonz]

David C Anderson Expert

English physician, endocrinologist and former professor of medicine and endocrinology in Manchester


My suspicion is that misguided investigations deflected effort from finding the real truth about Meredith Kercher's murder

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...nox-is-a-victim-of-italian-pride-2185628.html

 

[Allusonz]

Again we come to the break-in

My question is this again how many experts that testify, or present solid verifable proof that this could of been done will it take before individuals will actually take the time to read OBJECTIVELY the information provided

Ron Hendry - his investigations support the lone wold theory

Medical examiner Carlo Torre

Torre told the court there is not a single element that leads one to think more than one person could have comitted the crime.

Francesco Introna

told the court that Kercher was knifed from behind, a lone killer holding her chin with one hand and the knife in the other

 

[dgfred]

How many of these 'experts' were called by the defense to testify at the trial?

Are their defense teams competant in your opinion (or suspicion)?

Wonder why?

My suspicion is that AK and RS are guilty in participating in the murder of Meredith.

 

[Allusonz]

Then we come to Barbie Nadaeu


Barbie Nadeau, a journalist who writes for Newsweek and the online newspaper The Daily Beast, has covered the Knox-Sollecito trial from the beginning. She believes Knox's own words and behavior after the murder are the real reason she's on trial.

"It gives you pause that she has no idea about what happened in that house," Nadeau says

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/60456442.html

I note here that it is not the "abundance" of evidence as so many have stated that is here that gives her pause...so i ask where is the forensics which supports these theories?

Although I oft joke about her flying through the air, I am no longer joking. The only way these 2 could of been in MK's room is if they flew through the air

 

[Allusonz]

How many of these 'experts' were called by the defense to testify at the trial?

Are their defense teams competant in your opinion (or suspicion)?

Wonder why?

My suspicion is that AK and RS are guilty in participating in the murder of Meredith.

posted so many times fred take the time to look at all the posts.......

9 signed the open letter....as any person that has been involved with these discussions should by now know

 

[Allusonz]

I will again state for the record.....

For anyone that thinks that a couple of forums are not being documented completely as well as some very intense writing campaigns are not being closely watched, I do suspect that there will be some legal ramifications with respect to this

Although it is my opinion, I strongly believe there is just cause if they so choose for future legal ramifications

 

[dgfred]

Easier to look at it this way IMO:

Wouldn't 20+ Judges and two juries made up of people just like us... be able to look over ALL the evidence and make a competant decision regarding their guilt after almost a two year trial?

Would 'experts' elsewhere, semi-journalist, bloggers, regular people, etc. be better prepared to make that same decision even though they have not seen ALL the evidence and haven't exactly read the reports submitted by the judge in many instances? Would they know more or be better qualified than the actual experts that DID testify?

 

[Allusonz]

Easier to look at it this way IMO:

Wouldn't 20+ Judges and two juries made up of people just like us... be able to look over ALL the evidence and make a competant decision regarding their guilt after almost a two year trial?

Would 'experts' elsewhere, semi-journalist, bloggers, regular people, etc. be better prepared to make that same decision even though they have not seen ALL the evidence and haven't exactly read the reports submitted by the judge in many instances? Would they know more or be better qualified than the actual experts that DID testify?

Speaking of the 20 judges and since I cannot locate the names of these 20 judges but this has been referred to so many times could you please provide a cite with the names of these 20 judges

 

[Allusonz]

Ron Hendry was recruited by the Knox propaganda team to write these very one-sided articles. I rather read something a bit more objective. He doesn't make much sense to me. He speaks of police leaving blood stains by moving shoes or a jacket. The next day? Makes no sense. He does acknowledge that certain areas were wiped though. I guess there was a cleanup attempt after all. Maybe RG cleaned his bloody shoe prints that show him spreading out the duvet over Meredith's body, or where he closes the door behind him? Seriously, these people that write on the internet all have their opinions and that is fine but the real case is in Perugia where the real experts handle the case with first-hand knowledge. I much rather read their reports.

Ron Hendry was not recruited by the Knox family. Ron Hendry was working on the Toyota fiasco and out of curiousity decided to reconstruct this on his own and it was published in one of the newspapers

It was only after his initial reconstruction that he felt they were innocent and now is advocating for AK and RS

 

[Allusonz]

Then we get into the autopsy problems

Mariano Cingolani, also testified to the presence of alcohol in her system. Alcohol changes not only the potential dynamic of the crime, but it could affect calculations about the time of death, because alcohol slows the digestive process

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-09-19/zero-hour-for-amanda-knox/p/

 

[Allusonz]

This is just the beginning with respect to the autopsy issues

Alcohol slows down the digestive tract, which is important since the BODY TEMPERATURE was not taken till 11 hours after the body was found

Giancarlo Umani Ronchi, testified that there were traces of alcohol in Kercher’s blood.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-09-19/zero-hour-for-amanda-knox/p/

 

[Allusonz]

I believe that not many would disagree with this individual when he states that he believes they are innocent

Special Agent John Douglas

 

[Allusonz]

So we have AK and RS being arrested for this murder based on AK's behavior as I have posted before

1. She sobbed at the crime scene
2. She made a la mosa movement
3. At 3 pm her and RS shared pizza

Then it was bragged that they solved this case prior to any forensic results whatsoever

 

[kemo]

Ron Hendry is very good and his job and has an excellent reputation for accuracy and integrity. That being said, he is also a hired gun who works for lawyer who are either trying to get clients off or win judgments against insurance companies. He is in the business of analyzing known facts in order to interpret them in a manner that is most favorable to his client. He is not in the business of determining the truth. In criminal trials, his job is to create reasonable doubt. I'm sure his expertise has saved more than one innocent client but I am certain that most of his clients were guilty and he will be the first to admit it.

His site is excellent and anyone who wants to understand what really happened should read it and understand his arguments. But, for the most part, what he offers are "alternative explanations", not the "probable explanations" of important aspects of this crime.

 

[ziggy]

Easier to look at it this way IMO:

Wouldn't 20+ Judges and two juries made up of people just like us... be able to look over ALL the evidence and make a competant decision regarding their guilt after almost a two year trial?

Would 'experts' elsewhere, semi-journalist, bloggers, regular people, etc. be better prepared to make that same decision even though they have not seen ALL the evidence and haven't exactly read the reports submitted by the judge in many instances? Would they know more or be better qualified than the actual experts that DID testify?

Nope. This is why experts are allowed to be used by the court system. Experts serve two important functions; they educate the fact finder on certain scientific modalities and psychological syndromes that the average person may not be aware of and they make it more probable that reliable evidence is admitted.

No matter how intelligent people are, if they are presented with faulty evidence it will never be a fair decision.

 

[dgfred]

Nope. This is why experts are allowed to be used by the court system. Experts serve two important functions; they educate the fact finder on certain scientific modalities and psychological syndromes that the average person may not be aware of and they make it more probable that reliable evidence is admitted.

No matter how intelligent people are, if they are presented with faulty evidence it will never be a fair decision.

That's why experts WERE allowed from both sides and the jurors educated themselves to the evidence... then found both AK and RS guilty.