Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[lonepinealex]

What? You think the only people that count are the ones who appeared at trial? That other people might have access to the same information and can make up their own minds? I'd say John Douglass knows about the case and knows about violent crime. I'd say Peter Gill also has access to all the data and is an expert in the field.

Sometimes the courts get it wrong Couldson. Sometimes VERY WRONG. It happens in the US, it happens in the UK and it happens in Italy.

And guess what? Outside people often have a huge impact on the judiciary and court cases. This is why trials are PUBLIC. So the public can oversee the courts. The authority actually resides in the people. They are the ones that provide power to the government. Not the other way around as you seem to suggest.

Is this what happens to your thought process when you live in a Monarchy? You think they are better and know more than you? I don't. Sometimes government officials and judges and Kings are as ignorant and clueless as laymen. Sometimes more so.

Ha, I don't think forelock-tugging deference to authority is the preserve of the unfortunate citizens of a monarchy. But I'm an uncompromising republican, so maybe I don't get the mindset

 

[Chris_Halkides]

hyoid bone debate

I didn't even get past page 4 before I came across something I don't remember from the autopsy report:

FROM (PDF Page 4): http://injusticeanywhereforum.org/download/file.php?id=1520

"(A) of the crime to which articles 110, 575, 573 paragraph 1 section 5 of the Criminal Code apply, in relation to the crime listed under count (C), and 577 paragraph 1 section 4, in relation to article 61 sections 1 and 5 of the Criminal Code, for having, in complicity amongst themselves [in concorso fra loro]1 and with Rudy Hermann Guede, killed Meredith Kercher, by strangling her, fracturing the hyoid bone... "
-

I don't remember in the autopsy report that the hyoid bone was broken. I don't have the autopsy report in front of me, so I'm going to have to find it to verify my impressions here,

I seem to recall a debate about whether the hyoid bone had been cut or fractured. Possibly one of the experts (Torre) changed his mind at one point, and I recall that Perugia Shock covered it.

 

[Desert Fox]

Think about the fact that the 9-11 Hijackers were suppose to have used box-cutters.

 

[Dan O.]

By the way the English translation of the Florence appeal is available on PMF and this not discussions here or elsewhere will be the basis of the deliberations of the Italian Supreme Court next March.

What a strange remark. In one sentence he is saying that our discussions here are immaterial and pointing to the latest translation whoose only purpose is to continue discussions here.

 

[AmyStrange]

-

I seem to recall a debate about whether the hyoid bone had been cut or fractured. Possibly one of the experts (Torre) changed his mind at one point, and I recall that Perugia Shock covered it.

-

Thanx c and that was my first thought also, if it's in the autopsy report, was it cut or fractured. I remember that there was bruising under the chin that looked like finger marks, but it looked (to me) like someone was holding her chin up forcibly with one hand rather than like she was being strangled. I don't remember there being ligature marks like she was being strangled with some kind of belt or rope. Nor do I remember there being thumb print bruisings on her throat. I think I remember reading somewhere that most people strangle other people (when using their hands) from the front using their thumbs to close the airway, but those bruises might have been removed or hard to find or missed because of the knife wounds.

Anyway, I'm still searching for the autopsy report by searching through back post on this thread.

Thanx again c,

d

-

 

[acbytesla]

Ha, I don't think forelock-tugging deference to authority is the preserve of the unfortunate citizens of a monarchy. But I'm an uncompromising republican, so maybe I don't get the mindset

I agree, it's not. Hitler wasn't a monarch. No one called him King. That said, I find the whole concept of Royalty and hereditary titles to be repugnant. No offense to the Brits. I'm with Benjamin Franklin about democracy. That it is the worst form of government except for all the others.

 

[sept79]

This is perfectly true, but beside the point that Coulsdon's question is otiose to the point of being idiotic. John Douglas and Peter Gill do not require the imprimatur of these farcical trials to confirm their opinions as expert.

(There is a bizarre type who watches this case who is so determined to hold onto his or her viewpoint, they have apparently made peace with a willingness to look like blithering fools - and, in the worst cases, much worse - in order to do so.)

An objective study of this case must find significance in the C-V independent study and Dr. Gill's opinion when they are strengthened by Stefanoni's failure to defend her work as she continues to withhold the electronic data files.

 

[lonepinealex]

I agree, it's not. Hitler wasn't a monarch. No one called him King. That said, I find the whole concept of Royalty and hereditary titles to be repugnant. No offense to the Brits. I'm with Benjamin Franklin about democracy. That it is the worst form of government except for all the others.

No arguments here! There are plenty of Brit republicans, though I have to suppress my views a lot of the time as I work for the brown nosing BBC. Although we're not actually governed by a monarch, we 're also a poorly functioning democracy like all the others. And some might look at the American political dynasties with raised eyebrows...

Anyway, back on topic, are there examples of new evidence or witnesses coming forward during trials? Anglolawyer - can you shed any light?

 

[Samson]

Were any of the people you are referring called as expert witnesses in their field to the trial or subsequent appeals, a simple yes or no? What some people seem to be suggesting is events outside of the judicial proceedings should have some bearing on a ongoing case, now where in the western world has this ever happened in an ongoing court case?

It has happened in New Zealand, though we may be part of the southern world.

Arthur Allan Thomas was exonerated after a decade purely by the work of a scientist, Jim Sprott, and a journalist Pat Booth, neither of whom testified at his trials (check).
David Bain was found not guilty brd at his fourth trial purely because of the dogged pursuit of the cause by lawyer and ex All Black Joe Karam.

Teina Pora will shortly be exonerated by your British Privy Council, because New Zealand journalists did simple independent research.
The now sacked Justice minister Judith Collins (not because of this case) had the gall to declare this showed the process worked. CoulsdonUK, I will place any bet you choose that this current case will be resolved in the court of public opinion in your lifetime in favour of the defendents, because of efforts of people outside the Italian judiciary.

 

[Samson]

No arguments here! There are plenty of Brit republicans, though I have to suppress my views a lot of the time as I work for the brown nosing BBC. Although we're not actually governed by a monarch, we 're also a poorly functioning democracy like all the others. And some might look at the American political dynasties with raised eyebrows...Anyway, back on topic, are there examples of new evidence or witnesses coming forward during trials? Anglolawyer - can you shed any light?

Ladbrokes have first favourite a Clinton, and third favourite a Bush for 2016. Assuming two terms, that will mean two families have governed for 28 of 36 years.

 

[lonepinealex]

Coulsdon was very careful to specify ongoing trials, hence my question above.

While I agree that internet chatter probably won't have any influence over the case (not that this should stop people chatting), the work of new experts might. Why it should matter whether the trial is ongoing or not is beyond me.

If it matters to coulsdon, I do not imagine that anything I write about this case will have any effect on it whatsoever.

 

[Desert Fox]

Coulsdon was very careful to specify ongoing trials, hence my question above.

While I agree that internet chatter probably won't have any influence over the case (not that this should stop people chatting), the work of new experts might. Why it should matter whether the trial is ongoing or not is beyond me.

If it matters to coulsdon, I do not imagine that anything I write about this case will have any effect on it whatsoever.

Together we make a difference I think. . . .The Hubble Space Telescope was going to be decommissioned until NASA got letter after letter and kids sending their lunch money to NASA to save it.

As Americans, if they are convicted again (and I think they will be to be blunt), and assuming that there is an extradition request (I am not as sure about that), it is time for a massive letter writing campaign to the president and the secretary of state. Cannot save Raff but maybe Amanda from further incarceration.

 

[AmyStrange]

-

Coulsdon was very careful to specify ongoing trials, hence my question above.
While I agree that internet chatter probably won't have any influence over the case (not that this should stop people chatting), the work of new experts might. Why it should matter whether the trial is ongoing or not is beyond me.

If it matters to coulsdon, I do not imagine that anything I write about this case will have any effect on it whatsoever.

-

I personally don't know about anywhere else, but here in the US, all trials are ongoing if they can be appealed in some form or another, in my opinion,

d

-
P.S. I'm still looking for the Autopsy Report that was posted here. Any help would be appreciated.

-

 

[lonepinealex]

I was referring to Internet forum chat rather than letter writin campaigns and proper activism. I discuss the case because I find it horrifying and fascinating, but I'm adding nothing. It's all been said and there's clearly only a handful of people discussing it online. Some stick to one or two sites, some take it to twitter and comments below articles as well, but it's all the same people. I don't think any of the general discussion has any material effect on the case at all.

 

[Desert Fox]

I was referring to Internet forum chat rather than letter writin campaigns and proper activism. I discuss the case because I find it horrifying and fascinating, but I'm adding nothing. It's all been said and there's clearly only a handful of people discussing it online. Some stick to one or two sites, some take it to twitter and comments below articles as well, but it's all the same people. I don't think any of the general discussion has any material effect on the case at all.

I think we do create a buzz in our conversations.

 

[lonepinealex]

I'm afraid I think it's an echo chamber.

 

[Desert Fox]

I'm afraid I think it's an echo chamber.

I was talking to my brother about the issue. . . We live in different states and do not talk much and he thought that this was a railroad from hell as well. I have seen my posts mentioned by the pro guilt side.

Besides. . . .This issue just makes me mad and want to talk about it.

 

[lonepinealex]

Me too, like I said. That's what discussion forums are for. I'm just acknowledging that I'm adding nothing to the progress of the case.

I include the guilters in everything I said above btw. They are in the echo chamber too.

 

[AmyStrange]

-

I was referring to Internet forum chat rather than letter writin campaigns and proper activism. I discuss the case because I find it horrifying and fascinating, but I'm adding nothing. It's all been said and there's clearly only a handful of people discussing it online. Some stick to one or two sites, some take it to twitter and comments below articles as well, but it's all the same people. I don't think any of the general discussion has any material effect on the case at all.

-

I can't prove absolutely whether online discussions make any difference, but I think it does to some degree, because exonerations (at least here in the US) don't just happen in a vacuum or out of the blue.

I personally believe that "The Thin Blue Line" resulted in a public discussion (and isn't that what this forum and thread is, a public discussion) that eventually resulted in Randall Adams eventually being released.

I think it's possible, but that's just my opinion,

d

-

 

[AmyStrange]

Autopsy report

-

The following link is the closest I've found to the Autopsy report, but it isn't the actual report (which I used for my wound analysis explaining why a lone killer is possible, in my opinion):

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/RonHendry7.html

I read an article that said the report is on Amanda's website, but I can't find it there either, so I'm still looking for the actual report,

d

-
P.S. I find it so sad that people in the comment sections of some articles about the Meredith Kercher case still say there were 40 stab wounds, which is simply not true. Yes there were around 40 wounds, but most of them were bruises, and only six were actually stab wounds.

-
ETA: I found no reference in the above link to the hyoid bone though. There's a book out by John Follain (Death in Perugia: The Definitive Account of the Meredith Kercher Case from her Murder to the Acquittal of Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox) that list the report as one of it's sources. I might have to buy the book to see if they have the actual report within its pages.

-
ETA Part 2: I borrowed the Follain ebook above from the SPL. I'm going to check through it right now.

-