Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[lane99]

Well then it must be pure coincidence that Amanda falsely accused Patrick of the assault and murder, the ONLY OTHER black person she knew in Perugia?...

It's not a coincidence at all that Amanda falsely accused Patrick. She gave up Patrick because he is the specific person the police pressured her to accuse. Since he is the person with whom she exchanged the "see you later" text.

On the other hand, it is entirely pure coincidence that the actual killer happened to be black, as is Patrick.

 

[Diastole]

Depth of wounds

How could a forcefully thrust knife, with a blade length of about 12 cm, inflict a neck wound with a depth of only 8 cm? - try a simple experiment. Grasp an object about the size of a knife handle in your right hand, holding it in your fist as if about to stab with it. Hold your neck in a neutral or slightly forward flexed position. Now make a stabbing motion towards the left anterior aspect of your neck. Unless you have the physique of a catwalk model, you'll probably find that your thumb impacts against your clavicle, and the metacarpophalangeal joint of your index finger strikes your mandible. There will be a gap of a few centimetres between your fist and the surface of your neck.

The information about blade length which can be inferred from the smaller wounds is limited. The knife thrust to the right side of Meredith Kercher's neck is thought to have struck the inner aspect of her mandible, limiting the potential depth of penetration. The track of the smaller wound on the left side of her neck became contiguous with that of the larger wound immediately superior to it.

 

[lane99]

...Stefanoni lied about performing a second blood test on the luminol footprints, saying that no such test was performed. Later, under pressure from defense lawyers, she provided documents showing that a second test was performed, and it was negative for blood in every case...

Anyone have any more info about this? How do we know she denied the luminol findings were tested for blood?

In the first place, it would be troubling enough if they hadn't tested them. But doubly so, if they had, and tried to sweep a negative result under the carpet.

 

[lane99]

...If there were such a terrible scream that Nara could hear it behind the double glazed window, the people outside would have easily heard it...

Assuming the best case scenario that she did hear something, and it was on the day of the murder, is there any evidence that whatever it is she heard was actually the attack?

Other than the circular logic: that it must have been the attack on Miss Kercher, since that was the about the time she was murdered. And we know that was about the time she was murdered, because that was the time the apparent scream was heard?

 

[Dan O.]

No she didn't. Where did she say this?

Were they? Where are these people?

from SeattlePI:

At the moment she heard the scream, Capezzali said she thought there had been a car accident

Rudy's diary claims that there were people playing basketball in the plaza when he left.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Yes, like Steve Moore and people on this forum.
If you are not able to follow the logic, just don't follow me.

Yummi, even if we can't follow your "logic", the entertainment value you provide to this forum is priceless

 

[Antony]

(msg #7474)
And yes, it IS a factor. If you are trying to prove that two people are innocent after a court finds them guilty, you better be able to answer for EVERYTHING.

... and further to my previous reply, is this exchange that you meant in your posting #7147 (p179)?

That is about false confessions, not lies here and there to cover up damning evidence. That is not comparable.

This isn't "damning evidence", and the only lie is the spurious finding of Meredith's DNA. The reading was obtained in an improperly conducted test carried out in conditions unsuitable for using the LCN technique.

 

[Katody Matrass]

But anyway the question gets in the end to the same point. Regardless what happened during the previous minute on which you express your belief, a moment has come where Meredith had her mouth grabbed for a long timke and her arms were restrained with force and she was forced to immobility. At that moment, who was pointing the knife at her throught? The same attacker?
Or if you prefer, if the knife bearer was grabbing her hands, who, meanwhile, was covering her mouth for minutes as shown by the autopsy?
Or, when the attacker was stabbing her repeatedly first on one side and then on the other with puncture movements, who was grabbing her arms, body and mouth?

Why do you think that she had her mouth covered "for minutes"? I assume you've read the autopsy report as discussed in the Massei report? The report states that Massei found clear signs of asphyxiation, but the other evidence points clearly to the fact that Meredith suffocated in her own blood from the neck wound. She had bruises on her face and neck consistent with having a hand forcibly placed over her mouth at some point, but nothing that points to this hand having been placed there "for minutes".

And while we're on the subject, the Massei report's discussion of the autopsy report indicates that Lalli found only very small wounds and bruises to Meredith's arms, hands and chest:

"There were no noticeable injuries to the chest or abdomen.
The presence of two relatively slight areas of bruising, with scarce colouring and barely noticeable, were detected in the region of the elbow.
On the hands were small wounds showing a very slight defensive response." (Massei report translation, page 112)

So much for an extended violent struggle with her assailant(s). It seems that hyperbole in this area suits some people's agendas, even if it's at odds with the scientific evidence.

Looks like Machiavelli bases his theory on a seriously mistaken mental picture of the murder. Concocting a "mouth grabbing for minutes" scenario to prove how it was not possible to do for one person - a nice fat strawman.

From the amount of hardships and "impossibilities" colpevolisti bring up about the murder dynamics it would appear that never in the history a single knife wielding man managed to kill an unarmed girl.

 

[Chris C]

Couldn't it have something to do with the broken car ?

Where exactly is Nara's residence? Because there is 1 car in the driveway, 1 broken down car near the residence and a parking garage sitting between Knox's home and the nearest apartments. Apparently in this time frame no noise came from either of the cars, the people in the broken down car or the parking garage on this WINDY night. Apparently the only people that made noise that night was Meredith's killer and Meredith.

 

[Mary_H]

I think Raffaele did lie. He knew the knife never left his apartment, and there was no way Meredith ever had any contact with it. But he was told that her DNA was on the blade, so he came up with a line of BS.

My post was intended to address the question of whether Dr. Sollecito lied in his interview with Sky News.

 

[LondonJohn]

Where exactly is Nara's residence? Because there is 1 car in the driveway, 1 broken down car near the residence and a parking garage sitting between Knox's home and the nearest apartments. Apparently in this time frame no noise came from either of the cars, the people in the broken down car or the parking garage on this WINDY night. Apparently the only people that made noise that night was Meredith's killer and Meredith.

And that's where the paradox lies for me. This scream had to be incredibly loud to be heard by Nara from behind double glazing inside her apartment, some 50m from the girls' house, and completely opposite Meredith's own window. Yet this incredibly loud scream was missed by the myriad residents, plus anyone out walking anywhere in the vicinity (even as far as the Etruscan Arch, let alone the basketball court).

 

[Chris C]

Meredith did resist physically and was restraint with overwhelming force.

There is no doubt on this.

The idea that Nara could be mistaking that scream with something else is below any acceptable intellectual level. And would oly shift the question why the other residents didn't hear the same noise.

Nara's window pane is 39 metres from the cottage's nearest window, and 44 metres from the rear balcony window.

You really should see how far that 39 meters is.

Knox/Merediths

 

[Mary_H]

Yes, our culture has lots of folklore on how you can detect liars. But since this is JREF and not the Weekly World News, we have to look to science to see if these techniques are valid.

Quoting from a recent article on this subject.

Consistently, empirical research has shown that many of the behavioural cues that police are trained to use – such as gaze aversion, rigid posture, and fidgeting – are not diagnostic of truth and deception; that laypeople on average are only 54% accurate; that training produces only marginal improvement; and that police investigators, like judges, psychiatrists, customs inspectors, and other professionals who make these judgments for a living, perform only slightly better, if at all.

Forget gaze aversion, rigid posture, and fidgeting -- hip-swiveling is the new big thing.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Massei is no scientist

I found a quote at TJfM, “Amazingly, even the deeply respected Massei Report is coming in for ridicule.” I for one do not make fun of the report. What I do say is that one of the two reasons that Massei gives for accepting that some of the bra clasp DNA is Raffaele’s is contrary to the principles of forensic genetics. It is not a question of ridicule: I think it is unfortunate that a judge trained in law has to give opinions on matters of science. This error does not automatically invalidate the whole report. However, it should cause one and all to treat the other conclusions of the report with great caution.

 

[LondonJohn]

I found a quote at TJfM, “Amazingly, even the deeply respected Massei Report is coming in for ridicule.” I for one do not make fun of the report. What I do say is that one of the two reasons that Massei gives for accepting that some of the bra clasp DNA is Raffaele’s is contrary to the principles of forensic genetics. It is not a question of ridicule: I think it is unfortunate that a judge trained in law has to give opinions on matters of science. This error does not automatically invalidate the whole report. However, it should cause one and all to treat the other conclusions of the report with great caution.

There are also plenty of areas of law where Massei's reasoning is suspect to say the least. Of course, the word "ridicule" is deliberately used in order to emote certain feelings. And who decided that the Massei report was "deeply respected", anyhow?

 

[Chris C]

But as I posted earlier, it's irrelevant to the facts of this case since clearly Meredith did resist...as evidenced by her restraint and defensive injuries. Where evidence exists, as it does in this case, we should turn to that before...'statistics'.

Yeah well there is a problem with the scream testimony. After the scream Rudy has to still rape Meredith's lifeless body, clean up and change clothes, and then go clubbing.

 

[katy_did]

So, while he was doing that and she was NOT being restrained (since he had no hands to do so), what do you suppose she was doing? Lying back and thinking of England?

Wow, that's really quite offensive. Is that what you think all rape victims who don't fight back are doing? FYI:

1. Passivity during sexual assault is a common response of both child and adult victims.

Studies suggest that anywhere from 1/3 of adult rape survivors (Heidt, Marx, & Forsyth, 2004) to 1/2 of child sexual abuse survivors (Heidt, Marx, & Forsyth, 2004) display a passive, even frozen, response during the assault. Naturally, people do wonder why and how this passive response occurs, but it is important to recognize that, separate from questions of motivation and mechanism, we know from empirical scientific research on sexual victimization that such a passive response is quite common (Marx, Forsyth, & Lexington, 2008; Rizvi, Kaysen, Gutner, Griffin & Resick, 2008). There are research studies attempting to answer the 'why' and 'how' questions regarding victim passivity. It appears that there are a number of factors (such as power disparity) and pathways that are associated with a passive response ranging from a conscious decision based on the assessment that it is a wise course of action given the dangers of resisting, to involuntary physiological responses of paralysis or freezing. In the scientific literature on sexual assault this constellation of victim passive/freeze responses is sometimes called 'rape induced paralysis' and increasingly often called 'tonic immobility' although there is also a more technical use of that term (Marx, Forsyth, & Lexington, 2008).

I'd hazard a guess that sexual assault in which the attacker is armed with a knife has an even higher rate of victims exhibiting this 'freeze' response, given the much lower chances of fighting back being successful. I find the predictions as to what Meredith would have done in this situation, often repeated as if fact, to be a bit disturbing; invariably they imply that she would inevitably have fought back and that this would have been praiseworthy (and thus, implicitly, that not doing so would be less praiseworthy). The fact is that none of us really know what we ourselves would do in that situation, let alone what someone else might do. Pretty much no one says, "Well, I think I'd probably freeze and not do anything", and yet many people would in fact do exactly that.

 

[Chris C]

I found a quote at TJfM, “Amazingly, even the deeply respected Massei Report is coming in for ridicule.” I for one do not make fun of the report. What I do say is that one of the two reasons that Massei gives for accepting that some of the bra clasp DNA is Raffaele’s is contrary to the principles of forensic genetics. It is not a question of ridicule: I think it is unfortunate that a judge trained in law has to give opinions on matters of science. This error does not automatically invalidate the whole report. However, it should cause one and all to treat the other conclusions of the report with great caution.

I do not Blame Massei, he had no choice in this matter. It would have been political suicide to overturn the conviction. Instead he had to make everything fit and thats why that report is the way it is.

When I envision the prosecutions case the Big Bang Theory comes to mind. When I was in school the BBT was just starting to get its roots.
If i remember correctly then the universe was between 5 and 7 billion years old. It was very simple in the beginning. However as the years have passed BBT has turned into dozens of theories with evidence contradicting other theories. So now the BBT is just a collection of multiple theories.

At the center of this murder is Amanda.
From the start Mignini is after Amanda. Afterall they all believe she is the one from the very beginning. They just had to prove it. As more and more bits of possible evidence comes in the prosecution starts to add multiple theories that doesn't quite fit with the other theories of the case. Then at the trial the prosecution dumps all their EVIDENCE and theories on the jury and point the finger at KNOX. However, none of the evidence proves a theory it just contradicts the other theories. Any attempt to attack the evidence is met with resistance by not allowing the defense to examine it. Any attempt to add evidence is met with resistance by the Prosecution and Judge.
However, this investigation and trial where doomed from the beginning because Meredith should have been the center of the Murder.

 

[Mary_H]

Wow, that's really quite offensive. Is that what you think all rape victims who don't fight back are doing? FYI:

I'd hazard a guess that sexual assault in which the attacker is armed with a knife has an even higher rate of victims exhibiting this 'freeze' response, given the much lower chances of fighting back being successful. I find the predictions as to what Meredith would have done in this situation, often repeated as if fact, to be a bit disturbing; invariably they imply that she would inevitably have fought back and that this would have been praiseworthy (and thus, implicitly, that not doing so would be less praiseworthy). The fact is that none of us really know what we ourselves would do in that situation, let alone what someone else might do. Pretty much no one says, "Well, I think I'd probably freeze and not do anything", and yet many people would in fact do exactly that.

Excellent point, katy.

 

[Chris C]

Wow, that's really quite offensive. Is that what you think all rape victims who don't fight back are doing? FYI:



I'd hazard a guess that sexual assault in which the attacker is armed with a knife has an even higher rate of victims exhibiting this 'freeze' response, given the much lower chances of fighting back being successful. I find the predictions as to what Meredith would have done in this situation, often repeated as if fact, to be a bit disturbing; invariably they imply that she would inevitably have fought back and that this would have been praiseworthy (and thus, implicitly, that not doing so would be less praiseworthy). The fact is that none of us really know what we ourselves would do in that situation, let alone what someone else might do. Pretty much no one says, "Well, I think I'd probably freeze and not do anything", and yet many people would in fact do exactly that.

Of course when the assault first happened he might have just beat her up. He does place himself involved in a fight outside of the room near the kitchen where there are knives at. Heck according to him he had to grab a chair to protect himself from someone wielding a knife. Anyone ever wonder if maybe it was Meredith with the knife and he used the chair to disarm her. Apparently this attacker even cut Rudy on his hand.

I'd hazard to guess she would completely surrender facing 3 people wielding knives.