Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Gaspode]

A few more off-topic and bickering posts moved to AAH for the second time today.

Keep it civil and on-topic from now on.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Gaspode

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

K-Lo,

I could rebut all this, but since Lex Rex did such a great job of it on PMF, I'll just repost his/her response here (I don't think he/she will mind):

Thanks in advance for answering all these questions, K-Lo.

Henceforth you'll use my full name, not amusing contractions of it, or I'll report your posts. Thanks in advance for not being childish.

And I'll just reiterate for myself that, unless you are a pathologist or have support in the medical literature for your assertions, there's no evidence for what you've said.

There's a sad tendency in some quarters to think that it constitutes an argument to stand around demanding evidence for things they could trivially ascertain for themselves.

You aren't going to find a paper titled "Is the Small Intestine Elastic Or Not: A Poking-It-With-a-Finger Study", any more than you will find a paper titled "An Investigation Into Whether Untethered Helium Balloons Ascend In the Atmosphere: We Filled Up A Bunch and Let Them Go". The question is trivial and already settled.

What you will find are painstaking studies to pin down the precise elasticity of different bits of the intestine.

There's also the possibility that Meredith ate her one piece of pizza at 5:30 (Amy Frost testimony) and it was already into and through her duodenum by the time she ate the apple pie + ice cream at 8:15 or 8:30 pm. Many of the pathologists at the trial said that food can completely clear the stomach in 2-4 hours, which would be in that time-frame.

This is the echo chamber problem again. The person whose work you are cutting and pasting couldn't be bothered to read the Massei report, and couldn't be bothered to actually read the discussion here he wanted to pose as replying to. You couldn't be bothered reading either of those things yourself, so you assumed this guy knew what he was talking about and regurgitated it verbatim.

There was nothing in Meredith's digestive system except the food in her stomach (which contained identifiable chunks of cheese, possibly mozzarella, and fibrous vegetable matter), and some digested food right at the far end of her small intestine.

Thus the problem for Massei's distortion of Ronchi's statement: If there was anything in Meredith's duodenum, Dr Lalli would have to have botched the autopsy by squeezing every last bit of it down the entire length of the small intestine to the very end through the ligatures placed there especially to prevent any travel of the bowel contents. If he did that by accident he's the worst pathologist in history.

So the 500 mL (about 2 cups) in her stomach at death (in this case) was just apple crumble and ice cream.

If you or the guy you are copying had bothered to read Dr Lalli's statements in the Massei report before you posted this nonsense it would have saved us all some time and electrons. Apple crumble doesn't contain cheese or vegetables, and pizza would have been found somewhere in her duodenum or small intestine.

And my "final word" to K-Lo and Lo-J and all the others who may believe this TOD due to stomach contents is this "clincher" to this case:

If this were such an important piece of evidence, why was it not raised at trial? Why would no defense pathologist swear that TOD was before 9:30 as you claim to have "proven"?

Not this tiresome appeal to authority again? Get it straight guys and girls of PMF, we think the defence was imperfect and we think the court was imperfect. Or to put it another way, we think miscarriages of justice are possible (because it's a provable fact that they happen from time to time), a fact that the PMF crew seem utterly incapable of understanding.

And one more thing: Even if somehow you could prove, contra all pathologists' pronouncements that stomach contents can't be used to prove time of death, and contra all the books I've read (including one called Time of Death that I'm reading now), and contra all pathologists at the trial (even the defense pathologists), that Meredith died by 9:30 pm, it still wouldn't amount to a hill of beans (to coin a phrase).... because....

Actually the statements to that effect have been cherry-picked and taken out of their proper context, as you well know Trigood because you have been chastised for doing exactly that yourself. Twice, in fact.

They only have a (very weak) alibi til 9:10 pm. (No K-Lo, the 9:26 time was brought up and dismissed at trial, and until a trial adjudicates otherwise, it is not valid.)

Once again the PMFers really need to read the stuff they are replying to.

The 9:26pm activity is being brought up by the appeals team. If it was brought up and dismissed at trial, this is news to me because there is certainly no mention of it whatsoever in the translated Massei report.

The walk from Raff's to Amanda's house was only about 5-10 minutes. They go to the cottage, find Rudy outside (as he testified he was there then), they go in together and murder Meredith.

Why? Why the hell would anyone do that? That's the insurmountable problem Mignini confronted, which he found no way around. The Massei/Mignini narrative is lunacy as it is, if you take a couple of steps back and look at the big picture including what they claimed to know and when they claimed to know it, but it's the least worst story anyone has ever been able to fantasise which covers the facts (sort of) and makes Knox and Sollecito guilty.

There's just no damn reason, or any precedent in human history, for a pair of ordinary young people six days into an ordinary relationship to watch Amelie, pop over to the girl's place and then decide out of the blue to team up with a local crim they knew only by sight they met at that spot to sexually assault and murder their housemate.

Mignini and Massei tried to talk their way around the total lack of motive, the total lack of any evidence of premeditation and the total lack of any evidence that Rudy, Amanda and Raffaele were more than the most distant of acquaintances by postulating a drug-fuelled sex party that went on for some time that somehow turned ugly and led to Meredith being sexually assaulted and murdered. Hey, drugs are bad, mmkay? They make you kill people.

However if you take away the drug-fuelled sex party fantasy, what's left as a story? Absolutely nothing, as far as I can see. No motive, no logic, and no precedent in human history.

There is no way past the DNA evidence. That proves them guilty as well as Rudy. It really doesn't matter what time of death you assert as long as it's after 9:15.

Thanks for playing, though!

Well what do you know, he's popped the DNA evidence mole back up again right at the end.

We've already hammered that mole down often enough I think. The DNA evidence has serious procedural question marks over it and as such can't be proof beyond reasonable doubt of anything.

So to sum up: The original author of this drivel had manifestly not even bothered to read the Massei report or the discussion here before composing their response. Trigood, who thought it good enough to repost, manifestly hadn't read the Massei report or the discussion here either.

This is a very curious kind of debate. We cite facts and reasoning to support a conclusion. Some guy on another board, who clearly has his fingers in his ears because he can't make out half of what we are saying, shouts a response to what he'd like to think he heard, but he does so where he knows he is safe from any response or any real danger that his claims will be checked. Then some guy on this board, Trigood, who had his fingers in his ears too posts that response verbatim because he thinks it's a "great job!".

 

[Draca]

Bedroom Crime Scene

Sorry to interrupt.

Could someone direct me to this group's discussion of the murder room's crime scene photographs? I used the search tool, but did not get satisfactory results.

Also, if someone here remembers those discussions, I would appreciate being directed to the best posts from both guilty and innocent perspectives.

I am hoping the discussion of the murder room evidence is as thorough as these stomach contents posts that have taken place recently.

Thanking you in advance.......

There is limited access to the photos of the bedroom crime scene availabe, which is probably why the discussion has not been more in depth. I don't think the majority of the photos will ever be released out of respect for Meredith Kercher.

I will ask a couple of questions about the bedroom crime scene. The jacket Meredith Kercher was wearing that night was forcibly removed, turned inside out and bloody. The red sneakers she was wearing were also found near her body and bloody, as well as her socks.

If Meredith Kercher was killed at 23:30 as the Motivation Report writes, then why was she still wearing her jacket and shoes at that late of an hour?

There is a book and notebook left on her bed. Is this the book she borrowed to read? Why was it found where a person might lay a book upon entry into the bedroom. Is there any signs at all that she had started to read it. It doesn't look like it.

The Mattress is pushed to the far edge of the back frame. I hear from Dan O. that there is a dent with blood and hair above the bed. (Dan, you were going to send me the link that shows this... ) The night stand lamp is found on the floor between the bed and the nightstand. It was probably knocked off of the nightstand. There are the famous bloody finger prints on the upper wall between the bed and the night stand. It is clear that the worst part of the crime happened on the other end of room near the wardrobe however.

It looks like the attack started near the bed. She was shoved across the bed pushing the mattress back on the frame. Her head hit the back wall and left the small dent. The finger prints on the wall are believed to be Rudy Guede's. She must have already been bleeding pretty well when he touched the wall before moving the attack to the other side of the room.

Based on her still wearing her jacket and shoes, as well as the books location, she was probably attacked soon after arriving home.

 

[Fine]

That is an excellent point that you make and if you read Matteini you can gat a spooky feeling that similar reasoning would follow in subsequent judges reports:

"Referring finally to the position of Diya Lumumba’s statements of November 6 Knox Amanda is very important, since they attest to the presence within Meredith’s bedroom at the time of his murder when the same cry.
Such statements are confirmed, albeit indirectly, in some objective data regarding just the opening hours of the pub Le Chic, because while Lumumba at the hearing of validation claimed to have opened the space of one afternoon in November at approximately 17:00 to 18:00, the first tax receipts are being carried out from 22:29 hours nor the suspect and reused to give any logical explanation to this fact, not being able stao provide precise information on possible customers who could confirm his presence at the time before 22:29 hours, could hardly qualify as a precise indication therefore useful for the necessary evidence to have identified with the person who uses only one name would entered her room at 20.00 without adding or his telephone number or other identifying elements, although it has called a friend.
There is more to note that when this court addressed the suspect that dispute, the same remained some minutes in silence and then sought to justify this “vacuum” They come on the assumption that the receipts issued but not when ordering when the customer leaves the premises.
Even this justification does not hold because it does not explain why from 18.00 to 22:29 There are no receipts and these begin to be constant with frequency from 22:29 hours until closure.
Further substantiated the closure of the premises before that time is found in the statements one of the regulars, this volcano Gerardo Pasquale, who heard a summary information On 7.11.2007, reported that the evening on November had noticed at around 19.00 that restaurant was closed as well as he could see that fact even later to return the pizzeria.
Also as regards the text of the message that the suspect sent to the 20.30 to Amanda there are discrepancies between what is reported by the girl and what the predicted; Indeed while the girl spoke of a message which was that the local sights would remained closed and therefore should not have to go to work, Patrick say they have written that evening there was no need of its few customers collaborative absence.This may seem like a fact of little importance when in reality it is not absence a substantial difference between the two messages, it is likely that Patrick had intended actually not to open the room thinking that you can spend the night with Meritith, then, since the evolution of facts, has seen fit to open the pub for specially established an alibi."


_______________________


This doesn't strike me as faulty logic, Rose. Just considerable misinformation. (Such as Amanda's accusation that Patrick had killed Meredith!) And you can thank Amanda for creating the discrepancy between her version of the test message from Patrick and Patrick's version of the same text. Initially Amanda was telling the cops ---and Raffaele too--- that the text message had said that La Chic would stay closed ("rimasto chiuso") the night of November 1st. This discrepancy was ---apparently--- due to Amanda's lack of fluency in Italian. (See her 1:45 AM signed DECLARATION and Raffaele's Diary.)

///

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

"Would you have it that the increasing pro-Amanda media coverage constitutes a suppression of the truth? Do you imagine that David Marriott has the power to persuade journalists and broadcasters of lies?"

Yes!

The fact is that this woman has been unanimously convicted of murder in a trial that lasted some months. There has been a 400 plus page sentencing report published.

In spite of this, most television shows appear to approach each new story from the point of view that she has been unjustly convicted and is deserving of our sympathy.

Your perspective implies that no one acting in good faith would question the verdict, so the people who are doing so must be paid shills. But that is not the case. We are motivated by what we perceive as a serious injustice, and for the most part, the US media agrees with us that an injustice has occurred. That is why Amanda and her family get sympathetic coverage.

Like many of your fellow travelers, you refer to Massei's report in terms of volume rather than its contents. What in that 400 plus page report shows convincingly that the verdict is sound? Are you capable of understanding why many people view Massei's reasoning and conclusions as factually unsupportable?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Some questions on the DNA evidence

Hello Katody,

However, if you had asked, do I think the DNA evidence is enough to be certain about their guilt, without any absolute contradictions in terms of incontrovertible alibis? Then the answer is "yes."

Assuming, of course, that the DNA analysis was carried out carefully and correctly by a respected lab and technicians, which it was.

Trigood,

Allow me to make some assumptions about your evaluation of the DNA evidence. Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

Do you accept that DNA evidence cannot be dated as to the time of deposit? If so, then what is your evaluation of Amanda’s DNA on the handle of a kitchen knife?

Do you acknowledge that three unknown people deposited their DNA in the bra clasp innocently? If so, then why do you conclude that Raffaele’s putative DNA was also not deposited innocently?

Do you acknowledge that Dr. Stefanoni used a different method of low copy number DNA than has ever appeared in the forensic DNA literature before? If so, then why should her results still be accepted as valid?

 

[Magister]

I would be very grateful to know if anyone here attaches any credence to Luciano Aviello's statements that his brother,Antonio and an Albanian,Florio, broke into the cottage on the night of Meredith's murder.
There is also Rudy's diary account of a white car in/by the driveway which he recognised.
Unfortunately I am not yet allowed to post a link.

I know RWVBWL has raised this matter here on more than one occasion but I cannot find any discussion.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

el buscador, thank you for asking.

My original request was for this forum's original discussion of the murder room crime scene and photographs and how it relates to the guilt of Amanda Knox. I had tried the search tool and the results were unsatisfactory leading me to believe that it was possible this forum just hasn't been "that into it."

Steve Moore, the retired FBI agent who has been widely seen on TV stated “The evidence doesn’t just say she didn’t do it; the evidence proved that she couldn’t have done it.” He also said "“In a crime scene like that, when you have so much blood, it’s as if you threw blood all over the floor,” he told Curry. “If Amanda Knox and her boyfriend and that drifter were involved in this, there would be three sets of fingerprints, three sets of footprints, DNA, hair samples. It would have been an absolute zoo of evidence."

My intention initially was to see how this was handled in the distant past by this forum. I don't think it has been, and one would think a thread titled "Discussion of the Amanda Knox case" would address Mr. Moore's subsequent points thoroughly, at least as long as stomach contents of the victim and cell phone tower showing where Miss Knox was when Lumumba texted her, both of which could never prove the guilt of a suspect.

The reason this doesn't get discussed much, I think, is that it's very difficult to say what particular evidence would have been there if Knox and Sollecito had been there. Given that the forensics team on the job weren't exactly competent, there's plenty of scope for the guilters to argue that there was evidence there but they missed it.

Most obviously if Raffaele and Amanda had been in any kind of rough-and-tumble contact with Meredith then they should have left DNA traces on her clothes or her body, but as I recall Meredith's corpse was only swabbed in a handful of places so it's easy for the guilters to argue "oh, they probably held her by a bit that was never swabbed". Am amazing piece of luck for them if they did it, or indicative of the same kind of psychic powers that allowed them to know Rudy's MO in order to stage a crime scene compatible with it, but nonetheless not physically impossible.

I've seen a couple of them try to argue that the bloody hand-marks that can't be definitively attributed to Rudy were probably made by Amanda or Raffaele, and in isolation there's no reason why they couldn't be.

The total lack of any proper evidence putting Amanda and Raffaele in the murder room is a powerful argument for the unconvinced, I think, but the discussion here has tended to be a polar one where those who are very, very certain that Amanda and Raffaele did it (they just aren't sure how, when or why) argue with those who think that the prosecution was unsafe. So the pro-guilt participants are pretty much a self-selecting group of people who have already swallowed that whale.

What I would like to know, to be clear, is where this forum discussed this issue originally, the murder room crime scene, and how there is no fingerprints, footprints, hair samples, or DNA of Amanda Knox? And, why wouldn't a forum such as this discuss this for pages, unless it has more interest in arguing the details of Amanda Knox's non-related private life on Nov 1-2 instead of her guilt or innocence?

I think the original thread would be the place to look.

Bear in mind that you only see a large volume of discussion where both sides think they have something interesting to say. Volume is not necessarily proportional to the value that the pro-innocence side put on a given piece of evidence.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

I would be very grateful to know if anyone here attaches any credence to Luciano Aviello's statements that his brother,Antonio and an Albanian,Florio, broke into the cottage on the night of Meredith's murder.
There is also Rudy's diary account of a white car in/by the driveway which he recognised.
Unfortunately I am not yet allowed to post a link.

I know RWVBWL has raised this matter here on more than one occasion but I cannot find any discussion.

We've discussed it before but there is so little to chew on that discussion tends to falter.

I think there was a consensus that if any forensic evidence at all shows up to corroborate their story (say an unidentified fingerprint matches theirs, or an unidentified DNA trace matches theirs) then that would be absolutely game-changing.

However since they are considered unreliable attention-seekers and nothing in the available body of evidence makes the pro-innocence side think anyone by Rudy did it, or the pro-guilt side think anyone but Rudy, Raffaele and Amanda did it, currently not much weight is given to their statements.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Not in this case.

Found in conjunction with Meredith's DNA in splotches of blood in the bathroom (three times).

Found in conjunction with Meredith's DNA in luminol-revealed footprints (twice, two distinct footprints, one of which was in Filomena's room), meters from Meredith's dead body and the blood-bath there.

Found furthermore in other luminol-revealed footprints without Meredith's blood, footprints that matched Amanda's foot size.

Found on a knife with Meredith's DNA on the blade.

Nope, those four circumstances do not allow for ALL to be "accidents"... especially the knife.

And, you've neglected the staged crime-scene, the locked door (why would anyone except Amanda need to lock it?), her lack of alibi, her accusing an innocent man, and her knowing that Meredith screamed and was stabbed to death, before the police even knew or reported those things.

It all holds together so well, that I tire of proclaiming it over and over. Sigh.

Gotta run. More later.

I look forward to your response to halides1: I won't clutter up the thread by repeating what they said.

 

[Machiavelli]

Should they not check out her story, and determine if she is telling the truth, before telling the media that she is lying?

But where my opinion differs, is in the idea that authorities used the media to shape public opinion, and that that had influenced the course of justice.
This is not the reality of which I have experience, and I can observe this local reality by living directly in contact with it on the ground. The police are not media guys. But in Italy they are forced by the system to deal and seek compromises with the media. Usually it is parties lawyers who feed the media. When the police feed the media it is usualy for one reason: to get rid of them. They tell them they found the culprit, or that they have a track, they tranquillize and satisfy the public opinion so to get out of media pressure as soon as possible. They show a picture, a piece of evidence or something to journalists, in exchange they get off the balls. It is always the same, you don't have to pay attention to this pantomime.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

DNA weaknesses

Not in this case.

Found in conjunction with Meredith's DNA in splotches of blood in the bathroom (three times).

Found in conjunction with Meredith's DNA in luminol-revealed footprints (twice, two distinct footprints, one of which was in Filomena's room), meters from Meredith's dead body and the blood-bath there.

Found furthermore in other luminol-revealed footprints without Meredith's blood, footprints that matched Amanda's foot size.

Found on a knife with Meredith's DNA on the blade.

Nope, those four circumstances do not allow for ALL to be "accidents"... especially the knife.

And, you've neglected the staged crime-scene, the locked door (why would anyone except Amanda need to lock it?), her lack of alibi, her accusing an innocent man, and her knowing that Meredith screamed and was stabbed to death, before the police even knew or reported those things.

It all holds together so well, that I tire of proclaiming it over and over. Sigh.

Gotta run. More later.

Trigood,

Some of your assumptions about the DNA evidence appear to be wrong, but I may be misunderstanding your meaning. It looks to me as if you are referring to Amanda’s DNA in the passages I quoted above.

http://www.friendsofamanda.org/luminol.html
To the best of my knowledge, none of the footprints in the hallway tested positive for anyone’s DNA, neither Amanda’s nor Meredith’s. Three footprints in Amanda’s room tested positive for Amanda’s DNA. There is no evidence that any luminol-detected footprint was blood; in fact, there is evidence to the contrary: the lack of DNA and the fact that at least some of the prints were tested with TMB.

Amanda’s DNA on the handle of the knife is strictly meaningless, because it cannot be dated. There is no reason to believe it was not deposited when Amanda cooked with it. Meredith’s DNA profile on the knife is undermined by the lack of blood on the blade, the failure of ILE to look for blood by disassembling the knife, and by the increased chances of contamination when performing LCN profiling in a lab that is not specifically designed for this purpose.

What evidence is there that would falsify the hypothesis that Meredith’s blood landed on Amanda’s DNA in the bathroom, creating mixed DNA samples? No substrate controls were done. These would be swabs of areas in the bathroom where Meredith’s blood was not found.

Moreover, the problems with the DNA evidence are not limited to those discussed above. There exists video footage of the collection of the evidence, and this footage shows a failure to change gloves after each sample and to use disposable tools, among other problems. These points have been made here and elsewhere for nearly a year.

Finally, I would remind you that reference footprints from the other flatmates were not taken, and Colonel Garofano (who leans toward guilt) pointed out that overapplication of the luminol in this instance led to dilution of the image.

 

[Magister]

I think there was a consensus that if any forensic evidence at all shows up to corroborate their story (say an unidentified fingerprint matches theirs, or an unidentified DNA trace matches theirs) then that would be absolutely game-changing.

One wonders if the police have ever apprehended either of these characters and checked out the owner of the white car?

 

[Machiavelli]

I have a couple of questions for Charlie Wilkens:

1. Do you have the first Rinaldi report? I mean the April 2008 Rinaldi's Report, focused on the bathmat print, which I assume would contain also the famous "L. Robbins grid"?

2. Do you know whose shoewears left the prints on paper sheets in Filomena and Meredith's room?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

The TOD was changed in the closing remarks

And my "final word" to K-Lo and Lo-J and all the others who may believe this TOD due to stomach contents is this "clincher" to this case:

If this were such an important piece of evidence, why was it not raised at trial? Why would no defense pathologist swear that TOD was before 9:30 as you claim to have "proven"?

Were the defense pathologists stupid? Were they incompetent? You have to pick one or the other!

Trigood,

I don't think that the defense pathologists were either of these things, necessarily. PM Mignini moved the time of death back in his closing remarks. By putting the time of death back, PM Mignini was trying to make parts of his story work, but the stomach contents problem got worse by doing so. Perhaps the defense was not expecting this. I find it strange that he would be allowed to do so. But I suspect that the defense was caught off-guard. Had they known PM Mignini would do this, they might well have emphasized stomach contents more in their own presentation. My opinions only.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Trigood,

I don't think that the defense pathologists were either of these things, necessarily. PM Mignini moved the time of death back in his closing remarks. By putting the time of death back, PM Mignini was trying to make parts of his story work, but the stomach contents problem got worse by doing so. Perhaps the defense was not expecting this. I find it strange that he would be allowed to do so. But I suspect that the defense was caught off-guard. Had they known PM Mignini would do this, they might well have emphasized stomach contents more in their own presentation. My opinions only.

Is there a source you can recommend discussing this? I'm curious about what story Mignini was telling at different times, particularly with regard to the time of death.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Resetting the time of death

Is there a source you can recommend discussing this? I'm curious about what story Mignini was telling at different times, particularly with regard to the time of death.

Kevin_Lowe,

Both Darkness Descending and Murder in Italy mention this, but I do not have the page numbers handy. PM Mignini also had several motives at different times, and this was discussed here, as claim number one.

 

[christianahannah]

Draca I will answer what questions I can. Maybe others can contribute answers to the other questions. Charlie Wilkes has many resources and may be able to answer your questions better and give correction to my answers if needed.

There is limited access to the photos of the bedroom crime scene availabe, which is probably why the discussion has not been more in depth. I don't think the majority of the photos will ever be released out of respect for Meredith Kercher.

I will ask a couple of questions about the bedroom crime scene. The jacket Meredith Kercher was wearing that night was forcibly removed, turned inside out and bloody. The red sneakers she was wearing were also found near her body and bloody, as well as her socks.

I am not sure that Meredith's sweatshirt/jacket was turned inside out. Her jeans were turned inside out (Stefanoni, motivations). The red sneakers she was wearing were not bloody from photos I have seen. Rinaldi included a photo of Puma sneakers in his report (I am assuming they are the same shoes recovered from the bedroom) - and if there is blood on them it is not evident and of small quantity. Photos of the sneakers at the crime scene do not show them bloody but you cannot see the bottoms of the shoes (Rinaldi's photo does include one shoe bottom which might have what looks like two drops of blood but I am not sure).

Here is a link to a photo of Meredith's jacket. It is difficult for me to tell if it is turned inside out. One cuff is visible while one is hidden.

http://perugiamurderfile.org/gallery/image_page.php?album_id=21&image_id=1447

If Meredith Kercher was killed at 23:30 as the Motivation Report writes, then why was she still wearing her jacket and shoes at that late of an hour?

I do not know whether Meredith was wearing her shoes at that late hour. She may have taken them off in her room after arriving home.

There is a book and notebook left on her bed. Is this the book she borrowed to read? Why was it found where a person might lay a book upon entry into the bedroom. Is there any signs at all that she had started to read it. It doesn't look like it.

I don't know what the book is or if it is the one she had borrowed. It could be she had laid the book on the bed upon entry into the bedroom or it could be she was reading the book, while still dressed (minus shoes and jacket), relaxing on the bed.

 

[act1roson]

I would be very grateful to know if anyone here attaches any credence to Luciano Aviello's statements that his brother,Antonio and an Albanian,Florio, broke into the cottage on the night of Meredith's murder.
There is also Rudy's diary account of a white car in/by the driveway which he recognised.
Unfortunately I am not yet allowed to post a link.

I know RWVBWL has raised this matter here on more than one occasion but I cannot find any discussion.

I make it a habit not to believe anything a convict has to say. They use statements like these as bargaining chips in their imprisoned lives. "Give my sister a job, and I'll blab (lie) about this" sort of thing.

I believe only the first statements Rudy made to a friend before he was arrested. After he obtained lawyers nothing is believable. His attorneys (and all attorneys) work for the best interest of their clients, and also their own reputations.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

treating one's own bed with due respect

In that case, we shall have to wait for the outcome of the two appeals. In the meantime, I have asked for cites, from Halides. He has asserted that Ghirga would be in jeopardy, should he have spoken badly about the outcome. I believe you, Kevin, are the strongest voice here, demanding cites, for everything. From the guilters, to be sure. No leeway for us. May I even suggest, you have been rather abrasive. Very good posters, for example, have been Solange and Pilot Padron. Solange has left, I imagine Pilot will shortly leave. They have been extremely polite, in my view. I am left with the impression, that our views are not welcome. I look forward to a forum, where there is at least respect for opposing views. There are posters here, who meet that criteria. I leave it to all, or any of you here, to think about who encourages newbies, and those that insult, and demean. I am done here, as any kind of debate seems fruitless. Tjere have certainly been no cites coming forward to refute what I have said. I won't claim that anyone here was happy with the fact that Ghirga and Amanda said what they did. If I was an innocenter, I would be quite chagrined. I did read over at pmf, an article written by Raffaele's aunt. She begs forums, all forums, basically to cease and desist. She feels that they are detrimental to Amanda's and Raffaele's cause. I don't accept that, because whatever is discussed, for or against, will have no bearing on the outcome. It has never been my objective to change anyone's mind. With that, as I have said before, may all of us, and I mean all, never know the tragedy of the Kerchers.

Capealadin,

I agree with the notion that facts should be given citations, especially when they are disputed. Speculation and opinion do not need citations, but it is helpful when a commenter makes it clear when he or she is speculating.

You asked in effect whether we should take Mr. Ghirga’s assessment that the trial was fair at face value. My answer is no, but it was not based on any specific knowledge of Mr. Ghirga’s thoughts; rather, it was based on several pieces of indirect, dare I say circumstantial, evidence. Short of speaking to Mr. Ghirga privately, I am not sure how to ascertain his candid opinions, unfettered by the concerns of offending those with whom he works. I will summarize my line of reasoning in the following three paragraphs. It was never my intention to focus solely on Mr. Ghirga, nor to imply specifically what sort of jeopardy he would be in (let me emphasize the word specifically), but rather to suggest it would in general be a poor career move to be overly free with his opinions.

First, Mr. Ghirga must interact with the judges and other representatives of ILE on a regular basis, as I first argued in comment 8807. It is common sense that he cannot criticize them openly. Suppose he said the trial was not fair. How does that help his client in this case when he next faces judges? How does this help him win his next case? There is a saying to the effect that one should not urinate in one’s own bed, because sooner or later one must sleep there. This is an argument from common sense, not about any one specific instance.

Second, I have documented that some Italian journalists are afraid of reprisals. They asked the Committee to Protect Journalists for anonymity (8821), and we know that PM Mignini has sued several of them (including Mr. Maori) recently, as documented at InjusticeInPerugia (8915). Although you did not ask specifically for citations covering journalists, their experiences are pertinent to the question, IMO. I am sorry you felt it was rigamarole (9052). We can agree to disagree, if you like, but can you explain why you feel that their experiences are not relevant?

Third, I pointed out (8898) that Mr. Maori implied that the police erased the information when the file Stardust was accessed, yet he refrained from naming them outright. You asked for information on who else had a key, IIRC. I have no reason to believe that anyone besides Raffaele had a key, and he gave his to the police. If you believe that someone else accessed this file, it is up to you to document who else had a key (for you to ask me is a reversal of the burden of proof). As to the actual question of whether the police did erase the Stardust information, it is not exactly relevant to the matter at hand. Mr. Maori clearly thought that it was probable, and so did Mr. Sfarzo and Ms. Vogt. Why did Mr. Maori not come right out and say so, unless he were concerned about getting into trouble?

The gist of some of your complaints is that I have not specifically addressed Mr. Ghirga’s potential. I never intended to do so directly (see above), nor did you limit the discussion in this way. In another comment (8817) you wrote, “Can you cite where in Italy, a lawyer would be in jeapordy if he did so?” It would be disingenuous of you to claim otherwise now.

I also resist the notion that Mr. Ghirga should be the final word on the fairness of this trial: I have recently provided new information on the importance of the electronic data files from Dr. Krane. The prosecution withheld these files from the defense, along with other forensic information, as Dr. Hampikian has stated. Because of this failure, the defense did not have the fullest possible opportunity to challenge the evidence, not even close. I have argued that this issue alone is enough to keep the trial from being considered fair. Do you disagree, and if so, why?

I do not have further information about Ms. Popovic. Therefore, I have no additional information that would make her testimony any more or less credible. I have given you every citation that I think it was reasonable of you to request, and I have answered all of your questions to the best of my abilities. Would you please answer mine?