I will grant that the lack of much physical evidence is a similarity, but overall, the two cases are very different. To take a single example, the burglars in the Spader case were thought to be deliberately looking for a family to kill. No one is suggesting anything comparable in this case.
halides1 - Thank you for the thoughtful reply.
As for the comparison between the writings of Spader and LondonJohn & Kevin_Lowe, I agree that it is of no greater significance to a discussion of the Meredith Kercher case. I was not the one who originally made such a comparison; however, by highlighting selected excerpts of each, I had hoped to demonstrate how I could understand Stilicho might have made such an argument in the first place.
As for the comparison between the writings of Spader and Knox & Sollecito, I agree that the respective contents are quite dissimilar, and I said as much earlier.
As for the physical evidence -
of course the two cases are very different. Both are somewhat exceptional crimes which tend to stand outside the normal range of criminal activity. However, I wish to emphasize two specific points to you regarding the nature of the physical evidence in both cases:
1) You and others have introduced countless other criminal cases to argue by way of analogy specific aspects of the Kercher case which support the position of Knox's and Sollecito's innocence, most particularly in regard to instances of false confessions. However, even a cursory glance at these other cases reveals great dissimilarities between them and the Kercher case. As such, I think that there is definitely room in this thread for comparisons to be made between the Cates and Kercher cases, especially given recent public statements by those professing certainty of Knox's innocence (see below).
2) Retired FBI agent Steve Moore is a prominent supporter of Knox's innocence, having appeared on radio and television interviews, as well as siginficantly participating in the online discussion of the case, most notably at Bruce Fisher's "Injustice in Perugia" site.
On the "Today" show on 2 September, Moore
asserted:
"The crime scene itself precludes Knox’s involvement — and her boyfriend Sollecito’s as well, Moore 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.
“There was, in that room, footprints, fingerprints, DNA, hair samples, saliva samples, everything for one person — a drifter. There is no way they could have been in that room without their physical presence being obvious.” "
The attack on Kimberly and Jamie Cates was
far more brutal than that visited upon Meredith Kercher.
Two assailants hacked and butchered the victims using a knife and a
machete. And yet, there was
no physical evidence linking the machete-wielder to the scene (Christopher Gribble, the knife-wielder, goes on trial next February - it remains to be seen what physical evidence, if any, the state will introduce at that time).
Mind you, in the Kercher case, there is at least
some disputed or questionable physical evidence tying Knox and Sollecito to the crime. In regards to Spader, by contrast, it needs to be repeated: we have "the complete lack of physical evidence linking the defendant to the crime scene". As such, it is evident to me that Steve Moore and those utilizing similar reasoning are in fact employing the "absence of evidence is evidence of absence" fallacy quite liberally.
