• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Another thought on the baby murdering, shovel killer....

Until a non-emotional super computer runs the jury system it is still subjected to the sways of human emotion. I don't think anyone would argue with the fact that Mario Alessi is hated by just about everyone in Italy. The defense giving credence to his lies, and therefore giving him publicity (and an opportunity to get out of his cell), won't sit well with the jury.
 
RoseMontague said:
I will have to go back and check but if I recall the existence of possibly two additional partial profiles in the mix on the bra clasp were both considered to be female by experts on both sides.

I agree with Alt+F4 that the introduction of these 2 prison inmates in the appeals is not a good strategy.
Click to expand...

According to machiavelli there is no other profiles. Thus there is no contamination or other attackers.
 
Chris C said:
How about a thing most people like to call. Fair Trial.
Click to expand...

You really think trials are fair? I guess you have never been on jury duty. It's about what you can convince a jury. In this case you have two conclusions:

1. The jury rejected evidence submitted of innocence.
2. The whole thing was rigged in someway that has not been explained.
 
Alt+F4 said:
You really think trials are fair? I guess you have never been on jury duty. It's about what you can convince a jury. In this case you have two conclusions:

1. The jury rejected evidence submitted of innocence.
2. The whole thing was rigged in someway that has not been explained.
Click to expand...

Still no answer on the extra DNA. Still avoiding the question. How did it get there if there is no contamination.
 
Chris C said:
Why should the jury believe anything out of the mouth of a convicted and corrupt prosecutor?
Click to expand...

That is for the jury to decide. That is the whole point of being a jurist, they accept some evidence, they reject others.

Having been on jury duty before (and maybe going again for federal in December...yikes!) I can tell you that I made my deliberation based on the evidence and testimony presented. Do you have evidence that the jury in this case didn't do the same thing?
 
contamination

Alt+F4 said:
Well good then. Glad we are agreed there was no contamination at the crime scene. After all, the defense isn't doing anything to pursue a contamination stratgey so they must agree with us.
Click to expand...

Alt+F4,

Please explain why you believe that the defense is not pursuing a contamination strategy. Speaking only for myself, I am eager to hear the defense's expert witnesses.

ChrisC,

Machiavelli's comments about the extra DNA on the clasp are misleading.
 
Last edited:
Chris C said:
Still no answer on the extra DNA. Still avoiding the question. How did it get there if there is no contamination.
Click to expand...

I'm not avoiding the question. The defense is implying the extra DNA came from the mobster's brother and/or the mystery guy the baby killer spoke of.
 
Alt+F4 said:
If the defense believed it was contamination why aren't they asking for DNA samples from the scientific police and any cases they were working on at the time to compare against the unknown DNA on the bra clasp?

On the surface of it, they seem to believe the extra DNA belongs to the mobster's brother and/or the mystery guy the baby killer spoke of.

This why I think the defense will lose the appeal. The best avenue of approach would be to push the contamination angle...hard. They choose not to. The defense choose to go with two absolute lies by convicted murderers. Do you really think the jury is going to believe anything coming from the mouth of someone who beat an 18-month old baby to death with a shovel?
Click to expand...

I have previously quoted at great length some of the parts of the appeals dealing with this subject. It appears to me they are arguing possible contamination at the crime scene of the bra clasp and possible lab machine contamination of the knife blade, among other contamination possibilities. There are several quotes that would seem to me to indicate they don't believe any DNA at all was present on the knife blade.

I don't believe the strategy of these 2 inmates is closely related to the possible contamination issues.
 
halides1 said:
A,t+F4,

Please explain why you believe that the defense is not pursuing a contamination strategy. Speaking only for myself, I am eager to hear the defense's expert witnesses.
Click to expand...

Good luck on that one. The appeal clearly shows a strong attack on pretty much everything dna related on the bra clasp and knife. Including contamination. I sometimes wonder if they even bothered to read either appeal.
 
RoseMontague said:
I have previously quoted at great length some of the parts of the appeals dealing with this subject. It appears to me they are arguing possible contamination at the crime scene of the bra clasp and possible lab machine contamination of the knife blade, among other contamination possibilities. There are several quotes that would seem to me to indicate they don't believe any DNA at all was present on the knife blade.

I don't believe the strategy of these 2 inmates is closely related to the possible contamination issues.
Click to expand...

I could only guess of the possible strategy. Either way, the prosecution will try and block either inmates testimony. Though I think they might be able to force rudy to testify since his appeal could be finished before Knox/Sollecito's. Which could be the real reason for the delay tactics.
 
halides1 said:
A,t+F4,

Please explain why you believe that the defense is not pursuing a contamination strategy. Speaking only for myself, I am eager to hear the defense's expert witnesses.
Click to expand...

I also am curious to see what new expert witnesses the defense will present when they are given the opportunity to. Do you think perhaps the authors of the "open letter" will be there?

The reason why I don't think the defense is pursuing a contamination strategy is because the appeals mention Alessi and Aviello. Why do you think their statements were mentioned, if not to suggest the unknown DNA belongs to them?
 
halides1 said:
Alt+F4,

Please explain why you believe that the defense is not pursuing a contamination strategy. Speaking only for myself, I am eager to hear the defense's expert witnesses.

ChrisC,

Machiavelli's comments about the extra DNA on the clasp are misleading.
Click to expand...

I know they are misleading. Its his way of saying he responded without answering the question.
 
Alt+F4 said:
The reason why I don't think the defense is pursuing a contamination strategy is because the appeals mention Alessi and Aviello. Why do you think their statements were mentioned, if not to suggest the unknown DNA belongs to them?
Click to expand...

Yep, you haven't read the appeals.
 
Alt+F4 said:
I also am curious to see what new expert witnesses the defense will present when they are given the opportunity to. Do you think perhaps the authors of the "open letter" will be there?

The reason why I don't think the defense is pursuing a contamination strategy is because the appeals mention Alessi and Aviello. Why do you think their statements were mentioned, if not to suggest the unknown DNA belongs to them?
Click to expand...

Alt+F4,

Based upon his statements in two Irish newspapers last March, I would not be surprised to see Dr. Hampikian.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom