Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[katy_did]

The way the metal hook is bent out of shape looks to me like it was pulled with great force. Or stepped on. Or both.

I think he probably did try to tear it first (or to unhook it) and that could possibly account for the hook being bent, but I'm not sure he'd have actually managed to tear it without cutting it first. That part of a bra is really tough. Personally though I'm more inclined to think the hook was deformed through being stepped on (that could even account for the DNA findings on it).

ETA: I also reckon that the hook would fail before the material of the clasp did.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

I don't know what to think about today's hearing. Was it good for Amanda and Raffaele? Are things in fact moving forward? What's your opinion guys? I'm not asking about today's rullings, but for your personal opinions on how do you think it will all work out.

My best guess is that he wants to drag it out for as long as possible in the hope that the public will shift its attention elsewhere. He has no intention of rendering a decision that would embarrass his colleagues.

 

[Chris C]

Look at the photos here:

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/Meredith_Kercher_murder_reconstruction_graphic_-_Ron_Hendry.pdf

You can zoom in because the resolution embedded in the pdf is almost as good as the original photos. You can see the small, round blood droplets on the bra. They fell there when she was on her back, with a spray of aspirated blood rising into the air as she struggled to breathe. Her breasts showed the same fine spray. He removed her bra after inflicting the fatal injury and while she was still gasping for breath. He would have had to roll her onto her side momentarily to do that, but he would not have had to roll her onto her stomach.

She was still wearing the jacket when she was killed, but it was unzipped. Hendry thinks he used it to drag her and it came off completely while he was doing so. She was dragged a couple of feet from the spot where she fell to the spot where she was found. Hendry thinks he did that because there was not enough space between the wardrobe and the desk for him to remove her pants, and indeed, the photos show that to be the case.

Unless her bra was already broken before the stabbing. No roll over is needed. He wouldn't need to roll her over if the bra wasn't already cut. You just cut it from the front.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

In Peterson's case they were able to establish motive. So they have motive + circumstantial evidence. I think everyone agrees motive is very weak in the Kercher homicide so the situation is not quite the same.

Sure, lots of murder trials lead to guilty verdicts despite a complete lack of physical evidence. In Peterson's case, he was having an affair, he claims to have gone fishing in the area where the body later washed up, and there was no other plausible suspect. The facts of the case conform to a certain type of homicide that is common and well understood. One may argue that the evidence is insufficient, and perhaps it is, but speaking only for myself, I would never join a crusade to free Scott Peterson because I think he probably did it.

Similarly, I think Drew Peterson probably murdered his wife. There is no evidence he did so; it simply fits the mold as the most likely explanation why this woman would disappear without any signs of foul play. But, a case where a female roommate and her boyfriend team up with someone they barely know to commit murder... that doesn't fit any mold. It is unprecedented. And the rare cases that come closest to forming a precedent involve young women who are deeply and profoundly messed up in the head, like Justina Morley:

She had a history of self-mutilation. She tried to kill herself twice. She
started smoking marijuana at 12, then moved on to pills, coke, heroin and,
weirdly, pot laced with embalming fluid. She abused herself by having
indiscriminate promiscuous sex. She was twice admitted to a psychiatric
institution. She'd been diagnosed with depression, for which she was taking
medication at the time of the crime.

But hey, Amanda got a noise ticket...

 

[Chris C]

Sure, lots of murder trials lead to guilty verdicts despite a complete lack of physical evidence. In Peterson's case, he was having an affair, he claims to have gone fishing in the area where the body later washed up, and there was no other plausible suspect. The facts of the case conform to a certain type of homicide that is common and well understood. One may argue that the evidence is insufficient, and perhaps it is, but speaking only for myself, I would never join a crusade to free Scott Peterson because I think he probably did it.

Similarly, I think Drew Peterson probably murdered his wife. There is no evidence he did so; it simply fits the mold as the most likely explanation why this woman would disappear without any signs of foul play. But, a case where a female roommate and her boyfriend team up with someone they barely know to commit murder... that doesn't fit any mold. It is unprecedented. And the rare cases that come closest to forming a precedent involve young women who are deeply and profoundly messed up in the head, like Justina Morley:

She had a history of self-mutilation. She tried to kill herself twice. She
started smoking marijuana at 12, then moved on to pills, coke, heroin and,
weirdly, pot laced with embalming fluid. She abused herself by having
indiscriminate promiscuous sex. She was twice admitted to a psychiatric
institution. She'd been diagnosed with depression, for which she was taking
medication at the time of the crime.

But hey, Amanda got a noise ticket...

You forgot she was of German decent.

Also apparantly some guilters believe she is a racist that would help a black man kill a white woman.

Oh also instead of lose lips sink ships, its now called lose women sink ships.

 

[CDHost]

I don't know what to think about today's hearing. Was it good for Amanda and Raffaele? Are things in fact moving forward? What's your opinion guys? I'm not asking about today's rullings, but for your personal opinions on how do you think it will all work out.

IMHO its hard to read. It depends if the judge wants to make this go away. There is going to be a major motion picture about this movie examining the case, how does he want to be remembered? If this evidence starts to unravel and Colin Firth's movie has that....? This case is already a PR disaster, do they want to walk or double down?

I like Curato being on the stand. The prosecution's timeline is a very weak point. Kill Curato and you kill the timeline and then you kill Massei's theory of the crime. The appeals court could rule that the prosecution theory is wrong while no position on the murder and acquit. Curato allows the appeals court to conclude what is essentially my position: you have a lot of evidence, quite a bit of this evidence contradicts itself and hence some of it must be wrong. You have no plausible theory that fits most of the evidence so no way to construct the murder. There is nowhere near enough evidence given this level of doubt conclude that AK and RS were primaries in a murder even if you are suspicious they may have been.

The knife I'm not sure about. If there is Meredith's DNA under the handle that's devastating. The odds that RS had the murder weapon go way up. On the other hand if there is none of Meredith's DNA then we can reopen all the DNA. If the experts examine the tests and determine that the various conclusions are bogus then the knife is out. Without the knife the prosecution doesn't have a murder weapon at RS's house. If the judge wants to he can toss the knife and conclude the only knife we know about is the one that left its imprint at the cottage and we haven't recovered that. That means all the knives disappear.

So what ties AK and RS to the crime?

1) The bra clasp.
2) The bloody footprint under Meredith [EDIT: This was false]

That's not enough. At best it proves they were in the room.

Then what's left:
1) A weak alibi
2) They did poorly during questioning
3) A clean up.
4) Some behaviors indicating that Amanda knew that Meredith was already dead.

That looks like accessory after the fact. So maybe we can get this reduced to something like criminal facilitation, which more plausible than murder and they get paroled on time served.

If on the other hand the judge wants them effectively dead he could be just going through the motions and this is essentially a show trial. Rudy gets paroled in 2015 while Amanda rots in prison for 2 decades.

The other possibility is that there isn't DNA on the blade and the judge wisely cuts AK and RS sentence to the same as Rudy's. Figuring that for PR reasons she better not be in jail when Rudy gets out.

 

[Magister]

Frank's latest...

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/

 

[Sherkeu]

Hi ! New poster and new to this case. My 2yr old broke her leg 2 weeks ago and I had lots of time indoors and came across this case. After reading a decent amount, I am pretty much for a not guilty vote. There are a few things I cant find good answers to though. Hoping I can get some answers here!

1. What is the prosecutions evidence that the floor was cleaned? Would it not be seen that some areas were cleaner than others?

2. Where is AK's or RS's "cleaned-up" bloody footprints in Meridiths room? Or did they supposedly hop or walk on towels til they got to the door or what?

3. I hear talk of mixed blood in the bathroom from AK and MK. If this really is AK's fresh blood, where did it come from? Why would Amanda be bleeding?

4. Why do they think Rudy left right away? Why couldnt his footprints be from entering the room again after a period of time and then leaving?

5. For the DNA evidence, I dont see anywhere where it is given the odds of the DNA being a particular individual. (ie 1:35,000,000 or 1:10).

I have some more but that's it for now!! Thanks!!

PS. Being so new to this case it was amazing to go to some of the first threads and see that almost everything reported about this case in the first weeks turned out to be false... cctv footage showing AK entering the cottage, phone calls to guede from AK, "bloody bathroom" photo, bleach receipts, etc....

 

[Chris C]

IMHO its hard to read. It depends if the judge wants to make this go away. There is going to be a major motion picture about this movie examining the case, how does he want to be remembered? If this evidence starts to unravel and Colin Firth's movie has that....? This case is already a PR disaster, do they want to walk or double down?

I like Curato being on the stand. The prosecution's timeline is a very weak point. Kill Curato and you kill the timeline and then you kill Massei's theory of the crime. The appeals court could rule that the prosecution theory is wrong while no position on the murder and acquit. Curato allows the appeals court to conclude what is essentially my position: you have a lot of evidence, quite a bit of this evidence contradicts itself and hence some of it must be wrong. You have no plausible theory that fits most of the evidence so no way to construct the murder. There is nowhere near enough evidence given this level of doubt conclude that AK and RS were primaries in a murder even if you are suspicious they may have been.

The knife I'm not sure about. If there is Meredith's DNA under the handle that's devastating. The odds that RS had the murder weapon go way up. On the other hand if there is none of Meredith's DNA then we can reopen all the DNA. If the experts examine the tests and determine that the various conclusions are bogus then the knife is out. Without the knife the prosecution doesn't have a murder weapon at RS's house. If the judge wants to he can toss the knife and conclude the only knife we know about is the one that left its imprint at the cottage and we haven't recovered that. That means all the knives disappear.

So what ties AK and RS to the crime?

1) The bra clasp.
2) The bloody footprint under Meredith

That's not enough. At best it proves they were in the room.

Then what's left:
1) A weak alibi
2) They did poorly during questioning
3) A clean up.
4) Some behaviors indicating that Amanda knew that Meredith was already dead.

That looks like accessory after the fact. So maybe we can get this reduced to something like criminal facilitation, which more plausible than murder and they get paroled on time served.

If on the other hand the judge wants them effectively dead he could be just going through the motions and this is essentially a show trial. Rudy gets paroled in 2015 while Amanda rots in prison for 2 decades.

The other possibility is that there isn't DNA on the blade and the judge wisely cuts AK and RS sentence to the same as Rudy's. Figuring that for PR reasons she better not be in jail when Rudy gets out.

If there is no dna on the blade. Thats a huge blow.

No weapon to link them and a ToD that they have an alibi for.

 

[CDHost]

But, a case where a female roommate and her boyfriend team up with someone they barely know to commit murder... that doesn't fit any mold.

Lets not forget this was a rape/torture/murder and they have the female in the lead. I'm thinking Erzsébet Báthory (1560-1614) is the last woman to meet those criteria. And the history is questionable about her. The prosecution's theory is completely nuts.

 

[CDHost]

If there is no dna on the blade. Thats a huge blow.
No weapon to link them and a ToD that they have an alibi for.

Sorry, are they retesting the blade again for Meredith's DNA? I thought they were only testing under? If they can throw out the knife entirely with a retest, I'll stand corrected and agree that's even better no murder weapon. The ToD is a separate issue and that's why I think Curato is huge.

 

[RoseMontague]

Then how is it someone can come to these conclusions that are so more believible than the experts that actuall held the items in their hands, examined them under microscopes and so forth, it baffels the mind.

The appeal points out that the prosecutions footprint expert never examined the bathmat in person in contrast to the defense expert.

 

[RoseMontague]

So what ties AK and RS to the crime?

1) The bra clasp.
2) The bloody footprint under Meredith

That's not enough. At best it proves they were in the room.

Then what's left:
1) A weak alibi
2) They did poorly during questioning
3) A clean up.
4) Some behaviors indicating that Amanda knew that Meredith was already dead.

The bloody shoeprint on the pillow is attributed to Rudy. Even Massei conceded that one and said that Amanda was most likely barefoot in any case. There are no footprints or shoeprints in Meredith's room that were attributed to either Amanda or Raffaele.

 

[Chris C]

Sorry, are they retesting the blade again for Meredith's DNA? I thought they were only testing under? If they can throw out the knife entirely with a retest, I'll stand corrected and agree that's even better no murder weapon. The ToD is a separate issue and that's why I think Curato is huge.

If they break that knife down and test the cracks on the handle and no dna is found. That is a huge blow. There are numerous citations that claim the handle and blade is crack dirty and has never been cleaned. So if thats true and no dna is found, then there is no chance that knife was used. Thats not counting the obvious rational flaws when comparing the knife to the wounds and the bed sheet. They really screwed the pooch when they grabbed that knife thinking that was the size of knife that inflicted all the wounds.

 

[Chris C]

Then how is it someone can come to these conclusions that are so more believible than the experts that actuall held the items in their hands, examined them under microscopes and so forth, it baffels the mind.

The same can be said about why the prosecution/court would withhold evidence. Evidence the defense requested. The same can be said about why the prosecution would object to testing evidence to begin with. Does that not baffle your mind. Why would the prosecution object to the defense examining all the evidence the prosecution got to examine.

The prosecution withheld evidence on the knife they claim is the murder weapon. What Democratic country, other than Italy, would not be granting a new trial.

 

[CDHost]

The bloody footprint on the pillow is attributed to Rudy. Even Massei conceded that one and said that Amanda was most likely barefoot in any case. There are no footprints or shoeprints in Meredith's room that were attributed to either Amanda or Raffaele.

Hmmm. Thank you, I stand corrected. You are correct. I'll go revise my comments in the original with the correction. For lurker's here is Massei's comment:

The Court, on this point, takes notice of the opposing conclusions without expressing a specific opinion. It cannot in fact be excluded that Guede alone tread on the cushion lying on the floor, to the exclusion of Knox (the smaller dimensions of the right foot can be explained by the characteristics of the underlying surface, the pillow, having a non-rigid structure and where the material of the pillow-slip may have been not perfectly straightened out, but, on the contrary, soft and as such determining the curvature), to whom [=Knox], actually, one [must] attribute moving herself about the murder scene essentially in bare feet, as shown in the part of the report that examines the genetic investigations that were done on certain biological traces and the positive Luminol prints.

I did a little web searching and ran into this page on the Bruce's website on the footprints

Thanks again for the kind correction. That's the second time I've screwed up a technical detail like that and you've been a very generous teacher each time.

 

[Chris C]

The bloody shoeprint on the pillow is attributed to Rudy. Even Massei conceded that one and said that Amanda was most likely barefoot in any case. There are no footprints or shoeprints in Meredith's room that were attributed to either Amanda or Raffaele.

Yep according to Massei she had bloody footprints outside the room. There was no blood on her feet in the room.
Lets not forget poor Sollecito that apparently had bloody feet outside the room, but no bloody bare footprints in the room.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

The appeal points out that the prosecutions footprint expert never examined the bathmat in person in contrast to the defense expert.

So then, I guess the prosecution wins that one according to the way most on here think. Thanks - Go Pros

 

[CDHost]

The prosecution withheld evidence on the knife they claim is the murder weapon. What Democratic country, other than Italy, would not be granting a new trial.

I have no idea but in America facing profound prosecutorial misconduct the judge acquits. They rightly feel that once widespread misconduct is proven it throws all evidence into doubt and creates reasonable doubt by itself.

Italy the prosecutor seems to be able to get 200 bites at the apple.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

The same can be said about why the prosecution/court would withhold evidence. Evidence the defense requested. The same can be said about why the prosecution would object to testing evidence to begin with. Does that not baffle your mind. Why would the prosecution object to the defense examining all the evidence the prosecution got to examine.

The prosecution withheld evidence on the knife they claim is the murder weapon. What Democratic country, other than Italy, would not be granting a new trial.

In what world are these two things even remotely connected - they are not.