Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[CDHost]

Sollecito has no attackable Money that i'm aware of. He was a college student.

He has a wealthy father.

 

[Chris C]

He has a wealthy father.

I have two questions:

1) There are 5 or 6 major evidence points for the defense. For example the computer forensics? When do those get discussed

2) Can someone check me here on the knife because I'm sorta losing the logical of the positions. I'm just going to assert let me know where I'm wrong (genuinely asking):

a) The knife belongs to a set that Raffaele owns. That is not disputed fact.
b) Amanda's DNA is on the handle, undisputed.
c) The knife has been washed with bleach
d) There was some DNA found on a crevice on the blade. Under standard methodologies it was untestable, violating forensic procedure it matched Meredith.
e) The wounds on Meredith are semi consistent with the knife but only if we assume it was used in unusual ways.
f) The knife definitely fails to match the impression on the sheet.
g) Raffaele claims that Meredith pricked herself on the knife when Amanda brought it over to the cottage to cook with. I'm assuming he offered this opinion during the everyone decided to incriminate themselves interrogation on the 5th-6th?
h) Somehow the prosecution claims to know that Meredith never went to Raffaele's house. How?
i) The prosecution claims they are worried about destroying the evidence during an examination? Why would that be a concern? What do they need the knife whole for?

Thanks.

He has to inherit first, and Sollecito has a sister that could inherit all the money.

I believe that Sollecito made that claim about the knife after he found out that somehow there was Merediths DNA on the dirty knife but no blood.

i) Well logically they dont want to destroy evidence they might have to use against Knox and Sollecito, in case the conviction gets overturned. If the knife gets destroyed during the appeals and the conviction gets overturned, they are going to have a hard time using the knife in the next trial against them.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

bladeblogger

I have two questions:

1) There are 5 or 6 major evidence points for the defense. For example the computer forensics? When do those get discussed

2) Can someone check me here on the knife because I'm sorta losing the logical of the positions. I'm just going to assert let me know where I'm wrong (genuinely asking):

a) The knife belongs to a set that Raffaele owns. That is not disputed fact.
b) Amanda's DNA is on the handle, undisputed.
c) The knife has been washed with bleach
d) There was some DNA found on a crevice on the blade. Under standard methodologies it was untestable, violating forensic procedure it matched Meredith.
e) The wounds on Meredith are semi consistent with the knife but only if we assume it was used in unusual ways.
f) The knife definitely fails to match the impression on the sheet.
g) Raffaele claims that Meredith pricked herself on the knife when Amanda brought it over to the cottage to cook with. I'm assuming he offered this opinion during the everyone decided to incriminate themselves interrogation on the 5th-6th?
h) Somehow the prosecution claims to know that Meredith never went to Raffaele's house. How?
i) The prosecution claims they are worried about destroying the evidence during an examination? Why would that be a concern? What do they need the knife whole for?

Thanks.

c) The bleach was rumored, but it is not obvious how this could be tested for unless bleach remained on the blade. If the knife were cleaned with bleach, then there was no DNA on it when it was collected. Period. So if the prosecution wants to say that the knife was cleaned with bleach, I am tempted to say, let them claim it. It just makes the case look that more ridiculous.
e) I think even the prosecution concedes it is inconsistent with at least one wound; that is why they had to invoke a second knife into their theories. Personally, I favor the view that the knife is inconsistent with two of the wounds, and any knife could have made the third. In the summer and fall of 2009, Frank Sfarzo had several good posts on the knife. Ms. Dempsey's book also dismantles the theory that this is a murder weapon.
g) This story emerged after the DNA result was made public. Raffaele put it into his diary.
i) Good question.

 

[CDHost]

He has to inherit first, and Sollecito has a sister that could inherit all the money.

I get that. But how likely are they going to get a better target than RS? And I would add that I think Sollecito Sr. is going to shield the money, why give it to the Kerchers? But under that argument why have the Kercher's lawyer there at all, what legitimate interest is representing even in theory?

Sure it would be better if Mignini thought one of Giorgio Armani's kids did the murder but realistically how do the Kerchers ever see a dime unless:

a) Italy does some sort of sick ransom with AK where she has to pay get out of jail.
b) They go after RS.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Ok so your theory is all three straps broke at the seam. Ok I can buy that as possible. So enough force is pulled against the bra to break all 3 straps without one of the shoulder straps sliding off the shoulder and down the arm. The only way i see one of the straps not sliding down is if it was being prevented by the victim still resisting. However, the shoulder straps would have had to break before the back of the bra, otherwise there would have been nothing to pull with.

Not necessarily. I think the victim was still wearing a long sleeve T shirt. You can remove a bra from under a T-shirt if you slide a shoulder strap over the elbow, but it's impossible with long sleeves.
Rudy could easily break the straps in any order, one by one, although I agree that a single brutal pull from the front looks plausible.

 

[Chris C]

Not necessarily. I think the victim was still wearing a long sleeve T shirt. You can remove a bra from under a T-shirt if you slide a shoulder strap over the elbow, but it's impossible with long sleeves.
Rudy could easily break the straps in any order, one by one, although I agree that a single brutal pull from the front looks plausible.

You could also pull at each strap individually. Yet for that to be done at the spur of the moment, makes it sound like the attacker has ripped a bra off someone before.

 

[CDHost]

g) This story emerged after the DNA result was made public. Raffaele put it into his diary.

Thank you for your answers. So we don't actually know that Meredith was never at RS' house? She might have come over 2 or 3 times with AK to hang out or get high or ...?

 

[Withnail1969]

Thank you for your answers. So we don't actually know that Meredith was never at RS' house? She might have come over 2 or 3 times with AK to hang out or get high or ...?

That's a good question. It's always been taken as Gospel that Meredith never went there, but do we really know this for certain? We definitely know that Amanda and Meredith went nightclubbing together at least once.

 

[Chris C]

Thank you for your answers. So we don't actually know that Meredith was never at RS' house? She might have come over 2 or 3 times with AK to hang out or get high or ...?

I'm not even sure Sollecito knew what he meant when he wrote that in his diary. You have to look at it from a distance.
1) If he is guilty he is trying to explain evidence that he knows could be there.
2) If he is innocent he is trying to figure out how its possible for evidence to be on a knife when there shouldn't be evidence on there. Yet if there is actually no evidence, then he is making up a story to explain evidence that is suppose to be there but actually isn't.

Yet this was wrote in his diary I believe. So he was trying to work out how evidence was found on the knife to himself. He wasn't writing it for the prosecution.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

magical thinking

Thank you for your answers. So we don't actually know that Meredith was never at RS' house? She might have come over 2 or 3 times with AK to hang out or get high or ...?

CDHost,

I am not sure, but I am doubtful that she did. They had only known each other six days. Raffaele does not specify which flat, his or Amanda's, and so his story could refer to his cooking at the girls' flat. However, I think both stories are doubtful. Either he lied or he convinced himself of something that was not true. As RoseMontague said (approximately), he answered baloney with baloney. The important aspect of the knife business for me is the first half of that formulation: finding of Meredith's profile on a sample culled from the knife is a ridiculous result. There is no blood on the blade, and the sensitivity of the TMB test makes it unlikely that DNA would survive but blood would not. One has to invoke magical cleaning fluid.

 

[CDHost]

I'm not even sure Sollecito knew what he meant when he wrote that in his diary. You have to look at it from a distance.
1) If he is guilty he is trying to explain evidence that he knows could be there.
2) If he is innocent he is trying to figure out how its possible for evidence to be on a knife when there shouldn't be evidence on there. Yet if there is actually no evidence, then he is making up a story to explain evidence that is suppose to be there but actually isn't.

Yet this was wrote in his diary I believe. So he was trying to work out how evidence was found on the knife to himself. He wasn't writing it for the prosecution.

Yes I agree the prosecution's technique has been:

a) lie to RS and AK about the evidence
b) demand they explain the evidence
c) reveal the actual evidence
d) show how the actual evidence contradicts their story
e) when AK or RS try and explain accuse them of making up yet another story.

Not actually having Meredith's DNA on the knife....

 

[CDHost]

Cantwell on policy

I'm starting to write a blog post on Cantwell and I forgot about this comment from Senator Cantwell on US policy regarding Americans tried abroad. She actually does seem to agree with me that we need a system that represent's both country's interests, more like a civil system, when a person who is a citizen of country A is accused of a crime in country B

"In this case [Knox], as in all cases where US citizens abroad face legal jeopardy, I believe that the U.S. Government should work to ensure that U.S. citizens are treated fairly, given adequate due process, and when appropriate, a fair trial by an impartial tribunal."​

She's a great Senator. I'm writing up a real biography on her, since the FOM like trashing her as an ignorant buffoon, corrupt, controlled by her staff... rather than one of America's top technological marketing innovators a 2nd generation lifetime of political service who has been a champion on freedom related issues for a generation.

 

[CDHost]

CDHost,
I am not sure, but I am doubtful that she did. They had only known each other six days. Raffaele does not specify which flat, his or Amanda's, and so his story could refer to his cooking at the girls' flat. However, I think both stories are doubtful. Either he lied or he convinced himself of something that was not true. As RoseMontague said (approximately), he answered baloney with baloney. The important aspect of the knife business for me is the first half of that formulation: finding of Meredith's profile on a sample culled from the knife is a ridiculous result. There is no blood on the blade, and the sensitivity of the TMB test makes it unlikely that DNA would survive but blood would not. One has to invoke magical cleaning fluid.

What about spit? Assume Meredith used the knife to eat and Raffaele, just wiped it down and tossed it in the drawer. Could that produce DNA but no blood?

 

[Chris C]

What about spit? Assume Meredith used the knife to eat and Raffaele, just wiped it down and tossed it in the drawer. Could that produce DNA but no blood?

Like the spoon, there is no DNA.

 

[snook1]

If there were two knives, as the prosecutor claimed, then why they didn't throw away, hide, destroy the kitchen knife? Why only one knife is missing? How did they decide on which knife they have to get rid off and at what point? These are the questions that just came to my mind...

And how exactly did they killed Meredith with two knives? Rudy and Raffaele held her and Amanda stabbed her for the first time, then changed her mind about the knife and said : "Hey, give me the other knife" ? I mean, this is all ridiculous.

And even though the judge didn't agree with Mignini about the dynamics of the murder, they still managed to convict them. It's unbelievable.

 

[billyryan]

The new kids on the block; Stefano Conti and Carlo Vecchiotti,Patrizia Stefanoni work colleague,who knows what report they will produce


Another new kid on the block is the lead prosecutor Giancarlo Costagliola,he has only been told the story by Mignini,there has certain parts of the facts been left out,like Curatolo did not see anybody in the car park on the night of November1,maybe Curatolo was not even near the car park that night himself,he is just a guy who helps fill in the gaps between the theory and the evidence at a price.The problem with Costagliola is he has come in at the top,and probably without been in full possession of the facts,he has made a submission to have Curatolo take the stand again,now the police have a serious problem,can't tell Costagliola this guy is lying,much better to go the old tried and tested route of leaking information, the police are very good at that,the kind of people that Curatolo meets between midnight and four in the morning in the parts of Perugia where the street lights don't reach,Albanians Sicilians could be easy enough to convince these people that the police are targeting them using Curatolo,maybe easier than telling Costagliola he is lying but for the right reasons

Curatolo now has a lawyer,who is another new kid on the block,I wonder what this guy knows,I think he should sit Curatolo down and make a recording of how Curatolo was organised to give false evidence at probably three murder trials,what police officers were involved and who knew he was lying,it could conceivably become something very valuable to have,Curatolo looks like someone soon to have an accident to me

 

[Chris_Halkides]

could be

What about spit? Assume Meredith used the knife to eat and Raffaele, just wiped it down and tossed it in the drawer. Could that produce DNA but no blood?

As long as the knife were not cleaned, there might be DNA.

 

[Mrs.Columbo]

I recommend checking out Perugia Shock for new photos of The Knife. It turns out The Knife is actually quite dirty, therefore it has not been cleaned, therefore it is not the murder weapon.

I am confused now,
I assume that knife has been collected from Raffaeles appartement and since then been in police custody. How come that there has a 'new photo' been taken??

 

[Withnail1969]

I am confused now,
I assume that knife has been collected from Raffaeles appartement and since then been in police custody. How come that there has a 'new photo' been taken??

New in the sense that we haven't seen it before. And why didn't we see it before? Perhaps because it shows that the prosecution's claim that The Knife had been thoroughly cleaned is a lie.

 

[Alt+F4]

I get that. But how likely are they going to get a better target than RS? And I would add that I think Sollecito Sr. is going to shield the money, why give it to the Kerchers?

RS was over 18 when these events took place. Any lawsuits against him have nothing to do with his father. RS is responsible for them, not his father. Same thing with Amanda.