Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[lionking]

Chris, I am going to answer several things in this post from some of the previous posts.

Who's Chris?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the court should have sought out more experts

I believe amateur analysis is self explanatory, a scene of crime officer, a pathologist, a forensic scientist and a geneticist for example those who have been trained and have experience would generally be regarded as professionals. In addition, those that have access to the evidence and the necessary equipment to test said evidence. This in itself does not mean mistakes are not made, but I would rather the diagnosis of a doctor over internet self diagnosis.

CoulsdonUK,

I presume that Dr. Stefanoni is really a doctor, but that does not mean that everything she says is correct. Nor is there any evidence that her training is specifically in the area of forensic genetics. The most authoritative textbook in DNA profiling indicated that one should change gloves between samples. Dr. Stefanoni and her team did not (this came up in cross examination, as well as the photos I cited). In the Massei report, Dr. Stefanoni claimed that one needs liquid to be present for transfer of DNA to be efficient, but there are examples in the literature of transfer from ordinary objects and no mention of liquids in the reports I have read. I have previously discussed the case of Gregory Turner in this regard. Why should I pretend that ILE knows what it was doing in this case when the evidence says that it does not?

Your discussion makes no mention of the opinions of experts with national or international reputations, something that Dr. Stefanoni, for example, does not have. You are not alone. The appeals court could have listened to some of them, had it so chosen. Now you know one of the reasons why its final decision will have only a modest effect on my opinions of the case.

 

[christianahannah]

Who's Chris?

I am sorry. I have addressed a poster of this forum by their first name when posting on another board and did so here without thinking. I have edited the name out of my post.

 

[el buscador]

A new and interesting article by Andrea Vogt talking about rudy's judge's report.

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/436221_knox28.html

 

[CoulsdonUK]

CoulsdonUK,

I presume that Dr. Stefanoni is really a doctor, but that does not mean that everything she says is correct. Nor is there any evidence that her training is specifically in the area of forensic genetics. The most authoritative textbook in DNA profiling indicated that one should change gloves between samples. Dr. Stefanoni and her team did not (this came up in cross examination, as well as the photos I cited). In the Massei report, Dr. Stefanoni claimed that one needs liquid to be present for transfer of DNA to be efficient, but there are examples in the literature of transfer from ordinary objects and no mention of liquids in the reports I have read. I have previously discussed the case of Gregory Turner in this regard. Why should I pretend that ILE knows what it was doing in this case when the evidence says that it does not?

Your discussion makes no mention of the opinions of experts with national or international reputations, something that Dr. Stefanoni, for example, does not have. You are not alone. The appeals court could have listened to some of them, had it so chosen. Now you know one of the reasons why its final decision will have only a modest effect on my opinions of the case.

Halides1
I have no wish to be drawn into discussing the trial as I have said before, I want to discuss what happens in the appeal if and when these issues are raised I’ll be happy to discuss points at that time.

I guess I should add judges, lawyers and those with the relevant training and experience in processing or deliberating evidence in such cases.

 

[lane99]

What was my case?

You didn't, it seems, have one.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

You didn't, it seems, have one.

That response was directed to another poster.

 

[jhunter1163]

Do not personalize your arguments, and remain civil and polite.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jhunter1163

 

[Alt+F4]

A new and interesting article by Andrea Vogt talking about rudy's judge's report.

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/436221_knox28.html

In real life, the sentencing report on Ivory Coast immigrant Rudy Guede by the Supreme Court of Cassation in the Meredith Kercher homicide case was deposited in Rome late last week. The next appeal hearing is slated for March 12, and forensic reviews of two pieces of major evidence are under way. This Guede's final appeal.

Huh? Did she mean this was his final appeal?

 

[RWVBWL]

Bruise answer...

Hi all,
I wish to bring something up which I have not seen discussed before.

It was from reading a post that LMT, whom I have quoted before from the blog he/she had, had written on Perugia Shock that I thought of this:

Below is the gist of what I am curious about, where LMT mentions bruising:
<snip>
1. "Bruises: There is confusion about which areas are real bruises and which areas are lividity. You have to start with an estimate of the length of time of death. In this case, most of the experts agreed that it was around ten minutes from the start of the attack. A bruise is a blow or force that breaks capillaries in the skin. Blood flows into the tissue and later turns dark causing the mark. When the heart stops, blood flow to the broken vessels stops so that the real bruises in this case would be light colored. Lividity is when all of the blood in the tissues flows to the area of the lowest level of gravity. This takes a couple of hours and the marks then become dark. In the case summary, I did see mention of some bruises that sounded logical as bruises. I did not see mention of lividity so they must have done that at the trial or they left that out."
<snip>
_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Meredith Kercher had bruises on her body. Everyone seems to believe that they were caused when she was brutally murdered.

Might there be another, simpler explanation for some of them?

I'm a guy who has had some fun relationships with women thru-out my life. Some gals liked making love romanticly, some gals liked their luvin' rough, some gals liked to experiment. During the course of lovemaking, I have even caused a few gals I dated to bruise.

From reading in Barbie Nadeau's book "Angel Face", a favorite among the pro-guilt community, I learned that Meredith Kercher had been intimate with her new Italian boyfriend Giacomo for about 10 days before her brutal murder. Barbie Nadeau also let me know that Giacomo and Meredith were already experimenting in their intimate sexual encounters. In Candace Dempsey's book "Murder in Italy" I have learned that Giacomo is muscular also.

With this in mind, is it anyway possible to deduce if any of the bruises on Meredith occurred in the days before her death, possibly from rough, experimental love making?
<snip>

Hello all,
LMT was kind enough to reply to my posting. It is, I believe , relevant to the case we discuss, so I bring LMT's answer over here:

"Here is an example of a problem which I believe is crucial to the case and concerns lividity. What is called "bruising" and supposedly are dark marks in the area of both elbows is described as a key example that more than one person was involved in the murder. It was described as someone forceable holding Meredith at the elbow area. And forceable enough to cause deep bruising.

Lividity is when the blood in the tissues of a certain area migrates and pools to the lowest area of gravity. In the case where the body is face up for several hours then, yes, the elbows would show lividity. All the blood from the upper arms pool at the elbows. Also blood pools in a circle area at the buttocks. The area of the buttocks which presses against the floor has a pressure that prevents the blood from going there but it pools outside the area of pressure.

It seems to me that probably many of the marks that are called bruises and indicate a violent struggle between more than one person are actually lividity. The experts for the defense should have pointed that out - LOUDLY at the trial. If they were going to advocate for a lone wolf, then they should have done a better job.

Now to answer your question about prior sexual contact that caused bruises. That is unlikely because bruises develop over the course of days and older bruises would go from purple color to greenish. Older bruises would have been noted, I think."

This is something else to keep in mind as we discuss the brutal murder that took the life of Meredith Kercher...

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Huh? Did she mean this was his final appeal?

Guede has no more options within the Italian legal system, this was his final appeal. I believe his only option now would be raise his case in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

 

[RoseMontague]

A new and interesting article by Andrea Vogt talking about rudy's judge's report.

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/436221_knox28.html

Vogt could at least point out that the famous "I was there" refers to her being in Raffaele's apartment. Does this court even read the testimony?

GUP. In these conversations, on the 10th with your mother, on the 17th with your mother and your father, there is a sentence... [long pause, flipping pages]here it is: it's the famous sentence "I was there. I can't lie about this.I'm not scared of the truth." Here it is, page 8, Presidente, of the transcription Nov 17. I repeat, she's speaking with her parents, and she says: "It would be stupid to lie about this because I know I was there." Do you remember that conversation?

AK: Of course.

LG: What did you mean by "I was there".

AK: I was in Raffaele's apartment and I wasn't afraid [laughing] to say it.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

beyond belief

Vogt could at least point out that the famous "I was there" refers to her being in Raffaele's apartment. Does this court even read the testimony?

RoseMontague,

It is beyond comprehension that the Supreme Court could make such a foolish error. However, did they not make this mistake once before, in 2008?

 

[RoseMontague]

RoseMontague,

It is beyond comprehension that the Supreme Court could make such a foolish error. However, did they not make this mistake once before, in 2008?

What gets me is that they get hold of this 23 page report before anyone else, don't make it available to look at, and then reduce it to one piece of old news, pretending this was something shocking.

From other reports of the motivations, it takes care not to name Amanda and Raffaele as the others responsible, flying in the face of this shocking news they are reporting.

 

[Danceme]

It seems to me that probably many of the marks that are called bruises and indicate a violent struggle between more than one person are actually lividity. The experts for the defense should have pointed that out - LOUDLY at the trial. If they were going to advocate for a lone wolf, then they should have done a better job.

RWVBWL, don't you think the coroners who examined the body can tell the difference between bruises and lividity? I mean really!

Vogt could at least point out that the famous "I was there" refers to her being in Raffaele's apartment. Does this court even read the testimony?

None of us have ever heard the tape or seen a transcript in its entirety but it is quite likely the judges have.

 

[Fine]

And if Amanda had, instead, said to her parents

"I wasn't there"

I think we know how the Supreme Court would have used that against her too. (Some guilty people just can't hide their guilt.)

///

 

[zeb]

The supreme has got it right.
I think that Guede was with some one else, I also think that wineo knows more then he is tellling.

 

[RoseMontague]

None of us have ever heard the tape or seen a transcript in its entirety but it is quite likely the judges have.

Dempsey sets the record straight on this.

http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2011/02/28/amanda-knoxs-there-doesnt-place-her-at-crime-scene/

 

[LondonJohn]

What gets me is that they get hold of this 23 page report before anyone else, don't make it available to look at, and then reduce it to one piece of old news, pretending this was something shocking.

From other reports of the motivations, it takes care not to name Amanda and Raffaele as the others responsible, flying in the face of this shocking news they are reporting.

Personally, I can't see how any of the courts in Guede's trial process came to the firm conclusion that the murder was a group endeavour, of which Guede was but one member. I can't see any evidence whatsoever which implies that this was necessarily a group killing - to me, the available evidence is consistent with either a group attack or a solo attack by Guede.

Perhaps the only thing which in any way suggests others were involved is the alleged mixed DNA profiles on the bra clasp (in which Sollecito's profile is allegedly present). I can't see hbow the courts managed to determine that the wounds and marks on Meredith's body indicated a group attack, and that they apparently excluded a sole attack by Guede.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Personally, I can't see how any of the courts in Guede's trial process came to the firm conclusion that the murder was a group endeavour, of which Guede was but one member. I can't see any evidence whatsoever which implies that this was necessarily a group killing - to me, the available evidence is consistent with either a group attack or a solo attack by Guede.

Perhaps the only thing which in any way suggests others were involved is the alleged mixed DNA profiles on the bra clasp (in which Sollecito's profile is allegedly present). I can't see hbow the courts managed to determine that the wounds and marks on Meredith's body indicated a group attack, and that they apparently excluded a sole attack by Guede.

I do not believe it has been a good 10 days or so for the defence, whatever way people want to write this up the Italian Supreme Court’s ruling is a setback for Amanda and Raffaele, simply because it ruled that Guede and others were responsible for Meredith murder. According to Vogt’s article stated

“The court, however, said that based on the 43 wounds to Kercher's body (and the time it would take to inflict them) that it was more probable that Guede and two others forcibly held Kercher down, threatened, taunted and eventually fatally stabbed her.

Whilst Dempsey states

You’d never guess the prosecution took a massive hit this weekend. Police jailed the star witness against Knox on heroin dealing charges. A homeless man named Antonio Curatolo, he claims he saw Knox and ex-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito hovering near the murder scene for hours. If he’s discredited, then no one can say they spotted the lovers anywhere but at Raffaele’s flat on the night of the murder.

Pay your money take your choice, the fact stills remains the highest court in Italy has ruled that Guede and others murdered Meredith.