Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Draca said:
And WHY was the jacket thrown in the laundry hamper instead of collected in the first place?! It was clothing Meredith Kercher was wearing that night, it was found near her head, the sleeves were found inside out from being removed from her. How could it possibly NOT have been some of the very first evidence collected? Instead it is just thrown in the laundry hamper! The forensic collection is disgusting, enraging. They truly disrespected Meredith and her family.


Meredith Jacket on Nov 2, 2007
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_401664e4885f50a9e0.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Draca,

Well, in the December 18 Video #9 posted upstream by Rose (HERE) the blue sweatshirt doesn't have the sleeves inside-out. How do you account for this?

///
 
Meredith's Blue Jacket with the Sleeves pulled inside out

Fine said:
Draca,

Well, in the December 18 Video #9 posted upstream by Rose (HERE) the blue sweatshirt doesn't have the sleeves inside-out. How do you account for this?

///
Click to expand...


Fine,

Two minutes into Part 7 / minute 43.20 in the longer video. You will see the Blue Adidas Jacket Discovery Video. A forensic police officer pulls it out of the laundry hamper and tosses it on the floor. The arms are pulled inside out, as they are in the Nov 2nd photo I posted above.

In Part 8, at about 4 minutes in, their attention goes back to the jacket. Past 5 minutes you will see an officer turn the jacket sleeves outside in.

Anyone who has followed my posts knows that one of my main interests has been the forensic collection. I have been talking about this blue jacket for months! It is a huge deal in my mind. It represents a total failure on the part of the forensic team to me.


http://www.oggi.it/video/notizie/20...non-c’e-poi-c’e-–-il-video-integrale-parte-7/

http://www.oggi.it/video/notizie/20...a-non-c’e-poi-c’e-il-video-integrale-parte-8/
 
Last edited:
Guilters - quiet, crickets

Guilters -- chirp, chirp, cricket

Over time in discussing this case with the guilters I have come to know when they have been struck the hardest by - quiet.

I have not once managed to have a conversation with a guilter after asking them why the forensic team did not collect the clothing Meredith Kercher was wearing the night she was murdered. Not once. Every comment I have made in online papers, articles, blogs - all ignored. Not one taker. Even recently on JREF I asked Bolint to discuss this with me. I had high hopes but they did not reply. Most other topics the guilters reply to. When I hear crickets I know the reason. They have no reply to give. Not even Harry Rag or Michael can in their hearts excuse this. There is no comments to be given.

The same is true of the Gift Wraps a Mop video. Quiet, sweet quiet. Not once was the video posted on any of the guilt sites. Is it because they do not find it an interesting video or topic? No, they can not muster the strength to deny what is obvious.

I will ask them, if the forensic collection was so bad it can not even be discussed or posted on your sites, how do you maintain that there is not reasonable doubt about the forensic validity of this case?
 
Draca said:
Guilters -- chirp, chirp, cricket

Over time in discussing this case with the guilters I have come to know when they have been struck the hardest by - quiet.

I have not once managed to have a conversation with a guilter after asking them why the forensic team did not collect the clothing Meredith Kercher was wearing the night she was murdered. Not once. Every comment I have made in online papers, articles, blogs - all ignored. Not one taker. Even recently on JREF I asked Bolint to discuss this with me. I had high hopes but they did not reply. Most other topics the guilters reply to. When I hear crickets I know the reason. They have no reply to give. Not even Harry Rag or Michael can in their hearts excuse this. There is no comments to be given.

The same is true of the Gift Wraps a Mop video. Quiet, sweet quiet. Not once was the video posted on any of the guilt sites. Is it because they do not find it an interesting video or topic? No, they can not muster the strength to deny what is obvious.

I will ask them, if the forensic collection was so bad it can not even be discussed or posted on your sites, how do you maintain that there is not reasonable doubt about the forensic validity of this case?[/QUOT

It very funny in what you say that they who think AK and RS has gone very quiet.
The truth here is they cannot put forward any facts that can prove s/he is guilty .
That what hurts them the most, no real facts.
:)
Click to expand...
 
Mary_H said:
Just as a point of information -- if I recall correctly, the $1,000,000 figure comes from an interview with Curt Knox for the CBS 48 Hours show American Girl, Italian Nightmare. The question, though, was about how much the family had spent on legal fees up to that point. Nothing was said about any other financial activity.

Given that the program first aired in April 2009, I am going to guess the expenditures for defending Amanda in court have surpassed a million by now. Pretty much everyone in the extended family has remortgaged their properties.
Click to expand...

Ah, thank you, it looked like there was an attempt to imply that was part of the 'million dollar PR effort' I recently saw mentioned in a Twitter conversation LJ pointed out during a trial date. They just made that part up starting with the 'premise' 'There is a massive PR campaign going on, how much is the most they could be spending on it?' The accountant and others decided on a million. It had to be the 'most' because people were popping up everywhere and they had to account for the expanding conspiracy! Grassroots people, grassroots! Those do have people popping up from everywhere. Myself from a delayed reaction to a newscast on some TV station out of either Buffalo or Rochester. Who kicked it off, Paul Ciolino? The man from Chicago so he knows how it goes? 'There's truth, justice and then there's the Chicago Way.' :P

I heard there's a Bears fan who had to grudgingly congratulate the Packers recently... :cool:
 
christianahannah said:
Well it would be important to know the various ways contamination can and does occur on a forensic level. Then we can see if this applies to the cottage and the evidence collected therein.

As for Filomena's DNA in her own room, well they didn't swab the whole room but very few areas. And even if they swabbed many areas maybe the reason her DNA wasn't found is that DNA doesn't shed or isn't deposited as easily as some think it is. It would be interesting to know the answer to that.

There were traces (or a trace and a hair) tested from the window sill but they yielded no results.

There were also many hairs of different colors and lengths collected and analyzed from the crime scene. They also yielded no results.
Click to expand...

Did they even have a reference sample from Filomena? How many items tested had an unidentified female profile? I recall Ms. Steffi referring to the unidentified male profiles as Man 5 etc and I think she gets up to Man 9 or so including the tests at Raffaele's place but I don't remember her listing the unidentified female profiles this way.
 
Draca said:
I agree Bruce. Every time I have watched the video my blood boils. :mad: How dare they be this incompetent, this careless, this disregarding of standards and protocols.

Another point about those booties, that walked all over the floor during the time the bra clasp and luminol prints were being collected, is that they were one piece hazmat suits where the boots could not be changed. The potential cross-contamination between the rooms was immense.

I posted on this here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7466379&postcount=2086
Click to expand...


You're absolutely correct. This is the first time I've seen this set of videos from 18th December 2007. It's perfectly clear that most (if not all) of the "crack" forensics team were a) not wearing any overshoes over the integrated boots of the suits, and b) were walking with total impunity from room to room, including going in and out of Meredith's room.

Since the Luminol testing was pretty much the last piece of forensic work carried out (certainly after these videos were taken), I would judge that it's not just possible but likely that the shapeless blobs in the hallway that were weakly luminescent were the product of one or more forensics people tracking small amounts of blood from Meredith's room into the hallway. This could have happened either on this revisit in December, or during the initial visit in the days after the murder. It's probably more likely that this would have happened in the first visit, when the blood was still moist; the blood would have totally dried by December, but it would still be possible to pick up small elements of dried blood on footwear and deposit them elsewhere.

I therefore contend that the Luminol evidence in the hallway can almost certainly be shown to be invalid and useless against Knox (or Sollecito). I can't see how the defence can fail to argue - based on the videos that must have been entered into evidence in Massei's court, and are therefore available for argument in Hellmann's court - that there's a strong possibility (if not a high likelihood) that these blobs were deposited by the "crack" forensics team.

Incompetence. Sheer incompetence. There's no possible way to defend the indelibly-documented working practices of these people in this case.
 
Forensics collection

Thanks for posting the videos, Rose.
It makes me laugh that before the C & V report became public, whenever any pro-acquittal posters critiqued the forensics collection in the case, the guilters would deride our lack of qualifications to make such judgements. Pro-acquittal posters argued that the mistakes made in collection were so fundamental that any lay person could spot them (regardless of qualifications!).
The strength of C & V's language and conclusions supports those pro-acquittal arguments. These weren't subtle errors that can only be spotted by a professional.
The videos prove this. I think I could probably do a better job with no experience and no formal scientific training! I could do a better job just from watching CSI, which would've at least taught me:
a. To document everything where it is, before it is touched
b. To touch items as little as possible- the bare minimum necessary in order to document and package the item.
c. To package and send to the lab anything that was obviously 'involved' in the murder, i.e. anything with blood on it, and anything worn by the victim as the murder took place!

Here's what I don't understand. Meredith didn't have that much stuff. She was living in a tiny room, and hadn't been in Italy that long. It wouldn't have been that much trouble to bag and tag everything from her room. If they had any doubts whether something would've been useful, they could've erred on the side of caution and bagged it anyway.
Instead they toss Meredith's room, literally, they appear to be touching everything for no apparent reason, and they leave the clothes Meredith was wearing at the time of the attack at the scene! :jaw-dropp
It's remarkable, to say the least.
It makes me wonder if they'd have caught (or convicted) Rudy at all, if he'd attempted a clean-up.
 
JREF2010 said:
Not to be a couche-expert, but it seems there would be some protocol.

Arrive to check the burglary out.
The door is opened and everyone was told to leave, its now a crime scene. That makes sense.

But from there on I would assume a very standard list of who goes in, who follows that team etc..

Within reason, there should be some type of formal standardized procedure as you go through the house. The entry way first for example, and then the back of the cottage last, or something like that.

I wouldnt think a trained team wouldn't just "jump in" and start putting their foot through the door windows, as they did in the downstairs.

Its been very strange to watch.
Click to expand...

I recall from reading some of the evidence collection protocols listed in the C&V report and one in particular (it might have been the Mayberry PD one) that talks about having a leader in charge of who goes where and when and documentation each time a person enters and leaves a room, etc. Some of these folk in the videos seem to be just wandering around without any rhyme or reason.
 
Kaosium said:
Ah, thank you, it looked like there was an attempt to imply that was part of the 'million dollar PR effort' I recently saw mentioned in a Twitter conversation LJ pointed out during a trial date. They just made that part up starting with the 'premise' 'There is a massive PR campaign going on, how much is the most they could be spending on it?' The accountant and others decided on a million. It had to be the 'most' because people were popping up everywhere and they had to account for the expanding conspiracy! Grassroots people, grassroots! Those do have people popping up from everywhere. Myself from a delayed reaction to a newscast on some TV station out of either Buffalo or Rochester. Who kicked it off, Paul Ciolino? The man from Chicago so he knows how it goes? 'There's truth, justice and then there's the Chicago Way.' :P

I heard there's a Bears fan who had to grudgingly congratulate the Packers recently... :cool:
Click to expand...


The whole Gogerty Marriott issue is actually a classic example of how a group will twist a collection of unrelated facts into something that supports a pre-judged position. These were the facts that were distorted and misrepresented in this instance:

1) The Knox family were reported to have spent upwards of $1 million on the case - but this figure would have comprised all legal costs (by far the largest proportion of the total), and travel/subsistence costs in Italy.

2) David Marriott contacted the Knox/Mellas family to offer assistance with media management and to offer some general PR advice.

3) Gogerty Marriott subsequently listed this assistance on its website, presumably as an example of a) the firm's social conscience, and b) an example of how the firm has made a positive difference to the client (here, Knox's family)

4) Gogerty Marriott's website also contains some general rubric on the way it works - including lobbying, paid and earned media, influencing public opinion, etc. This information is clearly non-specific, and is also clearly referring to Gogerty Marriott's bread-and-butter corporate PR work: crisis management or opinion-forming for large companies and organisations.

A group with an agenda has taken these known facts and willfully distorted them into a narrative that fits their agenda:

Gogerty Marriott is conducting a $1 million PR campaign on behalf of the Knox/Mellas family, which includes lobbying, paid/earned media and influencing public opinion.

"One couldn't make it up" etc, etc........
 
But the big Q
LJ
Who is paying the Kercher PR machine and this machine is very well oiled?
:confused:
 
zeb said:
But the big Q
LJ
Who is paying the Kercher PR machine and this machine is very well oiled?
:confused:
Click to expand...

Marriot are sort of like the A-Team. You don't actually have to pay them, once you "hire" them they unleash a perfect storm of astroturf, then they turn down your money. Except that they are evil and only accept contracts to defend evil people.
 
Kevin_Lowe said:
Marriot are sort of like the A-Team. You don't actually have to pay them, once you "hire" them they unleash a perfect storm of astroturf, then they turn down your money. Except that they are evil and only accept contracts to defend evil people.
Click to expand...

:D
If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire... The Gogerty Stark Marriott Team!

Of course the guilter community have these beliefs. They believed (and still believe) everything written about Amanda in tabloids, so you can see that any whiff of the 'other side' getting help from a PR company is going to be construed as an attempt to obfuscate.
If they could understand the media coverage for what it was, a smear, a character assassination designed by the police and perpertrated by the tabloids, then this help from Marriott looks necessary and unproblematic.
Of course this misunderstanding is combined with an ignorance about how PR actually works, how they interact with the media, etc etc.
The fact is that the assitance provided by the company probably involved a consultation with Marriott himself once a year and a fairly low-level assistant (maybe even an intern!) acting as a 'scheduler' when press make contact to get an interview with one of the family.
Of course, it's a possibility that when the hate groups started in with the $1 million dollar PR conspiracy, they might've had to schedule an extra meeting with Marriott to discuss how that particular smear should be handled! :)
 
Just thought I'd clarify a couple of points (hi Kermit!):

1) The inmates who were brought to testify in Hellmann's court were not defence witnesses. The defence asked that the court investigate the inmates' claims, in order to establish whether the claims had any validity. In Italy, courts have both the power and the obligation to make sure that all reasonable leads are investigated. The defence teams never claimed that either of the inmate stories was correct, and the defence certainly never claimed that either of the inmate stories represented part of the defence case. Instead, this was all about petitioning the court to use its powers in order to determine the truth/reliability of the inmate stories. Hellmann agreed with this request, and called the inmates to testify as court witnesses. Not defence witnesses.

2) Let's be perfectly clear about the objective of the defence in Knox's/Sollecito's trials. The defence objective is explicit and narrowly-defined: it aims to convince the court that there is insufficient evidence to find Knox/Sollecito guilty (beyond all doubt based in reason) of the murder of Meredith Kercher, and of the associated crimes with which they are charged. The defence teams are not aiming to establish how Meredith Kercher was actually killed, and nor are they aiming to establish who exactly participated in the murder. It so happens that in this case the defence are potentially helped in their argument by the proven presence/participation of another person - Rudy Guede. This, for example, helps the defence rebut the common argument along the lines of "If the defendants in this trial didn't commit the crime, then who did?". But that's incidental to the sole objective of the defence teams: to demonstrate reasonable doubt as to the guilt of Knox/Sollecito.
 
Kaosium said:
Ah, thank you, it looked like there was an attempt to imply that was part of the 'million dollar PR effort' I recently saw mentioned in a Twitter conversation LJ pointed out during a trial date. They just made that part up starting with the 'premise' 'There is a massive PR campaign going on, how much is the most they could be spending on it?' The accountant and others decided on a million. It had to be the 'most' because people were popping up everywhere and they had to account for the expanding conspiracy!<snip>
Click to expand...

Yes, as Dr. Evil would say, "One million dollars."
 
bri1 said:
:D
If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire... The Gogerty Stark Marriott Team!

Of course the guilter community have these beliefs. They believed (and still believe) everything written about Amanda in tabloids, so you can see that any whiff of the 'other side' getting help from a PR company is going to be construed as an attempt to obfuscate.
If they could understand the media coverage for what it was, a smear, a character assassination designed by the police and perpertrated by the tabloids, then this help from Marriott looks necessary and unproblematic.
Of course this misunderstanding is combined with an ignorance about how PR actually works, how they interact with the media, etc etc.
The fact is that the assitance provided by the company probably involved a consultation with Marriott himself once a year and a fairly low-level assistant (maybe even an intern!) acting as a 'scheduler' when press make contact to get an interview with one of the family.
Of course, it's a possibility that when the hate groups started in with the $1 million dollar PR conspiracy, they might've had to schedule an extra meeting with Marriott to discuss how that particular smear should be handled! :)
Click to expand...


It's wheels within wheels! A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma!

:D
 
 
RoseMontague said:
Wow, reading the wiki article it is difficult to find any evidence against Sabrina or her Mom. A dream and a cell phone tower connection of 37 seconds, suspicion of jealousy. Am I missing something here? I don't see the evidence.

The town is joining in as a civil party??? This case is one big joke. Italy should be embarrassed.


Did anyone else happen to follow the link to the medical examiner statement:
Here it is and no I am not making this up:



Thanks Fine for the update and link to the wiki article.
Click to expand...

Indeed, thank you both for the update...I too am interested in the Scazzi case as it pertains to a similar phenomena in this one. It also reminds me how strange it was when I went over the case the second time during the week my brother and his wife were showing their production of 'The Crucible' and I was helping a little and coming back to read about Raffaele and Amanda....

That was really kind of weird.
 
LondonJohn said:
* * *
Since the Luminol testing was pretty much the last piece of forensic work carried out (certainly after these videos were taken), I would judge that it's not just possible but likely that the shapeless blobs in the hallway that were weakly luminescent were the product of one or more forensics people tracking small amounts of blood from Meredith's room into the hallway. This could have happened either on this revisit in December, or during the initial visit in the days after the murder. It's probably more likely that this would have happened in the first visit, when the blood was still moist; the blood would have totally dried by December, but it would still be possible to pick up small elements of dried blood on footwear and deposit them elsewhere.

* * *
Click to expand...
_______________________

John,

If you're looking for the right size blobs in the corridor, remember that when Meredith's murder---or apparent murder---had been discovered, an ambulance was called. Two emergency personnel arrived, one a female doctor. The doctor---and apparently her assistant, too---were permitted to enter Meredith's bedroom, where the duvet was removed from Meredith and the doctor determined that Meredith was dead. The doctor and her assistant did not wear gloves or protective booties.

Oddly, Massei just summarizes this incident in a few sentences.

///
 
LondonJohn said:
The whole Gogerty Marriott issue is actually a classic example of how a group will twist a collection of unrelated facts into something that supports a pre-judged position. These were the facts that were distorted and misrepresented in this instance:

1) The Knox family were reported to have spent upwards of $1 million on the case - but this figure would have comprised all legal costs (by far the largest proportion of the total), and travel/subsistence costs in Italy.

2) David Marriott contacted the Knox/Mellas family to offer assistance with media management and to offer some general PR advice.

3) Gogerty Marriott subsequently listed this assistance on its website, presumably as an example of a) the firm's social conscience, and b) an example of how the firm has made a positive difference to the client (here, Knox's family)

4) Gogerty Marriott's website also contains some general rubric on the way it works - including lobbying, paid and earned media, influencing public opinion, etc. This information is clearly non-specific, and is also clearly referring to Gogerty Marriott's bread-and-butter corporate PR work: crisis management or opinion-forming for large companies and organisations.

A group with an agenda has taken these known facts and willfully distorted them into a narrative that fits their agenda:

Gogerty Marriott is conducting a $1 million PR campaign on behalf of the Knox/Mellas family, which includes lobbying, paid/earned media and influencing public opinion.

"One couldn't make it up" etc, etc........
Click to expand...

They made it up anyway though!

Thanks for compiling all though. I betcha David Marriott and Pat Gogerty are downright delighted by all the free advertising they get on the internet from certain quarters.

Now that's an interesting conspiracy theory...with more actual evidence to back it. It cannot be denied that a certain venue has outdone even the boasts of the Gogerty-Marriott website in promoting the unearthly sway they hold over the American (and British & Italian! The Illuminati revealed!) media.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom