• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi JREF2010,
Ah, another connoisseur who enjoys the taste of a cold beverage on a summer day!

Ya know, I was just watching that Aussie Dateline show, and as I watched the journo's pourin' their wine and eating, I thought this: No matter how many beers that I drink or Jack+Cokes I down, I continue to wonder how the gals, Nadeau and Vogt, after covering this case or years, still can not understand the mixed DNA issue...


http://www.sbs.com.au/dateline/story/watch/id/601316/n/Justice-on-Trial

ANDREA VOGT: I feel that it has still not been properly explained why there are mixed traces of DNA of Amanda Knox and Meredith Kercher in 4 different spots in the house. Mixed blood, and I've talked to different biologists –


BARBIE NADEAU: I have to say, I live in a house with 3 people, my two sons and my husband, I guarantee you I have no mixed blood with any of them, anywhere in my house. I don't bleed where they bleed, we don't bleed at the same time. There would never be my mixed blood, their blood and my blood anywhere ever.

I wish that Halides1 was at that dinner table,
he'd set them clueless gals straight.
L8, RW
 
oh yeah...

This sounds like Reasonable Doubt, yes?
...from "guilters" who wrote books calling someone a murderer? what happened?


SABINA CASTELFRANCO: The reality is that none of us know what happened that night.

BARBIE NADEAU: The truth is elusive. We don't know the truth, we have no idea whether she's innocent, whether she's guilty, whether she was there, whether she wasn't, whether her false confession was actually true, we actually don't know, none of us know, whatever we believe. None of us know for sure.
 
As I recall Hellman left it open if he wanted to do more requests from the defense.

Maybe two reasons he didn't review the other mixed traces, luminol,bathmat ..-

a) he accepts the previous courts findings

b) he felt without the knife and bra clasp, the rest in the bathroom and floors elsewhere aren't important.

I'll guess "B".

I agree. He put to test the only things even resembling evidence of any value - the eyewitness and the traces indicating direct guilt, if taken as the prosecution wanted.
 
So will they switch to Rudys story? Raffaele swapped out for the knife/Amanda, then Amanda in the kitchen ears covered, then Rudy jamming on the toilet?

Who would stoop so low as to use Rudys Date Alibi and the Savior from theToilet ?
I think the story is going to account for the lack of evidence of Amanda in the room. They will throw away the knife and make it like Amanda instigated the crime from the outside of the room, directing Guede and Raffaele to kill and rape, urging them with mesmerizing hip-swivels, I suppose.


So I'm clueless, whats the status of the Interrogation Documents in this trial? Can the prosecution drag that out, and resume where it all started, the Interrogation at the Questra?
I think they don't want to do it for two reasons. First, the statements as evidence lead nowhere and instead of strengthening some (yet to be seen) narrative only bring up questions of even more police misconduct and/or incompetence. Second, it's a straight way to having the verdict shot down by the Cassation.
Thinking again, they will probably bring it up only to have it disallowed by Hellmann. The counter to this will be probably Amanda taking her right to speak, recalling the details of her mistreatment.
 
RW - I've been saying for while that defense shouldn't even address the whole break in staging thing because it's really not their job. I think I said it here that they could have just left the balcony unlocked, like someone (space case Amanda had just left it that way) or the front open or the kitchen window unlatched.

They could have just gone to Gobbio or whatever the place they were planing to go was. They could have wash off the blood in the bathroom and thrown the mat in the tub during the night. They cleaned every trace from the room but left the stuff they pointed out to cops - makes no sense.

I'd have gone to meet dad, not answered my cell phone while with him and called back in the afternoon. There is no way I would have been going back and forth between the apartment and the cottage, much less carrying a mop and bucket.

Or if I didn't know that all of my DNA, prints etc. had been cleaned up or never there, I would have unlocked the door with Meredith's keys, run in the room, pulled the duvet off her, tried to revive her; getting blood all over my clothes, my prints all over the room, my DNA on Meredith, etc. Then call the police.

How could they possibly believe they had left no significant evidence in the room? How could they leave the visible evidence in the bathroom?

"But, Amanda the most important thing is a staged break in." -Raf
 
How long can the appeal last? I thought that there was a time limit for the appeal.

I would have thought that any additional reviews or opinions would already have been ordered by Hellman directly after CV filed their report.
 
How long can the appeal last? I thought that there was a time limit for the appeal.

I would have thought that any additional reviews or opinions would already have been ordered by Hellman directly after CV filed their report.


Early in the appeal process Hellmann reviewed and denied most issues brought up in both AK and RS appeal documents. Well, I suppose the correct term is that he denied further review of the issues raised excepting Toto, the convicts and the two DNA issues of knife and bra clasp.

Prior to doing this I’m certain the two judges read the Massei report and already made certain conclusions based on their opinion of that gem. I think Hellmann has all the answers he needs at this point however he certainly left open the possibility to review anything else he wishes to. I suppose that will depend on how the prosecution wishes to proceed.

All the appeal issues can now be brought forth in the argument phase. For example ...I don’t think we really need to hear from Nara again in order to argue that her testimony is meaningless and unreliable. She says she heard a scream. She has no idea when she heard it. She says she heard footsteps...she has no idea when she heard them. The last judge allowed her statements because they seemed to show there were multiple attackers who later ran in different directions. But she saw no one and cant say the time. So the defense can argue against her statements because they are unreliable and most likely false. Don’t forget she tried to guess at the time before and that time was during the broken down car peoples visit so that showed her statements as unreliable. Now she says she heard a scream and running thats it. I suppose its possible but its as meaningful as Toto's statements.

She is a non witness as is Quintinville. If the prosecution decides to try and run with these two then they will be chopped into pieces by information in Massei alone. Nara never looked at a clock or woke up her daughter...Quintinville either lied to police in the days following the murder or he lied to the court more than a year later. Which makes him a liar one way or the other. And so the defense can argue that he is a non witness. Rather a attention seeker...which BTW I think is the case with Nara as well. Frank seems to think she is normal...I disagree ...I think she is as normal as Quintinville and Toto...these three should get together with Mignini for a game of Canasta down at the local loony bin.
 
the break-in

RW - I've been saying for while that defense shouldn't even address the whole break in staging thing because it's really not their job. I think I said it here that they could have just left the balcony unlocked, like someone (space case Amanda had just left it that way) or the front open or the kitchen window unlatched.
Grinder,

I do not believe that the evidence warrants the conclusion that the break-in was staged (not even close). However, my concern is that if the jury believes that it was staged, they might convict the two. It seems unlikely (though not impossible) that Guede staged a break-in (he may have been too worried about other people returning to the flat to stay around any longer); therefore, if there were a staged break-in, that only leaves Sollecito and Knox. Therefore, I think it is prudent for the defense to rebut the prosecution's claims.
 
Randy,
I realize that your opinion and most here are as you stated, but Massei didn't agree and certainly we know that the prosecution, the civil attorneys and some of the "stellar" press also still believe in guilt.

My point was that there is a deadline IIRC for when the appeal must be completed and I doubt that Hellman will at this late date order more independent analysis, but I was hoping someone else knew for sure.

Btw, I agree with Barbie (the reporter not the doll) that the defense didn't do a great job in the trial of the first instance. Hopefully they will have improved.
 
Hi Grinder,
I was wondering what the actual dealine to complete the appeal. I thought I read that it could easily be changed and extended by the judge, although I'm not certain of this.
 
Halides,

The stone could have been thrown from the outside even in a staging situation.

Whether or not the break in was staged doesn't really matter because staging does not equal A and R guilt. I can easily imagine that Rudy threw the stone to see if anybody was home before MK returned or I can believe that Rudy did have a date (or he thought he had one) with MK and worried that she might have told her friends. It is truly amazing how much activity A and R had in the cottage that night without leaving and evidence of being there.
 
supposed break in

Halides,

The stone could have been thrown from the outside even in a staging situation.

Whether or not the break in was staged doesn't really matter because staging does not equal A and R guilt. I can easily imagine that Rudy threw the stone to see if anybody was home before MK returned or I can believe that Rudy did have a date (or he thought he had one) with MK and worried that she might have told her friends. It is truly amazing how much activity A and R had in the cottage that night without leaving and evidence of being there.
Grinder,

I believe that the rock was thrown from the outside for the reason that you suggest, but PG commenters point to the supposed glass on top of Filomena's clothes and other evidence (supposed lack of marks on the outside wall) to support their claim about staging.
 
Halides,

The glass on top of the clothes has always seemed over cooked. Glass sticks to things so even if the clothes were moved the glass could still show up on top.

The point remains that staging in this kind of case does not mean a resident had to have done it. The stone could have been thrown by Rudy but entry occurred when MK returned. He could worried that people would think he had gone there and in his unthinking way used his own MO for a break in to divert suspicion. Remember this is the guy that left his palm print, bloody shoe prints, DNA and more in the cottage. He also admitted being there during the murder. Not the brightest bulb, but he does have a very good lawyer.
 
Thoughtful's English translation

Greetings everyone,
I am posting this English translation that Thoughtful from PMF.org has taken the time to do, because I am curious about what truthfully happened in this brutal murder we discuss. If Amanda Knox and Raffaele Solleciito are guilty of Meredith Kercher's horrible death, lock them up forever. If they are not guilty of any involvement, please set them free...

Thoughtful said:
Translation excerpt from trial transcript July 25, 2011

Conti is showing a video and talking about the images, referring to them by hours, minutes and seconds.

At 26:38 [Stefanoni] takes the swab with the other hand to fold it: 26:53 she takes a small haematic sample with the swab that was already passed over almost three tiles; someone asks if there are paper envelopes and the reply is that there are no more paper envelopes; at 46:27 the tweezers are not used any more for taking samples from the floor; at one o'clock the same sampling as the one before; a sample from the floor holding the swab with the finger without using the tweezers which are in the palm of the hand; at 01:05 the tweezers are not used to hold the swab sampling the floor; between 01:16 and 01:18:24 we can hear Dr. Stefanoni several times come in and go out of the room which is the maximum level of crime scene containment, as we saw earlier; at 1:22 and 1:25 a bra is collected, the presumed bra of Meredith from the floor, with the hands, and is placed in a transparent plastic envelope, Dr. Stefanoni is not [or does not appear to be: "non risulta indossare"] wearing the face-mask; at 1:22, at 1:22:25 one sees an agent behind without any protection on the head and without a face-mask; before being placed in an envelope the bra was touched by the finger of another agent; one sees the underwear being picked up from the floor, waved around, a more exact term would be that the exhibit was "shaken" [sgrullare; a very special word] and then placed in a plastic envelope. Before being placed in the envelope the bra is touched by a finger of another agent, one sees the wrist of Dr. Stefanoni's protective suit stained with haematic substance; at 1:34 one sees two people moving the body without any protective suit, only gloves and shoe covers; one of them has a female voice; at 1:37 a person appears wearing a black hat on their head, and another is using blue gloves. From this point on, the samples of hairlike formations are taken with the hands without using tweezers. At 1:44:36 until 1:44:38 one can hear Dr. Stefanoni saying: "Her nails are fairly long and well-kept"; at 1:46 both hands are inserted into plastic envelopes; at 1:48 one sees a person wearing jeans in the crime scene, i.e. in Meredith's room; at 1:49 one sees [the person] clearly touching the body; at 1:52 one hears Dr. Stefanoni referring to the wound on the neck: "The edges appear jagged" while the other person is touching those edges and the whole edge of the wound and partially also inside. At 1:53 one sees the hair of a person wearing no protection in front of the camera, at 1:54 other people without protective suits, wearing only gloves and shoe covers, are moving around Meredith's body; at 1:55 and 1:56 a person with only shoe covers, wearing jeans and a sweater points to something with his foot and stretches his leg over Meredith's body; at 1:57 another person in jeans and a sweater with lowered shoe covers; at 1:58 hairlike formations are taken with hands that are gloved and dirty with haematic substance, from behind Meredith and after having manipulated the body several times; at 2:02 a person wearing jeans and a sweater uses glove-clad hands to take a piece of fabric found under the body and places it in a plastic envelope; another person in jeans and a sweater is also present. At 2:12 a woman without a face-mask, without any head protection and with a sweater again in Meredith's room. t 2:24 appears the bra clasp which is described and indicated as being positioned under the pillow. There is also an iconographic, photographic documentation relative to the finding of this bra clasp. The filming starts again at 12:41 with Dr. Stefanoni appearing holding the material in her fingers, the unused tweezers in the palm of her hand; it is cut from the material as an exhibit [??] and again the protective headwear is missing. At 12:42 another sample, this time using the tweezers but the gloves are stained with haematic substance and the index finger of the left hand seems to appear in a broken glove. At 12:45 swabs are used without tweezers, without protective headwear and face-mask, 12:47 same sampling in the same way; 12:51 as before while taking samples from the traces on the door handle, and the tweezers are only used at 12:51, at 12:55 the same situation without tweezers on the traces on the wall; at 13:00 three distinct although contiguous stains of blood are sampled with the same swab and without tweezers; 13:50 biological traces from the toilet are taken by gloved hands and placed in a plastic envelope and the fingers also go inside in order to push it well into the test-tube; excrements taken at 13:56 in the toilet with tweezers, note that the contour on the inside of the cup is not stained; when they are placed in the test-tube one sees the glove and the sleeve of the protective suit are stained; 14:02 again without face-mask and protective headwear one hears instructions to place a glass inside a plastic bag; 14:02 one sees a dirty glove-thumb of a left hand; 14:10 samples are taken on two splashes of blood with the same swab, which is obviously humid and not dry; 14:21 again no face-mask; 16:36 samples taken without tweezers, for some time already no longer single-use tweezers but metal tweezers; 16:54 the paper envelopes reappear for the conseration of findings; 18:23 the video operator enters from outside to the inside wihtout changing shoe covers, and this one can be seen throughout the continuity of the video, so from the passage from the most exterior containment perimeter to the second level of containment; 18:24, and here I would ask you to pay particular attention to this passage, at the request of the video operator of the Scientific Police as to whether he should film the cigarette stubs in the kitchen, from his dialogue with another agent of the Scientific Police one hears: "It's absurd, absolutely absurd, I sharply criticized it, unbelievable [inverosimile] disorganization in every aspect". One sees a person with no protection at 18:27, at 20:45 three people without face-masks and protective headwear are on the ground with sampling instruments, tranquilly placed on the floor of the habitation, with no protection.

And if we go back in time, farther back, to see if all the procedures and protocols dictated by the International Community as to anticontamination norms, we come to November 2, 2007. At 15:10, no external area of protection; no perimeter of containment; 15:10:45 no internal area of protection, no secondary area of containment; the video operator of the Scientific Police enters from the outside to the inside wearing the same shoe covers and this throughout the continuity of the video; at 15:10 no area of stockage between the exterior perimeter and the secondary containment, so a lack of material containers for gloves, suits, face-masks, tweezers etc.; 15:10 no area of protection between the different areas of the house, lack of containment at the secondary and primary levels, agents of the Scientific Police enter and leave from all the rooms without ever even changing shoe covers; 15:20 no area of protection defining Meredith's room, the maximal (primary) level of containment of the crime scene. 15:20 a person with a coat is in Meredith's room, which, recall, is the crime scene, and touches the quilt which covers the body with gloves; 16:28 an agent from outside the house tries to break down a door with repeated kicks without wearing any protection except gloves; at the end of the attempt she smashes the glass with a violent kick and the glass flies to the outside and to the inside.

Having not read these specifics before, it looks like there were many mistakes made when evidence was collected. And yet some folks will still argue against any chance of contamination when this evidence was collected. I don't understand how they can still do so though...
RW
 
Halides,

The glass on top of the clothes has always seemed over cooked. Glass sticks to things so even if the clothes were moved the glass could still show up on top.
.

and isnt it odd, Rudy said he looked out the window,
but Filomena said at least one set of shutters were closed, maybe both?
 
Times out for the Prosecution

Hi Grinder,
I was wondering what the actual dealine to complete the appeal. I thought I read that it could easily be changed and extended by the judge, although I'm not certain of this.

One has to remember that this is an appeal and not a first trial, all the delay has been the fault of the Prosecution.
Like Dr Stefanoni not giving all the DNA records to the court experts, who had to ask for a further forty days.
Then we have got the family lawyer for the Kerchers family asking yet again, asking for forty more days.
So all in all this trial as lost ten weeks of hearing thanks to the Prosecution.
Also we all notice, that Marescar walk out of court, when Amanda did her plea, so in the end he was not showing any respect to the court and none to Judge Hellman.
On that account Judge Hellmann would have took note of it, even though he did not say anything, that is not the right move with one of Italy’s top judges.
If the prosecution want to bring in new evidence now I think it would look strange to the Judge? At this stage of the trial.
After all they had nothing to start with, and what they did have has gone with the wind.
MOO
 
Last edited:
Halides,

The stone could have been thrown from the outside even in a staging situation.

Whether or not the break in was staged doesn't really matter because staging does not equal A and R guilt. I can easily imagine that Rudy threw the stone to see if anybody was home before MK returned or I can believe that Rudy did have a date (or he thought he had one) with MK and worried that she might have told her friends. It is truly amazing how much activity A and R had in the cottage that night without leaving and evidence of being there.

Its common sense, burglars throw rocks and items through windows to see if the alarms are in working condition, if there are dogs in the home, and especially to see if humans are home. (lights get turned on, or someone is seen at the window, police might arrive in a few minutes). Burglars will wait a bit and monitor the home, then proceed if there is no activity.

Very likely this was the reason, but we'll never know.

Just because Rudy said the window wasn't broken when he left is only his worthless word, the honesty of a rapist, murderer, thief, dope dealer.

All the rest is speculation, hopefully the Jury wont buy the Mignini Stew this time...
 
I wasn't talking about the prosecution bringing in more evidence, at least that wasn't my intent. I was wondering if there was enough time left for Hellman to order reviews of other evidence, for example the bath mat and the luminol prints in the hallway.

Perhaps C & V could do those as well ;).

I thought there was a hard deadline for this trial to be completed and that if not done by that date, the defendants must be released, but this is just a best as I can remember situation.

RW - I'd surely like to get to as much truth as is possible. It is amazing that the PG people can't admit the case was bungled to any extent. I would add to your POV that if they are guilty of something, but there is not sufficient evidence collected properly, they must be found not guilty. Had the ILE gone around and found their disposed of evidence, had the police actually have located witnesses within a week or two, had they found incriminating evidence on the computers, had they found blood in the mop and bucket, had they found any fingerprints of A or R made with Meredith's blood, had a knife of Raf's matched the bloody outline and tested positive with Meredith's DNA and blood, had AK's interrogation been recorded showing she freely made up the Patrick account and had they produced the bleach receipt; I'd convict them in a second.

Finally, if the DNA on the knife and the bra was truly "abundant" and on the bra clearly Raf's, as well as being on the other part of the bra, I'd not be so concerned about the collection mistakes. The PGers need to consider not just the obvious sloppy collections but also the marginal nature of the DNA "found".
 
LondonJohn has many times given the order of play for this appeal so I won't repeat them.
The press has recently reported that the hearings will continue on a daily basis until a decision is reached.
So what has happened to Giulia Bongiorno?
It was primarily due to accommodating her parliamentary work that the first trial took so long as she could only attend one day a week .
 
Darn interesting article over at Ground Report by a Joseph Bishop on Rudy's criminal background.

http://www.groundreport.com/World/The-Amanda-Knox-Case-New-Questions-Emerge-Surround/2941100

A couple of things that were new to me included the information that 2 workers accompanied the owner of the day care facility in Milan which explains why Rudy didn't just run when caught there.

This article makes clear that the police and prosecutors didn't seek truth and be open about what they knew about Rudy. In fact, one could say they lied by omission.

One small error, he states that Meredith didn't know Rudy. I'm quite sure that her boy friend tragically introduced them, maybe even the exact same time as Amanda met him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom