Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Ammonitida]

Yes, it would.

Also, if it were from any wounds suffered in a hypothetical struggle with Kercher, why were there no wounds found on Knox? We know that Guede had a number of cuts on his hands consistent with being in a struggle over a knife -- so why did Sollecito and Knox have no similar wounds. And, if Knox had no wounds upon examination shortly after the murder, where did her blood come from? The most logical conclusion would be that the blood was deposited there well before Kercher's murder.

I think Massei came to that conclusion as well based on the morphological nature of the blood stains. Whatever the case, it's not incriminating since it was not found at the murder scene but in the bathroom (a wound from the murder would have been inflicted in Meredith's bedroom, but yet no blood or DNA of hers was found there). It's scary to think that the blood on the tap could have been easily mixed with Meredith's DNA since she also used that bathroom regularly. Good thing that didn't happen. Shame for the guilters though.

 

[misteratunta]

Doesn't Kaosium's full view picture above and You Tube reference show that in all probability Amanda would not see the small drops that we are examining under artificial light and close up.

In which case when she said the bathroom was clean the day of the murder, she may have been mistaken.

Thus rendering the "she dated that blood HERSELF" crud completely redundant.

Would you like a plaster for that stab wound in your own foot Pilot? Looks nasty!

 

[DarkStar2011]

Andrea Vogt
Culinary sources in Perugia say a catering service is organizing lunch & dinner Monday for Amanda Knox jury. Long deliberations?

As against some here who see this as ominous, I doubt it has much meaning whatsoever. Better to schedule a meal that might not be necessary, rather than needing "emergency catering" should deliberations last longer than expected.

I do think, though, that some people here are unrealistic in their expectation that, essentially, the deliberations will consist of the panel getting together in a second room, Hellmann asking "O.K., who thinks they didn't do it?," everybody raising their hands and the whole group heading straight back out to deliver the verdict. I'm sure there's going to be some discussion over particular points of evidence. Plus, recall that this is a deliberation on a number of different charges on which Knox and Sollecito were found guilty at the first trial, and they probably have to go over each one. In particular, I wouldn't be surprised if there is extended discussion over the slander charge, even if the murder charges themselves are disposed of quickly. (I, personally, wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the panel voted to acquit on the murder charges, but still found Knox guilty of slandering Lumumba -- in which case, I'd guess the odds were high that they might simply sentence her to time served on that count.)

 

[smkovalinksy]

Verdict Watch: Amanda Knox's Trial by Tabloid Comes to an End

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2095962,00.html#ixzz1ZfZMpWhg

 

[Rolfe]

I don't see anything especially sinister in making sure that they have dinner if they need it. Better than finding they need it and didn't order. They may even feel that they don't want to leave and run the media gauntlet after the verdict is delivered.

And I find the assumption that women are all biassed against Knox and would vote to convict personally insulting. And in case anyone from PMF is lurking here (as if!), my Mensa IQ tested out at 161 and I firmly believe Knox and Sollecito had nothing at all to do with the murder.

Rolfe.

 

[DarkStar2011]

Since this is a jury composed of college educated women who are likely to have been exposed to feminist theory, I think a backfire is possible but then again, no objections came from the judges during that misogynistic spectacle. Makes you wonder.

Fortunately though, this is not a United States type of jury which are usually made up of ordinary citizens. If that had been the case, there'd be no hope at all.

Do we know they're "college-educated"...? From what I've read, the only requirement to be a juror in Italy is to have a high-school diploma, which is pretty much my definition of "ordinary citizen."

 

[js202]

I don't see anything especially sinister in making sure that they have dinner if they need it. Better than finding they need it and didn't order. They may even feel that they don't want to leave and run the media gauntlet after the verdict is delivered.

And I find the assumption that women are all biassed against Knox and would vote to convict personally insulting. And in case anyone from PMF is lurking here (as if!), my Mensa IQ tested out at 161 and I firmly believe Knox and Sollecito had nothing at all to do with the murder.

Rolfe.

Your 161 towers over my 147, Rolfe, and I humbly concur with this and most of your opinions, actually.

 

[Ammonitida]

Do we know they're "college-educated"...? From what I've read, the only requirement to be a juror in Italy is to have a high-school diploma, which is pretty much my definition of "ordinary citizen."

I was under the impression that "lay-judges" in Italy were actually real judges.

 

[Kaosium]

Would it be too 'confirmation biased' to assume that possibly a lot more than those still visible, drops are but a small fraction of the rest of the blood ...that went down the drain, and/or was cleaned up?

Amanda had no wounds, even Massei agrees. Where'd the blood come from? What evidence is there that occurred other than someone's feverished imaginings?

Against that you have a girl who has gotten the silly idea to poke a dozen (new) holes in her head, a dubious proposition to be sure, and it would not surprise me there might be blood evidence of that endeavor. In fact it might even be surprising if there was not.

 

[Grinder]

The bathroom wasn't bloody

Doesn't Kaosium's full view picture above and You Tube reference show that in all probability Amanda would not see the small drops that we are examining under artificial light and close up.

Would't this probability make the utter brilliance/stupidity dichotomy non applicable in this instance ??

If she cleaned the bathroom along with the hall and the murder room, I think she would have been able to make sure she cleaned it without having to see it. Remember she was able to get all her DNA without being able to see it.

Didn't she point out these blood spots to the police? I'm sure she did.

After watching the video I don't know how anybody with any degree of honesty could refer to it as the bloody bathroom. I've read the bloody bathroom in comments thousands of times probably a thousand times from one poster.

If she had cleaned the blood off herself in the bathroom, wouldn't she look really, really close to make sure had cleaned up everything? Yet after missing it during the fab cleanup she found it just as the PP arrived and she had to ride her broom quickly to Raffaele's side.

 

[smkovalinksy]

I don't see anything especially sinister in making sure that they have dinner if they need it. Better than finding they need it and didn't order. They may even feel that they don't want to leave and run the media gauntlet after the verdict is delivered.

And I find the assumption that women are all biassed against Knox and would vote to convict personally insulting. And in case anyone from PMF is lurking here (as if!), my Mensa IQ tested out at 161 and I firmly believe Knox and Sollecito had nothing at all to do with the murder.

Rolfe.

Rolfe: I am in awe of your IQ. Did not mean to offend you, but I am female (assuming by your name you are not??) and do not trust other females. Sorry.

 

[LondonJohn]

Your 161 towers over my 147, Rolfe, and I humbly concur with this and most of your opinions, actually.

Mine is 83. Is lower better?

 

[DarkStar2011]

Doesn't Kaosium's full view picture above and You Tube reference show that in all probability Amanda would not see the small drops that we are examining under artificial light and close up.

Would't this probability make the utter brilliance/stupidity dichotomy non applicable in this instance ??

Not really. You would have to think that, if she would not see such small drops, she and Sollecito would have similarly missed some incriminating evidence of a similar size during their supposed "magic soap" clean-up of the murder room.

 

[RandyN]

There is no proof that Stardust was touched by anyone from his house.

On the one hand it was in the peer-to-peer shared folder so any download would have modified its Last Access timestamp.

More importantly, on the other hand, if it had been started by a player than the opening record would have been added to the same Spotlight database where the Naruto opening record was found.

It is a simple task for the defence to check in their copy if there is such record or not.

If there is not ...

Not true. The file where Stardust was overwritten was not P2P rather the Vlc player media file. P2P file would not be overwritten. VLC player is and was...proof is VLC file opened and therefore overwritten while RS was in police custody...any questions?

 

[Rolfe]

Whimsical aside.

I told LondonJohn that I was attending workshops on Early Music this weekend. At the Madrigal workshop on Saturday, we studied this 1588 madrigal by the English composer Byrd.

Where fancy fond for pleasure pleads
And reason keeps poor hope in jail,
There time it is to take my beads
And pray that beauty may prevail,
Or else despair will win the field
Where reason, hope and pleasure yield.

I have bugger-all idea what it's supposed to mean, but I thought it sounded kind of appropriate.

Rolfe.

 

[Grinder]

Mine is 83. Is lower better?

If you're a golfer

 

[smkovalinksy]

Mine is 83. Is lower better?

..............

 

[Rolfe]

Mine is 83. Is lower better?

Probably!

Rolfe.

 

[DarkStar2011]

I agree. However, it actually is fair to say that in the vast majority of criminal trials in modern democracies, the defendants are guilty (both factually and legally) of the charges against them. And that's even before the verdict is announced. It's an even stronger bet that someone convicted of a crime in a modern democratic justice system is indeed legally and factually guilty of committing that crime.

The reason for the above is that there are plenty of checks and balances in modern justice systems which try to ensure that people are not even charged and brought to trial unless there is a strong (and provable) suspicion that they committed the crime(s) with which they are charged. And in the vast majority of criminal trials, people are not found guilty unless the case against them truly has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Just as a side note -- while what you say may be correct, when Meese spoke of "suspects" almost always being guilty, he wasn't referring to defendants who had been through the "checks and balances." He was referring to anyone who the police considered a suspect. (I don't remember the exact context of his comments twenty-plus years on, but it was in regard to treatment of "suspects" by investigators.)

 

[Swimfish]

Again, I think it's well worth thinking of the situation in Italy as more akin to a "preliminary trial" and "real trial". Whilst the analogy is not perfect, it's almost certainly a better comparison than misinterpreting the word "appeal" as used in the second trial.

So it's more appropriate to consider that Knox and Sollecito have been found guilty in the preliminary trial, and that the main trial is now making the ultimate finding of fact.

There is a similar system in US military courts marshal called the Article 32 Investigative Hearing. The Hearing is required whenever a general courts marshal is convened and involves direct examination of evidence and witnesses with cross-examination allowed. The defendant is also allowed to make an unsworn statement to the Investigating Officer (usually a military judge). The case can end there but in most cases it goes to the full courts marshal for trial.