• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
madrigal said:
They only contested the bra clasp (left by the bungling police) and the knife but not the numerous dna mixes pointing to them being at the scene.
Click to expand...

They pointed out that the only other DNA trace from Raffaele was found on a cigarette butt in the kitchen which was probably from him smoking. He never denied visiting the flat because he did visit the flat. Does that make him guilty in some way? They pointed out that Amanda's DNA from the bathroom is because she used the bathroom. Does having one's DNA in one's own bathroom point to guilt? They pointed out that some DNA found on the floor of the flat that belonged to Amanda was because Amanda lived in the flat. Does having one's own DNA in the place one lives makes one guilty of a crime?

DNA can't be dated. Amanda lived there and Raffaele visited there. That is the only thing this DNA proved. The rest is simply conjecture as pointed out by one juror in this case in an article I linked to earlier today.
 
the arguments failed to sway the first jury

madrigal said:
It wasnt contested in Court. As the blogger from the Wilmington Post pointed out.
Click to expand...
It was contested in the trial of the first instance according to Ms Nadeau, but apparently the arguments were not effective. I do not know what was said at the second trial.
 
Last edited:
madrigal said:
It wasnt contested in Court. As the blogger from the Wilmington Post pointed out.
Click to expand...

Contesting in the appeal document is contesting it in court. The judges read the appeal documents and make their judgments. If Hellman refused a independent review that could mean he didn't need it. He probably could see that the footprint on the bath mat didn't match Raffaele's foot, for example.

Quintavalle could be discounted without bringing him back.
 
madrigal said:
Found not guilty through lack of evidence.

To quote the Judge..

"They're free for not having committed the crime," Judge Claudio Pratillo Hellmann told the daily La Stampa.

"But this is the truth in court, not the real truth. And that could be different."

He told the daily Corriere della Sera: "They could have been responsible but there is no proof. Perhaps they knew what happened that night. We do not know."
Click to expand...


Oh dear!!

I can see that some guilters are going to cling on to their straws come what may. You don't even need to go elsewhere - your 'claim' has been addressed in this very thread. I won't link it/them for you - it might be useful if you do the searching yourself and pick up some more knowledge along the way.

P.S. if you want to save on stamps, I understand that Raffaele may be visiting Amanda before the end of the year - you could send just the ONE Xmas card direct to them both if you like. I haven't got Rudy's address, but, personally I wouldn't send him one myself as I don't like murdering rapists.
 
Ammonitida said:
Women rarely kill other women. The victims of female killers are almost always men and children. Moreover, cases where a woman willingly participates in the murder and rape of another woman are practically unheard of outside of deviant male sexual fantasy. I consider Knox's gender to be "circumstantial evidence" of innocence.
Click to expand...


Maybe but a well known opinion is that it was made to look like a rape scene afterwards. No-one knows what the motive was or even if Knox was the person who killed her. For all we know she may have been in the bathroom trying to drown out the screams as she said in her original confession.
 
Scorpion NITE said:
So do you agree that GUEDE (the person we were discussing, not Lumumba) is GUILTY as sin?

Regardless, I was commenting on the article. I also suggested that the article was taking a racist stance. Do you agree? Here, I'll repeat the relevant part I was referring to:

''To many people, Guede looks like a killer, while Knox does not. That’s not to say that the Italian courts are necessarily racist, of course. But the facts are the facts: The white woman and man are free. The Black man remains in prison.''
Click to expand...

madrigal said:
Not necessarily, he may not have inflicted the wounds to Meredith or be responsible for her death. In that at least he may have been innocent.
Click to expand...


Disregarding the tripe, that was not what I asked.

I have highlighted it this time for you.

I used to highlight sections in books when I was revising for examinations at school many moons ago - I found it helped me to focus and aided basic comprehension of the relevant parts. :D
 
RoseMontague said:
They pointed out that the only other DNA trace from Raffaele was found on a cigarette butt in the kitchen which was probably from him smoking. He never denied visiting the flat because he did visit the flat. Does that make him guilty in some way? They pointed out that Amanda's DNA from the bathroom is because she used the bathroom. Does having one's DNA in one's own bathroom point to guilt? They pointed out that some DNA found on the floor of the flat that belonged to Amanda was because Amanda lived in the flat. Does having one's own DNA in the place one lives makes one guilty of a crime?

DNA can't be dated. Amanda lived there and Raffaele visited there. That is the only thing this DNA proved. The rest is simply conjecture as pointed out by one juror in this case in an article I linked to earlier today.
Click to expand...



Unfortunately that fails to explain why the DNA mixes were between Meredith/Knox and not with any of the other housemates who live there. Moreover Meredith was closer to the other housemates...so why are there no DNA mixes between any of them?
 
Scorpion NITE said:
Disregarding the tripe, that was not what I asked.

I have highlighted it this time for you.

I used to highlight sections in books when I was revising for examinations at school many moons ago - I found it helped me to focus and aided basic comprehension of the relevant parts. :D
Click to expand...


No need to be patronising.

I merely stated that the article was questionable as you have questioned it yourself.
 
madrigal said:
Maybe but a well known opinion is that it was made to look like a rape scene afterwards. No-one knows what the motive was or even if Knox was the person who killed her. For all we know she may have been in the bathroom trying to drown out the screams as she said in her original confession.
Click to expand...

DNA of Rudy was found on a swab that had been used to collect a sample from inside Meredith's genitalia. This forced Rudy to concoct a story about having consensual sex with her that night. The testimony of Meredith's friends dispute this story of his. So a rape most likely happened.
 
evidence collection techniques

madrigal said:
Unfortunately that fails to explain why the DNA mixes were between Meredith/Knox and not with any of the other housemates who live there. Moreover Meredith was closer to the other housemates...so why are there no DNA mixes between any of them?
Click to expand...
Several of us pointed out that Amanda and Meredith shared a bathroom. I also pointed out that there was evidence of a third person's DNA in one of the samples. In addition, the way the samples were taken raises further questions. If you swab over a large area, you will mix samples that were previously spatially distinct. See this video. If you fail to change gloves when you handle multiple samples, you raise the odds of contaminating one sample with another. I have documented this point many times on this thread and elsewhere. Seeing a member of the forensic police handle Meredith's blue sweatshirt (which had dried blood on it) then handle other pieces of evidence without changing gloves (in a video available at Oggi) made me angry. What was that person thinking?
 
madrigal said:
The samples were from all over the house incl Filomena's room yet there is not one mix of DNA recovered with a mix of Meredith and Filomena (or other housemate).
Click to expand...

Most of the samples were collected from the murder room and the bathroom that Amanda and Meredith shared. The DNA mixtures came mostly from the bathroom. There was a DNA mixture found in Filomena's room that included Meredith, Amanda and an unknown third individual, likely Filomena. We will never know because reference samples from the two other women were not taken.
 
madrigal said:
The samples were from all over the house incl Filomena's room yet there is not one mix of DNA recovered with a mix of Meredith and Filomena (or other housemate).
Click to expand...

They weren't from all over the house. There was an interesting comment a while back about the scientific police wearing hazmat suits instead of proper forensic suits which meant they had booties not of cloth but of whatever hazmat suits are made of and that it is possible that is how the bra clasp was dragged about.

The police walked all over before Meredith was discovered. One spot in Filomena's room of Amanda's DNA - not connected to a walking pattern - isn't much evidence of anything.
 
madrigal said:
So were the Jamie Bulger killers.

In fact jails are jam full of wide-eyed young, naive, inexperienced...innocents.
Click to expand...

Scorpion NITE said:
Personally, I think that anyone who would use the Bulger killers as an example to illustrate an obviously incorrect point would either have to be seriously deluded or disingenuous to say the least.

Pathetic.
Click to expand...

madrigal said:
Leave them out if you wish but the point remains intact.

Namely that jails are jam full of wide-eyed young, naive, inexperienced...innocents. They arent all shifty faced monsters!
Click to expand...

Scorpion NITE said:
YOU used them as your example - it's not for me to 'leave them out'

How does your 'point' remain intact anyway?

Source or proof?

Or are you just utilising the much vaunted 'Giobbi-like' special powers to deduce? :rolleyes:

P.S. Please don't tell us you don't even know who Giobbi is? :D
Click to expand...

madrigal said:
jails are jam full of wide-eyed young, naive, inexperienced...innocents. They arent all shifty faced monsters!

That is my opinion.

I am I hope entitled to one here.
Click to expand...



Your OPINION?

Oh, right, it is your opinion !!!

Then, OF COURSE you are entitled to your opinion. I'll defend that right every time.

It's just...just that...well...I...er...I could have sworn that you were adamant that your ''point remains intact''

Ya know...as in...oh well....never mind. :D


P.S. I don't agree with your opinion, by the way. Hope you would also defend my right to say that. :p
 
no reference samples

madrigal said:
The samples were from all over the house incl Filomena's room yet there is not one mix of DNA recovered with a mix of Meredith and Filomena (or other housemate).
Click to expand...
Without reference samples from Laura or Filomena, it would not be possible to say whether any unknown partial profile was or was not theirs. There was DNA from an unknown person in Rep. 177. There were multiple mixed DNA samples from Raffaele's flat. What do those mean?
 
madrigal said:
Maybe but a well known opinion is that it was made to look like a rape scene afterwards. No-one knows what the motive was or even if Knox was the person who killed her. For all we know she may have been in the bathroom trying to drown out the screams as she said in her original confession.
Click to expand...



Whisper it but it wasn't said to be there (bathroom).

P.S. Whose DNA was found in Meredith?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom