Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Paninaro]

'Skeptics' here are not allowed to have the slightest suspicion that Knox, Sollecito, OJ Simpson, Casey Anthony, etccccc just might be guilty.

Of course they do. It's not about that. It's about the proof that they're guilty and the non-existent evidence. If you believe they're guilty it's your prerogative.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Dan Krane on DNA profiling

Uhhhh, but then, wouldn't a skeptic also think that if C&V are to be believed, thousands of criminals convicted world wide on dna should be 'not guilty'.
Or even those convicted because they repeatedly, deliberately lied and attempted to disrupt the investigation ? ? ?

Hey.... like C&V said under cross examination......."anything is possible"

Pilot Padron,

I have seen some commentary to this effect at PMF. The short answer is givn by Dan Krane (possibly this is a slight paraphrase): "The science of DNA profiling is sound, but not all DNA profiling is sound science." Greg Hampikian mentioned that as part of clearing innocent people, the work of the Innocence Project also ends up identifying the guilty parties.

 

[Diocletus]

One of the photo-journalists who participated in that March, 2010, Exhibition in Perugia took photographs of the crime scene within the cottage. See: HERE.

///

It looks like that image was taken by one Pietro Crocchioni, who appears to be a local Perugian photog. It was published by the Telegraph with a caption that states "November 4: A post-mortem examination reveals evidence of sexual activity at some point before Miss Kercher died." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/worldnews/8796784/Meredith-Kercher-murder-the-trial-of-Amanda-Knox-Raffaele-Sollecito-and-Rudy-Guede.html?image=2
However, the description of this photo on the EPA website states: "Visible traces of blood on a wall in the apartment in Perugia, southern Italy, 3rd November 2007 following the murder 2nd November 2007 of British student Meredith Kercher. "

Was Crocchioni also inside the cottage on 11/3, or maybe this was taken through a window???

 

[smkovalinksy]

Sincerely glad my argument provided you with the opportunity to bestow upon your readers that spittle laced, paranoid, hate filled argument ( rabid rant) about PMF, Peter Quinnell, the Kerchers and sundry other personal hang ups that had absolutely no relation to my argument.

You are very welcome anyway.
Don't forget to copy to Dougie, the favorite pill blog pal dude.
He will be so proud when the gets the usual tweet.



Oh dear, now, I see.

'Skeptics' here are not allowed to have the slightest suspicion that Knox, Sollecito, OJ Simpson, Casey Anthony, etccccc just might be guilty.
This after even Judge Hellmann pretty much said that although not proven guilty in his eyes, Knox and Sollecito may well know a lot more about the senseless murder of Meredith Kercher than they revealed to the Courts.

Oh, sorry, I forgot what is endlessly stated here.
These skeptics would then just become ignorant morons.
This since they do not hook, line, and sinker swallow the company line that the huge majority posts and childishly 'atta boys' each other endlessly about here.
Their arguments would, as the majority stated as recently as yesterday, wallow in ignorance, self-deception, deliberate blindness, and stupidity.
Got it.

Uhhhh, but then, wouldn't a skeptic also think that if C&V are to be believed, thousands of criminals convicted world wide on dna should be 'not guilty'.
Or even those convicted because they repeatedly, deliberately lied and attempted to disrupt the investigation ? ? ?

Hey.... like C&V said under cross examination......."anything is possible"

If you do not believe this to be a legitimate skeptic's forum, why do you persist in posting here? No one cares about your desire to view the pair as guilty - that you have no valid reasons for doing so is of great concern. If you think the C & V report and Hellman's ruling are all a sleight of hand, a meaningless gesture, without substance and unfounded in true logic, then you must begin immediately the fight to expose this farce and corruption. To Perugia, go, and quickly....you are needed.

 

[Fine]

That's interesting. I'm confused where the linked picture would have been taken from. There appears to be some kind of structural framing at the top of the picture. Also, I've seen the wardrode smears before, but don't recall seeing the smears shown in this picture. Maybe I'm just forgetting.

_____________________________

Diocletus,

The three bloody streaks are on the western wall of Meredith's bedroom.
See HERE

///

 

[HumanityBlues]

Sincerely glad my argument provided you with the opportunity to bestow upon your readers that spittle laced, paranoid, hate filled argument ( rabid rant) about PMF, Peter Quinnell, the Kerchers and sundry other personal hang ups that had absolutely no relation to my argument.

You are very welcome anyway.
Don't forget to copy to Dougie, the favorite pill blog pal dude.
He will be so proud when the gets the usual tweet.

Do you even read people's posts? I had a rant about the Kerchers? What are you even talking about?

And your whole Doug Bremner diatribes don't even make sense. I tweeted the guy once in my life, now we are in constant twitter contact? Seriously, that's your comeback?

You obviously have no arguments left.

It seems you were a little intimidated by Peter "Quinnell" rant, being that you clicked violation and the mods buckled. I think it's a perfect example of the amazing denial in this case.

It was on topic in relevant. You're clearly just trying to take advantage of the mods who will pretty much erase any post when violation is clicked because they're tired of this thread.

Obviously, it contained things you didn't want other people to see. Is that your role now? I suggest anyone take a look at it, as it can still be viewed, and you can tell me how it makes your gang on PMF look. You don't get to have it both ways. You come in here and tell us how respected and well read these blogs are, then we discuss them in the context of the case, people throw hissy fits. Get over it:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7709284

 

[Grinder]

Sincerely glad my argument provided you with the opportunity to bestow upon your readers that spittle laced, paranoid, hate filled argument ( rabid rant) about PMF, Peter Quinnell, the Kerchers and sundry other personal hang ups that had absolutely no relation to my argument.

The Kerchers were only mentioned in relationship to a PQ statement. Nothing was directly said about them.

'Skeptics' here are not allowed to have the slightest suspicion that Knox, Sollecito, OJ Simpson, Casey Anthony, etccccc just might be guilty.
This after even Judge Hellmann pretty much said that although not proven guilty in his eyes, Knox and Sollecito may well know a lot more about the senseless murder of Meredith Kercher than they revealed to the Courts.

Many here have said that we are sure that the case wasn't proven beyond a reasonable doubt but that they could not know for certain that the kids had no involvement.

Oh, sorry, I forgot what is endlessly stated here.
These skeptics would then just become ignorant morons.
This since they do not hook, line, and sinker swallow the company line that the huge majority posts and childishly 'atta boys' each other endlessly about here. Their arguments would, as the majority stated as recently as yesterday, wallow in ignorance, self-deception, deliberate blindness, and stupidity.
Got it.

I think more that people are frustrated that you and yours (Mach excepted) refuse to discuss the issues. For example, I've asked you many times to discuss the police chief's comments, but you don't.

The important lies you refer to are all involved with the night of the great interrogation both for Raffaele and Amanda. If you would see that the only way that the police could say that "she buckled and told us what we knew to be correct", would be if they had it in their minds before she spoke it. But, it wasn't the truth, so do you believe that she told them exactly what they believed by coincidence? Think about it.

Once one recognizes that the interrogation and the statements are not legitimate, one understands that the inconsistent statements connected to it also can not legitimately be called lies.

Uhhhh, but then, wouldn't a skeptic also think that if C&V are to be believed, thousands of criminals convicted world wide on dna should be 'not guilty'.
Or even those convicted because they repeatedly, deliberately lied and attempted to disrupt the investigation ? ? ?

Yes, LCN DNA needs to be treated very carefully. The collection, the labs and the analysis needs to be done with the greatest care. However, thousands of of people have not been convicted on LCN DNA evidence.

When the suspects live in the house where the crime occurred, it is even more important to do DNA very, very carefully.

As for your lying comment see my last response above. If a suspect lies it would depend about what. If they lied about drug consumption to hide it, or if the they lied about being with someone's spouse to hide that or other lies that had nothing to do with the crime being investigated, then no they shouldn't be convicted of that crime. What lies did the kids tell that disrupted the investigation?

The police chief has not sued the paper. No one to my knowledge has disputed that police knew what they wanted to hear before Amanda said it. It is clear that since what they wanted to hear wasn't the truth the only way that Amanda could come up with their theory of the crime is that they led her to it.

 

[Diocletus]

_____________________________

Diocletus,

The three bloody streaks are on the western wall of Meredith's bedroom.
See HERE

///

Ah yes. Thank you.

So I wonder exactly how many photographers were tramping through this place? Alternatively, who supplied these local Perugian photographers with these images that they appear to have peddled?

 

[RWVBWL]

Well, that's the strange thing. Stefanoni herself - inexplicably - inserted herself into the evidence collection process, even though she's a laboratory scientist. This makes no sense for three main reasons: first, crime scene investigators should be specially trained and experienced in doing that specific job; second, Stefanoni's time and training is far better utilised in the laboratory; third, those doing the lab analysis should be conducting their tests with absolute objectivity and neutrality, and should not have had exposure to the crime scene.

In addition, the whole operation of crime scene analysis at the cottage seems to have had an almost-farcical lack of professionalism. In the UK (and most other countries. I'm sure), a dedicated team of SOCOs (Scene of Crime Officers) moves in. This team is usually well-trained (particularly in the case of murder investigations), and consists of various personnel who are trained in different crime scene disciplines: evidence collection, fingerprinting, photography, etc. But in the Kercher case, thanks to the crime scene video and previous court testimony, we know that the whole process was little more than a semi-organised shambles. We have evidence being collected in a completely unprofessional fashion, by people who seem barely trained to do the work. Specific examples include the infamous mop-wrap (courtesy of La Stefanoni herself), the doubly-infamous bra clasp collection, the apparent failure to change shoe covers and gloves appropriately, and the unbelievably-shoddy "smear" swabbing of the bathroom sink (which was, incidentally, conducted by the same person who served as the photographer!).Quite how this huge ineptitude (and that's the most generous description that can be employed) got through Massei's court is extraordinary in itself. But I don't believe Hellmann is as ignorant or as "willfully blind" as Massei. I therefore think that the appeal court will - in addition to throwing out the knife/clasp evidence - also assign clear doubt to the "mixed DNA" evidence in the bathroom sink, on account of the erroneous collection technique.

Ah yes. Thank you.

So I wonder exactly how many photographers were tramping through this place? Alternatively, who supplied these local Perugian photographers with these images that they appear to have peddled?

With so many photographers at the scene of the murder, it appears that 1 was tasked to help collect evidence. I guess maybe due to budget cuts?
Hmmm...
RW

 

[Fine]

Ah yes. Thank you.

So I wonder exactly how many photographers were tramping through this place? Alternatively, who supplied these local Perugian photographers with these images that they appear to have peddled?

___________________

Diocletus,

You're right, the photograph I first posted could have been taken through a window, not from within the cottage. Here's a similar photograph taken by another photo-journalist who also exhibited at the Perugian Exhibition during March, 2010, Giancarlo Belfiore: Here. Still, the "bloody bathroom" photo--- and other copyrighted crime scene photos--- must have been taken from inside the cottage.

It could be that the Perugian cops hire local photo-journalists--- as needed--- which would save them money by not having to employ a full-time photographer. If that's the case, the photographers may retain some proprietary interest in their photographs.

ADDED: I believe that Machiavelli suggested this upstream.

///

 

[davefoc]

This is a slight digression but Machiavelli has been asked several times what his theory of the crime is. How were RS/AK involved? His usual reply is something to the effect that he has already described that at length other places.

Does anybody know what he believes with regard to this? And failing that what do guilters generally believe happened? Is it along the Nancy Grace idea of actual physical involvement?

 

[Justinian2]

Wow! The momentum of this thread is incredible!

I do wonder if Amanda will recover enough from interviews to pay her legal fees.

Did the hyper negligent Anthony Casey mess things up by causing the media to stop paying for interviews?

 

[Didaktylos]

___________________

Diocletus,

You're right, the photograph I first posted could have been taken through a window, not from within the cottage. Here's a similar photograph taken by another photo-journalist who also exhibited at the Perugian Exhibition during March, 2010, Giancarlo Belfiore: Here. Still, the "bloody bathroom" photo--- and other copyrighted crime scene photos--- must have been taken from inside the cottage.

It could be that the Perugian cops hire local photo-journalists--- as needed--- which would save them money by not having to employ a full-time photographer. If that's the case, the photographers may retain some proprietary interest in their photographs.

///

... or even, they take more pictures than the police specifically require, which the police do not offically have knowledge of.

 

[smkovalinksy]

This is a slight digression but one of the things that Machiavelli has been asked about several times what his theory of the crime is. How were RS/AK involved? His usual reply is something to the effect that he has already described that at length other places.

Does anybody know what he believes with regard to this? And failing that what do guilters actually believe happened? Is it along the Nancy Grace idea of actual physical involvement?

Do not know specifically what Machiavelli thinks, but one thing which really surprised me at PMF last night:
A new poster set forth their theory that AK and RS probably failed to protect Kercher from their out-of-control pal Guede, and thus, were justly given 4 years - and nothing more- for failing to protect their friend, and cleaning up - while Guede himself justly remains behind in prison.

Incidentally, this is the ONLY theory which I ever gave even the slightest passing credence to. (that is, once I no longer believed the initial sex-game-gone-wrong theory originally proposed in the media).

What surprised me: The PMFers would have none of it: They believe still in Amanda as ring leader. A few, that RS and AK were at least egging on, and physically involved. Many argue for the idea that Knox wielded the knife ( examples of women in Great Britain who have stabbed other women are cited at great length by a PMF poster - of course, what they fail to talk about is nearly all these cases involved either: a. a woman going after her cheating husband's mistress or b. a lesbian couple in a messy break-up - neither of which can be applied to the Knox/Kercher scenario.)

 

[smkovalinksy]

Additionally, many "guilters" seem to believe that Knox had taken cocaine or ectasy on the night in question, and not simply smoked pot as she claimed, thus acting as an incendiary device which led her to spontaneously commit murder.

 

[Skind]

I've also seen a few guilters claim that Knox was using PCP, and was wasted all week including during all the police interviews and the final illegal interogation.

Quite how a totally wasted person could both pre-plan a murder and act spontaniously, and perform a highly specific clean-up with an incredibly high accuracy not found in other known clean-ups, is never fully explained.

 

[Grinder]

Pilot,

please, please, please explain how could Amanda tell them what they knew to be correct, when in fact it was false, without the police creating that "truth" for her?

do you believe that she just happened to come up with a false story that matched what the police already knew to be correct?

the interrogation is the lynch-pin for the entire guilt argument. without it there are no lies and absolutely no case.

 

[Grinder]

Mach,

If Amanda were to tell what happened to her the night of the interrogation on US TV would she be exposing herself to more Italian legal action?

Put another way, is she allowed to defend herself against the calunnia and defamation charges?

If she were to go to Italy and deny she lied about her treatment, can she charged with yet another calunnia or some such offense?

 

[smkovalinksy]

I've also seen a few guilters claim that Knox was using PCP, and was wasted all week including during all the police interviews and the final illegal interogation.

Quite how a totally wasted person could both pre-plan a murder and act spontaniously, and perform a highly specific clean-up with an incredibly high accuracy not found in other known clean-ups, is never fully explained.

Yes, there is no explanation because they want it both ways. And it can't be both ways.

 

[Fine]

... or even, they take more pictures than the police specifically require, which the police do not offically have knowledge of.

___________________________

Didaktylos,

Speaking of which..............a very interesting mystery photograph of deceased Sarah Scazzi has been printed in a newspaper, but apparently no such photograph exists in the prosecutor's file. The (two page) story is HERE.

The photograph is HERE

///