Continuation Part Six: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[Grinder]

.
When I was a kid, my pals and I climbed just about anything that was climbable. We did not need instruction and technique, we just did it. It was instinctive and compelling, a throwback to our roots I guess. I think most boys are natural little monkeys.
.

look at the move - you think that there is no learned skills for rock climbing?

I climbed plenty of things and to the exasperation of my SO still do but I never made a move like that climber.

The lawyer didn't do anything like the climber. He did it like the vast majority of people would.

Anyway I think the window climb is a little harder than others, so be it.

 

[Mary_H]

One cannot improve on the truth, which is that this knife was not the murder weapon. IMO everyone with a trace of common sense already knew that. That is why the prosecution objected to further tests during the first appeal, especially tests that would open up the handle of the knife and sample the area where blood would likely have seeped, had it actually been a murder weapon.<snip>

Since when has it mattered what everyone with a trace of common sense knows? The fact that this knife got as far as the Supreme Court should scare us half to death. The more "science" is applied to it, the more people take it seriously, when it never should have been allowed into evidence in the first place.

 

[Grinder]

I've asked before and if someone answered I missed it. From what do we know that C&V stays as valid? I'm not in any way saying it doesn't stay in, but I haven't seen a reliable source.

Obviously, if the C&V report remains and the court considers it with as much weight as Stefanoni's then the evidence of the DNA is not serious, precise, and consistent.

The DNA was never judged to be starch regardless of how often people want to repeat it. Recent written reports not withstanding. Those were just written by someone not competent.

The C&V report must, if it is still in, be used only as one report and the judges must decide. They are not permitted to default to the C&V because they were independent .

Clearly the PGP wanted it to be Meredith's DNA. This was to be the second confirming test even though it was found at a different location. Thoughtless wrote in her book that it would be like a second test and that the C&V report was wrong. Wonder if she will concede that this doesn't confirm

 

[Bill Williams]

Since when has it mattered what everyone with a trace of common sense knows? The fact that this knife got as far as the Supreme Court should scare us half to death. The more "science" is applied to it, the more people take it seriously, when it never should have been allowed into evidence in the first place.

Ok - this part I agree with.

Apparently Section 12 of the ISC motivations report about DNA is being touted as completely dangerous to Italian law, IF Italian law follows precedents as set. It's the equivalent of finding scientists guilty of not predicting earthquakes or saying that women cannot be raped if their jeans are tight enough.

In my opinion, that knife was never meant to make it to court, which makes it all the more scary it made it to Rome's highest court! It was meant to scare Raffaele - the police were signalling to him in Nov 2007 that if he did not cooperate, like Lumumba did, they'd throw the whole shooting match at him, too.

Which is what happened. I firmly believe that Mignini did not think that Raffaele would make it to trial, except as a prosecution witness ratting out Knox. Then the knife (perhaps) would not even be needed.

Raffaele called Mignini's bluff, and it took until Oct 11, 2013, for Mignini, perhaps, to feel the full weight of his own gamble-gone-horribly-wrong.

Maybe Machiavelli and Andrea Vogt will join Mr. Mignini in seeking asylum somewhere..... I hear Syria is nice this time of year, eh Billy?

 

[Mary_H]

Never mind.

 

[Bill Williams]

I've asked before and if someone answered I missed it. From what do we know that C&V stays as valid? I'm not in any way saying it doesn't stay in, but I haven't seen a reliable source.

Obviously, if the C&V report remains and the court considers it with as much weight as Stefanoni's then the evidence of the DNA is not serious, precise, and consistent.

The DNA was never judged to be starch regardless of how often people want to repeat it. Recent written reports not withstanding. Those were just written by someone not competent.

The C&V report must, if it is still in, be used only as one report and the judges must decide. They are not permitted to default to the C&V because they were independent .

Clearly the PGP wanted it to be Meredith's DNA. This was to be the second confirming test even though it was found at a different location. Thoughtless wrote in her book that it would be like a second test and that the C&V report was wrong. Wonder if she will concede that this doesn't confirm

Grinder - for me, I am making a blind assumption. What little I know of my own country's law and legal practise - which is almost nil, really.... so consider the source....

.... I know that although cases are sometimes overturned at appeal, or where a new trial is ordered, that does not necessarily trash all the evidence. In my not-to-be-trusted-opinion the Italian system is superior in the sense that the courts actually do write motivations reports explaining why they decided as they did - and in this case, the ISC did give direction to the lower, de novo appeal court.

They said, "review the knife" and (I think) said nothing about C&V. If Nencini's court is independent, then unless Nencini says something then I assume C&V stands. It's the equivalent of what Zanetti said at the start of the first appeals' trial, "All we know for sure is that someone is dead."

That alone signalled that Stefanoni's work, ratified by Massei, was severely in trouble. There's actually been nothing since which has even remotely sustained Stefanoni's results - in any courtroom or in any lab around the world.

So... that's the best I can do from way up here in the cheap seats. We may not hear anything about C&V at trial, but my bet is that Nencini will HAVE TO say something about it in his eventual motivations report. Esp. if Nencini ends up convicting the pair - he'll have to at least say something like, "C&V was thrown out implicitly with the ISC's quashing of the acquittals."

Or this could be like Italy.... and C&V will simply never be referred to again.

 

[LondonJohn]

I've asked before and if someone answered I missed it. From what do we know that C&V stays as valid? I'm not in any way saying it doesn't stay in, but I haven't seen a reliable source.

Obviously, if the C&V report remains and the court considers it with as much weight as Stefanoni's then the evidence of the DNA is not serious, precise, and consistent.

The DNA was never judged to be starch regardless of how often people want to repeat it. Recent written reports not withstanding. Those were just written by someone not competent.

The C&V report must, if it is still in, be used only as one report and the judges must decide. They are not permitted to default to the C&V because they were independent .

Clearly the PGP wanted it to be Meredith's DNA. This was to be the second confirming test even though it was found at a different location. Thoughtless wrote in her book that it would be like a second test and that the C&V report was wrong. Wonder if she will concede that this doesn't confirm

C&V stays as valid. So does all the other additional evidence and testimony admitted to the Hellmann appeal. It's all added to the corpus of evidence/testimony from the Massei trial (and all the pre-trial hearings), and is appended by the "new new" evidence and testimony at this new appeal.

Therefore, the defence teams and the court will be able to reference the C/V report regarding its conclusions on the credibility/reliability of Meredith's DNA sample on the knife. Added to this will now be the Carabinieri's report on 36I. And C&V (and quite possibly also the Carabinieri report) will also be used as reference for the massive incompetence and malpractice involved in Stefanoni's work (all the way from her breathtakingly bad scene-of-crime efforts, right through to her ineptitude and dissembling around the testing/interpretation of the forensic samples).

 

[LondonJohn]

It being an interesting day in the evolution of the case, I decided to have a gander at pro-guilt commentary. And amidst all the predictable rationalisation around the 36I issue, I also noticed something peculiar (and rather amusing) relating to a certain anonymous letter...

So, here's the situation: A letter was sent - apparently anonymously - to a number of named recipients (the Hellmann Court, C&V and a local newspaper), dated 20 September 2011. The letter is a long numbered list of the failings of Stefanoni and the forensics team, and purports to come from a lab technician. Here's an English translation copy of the letter (the original was in Italian):

http://www.raffaelesollecito.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/LetterAppealCourt.pdf

Now, it appears that a pro-guilt commentator searched the metadata of that document, and made the "astonishing revelation" that the document was in fact written by no less than Sollecito himself! Cue lots of uproarious laughter from other pro-guilt commentators, alongside the obvious outrage-filled declarations of his (Sollecito's) stupidity, duplicity and slyness at trying to pass off his own writings as "anonymous".

But guess what? The metadata on that file shows that it was indeed created by Sollecito, but that it was both created AND last amended at exactly the same time: 10:59:48 PM on 12th July 2013. That in itself tells the first part of the story - this was either a cut-and-paste into a new document or (more likely) a conversion of another document into a .pdf file. Either way, it quite clearly is NOT the original document - it's never been edited or amended after having been created.

However, the much more relevant (and hilarious) factor relates to that date. Remember that the date in the metadata was 12th July 2013. Now, not only was the letter itself dated 20th September 2011 (which could obviously be corroborated by any of the receiving parties, most easily the newspaper), but a software copy of the original Italian letter is reported as having appeared on Sollecito's own Facebook page in this post by RoseMontague on IA:

http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.o...p=106881&sid=6513b8fa70a3d69d2b810e7fde99c6e4

Note the date of that post: it's 8th July 2013. IN OTHER WORDS, BEFORE THE DATE ON THE METADATA OF THE FILE CREATED/EDITED BY SOLLECITO.

So Sollecito must indeed be a computer genius if he can reverse time in order to post a letter on his FB page BEFORE he's even created it

Rational conclusion: there is NO reason to suggest that Sollecito is the original author of that letter. Instead, the evidence shows nothing more than that 1) Sollecito created a .pdf of the English translation of the letter, and that 2) this .pdf was itself only created AFTER the letter was already provably in the public domain.

Oh.... (as they say)...... dear

 

[christianahannah]

Look for times when Andrea has actually said something favourable, really, to Amanda. Forget about Raffaele... I sometimes wonder if Raffaele really exists in Andrea's universe.

I haven't seen a slant favorably or unfavorably to Amanda or Raffaele in her articles. She reports on what she covers or hears concerning this case (and other news not related to this case). It may be that it is the person who reads her articles who puts a favorable or unfavorable slant on it to Amanda and Raffaele.

Take the bit about not finding anything pointing to Meredith on the knife. Andrea goes on - objective journalist that she is - to not only speculate about another acquittal, but also about a conviction on reduced charges....

Well she does appear to cover all bases from acquittal to conviction. How else can she speculate on that? She cannot read the minds of the judges of the court. Who knows what weight they will give the knife depending on the results, plus any other evidence entered into the case file by both the defense and prosecution over the course of these trials.

Really? The knife that has been since Nov 6th, 2007, a pillar of the prosecution case gets thrown out and the best Vogt can do, as a neutral commentator, is include "conviction on reduced charges"?

That knife was tested by Stefanoni and we were told there was no possibility of contamination (why? Because acc. to Judge Massei Stefanoni would not lie) and if it is now thrown out - there is going to be no investigation against the cops as to how it has been allowed to be IN the case for so long?

How would Vogt know what will be done in the future should the knife be dismissed? I imagine if there is an investigation concerning the knife she will report on that. As far as Massei there might have been a wee more he considered than just Stefanoni saying such and such was so.

The Kerchers deserve better. Justice deserves better. Raffaele and Amanda deserve better.

My hope is that whatever decision is reached the motivation behind it and the evidence admitted or not admitted will leave little or no doubt that it was a just and correct decision. I honestly don't know if that can be achieved to the satisfaction and agreement of all.

The former update from AV pointed to McCall's website as an important resource in this area. Really? It has claims on that website that were debunked even by Judge Massei, the original convicting judge

I think she wrote specifically to the English translated transcripts on that site. I have visited that part of the site to read the transcripts (they are not original documents but are formatted easy to read in both Italian and English). I have not read the other part of the site so I will have to take your word as to its accuracy.

For some reason there are some people who are simply going to advance the original prosecution case come hell or high water, regardless of what the courts say, and regardless of what experts in their fields (criminal profiling, DNA, etc.) say.

And they will fight a rear guard action for all they're worth (cf. Machiavelli 1 and 2) against the notion that Mr. Mignini once touted a Satanic rite theory of this crime.

We know google translate and the British tabloids and some of the American media say this about Mignini but did he actually say it? And was this same reported in the Italian media or court documents?

That, I believe, is what they think of as Mr. Mignini's Achilles Heel. You see, they are defending Mr. Mignini not only from the embarrassment and possible criminal process to follow regarding his wrongful prosecution of Knox and Sollecito, but also the Spezi/Preston thing going all the way back to Narducci. Mignini himself has said his troubles started with the Narducci case.

Andrea Vogt could not be more unbalanced as a "neutral" blogger. To me her agenda is clear.

It might be that those who defend Mignini do so because what has been said about him is false and they know that. As far as The Narducci case or what will happen to Mignini concerning Amanda and Raffaele that is something that will have to wait for the future.

We disagree on Vogt but that is okay. Not that I think everything she writes is correct just that I don't think she has an agenda or is the PR person for the prosecution. And thank you for taking the time to answer my question.

 

[Kaosium]

It being an interesting day in the evolution of the case, I decided to have a gander at pro-guilt commentary. And amidst all the predictable rationalisation around the 36I issue, I also noticed something peculiar (and rather amusing) relating to a certain anonymous letter...

So, here's the situation: A letter was sent - apparently anonymously - to a number of named recipients (the Hellmann Court, C&V and a local newspaper), dated 20 September 2011. The letter is a long numbered list of the failings of Stefanoni and the forensics team, and purports to come from a lab technician. Here's an English translation copy of the letter (the original was in Italian):

http://www.raffaelesollecito.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/LetterAppealCourt.pdf

Now, it appears that a pro-guilt commentator searched the metadata of that document, and made the "astonishing revelation" that the document was in fact written by no less than Sollecito himself! Cue lots of uproarious laughter from other pro-guilt commentators, alongside the obvious outrage-filled declarations of his (Sollecito's) stupidity, duplicity and slyness at trying to pass off his own writings as "anonymous".

But guess what? The metadata on that file shows that it was indeed created by Sollecito, but that it was both created AND last amended at exactly the same time: 10:59:48 PM on 12th July 2013. That in itself tells the first part of the story - this was either a cut-and-paste into a new document or (more likely) a conversion of another document into a .pdf file. Either way, it quite clearly is NOT the original document - it's never been edited or amended after having been created.

However, the much more relevant (and hilarious) factor relates to that date. Remember that the date in the metadata was 12th July 2013. Now, not only was the letter itself dated 20th September 2011 (which could obviously be corroborated by any of the receiving parties, most easily the newspaper), but a software copy of the original Italian letter is reported as having appeared on Sollecito's own Facebook page in this post by RoseMontague on IA:

http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.o...p=106881&sid=6513b8fa70a3d69d2b810e7fde99c6e4

Note the date of that post: it's 8th July 2013. IN OTHER WORDS, BEFORE THE DATE ON THE METADATA OF THE FILE CREATED/EDITED BY SOLLECITO.

So Sollecito must indeed be a computer genius if he can reverse time in order to post a letter on his FB page BEFORE he's even created it

Rational conclusion: there is NO reason to suggest that Sollecito is the original author of that letter. Instead, the evidence shows nothing more than that 1) Sollecito created a .pdf of the English translation of the letter, and that 2) this .pdf was itself only created AFTER the letter was already provably in the public domain.

Oh.... (as they say)...... dear

I don't get it, this letter was originally sent on 20 September, 2011. Raffaele was still in prison. Considering the surveillance they were under in prison, both having conversations they had with family and letters they wrote show up in the papers or court, there's little chance Raffaele could send out a bunch of 'anonymous' letters to court officials and the like.

I'm not sure I follow all the technical details but it sounds like Raffaele just got a copy of the letter, either from it being sent to him by the author or seeing it in the newspapers, and put it on his facebook page.

ETA: This letter stirred a memory so I went back and lo and behold here's where a report on it was posted in the thread. If I understood your post correctly you were saying there were bunnies who thought Raffaele had written the letter because almost two years later he posted it to his facebook page.

Are they really that stupid?

 

[RandyN]

But that's impossible. You see, this knife was washed with bleach. Well, except for the numerous places where DNA turns out to be. And also all the crud from food preparation.

Maybe it was washed with some sort of blood-removing, DNA-preserving stuff? And then they put some food on it? I don't know. It's so confusing.

Its called Crime Klean, a magic blood remover with special additives that allow for selective DNA removal...all leaving other DNA untouched, oh and food is not cleaned off either...I hear they stock this at Quintinvales Market and Kebab Shop.

 

[Bill Williams]

I haven't seen a slant favorably or unfavorably to Amanda or Raffaele in her articles. She reports on what she covers or hears concerning this case (and other news not related to this case). It may be that it is the person who reads her articles who puts a favorable or unfavorable slant on it to Amanda and Raffaele.

Wow. She was the reporter who uncritically passed on the "I was there" statement, that Knox said in a secretly recorded conversation between Knox and her mother. The plain meaning of the comment is Knox telling her mother she'd been at Raffaele's. Vogt reported that it was a confession, that Knox had secretly confessed to her mother that she'd been at the cottage at the time of the murder. Vogt never corrected that report.

This is only one of many examples. Vogt's blog also contains a section on "Knox's book inconsistencies", as if faulty memory on trivia somehow places her also at the crime scene. Vogt also reported repeatedly on the fairness of the Otalian system. Perhaps the system IS fair and unbalanced in the main in favour of the accused, but that's NOT the case here.

Vogt regularly reports on the latest from Mignini, not even so much from others who prosecuted the case. For me, and perhaps my own bias is clear, it is simply unarguable that Andrea Vogt is a virtual press agent for Mignini, not even so much for the case against Knox.

How would Vogt know what will be done in the future should the knife be dismissed? I imagine if there is an investigation concerning the knife she will report on that. As far as Massei there might have been a wee more he considered than just Stefanoni saying such and such was so.

The trouble with reading the Massei motivations report is that Massei's own reasoning is exactly that, about Stefanoni. Acc. to Massei Stefanoni would not lie, which is not exactly what the defence was claiming. They claimed that she erred, not that she lied. Massei's response right there in the report is that he has no reason to think she'd lie... and for him it is not even a matter of Stefanoni actually proving she'd followed protocols - esp. when the video from the Scientific Police itself shows they did not.

Massei is the origin of the reversal of burden of proof - they have to prove that Stefanoni lied - or erred, all the while not forcing Stefanoni to turn over the EDFs for instance, so that the defence perhaps COULD prove error.

My hope is that whatever decision is reached the motivation behind it and the evidence admitted or not admitted will leave little or no doubt that it was a just and correct decision. I honestly don't know if that can be achieved to the satisfaction and agreement of all.

Agreed. My secret hope is that the Kerchers find closure and peace.

I think she wrote specifically to the English translated transcripts on that site. I have visited that part of the site to read the transcripts (they are not original documents but are formatted easy to read in both Italian and English). I have not read the other part of the site so I will have to take your word as to its accuracy.

"McCall" the wiki editor, and Peggy Ganong (webmaster of .ORG) had a recent back and forth claiming for themselves the term "guilter". Of course, that by itself does not directly speak to "accuracy", but "McCall's" site is the basis for thinking the two guilty. The specifics are too numerous to mention.

I haven't looked at it recently, but my bet is that the wiki did not amend its "facts" after the Channel 5 documentary showed the climb into Filomena's window was doable. And it probably will not rule out the kitchen knife based on today's DNA-forensics about it. It's a guilter site, and will not change even if the pair are re-acquitted.

We know google translate and the British tabloids and some of the American media say this about Mignini but did he actually say it? And was this same reported in the Italian media or court documents?

Machiavelli here on JREF claims to have the documents, and won't post them. Machiavelli is one who vigourously defends Mignini on the "Satanic Rite" point, yet won't post the very data he says clears Mignini on this one point. Whatever it says, it is clear Mignini spent a lot of time early on drawing connections between the murder and Nov 1 as "day of the dead", and Mignini most certainly called the murder a "home-made rite" based on the date.

Make of that what you will. The real mystery is why Mignini did not vigourously deny this in 2008 when the press first covered it. Here it is 2013 and Mignini only now is writing letters to the editor denying it.

It might be that those who defend Mignini do so because what has been said about him is false and they know that. As far as The Narducci case or what will happen to Mignini concerning Amanda and Raffaele that is something that will have to wait for the future.

Not really. Mignini himself has said that his problems only started with the Narducci case, the very problems that have plagued him through the Kercher murder cases. And if the things said about Mignini are false, why do his (few) supporters not simply provide the evidence? That one is the real poser.

We disagree on Vogt but that is okay. Not that I think everything she writes is correct just that I don't think she has an agenda or is the PR person for the prosecution. And thank you for taking the time to answer my question.

And thank you for taking your time as well.... It's actually not that important .... but how will AV "spin" today's news? Will we even hear from Machiavelli again, to tell us why today's events are actually damning of Amanda Knox!

That one will be strange to see....

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>ETA: This letter stirred a memory so I went back and lo and behold here's where a report on it was posted in the thread. If I understood your post correctly you were saying there were bunnies who thought Raffaele had written the letter because almost two years later he posted it to his facebook page.

Are they really that stupid?

Yes.

(Isn't it weird to go back and read those pages from a couple years ago? In some cases, I find myself having written things I have little or no memory of.)

 

[acbytesla]

I don't see that a failure confirm Kercher's DNA is categorically exculpatory.

Why couldn't the first finding be correct and the second finding be correct. There was Kercher DNA on the knife where Stefanoni detected it in a small quantity and there wasn't DNA on the knife where the samples used in the recent test was done.

Of course, the failure to be able to duplicate Stefanoni's results is a strong point for the defense especially given the questionable nature of the collection and testing of the knife. But there is already a very strong case that the defendants are innocent and that hasn't done anything to halt a prosecution spanning many years. Is the case for the defense that much stronger with the reported result (albeit reported so far in a questionable way).

The reality of the knife was always extremely suspect. How it and only it out of countless knives at both the cottage and Raffaele's flat is the only one of three knives tested for DNA. The other two being Raffaele's pocket knives. Which you can understand being tested. (they both had nothing on them that is suspect) The knife does not match most of the wounds on Meredith and the knife does not match the knife stain that was created by the killer on her bedding.

It is absurd to think that particular knife was used in Meredith's homicide given those facts.

 

[Mary_H]

The reality of the knife was always extremely suspect. How it and only it out of countless knives at both the cottage and Raffaele's flat is the only one of three knives tested for DNA. The other two being Raffaele's pocket knives. Which you can understand being tested. (they both had nothing on them that is suspect) The knife does not match most of the wounds on Meredith and the knife does not match the knife stain that was created by the killer on her bedding.

It is absurd to think that particular knife was used in Meredith's homicide given those facts.

You know that and we know that, but are the courts willing to admit it?

From Corriere della Sera

This is the indication which is emerging from the expert investigation of the Rome RIS. Further investigations are foreseen. There are said to be elements that lead to hypothesize the presence of Amanda Knox' DNA on the trace found, but until now not examined, on the knife with which Meredith Kercher was killed. This is the indication which is emerging from the expert investigation of the RIS in Rome, assigned by the Florence Court which is conducting the second appeal.

http://www.corriere.it/cronache/13_...lo-c5457fcc-32a5-11e3-b846-b6f7405b68a1.shtml

That's PMF.ugh's translation, btw.

 

[acbytesla]

look at the move - you think that there is no learned skills for rock climbing?

I climbed plenty of things and to the exasperation of my SO still do but I never made a move like that climber.

The lawyer didn't do anything like the climber. He did it like the vast majority of people would.

Anyway I think the window climb is a little harder than others, so be it.

I am by no means a rock climber and I never have been Grinder. There is little doubt that experienced rock climbers develop skills that are unique. That said, the climb would be easy for someone of Rudy's athleticism and body frame. Rudy being both fairly tall, and thin and I'm sure fairly strong. I have never thought that would be difficult of someone like Rudy. If he was built like a an American football where he was strong and heavy, the probably couldn't have scaled it. But of course he wasn't.

 

[Kaosium]

You know that and we know that, but are the courts willing to admit it?

From Corriere della Sera

This is the indication which is emerging from the expert investigation of the Rome RIS. Further investigations are foreseen. There are said to be elements that lead to hypothesize the presence of Amanda Knox' DNA on the trace found, but until now not examined, on the knife with which Meredith Kercher was killed. This is the indication which is emerging from the expert investigation of the RIS in Rome, assigned by the Florence Court which is conducting the second appeal.

http://www.corriere.it/cronache/13_...lo-c5457fcc-32a5-11e3-b846-b6f7405b68a1.shtml

That's PMF.ugh's translation, btw.

Here's how it comes out with Google translate:

[ Explore the meaning of the term : There would be elements that would suggest the presence of the DNA of Amanda Knox found on the track , and so far examined , the blade of the knife in Raffaele Sollecito's house seized by the prosecution considered the weapon with which he was killed Meredith Kercher. It is an indication that is emerging from the expertise of the police of the Ris of Rome, appointed by the Court of Florence, which is celebrating the appeal a.

RELIABLE RESULTS - The exams began on Thursday and continued throughout the day on Friday , in the presence of the consultants of the parties. For the final outcome , however, need further investigation . The results will then be displayed in a report , which will be filed by the end of October and discussed in class on November 6. The track was identified by the experts named in the appeal trial in Perugia , but not subjected to analysis because it was considered not susceptible to 'correct amplification , being a low copy number . " That is an amount of DNA that " it can not ensure reliable results ." The same criterion led to believe unreliable giving the Kercher another track of DNA found on the blade. The experts of the courts of second instance instead believed correct identification of Knox 's DNA on the handle of the knife: Amanda at the time was engaged to Sollecito and therefore normally used its objects cucina.Dopo the annulment by the Supreme Court of acquittals Amando Knox and Sollecito , in the appeal in a course in Florence , the judges ordered a new appraisal . At Ris were asked to determine if the track has not examined were analyzed and , if so, whether it was due to the victim or Rudy Guede , already sentenced to 16 years in prison. The facts disclosed would lead instead to the genetic code of Knox.

The DEFENDERS - No comments from the defenders of the accused, waiting to hear the official results of the assessment. The lawyers Luciano Ghirga and Luca Maori , Sollecito and Knox 's lawyers , you are in fact limited to make it clear that they would be satisfied if the rumors were confirmed on the attribution of the young Seattle. "If correspond to true - said the Kercher family lawyer , the lawyer Francesco Maresca - it is confirmed that the knife is passed into the hands of Amanda , being satisfied that the survey had to be completed and that it was instead left unfinished " ( source USA ) ] There would be elements that would suggest the presence of the DNA of Amanda Knox found on the track , and so far examined , the blade of the knife in Raffaele Sollecito's house seized by the prosecution considered the weapon with which she was killed Meredith Kercher . It is an indication that is emerging from the expertise of the police of the Ris of Rome, appointed by the Court of Florence, which is celebrating the appeal a.

In the google version it comes across as more them saying the knife the prosecution 'considered' to be the murdered knife, kind of like saying 'the alleged murder knife' instead of the more definite 'knife with which Meredith Kercher was killed.'

 

[RWVBWL]

I am by no means a rock climber and I never have been Grinder. There is little doubt that experienced rock climbers develop skills that are unique. That said, the climb would be easy for someone of Rudy's athleticism and body frame. Rudy being both fairly tall, and thin and I'm sure fairly strong. I have never thought that would be difficult of someone like Rudy. If he was built like a an American football where he was strong and heavy, the probably couldn't have scaled it. But of course he wasn't.

Where there's a will there's a way.
Hard to believe the many, many different contortions I see dudes go thru just trying to get that lil' basketball thru that hole...

Hard to believe that some still can not realize how easy it is for somebody athletic+limber to climb up to a window when the rent is due...

 

[acbytesla]

Where there's a will there's a way.
Hard to believe the many, many different contortions I see dudes go thru just trying to get that lil' basketball thru that hole...

Hard to believe that some still can not realize how easy it is for somebody athletic+limber to climb up to a window when the rent is due...

Have to agree 100 percent

 

[RWVBWL]

Guede's rent was due that day.

I wonder how much of that 320 Euro he had ready to pay his landlord?
I wonder if his landlord stopped by to collect the rent that day from Guede+The Spanish gals?

While Amanda helped Filomena wrap a birthday present and Meredith slept off her late night out the night before on Halloween, I wonder if Guede was a little stressed:
How the **** am I gonna pay this months rent?