• 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 Six: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Supernaut said:
Worth re-iterating, thanks.

You'd think this is rocket surgery, the way it's sometimes discussed, when it couldn't be more facile.

Facile it may be, but still beyond Rinaldi and the suckers who bought his crap.

(Or was Rinaldi just a lying liar?)
Click to expand...
Rinaldi got the shoes right, his conclusions about the bare footprints are... questionable...
 
LondonJohn said:
In the circumstances, I think that a visit was inappropriate and inconsiderate. I would proffer that view even if Sollecito had told me privately and in confidence that he had made the visit.
Click to expand...


I don't think it makes a bit of difference. The haters are already attacking them for not showing sympathy that Meredith was dead. How many of the "Meredith first / remember Meredith" crowd have visited her grave. At least Amanda and Raffaele had actually shared a short part of Meredith's life. Their moral right to give final respect to their friend far exceeds your own morbid interest.

Have we got the details of how this event became public many months after the fact? Raffaele had apparently shared this only with his father. How did the issue come up in the Father's interview?


Apart from the very principle of the thing, there were practical considerations too: what if someone else present in the cemetery at the same time had taken photographs of Sollecito at the grave site and published them? What if one of Meredith's family or close friends had happened to visit the grave at the same time?
Click to expand...


I don't think you would have even formed an opinion of the principle if the haters hadn't made a big deal about it. A quick scan of unrelated cases show a mixed bag from restraining orders keeping suspects away to court ordered mandatory annual visits.

Do you have nothing to say about the sort of person that would stake out a grave site to take pictures of the visitors?
 
Charlie Wilkes said:
There's a reason why they followed up the luminol with the TMB. They get a lot more false positives than false negatives, and if they're not sure, they can use morphology, which they didn't bother to do in this case because they realized it was crap. But they used it in court anyway, because they needed something and they didn't have anything that wasn't crap.

Machiavelli can take advantage of the fact that none of us are experts to post luminol drivel that experts would ridicule. Leila did the same thing with her cargo cult DNA analysis on IIP, until DNA experts joined the discussion.

I've got a stack of crime books that mention luminol and Kastle-Meyer red herrings. The few cases where these tests are useful involve crime scenes where a body was removed, or where someone mopped an entire kitchen/bathroom to remove all the visible blood evidence. And the police damn well have lab work that proves it is blood.
Click to expand...

I know Charlie, but it bothers me that Grinder or anyone takes this tack of dismissing the negative TMB test. The fact is that scientists including Stefanoni (I guess I'm using this term loosely today) respect the TMB test and that is why they perform it.

If Stefanoni thought for any reason that the TMB produced a false negative it would be incumbent upon her to do the necessary testing to make that conclusion.

Instead, Stefanoni proved herself to be a shill and a whore. She sold herself and her integrity as a scientist. Grinder makes me angry because he is playing games. He is allowing the prosecution the right to argue that it is blood with highly doubtful evidence. I expect that from Machiavelli, I don't expect it from Grinder.
 
RoseMontague said:
Yes. Let me ask you. Do you think the shoes shown in this CCTV screen capture are Nike Outbreak 2's?
Click to expand...

While I agree that the picture is too small to identify what kind of shoe the person is wearing, I have to say, as an addicted fan of Nike shoes, that Outbreak 2's very often come in bright colours and white(or mostly white) is definitely the most common one used in this particular type of Nike shoes. This is far from expert testimony though, just my two cents.
 
Methos said:
Rinaldi got the shoes right, his conclusions about the bare footprints are... questionable...
Click to expand...

Yeh - he figgered out the shoes were Nikes.

Jeenius. Just Jeenius.

All he had to do was figger out which kind of Nikes.

That required REAL eksperteez, which he didn't have, apparently.

Foot prints - well, that's a whole other area of eksperteez.
 
Surely the story in this Daily Mail piece is that there are two people innocent, who now at trial are virtually being proven innocent of a horrible crime....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2487148/Amanda-Knox-bares-soul-Raffaele-Sollecito-seen-prison-letter.html

But in true tabloid fashion once again the true victim Meredith Kercher is relegated to obscurity while the paper focusses in on a 2 year old letter.....

And people have the gall to blame Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito for this...

Nick Pisa just can't help himself in sluttifying a piece which should be proving people's innocence of crime.

However, even in this piece.... these are the facts Pisa himself reports:

It was revealed last week that DNA tests on the knife allegedly used to murder Kercher show traces of Amanda Knox but crucially none of the victim, according to a leaked copy of the report.
At the original hearing, the court was told how Knox's DNA was found on the handle and Miss Kercher's DNA on the blade.
However a subsequent hearing ruled DNA traces of the victim were so small they were inconclusive.
Click to expand...

The Daily Mail goes on to have the murder as happening at Raffaele's apartment. Sigh. But then Nick Pisa goes on.....

Forensic experts from the paramilitary Carabinieri carried out new tests at their headquarters in Rome and deposited their 'secret' report at the court in Florence.
The report says that DNA traces from Knox have been found on the knife in the area where the 'blade joins the handle' but no trace of Miss Kercher or Sollecito.
Click to expand...

Maresca makes a non-point... either that or Nick Pisa is now deliberately trying to make the Kercher lawyer look stupid.

Sollecito's lawyer, Luca Maori, said: 'This proves that all Amanda Knox did with that knife is pull it from a drawer in my client's kitchen and simply use it for cooking. There is no trace of Meredith on that knife as we clearly proved at the second hearing.'
Francesco Maresca, who represents the Kercher family from Coulsdon, Surrey, said: 'This shows that Knox used the knife and put together with the other elements, enables us to pursue the responsibility of those accused.'
He added: 'The earlier hearings were told how DNA from Meredith was found on the tip and we will be arguing this point when the trial resumes.'
Click to expand...

It then closes with info about prison guard Raffaele Argiro, "who Knox accused of sexually harassing her, has been ordered to stand trial for abusing another female inmate at Perugia's Capanne Prison where she was held."

Karma is a dish best served cold, even in the world of the Daily Mail.
 
Hopefully there will be a decent coverage of tomorrow's proceeding's on Twitter. It's about to get serious, I guess. I wonder in which way it will all go, how will Nencini express himself and how will the defense act. I really do hope they will be fierce and strong.

Edit:
Hopefully Raffaele's declaration before the court is well prepared and will work in their favour.
 
Last edited:
Grinder said:
Raf hardly spend more time with Meredith than Rudy spent with Amanda. In one case they are friends but in the other they only met once. :p



I think you are a little tough on them.



I object to the anti-gay people showing up at funerals of military dead and I think that the wishes of the family concerning the grave of a loved one trumps the wishes of others. At least they didn't need to make it public.
Click to expand...

I am pretty certain that Rafaelle should not be compared to the Westboro Baptist church. If I were just acquitted of a murder I did not commit I think I might, if a friend had offered me the choice and if I was in the country, go and pay my respects to the victim. I think I would even do it if I thought I might be put into prison again later. It would be a closure of some sort. Perhaps though Amanda Knox may be advised not to until she has the blessing of the Kercher family, even though the PGP community will surely make much of the fact that one does and the other doesn't. I think Amanda Knox put it well when she expressed the desire to mourn Meredith together with the family, though she was pilloried for it (Nick Pisa calling it a "bizarre request" which seems about the most unfair comment you could possibly make, except for all the others that are made).
 
I am going to ask what is probably a dumb question. If the Acquittal was overturned, are AK and RS now considered guilty as per the first trial? If so, by showing upat court , could RS be re-arrested and made to wait in prison until the decision of this court. Sorry , but I'm still a bit confused by this.
 
acbytesla said:
I know it's the lighting Rose :D God..nobody gets me. :confused:

You can't make anything out clearly Rose. The shoes look white but then that could be the lighting.
Click to expand...

Sorry, it was me being dense. I will try harder to get you better. They do seem to have a side shoe logo that could be the Nike one.
 
I don't think they will arrest Raffaele Sollecito. My guess is that they will wait until the SC rules on this, if found guilty at the appeal.
 
Poppy1016 said:
I am going to ask what is probably a dumb question. If the Acquittal was overturned, are AK and RS now considered guilty as per the first trial? If so, by showing upat court , could RS be re-arrested and made to wait in prison until the decision of this court. Sorry , but I'm still a bit confused by this.
Click to expand...

Well first Poppy. AK and RS are NOT considered guilty. They are still just "the accused".

You are right that RS could be re-arrested, but from everything I've read that is extremely unlikely. You could say that RS and AK are out on bail or more correctly on their "OR" own recognizance awaiting trial and verdict. There would only be one reason to arrest RS and that would be that Raffaele would "likely flee" authority. But if RS is willing to show up for a hearing that he was not under any requirement to show up for, why would a judge declare that he is likely to flee?

But hey, this is Italy, where up is down and down is vice-versa.
 
Dan O. said:
I don't think it makes a bit of difference. The haters are already attacking them for not showing sympathy that Meredith was dead. How many of the "Meredith first / remember Meredith" crowd have visited her grave. At least Amanda and Raffaele had actually shared a short part of Meredith's life. Their moral right to give final respect to their friend far exceeds your own morbid interest.

Have we got the details of how this event became public many months after the fact? Raffaele had apparently shared this only with his father. How did the issue come up in the Father's interview?<snip>
Click to expand...

This article is the only one I have taken the time to look at. It doesn't even say that Raffaele's father was the one who talked about the visit. It says the information "emerged" during an Italian TV show, and, in fact, "Mr Sollecito added he had “no details” of his son’s visit to the grave but said his son has always felt huge sympathy for the Kercher family for the loss of Meredith."

It would be ironic if the guilters were the ones who got wind of the visit and informed the show's producers.
 
RoseMontague said:
Sorry, it was me being dense. I will try harder to get you better. They do seem to have a side shoe logo that could be the Nike one.
Click to expand...

Your eyes are better than mine Rose. Or your just seeing things. ;) It looks to me like the person is wearing white shoes or barefoot. That's the only detail I see.

Your point about the lighting is right on though. It makes all the difference in the world. What you are seeing is just as likely to be a shadow as anything else.

I blew the image up with Photoshop, applied filters to it, reversed the values..tried every trick in the book and I still can't make out any detail. Which is exactly what I expected.
 
RoseMontague said:
Sorry, it was me being dense. I will try harder to get you better. They do seem to have a side shoe logo that could be the Nike one.
Click to expand...

The black thing on the right shoe might be a Nike logo, but not the usual one like on Outbreaks. They have a rather small one in the middle of the shoe side, at least most of them. My guess is that is a lightning thing(a shadow maybe?) or maybe colour pattern mixed with Nike logo. And I have always wondered how easier this case would be if we actually could see his face on the camera(dream on).
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
Well first Poppy. AK and RS are NOT considered guilty. They are still just "the accused".

You are right that RS could be re-arrested, but from everything I've read that is extremely unlikely. You could say that RS and AK are out on bail or more correctly on their "OR" own recognizance awaiting trial and verdict. There would only be one reason to arrest RS and that would be that Raffaele would "likely flee" authority. But if RS is willing to show up for a hearing that he was not under any requirement to show up for, why would a judge declare that he is likely to flee?

But hey, this is Italy, where up is down and down is vice-versa.
Click to expand...

Thank you Tesla. I get a bit confused. Is this considered a completely new trial? If so , why is evidence being disallowed? Or is this a new appeal trial ? This is why I asked if they were reverted back to the original guilty verdict. They were still in prison during the first appeal, so there current status seems blurred to me.
 
I think there is more a possibility of being dragged away for questioning related to the slander accusations regarding the book.
 
snook1 said:
The black thing on the right shoe might be a Nike logo, but not the usual one like on Outbreaks. They have a rather small one in the middle of the shoe side, at least most of them. My guess is that is a lightning thing(a shadow maybe?) or maybe colour pattern mixed with Nike logo. And I have always wondered how easier this case would be if we actually could see his face on the camera(dream on).
Click to expand...

A Google search shows there are some white ones with a black swath on the side but these are the newer models of course.
 
RoseMontague said:
Sorry, it was me being dense. I will try harder to get you better. They do seem to have a side shoe logo that could be the Nike one.
Click to expand...

Your eyes are better than mine Rose. Or your just seeing things. ;) It looks to me like the person is wearing white shoes or barefoot. That's the only detail I see.

Your point about the lighting is right on though. It makes all the difference in the world. I blew the image up with Photoshop, applied filters to it, reversed the values..tried every trick in the book and I still can't make out any detail although yes that does look a little like the Nike swoosh on the side of the shoe.

But, what you are seeing is just as likely to be a shadow as anything else. Actually, the persons pant leg. maybe
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom