Who killed Meredith Kercher? part 23

[Bill Williams]

Naseer knows how I feel about him, and he likewise. We've had numerous exchanges over the years. I'm not trying to hide anything. I just won't get into my issues with him here because it's impossible to not come across as personal attacks, which violate the rules.

I am unaware of that turd being a member here. I have never seen the handle "ergon" at this site.

Ergon is a member here. I was once cautioned many moons ago on this very issue.

Ergon goes by a differing handle here, but has never tried to hide the link between that handle and "Ergon". It was similar with "Machiavelli", whose very first post here in 2010 said right up front that he was "Yummi" from the PMF site (now sites").

 

[Bill Williams]

Guede's lawyers said they might appeal to the supreme Court of Cassation. A lawyer for Kercher's family, Francesco Maresca, said "I'd say this story is finished."

< ..... sinister deletia ..... >​

Fabiani said there were no grounds to revise the trial because new evidence had not been presented and Guede's conviction was not incompatible with the acquittal of Knox and Sollecito.
"What has not been proven is that the murder could not be committed without those accomplices", as claimed by Guede in his petition, Fabiani noted.

Of note is that this is not Fabiani denying "multiple attackers". This is Fabiani denying that Rudy's ISC ruling necessitated RS and AK being those extra attackers.

A lot depends on the triple-negative in the account - a triple negative rendered into English when the original is in Italian. Many languages handle the meaning of both double- and triple-negatives. Sometimes even the same language will have regional variations.

We should be careful about trying to be too precise on what the likes of Fabiana means by all this.

Multiple negation is the more general term referring to the occurrence of more than one negative in a clause. In some languages, double negatives cancel one another and produce an affirmative; in other languages, doubled negatives intensify the negation. Languages where multiple negatives affirm each other are said to have negative concord. Portuguese, some non-standard dialects of English, Persian, Russian, Spanish, Neapolitan and Italian are examples of negative-concord languages, while Latin and German do not have negative concord.

 

[LondonJohn]

Of note is that this is not Fabiani denying "multiple attackers". This is Fabiani denying that Rudy's ISC ruling necessitated RS and AK being those extra attackers.

A lot depends on the triple-negative in the account - a triple negative rendered into English when the original is in Italian. Many languages handle the meaning of both double- and triple-negatives. Sometimes even the same language will have regional variations.

We should be careful about trying to be too precise on what the likes of Fabiana means by all this.

Yes.... but in any case (and I'm playing Devil's Advocate here), even if Knox and Sollecito factually HAD been Guede's accomplices and co-participants in the murder, their acquittals would still not be incompatible with Guede's conviction for having committed the murder in participation with others.

Here's a more simplistic example to illustrate the above concept: A woman is raped and killed by Mr A and Mr B, acting together. Mr A is careless and leaves his bloody fingerprints at the scene and his semen on/in the body of the victim. Mr B leaves zero forensic evidence of himself at the scene. It's determined that at least two people must have killed the victim (perhaps a reliable witness saw, from a distance, two men in the shadows attacking the victim). Mr A is tried and convicted of rape and murder (the bloody fingerprints and the semen are enough to safely convict him on their own), and his sentencing report indicates that the court believes he acted in concert with one other man. Mr B is tried and acquitted (there is significantly insufficient evidence of Mr B's participation to allow for a finding of guilt BARD). There is no legal disparity in these two outcomes.


Of course, all of the above is purely hypothetical, in order to illustrate the legal point at issue here. The truth in this particular case is that a) despite the Guede ruling of "multiple attackers" (which, remember, was reached via the bizarre spectacle of all parties in Guede's trial actively NEEDING the court to find for multiple attackers....) this crime was wholly compatible with one man - Guede - acting alone; b) there never was a single piece of credible, reliable evidence pointing to the participation of Knox or Sollecito in the Kercher murder; c) the near-certain truth of the matter is that this was a relatively-simple murder with sexual assault, carried out by Guede alone*, while Knox and Sollecito were indeed together inside Sollecito's apartment during that whole evening and night.


* Guede's intended burglary turned into an unexpected confrontation with Kercher when she arrived home alone, which in turn led to a surge of lust, fuelled by adrenaline and fright within Guede, which led to him forcing Kercher into compliant submission with his knife at her throat, which led to the initiation of Guede's sexual assault of Kercher, which led to Kercher struggling and probably screaming out, which led to Guede stabbing Kercher in the neck

 

[Stacyhs]

Of note is that this is not Fabiani denying "multiple attackers". This is Fabiani denying that Rudy's ISC ruling necessitated RS and AK being those extra attackers.A lot depends on the triple-negative in the account - a triple negative rendered into English when the original is in Italian. Many languages handle the meaning of both double- and triple-negatives. Sometimes even the same language will have regional variations.

We should be careful about trying to be too precise on what the likes of Fabiana means by all this.

Noted. I guess two other people, who left not a shred of forensic evidence behind, must have been the (judicial truth) accomplices. Perhaps they were the two men who left the unidentified DNA on the same bra hook as Raffaele.

 

[Numbers]

Of note is that this is not Fabiani denying "multiple attackers". This is Fabiani denying that Rudy's ISC ruling necessitated RS and AK being those extra attackers.

A lot depends on the triple-negative in the account - a triple negative rendered into English when the original is in Italian. Many languages handle the meaning of both double- and triple-negatives. Sometimes even the same language will have regional variations.

We should be careful about trying to be too precise on what the likes of Fabiana means by all this.

Now, now, Bill, let's not be so negative.

This media article was provided in English by ANSA, and the translation appears to be correctly idiomatic.

But even if the triple negative as understood in "standard" English was not the intent of Fabiana, Guede's request for revision was declared inadmissible by the Florence Court of Appeal. At some point, there will be a motivation report with an explanation, and possibly an appeal to the CSC. Fabiana's or Maresca's opinion is interesting, but the legal document will, of course, be the MR. And Guede could appeal to the CSC to reverse the Court of Appeal's ruling.

 

[bagels]

This is easy, the "others" were Koko and the gang

 

[Bill Williams]

Now, now, Bill, let's not be so negative. This media article was provided in English by ANSA, and the translation appears to be correctly idiomatic.

But even if the triple negative as understood in "standard" English was not the intent of Fabiana, Guede's request for revision was declared inadmissible by the Florence Court of Appeal. At some point, there will be a motivation report with an explanation, and possibly an appeal to the CSC. Fabiana's or Maresca's opinion is interesting, but the legal document will, of course, be the MR. And Guede could appeal to the CSC to reverse the Court of Appeal's ruling.

Please don't say this when I have a mouthful of coffee.... now I have to clean up. Thanks a lot, Numbers!

 

[LondonJohn]

Now, now, Bill, let's not be so negative.

This media article was provided in English by ANSA, and the translation appears to be correctly idiomatic.

But even if the triple negative as understood in "standard" English was not the intent of Fabiana, Guede's request for revision was declared inadmissible by the Florence Court of Appeal. At some point, there will be a motivation report with an explanation, and possibly an appeal to the CSC. Fabiana's or Maresca's opinion is interesting, but the legal document will, of course, be the MR. And Guede could appeal to the CSC to reverse the Court of Appeal's ruling.

If Guede fancies losing more money, yep......

(Incidentally, I cannot see the MR for this one being particularly lengthy - Guede's application manifestly failed, by quite some margin, on both tests for the granting of a revision trial. It shouldn't take the MR long to point this out in sufficient detail to provide adequate legal robustness.)

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Forensic Science Reform book

A new book about the use and misuse of forensics is coming out, edited by Wendy Koen and C. Michael Bowers. Chapter 7 is about DNA and features the Knox/Sollecito case. Chapter 8 (which is coauthored by Kim Lott and myself) is about presumptive and confirmatory testing for blood, and the Knox/Sollecito case is mentioned.

 

[Numbers]

A new book about the use and misuse of forensics is coming out, edited by Wendy Koen and C. Michael Bowers. Chapter 7 is about DNA and features the Knox/Sollecito case. Chapter 8 (which is coauthored by Kim Lott and myself) is about presumptive and confirmatory testing for blood, and the Knox/Sollecito case is mentioned.

Forensic Science Reform: Protecting the Innocent

Edited by: Wendy J. Koen and C. Michael Bowers ISBN: 978-0-12-802719-6

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/book/9780128027196

Abstract Chapter 7

The purpose of this chapter is to encourage more scrutiny of DNA evidence by all parties in the criminal justice process. Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito's trials for the murder of Meredith Kercher serve as a warning of the very real threat of wrongful conviction that can originate from a failure to critically and objectively evaluate DNA test results. After discussing the trial of Amanda Knox, this chapter impresses upon those either challenging or proffering DNA evidence what they need to know, why they need to know it, and how they can get the materials and help that they need to ensure DNA evidence is not being misused. This chapter uses test results generated during the course of the investigation into Meredith Kercher's murder conviction and includes the steps that a lawyer should take in cases that turn on DNA evidence. Cases besides Knox and Sollecito's are consistently found where less than robust DNA evidence has been scrutinized but NOT challenged. This increases the likelihood that a court would accept biased interpretations of weak DNA test results. Because qualitative assessments need to be made by subjective humans even in intrinsically scientific forensic disciplines like DNA profiling, it is incumbent upon those faced with the most damning of evidence to look beyond its perceived infallibility. Questions should be developed about how the influence of bias and a rush to judgment may have influenced critical scientific decisions. This legitimate legal and scientific rigor ensures that human error has not corrupted the DNA evidence due to the perception of certainty.

 

[Numbers]

A new book about the use and misuse of forensics is coming out, edited by Wendy Koen and C. Michael Bowers. Chapter 7 is about DNA and features the Knox/Sollecito case. Chapter 8 (which is coauthored by Kim Lott and myself) is about presumptive and confirmatory testing for blood, and the Knox/Sollecito case is mentioned.

Forensic Science Reform: Protecting the Innocent

Edited by: Wendy J. Koen and C. Michael Bowers ISBN: 978-0-12-802719-6

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/book/9780128027196

Chapter 8 Abstract

The chapter begins by recounting Lindy Chamberlain's three-decade struggle to prove that she was not guilty of slitting her baby's throat in the family car. Lindy was convicted, based in large part, on presumptive blood testing and blood tests that were thought to prove the presence of infant blood. The chapter gives an overview of the history and use of presumptive blood tests and the failures of these tests that have resulted in wrongful convictions. After describing Lindy Chamberlain's saga, the chapter is broken in to three sections: Section 1 serves as an introduction and explains why there are both presumptive and confirmatory blood tests. Part I is a thorough, basic overview of the science of testing for blood. Part II covers presumptive tests and the law, and relies on examples of cases where presumptive and confirmative testing have either been misapplied or misunderstood. Finally, Part III covers problems faced in the Lindy Chamberlain case that led to Ms. Chamberlain's wrongful conviction and incarceration.

 

[acbytesla]

Ergon is a member here. I was once cautioned many moons ago on this very issue.

Ergon goes by a differing handle here, but has never tried to hide the link between that handle and "Ergon". It was similar with "Machiavelli", whose very first post here in 2010 said right up front that he was "Yummi" from the PMF site (now sites").

I didn't realize there was a members list. There is an "Ergon" who joined in 2012. He has posted twice. Not sure it is the same Ergon, but I will assume it is and refrain from commenting about him.

 

[Numbers]

Now, now, Bill, let's not be so negative.

This media article was provided in English by ANSA, and the translation appears to be correctly idiomatic.

But even if the triple negative as understood in "standard" English was not the intent of Fabiana, Guede's request for revision was declared inadmissible by the Florence Court of Appeal. At some point, there will be a motivation report with an explanation, and possibly an appeal to the CSC. Fabiana's or Maresca's opinion is interesting, but the legal document will, of course, be the MR. And Guede could appeal to the CSC to reverse the Court of Appeal's ruling.

Please don't say this when I have a mouthful of coffee.... now I have to clean up. Thanks a lot, Numbers!

Wait until the PGP catch up to this inadmissibility event.

We will be told that the judges of the Florence Court of Appeal were Mason - Mafia who took bribes from the PR Supertanker, and just wait for the inadmissibility ruling to be overruled by the CSC.

And that last could happen. We're talkin' about Italy, here.

 

[Vixen]

I am unaware of that turd being a member here. I have never seen the handle "ergon" at this site.

Do you mind?

I have always found him a fair-minded, polite, decent chap.

 

[Vixen]

Wait until the PGP catch up to this inadmissibility event.

We will be told that the judges of the Florence Court of Appeal were Mason - Mafia who took bribes from the PR Supertanker, and just wait for the inadmissibility ruling to be overruled by the CSC.

And that last could happen. We're talkin' about Italy, here.

You might jest.

There is no doubt there are incompatibles between Rudy's verdict and the kids'.


We have to see what the MR says. It may well say that even if it is incompatible, there is little reasonable chance of a successful acquittal, as Rudy was clearly there at the scene with the other two. None of them fetched help for Mez and all three are cynically cashing in on their infamy.

 

[Vixen]

I didn't realize there was a members list. There is an "Ergon" who joined in 2012. He has posted twice. Not sure it is the same Ergon, but I will assume it is and refrain from commenting about him.

LOL.

 

[Bill Williams]

You might jest.

There is no doubt there are incompatibles between Rudy's verdict and the kids'.


We have to see what the MR says. It may well say that even if it is incompatible, there is little reasonable chance of a successful acquittal, as Rudy was clearly there at the scene with the other two .

Fixed that for you.

 

[acbytesla]

Do you mind?

I have always found him a fair-minded, polite, decent chap.

I do mind since I have seen just the opposite. Nevertheless, there is an Ergon listed as a member although he clearly isn't an active member.

 

[acbytesla]

Why, thank you.

It's a fact. Although it was not intended as a compliment.

You are the last of the PGP still posting here and the choir gets tired preaching to each other.

 

[LondonJohn]

You might jest.

There is no doubt there are incompatibles between Rudy's verdict and the kids'.


We have to see what the MR says. It may well say that even if it is incompatible, there is little reasonable chance of a successful acquittal, as Rudy was clearly there at the scene with the other two. None of them fetched help for Mez and all three are cynically cashing in on their infamy.

You do realise, don't you, that:

1) There is zero credible, reliable evidence of Knox's/Sollecito's participation in the Kercher murder;

2) All of the evidence is wholly compatible with Guede being the sole perpetrator;

3) The near-certain truth is that Guede alone attacked and murdered Kercher, while Knox and Sollecito were alone together in Sollecito's apartment at the time?

Because that's what all the evidence (and lack of evidence) says very clearly. And that's what the Italian courts (eventually) confirm. And that's what every single rational, intelligent, well-informed observer of this case has long concluded.

What is it that you still don't understand. Perhaps one of us here can explain it to you? Best regards!