tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post2503553430900738542..comments2018-05-20T15:43:27.882-07:00Comments on The Startling Glass: 7. The Meredith Kercher Case - Doing the MathAlex van den Berghhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01337730177585489813noreply@blogger.comBlogger82125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-87320018830588093172013-09-05T07:01:09.211-07:002013-09-05T07:01:09.211-07:00Anon. at 6:41 AM, If Raffaele and Amanda had told ...Anon. at 6:41 AM, If Raffaele and Amanda had told as many untruths as you just did, I might concluded that they were actually guilty.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-38033111794987694302013-09-05T06:41:37.519-07:002013-09-05T06:41:37.519-07:00the so called weak evidence against those 2
for m...the so called weak evidence against those 2<br /><br />for much much less evidence lots were executed in many cases <br /><br /><br />the DNA of Raffaele Sollecito on Meredith’s bra-clasp in her locked bedroom;<br /><br />the almost-entire naked footprint of Raffaele on a bathmat that in *no way* fits that of the other male in this case – Rudy Guede;<br /><br />the fact that Raffaele’s own father blew their alibi that they were together in Raffaele’s flat at the time of the killing with indisputable telephone records;<br /><br />the DNA of Meredith Kercher on the knife in Raffaele’s flat which Raffaele himself sought to explain as having been from accidentally “pricking” Meredith’s hand in his written diary despite the fact Meredith had never been to his flat (confirmed by Amanda Knox);<br /><br />the correlation of where Meredith’s phones were found to the location of Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guedes’s flats;<br /><br />the computer records which show that no-one was at Raffaele’s computer during the time of the murder despite him claiming he was using that computer;<br /><br />Amanda’s DNA mixed with Meredith Kercher’s in five different places just feet from Meredith’s body;<br /><br />the utterly inexplicable computer records the morning after the murder starting at 5.32 am and including multiple file creations and interactions thereafter all during a time that Raffaele and Amanda insist they were asleep until 10.30am;<br /><br />the separate witnesses who testified on oath that Amanda and Raffaele were at the square 40 metres from the girls’ cottage on the evening of the murder and the fact that Amanda was seen at a convenience store at 7.45am the next morning, again while she said she was in bed;<br /><br />the accusation of a completely innocent man by Amanda Knox;<br /><br />the fact that when Amanda Knox rang Meredith’s mobile telephones, ostensibly to check on the “missing” Meredith, she did so for just three seconds - registering the call but making no effort to allow the phone to be answered in the real world<br /><br />the knife-fetish of Raffaele Sollecito and his formal disciplinary punishment for watching animal porn at his university – so far from the wholesome image portrayed;<br /><br />the fact that claimed multi-year kick-boxer Raffaele apparently couldn’t break down a flimsy door to Meredith’s room when he and Amanda were at the flat the morning after the murder but the first people in the flat with the police who weren’t martial artists could;<br /><br />the extensive hard drug use of Sollecito as told on by Amanda Knox;<br /><br />the fact that Amanda knew details of the body and the wounds despite not being in line of sight of the body when it was discovered;<br /><br />the lies of Knox on the witness stand in July 2009 about how their drug intake that night (“one joint”) is totally contradicted by Sollecito’s own contemporaneous diary;<br /><br />the fact that after a late evening’s questioning, Knox wrote a 2,900 word email home which painstakingly details what she said happened that evening and the morning after that looks *highly* like someone committing to memory, at 3.30 in the morning, an extensive alibi;<br /><br />the fact that both Amanda and Raffaele both said they would give up smoking dope for life in their prison diaries despite having apparently nothing to regret;<br /><br />the fact that when Rudy Guede was arrested, Raffaele Sollecito didn’t celebrate the “true” perpetrator being arrested (which surely would have seen him released) but worried in his diary that a man whom he said he didn’t know would “make up strange things” about him despite him just being one person in a city of over 160,000 people;<br /><br />the fact that both an occupant of the cottage and the police instantly recognised the cottage had not been burgled but had been the subject of a staged break-in where glass was *on top* of apparently disturbed clothes;<br /><br />that Knox and Sollecito both suggested each other might have committed the crime and Sollecito TO THIS DATE does not agree Knox stayed in his flat all the night in question;<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-81588787556180396612013-09-05T05:33:22.938-07:002013-09-05T05:33:22.938-07:00someone here mentioned the 2 did not know the guy ...someone here mentioned the 2 did not know the guy enough for a coffee to conspire with him yet an eye witness has testified that he saw the four together taking a stroll so they definitely knew him well <br />there are a couple of things that are obvious to me<br /><br />that the crazy couple are guilty cause everything says so<br /><br />that the german guy knows the truth so I dont understand why dont they just have some deal with him like reduce his sentence if he admits everythingAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-62313419246217215452013-06-18T17:18:55.187-07:002013-06-18T17:18:55.187-07:00To everyone:
Today, the Court of Cassation has re...To everyone:<br /><br />Today, the Court of Cassation has released its ruling in the case. <br /><br />Because of this, it would seem appropriate to desist from commenting further here. <br /><br />In due course, I'll follow on with an appraisal of the Court of Cassation's decision; we can all carry on from there.Alex van den Berghhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01337730177585489813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-4829204272843358152013-06-08T07:27:18.212-07:002013-06-08T07:27:18.212-07:00Sarah, Alex does not agree with you, but Italian c...Sarah, Alex does not agree with you, but Italian crime journalist Meo Ponte does: "Meo Ponte, an Italian journalist who covered the case for La Repubblica, said that many Italians thought Knox was guilty only because they did not know the details of the case. He described the original trial 'shameful' for convicting Knox.<br /><br />'To sentence someone for murder, you have to have proof," Ponte told USA TODAY.'"Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-87309550083607867232013-06-06T23:49:22.707-07:002013-06-06T23:49:22.707-07:00I hope you eventually figure it out, Tony. Good lu...I hope you eventually figure it out, Tony. Good luck to you! A utter absence in the murder room where they did take samples assiduously and processed them is telling, the lack of such near the break-in window where they didn't take many and failed to process them in a timely fashion sounds more like your Scott Peterson analogy.<br /><br />Anyway it's not actually all that tough to figure out, just start at the beginning and ask yourself what an amazing coincidence it would be if the cops wrongfully arresting three people on one set of evidence that turned out to mistaken or coincidence could have led to them uncovering a bizzare murder plot virtually unknown in the annals of crime, or if they just stuffed it up totally and wouldn't admit to it when they caught a burglar who'd broken into other second-story targets. Have you seen how easy it is to get up there climbing up the bars on the window below?<br /><br />Oh, and the FBI agents Steve Moore and the legendary father of the FBI's criminal profiling John Douglas both determined that there's no evidence of sociopathy in Amanda or Raffaele, the totality of their naughtiness is nothing they don't share with plenty of college students who have parties and smoke stinky substances.Kaosiumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03072817874327010156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-15123050149780505132013-06-06T15:05:45.295-07:002013-06-06T15:05:45.295-07:00Anonymous, A confirmatory test that was performed ...Anonymous, A confirmatory test that was performed several months later and was found to be negative. Joseph Neff <a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/12/26/881887/sbi-in-minority-on-test-results.html" rel="nofollow">and</a> Mandy Locke wrote, "The FBI's written policy directed the analyst first to report the positive presumptive test results. If the confirmatory test is negative, the analyst would write, 'Further testing could not confirm the presence of human blood.' It's a pity they waited so long to run the confirmatory test; the hemoglobin might have denatured in the interim. It is also worthwhile to contrast this with the luminol-positive work. I suppose Ms. Stefanoni should have reported "Further testing to confirm the presence of blood was not attempted."<br />Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-56618421084825241792013-06-06T11:25:51.550-07:002013-06-06T11:25:51.550-07:00Chris Halkides said: Please give me your interpret...Chris Halkides said: Please give me your interpretations of Rep. 198 and Rep. 199. Thanks in advance.<br /><br />Where can Rep. 198 and 199 be found?<br /><br />Was there a species test performed on the presumed blood sample?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-10031807556830198262013-06-06T10:59:11.298-07:002013-06-06T10:59:11.298-07:00Kaosium
we could go around the houses again on th...Kaosium<br /><br />we could go around the houses again on this but I feel there isn't much point. You're not going to change my mind and I'm clearly not going to change yours. <br /><br />I approached this case with an open mind, not accepting Knox was guilty until I'd read plenty on the case. I've seen both sides of the argument, both which can be overzealous at times. However, the more I read the more I came to the conclusion that there is no way Knox could not have been involved (with Sollecito). There are just too many "unfortunate co-incidences". That being said I am reading the Massei report and don't feel I have the whole picture until I have read it.<br />I do feel that the defence has been entirely based on trying to discredit the staged break-in and DNA evidence, for obvious reasons. To me the key is the break-in and I cannot see how or why anyone would attempt that particular window, and even if they did, leave no trace, but I reserve my own final judgement on that until I have finished the report.<br />I am also reading her book which is freely available on the internet (I would not pay for it). I have to say that it reads like a book of excuses and lies. For instance, expecting the reader to believe that a Police Officer asked her to do the splits during a murder enquiry. Nothing is ever her fault and it is not a very convincing account.<br />Lastly, Knox ticks all the boxes to put her high on the Sociopathy scale - a plausible liar, glib and superficial, empathy challenged, a risk taker, time limited friendships, manipulative, narcissistic, egotistical and an inflated view of her own abilities. Now this doesn't make her guilty but it sure as hell is a big red flag on top of everything else.<br />So, I'll carry on with the Massei report and once I've finished I'll have a much better idea of who's telling the truth and who isn't.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-8889041484886292672013-06-06T10:53:11.601-07:002013-06-06T10:53:11.601-07:00Ah the "we were bullied guv" defence ...<b> Ah the "we were bullied guv" defence Ah bless, sorry but there were no witnesses to corroborate her story and she never made a formal complaint so no, not credible at all. I have no doubt they put her under pressure, that's BAU in these situations but hitting, no evidence whatsoever.</b><br /><br />There was just the two whups on her head by Thugette Ficarra. Dunno what you mean by 'formal complaint' Mignini was bound by law to investigate it when he received her note. The Statements, the note, the fact they arrested Patrick on the basis of them and that they've been so desperate to quash criticism they filed charges on Amanda and Amanda's parents for even mentioning it are all evidence of the malfeasance and they will probably be answering for it to the ECHR which might want to know what happened to those interrogation tapes.<br /><br /><b> but let me guess, we should believe both Knox and Sollecito who have both been discredited as liars.</b><br /><br />No, they've not been discredited as liars, the police and prosecution told lies to courts about Amanda's Sweatshirt, her Harry Potter book and her having a handprint on Meredith's face. These are all things that were not true and there's every reason to think they knew better, being as all of them are obviously untrue from viewing the crime scene videos. They also told lies to the press about having bleach receipts, a "Clear cut" video of Amanda entering the cottage around the murder time and they lied in the Massei court about the TMB tests. All they've done is lie, so any accusation they make against anyone else you can assume they're probably lying about that too--that's their pattern.<br /><br /> <br /><b> Sure, just another unfortunate co-incidence in a huge long list of unfortunate co-incidences.</b><br /><br />No coincidence at all, it's irrelevant. What does it matter what he wrote in his diary trying to figure out how DNA got on a knife that couldn't have been used in the murder?<br /><br />Oh, and that knife is the biggest lie in this case.<br /><br /><br /> <b> Sure, because when it's so evident it could only have been one man the justice system is just so determined to make things really difficult for themselves by wrongly implicating a foreign national right? It just makes total sense. Meanwhile, back on earth, a lot of people want to see ALL of the culprits jailed for the sake of the Kerchers.</b><br /><br />Then take down Maresca who's been sucking them dry with lies when he should have been working for them, not Mignini.<br /><br /><b> No, I don't believe in conspiracy theories or a series of extremely unlucky co-incidences either because they're never proven right, there's a good reason for that, they just don't happen.</b><br /><br />Precisely why thinking three people that barely know each other would spontaneously conspire to murder someone with no discernible motive other than what one would get from a purse snatching.<br /><br />A burglar with his traces on the victim, her clothes, her wall her purse and her pillow is caught when there's a broken window, and the police claim instead it's this bizarro plot which would be almost unprecedented in the known annals of crime--and the break-in was 'staged?' How stupid is that?<br /><br />No, businesses, governments, political parties, churches, militaries and basically every institution known to man scapegoats and covers things up, the police and prosecution in Perugia are no different.<br /><br />However, most of those institutions are quite as <i>obvious</i> about it!Kaosiumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03072817874327010156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-66645310108761438052013-06-06T10:29:14.926-07:002013-06-06T10:29:14.926-07:00Erm except that there was an attempted crime scene...<b> Erm except that there was an attempted crime scene clean up and Sollecito's DNA IS on that bra clasp.</b><br /><br />What 'attempted' crime scene clean-up are you talking about? What was cleaned? Have you viewed the videos and pictures of the scene?<br /><br /><b> Well thats not what the pathologist indicated as well as being quite clear that the body had been moved so we have to believe that Guede came back to move the body but forgot he took a dump and didn't flush? I really don't think so.</b><br /><br />Is that from Michele? At any rate it was just a contention that couldn't be supported. There's no need for anyone to come back to the scene, and who cares about Rudy's dump?<br /><br /><br /> <b><br /> Except that at Guede's trial they fully accepted he was assisted, or did you forget that little point?</b><br /><br />It has nothing to do with the trial of Raffaele and Amanda and both parties had in interest in seeing Raffaele and Amanda being blamed for some of it. Because Mignini did that, Rudy will be eligible to walk the streets in a couple years on release. Does that please you?<br /><br /><b> As it happens the DNA evidence has not been disproven anyway..</b><br /><br />Trash is trash, it won't get better with age, and if they attempt to use it as evidence again they will have to explain to another judge why they won't release the required data, this time with the judge knowing the last independent court experts that analyzed it wrote a scathing review without even being able to see where the most damning data would be found. <br /><br /> <b> Oh please, so you're saying the Italian Police were against her, the judges and Jury were against her, the interpreters were against her, the witnesses were against her etc etc. It's just too ridiculous considering all the elements of evidence.</b><br /><br />Well obviously the last panel of judges weren't! They dismissed the 'evidence' as garbage, something apparent to every cogent reader of the Massei Report.<br /><br /> <b> Clearly, thats why they're facing another trial review.</b><br /><br />Which has nothing to do with the evidence, just points of law. The best result for Amanda and Raffaele would be to be able to cross-examine that 'evidence' again, this time with foreknowledge.Kaosiumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03072817874327010156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-82498959413520482542013-06-06T10:28:16.190-07:002013-06-06T10:28:16.190-07:00Unfortunately the contamination argument just does...<b> Unfortunately the contamination argument just doesn't stack up though does it. </b><br /><br />That's...not how it works, Tony. Do you think they turned on their tricorders and scanned the entire cottage and all that was there was the cigarette butt? :)<br /><br />They swabbed over the most likely places to find murder evidence, there was nothing of Raffaele and Amanda found, strongly suggesting they weren't involved in the murder, but both of them had DNA elsewhere in the cottage and without doubt places they didn't swab. The door Raffaele tried to break down is one place the cops that were fondling that bra clasp freely might have gotten it.<br /><br />However the most likely place for that DNA to have been transferred is the lab. There were about five contributors to that clasp, that's <i>prima facie</i> evidence of contamination for an item that wouldn't normally be handled, (covered by fabric) otherwise you must explain why Raffaele's DNA proves he handled it in the commission of the murder and the other three or so guys who contributed to that mixed sample didn't--or you can add three guys to this already ridiculous scenario--you're call!<br /><br /><b>It's also interesting that you're happy with all the DNA evidence against Guede but not happy when it doesn't suit your argument in the case of Knox and Sollecito.</b><br /><br />It's not "interesting", it's forensics. It was all found on or around the body and her purse, done before they'd identified any suspects and were doing objective police work. However you can throw all the DNA against Rudy out and you still have his admission he was at the scene and his handprint in the victim's blood by the body.<br /><br /> <b> Well no it was't "all over the scene" was it though. Four places of which two were very weak. On the subject of DNA it's also a case "shutting the door after the horse has bolted" isn't it.</b><br /><br />You're correct they went down to the picogram with some of that DNA work, which just shows how little chance there is they missed anything of Amanda or Raffaele who were excluded from all those samples.<br /><br /><b> The defence were invited to the testing but declined, hmm there wouldn't be a reason for that would there?</b><br /><br />Urban legend, but some basis in fact. Raffaele's lawyers sent Dr. Potenza to observe, you can read his report <a href="http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/download/file.php?id=1002" rel="nofollow">here.</a> You won't find him pleased with the knife tests. Amanda's lawyers was still trying to put a team of experts and weren't give enough notice to observe the tests, but that hardly matters as much as getting access to the <i>results</i> which everyone is <b>still</b> fighting for.Kaosiumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03072817874327010156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-75846557999894974562013-06-06T09:41:11.836-07:002013-06-06T09:41:11.836-07:00Ah the "we were bullied guv" defence
....Ah the "we were bullied guv" defence <br /><br />......how things go in those little back rooms in Perugia when they sic the mafioso breakers on an exhausted college girl.<br /><br />Ah bless, sorry but there were no witnesses to corroborate her story and she never made a formal complaint so no, not credible at all. I have no doubt they put her under pressure, that's BAU in these situations but hitting, no evidence whatsoever.<br /><br /><br />but let me guess, we should believe both Knox and Sollecito who have both been discredited as liars.<br /><br />The police and prosecution has told so many more lies in this case than anything false Raffaele and Amanda said it's literally ridiculous to pretend otherwise.<br /><br />And your evidence for that is? But lets not forget if you're innocent then it's easy, you never suffer from "fuzzy memories" especially if you're looking at a murder charge, I'm damn sure I wouldn't.<br /><br /><br />Why would you lie about stuff like that anyway? especially if you're innocent. Why did Sollecito lie about Kercher visiting his apartment and knicking herself on that knife? why would he do that? not another "fuzzy memory" story surely?<br /><br />He didn't lie to anybody, he wrote it in his diary trying to figure out how that anomalous DNA was found on his knife. His lawyer had suggested it might have been taken down to the cottage by Amanda to cook with, I don't know where you ever got the impression he wrote Meredith had come to his apartment. (but I can guess!)<br /><br />That was his explanation for the DNA on the knife.<br /><br />It wasn't even Raffaele's knife, he may never have used it, might not have been able to recognize it for sure. He remembered something that had happened at the cottage while cooking and figured that must be the answer, it's not like he told police or the courts any of this, he was just writing in his diary. <br /><br />Sure, just another unfortunate co-incidence in a huge long list of unfortunate co-incidences.<br /><br /><br />Well it's interesting in that there was no real physical evidence at all to convict him, just circumstantial evidence<br /><br />I really don't know much about that case, but did it take place in a little room where there was every reason to expect evidence to be found? Was there an obvious explanation for the death like Rudy Guede who no one thinks is innocent? That's what I don't think you understand, there's no mystery how Meredith Kercher died. They're trying to convict two others from the original wrongful arrests after it was determined there was only evidence of one man in the room and not look like the moronic thugs they were for coming up with such an idiot-ass theory.<br /><br />Sure, because when it's so evident it could only have been one man the justice system is just so determined to make things really difficult for themselves by wrongly implicating a foreign national right? It just makes total sense. Meanwhile, back on earth, a lot of people want to see ALL of the culprits jailed for the sake of the Kerchers.<br /><br />Hmmm I wouldn't give up your day job just yet, and if it is your day job, I'd start looking for a new one, the only conspiracy theory is that Knox and Sollecito DIDN'T do it.<br /><br />You don't understand the nature of conspiracy theories. This is like the Apollo Hoax stuff, bogus science, misleading pictures, character defamation and sophistic logic. Facts don't stand examination and the ones that do don't lead to the conclusions claimed.<br /><br />That's because the whole case was put together by Mignini, and he most definitely is a conspiracy theorist and he leads a bunch of corrupt lying thugs who really screwed the pooch and thought they could get away with blaming their victim--'cause that works most the time. In Italy, and in the United States too, and it's an "appalling vista" no matter where it happens...<br /><br />No, I don't believe in conspiracy theories or a series of extremely unlucky co-incidences either because they're never proven right, there's a good reason for that, they just don't happen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-39258215550111795172013-06-06T09:30:29.489-07:002013-06-06T09:30:29.489-07:00....nothing was ever found of Amanda Knox and only.......nothing was ever found of Amanda Knox and only the dubious bra clasp for Raffaele Sollecito which was contaminated on camera for all the world to see."<br /><br />Unfortunately the contamination argument just doesn't stack up though does it. Considering his DNA was only found in one other place in the house, then to suggest it magically found it's way from a cigarette butt to the bra clasp just doesn't work. It's also interesting that you're happy with all the DNA evidence against Guede but not happy when it doesn't suit your argument in the case of Knox and Sollecito.<br /><br />"On the other hand they found Rudy Guede's traces all over that scene."<br /><br />Well no it was't "all over the scene" was it though. Four places of which two were very weak. On the subject of DNA it's also a case "shutting the door after the horse has bolted" isn't it. The defence were invited to the testing but declined, hmm there wouldn't be a reason for that would there?<br /><br />........Tfindings it might not be as compelling evidence, but they did and it was. That murder room was a fishbowl, easy to process.<br /><br />Erm except that there was an attempted crime scene clean up and Sollecito's DNA IS on that bra clasp.<br /><br />"All the physical evidence of the assault clearly indicates the presence of more than one person."<br /><br />Well thats not what the pathologist indicated as well as being quite clear that the body had been moved so we have to believe that Guede came back to move the body but forgot he took a dump and didn't flush? I really don't think so.<br /><br />No, it doesn't. From Massei p. 368 of the PMF translation:<br /><br />.............there are no scientific elements arising directly from forensic science which could rule out the injuries having been caused by the action of a single person.<br /><br />So we're talking about the injuries but not the attack in it's entirety.<br /><br />That's both the prosecution and defense specialists, there's nothing about the murder that requires more than one attacker. The attempt to suggest otherwise amounts to trying to say an athletic man armed with a knife could not subdue and rape a college girl, which is part and partial of what I was getting at before regarding ridiculous 'holdings' of the Massei Court that the next court looks at and rolls their eyes. Massei doesn't have much to work with though, because the contention made by the prosecution was silly and unsupportable.<br /><br />Except that at Guede's trial they fully accepted he was assisted, or did you forget that little point?<br /><br />As it happens the DNA evidence has not been disproven anyway..<br /><br />Raffaele and Amanda weren't convicted on the evidence presented in court in the Trial of the First Instance, they were convicted on the 'evidence' presented in the press which was often nothing but outright lies by police and prosecution. There were two years of that, it's tough for people to keep those separate over that long a time period, and it's not like they voted on each piece of evidence either.<br /><br />Oh please, so you're saying the Italian Police were against her, the judges and Jury were against her, the interpreters were against her, the witnesses were against her etc etc. It's just too ridiculous considering all the elements of evidence.<br /><br />The paucity of evidence was revealed by the Massei Report and the embarrassing lengths he had to go to in order to attempt establish such specious 'facts' and piece together such an unlikely conclusion so poorly supported by real evidence.<br /><br />Clearly, thats why they're facing another trial review.<br /><br />The DNA 'evidence' is more evidence against the prosecution. Science is science and this was trash and revealed as such. That won't change, it can only get worse as they attempt to keep hidden the files that may expose fraud.<br /><br />Well I guess if the defence had actually attended the DNA testing then they wouldn't be furiously back pedalling like they are now would they.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-31176352182837679082013-06-06T09:04:25.390-07:002013-06-06T09:04:25.390-07:00Ah the "we were bullied guv" defence
A...<b><br />Ah the "we were bullied guv" defence </b><br /><br />Ana Domino described Amanda as exhausted, visibly shocked, frightened, crying, prostrate and dejected. Giobbi heard her screaming from another room. That neither of them had any problem with this gives you an idea of how things go in those little back rooms in Perugia when they sic the mafioso breakers on an exhausted college girl.<br /><br /><b><br />but let me guess, we should believe both Knox and Sollecito who have both been discredited as liars.</b><br /><br />The police and prosecution has told so many more lies in this case than anything false Raffaele and Amanda said it's literally ridiculous to pretend otherwise.<br /><br /><b><br /> Why would you lie about stuff like that anyway? especially if you're innocent. Why did Sollecito lie about Kercher visiting his apartment and knicking herself on that knife? why would he do that? not another "fuzzy memory" story surely?</b><br /><br />He didn't lie to anybody, he wrote it in his diary trying to figure out how that anomalous DNA was found on his knife. His lawyer had suggested it might have been taken down to the cottage by Amanda to cook with, I don't know where you ever got the impression he wrote Meredith had come to his apartment. (but I can guess!)<br /><br />It wasn't even Raffaele's knife, he may never have used it, might not have been able to recognize it for sure. He remembered something that had happened at the cottage while cooking and figured that must be the answer, it's not like he told police or the courts any of this, he was just writing in his diary. <br /><br /><b><br />Well it's interesting in that there was no real physical evidence at all to convict him, just circumstantial evidence</b><br /><br />I really don't know much about that case, but did it take place in a little room where there was every reason to <i>expect</i> evidence to be found? Was there an <i><b>obvious</b></i> explanation for the death like Rudy Guede who no one thinks is innocent? That's what I don't think you understand, there's no mystery how Meredith Kercher died. They're trying to convict two others from the original wrongful arrests after it was determined there was only evidence of one man in the room and not look like the moronic thugs they were for coming up with such an idiot-ass theory.<br /><br /><br /><b><br />Hmmm I wouldn't give up your day job just yet, and if it is your day job, I'd start looking for a new one, the only conspiracy theory is that Knox and Sollecito DIDN'T do it.</b><br /><br />You don't understand the nature of conspiracy theories. This is like the Apollo Hoax stuff, bogus science, misleading pictures, character defamation and sophistic logic. Facts don't stand examination and the ones that do don't lead to the conclusions claimed.<br /><br />That's because the whole case was put together by Mignini, and he most definitely <i>is</i> a conspiracy theorist and he leads a bunch of corrupt lying thugs who really screwed the pooch and thought they could get away with blaming their victim--'cause that works most the time. In Italy, and in the United States too, and it's an "appalling vista" no matter where it happens...Kaosiumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03072817874327010156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-63349158966572798252013-06-06T09:03:10.409-07:002013-06-06T09:03:10.409-07:00Tony Wrote:Well not a lot by all accounts and DNA ...Tony Wrote:<b>Well not a lot by all accounts and DNA evidence isn't required for a conviction.</b> <br /><br />No, but it strongly suggests no one else was, especially considering the nature of the crime and that little room. The murder room was swept by the full <i>Polizia Scientifica</i> in the first days of the investigation, and then again six weeks later and absolutely nothing was ever found of Amanda Knox and only the dubious bra clasp for Raffaele Sollecito which was contaminated on camera for all the world to see.<br /><br />On the other hand they found Rudy Guede's traces all over that scene.<br /><br />That is strongly suggestive that Raffaele and Amanda were not involved in physical activity in the murder room. Had they not looked as hard, or had other conditions inhibited any findings it might not be as compelling evidence, but they did and it was. That murder room was a fishbowl, easy to process.<br /><br /><b>All the physical evidence of the assault clearly indicates the presence of more than one person.</b><br /><br />No, it doesn't. From Massei p. 368 of the PMF translation:<br /><br /><i>The consultants and forensic scientists have asserted that from the point of view of forensic science, it cannot be ruled out that the author of the injuries could have been a single attacker, because the bruises and the wounds from a pointed and cutting weapon are not in themselves incompatible with the action of a single person.<br /><br /> With regard to this, it is nevertheless observed that the contribution of each discipline is specifically in the domain of the specific competence of that discipline, and in fact the consultants and forensic experts concentrated their attention on the aspects specifically belonging to forensic science: time of death, cause of death, elements indicating sexual violence, the injuries present on the body of the victim, and the causes and descriptions of these. The answer given above concerning the possibility of their being inflicted by the action of a single person or by more than one was given in relation to these specific duties and questions, which belong precisely to the domain of forensic science, and the meaning of this answer was thus that there are no scientific elements arising directly from forensic science which could rule out the injuries having been caused by the action of a single person.</i><br /><br />That's both the prosecution and defense specialists, there's nothing about the murder that requires more than one attacker. The attempt to suggest otherwise amounts to trying to say an athletic man armed with a knife could not subdue and rape a college girl, which is part and partial of what I was getting at before regarding ridiculous 'holdings' of the Massei Court that the next court looks at and rolls their eyes. Massei doesn't have much to work with though, because the contention made by the prosecution was silly and unsupportable.<br /><br /><br /><b> As it happens the DNA evidence has not been disproven anyway..</b><br /><br />Raffaele and Amanda weren't convicted on the evidence presented in court in the Trial of the First Instance, they were convicted on the 'evidence' presented in the press which was often nothing but outright lies by police and prosecution. There were two years of that, it's tough for people to keep those separate over that long a time period, and it's not like they voted on each piece of evidence either.<br /><br />The paucity of evidence was revealed by the Massei Report and the embarrassing lengths he had to go to in order to attempt establish such specious 'facts' and piece together such an unlikely conclusion so poorly supported by real evidence.<br /><br />The DNA 'evidence' is more evidence against the prosecution. Science is science and this was trash and revealed as such. That won't change, it can only get worse as they attempt to keep hidden the files that may expose fraud.Kaosiumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03072817874327010156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-68434469928126619272013-06-06T08:52:49.105-07:002013-06-06T08:52:49.105-07:00Chris,
I'm busy ploughing through the Massei ...Chris,<br /><br />I'm busy ploughing through the Massei Report so when I come to it I'll let you know my thoughts on it, no problem.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-6880411969877786662013-06-06T08:47:55.989-07:002013-06-06T08:47:55.989-07:00Both items of evidence were found near Filomena...Both items of evidence were found near Filomena's window. Rep. 198 is a presumed hair follicle, and Rep. 199 tested positive by tetramethylbenzidine.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-33845465994629973822013-06-06T07:42:38.654-07:002013-06-06T07:42:38.654-07:00Chris,
I'm quite happy to if you could be mor...Chris,<br /><br />I'm quite happy to if you could be more specific?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-29014959785724399012013-06-06T07:25:14.232-07:002013-06-06T07:25:14.232-07:00Tony,
Please give me your interpretations of Rep....Tony,<br /><br />Please give me your interpretations of Rep. 198 and Rep. 199. Thanks in advanceChris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-84774418533958406982013-06-06T07:01:29.103-07:002013-06-06T07:01:29.103-07:00"How much DNA evidence do you think is left i...<br /><br />"How much DNA evidence do you think is left in the average burglary? Rudy was probably there already as per the CCTV camera capture, and on the 'throne' when Meredith arrived, as suggested by the unflushed toilet and his story (no reason to lie about that and it fits). A man with a knife can easily control someone and get inside their guard ('do what I saw or I'll hurt you!' often works wonders) thus defensive wounds are hardly mandatory, and there's no reason to believe the body was moved, that silliness was just conjecture that didn't survive court. What's that from, Micheli? All that nonsense is stuff he just made up that couldn't be proved likely or even a defensible possibility at trial."<br /><br />Well not a lot by all accounts and DNA evidence isn't required for a conviction, it's a bonus if it's there but the absence of it doesn't mean someone wasn't there. All the physical evidence of the assault clearly indicates the presence of more than one person. As it happens the DNA evidence has not been disproven anyway. It certainly helped on a unanimous guilty verdict in the first trial. I think we can now safely dismiss the "acquittal".<br /><br /><br />Their alibi was each other and outside their being bullied all night by police it never changed. There's no reason to think that has anything to do with the murder, which is already explained by Rudy Guede, and adding two people from a bungled previous arrest from that overnight interrogation is reason to cast suspicion on police and prosecutors, not their poor victims.<br /><br />Ah the "we were bullied guv" defence lol. Interesting that nobody else saw it, including the interpreters, but let me guess, we should believe both Knox and Sollecito who have both been discredited as liars. Why would you lie about stuff like that anyway? especially if you're innocent. Why did Sollecito lie about Kercher visiting his apartment and knicking herself on that knife? why would he do that? not another "fuzzy memory" story surely?<br /><br />Tell me, do you believe Scott Peterson is innocent? <br /><br />Well it's interesting in that there was no real physical evidence at all to convict him, just circumstantial evidence, but because he was a bit of a naughty boy an American court did convict him and no-one seems bothered. It's interesting then that Knox has far more compelling evidence against her and yet Americans are "outraged" at the terrible Italian Justice system. If Knox is innocent I have no idea how Peterson could ever have been rightly convicted.<br />Hmm, can I smell a strong whiff of hypocrisy drifting across the Atlantic? <br /><br /><br />How the hell would I know? I don't follow this sort of thing generally, I bust conspiracy theorists and corrupt authorities and institutions. To me this was a puzzle I wanted to solve.<br /><br />Hmmm I wouldn't give up your day job just yet, and if it is your day job, I'd start looking for a new one, the only conspiracy theory is that Knox and Sollecito DIDN'T do it. You might want to look at the American justice system, it certainly seems like Petersons conviction was "corrupt" to me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-84647530885226873542013-06-06T06:29:07.520-07:002013-06-06T06:29:07.520-07:00Tony Wrote:
Kaosium,
if you're prepared to b...Tony Wrote:<br /><br /><i>Kaosium,<br /><br />if you're prepared to believe Guede's miraculous arrival through the window, leaving no trace and not being spotted by anyone, or heard by kercher, his amazing ability to assault Kercher and kill her though she had virtually no real defensive wounds, on top of his leaving his DNA at the scene but then returning to move the body (but not remove his obvious presence) - then I guess you'll believe anything......</i><br /><br />How much DNA evidence do you think is left in the average burglary? Rudy was probably there already as per the CCTV camera capture, and on the 'throne' when Meredith arrived, as suggested by the unflushed toilet and his story (no reason to lie about that and it fits). A man with a knife can easily control someone and get inside their guard ('do what I saw or I'll hurt you!' often works wonders) thus defensive wounds are hardly mandatory, and there's no reason to believe the body was moved, that silliness was just conjecture that didn't survive court. What's that from, Micheli? All that nonsense is stuff he just made up that couldn't be proved likely or even a defensible possibility at trial.<br /><br /><i><br />When we factor in Knox's lying and lack of a coherent alibi, Sollecito's lying and lack of a coherent alibi then I guess it is fair to say that anything is truly believable.....</i><br /><br />Their alibi was each other and outside their being bullied all night by police it never changed. There's no reason to think that has anything to do with the murder, which is already explained by Rudy Guede, and adding two people from a bungled previous arrest from that overnight interrogation is reason to cast suspicion on police and prosecutors, not their poor victims.<br /><i><br />Tell me, do you believe Scott Peterson is innocent? </i><br /><br />How the hell would I know? I don't follow this sort of thing generally, I bust conspiracy theorists and corrupt authorities and institutions. To me this was a puzzle I wanted to solve.Kaosiumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03072817874327010156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-401672875735188002013-06-06T06:03:41.403-07:002013-06-06T06:03:41.403-07:00Kaosium,
if you're prepared to believe Guede&...Kaosium,<br /><br />if you're prepared to believe Guede's miraculous arrival through the window, leaving no trace and not being spotted by anyone, or heard by kercher, his amazing ability to assault Kercher and kill her though she had virtually no real defensive wounds, on top of his leaving his DNA at the scene but then returning to move the body (but not remove his obvious presence) - then I guess you'll believe anything......<br />When we factor in Knox's lying and lack of a coherent alibi, Sollecito's lying and lack of a coherent alibi then I guess it is fair to say that anything is truly believable.....<br />Tell me, do you believe Scott Peterson is innocent?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-60525793515934644152013-06-06T05:55:40.232-07:002013-06-06T05:55:40.232-07:00Chris,
you're right, it would have need someo...Chris,<br /><br />you're right, it would have need someone better than Spiderman, someone who's capable of leaving no trace whatsoever, on the ground below, or on the wall. They would also have needed to climb to open the shutters first, then climb back down, then throw the stone and still manage to leave no trace of glass below the window. All this in wet conditions, truly remarkable.<br />As for the defences attempt to prove this was so, they failed dismally, which is why the whole theory has been discredited.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-60680012236429496562013-06-06T05:44:52.080-07:002013-06-06T05:44:52.080-07:00Well clearly the judge and lay judges didn't t...<b>Well clearly the judge and lay judges didn't think it was "garbage" and the Massei Report explains why.</b><br /><br />Yes, and the fact those 'explanations' are so convoluted, improbable, unscientific and non-incriminating that it took 400 pages of 'splaining to try to make a case against them is an excellent indication just why they <i>are</i> garbage.<br /><br />Rudy's motivations report was something like just over 100 pages, and he had <i>plenty</i> of <b>real</b> evidence against him. It didn't take four hundred pages of illogical nonsense. When you read the Massei Report realize that he lays out the facts, then offers the defense version and since the verdict is guilty must try to make the prosecution scenario work or come up with his own. When he says the 'court holds' he (essentially) <i>has</i> to say that, and when his scenario is illogical, unscientific--if not ridiculous--that suggests to the next court the evidence isn't actually very good if it has to be twisted to that extent. Massei's 'holdings' (we'll call them) are irrelevant at this juncture, it's only the bare-bones facts that count, the rest is for entertainment purposes only.<br /><br /><br /><b><br />Considering how much the Hellmann report was "slapped down" by the Court of Cassation I don't think there's too much to worry about for the Prosecution.</b><br /><br />The Supreme Court doesn't rule on evidence, and we don't know yet what they'll find wrong. It will be a technicality and not to do with the evidence which is still garbage. Perhaps to do with Hellmann putting an end to the jailhouse conspiracy stuff Mignini wanted to explore, him allowing the independent experts but denying another review--something like that. The science stays the same, the evidence stays the same, and that's not beneficial to the prosecution.<br /><br />Thinking that break-in had to be staged is really kinda weird, Tony. It wouldn't have taken him two minutes once he started up that wall, and he wouldn't have done it Kermit's way because he's better at it and doesn't have to be Spiderman. :)Kaosiumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03072817874327010156noreply@blogger.com