tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post3647298480455465266..comments2018-05-20T15:43:27.882-07:00Comments on The Startling Glass: 6. The Meredith Kercher Case - Back to the Drawing Board (Part Six)Alex van den Berghhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01337730177585489813noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-24558319374497137562013-06-05T21:40:53.881-07:002013-06-05T21:40:53.881-07:00Oh good grief.
No one took this notion seriously ...Oh good grief.<br /><br />No one took this notion seriously because there is no evidence whatsoever to support it.<br /><br />In fact, any and all evidence spectacularly discounts this notion.<br /><br />It just cannot be taken seriously by anyone, including the Appeal Court.Alex van den Berghhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01337730177585489813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-27823915268566073712013-06-05T18:45:06.574-07:002013-06-05T18:45:06.574-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Alex van den Berghhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01337730177585489813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-53565947445470307852013-05-31T13:24:34.794-07:002013-05-31T13:24:34.794-07:00An arbitrary dismissal of this third option does n...An arbitrary dismissal of this third option does not, in any way, make it any less likely an option. WHY can you not take it seriously? You have no problem putting Knox at the scene of the crime yet there is no forensic trace of her in Meredith's room, so why not someone else? Both Micheli and Borsini-Belardi, in their motivational reports, assumed Amanda and Raffaele collaborated while never once mentioning the consideration of anyone else. This is consistent with accepting Mignini's vision of the crime without question, something the courts had no authority to do. Massei and Hellmann were specifically looking at the guilt or innocence of Amanda and Raffaele, not the totality of the crime. Unless you can show where it's been PROVEN that Guede could not have acted alone AND that, if so, where it's been proven that no one other than Amanda and Raffaele could have been the conspirators, then I don't understand the basis for your disagreement.<br /><br />The first and second courts trying Guede did not have the authority to determine WHO committed the crime with Guede, and their conclusion that he didn't act alone went unchallenged so it is not, in my opinion, a proven fact but rather, an opinion. Italian law may view this differently but the issue is actually moot. Even if we assume it's an established fact that Guede did not act alone, it was only the Massei and Hellmann courts that were authorized to determine if Amanda and Raffaele were complicit. The Appellate court ruled they did not. The court was not in any position to determine, therefore, who was. A court can only hear evidence presented and rule on the charges brought forth and the Hellmann court did this. There is nothing established as fact at any court related to this case that precludes the finding that Guede acted with someone other than Amanda and Raffaele.<br /><br /><br />Frank Giordanohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08361845416919007067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-80300145352532018602013-05-28T17:18:24.485-07:002013-05-28T17:18:24.485-07:00Dear Anonymous,
I think we'll have to disagre...Dear Anonymous,<br /><br />I think we'll have to disagree here.<br /><br />1. The notion that Guede could have carried out the murder with other - hitherto unknown - accomplices is not one I can take seriously. More importantly, it is not a notion either court has taken seriously.<br /><br />2. There are, therefore - in both courts' views - only two options. That being the case, the choice for one of these options automatically means a choice against the other option. To be more specific, any choice a court makes when it deals with the guilt or innocence of Knox and Sollecito is also, and by definition, a choice between whether Guede acted alone or not. <br /><br />Again, bear in mind that neither court - including the Appeal Court - had any inclination whatsoever to seriously consider the "Guede w/ other" option. The Appeal Court did not make that option a part of its deliberations. Therefore, the Appeal Court has essentially taken the same point of view I have: it's either Guede alone, or Guede with Knox and Sollecito.Alex van den Berghhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01337730177585489813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6952241796880906610.post-27723443734135578732013-05-28T09:42:04.768-07:002013-05-28T09:42:04.768-07:00You seem to be making two fundamental mistakes in ...You seem to be making two fundamental mistakes in your analysis which render your argument moot.<br /><br />1. That the only possible conclusions can be Guede alone or Guede w/ Amanda and Raffaele. In fact, there is a third option - Guede w/ other.<br /><br />2. That the Appeal Court was supposed to go beyond determining guilt or innocence of Amanda and Raffaele. The Appeal Court's responsibility was to determine the guilt or innocence of Amanda and Raffaele, nothing more. To suggest that in finding them innocent the court effectively left aspect of the crime unanswered and that this is a failing of the court is patently false.<br /><br />In my opinion, it was the failing of the investigative team to look no further than these three people. Clearly, if it was acceptable to consider someone who left no forensic evidence in Meredith's room (i.e., Amanda) then why not someone else? The truth of this matter is the Investigative team suspected Amanda and Raffaele from early on and never seriously considered anyone else. Given the number of acquaintances Guede had (Raffale and Amanda not being two of them) if the prosecution felt certain there was more than one attacker they should have been looking at some of those people. Kokomani, who was quick to try to put Amanda and Raffaele outside the cottage, comes to mind.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com