Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #13

[SMK]

Apparently in Italy every murder trial has an automatic appeal attached to it ... most likely to ensure that everything was done correctly. Since the defense wanted a review of the DNA, along with a long list of other things, they got a review of two pieces of DNA evidence. It's truly unfortunate that defense lawyers chose not to attend the original testing as they could have introduced any complaints about the testing during trial.

Similar to so many other trials, all the evidence rarely appears to be something related to a rat.

So the appeals process is simply a gesture, a process of jotting the is and crossing the Ts, and the convictions being upheld is already a done deal. If this is truly the case, Knox's parents have been led down the primrose path by the media. I just do not know what to believe at this juncture....

 

[OldSteve]

Right, but in terms of suggesting that the prosecution theory has changed because of speculative responses made a couple of years after the trial seems to be quite a stretch ... so in that context ... that the prosecution theory has changed, I disagree on the basis that the theory has not changed at all. The theory is that Knox was at the scene of the crime during the murder, and if the prosecutor has to speculate on what would happen if the knife DNA were to be excluded, then he can also speculate that maybe the self-incriminating statement could be included. It's all speculation, and it doesn't IMO imply that the prosecution theory has changed.

Furthermore, the guilty verdict was not based on the DNA on the knife ... that evidence was but a small piece of the complete evidence. Exclude, the knife, then look at the statements. Exclude the statements, then look at the lack of alibi. Exclude the lies and absence of alibis, then look at the staged break in. Exclude the staged break in, then look at the luminol evidence. It goes on and on ... the three convicted murderers will not suddenly become innocent because one or two pieces of evidence are reviewed during appeal.

... and perhaps finally, look at the evidence placing AK/RS in the room with MK, look at the cuts and bruises on AK/RS oh, gee there are none!

 

[otto]

Time Of Death. Although what is attempted is to say that AK is innocent and she didn't know about what time Meredith died. But as it really shows- she had an idea of what time she died... and tried to say they ate dinner 'very late' :innocent: . She forgot that she would have eaten before planned-for work... and that RS's dad already had been told they had eaten (maybe she didn't hear this call :waitasec: ) and had a 'spill'.

*I couldn't tell that you were 'wrong-handed' otto :crazy: .

Thanks ... I think that Amanda was well aware of the fact that Meredith was murdered sometime after 9 pm based not only based on discussions with Meredith's friends at the police station, but because she was there. Even though dinner was finished at 8:30, she placed the dinner time "late", around 11, then 10, and then 9:30 ... always careful to place the time of dinner in the time frame when Meredith could have been murdered. She should have had no difficulty placing the time that they finished dinner correctly at 8:30. Even if she was stoned at the time she ate dinner, the following day she should have been able to relate the dinner time to her work schedule.

(lefties rule ... except when it comes to interacting with scissors & power tools, and then it's all backwards & dangerous)

 

[otto]

The problem is not that they will suddenly become innocent -- they either are or they aren't.

What is excluded or disproven as evidence, however, should have an effect on whether they are convicted.

All of the items on your list of evidence have been argued against in AK and RS's appeals. Since the appeal is still ongoing, we do not know if the judge is going to open up any or all of these areas of evidence. (DNA via the knife and clasp, and alibi via Cuartolo have already been opened up.)

At what point, if these items on your list of evidence are disproven or tossed out, will you consider the correct verdict to be not guilty? You must reach this point eventually unless your opinion is not based on evidence.

In watching a few trials, I've come to realize that there always seems to be one key piece of evidence that is the turning point for the jury. In the Cooper case it was the computer search, in the Jason Young case it will probably be the gas receipt. In this case, it was not the DNA evidence. I don't remember exactly what it was, but I think it was something that Amanda said or did that was in complete conflict with innocence.

I would have to recheck to be sure, but according to memory, my understanding is that the appeal decision was to review the analysis of two pieces of DNA evidence and if that evidence was problematic, additional DNA evidence (not additional evidence) would be reviewed.

I doubt the staged break in will be considered during appeal because there hasn't been any reason to question that evidence. The theory seems to be that Rudy could have broken the window and climbed into Filomina's bedroom. The first problem with this is that Rudy's history for entering 2nd floor rooms is to climb onto the balcony and enter through French doors. That is what he did in the past. The cottage has a balcony that is easy to climb, French doors, and is facing the opposite direction of the road. I doubt Rudy would change his MO and enter the cottage in the most difficult and visible way when his familiar way was much easier. Are you aware of any legal argument for reconsidering the evidence of a staged break in?

I think there is too much evidence for the three convicted murderers to be found not guilty; too many factors that cannot be explained.