1350 users online (232 members and 1118 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 3 of 71 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 53 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 1065
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,952
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelSmith View Post
    Those photos were shown by PROSECUTORS not lawyers representing the victims family especially when there was protocol to clear the media when graphic crime scene photos were shown. Do you think Meredith's mother approved of her naked dead body photos being shown by her own attorney while the media clicked away? I don't.
    BBM- I would assume not. However, they did not break with Maresca and continue to use him, so presumably they were not so offended as to find another attorney. I don't like viewing graphic crime scene photos, myself.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,952
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelSmith View Post
    Nope, it was Maresca who just flashed the photos. Were you there? The media sure was interested to know if he had permission to do that.
    Was he rebuked in any way, in court ? (not a rhetorical question; really wondering if he was.)

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    631
    Quote Originally Posted by SMK View Post
    BBM- I would assume not. However, they did not break with Maresca and continue to use him, so presumably they were not so offended as to find another attorney. I don't like viewing graphic crime scene photos, myself.
    It just opens a can of worms why they've stuck with the <modsnip>. The man who had no questions for Guede and objected to even the defence questioning him.
    Last edited by Harmony 2; 12-19-2013 at 12:58 PM. Reason: negative characterization

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,665
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelSmith View Post
    Nope, it was Maresca who just flashed the photos. Were you there? The media sure was interested to know if he had permission to do that.
    No, he asked several times to clear the courtroom. It is the job of the judge to make sure the courtroom is cleared but Hellmann did not make sure everyone was out. It is not the job of the lawyer to keep looking around the courtroom if everyone is outside. It is the job of the judge. The judge Hellmann is at fault here. It is just another myth made up by the conspiracy sites to attack the lawyer.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    631
    Quote Originally Posted by sherlockh View Post
    No, he asked several times to clear the courtroom. It is the job of the judge to make sure the courtroom is cleared but Hellmann did not make sure everyone was out. It is not the job of the lawyer to keep looking around the courtroom if everyone is outside. It is the job of the judge. The judge Hellmann is at fault here. It is just another myth made up by the conspiracy sites to attack the lawyer.
    Can you please cite this in the transcripts? Thanks.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,749
    Quote Originally Posted by Amber29 View Post
    It's ridiculous that it is being bashed because of where it is hosted. The actual trial is in Italian of course it isn't the actual transcript. It is translated. Please if we are going to accuse it of being inaccurate, take the time to compare two translations and point out the major flaws.

    It was made simple to read in format but the testimony is the testimony.

    If machine translations are used here and are by no means accurate then this one should be. It's way better than how a machine "interprets" the text.
    I don't know anything about the site where it's hosted. All I know about it is that it was formatted to look like an actual trial transcript, including the font, the line numbering and the capitalization of the parties, yet it isn't. I don't care who chooses to rely on it. But it isn't a transcript at all. A transcript is taken by an authorized court reporter fluent in the language of the testimony being given and present when the testimony is given. It's also certified as a true, accurate and verbatim transcription of the testimony. Imo, the transcript I saw is unreliable in general, and definitely not something I personally would rely on to parse nuances in the testimony. Especially since I have no idea who Thoughtful is and because he or she has stated that some license was taken.

    jmo

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by sherlockh View Post
    No, he asked several times to clear the courtroom. It is the job of the judge to make sure the courtroom is cleared but Hellmann did not make sure everyone was out. It is not the job of the lawyer to keep looking around the courtroom if everyone is outside. It is the job of the judge. The judge Hellmann is at fault here. It is just another myth made up by the conspiracy sites to attack the lawyer.
    I'm going to have to ask for evidence of this.

    Here is an article, from the BBC Sept. 282011, which says the opposite.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,952
    Quote Originally Posted by Monzoo View Post
    I'm going to have to ask for evidence of this.

    Here is an article, from the BBC Sept. 282011, which says the opposite.
    The link does not work here, Monzoo.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,952

    On another subject

    On another subject: I happened to see the Lifetime movie about Knox last night, and in his closing summation, the actor playing Mignini stated that Raffaele and Amanda were "conducting a cleanup that was interrupted only by the unexpected arrival of the Postal Police.".

    3 questions:

    1. Did Mignini actually assert this in his closing ( 2009)?

    2. If Knox and Sollectio were conducting a cleanup which was "only interrupted by the unexpected arrival of the postal police", wouldn't they worry that Filomena, who had already been called, would also interrupt the cleanup, or catch them in the act?

    3. How far away from the cottage was Filomena known to be when she was first called by Knox?
    Last edited by SMK; 12-19-2013 at 01:38 PM.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by SMK View Post
    The link does not work here, Monzoo.
    Hmm.. I'm on a mobile device at the moment have to see if I can figure out what went on when I gat back to a full computer. It is an article on the BBC site, Sept 28 2011.

    Edited to add that I found another:

    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/44668677/#.UrMtcH-9KSM
    Last edited by Monzoo; 12-19-2013 at 01:34 PM. Reason: Add link


  11. #41
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    29,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Amber29 View Post
    Lets try this again

    http://themurderofmeredithkercher.co...transcript.pdf

    Page 188

    For the testimony where she says she only knew Meredith a month and moving on with own life.
    Quote Originally Posted by Karmady View Post
    whoa...that is not a real trial transcript. I haven't followed this case much but have been reading recently and THIS is what's posted?

    ~snip from the "transcript"

    The following transcript is based on an interpretation of
    the trial testimony of Amanda Knox done by Thoughtful from video
    and audio recordings and posted on perugiamurderfile.org.
    References to video and audio sources, and some descriptive
    material has been eliminated, and a few words have been
    translated differently. The purpose of doing this is to create a
    transcipt similar to those common to US legal proceedings to
    permit specific page and line references analysis or discussion
    of her testimony.

    Okay - here's the deal guys - continuing to argue over this is NOT going to be allowed. We have to use what is available. If you feel you have a better or different translation - please LINK it. I have not been able to find one.

    Also - I have not been able to find an unbiased site that is providing any translations. All translations have been done by one side or the other, so they are all suspect to some extent. We have to deal with that. You can certainly compare and contrast the different documents - BUT just arguing is tedious and won't be allowed. If you have no faith in the translation, but cannot provide a link to a different translation - then SCROLL AND ROLL.

    If you have questions, contact one of the mods by way of PM. Harmony2 and Coldpizza are the main mods for this case.

    Thanks,

    Salem

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,952
    Quote Originally Posted by Monzoo View Post
    Hmm.. I'm on a mobile device at the moment have to see if I can figure out what went on when I gat back to a full computer. It is an article on the BBC site, Sept 28 2011.
    well, it was asserted in different articles, that Maresca's showing of the 8 x 8 foot photos came as a complete shock to those within the court.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,978
    Quote Originally Posted by SMK View Post
    well, it was asserted in different articles, that Maresca's showing of the 8 x 8 foot photos came as a complete shock to those within the court.
    I'm confused about this discussion. Is the concern that people, that were in the courtroom to watch the trial, were unprepared for the possibility that crime scene photos would be displayed during a murder trial? I don't understand why anyone would be surprised that crime scene photos would be part of the trial evidence.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,952
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    I'm confused about this discussion. Is the concern that people, that were in the courtroom to watch the trial, were unprepared for the possibility that crime scene photos would be displayed during a murder trial? I don't understand why anyone would be surprised that crime scene photos would be part of the trial evidence.
    I don't really, either. I did try to offer a rationale for Maresca's action in a post further up.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,952
    A friend of mine who is convinced of Knox's innocence just referred me to this piece (Aug 2013) from the Los Angeles Review of Books, which contains the absolute disputing of all the forensic evidence in the case against Knox and Sollecito.

    Asserted also is that the case against Knox is purely psychological, with evidence not mattering to the prosecution.

    I think this article is representative of most Americans' view of the case, and it's clear that if the convictions are upheld, more pieces of this kind will appear to decry the travesty.

    I wonder why it is, if these points can be refuted empirically, that no counter-pieces have been run in mainstream publications, disputing these points?

    Barbie Nadeau, the author of Angel Face: Sex, Murder, and the Inside Story of Amanda Knox (2010), on the other hand, is certain Knox did it.

    Her version corroborates the prosecution’s version of a sex game gone wrong, except that Nadeau believes that Knox and Sollecito, rather than seeking revenge on Kercher for her too-serious ways, were in the house to do a drug deal with Guede and simply got so high that they “lost touch with their own rational selves.” Nadeau speculates that Sollecito’s history of experimentation with drugs (mostly just hash, but also some cocaine and acid) could’ve made for a dangerous combination with Knox’s familiarity with “hard A” from the University of Washington party scene. “By sharing their knowledge, two experienced thrill seekers could have found a way to get higher than ever — with lethal consequences.”

    The problem, however, is that this story relies on evidence that has long ago been debunked. Nadeau refers to the bloodspots outside Meredith’s room that were described at one time as containing Kercher and Knox’s “mixed” DNA. That Knox’s DNA would be mixed with Meredith’s blood wouldn’t be surprising, given that they lived in the house together. But the prosecutors presented this mixed DNA as something that could only happen if Knox’s blood were mixed with Kercher’s blood. Nadeau lets this misrepresentation stand and she does the same thing with the footprints in the hallway. There were two small bare footprints outside Kercher’s room that were once thought to have been Knox’s, and to have been left in blood; a chemical called luminol detects the possibility of cleaned-up blood and the use of this chemical uncovered these footprints. But luminol only indicates the possibility of cleaned-up blood rather than the certainty of it; it reacts with a number of other substances, including rust, urine, and the bleach in the bleach-based cleaning product Knox and Kercher used on their floors. Follow-up tests with tetramethylbenzidine came up negative for blood on these footprints, but Nadeau doesn’t mention this.
    None of the hard evidence the prosecution presented to tie Knox and Sollecito to the crime scene survived the appeals trial.[1] The real reasons they remained suspects were psychological: the prosecution pursued Knox based on their belief that she was inherently bad, and Sollecito based on their belief that he was her smitten lackey. They believed that behind Knox’s cold, unfeeling eyes lurked a soul given over to the will of the devil. Mignini, his assisting prosecutor Manuela Comodi, and the police felt as if they could see inside her, and their conviction about what they saw overruled a lack of evidence they dismissed as a low-level inconvenience, the earthly interference in a case built around the nature of Knox’s soul.
    <modsnip>

    http://lareviewofbooks.org/essay/on-...of-amanda-knox
    Last edited by Harmony 2; 12-20-2013 at 10:38 AM.

Page 3 of 71 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 53 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 943
    Last Post: 01-31-2014, 10:01 AM
  2. Replies: 1026
    Last Post: 01-12-2014, 08:07 AM
  3. Replies: 1013
    Last Post: 12-19-2013, 05:30 AM
  4. Replies: 1150
    Last Post: 11-27-2013, 07:49 AM
  5. Replies: 1011
    Last Post: 11-12-2013, 12:34 AM

Tags for this Thread