Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#6

[aa9511]

I still don't completely understand. The prosecutor says that it is blood related to the murder. The blog said that there is no DNA so it is not Meredith's blood. If I understand that correctly, then I get the impression that it is really splitting hairs to claim that the prints are not from blood, but instead from high iron content in the water - which we haven't heard about, or from bleach residue left days earlier - and prior to several uses of the shower. The reason that Meredith did not leave the same residue or iron stains, even though she used the same shower, is because hypothetically she wore shoes after stepping out of the shower.

It seems like the blogger is really stretching to distance Knox from the bloody luminol foot prints.

Yes, I agree comletely with the stretching to distance Knox from the bloody footprints. That's why I have many problems with information coming from a site where I have seen with my own eyes how they twist information around to make it appear meaningless or inconsequential (sp?) or otherwise distort the evidence. And admittedly, that happens on both sides (in general, on the internet, not saying on here), so not trying to accuse one side.

I think what Yellow is trying to say is that if that is blood from Meredith, why didn't it test positive, or show, that it had Meredith's DNA? I must admit I find this odd, if this is true. I just don't know. You would expect that if the luminol indicated blood, then obviously it is Meredith's blood, so then they didn't it test positive for Meredith's DNA?

I think that is what Yellow was saying. Correct me if I'm wrong, Yellow.

 

[otto]

The prints only make sense if it is Mk DNA. I am sure that it an easy enough fact to know whether the prosecution said they did those tests and it tested positive for MK DNA, not MK blood, MK DNA.

Even if MK DNA there is the next thing to prove and that it is blood. The tetra-whatever tests tested negative for blood. RS says this too on his blog. again I am sure that is something the prosecution would be loudly disputing if it were the case that the tests came back positive for blood.

I'm confused. Was it tested for DNA and blood and both tests were negative and, if so, who did the tests. I'd like to read the non-blog reference because each time I think I understand, I realize I don't.

 

[SMK]

The prosecutor firmly connects Sollecito to Knox throughout the evening of the murder.

I understand. But why do you think it is, that a journalist like Nadeau would suggest that RS and AK were being separated "as we have not seen in 5 years" and that some talk of RS- overturned , AK--standing? Has she flipped her gourd?

 

[Yellow]

I'm confused. Was it tested for DNA and blood and both tests were negative and, if so, who did the tests. I'd like to read the non-blog reference because each time I think I understand, I realize I don't.

Look at this pro guilt blog. They pretty much say the same thing saying that AK genetic material was detected in the prints. The blog would have stated MK was there too. It only states that one print had both girls DNA. The other prints did not have it.

If MK DNA was not in those prints how could it be her blood that was reacting w luminol?

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Luminol_Traces

 

[otto]

Yes, I agree comletely with the stretching to distance Knox from the bloody footprints. That's why I have many problems with information coming from a site where I have seen with my own eyes how they twist information around to make it appear meaningless or inconsequential (sp?) or otherwise distort the evidence. And admittedly, that happens on both sides (in general, on the internet, not saying on here), so not trying to accuse one side.

I think what Yellow is trying to say is that if that is blood from Meredith, why didn't it test positive, or show, that it had Meredith's DNA? I must admit I find this odd, if this is true. I just don't know. You would expect that if the luminol indicated blood, then obviously it is Meredith's blood, so then they didn't it test positive for Meredith's DNA?

I think that is what Yellow was saying. Correct me if I'm wrong, Yellow.

Thanks. So it is an iron based substance, like blood, but Meredith's DNA is absent? This leaves open the possibility of suggesting that it is residue from high iron content in the water? If that were true, the entire cottage should be covered with footprints leading to and from both bathrooms. Even if the suggestion is that it is bleach from cleaning the bathroom at some time prior to the murder, there should still be multipled prints to and from both bathrooms ... or did everyone where shoes after stepping out of the shower, except Knox?

 

[SMK]

Yes that is my understanding but it is probably not blood. That is why the defense says the prosecutions argument is illogical1) either it is blood and does not match MK which makes no sense ; 2) the defense story that the luminol is cleaning products makes more sense given that it is not MK DNA; or 3) AK used bleach on it killing MK DNA, yet that does not make sense either bc it tested negative for blood

They did the test for blood, not the luminol test, the textra-whatever test that is extremely sensitive for blood. That test was negative for blood.

None of the luminol prints tested positive for MK DNA nor did they test positive for blood under the more sensitive tetra test

I am not sure if prosecutor claims that DNA is MK or just assumes that without testing OR they claim the DNA was killed bc of bleach.

BBM---Anyone know why there was a strong smell of bleach at RS's apt, but NOT at the cottage?

 

[aa9511]

:truce:

This ridiculous toilet story is a new twist, with RG waste apparently causing a tiff. The old motive was the sex orgy, then it was dispute about cleaning, then also some dispute about MK studying then now a combo of a dispute about the toilet and not keeping quiet.

No evidence to support any of it,

It is feasible that is started with an argument. We will never know what that argument was. But IMO, an agrument is not too far "out there." It didn't have to be about the feces, that's what pro-innocent supporters are grabbing on to because it supports their theory the most - that the whole case against RS and Amanda is "ridiculous."

They would not be that quick to grab hold of something which could plausibly be true. Such as, an argument started, probably b/w Amanda and MK since they knew each other the most. RS got into it to support his lover, Amanda, who by all accouts he was infatuated with since he met her. RG got into it because he has the personality which does not let him sit back, IMO.

That is not that outlandish.

People do stupid things all the time, for stupid reasons. The case where the teenager shot the baby in the stroller in the head because the mother wouldn't give him her purse comes to mind.

 

[otto]

I understand. But why do you think it is, that a journalist like Nadeau would suggest that RS and AK were being separated "as we have not seen in 5 years" and that some talk of RS- overturned , AK--standing? Has she flipped her gourd?

Nadeau published an article after the first day and apparently that was her opinion. Prosecutors did somewhat separate the two by asking 30 years for Knox and 26 years for Sollecito. Perhaps she expected a larger difference.

 

[otto]

BBM---Anyone know why there was a strong smell of bleach at RS's apt, but NOT at the cottage?

Does bleach destroy blood and leave DNA intact, the other way around, or neither?

 

[aa9511]

What is the scenario regarding cleaning products? Where do they come from, and why is it only Knox that tracks the products around the cottage on the day of the murder?

So it tested negative for blood, and tested negative for DNA? Does blood that is revealed with luminol always test positive for DNA and blood, or are there situations where blood is still blood even though tests do not confirm that it is blood?

But Otto, wouldn't Meredith's blood test positive for Meredith's DNA? I'm so confused at this point about this.

I thought blood automatically had DNA in it which could be tested.

So did they not test it?

 

[TorisMom003]

But Otto, wouldn't Meredith's blood test positive for Meredith's DNA? I'm so confused at this point about this.

I thought blood automatically had DNA in it which could be tested.

So did they not test it?

DNA can be found in any part of the body, from hair to saliva. Blood samples are often taken because blood contains a large amount of DNA. Additionally, since blood comes from the interior of the body, it will have fewer factors to interfere with the harvested DNA. This cannot be said of skin samples, which may have come into contact with contaminants, or of samples taken from saliva, which may be influenced by food.

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/about_5098709_dna-blood-testing.html#ixzz2lsbbQHGk

 

[geevee]

BBM---Anyone know why there was a strong smell of bleach at RS's apt, but NOT at the cottage?

I thought it was because his kitchen water pipe broke and spilled water all over the night MK was killed, and AK brought the mop the next day after showering to clean it up. At least that was what I supposed, leaving water under the cabinet or on the floor over night might tend to smell musty the next day and need more than just a mop to sop it up.

 

[otto]

It is feasible that is started with an argument. We will never know what that argument was. But IMO, an agrument is not too far "out there." It didn't have to be about the feces, that's what pro-innocent supporters are grabbing on to because it supports their theory the most - that the whole case against RS and Amanda is "ridiculous."

They would not be that quick to grab hold of something which could plausibly be true. Such as, an argument started, probably b/w Amanda and MK since they knew each other the most. RS got into it to support his lover, Amanda, who by all accouts he was infatuated with since he met her. RG got into it because he has the personality which does not let him sit back, IMO.

That is not that outlandish.

People do stupid things all the time, for stupid reasons. The case where the teenager shot the baby in the stroller in the head because the mother wouldn't give him her purse comes to mind.

The prosecutor said that it was the invasion of Knox with strange men again, drugs and a party when Meredith was at home and wanted to relax without the "invasion". I think this is quite reasonable given that Knox wasn't sleeping at the cottage. What the prosecutor says is that the invasion started the conflict and that it was aggravated by the lack of cleanliness in the bathroom off the kitchen.

Here's everything I can find about the motive:

Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki 59s
Rudy was not sober, quite high, a bit annoying, and was acting the same disgusting way he behaved downstairs days before.

Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki now
Meredith was the one triggering an argument because of the 'inpolite' invasion and behavior. She accused Knox.

Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki 11s
Crini cites Laura Mezzetti about the 'annoyance' caused by Knox on house cleaning issues.

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Meredith process, Prosecutor Crini: "The contrast between Meredith and Amanda comes to matters of hygiene and cleanliness in the house."

The Nation @ 1m qn_lanazione
Meredith trial, Prosecutor Crini: "The conflict between Meredith and Amanda explodes when Rudy left the dirty bathroom"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 7s
Lawyer Pacelli (Lumumba): "Witnesses said that Meredith was tired of the dirt that Amanda left in the bathroom"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Lawyer Pacelli (Lumumba ): "Witnesses said that Amanda often took men to the house"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 21s
Lawyer Pacelli (Lumumba ): "Witnesses spoke of a cosmetic bag left in the bathroom by Amanda with condoms and a vibrator"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 49s
Meredith process: lawyer Pacelli reads testimonials that talk about the use of cannabis and alcohol on the part of Amanda Knox

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Pacelli (Lumumba): "The Amanda Knox of the night of the murder was a mixture of sex, drugs and alcohol"

 

[SMK]

Does bleach destroy blood and leave DNA intact, the other way around, or neither?

Bleach is known to be a very effective DNA remover, one of the best.

As for blood evidence, or blood, oxidized bleach (I always use this for laundry) will not only destroy blood, but its compounds, so no later detection can occur. This is fact, and forensic sites back this up.

http://www.exploreforensics.co.uk/detecting-evidence-after-bleaching.html

So I had wondered why the cottage did not smell at all like bleach, but Sollecito's apt did?

 

[geevee]

It is feasible that is started with an argument. We will never know what that argument was. But IMO, an agrument is not too far "out there." It didn't have to be about the feces, that's what pro-innocent supporters are grabbing on to because it supports their theory the most - that the whole case against RS and Amanda is "ridiculous."

They would not be that quick to grab hold of something which could plausibly be true. Such as, an argument started, probably b/w Amanda and MK since they knew each other the most. RS got into it to support his lover, Amanda, who by all accouts he was infatuated with since he met her. RG got into it because he has the personality which does not let him sit back, IMO.

That is not that outlandish.

People do stupid things all the time, for stupid reasons. The case where the teenager shot the baby in the stroller in the head because the mother wouldn't give him her purse comes to mind.

I don't think it's outlandish at all, I just wonder why that sort of supposition is allowed in court. If the prosecutor says 'We really don't know what started the occurrences that culminated in Meredith's death, but this may be a likely scene that happened...' well okay then. But if he's stating it to the jury that this is what did occur, the new motive they've decided happened, I can't understand how that's allowed, it's certainly not evidence.

 

[otto]

I thought it was because his kitchen water pipe broke and spilled water all over the night MK was killed, and AK brought the mop the next day after showering to clean it up. At least that was what I supposed, leaving water under the cabinet or on the floor over night might tend to smell musty the next day and need more than just a mop to sop it up.

The water should have been cleaned up immediately, and if it wasn't, it would have evaporated after 16 hours.

 

[aa9511]

Look at this pro guilt blog. They pretty much say the same thing saying that AK genetic material was detected in the prints. The blog would have stated MK was there too. It only states that one print had both girls DNA. The other prints did not have it.

If MK DNA was not in those prints how could it be her blood that was reacting w luminol?

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Luminol_Traces

But please read about the Tetra.... (TMB) at the bottom of the page.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Luminol_Traces

It clearly states that Luminol is more sensitive to blood than TMB. Yet you stated earlier that TMB is more sensitive to blood than Luminol.....so who is correct? It cannot be that both are true.

So if TMB is less senstiive to blood than Luminol, would that not explain why the TMB test came back negative while Luminol test came back positive?

 

[geevee]

Does bleach destroy blood and leave DNA intact, the other way around, or neither?

Here's a forensic article on 'detecting evidence after bleaching':

http://www.exploreforensics.co.uk/detecting-evidence-after-bleaching.html

 

[otto]

Bleach is known to be a very effective DNA remover, one of the best.

As for blood evidence, or blood, oxidized bleach (I always use this for laundry) will not only destroy blood, but its compounds, so no later detection can occur. This is fact, and forensic sites back this up.

http://www.exploreforensics.co.uk/detecting-evidence-after-bleaching.html

So I had wondered why the cottage did not smell at all like bleach, but Sollecito's apt did?

Maybe they were soaking shoes and clothes in bleach.

 

[aa9511]

Thanks. So it is an iron based substance, like blood, but Meredith's DNA is absent? This leaves open the possibility of suggesting that it is residue from high iron content in the water? If that were true, the entire cottage should be covered with footprints leading to and from both bathrooms. Even if the suggestion is that it is bleach from cleaning the bathroom at some time prior to the murder, there should still be multipled prints to and from both bathrooms ... or did everyone where shoes after stepping out of the shower, except Knox?

No, I do not believe it is rust or bleach or anything like that. IMO, that is blood that the Luminol reacted to. It is blood, IMO.

But my question is......since it is, by necessity, Meredith's blood....then why didn't it test positive for Meredith's DNA? In the link Yellow posted, it just said some tested postiive for Amanda DNA, and one tested postive for both Meredith and Amanda DNA.

But if they were all made with Meredith's blood, wouldn't they all test positive for Meredith DNA?

Maybe I am not understanding something regarding blood and DNA.