WARNING:GRAPHIC PHOTOS Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #9

[Nova]

If AK's "I was there" is still being invoked as evidence of her guilt, then this was indeed a sham trial in a kangaroo court. And I'll take back everything I've said in defense of the Italian judicial system.

 

[SMK]

It's unfortunate that you have such a rigid opinion of those that are following this case with great interest.

I do not think so. I think other things are unfortunate. :innocent:

 

[Malkmus]

Professor Vinci found evidence of all three suspects on the bra clasp. Do you accept this evidence as well?

Yes. . . .

You have to take things like this with a grain of salt, SMK. Professor Vinci never said Amanda's DNA was found on the bra clasp. What was said by him was that there were profiles of other people on it (which we've known), one of which was a partial profile belonging to a female. Vinci, Raffaele's lawyer, said it "could" be Amanda's. However, it was never attributed to her, and as it stands, that unknown female profile remains "unknown". You can bet that had such a thing ever been attributed to her, it would have been a huge plus for the prosecution.

 

[SMK]

You have to take things like this with a grain of salt, SMK. Professor Vinci never said Amanda's DNA was found on the bra clasp. What was said by him was that there were profiles of other people on it (which we've known), one of which was a partial profile belonging to a female. Vinci, Raffaele's lawyer, said it "could" be Amanda's. However, it was never attributed to her, and as it stands, that unknown female profile remains "unknown". You can bet that had such a thing ever been attributed to her, it would have been a huge plus for the prosecution.

thanks.....it is shakier than i thought.....:waitasec:

 

[SMK]

If AK's "I was there" is still being invoked as evidence of her guilt, then this was indeed a sham trial in a kangaroo court. And I'll take back everything I've said in defense of the Italian judicial system.

Bravo. :clap:

 

[otto]

I should not still be here and typing, but just had to throw some last thoughts in:

1. They said Guede's statements were part of the evidence. THEY believe him, that's who.
2. " I was there" - where? at Raffaele's, so one has nothing to fear. She knows she did not leave? why assume it was "at the cottage"? the CONTEXT shows what she meant.
3. Well, the 2nd prosecutor may be known by "the company we keep"
4. I have NEVER thought this was anti-Americanism, and many, many others who believe in innocence believe it has ZIP to do with such.

:tears::tears:

The last point on the list was that refuters are stupid, evil, and dishonest ... I gave an example of a Democrat Senator - someone whom we would presume to be objective - who instead appears to believe that there was some sort of "anti-american" conspiracy. People that believe there was a conspiracy was not stupid, evil and dishonest, but some of them - notably public figures - are conspiracy theorists. Not everyone that believes it was a conspiracy agrees with the senator, some agree with the accident reconstructionist.

Amanda's statemet, in context, clearly did not communicate that she was referring to being at Raffaele's apartment.

Since the prosecutors are to be judged by their co-workers, then is there a reason why we don't take the high road and assume that Mignini would be an honorable officer of the court like his co-worker?

 

[SMK]

Some people following the case are completely confident that the DNA evidence will be upheld (because the evidence has already been reviewed by several experts) and that the conviction will be upheld. Since many of those people on a "certain site" are quite well educated (many holding several university degrees), I suspect they will modify their opinions based on evidence ... that is what I expect from educated people ... that they are able to re-evaluate information and modify opinions.

I think you are giving them far too much credit. Have you ever seen a pack of academics fight? :floorlaugh: Some of the "well educated" are the most obstinate, egoistic, tyrannical of all. I would be willing to bet my bank account that IF the convictions are overturned, and the refuters dance a jig, and little Amanda comes prancing home, "that site" will cry foul. I don't feel badly for saying so, after the way they slurred me and my articles, btw....:maddening:

 

[wasnt_me]

I find that HIGHLY improbable. So you think she cleaned her own prints and left RG's prints on purpose, and then when she had to come up with a suspect to defer attention she made up someone else entirely? If she knowingly left all of RG's evidence while cleaning up her own, wouldn't it then follow that she name RG when ILE is forcing her to say that she was there with someone?

This is what I'm thinking. I mean, you go through ALL the trouble of making sure RG's DNA, fingerprints, and footprints, and his literal crap stays on the scene, but then you implicate PL. That's nonsensical to me. That's why I believe that there wasn't a clean up, or there was just enough clean up to the actual murderer(s) to allow them to get out of the house without looking bloody. the culprit(s) might have cleaned the bathroom a little in the process of cleaning himself (themselves) up.

But, if going on the theory that they cleaned everything but RG's guilt, why in the world would they leave the bloody bathmat, if that was RS's print?

 

[otto]

You have to take things like this with a grain of salt, SMK. Professor Vinci never said Amanda's DNA was found on the bra clasp. What was said by him was that there were profiles of other people on it (which we've known), one of which was a partial profile belonging to a female. Vinci, Raffaele's lawyer, said it "could" be Amanda's. However, it was never attributed to her, and as it stands, that unknown female profile remains "unknown". You can bet that had such a thing ever been attributed to her, it would have been a huge plus for the prosecution.

"In a new twist in the Meredith Kercher murder mystery, evidence has been heard alleging that a bloodied bra worn by the British student carried the DNA of all three people accused of killing her in a sex game gone wrong."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...hers-bra-had-DNA-from-all-three-suspects.html

 

[Malkmus]

This is what I'm thinking. I mean, you go through ALL the trouble of making sure RG's DNA, fingerprints, and footprints, and his literal crap stays on the scene, but then you implicate PL. That's nonsensical to me. That's why I believe that there wasn't a clean up, or there was just enough clean up to the actual murderer(s) to allow them to get out of the house without looking bloody. the culprit(s) might have cleaned the bathroom a little in the process.

But, if going on the theory that they cleaned everything but RG's guilt, why in the world would they leave the bloody bathmat, if that was RS's print?

Not only that, but Raf himself called the police to tell them about the blood specifically in the bathroom. So he cleaned up his remaining prints, left his footprint on the mat, then called the police and told them there's blood in the bathroom? Doesn't make sense.

 

[otto]

I think you are giving them far too much credit. Have you ever seen a pack of academics fight? :floorlaugh: Some of the "well educated" are the most obstinate, egoistic, tyrannical of all. I would be willing to bet my bank account that IF the convictions are overturned, and the refuters dance a jig, and little Amanda comes prancing home, "that site" will cry foul. I don't feel badly for saying so, after the way they slurred me and my articles, btw....:maddening:

What articles are you referring to?

 

[SMK]

Since the prosecutors are to be judged by their co-workers, then is there a reason why we don't take the high road and assume that Mignini would be an honorable officer of the court like his co-worker?(snipped by SMK---Otto post)
Well, Mignini has led us to believe it might be the other way around....as for that Senator from WA, yes, she was being silly. I thought so at the time. But that does not make us ALL "conspiracy theorist" types. and what of convictions which really prove false in the end, in our U. S. courts? I have become a skeptic from these American atrocities...

 

[Malkmus]

"In a new twist in the Meredith Kercher murder mystery, evidence has been heard alleging that a bloodied bra worn by the British student carried the DNA of all three people accused of killing her in a sex game gone wrong."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...hers-bra-had-DNA-from-all-three-suspects.html

I'm sorry, is there something there that contradicts what I wrote? Cause I don't see it.

"evidence has been heard alleging", I mean come on. Could it be more vague?

 

[SMK]

What articles are you referring to?

oh, things I wrote for Bruce Fisher....some blog pieces, a book review, some news articles...oy vey

:nevermind:

 

[ziggy]

If that was true you would always get smeared luminol findings at any cleaned crime scene. Then you could never identify anything. Also these luminol pics are not exactly pristine anyway. But anyway, I tried to Google 'luminol footprints' and the first 2 pages were results from this case.
Isn't that amazing?

That's because this case is all over the internet in light of the controversy in which luminol prints that could not be said to have been made in blood and there were other explanations, were used to convict someone of murder.

You see a good deal of luminol prints where the blood may have been on the shoe but reduced as the person walked on carpet or other material - some of those footprints are not easily seen by the naked eye and luminol enhances the shoe print. Also, shoe prints on dark carpet - luminol enhances the print for shoe print matching.

The prosecutor's logic was that someone walked in MK's blood in her room, managed to clean up those footprints on the floor of MK's room, but after cleaning footprints from other locations in the flat as well, some of the "cleaned" footprint shapes glowed perfectly under the light and luminol test while other "cleaned" footprints disappeared without a trace. Flawed.

 

[otto]

I'm sorry, is there something there that contradicts what I wrote? Cause I don't see it.

"evidence has been heard alleging", I mean come on. Could it be more vague?

You wrote: " Professor Vinci never said Amanda's DNA was found on the bra clasp"

I presented a link to an article with Vinci, Raffaele's DNA expert "alleging that a bloodied bra worn by the British student carried the DNA of all three people accused of killing her in a sex game gone wrong. "

That looks to me to be a contradiction.

 

[SMK]

Well, it would depend on who you believe. Why do you think Vinci is on the prosecution's side?

The court in Perugia has previously heard that a clasp on the bra carried only traces of DNA belonging to Mr Sollecito.
His lawyers argued on Friday that the presence of the DNA was the result of laboratory contamination and not evidence that their client was involved in the brutal attack on Miss Kercher.
Last week they sketched out a scenario in which an intruder murdered Miss Kercher after being disturbed while trying to rob the house she shared with other students in the Umbrian university town.
Mr Sollecito's lawyers allege that Miss Knox's DNA has also been found on the torn bra. They will argue that the DNA evidence is so complex and confused that it cannot be used to incriminate their client. [ . . . ]Defence lawyers have called the entire scenario a fantasy based on the the fevered imagination of prosecutors and deeply flawed evidence.

OR.............................


"The analysis of the profile [found on the bra] in our opinion shows clearly the presence of at least three individuals," according to forensic expert Francesco Vinci, retained by Mr Sollecito's legal team.
There was a "mix" of DNA with the strongest trace from Miss Kercher but also traces from other individuals, both male and female, making it "impossible or nearly impossible" to draw any firm conclusions from the evidence, said Professor Vinci.
Prosecutors allege that during a kinky sex game, Miss Kercher, on all fours, was held down by Mr Sollecito and Mr Guede, who allegedly tried to rape her.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/3268373/Meredith-Kerchers-bra-had-DNA-from-all-three-suspects.html

 

[RR0004]

You wrote: " Professor Vinci never said Amanda's DNA was found on the bra clasp"

I presented a link to an article with Vinci, Raffaele's DNA expert "alleging that a bloodied bra worn by the British student carried the DNA of all three people accused of killing her in a sex game gone wrong. "

That looks to me to be a contradiction.

Wow...the media may have gotten it wrong...what a surprise!

 

[Malkmus]

You wrote: " Professor Vinci never said Amanda's DNA was found on the bra clasp"

I presented a link to an article with Vinci, Raffaele's DNA expert "alleging that a bloodied bra worn by the British student carried the DNA of all three people accused of killing her in a sex game gone wrong. "

That looks to me to be a contradiction.

Why don't you read what Vinci himself is quoted as saying in the article you posted, Otto?

There was a "mix" of DNA with the strongest trace from Miss Kercher but also traces from other individuals, both male and female, making it "impossible or nearly impossible" to draw any firm conclusions from the evidence, said Professor Vinci.

 

[otto]

Since the prosecutors are to be judged by their co-workers, then is there a reason why we don't take the high road and assume that Mignini would be an honorable officer of the court like his co-worker?(snipped by SMK---Otto post)
Well, Mignini has led us to believe it might be the other way around....as for that Senator from WA, yes, she was being silly. I thought so at the time. But that does not make us ALL "conspiracy theorist" types. and what of convictions which really prove false in the end, in our U. S. courts? I have become a skeptic from these American atrocities...

I don't follow. You are prepared to damage the reputation of an officer of the court because of what? Because she prosecuted the case against Amanda and Raffaele, or because co-counsel was Mignini?