Amanda Knox found guilty for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy #15

[otto]

You mean the drop of blood that they even said could have been there for weeks? No, that doesn't place her at the crime scene. They didn't place her in the bedroom, where Meredith was murdered, or the hallway, and I see no reason why Knox's DNA would not be found in any room that she lives in.

How did AK and RS manage to clean MK of their DNA but leave RG's?

In Meredith's bedroom, foreign DNA was found on the cuff of Meredith's sweatshirt, on Meredith's body, on her purse, on her bra strap and on her bra clasp. Four samples belonged to Guede, one belonged to Sollecito.

The blood in the bathroom and in Filomina's bedroom was directly connected to the night of the murder. Knox's DNA is mixed with Meredith's blood in Filomina's bedroom.

It's important to realize that DNA is not always found at crime scenes, so it's fortunate that DNA was discovered at this crime scene, as it clarifies who was involved in the murder ... we should be thankful for the expertise of the investigators that have worked hard to solve the murder of Meredith Kercher.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I think too often people think of AK's actions as being as how they would react or behave as an adult. They don't think how they would behave or react as a 20 yeta old stoned kid. Also, when one is in college and you do the same things day in and day out the days can run into each other. Add to that the fact that one is stoned or doing drugs and I think it is perfectly understandable that they don't have a timeline down.



Older people tend to have routines, kids don't. One night they may order pizza at 3am, the next night they may sleep all day and not get up till noon. I don't find anything ususual in not being able to give definite times.

I did my share of partying when I was young. I never blacked out and couldn't remember where I was and who I was with.
I did have a girlfriend that would drink way too much and suffer blackouts. She tended to get a little crazy and violent. Didn't hang out & party with her too often...I didn't need the hassle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ashleigh_schwartz]

In Meredith's bedroom, foreign DNA was found on the cuff of Meredith's sweatshirt, on Meredith's body, on her purse, on her bra strap and on her bra clasp. Four samples belonged to Guede, one belonged to Sollecito.

The blood in the bathroom and in Filomina's bedroom was directly connected to the night of the murder. Knox's DNA is mixed with Meredith's blood in Filomina's bedroom.

It's important to realize that DNA is not always found at crime scenes, so it's fortunate that DNA was discovered at this crime scene, as it clarifies who was involved in the murder.

Can you provide me with a source that states Knox's DNA was found mixed with MK's blood in Filomena's room? And not one that is biased?

 

[Linda7NJ]

I read that Italy has been found to have more violations by the European court of human rights than any other EU nation. - over 900 instances. Yet Italy does not seem to care. I imagine this case will join the list if they are stupid enough to base their ruling on the DNA evidence.

There's a ton more than just "DNA"




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[otto]

Sorry. I just read the sources and they say MK's DNA was not on it. All of them do. I even linked them in a previous post.

Have you looked at the report about the DNA sample that was found on the knife and compared it to Meredith's DNA? That might be a good place to start.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Wasn't Amanda's footprint also found on the pillow?

That's "iffy" defense claims the pillow was wrinkled or some such nonsense..whatever...Iirc that was left up in the air and not considered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[otto]

I think too often people think of AK's actions as being as how they would react or behave as an adult. They don't think how they would behave or react as a 20 yeta old stoned kid. Also, when one is in college and you do the same things day in and day out the days can run into each other. Add to that the fact that one is stoned or doing drugs and I think it is perfectly understandable that they don't have a timeline down.

Older people tend to have routines, kids don't. One night they may order pizza at 3am, the next night they may sleep all day and not get up till noon. I don't find anything ususual in not being able to give definite times.

I don't think we should start labelling Knox as a child again. By that standard, Guede was also a child, as he and Knox are the same age.

Should Guede be excused for committing murder because he was a "kid" or a "child" like 20 year old, world traveling, University student Knox?

 

[otto]

I read that Italy has been found to have more violations by the European court of human rights than any other EU nation. - over 900 instances. Yet Italy does not seem to care. I imagine this case will join the list if they are stupid enough to base their ruling on the DNA evidence.

How many human rights violations does the US have?

 

[Myvice]

I read that Italy has been found to have more violations by the European court of human rights than any other EU nation. - over 900 instances. Yet Italy does not seem to care. I imagine this case will join the list if they are stupid enough to base their ruling on the DNA evidence.

I don't have a link handy for this but if I remember correctly president Obama accused the US of human rights violations for not giving amnesty to the people that had entered the country illegally. That would give us an estimate of eleven million.

 

[Yellow]

Sounds like the defense of RS is grasping at straws.
...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think so. The judge was stupid to be making adverse inferences for RS not taking the stand. As I mentioned yesterday, if a prosecutor said that during a closing argument, it is immediate grounds for a mistrial without question. Mistrials have often been declared on that basis alone. You cannot comment adversely on a defendant invoking their right not to testify. Here, it is not the prosecutor but the jury implying it.

If in fact the jury or this judge made a negative inference because they did not testify or AK was not present in the courtroom that is a legal argument that would hold sway in a US court. Of course it is difficult to prove but I believe that it would be grounds for appeal if there was evidence that they improperly considered the failure to testify as evidence of guilt.

This is not comparable to Hellmann talking, it is not merely the talking. It is that the judge is hinting that they improperly considered evidence. Of course any defense attorney would be all over that.

 

[ashleigh_schwartz]

I guess AK and RS really are guilty BARD. Time to round them up and throw them in prison. They clearly murdered MK. There is no evidence disputing that.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I don't have a link handy for this but if I remember correctly president Obama accused the US of human rights violations for not giving amnesty to the people that had entered the country illegally. That would give us an estimate of eleven million.

Found this...
http://m.ibtimes.com/us-guilty-several-human-rights-violations-2012-human-rights-watch-1056702


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

I don't think so. The judge was stupid to be making adverse inferences for RS not taking the stand. As I mentioned yesterday, if a prosecutor said that during a closing argument, it is immediate grounds for a mistrial without question. Mistrials have often been declared on that basis alone. You cannot comment adversely on a defendant invoking their right not to testify. Here, it is not the prosecutor but the jury implying it.



If in fact the jury or this judge made a negative inference because they did not testify or AK was not present in the courtroom that is a legal argument that would hold sway in a US court. Of course it is difficult to prove but I believe that it would be grounds for appeal if there was evidence that they improperly considered the failure to testify as evidence of guilt.



This is not comparable to Hellmann talking, it is not merely the talking. It is that the judge is hinting that they improperly considered evidence. Of course any defense attorney would be all over that.

Not gonna hold my breath.

I don't think it's an issue. He did not say it was used against him. Saying something didn't help is far different than saying it hurt. IMO




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Myvice]

I don't think so. The judge was stupid to be making adverse inferences for RS not taking the stand. As I mentioned yesterday, if a prosecutor said that during a closing argument, it is immediate grounds for a mistrial without question. Mistrials have often been declared on that basis alone. You cannot comment adversely on a defendant invoking their right not to testify. Here, it is not the prosecutor but the jury implying it.

If in fact the jury or this judge made a negative inference because they did not testify or AK was not present in the courtroom that is a legal argument that would hold sway in a US court. Of course it is difficult to prove but I believe that it would be grounds for appeal if there was evidence that they improperly considered the failure to testify as evidence of guilt.

This is not comparable to Hellmann talking, it is not merely the talking. It is that the judge is hinting that they improperly considered evidence. Of course any defense attorney would be all over that.

My interpretation of what he said was that there was just too much evidence against them and that he wished RS would have tried to give them a reason not to believe the evidence.

 

[otto]

Wasn't Amanda's footprint also found on the pillow?

There was a print on the pillow case that is consistent with Knox's shoe size. In the trial summary, Massei explained that he would not rule on whether the print belonged to Knox, as there were bloody barefoot prints at the scene that placed her at the murder. The prints were ruled as having been made with blood, and that decision has not been overturned.

 

[Myvice]

Found this...
http://m.ibtimes.com/us-guilty-several-human-rights-violations-2012-human-rights-watch-1056702


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pretty scathing IMO.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I guess AK and RS really are guilty BARD. Time to round them up and throw them in prison. They clearly murdered MK. There is no evidence disputing that.

You've crossed over to the "dark side"? Or was that sarcasm?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

There was a print on the pillow case that is consistent with Knox's shoe size. In the trial summary, Massei explained that he would not rule on whether the print belonged to Knox, as there were bloody barefoot prints at the scene that placed her at the murder. The prints were ruled as having been made with blood, and that decision has not been overturned.

Otto, what ever happened with her shoes? Do you know?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Yellow]

There's a ton more than just "DNA"




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the jury bases their verdict with the junk DNA being the lynchpin, it would be a strong ground for appeal bc I doubt Italy to humiliate itself by being the nation bases convictions on DNA evidence of the type discredited by the intl community.

If on the other hand the jury bases it verdict on the circumstantial case where you have to essentially imagine AK and RS hopping all around the room to avoid leaving their DNA... Well, ridiculous as the case may be, if they make out a circumstantial case and if they don't rely too much on the DNA, it would be hard to overturn that. the law does not give a legal out for a jury believing a ridiculous circumstantial case.

 

[Linda7NJ]

If the jury bases their verdict with the junk DNA being the lynchpin, it would be a strong ground for appeal bc I doubt Italy to humiliate itself by being the nation bases convictions on DNA evidence of the type discredited by the intl community.



If on the other hand the jury bases it verdict on the circumstantial case where you have to essentially imagine AK and RS hopping all around the room to avoid leaving their DNA... Well, ridiculous as the case may be, if they make out a circumstantial case and if they don't rely too much on the DNA, it would be hard to overturn that. the law does not give a legal out for a jury believing a ridiculous circumstantial case.

Have you not read the previous decisions?

I am actually going to go back and read them again..cause it's been a long time and I feel bad that I keep torturing poor Otto.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk