Amanda Knox New Motivation Report RE: Meredith Kercher Murder #1 *new trial ordered*

[Malkmus]

Did Nina Burleigh, in her most recent article criticizing forums related to Meredith Kercher's murder, imply that there was no mop and that it was not tested? A mop and bucket are mentioned in the summary of the court verdict. The report specifically mentions the testing of the mop.

I know what premises I am using, and I know that the mop and bucket were part of the evidence collected at the scene of the murder. It was reported early on that the mop and bucket were found at the door of the cottage. Today, it is difficult to prove that. It is not reasonable to conclude that because links related to a murder that happened six years ago are no longer available, the content from those links must have been imagined. It's rather bizarre that anyone would select that simple point: whether the mop and bucket were at the door or in the closet, as a focus for attempting to discredit a victim based website.

No, you misunderstand what she has written:

I emailed him to ask where he had found out that Knox and Sollecito met police standing outside the murder house with a mop and bucket in hand. That damning incident was nowhere in the record, not even the prosecutor would confirm it, nor had Italy’s Polizia Scientifica ever tested such items, which would surely have offered up some useful DNA evidence, had they been used to clean blood.

First, she is saying Amanda and Raf were not caught outside with the mop and bucket in hand. This is accurate. The police statement says they were waiting outside, and no mention of them with mop or bucket.

Second, she is saying the mop and bucket were not tested. While this is not a fact I can verify 100 percent, there is no information I have found to the contrary. And even more importantly, her claim is reinforced by photos of the cottage months later where you can see the mop and what looks like a crate are still outside in the same place they were the day the body was found.

So, in short, Nina is correct in everything she has said. Can you offer anything that contradicts that?

ETA: PHOTO OF THE MOP STILL SITTING OUTSIDE THE COTTAGE JULY 2009

 

[Malkmus]

Thanks, but the link doesn't work for me.

Here you go. They pull a different mop from the storage closet. This one was tested, I believe:

 

[otto]

No, you misunderstand what she has written:



First, she is saying Amanda and Raf were not caught outside with the mop and bucket in hand. This is accurate. The police statement says they were waiting outside, and no mention of them with mop or bucket.

Second, she is saying the mop and bucket were not tested. While this is not a fact I can verify 100 percent, there is no information I have found to the contrary. And even more importantly, her claim is reinforced by photos of the cottage months later where you can see the mop and what looks like a crate are still outside in the same place they were the day the body was found.

So, in short, Nina is correct in everything she has said. Can you offer anything that contradicts that?

ETA: PHOTO OF THE MOP STILL SITTING OUTSIDE THE COTTAGE JULY 2009

So there was a mop and bucket, but it was unrelated? I don't know anything about mops and buckets other than what is in the motivation report ... and there is information there about both a mop and bucket. The mop was tested and no evidence was discovered.

If the only complaint about a forum (that has been around for 6 years) is that there is a six year old unsourced remark about a mop and bucket being outside the cottage when police arrived, then I think that forum must be an exceptionally great place. Imagine a forum where that is the only complaint regarding factual information! It seems almost unheard of.

 

[Malkmus]

So there was a mop and bucket, but it was unrelated? I don't know anything about mops and buckets other than what is in the motivation report ... and there is information there about both a mop and bucket. The mop was tested and no evidence was discovered.

If the only complaint about a forum (that has been around for 6 years) is that there is a six year old unsourced remark about a mop and bucket being outside the cottage when police arrived, then I think that forum must be an exceptionally great place. Imagine a forum where that is the only complaint regarding factual information! It seems almost unheard of.

The fact that you can only participate in that forum if you believe the pair are guilty is quite a drawback. I realize you were being sarcastic though.

 

[Perodicticus potto]

According to experts that tried to pinpoint the time of death to 2 hours or 4 hours after Nicole Simpson had eaten, both experts had to admit that the stomach contents (regardless of where they were in the digestive process) were the least reliable method for pinpointing actual time of death. Nothing has changed since then. It is still not possible to identify an exact time of death based on the digestive system of the dead person.

I have provided a link to support this fact. If you have a link that contradicts this fact, one that states that the digestive system and stomach contents are a good indicator or actual time of death, I would be very interested in reading it. Barring that, I think we have to go with what medical experts have stated regarding the unreliability of using the stomach contents (regardless of where they are in the digestive process) to determine actual time of death.

I have to admit to being confused. I agreed that stomach contents were not a reliable indicator, and even provided a reason for that. Are you using the term "stomach contents" to mean something beyond "the material contained within the specific digestive organ known as the stomach"? If not, I'm not sure what your point of disagreement is.

Your post doesn't really contribute anything.

First of all, that's quite a rude and counterproductive comment.

Secondly, my intent was to contribute further understanding of how the digestive system works, which seemed 1) to be germane to the topic at hand and 2) to be somewhat lacking in the thread. I guess it's a matter of opinion whether that was a worthwhile aim. If it makes you feel better, I will certainly think twice before trying something similar again.

 

[Nova]

Don't get discourage, potto. This topic gets heated at times, but very every dismissive remark, there are hundreds if not thousands of us who are following your arguments.

 

[Tugela]

She already has travel restrictions based on her other conviction and jail time. If her murder conviction is affirmed, then she should serve out her sentence. That seems like a no-brainer, yet based on comments here, I get the impression that people believe that Knox shouldn't have to suffer the consequences for murder if the murder is in a country with a different legal system. That's a scary thought.

Part of the extradition process is that the requesting country has to present a statement of facts. If those facts are considered inadequate the request will be refused. That is part of the extradition treaty.

The evidence used to convict in the first trial would not have been admitted in the US, so I doubt that any request to extradite by Italy would be granted by a US court.

 

[otto]

Part of the extradition process is that the requesting country has to present a statement of facts. If those facts are considered inadequate the request will be refused. That is part of the extradition treaty.

The evidence used to convict in the first trial would not have been admitted in the US, so I doubt that any request to extradite by Italy would be granted by a US court.

Why wouldn't the evidence be admitted by a US court?

I'm looking forward to hearing the fruit juice argument presented in a US court ... but I somehow doubt that it will be tolerated.

 

[Ebbiguise]

Don't get discourage, potto. This topic gets heated at times, but very every dismissive remark, there are hundreds if not thousands of us who are following your arguments.

The argument on TOD relating to her last meal is that it is impossible that she ate at the times we know she did, but had nothing in her duodenum at the later (11:30PM) time of death.

The theory is that since she actually had nothing in her duodenum part of small intestines, and her stomach was full, that this more then likely means she died much earlier.

I am still waiting for someone to present a valid argument that this holds water on considering any science.

This has been established to be the case by many members here, so I am interested in more evidence backing up this claim.

 

[otto]

Part of the extradition process is that the requesting country has to present a statement of facts. If those facts are considered inadequate the request will be refused. That is part of the extradition treaty.

The evidence used to convict in the first trial would not have been admitted in the US, so I doubt that any request to extradite by Italy would be granted by a US court.

Read the treaty here:

http://internationalextraditionblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/italy.pdf

The statements of fact are the judicial summaries, which must be (art. 21) published within 90 days of a decision and translated for the country of extradition and ... as it turns out ... they have been translated to English for the last six years by a dedicated group of international translators that want to see the murder of Meredith Kercher prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Requesting a statement of facts is not equivalent to retesting the evidence. The ideal outcome for Ms Knox would be that the trial evidence is reconsidered in the US. She has all sorts of experts lined up. The ideal outcome for Meredith would be that all people remotely associated with her murder suffer the consequences. If Guede is the lone wolf, then it's all on him. If the police, prosecutors, supreme court, fast-track courts and some outspoken journalists are correct, then more than one person is involved in this murder.

Is grapefruit juice foot-prints one of the few things that can be confused with bloody footprints?

 

[sherlockh]

The argument on TOD relating to her last meal is that it is impossible that she ate at the times we know she did, but had nothing in her duodenum at the later (11:30PM) time of death.

The theory is that since she actually had nothing in her duodenum part of small intestines, and her stomach was full, that this more then likely means she died much earlier.

I am still waiting for someone to present a valid argument that this holds water on considering any science.

This has been established to be the case by many members here, so I am interested in more evidence backing up this claim.

It is not impossible at all which I already showed several times. 4-5 Hours makes it very possible for the slice of pizza to have passed the stomach and duodenum and end up exactly where they found food in her intestines. The alternative, a gastric emptying delay of 3 hours is extremely unlikely. Besides if Meredith had this medical disorder then where is the proof that this delay wouldn't be any longer than 3 hours?

There is 2 choices here. One being extremely unlikely without any proof, the other one right in the range of what is normal. So I don't understand how you can continue to argue that there is no valid argument?

I think it is important to note that the Supreme Court did not cancel the Massei Report of the first trial.

Massei report (bbm):

empty duodenum, small intestine containing digested material in the last loop

In general, he observed, the stomach takes 2 to 3 hours after eating to empty. He wanted to stress, however, that this was a subjective indication that may vary depending on the subject’s condition, as well as on the amount and kind of food consumed. He also stated that while it takes 2-3 hours for emptying to take place, ‚when it starts the emptying is fairly quick, when food has reached ...that semi-liquid or fluid aspect... emptying happens quickly‛

 

[sherlockh]

Don't get discourage, potto. This topic gets heated at times, but very every dismissive remark, there are hundreds if not thousands of us who are following your arguments.

Millions

 

[Frankie Hellis]

The argument on TOD relating to her last meal is that it is impossible that she ate at the times we know she did, but had nothing in her duodenum at the later (11:30PM) time of death.

The theory is that since she actually had nothing in her duodenum part of small intestines, and her stomach was full, that this more then likely means she died much earlier.

I am still waiting for someone to present a valid argument that this holds water on considering any science.

This has been established to be the case by many members here, so I am interested in more evidence backing up this claim.

With this digestion vs. TOD thing it is because digestions starts when eating commences, not when the meal is finished. Within 2-3 hours from the start of the meal the stomach has started to empty.

All the literature claiming TOD cannot be determined based on the state of digestion is typically referring to someone who is dead and there are no known facts about the situation. In this case, we know the meal was at 6-ish, we know she was alive at 8:55. We know her stomach had 500cc of digested material in it, which had not yet emptied into the duodenum. Based on those known facts it is difficult to come up with a theory where she died at 11:30PM.

 

[otto]

With this digestion vs. TOD thing it is because digestions starts when eating commences, not when the meal is finished. Within 2-3 hours from the start of the meal the stomach has started to empty.

All the literature claiming TOD cannot be determined based on the state of digestion is typically referring to someone who is dead and there are no known facts about the situation. In this case, we know the meal was at 6-ish, we know she was alive at 8:55. We know her stomach had 500cc of digested material in it, which had not yet emptied into the duodenum. Based on those known facts it is difficult to come up with a theory where she died at 11:30PM.

BBM

Not so ...

In the case I quoted/linked, where two medical experts admitted that stomach contents (where ever they are in the digestive process) is not a reliable method for determining time of death, they knew exactly when Nicole Simpson had eaten the meal. Experts debated whether she was murdered two hours, or four hours, after the meal for the very same reason that stomach contents is debated here. OJ wanted to place the time of death at a time when he could not have been murdering Nicole. The conclusion was that nothing could be determined based on what was going on with the food in the digestive system. This case is no different. No matter what argument is made, the conclusion is the same: nothing can be determined about the time of death based on the food that was eaten.

It cannot be said that Meredith was murdered two hours after her meal or four hours after her meal ... according to previous cases and medical experts.

 

[Frankie Hellis]

BBM

Not so ...

In the case I quoted/linked, where two medical experts admitted that stomach contents (where ever they are in the digestive process) is not a reliable method for determining time of death, they knew exactly when Nicole Simpson had eaten the meal. Experts debated whether she was murdered two hours, or four hours, after the meal for the very same reason that stomach contents is debated here. OJ wanted to place the time of death at a time when he could not have been murdering Nicole. The conclusion was that nothing could be determined based on what was going on with the food in the digestive system. This case is no different. No matter what argument is made, the conclusion is the same: nothing can be determined about the time of death based on the food that was eaten.

It cannot be said that Meredith was murdered two hours after her meal or four hours after her meal ... according to previous cases and medical experts.

That book looks interesting; I ordered it.
Even if you go 2-4 hours, you still are not looking at 11:30PM, which is the prosecution's theory.

Okay, let's not consider just TOD vs. digestion. What time was the broken down car sitting outside? We know she wasn't murdered during that time. Guede's claims her scream was at 9:25. He can't lie about that because he doesn't know who heard it and who will corroborate the timing of that. Meredith was murdered while still wearing her jacket from the walk home at 9PM and she never attempted to call her mother back after the disconnected call at 8:56 (I might be off by a couple minutes on the call time). Consider the package, isn't that what y'all keep harping on about? When you consider the package with regard to TOD you still can't be on board with anything after 10PM and it really points to earlier. What time do you think she was killed?

 

[sherlockh]

With this digestion vs. TOD thing it is because digestions starts when eating commences, not when the meal is finished. Within 2-3 hours from the start of the meal the stomach has started to empty.

All the literature claiming TOD cannot be determined based on the state of digestion is typically referring to someone who is dead and there are no known facts about the situation. In this case, we know the meal was at 6-ish, we know she was alive at 8:55. We know her stomach had 500cc of digested material in it, which had not yet emptied into the duodenum. Based on those known facts it is difficult to come up with a theory where she died at 11:30PM.

BBM. Wrong again. It takes 2-3 hours for the stomach to completely empty not to start to empty. It takes just about half an hour to start to empty. This means if you consider Meredith a normal healthy person, then her 6pm pizza would have been gone from her stomach by 8-9pm. TOD was set at 10:50pm by the coroner. So there are still several hours for that pizza to reach the last loop of the intestines where it showed up during autopsy.

Therefore whatever was in her stomach at TOD must have been eaten later. Another piece of evidence that proves this was that a piece of mushroom was found while the 6pm pizza did not contain any mushrooms. This 9pm TOD theory proves exactly the opposite of what it was supposed to proof.

 

[otto]

That book looks interesting; I ordered it.
Even if you go 2-4 hours, you still are not looking at 11:30PM, which is the prosecution's theory.

Okay, let's not consider just TOD vs. digestion. What time was the broken down car sitting outside? We know she wasn't murdered during that time. Guede's claims her scream was at 9:25. He can't lie about that because he doesn't know who heard it and who will corroborate the timing of that. Meredith was murdered while still wearing her jacket from the walk home at 9PM and she never attempted to call her mother back after the disconnected call at 8:56 (I might be off by a couple minutes on the call time). Consider the package, isn't that what y'all keep harping on about? When you consider the package with regard to TOD you still can't be on board with anything after 10PM and it really points to earlier. What time do you think she was killed?

Two or four hours was important in the OJ trial. Is it 2.5 or 4.5 in this case? It doesn't change the fact that the stomach contents (at whatever stage of digestion) mean nothing.

Let's look at other factors. We know the murder occurred between 9 and midnight. We know that Rudy, who was there at the time of the murder, ran down the street in bloody clothing, went home, changed and was dancing in the clubs shortly after midnight. If it took him an hour to clean up, that means it was about 11:30 or midnight when he left the cottage. If he had left the cottage at 9:30, he would have been in the clubs much earlier.

 

[redheadedgal]

Amanda Knox is “very confident” the U.S. government will not allow her extradition to Italy if she is convicted of the murder of Meredith Kercher in a retrial.

Knox, 25, is understood to have been briefed by lawyers on the 1984 extradition treaty between the U.S. and Italy, and on her rights under the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution not to be tried twice for the same crime.

A friend said: “I spoke to the family and they are very confident she won’t have to go whatever happens — very confident.”

Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/news/Ama...adited+Italy/8165533/story.html#ixzz2P8fet5Vk
​

 

[redheadedgal]

Most analysts agree that the US likely would not extradite Knox if the Italian court sentences her to more time.


http://ca.news.yahoo.com/amanda-knox-retrial-tale-two-countries-legal-systems-231855314.html

 

[otto]

Amanda Knox is “very confident” the U.S. government will not allow her extradition to Italy if she is convicted of the murder of Meredith Kercher in a retrial.

Knox, 25, is understood to have been briefed by lawyers on the 1984 extradition treaty between the U.S. and Italy, and on her rights under the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution not to be tried twice for the same crime.

A friend said: “I spoke to the family and they are very confident she won’t have to go whatever happens — very confident.”

Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/news/Ama...adited+Italy/8165533/story.html#ixzz2P8fet5Vk
​

If Knox was briefed by her lawyer, Anne Bremner, then she may want to check the facts with another lawyer. It appears that Bremner is glazing over the little words, like "Requested Party."

"Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the Requested Party [this means the US] for the same acts for which for which extradition is sought."

Knox has not been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or served a sentence in the US for the murder of Meredith. She has served 4 years in jail in Italy, three of which were for the false allegations against the bar owner. During the appeal stage of the trial, she was released. That appeal process was reviewed and annulled, so the appeal process will be repeated. It could still go either way, but the ruling that she lied to avoid the consequences for the murder is part of the appeal. That is, it is confirmed that she lied because of the murder, so it's difficult to argue that she didn't commit the murder ... it becomes illogical to have one verdict without the other.

Perhaps Knox is thinking that because an US fighter pilot, a colonel and 22 CIA people were not extradited from the US to Italy, that means that she too won't be extradited. This would also be an error, as there is an exemption clause in the treaty for military personnel. Knox is not military.

I find it very interesting that Knox and friends are continuing to explore tactics for avoiding the consequences of a murder conviction.