Meredith Kercher murdered - Amanda Knox convicted, now appeals #6

Discussion in 'Amanda Knox' started by Salem, Feb 7, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Salem

    Salem Former Member

    Messages:
    29,160
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Please continue here. Please be mindful of TOS and don't let emotion get the better part of the discussion.

    Thread 1

    Thread 2

    Thread 3

    Thread 4 - On hold.

    Thread 5

    Appeal is to be decided in March 2011.

    Last few posts from previous thread:

     
  2. Loading...


  3. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    27,647
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I had to bring this quote over ... because reading this made me start thinking about how a movie about a murder could be done more respectfully.

    Rather than show a violent attack, the scene could follow Meredith going home and show her settling in to study, cut to 1-3 figures entering the cottage and then silence ... with a photo tribute to Meredith and maybe some shots of her memorial.

    I'm not convinced that sex and violence were needed to draw an audience for this film ... too bad the producer didn't realize that.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg9eSyhgzBw
     
  4. Nova

    Nova Active Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I want to be clear that while I am skeptical about this film, I by no means think we should discard the first amendment to ban it.

    otto, there is no evidence whatsoever that 3 figures entered the cottage together. Even if you believe the evidence shows 3 people (in addition to the victim) ended up there eventually, there's no evidence they arrived together.

    So even in one brief and tasteful example, we've already left the available evidence and departed for the land of fiction.
     
  5. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    27,647
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I wrote 1-3, not 3.
     
  6. Nova

    Nova Active Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    The principle is still the same. Sorry, I should have made it clear I wasn't objecting to your example, per se, just pointing out that any film made will require choices that tilt the narrative toward one conclusion or another.

    It is possible in theory to construct a film that is ultimately neutral, but very difficult to do in practice. And probably impossible with the budget and shooting schedule of a made-for-TV movie.
     
  7. Allusonz

    Allusonz New Member

    Messages:
    4,679
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The start of 1 - 3 still represents an issue

    On the record I will not partake in any movie discussion. I have no idea what the content is but I do know the aim of most movies

    I am actually saddened that MK's family has to go through this and I will simply not be a part of it
     
  8. Allusonz

    Allusonz New Member

    Messages:
    4,679
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  9. Nova

    Nova Active Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    What were you saying about how sometimes one thank-you just isn't enough?
     
  10. Nova

    Nova Active Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Having a photo with the knife next to a ruler merely confirms my earlier conclusion: there's no way somebody chose to carry that knife out for the evening "just for fun."
     
  11. Malkmus

    Malkmus New Member

    Messages:
    1,266
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't plan on watching the movie. TV movies are generally trashy and not well made to begin with. That being said, I'm sure at some point a "tasteful" version of the story could be made, but probably not until long after all the appeals are done and the maximum amount of information has been made available and some time has passed. IIRC, the Michael Winterbottom version is supposed to stay away from any depiction of the murder, barely focus on the Amanda character, but centralize more on a reporter covering the case.
     
  12. Allusonz

    Allusonz New Member

    Messages:
    4,679
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Sorry by the time it was at the end i was laughing so hard at what they had done i had tears rolling down my face

    The interesting part is that it was the defense that requested it be taken apart not the experts as has been reported thus I am thinking the objections ....

    Nope those objections make no sense to me whatsoever
     
  13. Nova

    Nova Active Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    As I'm sure you know, a basic rule of direct and cross-examination is "never ask a question unless you already know the answer." The same principle applies here, I feel certain: the prosecution doesn't want any surprises and has no way of knowing what is inside that handle.

    That, of course, is no FAIR reason not to take the handle apart and retest, but I'm sure that is the prosecutor's motivation for objecting.

    (And given the way the evidence was handled in this case, that knife handle may well hold traces of MY DNA!)

    What is telling is the defense request. Obviously, AK and RS are telling their lawyers there is no way that knife was involved in the murder, because their lawyers aren't worried that pulling the handle apart will unearth a huge sample of MK's blood.
     
  14. Allusonz

    Allusonz New Member

    Messages:
    4,679
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    BBM

    I have 2 schools of thought on this

    No one wants to be surprised during any trial that includes the defense/prosecution

    If there is indeed DNA in that handle they would be very hard pressed to not be able to say contamination
     
  15. Nova

    Nova Active Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Wouldn't that depend on whose DNA was there? Any number of people may have used that knife at RS' apartment and any or all of them may have left DNA in the handle.

    And, of course, if more of MK's DNA were found, the prosecution would simply claim it was additional evidence that this knife was one of the murder weapons. I think the prosecutor fears no additional MK DNA will be found and that will only fuel the skepticism over the tiny amount supposedly found on the blade.
     
  16. miley

    miley New Member

    Messages:
    538
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I guess they could start creating bad press, full page ads or however it's done.. basically start lobbying hard against the movie in hopes of stirring up enough negative publicity that the sponsors back out of advertising.
     
  17. miley

    miley New Member

    Messages:
    538
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thank you for the video Allisonz, reminds me of what Steve Moore said about a law enforcement truism, "absence of evidence is evidence of absence."

    and you know, John Kercher said it was two years before they could take home Meredith's things, things of hers they could all cherish. He was expecting a huge suitcase full of her stuff and instead he got a small beat up box -
    he also said none of her clothes were returned, all were taken for forensic testing - seriously? obviously he hasn't seen the video footage.

    why did they treat Meredith's personal possessions like that - so unnecessary. very strange manner of professionalism.
     
  18. SleuthyGal

    SleuthyGal Former Member

    Messages:
    4,078
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have no doubt the movie will be a work of creative fiction, taken from the tabloids first & foremost, made to hint at salacious (and likely false) hypothesis, treating neither victim, MK, nor suspects/defendants with anything akin to the plain truth.

    And really, we've had enough rumors to create a whole 'nother set of characters and a crime that veer far from what actually happened.

    Unfortunately people believe whatever rumor-du-jour comes across their computer or newspaper and align their beliefs with the lowest common denominator. It's easy to just accept what the media selects as 'truth,' I suppose.
     
  19. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    27,647
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    38
    The knife is still 12 inches in length, even when placed next to a centimeter ruler that is too short.
     
  20. Allusonz

    Allusonz New Member

    Messages:
    4,679
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    From the length of the ruler i would gather that this had cm (metric) on one side and if you flip it has the inches on the other side. This a very common type of ruler
     
  21. Allusonz

    Allusonz New Member

    Messages:
    4,679
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They would state contamination and here is just a brief synopsis why:

    We are supposed to believe that the knife was taken from RS's kitchen, used to kill MK, then returned back to RS's apartment but luminol testing in RS's apartment revealed no evidence of any clean up. No evidence of any kind was found in RS's apartment

    1.Officer that testified at the trial said he used "police intuition" when choosing the knife from Raffaele's drawer but took nothing else out of the drawer for CONTROL EXPERIMENTS

    2. No control experiments were run to follow the handling of the item from the field through to the laboratory. Remember this knife was collected from RS's appartment by the police, taken to the police station, sat there, then put in a open brown box and taken to the lab. The box was not tested. We have no idea how long the knife was actually at the police station, who had access to it etc.

    3. Patrizia Stefanoni testified that it had tiny scratches on the side, compatible with intense scrubbing with bleach. Bleach destroys DNA. If you clean an item, you will remove the DNA before the blood and we know the knife tested negative for blood so if it had been cleaned how did the DNA get there?

    Elizabeth A. Johnson, Ph.D

    “If someone had a knife covered in blood and they tried to clean it very well, they would remove their ability to detect the DNA before they removed the ability to detect the chemical traces of blood.” Therefore, the lack of blood makes it impossible for there to be DNA on the knife, so the DNA that was observed has to arise from contamination."

    Patrizia Stefanoni stated under oath that there is NEVER CONTAMINATION in her lab. Every expert i know states that contamination is an ongoing issue in their labs but in HER LAB NO CONTAMINATION EVER

    I wont even go into the problems with the lab i think i have posted enough on the lab.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice