Judge Massei Sentencing Report     The Meredith Kercher Fund     The Murder Of Meredith Kercher Wiki     True Justice For Meredith Kercher     Judge Nencini Sentencing Report 


Last visit was: Sat Nov 18, 2017 1:56 pm
It is currently Sat Nov 18, 2017 1:56 pm
All times are UTC

Forum rules

XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 - SEPT 22, 11

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


 Page 44 of 46 [ 11433 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46  Next
Author Message

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:33 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Ghirga says unheard of to have another round of indie exams on knife. #amandaknox

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

From Mathew Chance of CNN:

mchancecnn Matthew Chance
#AmandaKnox prosecutor asks court to reject assessment of DNA evidence by independent experts.... Wants samples to be reexamined!


So, they don't want just a review, they want the C & V thrown out!

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:36 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Ghirga also objects to rehearing aviello. #amandaknox

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:41 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Del grosso says no reason to test knife again because there has never been blood on it. #amandaknox #knox


BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Judge now must decide what to do about indie exam. #amandaknox


BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Judge in chambers for half an hour. #amandaknox

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:44 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

My expectations are low for the re-review request, but it would be fantastic and definitely a rejection of C&V. At least, as far as the knife goes and a little bit overall as well. So here is a cappuccino for the judges. May they be wise :)


Last edited by max on Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:45 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Wow. Just wow.

If the judge accepts, that'll be dynamite. If he refuses, the prosecution will have at least highlighted and underlined the fact that C & V screwed up and didn't do the job they were tasked to do. They will also have brought suspicion on the defence (Bongiorno) of being dodgy. Whatever happens, there will be controversy.

Clever...

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:48 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

So...now we wait, for (an Italian) half an hour...

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Essentially, right now...the judge is being forced to rule on whether he believes the C&V report is valid or not and provide his reasons. This is something we wouldn't of otherwise found out until he wrote and published his Motivations Report three months after the appeal. At the very least, it will provide the prosecution with a good idea of where they need to place emphases in their summing up.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:56 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Amanda Knox's father says DNA evidence 'critical'


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpI9FXFMRho

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:01 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:


The process Meredith "there is no blood on the knife"


Perugia, September 7, 2011 - 'That knife is not' washed 'cause even a washing surface would take away the starch, which is' reasonable to expect them to be finished 'Activity' kitchen.'' said the consultant defense of Amanda Knox, Professor Carlo Torre, referring to the knife that was held at first instance in which the murder weapon was killed Meredith Kercher. The defense counsel has laid this morning as part of the appeal process.
And'''clear - the consultant said - that when faced with a situation where the knife was used to injure a person, which sull'amido' a formidable absorbent,''must be hemoglobin.
Plaintiff's lawyer Francesco Maresca with a question but 'pointed out that these starch granules were never analyzed, but only visually under the microscope, then you can not' know whether it contains biological traces of DNA or less.



LA NAZIONE

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline jeffski


Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 9:46 am

Posts: 46

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:02 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Sounds like it is really heating up today!!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Tiziano


Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 5:06 am

Posts: 714

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:04 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 - a query   

Michael wrote:
Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Del grosso says no reason to test knife again because there has never been blood on it. #amandaknox #knox


BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Judge now must decide what to do about indie exam. #amandaknox

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Judge in chambers for half an hour. #amandaknox


Could anyone explain what an "indie exam" is, please?
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:04 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:


MEREDITH: CONSULTANT KNOX, KNIFE IS NOT 'BEEN WASHED


September 7, 2011 11:43

(AGI) - Perugia, September 7 - The knife found the murder weapon from the charge of Meredith Kercher 'not' washed 'cause even a simple rinse alienate the traces of starch. " And 'As argued in court this morning the professor Carlo Torre, a consultant in the process of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito of American appeals for the murder of Meredith Kercher. Speaking of grams of starch found by the experts of the Court on the knife, Torre has said how 'and' reasonable to think that stem from activities 'cooking'. The consultant then recalled how on the same knife, "there are no cells, there is no 'blood and there is no' genetic material." (AGI)



AGI

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:05 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Tiziano wrote:
Could anyone explain what an "indie exam" is, please?



That would be 'independent examination' Tiz.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:08 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

From Mathew Chance:

mchancecnn Matthew Chance
#AmandaKnox leaves court, looking meek and subdued yfrog.com/mmwoofj

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Tiziano


Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 5:06 am

Posts: 714

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:09 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 - latest online   

Latest

11:46 07 SET 2011

(AGI) - Perugia, 7 set. - Una nuova perizia in relazione alle tracce di Dna e' stata chiesta questa mattina dal pubblico ministero, Manuela Comodi, alla Corte d'assise di appello di Perugia che sta processando Amanda Knox e Raffaele Sollecito per l'omicidio di Meredith Kercher. In particolare il sostituto procuratore Manuela Comodi ha parlato di "appunti oggettivi" alla perizia svolta dai periti incaricati dalla Corte d'assise di appello, perizia definita dallo stesso pm "irrimediabilmente lacunosa". In particolare il pm ha chiesto alla Corte di disporre un'analisi bio-statistica e che le tracce trovate sul coltello vengano analizzate tramite kit di ultima generazione.
"Se la nomina di un perito e' volta all'accertamento della verita' - ha detto la Comodi - questo tentativo e' doveroso che sia fatto". Per il pm "i periti non hanno risposto ai quesiti che la Corte aveva posto loro". "Hanno lanciato dei dubbi dicendo che tutto e' possibile. Il compito di un perito pero' - ha detto la Comodi - non e' quello di insinuare dubbi, ma di dare ulteriori certezze a chi ha poi il compito di decidere".
La Comodi ha poi parlato di "inadeguatezza e inaffidabilita'" dei due esperti. L'accusa, inoltre, ha chiesto alla Corte d'assise d'appello di Perugia di risentire di nuovo in aula Luciano Aviello. (AGI) Pg2/Mav/Roc
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:11 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:


MEREDITH: NEW REPORT CALLS ON PM ON THE TRAIL OF DNA


September 7, 2011 11:46

(AGI) - Perugia, September 7 - A new report in relation to traces of DNA and 'was asked this morning by the prosecution, Manuela comfortable, the Assize Court of Appeals of Perugia that is processing Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito to the murder of Meredith Kercher. In particular, the Prosecutor Manuela Handy spoke of "objective notes" the report carried out by experts appointed by the Court of Assizes of Appeal, defined by the same expert am "hopelessly inadequate". In particular, the prosecutor asked the Court to order bio-statistical analysis and that the traces found on the knife kits are analyzed using the latest technology.
"If the appointment of an expert and 'After the ascertainment of the truth' - said comfort - this attempt and 'duty to be done. " For the prosecutor, "the experts did not respond to questions that the Court had placed them." "They threw everything and doubts by saying that 'as possible. The task of an expert but' - said Comfortable - not 'to imply doubt, but to give more certainty to those who went on to decide."
The Comfortable then spoke of "inadequacy and unreliability '" the two experts. The prosecution also asked the Court of Assizes of Appeal in Perugia to hear back in the classroom Aviello Luciano. (AGI)



AGI

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:13 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:


MEREDITH: NEW REPORT CALLS ON PM ON THE TRAIL OF DNA (2)


September 7, 2011 12:02

(AGI) - Perugia, September 7 - The report "objectively improper and vitiated by partiality absolute '" has also spoken lawyer Francesco Marotta, a lawyer for the plaintiff of the family of Meredith Kercher, partnering with the prosecutor requests. Opposed, however, a new report to the defense of Sollecito and Knox. The Assize Court of Appeal in Perugia, and 'now retired to closed session for the decision. (AGI)



AGI

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:15 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

From Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Court reconvenes at 1pm #amandaknox


(45 minutes from now)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:15 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Mathew Chance:

mchancecnn Matthew Chance
Just spoke with #AmandaKnox father. Told me: "clearly Amanda no longer has case to answer"

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:17 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:

Kercher murder, PM asks new report traces DNA
Sollecito and Knox opposing defenses
07 September, 12:15


(ANSA) - Perugia, 7 SET - A new report on the analysis of traces of DNA at the center of the appeals process to Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox for the murder of Meredith Kercher, and 'was asked by prosecutors this morning. The substitute Prosecutor Manuela Handy spoke of''objective''data''irreparably flawed''that make the work of the experts appointed by the Court. The defense of Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito and opposed the request. (AP).



ANSA

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:21 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:


Perugia, September 7 - (Adnkronos) -''That knife is not 'washed' cause even a washing surface would take away the starch, which is' reasonable to expect them to be finished 'Activity' kitchen.'' The adviser said the defense of Amanda Knox, Professor Carlo Torre, referring to the knife that was held at first instance in which the murder weapon was killed Meredith Kercher.

And'''clear - the consultant said - that when faced with a situation where the knife was used to injure a person, which sull'amido' a formidable absorbent,''must be hemoglobin.

Plaintiff's lawyer Francesco Maresca with a question but 'pointed out that these starch granules were never analyzed, but only visually under the microscope, then you can not' know whether it contains biological traces of DNA or less.[/url]


[url=http://www.libero-news.it/articolo.jsp?id=816300]LIBERO

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:23 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:


Perugia, September 7 - (Adnkronos) - A new genetic survey to be conducted by experts and others' has just been requested by the prosecutor Manuela comfortable in the process of appeal to Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. The prosecutor said that there are sampled traces on the knife that can and should be analyzed. He also requested that the experts will undertake new calculations of biostatisticians to determine the degree of reliability 'of forensic analysis.



LIBERO

The prosecution then asked to hear again Aviello Luciano, who has already 'evidence in the context of the process. (Continued)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Tiziano


Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 5:06 am

Posts: 714

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:23 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

11:46 07 SET 2011

(AGI) - Perugia, 7 set. - Una nuova perizia in relazione alle tracce di Dna e' stata chiesta questa mattina dal pubblico ministero, Manuela Comodi, alla Corte d'assise di appello di Perugia che sta processando Amanda Knox e Raffaele Sollecito per l'omicidio di Meredith Kercher. In particolare il sostituto procuratore Manuela Comodi ha parlato di "appunti oggettivi" alla perizia svolta dai periti incaricati dalla Corte d'assise di appello, perizia definita dallo stesso pm "irrimediabilmente lacunosa". In particolare il pm ha chiesto alla Corte di disporre un'analisi bio-statistica e che le tracce trovate sul coltello vengano analizzate tramite kit di ultima generazione.
"Se la nomina di un perito e' volta all'accertamento della verita' - ha detto la Comodi - questo tentativo e' doveroso che sia fatto". Per il pm "i periti non hanno risposto ai quesiti che la Corte aveva posto loro". "Hanno lanciato dei dubbi dicendo che tutto e' possibile. Il compito di un perito pero' - ha detto la Comodi - non e' quello di insinuare dubbi, ma di dare ulteriori certezze a chi ha poi il compito di decidere".
La Comodi ha poi parlato di "inadeguatezza e inaffidabilita'" dei due esperti. L'accusa, inoltre, ha chiesto alla Corte d'assise d'appello di Perugia di risentire di nuovo in aula Luciano Aviello. (AGI) Pg2/Mav/Roc

Quick summary:

1. Manuela Comodi requests new expert report re DNA - calls C/V report "irremediably lacking"

2. esp would like new test on knife with latest generation kit

3. "If the nomination of an expert has the aim of ascertaining the truth, this attempt is duty bound to be done" said Comodi

4. "They have thrown doubts saying that everything is possible. However the duty of an expert is not that of insinuating doubt, but of giving the further certainties to those who have the task of deciding" Comodi

5. C.spoke of "inadequacy and unreliability" of C/V.

6. Prosecution asks for Aviello to be heard again.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:25 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:


(Adnkronos) - The prosecutor argued that''Manuela Convenient notes there are objective facts that go to the skill (Conti and professors Vecchiotti, ed) beyond the 'merit, because' there is' a track, as they supported more 'consultants, not just the prosecution, analyze and use. It 'a low copy number, but you can' analyze''he said.

Convenient also said that the experts have failed to report that''there are kits that allow even advanced to analyze trace amounts with 'very low''of DNA. ''If I name an expert third party and 'all the way to ascertain the truth', and then an attempt should be made,''said the prosecutor, who also pointed out how the experts Stefano Conti and Carla Vecchiotti who drafted the report in which it is put into question the scientific work of the police were allowed to purchase all, and while''on the one hand they asked around, other, not only did not ask, but they have more 'sometimes asserted that there were no'' .

The magistrate then asked that any new experts may be asked to establish a biostatistician,''in relation to the second question that the Court had placed the Accounts and Vecchiotti experts, to ensure the reliability 'of police work. I believe that this aspect should be thorough.'' (Continued)



LIBERO

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:28 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:


MEREDITH: LEGAL REMINDER FROM PUBLIC PROSECUTOR CARDS GAME 3

September 7, 2011 24:24

(AGI) - Perugia, September 7 - "What the prosecution and 'really the game of the 3 cards." So 'one of the lawyers for Raffaele Sollecito, Luca Maori, said the request made ​​by the prosecution to have a new report on the DNA in the process of appeal to Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito to the murder of Meredith Kercher. "When things are not going well - said the lawyer Maori - we always try to bring water to their mill. The prosecution, increasingly, from the first moment, even during the first trial, has always denied expertise requests that we had advanced.
Now, after the report, perhaps, in a sense is not good for the prosecution, at this point are not good things and we must change. " "It 'a shame - said Sollecito's lawyer - a process so that' important - where there is 'the lives of two people, and' stop and frozen for 4 years, you can still do this kind of tricks ". Then on the request made ​​to the Court by the prosecutor Manuela Comfortable, sorry to hear Luciano Aviello the classroom, the lawyer pointed out that the latter Maori 'and' was judged by the same investigators, a person completely unreliable. " "At this point we want to suffer again, 'cause he retracted what he said at first - he said -. And then the lawyer before the Assize Court of Appeal that will say'? Retract 'retraction retraction? It 'really is another way to waste time. We must get to the end of the process as soon as possible and close this issue. " (AGI)



AGI

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:33 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:

MEREDITH: NEW REPORT CALLS ON PM ON THE TRAIL OF DNA


September 7, 2011 24:12

(AGI) - Perugia, September 7 - The report "objectively improper and vitiated by partiality absolute '" has also spoken lawyer Francesco Marotta, a lawyer for the plaintiff of the family of Meredith Kercher, partnering with the prosecutor requests. Opposed, however, a new report to the defense of Sollecito and Knox. The Assize Court of Appeal in Perugia, and 'now retired to closed session for the decision. (AGI)



AGI

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:36 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:


(Adnkronos) -''The experts (Conti and Vecchiotti, ed) - he said - did not respond to questions that you placed. Have not arrived at their conclusions, they did apodictic statements. They launched in doubt, the task of the expert is not 'imply, but to give more certainty to the decision makers. "

And'''implied that the office of attorney considers them inappropriate to make further analysis for this we ask the court to appoint other experts with the mandate,''he said.



LIBERO

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:37 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

From Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
General consensus as we wait for judge's decision is that if he denies new exam on knife very good for Knox's appeal. #amandaknox

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:38 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Barbie Latza Nadeau tweets the following:

Quote:
BLNadeau
General consensus as we wait for judge's decision is that if he denies new exam on knife very good for Knox's appeal. #amandaknox
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:43 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

I think no request for a re-test would have been better Barbie!
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:45 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Andrea Vogt :)

andreavogt Andrea Vogt
Perugia courtroom filling back up as judge prepares to announce crucial decision on more dna tests in #amandaknox appeal.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline jeffski


Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 9:46 am

Posts: 46

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:47 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

max wrote:
I think no request for a re-test would have been better Barbie!


wtf Barbie is really confusing at times, i thought that it would of been better for Knox if they never mentioned a re-test, now the if it is not allowed it will look like the defence are scared what would of been found......Confusing!!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:51 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:


Meredith, the attorney asks for a new skill
"Experts from the Court unreliable"
NEW ADDRESS IN PERUGIA - ll pm spoke of "objective notes" to the work of experts, appointed by the Court of Appeal. At the request of the opposing defenses


Perugia, September 7, 2011 - A new report on traces of DNA . And 'the request of the prosecutor, Manuela comfortable, the Assize Court of Appeals of Perugia that is processing Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito to the murder of Meredith Kercher.

Today in court, the prosecutor spoke of "objective notes" the appraisal conducted by experts appointed by the Court of Assizes of Appeal , defined by the same expert Comfortable "hopelessly inadequate". In particular, the prosecutor asked the Court to order bio-statistical analysis and that the traces found on the knife kits are analyzed using the latest technology.

"If the appointment of an expert is intended to establish the truth - said Comfortable - this attempt is only right that it is done." For the prosecutor, "the experts did not respond to questions that the Court had placed them." "They have thrown in doubt by saying that anything is possible. The task of an expert though - Handy said - is not to imply doubt, but to give more certainty to those who went on to decide."

The Convenient then spoke of " inadequacy and unreliability "of the two experts . The prosecution also asked the Court of Assizes of Appeal in Perugia to hear back in the classroom Aviello Luciano. Expertise "objectively improper and vitiated by absolute bias" has also spoken lawyer Francesco Marotta, a lawyer for the plaintiff of the family of Meredith Kercher, partnering with the prosecutor requests. Opposed, however, a new report to the defense of Sollecito and Knox. The Assize Court of Appeal has now withdrawn Perugia in chambers for decision.

At the request of a new expert opinion opposed to the defense of Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito and opposed. Same position for the application for a new testimony of Luciano Aviello. Called''impractical''the demand for new expertise the lawyer Luca Maori, Sollecito's defense. No''absolute''also by the lawyer Luciano Ghirga, Knox's legal.

THE DEFENSE COUNSEL: "THE KNIFE IS NOT 'BEEN WASHED"

"That knife is not washed because it was just washing the surface would take away the starch, it is reasonable to think is over there to kitchen activities.'' consultant, said the defense of Amanda Knox, Professor Carlo Torre, referring to the knife that was held at first instance in which the murder weapon was killed Meredith Kercher. The defense counsel has laid this morning as part of the appeal process.
And'''clear - the consultant said - that when faced with a situation where the knife was used to injure a person, which sull'amido 'a formidable absorbent,''must be hemoglobin.
Plaintiff's lawyer Francesco Maresca with a question, however, pointed out that these starch granules were never analyzed, but only visually under the microscope, then you may not know whether it contains biological traces of DNA or less.



LA NAZIONE

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:55 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

jeffski wrote:
max wrote:
I think no request for a re-test would have been better Barbie!


wtf Barbie is really confusing at times, i thought that it would of been better for Knox if they never mentioned a re-test, now the if it is not allowed it will look like the defence are scared what would of been found......Confusing!!



I have no idea what has happened so far (didn't have time today), but I don't share Barbie's opinion that no re-test is automatically good for the defense. From what I have read in the media (and they are Knox friendly), I didn't get the impression that they were doing too well. So if the test is rejected the court has made up its mind, but that is not necessarily good for the defense after all that has emerged. I might be wrong. Barbie Nadeau writes something about "general consensus". What am I missing here?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:55 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

From Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Tension high in #amandaknox courtroom waiting for judge to rule on new review of knife and rehearing mobster. Knox and #sollecito in place.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

From Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
This feels like a dress rehearsal for the final appeal verdict. Lots of tension in #amandaknox courtroom among lawyers.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:02 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:

Perugia, September 7 - (Adnkronos) - A chorus of no part of the defense of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito to the request by the prosecution to make a new genetic survey. "E'inammissibile", argued the lawyer Luca Maori defending Raffaele Sollecito. A "no absolute" e'arrivato also the lawyer who defends Luciano Ghirga Amanda Knox. The court and 'now retired to closed session to deliberate on. The decision should arrive within one hour.



LIBERO

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:03 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

From Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
prosecutor in place, all lawyers in place, cameras in place, just waiting for judge and jury #amandaknox

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:05 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:

Perugia, September 7 - (Adnkronos) - "When things go well, always trying to bring water to their mill, has always denied the accusation a new skill. Now that the analysis is done in a positive way for the prosecution must not change. It 'really a shell game, and' a shame that in a process so important, where there is' still life of two people for four years we still have fiddled like this. " Said Raffaele Sollecito's lawyer Luca Maori leaving the court this morning on the application of new expertise advanced by the prosecution.

As for the request to hear again Aviello Luciano, the lawyer said that "it 'was the same charge to call it completely unreliable, and now it asks to hear it again?". "Time to stop and close the process as' soon as possible," he concluded.



LIBERO

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:12 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Barbie latest:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
judge and jury entering courtroom, need to clear cameras #amandaknox

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:14 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Barbie tweets

Quote:
BLNadeau
Judge denies both requests, no new exam on knife, no aviello. #amandaknox
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:16 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Judge has denied all requests....

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:17 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

As expected but of course pro-Knox supporters and probably media will jump on it :(
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:18 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Judge denies both requests, no new exam on knife, no aviello. #amandaknox

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
judge now deciding schedule

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Judge says resume to September 23 to begin closing arguments through following week. #amandaknox more details coming on schedule

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
September 23, 24, 26, 27 for closing arguments, rebuttals and verdict. #amandaknox


Andrea:

andreavogt Andrea Vogt
Judge rejects prosecution's request for more dna tests and testimony, boosting #amandaknox chances to overturn conviction on appeal.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:19 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
judge just said, 'we could also start tomorrow' but no one wants to #amandaknox


BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
23, 24 for prosecution, 26 civil parties, 27, defense, 28 defense. Judge says he hopes to close it all within a week's time #amandaknox


BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
That's all for today from the courtroom in Perugia. Back the 23rd of September for the big finish. Looks like Knox will walk #

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:21 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

I've read that The Machine has posted on the other forum that she knows from a "reliable source" that the verdict will stand, but the sentences lowered. Huh?

How can she or anybody else "know" that already? Based on what?

Barbie Nadeau just tweeted

Quote:
BLNadeau
That's all for today from the courtroom in Perugia. Back the 23rd of September for the big finish. Looks like Knox will walk #amandaknox
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:27 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Well, I have to disagree with Barbie. Just because the judge hasn't agreed to a new review, or rejected the C&V report...does not mean that he has decided that the knife or/and bra clasp is contaminated and must be rejected. It could just as easily be that the court debate of the last two days has actually made him decide that the knife and clasp are sound and no further tests or debate on the matter are needed. Moreover, I don't see why Barbie thinks Knox and Sollecito walking or not depends on the knife and clasp. It seems, some people completely forget all that other evidence...that other evidence is far from irrelevant and could seal a conviction in any court in the world.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline jeffski


Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 9:46 am

Posts: 46

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:27 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Nell wrote:
I've read that The Machine has posted on the other forum that she knows from a "reliable source" that the verdict will stand, but the sentences lowered. Huh?

How can she or anybody else "know" that already? Based on what?

Barbie Nadeau just tweeted

Quote:
BLNadeau
That's all for today from the courtroom in Perugia. Back the 23rd of September for the big finish. Looks like Knox will walk #amandaknox


wtf) How does she come to that conclusion?????
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline jeffski


Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 9:46 am

Posts: 46

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:29 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Well, I have to disagree with Barbie. Just because the judge hasn't agreed to a new review, or rejected the C&V report...does not mean that he has decided that the knife or/and bra clasp is contaminated and must be rejected. It could just as easily be that the court debate of the last two days has actually made him decide that the knife and clasp are sound. Moreover, I don't see why Barbie thinks Knox and Sollecito walking or not depends on the knife and clasp. It seems, some people completely forget all that other evidence...that other evidence is far from irrelevant and could seal a conviction in any court in the world.


Totally agree Michael, Barbie is so confusing at times!!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:31 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

It was actually a great move by the prosecution. If there's an acquittal, the retest refusal should give the prosecution grounds for appeal.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:32 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

From Andrea:

andreavogt Andrea Vogt
It is the end game in #amandaknox appeal as judge rejects prosecution requests. Momentum swinging in her favor as sept 28 deadline nears.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:36 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Mathew Chance just tweeted this:


mchancecnn Matthew Chance
Judge accepts findings of independent DNA experts, who cast doubt on evidence against #AmandaKnox.


This isn't right. It doesn't mean the judge accepts their findings. Which ones? Every single one of them? Mist of them> Some of them? Which ones?

We won't know what the Judge 'accepts' (or does not), until he writes up his Motivations Report. Although, I guess we know in advance what all the Anglo papers are going to be claiming today...

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:39 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Well, I have to disagree with Barbie. Just because the judge hasn't agreed to a new review, or rejected the C&V report...does not mean that he has decided that the knife or/and bra clasp is contaminated and must be rejected. It could just as easily be that the court debate of the last two days has actually made him decide that the knife and clasp are sound. Moreover, I don't see why Barbie thinks Knox and Sollecito walking or not depends on the knife and clasp. It seems, some people completely forget all that other evidence...that other evidence is far from irrelevant and could seal a conviction in any court in the world.


I feel very sorry for the Kercher's. This rumour spreading makes it only worse for them.

I see Knox supporters are already cheering and the "stepdad" informs them that this is very good news. Great. Reminds me of the "news" when the knife was "thrown out" and when it was considered "good news" for the defense when the independent review was denied by judge Massei.

At this point I can only hope they will find them at least guilty. Will it help, considering they could walk the streets in as little as 10-12 years again? Still at time to start a family and make a fortune out of their crimes (welcome to America), while Meredith Kercher rots? It doesn't seem fair to me. Everything under 25 years is unacceptable for what they have done. The punishment must fit the crime.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:43 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Yep...and for all the whining the Knox family and her supporters have been doing, one would have thought that she'd got the death penalty, instead of an extremely light sentence considering her crimes...

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:44 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

From Andrea:

andreavogt Andrea Vogt
#amandaknox lawyer Luciano Ghirga calls it "a difficult trial, very contested and uniquely intense" said pleased with how its going.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

If anything in the below article is true then we can expect to see Comodi be thrown off this case today or tomorrow. If she stays on then we can safely assume that Nick Pisa made the whole thing up. I suspect he made it up. No way she would say things like "The judge and his assistant are clearly against us".

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... secutor.do
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

From the above:

Quote:
Ms Comodi said: "We are going to ask for a second review of the evidenceut I'm not confident that the judge will grant the prosecution request - it's very obvious they are against us."


Well, she called it right.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
From the above:

Quote:
Ms Comodi said: "We are going to ask for a second review of the evidenceut I'm not confident that the judge will grant the prosecution request - it's very obvious they are against us."


Well, she called it right.

True, but things like 'they are against us'? Isn't that contempt of court? I can't imagine she would say things like that.
Top Profile 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:14 pm   Post subject: BRAVO, A GREAT TWEET TO A BIT OF A TWIT   

Michael, bravo for getting this message through to the CNN reporter in Perugia today, Matthew Chance.

I wonder why he's so excited to get word-blurbs from the Knox-Mellas clan. I would have hoped that he try to report on all aspects of the case.

Cheers, K.

Image
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

The thing is...I think the prosecution put in an excellent defence of their work yesterday. If the judge is to reject their arguments defending that work, then he has to find a way of explaining that in his report. How for example, would he argue contamination on the knife when no source or route of contamination for it has been found (and indeed eliminated) and that his own appointed experts conceded in court that contamination couldn't have occurred in the lab due to the 6 day gap? Is he to argue that it occurred outside of the lab? On what grounds...where was the source for that contamination?

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit wrote:
Michael, bravo for getting this message through to the CNN reporter in Perugia today, Matthew Chance.

I wonder why he's so excited to get word-blurbs from the Knox-Mellas clan. I would have hoped that he try to report on all aspects of the case.

Cheers, K.



Hi kermit. The funny thing is, he didn't reply/respond..but...he re-tweeted it to his 22 thousand + followers.

I felt it had to be said...with all his joyous fawning over the Knox family.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

max wrote:
Michael wrote:
From the above:

Quote:
Ms Comodi said: "We are going to ask for a second review of the evidenceut I'm not confident that the judge will grant the prosecution request - it's very obvious they are against us."


Well, she called it right.

True, but things like 'they are against us'? Isn't that contempt of court? I can't imagine she would say things like that.



Hmm...not really. I mean, she hasn't accused the judge of actual wrongdoing.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

'An ill wind is blowing': Now even PROSECUTOR says Foxy Knoxy will be freed
Daily Mail, by Nick Pisa, 1:20 pm


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ds-newsxml

"A prosecutor in the Amanda Knox appeal case has said 'an ill wind is blowing in the case' as she predicted the American would be acquitted of the murder of Meredith Kercher.

Manuela Comodi, who is one of two prosecutors involved in the appeal of Knox against her conviction for the murder of student Meredith, 21, said she was convinced the American would be freed.

Comodi made her comments just hours before the appeal hearing resumed today, with prosecutors and defence lawyers again contesting crucial DNA evidence."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Hi kermit. The funny thing is, he didn't reply/respond..but...he re-tweeted it to his 22 thousand + followers.

I felt it had to be said...with all his joyous fawning over the Knox family.

.
Yeah, it makes you wonder about big American media.

Maybe I'll write Al Jazeera, to get them interested ....
Top Profile 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Ava wrote:
'An ill wind is blowing': Now even PROSECUTOR says Foxy Knoxy will be freed
Daily Mail, by Nick Pisa, 1:20 pm


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ds-newsxml

.
Hi Ava,

The Nick Pisa text in the link is the same as Max's link above (I think), and it does make you question how truthful the reports are ... I believe that in the second part of the article you see that these supposed quotes were supposedly made before today's session ... but why?

I'm a little confused about Pisa's reporting.

I honestly think that today wasn't a bad day for the Prosecution, quite the opposite.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit wrote:
Michael wrote:
Hi kermit. The funny thing is, he didn't reply/respond..but...he re-tweeted it to his 22 thousand + followers.

I felt it had to be said...with all his joyous fawning over the Knox family.

.
Yeah, it makes you wonder about big American media.

Maybe I'll write Al Jazeera, to get them interested ....



Yeah...reading him I started to feel a bit sick, I have to say. And I'm afraid to say, he's an absolutely typical representation of the general US media, those at least that have been following this case (with one or two rare exceptions).

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit wrote:
I honestly think that today wasn't a bad day for the Prosecution, quite the opposite.


I don't think yesterday was either. But, it does concern me that they think the judge is against them and that Knox will probably be acquitted...even before their requests for further witnesses and another review was denied.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Barbie Nadeau tweeted the following:

Quote:
BLNadeau
"@Allison_01: @BLNadeau you have changed your view on the case - any reason why?" the story is changing, I'm still objective


I think she is backpadelling, so in case Amanda Knox wins her appeal, she will not be banned from interviewing her. Anyway, I don't see Andrea Vogt doing the same. Andrea is more objective, always has been. She reports the facts, but doesn't let her own opinion be the news. Unfortunately she doesn't tweet and write as much as Barbie Nadeau. If it weren' t for her tweets, I wouldn't even read Barbie anymore. In one article she says one thing and in the next she contradicts her former articles without giving any reason why that would be. She is not consistent.

I hope that Comodi was wrongly quoted, because I don't think her allegations against the judge are very clever.

Quote:
Ms Comodi said: "There is an ill wind blowing in this case. The judge and his assistant are clearly against us. I can see both Knox and Sollecito being freed which will be a shame as they are both involved."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

What scandalises me the most, is that the primary task of C&V in their review, was to examine the knife to see if there was any DNA and test it. They FOUND DNA on the blade, but then didn't run the profile, despite having the technology and equipment to do so....then declared in their report that there was no DNA on the blade. Instead, they concerned themselves looking for 'starch'. Wtf?

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit wrote:
Ava wrote:
'An ill wind is blowing': Now even PROSECUTOR says Foxy Knoxy will be freed
Daily Mail, by Nick Pisa, 1:20 pm


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ds-newsxml

.
Hi Ava,

The Nick Pisa text in the link is the same as Max's link above (I think), and it does make you question how truthful the reports are ... I believe that in the second part of the article you see that these supposed quotes were supposedly made before today's session ... but why?

I'm a little confused about Pisa's reporting.

I honestly think that today wasn't a bad day for the Prosecution, quite the opposite.



Hi Kermit,

I thought it was a bit different from Max' link (hi Max :) ), and longer, but same content, you're right.

And yes, Manuela Comodi allegedly said that before the decision was made. According to Nick Pisa, she could feel that ill wind.

Confusing indeed.

In case they do walk free, would the prosecution be able to appeal on technical grounds?

I think Michael has mentioned that possibility before, but I'm not quite sure.


Last edited by Ava on Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Nell wrote:
Barbie Nadeau tweeted the following:

Quote:
BLNadeau
"@Allison_01: @BLNadeau you have changed your view on the case - any reason why?" the story is changing, I'm still objective


I think she is backpadelling, so in case Amanda Knox wins her appeal, she will not be banned from interviewing her. Anyway, I don't see Andrea Vogt doing the same. Andrea is more objective, always has been. She reports the facts, but doesn't let her own opinion be the news. Unfortunately she doesn't tweet and write as much as Barbie Nadeau. If it weren' t for her tweets, I wouldn't even read Barbie anymore. In one article she says one thing and in the next she contradicts her former articles without giving any reason why that would be. She is not consistent.

I hope that Comodi was wrongly quoted, because I don't think her allegations against the judge are very clever.

Quote:
Ms Comodi said: "There is an ill wind blowing in this case. The judge and his assistant are clearly against us. I can see both Knox and Sollecito being freed which will be a shame as they are both involved."



The thing is, Barbie hangs out with people like Pisa when she covers the case, and I think he's one of the major causes of her wavering back and forth.

But to be fair to her, it is a very up and down case....one day you can think the judges will certainly convict and the next they'll certainly acquit.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

From Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Just saw the two judges walking down the main street in perugia in deep conversation. #amandaknox

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 904

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Ava wrote:
'An ill wind is blowing': Now even PROSECUTOR says Foxy Knoxy will be freed
Daily Mail, by Nick Pisa, 1:20 pm


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ds-newsxml

"A prosecutor in the Amanda Knox appeal case has said 'an ill wind is blowing in the case' as she predicted the American would be acquitted of the murder of Meredith Kercher.

Manuela Comodi, who is one of two prosecutors involved in the appeal of Knox against her conviction for the murder of student Meredith, 21, said she was convinced the American would be freed.

Comodi made her comments just hours before the appeal hearing resumed today, with prosecutors and defence lawyers again contesting crucial DNA evidence."



Amazing.
Top Profile 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael, about Nick Pisa, wrote:
I'm afraid to say, he's an absolutely typical representation of the general US media, those at least that have been following this case (with one or two rare exceptions).

And he's not even American!!!

Ava wrote:
In case they do walk free, would the prosecution be able to appeal on technical grounds?
I think Michael has mentioned that possibility before, but I'm not quite sure.

.
I don't know. If there was an acquittal (which I don't contemplate), and the prosecution has the opportunity, they would surely appeal.

Would Knox continue in preventative prison? It's clear that she would never return to Italy if she were released back to Seattle, then called up a year from now for a final Supreme Court appeal.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Ava wrote:
In case they do walk free, would the prosecution be able to appeal on technical grounds?

I think Michael has mentioned that possibility before, but I'm not quite sure.



They should be able to, on the grounds that he made his decision largely based on a report that had not done what he'd tasked it to do in regard to a crucial piece of evidence while denying requests to set things to rights by acquiescing to a request by multiple parties that he commission someone to perform the test he had originally requested be done, but had not been. I've garbled it, but you get the idea.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit wrote:
And he's not even American!!!


Oh sorry, crossed purposes, I was referring to that Mathew Chance chap of CNN I tweeted, not Nick Pisa.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit wrote:
Would Knox continue in preventative prison? It's clear that she would never return to Italy if she were released back to Seattle, then called up a year from now for a final Supreme Court appeal.



I mooted a few days ago, that in that even, she'd be freed from prison while the final appeal process went forward, but would have to surrender her passport.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Kermit wrote:
And he's not even American!!!


Oh sorry, crossed purposes, I was referring to that Mathew Chance chap I tweeted, not Nick Pise.

Okay, my comment works on Pisa.

As for Chance, they also work. I see from his CNN profile that he also "British":

"Matthew Chance is CNN's senior international correspondent based in Moscow. He has reported extensively on major stories for CNN's global news networks from the Middle East, Afghanistan, Russia and Chechnya, Europe and the Far East. .... Chance is British and attended the University of London where he earned a BA in Archaeology and Art from the School of Oriental and African Studies."

This profile also shows that geographically, and categorically, Italian crime reporting is not his forte.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

This from Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Just askd 10 pple close 2 trial of #amandaknox what they think will happen. 4-go home 3-stay 2-reduced snt 1 -raf home/knox stay

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Nell wrote:
Barbie Nadeau tweeted the following:

Quote:
BLNadeau
"@Allison_01: @BLNadeau you have changed your view on the case - any reason why?" the story is changing, I'm still objective


I think she is backpadelling, so in case Amanda Knox wins her appeal, she will not be banned from interviewing her. Anyway, I don't see Andrea Vogt doing the same. Andrea is more objective, always has been. She reports the facts, but doesn't let her own opinion be the news. Unfortunately she doesn't tweet and write as much as Barbie Nadeau. If it weren' t for her tweets, I wouldn't even read Barbie anymore. In one article she says one thing and in the next she contradicts her former articles without giving any reason why that would be. She is not consistent.

I hope that Comodi was wrongly quoted, because I don't think her allegations against the judge are very clever.

Quote:
Ms Comodi said: "There is an ill wind blowing in this case. The judge and his assistant are clearly against us. I can see both Knox and Sollecito being freed which will be a shame as they are both involved."



The thing is, Barbie hangs out with people like Pisa when she covers the case, and I think he's one of the major causes of her wavering back and forth.

But to be fair to her, it is a very up and down case....one day you can think the judges will certainly convict and the next they'll certainly acquit.



I found Conti and Vecchiotti absolutely unspectacular. I expected much more and from what has been reported about their responses to cross examination it must have been quite embarrassing.

Barbie just tweeted:
Quote:
BLNadeau
Just askd 10 pple close 2 trial of #amandaknox what they think will happen. 4-go home 3-stay 2-reduced snt 1 -raf home/knox stay


Does she think that is news? Is it newsworthy what 10 people think? Did they even follow the case on a regular basis or since the start? Do they still remember Amanda's false accusation and her lies? This is a big mess and for me, Barbie right now is a contributor. I am glad I never bought her book.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit wrote:
Michael wrote:
Kermit wrote:
And he's not even American!!!


Oh sorry, crossed purposes, I was referring to that Mathew Chance chap I tweeted, not Nick Pise.

Okay, my comment works on Pisa.

As for Chance, they also work. I see from his CNN profile that he also "British":

"Matthew Chance is CNN's senior international correspondent based in Moscow. He has reported extensively on major stories for CNN's global news networks from the Middle East, Afghanistan, Russia and Chechnya, Europe and the Far East. .... Chance is British and attended the University of London where he earned a BA in Archaeology and Art from the School of Oriental and African Studies."

This profile also shows that geographically, and categorically, Italian crime reporting is not his forte.



Yeah, but he works for CNN which to all intents and purposes makes him American. His perspective is going to be the same as his editor and fellow CNN reporters.

BA in archeology huh? I guess they didn't teach him to dig very deep on his course..."Take your trowel and just gently scrape the surface"...

And he's not there to report crime, he's there to report a human interest story (the Knox human interest story). That is how the US media have always treated this case, not as crime, but human interest infotainment.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Hope this is no double post again:

"Amanda Knox judge: No new DNA evidence"
CNN, 12:24 pm

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europ ... ox.appeal/


"Knox's father Curt told CNN after the rulings he was optimistic his daughter would come home soon.
But Francesco Maresca, a lawyer representing the Kercher family, said the rulings were not a defeat, and that he understood why the judge rejected the requests."


"Sara Gino, another defense witness, testified Wednesday that Sollecito's genetic material could have gotten onto the bloodied bra if it was on Knox's clothes when they were washed with Kercher's before the killing."


Last edited by Ava on Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
This from Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Just askd 10 pple close 2 trial of #amandaknox what they think will happen. 4-go home 3-stay 2-reduced snt 1 -raf home/knox stay

.
Oh, come on Barbie!!

4 = Edda, Curt, Puke, Madison
3 = Pacelli, Maresca, Cottage owner's lawyer
2 = Court cleaners
1 = Dr. Sollecito
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

RE: Manuela Comodi's remarks, I think she's (like us) a bit sensitive to every rumour at this stage of the game.

Let's see.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Nell wrote:
Does she think that is news? Is it newsworthy what 10 people think? Did they even follow the case on a regular basis or since the start? Do they still remember Amanda's false accusation and her lies? This is a big mess and for me, Barbie right now is a contributor. I am glad I never bought her book.


Barbie gave me a clue to what her problem is in a relatively recent article of hers. She referred to the rest of the case evidence (other then the clasp and knife) as 'circumstantial'. It seems she thinks the knife and clasp are direct evidence and without those there is no direct evidence, only circumstantial evidence and that makes the case weak if there's only circumstantial evidence. This is her mistake. She doesn't seem to realise that the clasp and the knife are also circumstantial evidence. There is no direct evidence in this case. In nearly all cases, there is no direct evidence...it's rare.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Ergon wrote:
RE: Manuela Comodi's remarks, I think she's (like us) a bit sensitive to every rumour at this stage of the game.

Let's see.


She does get a bit emotional.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit wrote:
Michael wrote:
This from Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Just askd 10 pple close 2 trial of #amandaknox what they think will happen. 4-go home 3-stay 2-reduced snt 1 -raf home/knox stay

.
Oh, come on Barbie!!

4 = Edda, Curt, Puke, Madison
3 = Pacelli, Maresca, Cottage owner's lawyer
2 = Court cleaners
1 = Dr. Sollecito



Mind you, that's 6 - 4 that she stays.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

This from Andrea Vogt of two of the judges from the appeal walking in Perugia:



_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit wrote:
Michael wrote:
This from Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Just askd 10 pple close 2 trial of #amandaknox what they think will happen. 4-go home 3-stay 2-reduced snt 1 -raf home/knox stay

.
Oh, come on Barbie!!

4 = Edda, Curt, Puke, Madison
3 = Pacelli, Maresca, Cottage owner's lawyer
2 = Court cleaners
1 = Dr. Sollecito



Good one!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Ava wrote:
Hope this is no double post again:

"Amanda Knox judge: No new DNA evidence"
CNN, 12:24 pm

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europ ... ox.appeal/


"Knox's father Curt told CNN after the rulings he was optimistic his daughter would come home soon.
But Francesco Maresca, a lawyer representing the Kercher family, said the rulings were not a defeat, and that he understood why the judge rejected the requests."


"Sara Gino, another defense witness, testified Wednesday that Sollecito's genetic material could have gotten onto the bloodied bra if it was on Knox's clothes when they were washed with Kercher's before the killing."



Yeah, she is Torre's buddy, from their university, like Carla whatshername, neither Torres or Sarah wahatshernme, ever examine a crime scene directly, and when she appeared, she meshed in fine with Knox's happy go lucky smirking, laughing and all that nonsense, for yes, she obviously was glad to have a bus ride down or something and pocket the fees, seeing as how she was with Torres and had sweet FFFFFFFF all to say, I placed her in the greasy bag I already used for putting Torres and his outlandishly off the efdge of Saturn ideas, he's way out.

Could have gotten on there via washing my fat jacks, yes, because isn't it odd that it managed to get itself onto that tiny hook, but nowhere else.

The only way Sollecitós DNA got on Meredith's bra, was through him butchering her.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
This from Andrea Vogt of two of the judges from the appeal walking in Perugia:





Which ones, the guy who looks like he might pop or the gentlemanly type in suit?

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Here is a video from today:

Knox trial: Court rejects new DNA test request

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44422551/ns ... ws-europe/

With pictures of the refrigerator of the cottage shown this morning in court.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Zorba -

The two chaps on the right with backs to camera.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

zorba wrote:
Ava wrote:
Hope this is no double post again:

"Amanda Knox judge: No new DNA evidence"
CNN, 12:24 pm

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europ ... ox.appeal/


"Knox's father Curt told CNN after the rulings he was optimistic his daughter would come home soon.
But Francesco Maresca, a lawyer representing the Kercher family, said the rulings were not a defeat, and that he understood why the judge rejected the requests."


"Sara Gino, another defense witness, testified Wednesday that Sollecito's genetic material could have gotten onto the bloodied bra if it was on Knox's clothes when they were washed with Kercher's before the killing."



Yeah, she is Torre's buddy, from their university, like Carla whatshername, neither Torres or Sarah wahatshernme, ever examine a crime scene directly, and when she appeared, she meshed in fine with Knox's happy go lucky smirking, laughing and all that nonsense, for yes, she obviously was glad to have a bus ride down or something and pocket the fees, seeing as how she was with Torres and had sweet FFFFFFFF all to say, I placed her in the greasy bag I already used for putting Torres and his outlandishly off the efdge of Saturn ideas, he's way out.

Could have gotten on there via washing my fat jacks, yes, because isn't it odd that it managed to get itself onto that tiny hook, but nowhere else.

The only way Sollecitós DNA got on Meredith's bra, was through him butchering her.



Yeah. I am no DNA expert but what Sara Gino is saying sounds to me like another anything's possible argument. In the washing machine??
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Zorba -

The two chaps on the right with backs to camera.


IMHO
1) Are the tourists with the Fodor Guide in hand on a mission to improve the image of tourists in general with their sneakies, whitey white sockies and shorties ?? :roll:

2) Is it just me or if moustache was shaved, does the ever so fit looking male tourist in shorts bear a resemblance to Mr Mellas.
Possibly as a relative ?? ;)
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Yep...yet strangely, Knox's DNA wasn't on her own clothes to get on said bra clasp in said washing machine, only Raffaele's DNA. And Raffaele's very special DNA, only got on the clasp in said washing machine, no other part of the bra. Or on any of Meredith's other clothes that were in the washing machine for that matter.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

It is good there is some reporting on Sara Gino as I think nobody in court could really follow her :) Also very little reporting on Torre. Both consultants were done within minutes today. No further reviews being allowed by Hellmann. Not only on the knife but also not on the bathmat, luminol prints, or mixed blood/DNA,etc. The media can jump up and down but Hellmann&Co will have the last word. Nobody else.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

stint7 wrote:
Michael wrote:
Zorba -

The two chaps on the right with backs to camera.


IMHO
1) Are the tourists with the Fodor Guide in hand on a mission to improve the image of tourists in general with their sneakies, whitey white sockies and shorties ?? :roll:

2) Is it just me or if moustache was shaved, does the ever so fit looking male tourist in shorts bear a resemblance to Mr Mellas.
Possibly as a relative ?? ;)



Actually, I had considered quipping something about how they couldn't look more like tourists if they tried :)

As for whether he looks like Mellas...stick him in a flat cap or make him hold a fish and I'll tell yer ;)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

max wrote:
It is good there is some reporting on Sara Gino as I think nobody in court could really follow her :) Also very little reporting on Torre. Both consultants were done within minutes today. No further reviews being allowed by Hellmann. Not only on the knife but also not on the bathmat, luminol prints, or mixed blood/DNA,etc. The media can jump up and down but Hellmann&Co will have the last word. Nobody else.


Well, there is reporting, but I have to pop out for a short while...so I'll post it all up a little later.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Yep...yet strangely, Knox's DNA wasn't on her own clothes to get on said bra clasp in said washing machine, only Raffaele's DNA. And Raffaele's very special DNA, only got on the clasp in said washing machine, no other part of the bra. Or on any of Meredith's other clothes that were in the washing machine for that matter.


Where did I read that Dr. Stefanoni testified that Meredith's DNA wasn't found in her own socks> She brought that up to explain that it is not that easy to transfer DNA. I found that very interesting. The Melloxes would have you believe it just flies through the air and sticks to the most incriminating places, through closed doors if it has to.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Nell wrote:
Michael wrote:
Yep...yet strangely, Knox's DNA wasn't on her own clothes to get on said bra clasp in said washing machine, only Raffaele's DNA. And Raffaele's very special DNA, only got on the clasp in said washing machine, no other part of the bra. Or on any of Meredith's other clothes that were in the washing machine for that matter.


Where did I read that Dr. Stefanoni testified that Meredith's DNA wasn't found in her own socks> She brought that up to explain that it is not that easy to transfer DNA. I found that very interesting. The Melloxes would have you believe it just flies through the air and sticks to the most incriminating places, through closed doors if it has to.


It's in the Massei Report.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Knox trial: Court rejects new DNA test request
ALESSANDRA RIZZO, Associated Press
Updated 06:53 a.m., Wednesday, September 7, 2011

SEATTLE PI

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

That's an interesting look...



_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

From the article in the SPI:

Quote:
The court also rejected another prosecution request to put back on the stand a witness who had previously testified that his brother, a fugitive, had killed Kercher during a botched burglary. The witness, a jailed Naples mobster called Luciano Aviello, announced he wanted to retract and was questioned by Comodi in prison in July. The court ruled that transcriptions of that questioning would suffice.


At least the prosecution have been permitted to present the transcripts of the Aviello interview!

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Nell wrote:
Michael wrote:
Yep...yet strangely, Knox's DNA wasn't on her own clothes to get on said bra clasp in said washing machine, only Raffaele's DNA. And Raffaele's very special DNA, only got on the clasp in said washing machine, no other part of the bra. Or on any of Meredith's other clothes that were in the washing machine for that matter.


Where did I read that Dr. Stefanoni testified that Meredith's DNA wasn't found in her own socks> She brought that up to explain that it is not that easy to transfer DNA. I found that very interesting. The Melloxes would have you believe it just flies through the air and sticks to the most incriminating places, through closed doors if it has to.


It's in the Massei Report.


You are a walking encyclopedia on this case. I've read so much about it and after almost four years it often cost me to remember where I read what. Thanks Michael.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
From the article in the SPI:

Quote:
The court also rejected another prosecution request to put back on the stand a witness who had previously testified that his brother, a fugitive, had killed Kercher during a botched burglary. The witness, a jailed Naples mobster called Luciano Aviello, announced he wanted to retract and was questioned by Comodi in prison in July. The court ruled that transcriptions of that questioning would suffice.


At least the prosecution have been permitted to present the transcripts of the Aviello interview!


That is even better than Aviello himself in my opinion. Who would want to see him in court again. Not me.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 3:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Zorba -

The two chaps on the right with backs to camera.


IMHO
1) Are the tourists with the Fodor Guide in hand on a mission to improve the image of tourists in general with their sneakies, whitey white sockies and shorties ?? :roll:

2) Is it just me or if moustache was shaved, does the ever so fit looking male tourist in shorts bear a resemblance to Mr Mellas.
Possibly as a relative ?? ;)
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 3:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

So, another two-week break in the trial, but the Sep 28 deadline for the verdict still stands, notwithstanding the delay. I can understand that everyone in the courtroom wants to pause to catch their breath, wipe the sweat from their brows (quite literally!) and get ready for the final fight. More sleepless nights for Knox I guess.

The judges' motivation for rejecting the prosecution's request, from the article in the Seattle PI:

Quote:
Pratillo Hellmann said the discussion had been thorough enough for the court to form an opinion. New testing would be "superfluous," he said, rejecting the request made earlier in the day by Prosecutor Manuela Comodi.


It doesn't mean that the judges' opinion would automatically be favorable towards Knox and Sollecito.


Last edited by guermantes on Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 3:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
That's an interesting look...



She looks unkempt today. eee-)
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 3:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

From Mathew Chance:

mchancecnn Matthew Chance
#AmandaKnox prosecutors privately concede possibility conviction may be overturned later this month...met them earlier with other journos.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
From Mathew Chance:

mchancecnn Matthew Chance
#AmandaKnox prosecutors privately concede possibility conviction may be overturned later this month...met them earlier with other journos.

Lol..he 'forgot' to mention the other possibilities.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATE:

Perugia, September 7 (Adnkronos) - The Assize Court of Appeal of Perugia has rejected calls for a new expert witness and listen to a new advanced by the prosecution in the trial for the murder of Meredith Kercher.

The new genetic survey, carried out by other experts had been requested by the prosecution this morning Manuela comfortable in the process of appeal to Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, convicted at first instance and 25 to 26 years in prison. The prosecutor said that there are sampled traces on the knife that can and should be analyzed. He also requested that the experts will undertake new calculations of biostatisticians to determine the degree of reliability of forensic analysis. The prosecution then asked to hear again Aviello Luciano, who has already 'evidence in the context of the process.

The prosecutor had argued that''Manuela Convenient notes are objective facts in the report (Conti and professors Vecchiotti, ed) beyond the 'merit, because' there is 'a track, as they have supported more' consultants, not only those of the prosecution, analyze and use. It 'a low copy number, but you can' analyze''he said.

Convenient also said that the experts have failed to report that''there are kits that allow even advanced to analyze trace amounts with 'very low''of DNA. ''If I name an expert third party and 'all the way to ascertain the truth', and then an attempt should be made,''said the prosecutor, who also pointed out how the experts Stefano Conti and Carla Vecchiotti who drafted the report in which it is put into question the scientific work of the police were allowed to purchase all, and while''on the one hand they asked around, other, not only did not ask, but they have more 'sometimes asserted that there were no'' .

The prosecutor had asked that any new experts were asked to establish a biostatistician,''in relation to the second question that the Court had placed the Accounts and Vecchiotti experts, to ensure the reliability 'of police work.''



LIBERO

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:

Perugia, September 7 (Adnkronos) - "The renovation of the expertise is unnecessary, regardless of whether there are gaps highlighted by the Attorney General and shared by the plaintiffs." And 'because he supported the President of the Assize Court of Appeal of Perugia, Claudio Pratillo Hellmann, rejecting the request made by the Attorney General in the appeal trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, in the first instance sentenced to 26 and 25 years in prison for the murder of Meredith Kercher.

"The findings made by the experts-said-even the president and the evaluations of the consultants allow this court to form a just and reasoned conviction. This is the new skill is not 'indispensable'.



LIBERO


Note
Just a Note.
~ Could someone kindly render a proper translation of this one please. Thanks in advance.~

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:


Perugia, September 7 - (Adnkronos) - "I had expected." He said the prosecutor Manuela Comfortable, after hearing the appeal process to Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, commenting on the decision of the Assize Court of Appeals not to grant a new skill to the same magistrate had made a request on behalf of the Attorney General.

It is separated from their husbands''- said Dr. Comfortable - and then you can 'also be separated by the experts wrong. The fact that they (the judges of the court, ed) did not have the curiosity 'to know what's' on track 'I', leaves me very puzzled.''



LIBERO


Note
Just a Note.
~ Could we have a translation for this one too please.~

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:

Perugia, September 7 - (Adnkronos) - "The survey confirmed other evidence documenting the foreignness' of Sollecito to the crime." The lawyer Giulia Bongiorno said, commenting on the decision of the Assize Court of Appeals not to grant a new Perugia genetic expertise as requested by the prosecution.

"So - said the lawyer, who defends Sollecito and his colleague Luca Maori - if it was assumed that the prosecution tried to weaken it and request another place it was just as foolish."

"It should be noted - has concluded the lawyer - that the foreignness 'of Sollecito emerges from every page of the job so the expertise and' one of many tests exonerated him but certainly not the only one."



LIBERO

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Yes pity about Nadeau, seems like she was abducted by aliens, she was one of the few, meaning about 2 people who seemed to have a brain instead of sawdust between their ears, but I noticed the signs of oncoming premature senile dementia, when she kept on saying stuff without providing substantiating it quite like Pisa does.

He's obviously not only in it for the money, but for the lifestyle, many of these people down there, seem to be there and willing to do or say anything as long as they keep themsleves there and employed.

I do still like Nadeau, and if Pisa hadn't started slipping her sleeping tablets she might have had something to say, because what she came up with now, has not been helpful and it has been very careless of her to say such stuff. Maybe she ought to try to ask the judge like: hey judge we all decided what you are going to do, maybe I could do your job, is there really any need to go through all this, we here already decided what ya all are gonna do.

If Ms Nadeau in the meantime does come up with any degree of substantiation and insight - after blocking her ears to Pisa who is leaning, she will be saved from the zombies.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
From Mathew Chance:

mchancecnn Matthew Chance
#AmandaKnox prosecutors privately concede possibility conviction may be overturned later this month...met them earlier with other journos.

.
Okay, if this wasn't a private session with Nick Pisa, but a multitude, where you can be sure that no one would respect any request for "off the record", it's clear that Comodi wanted this message to be propagated.

I believe that on .ORG someone showed that Comodi has used this sort of tactic in the past. Iif so, the logic is that she makes it feel like she/the prosecution is being dealt with unreasonably, and the offender (in this case, the court?) has to be nice. However, this supposed media conversation happened before the decision to reject the new test request ... Now that it has been rejected, what effect do these comments have on the rest of the trial and the verdict???
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:

Perugia, September 7 - (Adnkronos) -''Raffaele counts the days until the end of this ordeal.'' He said his lawyer Luca Maori at the end of the hearing today in which the Court of Assizes of Appeal in Perugia rejected the request by the prosecution to a new genetic survey. Remember''- he added - that he is unjustly imprisoned for four years.''

As for the decision of the Court, the attorney claimed that''the Court has rightly rejected the request of the PM to have a new skill with new experts, absurd and out of all reason and suffer Aviello, declared themselves unaccountable pm I think that is formally and legally watertight.''



LIBERO

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit wrote:
Michael wrote:
From Mathew Chance:

mchancecnn Matthew Chance
#AmandaKnox prosecutors privately concede possibility conviction may be overturned later this month...met them earlier with other journos.

.
Okay, if this wasn't a private session with Nick Pisa, but a multitude, where you can be sure that no one would respect any request for "off the record", it's clear that Comodi wanted this message to be propagated.

I believe that on .ORG someone showed that Comodi has used this sort of tactic in the past. Iif so, the logic is that she makes it feel like she/the prosecution is being dealt with unreasonably, and the offender (in this case, the court?) has to be nice. However, this supposed media conversation happened before the decision to reject the new test request ... Now that it has been rejected, what effect do these comments have on the rest of the trial and the verdict???


Hmm...it's interesting that she's done it before in the past. I don't know what to make of that. I find it hard to see what good it could do...

Those cases where she did it in the past...did she win them?

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:


Perugia, September 7 - (Adnkronos) - The rejection of the Assize Court of Appeal in Perugia to a new report for Francesco Maresca, the lawyer representing the plaintiffs Kercher's family''is not 'a defeat.''

''The judges go on for free conviction - he added - the Court gave a deep motivation instead arguing that the dialectic of consultants allows him a clear opinion. I appreciate the motivation with which they have rejected a new skill, of course, the Assize Court of Appeal and 'satisfied with the serenity' is required to listen to all sides.''



LIBERO

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:

Perugia, September 7 - (Adnkronos) - Amanda '"very concerned" about the outcome of hearings. Said the lawyer Luciano Ghirga, one of his defenders. According to the lawyer, however, "the renewal of the expert opinion is not allowed the same favorable outcome of the process' equation is not legally permissible."

"It ', acknowledged - he added - the work of experts. We are among other things in front of a rare case of extensive renewal hearing. A challenge forward even legally. C' and 'all - concluded Ghirga the lawyer - for some good defenses. "


LIBERO


Note
Just a Note.
~ Could we have a translation of this one too, please.~

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
LIBERO


Note
Just a Note.
~ Could we have a translation for this one too please.~

.
I'm no translator, but here's a smoothed out version:

http://www.libero-news.it/articolo.jsp?id=816588

ITALIAN:
"Me lo aspettavo". Lo ha detto il pubblico ministero Manuela Comodi, al termine dell'udienza del processo d'Appello ad Amanda Knox e Raffaele Sollecito commentando la decisione della Corte d'Assise d'Appello di non concedere la nuova perizia di cui lo stesso magistrato aveva fatto richiesta a nome della procura generale.

''Ci si separa dai mariti - ha detto ancora la dottoressa Comodi - e quindi ci si puo' separare anche dai periti sbagliati. Il fatto che loro (i giudici della corte, ndr) non abbiano avuto la curiosita' di sapere che cosa c'e' nella traccia 'I', mi lascia veramente perplessa''.



FAST TRANSLATION:

"I expected it." Thus spoke Prosecutor Manuela Comodi, at the end of the hearing in the appeals trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, commenting on the decision of the Assize Court of Appeals to not grant new (DNA) testing which this prosecutor had made on behalf of the Prosecution..

"You can get separated from your husband'' said Dr. Comodi, "and so you can also separate from erroneous experts. The fact that they, the judges of the court, did not have the curiosity to know what's in (knife) evidence "I", leaves me very puzzled."
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:


Perugia, September 7 - (Adnkronos) -''I am more 'before you hope to bring home my son.'' Said the father of Raffaele Sollecito exit from the hearing today in the appeal process in Perugia. ''I have shared in every way - said Francesco Sollecito - the objections advanced by the defense of my son from that of Amanda Knox on the request of the prosecution. Then, when the Court, and 'expressed reason for giving the lawyers I was pleased.''

Surely''- she added - now Raffaele and 'more' confident of a few days ago. Andro 'to see him in prison soon and I expect to find more' serene.''



LIBERO

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit - thanks for the fast trans :)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

I think I might write a PMF blog article tomorrow.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Umm...now this from Mathew Chance:

mchancecnn Matthew Chance
More on #AmandaKnox prosecutors. They are confident and hopeful that verdict will be upheld, but aware it could go other way.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
GOOGLE TRANSLATION:

Perugia, September 7 (Adnkronos) - "The renovation of the expertise is unnecessary, regardless of whether there are gaps highlighted by the Attorney General and shared by the plaintiffs." And 'because he supported the President of the Assize Court of Appeal of Perugia, Claudio Pratillo Hellmann, rejecting the request made by the Attorney General in the appeal trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, in the first instance sentenced to 26 and 25 years in prison for the murder of Meredith Kercher.

"The findings made by the experts-said-even the president and the evaluations of the consultants allow this court to form a just and reasoned conviction. This is the new skill is not 'indispensable'.



LIBERO


Note
Just a Note.
~ Could someone kindly render a proper translation of this one please. Thanks in advance.~



___________________________________________________________________

[Zorba: If someone can do a better job, then please. I'm just trying]


The renewal of expertise is unnecessary, regardless of whether there are gaps highlighted by the PM and shared by the plaintiffs"

This is how he, the President of the Assize Court of Appeal of Perugia, Claudio Pratillo Hellmann, substantiated (underpinned) his decision, rejecting the request made ​​by the Attorney General (PM) in the appeal of the first trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, in the first trial sentenced to 26 and 25 years respectively, for the murder of Meredith Kercher.

The findings made by the experts - said the president - and their consultants' evaluations allow this court to form a just and reasoned conviction. For this purpose, new expertise is not indispensible.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Wouldn't any new testing suffer the same questions/doubt/objections as the first test?

I see nothing to be gained by either side with any further testing, am I missing something?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Thanks Zorba. This is the part I most wanted:


Quote:
The findings made by the experts - said the president - and their consultants' evaluations allow this court to form a just and reasoned conviction. For this new expertise is not indispensible.



I want clarification that he's emphasised that he's taking into account the testimony/findings of BOTH C&V and the experts of ALL the parties. I 'think' that's what he's giving.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

dgfred wrote:
Wouldn't any new testing suffer the same questions/doubt/objections as the first test?

I see nothing to be gained by either side with any further testing, am I missing something?



There's certainly something to be gained if they test the knife and find Meredith's DNA on the blade. That constitutes a 're-test'...a re-test that the defence and C&V claimed there wasn't enough material to do and constitutes their primary argument for rejecting the knife!

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

dgfred wrote:
Wouldn't any new testing suffer the same questions/doubt/objections as the first test?

I see nothing to be gained by either side with any further testing, am I missing something?



Yes and though some think they are gifted by being telepathic, he did not say that what was provided meant that he is going to base his own reasoning exclusively on any single part, according to the strength of logical reasoning and law, he will for his final decision have viewed all points aline and then what they mean/imply viewed in their entirety after having had the court clerks present summaries of all important complex legal jargon and data to the lay judges so that they also make well-informed conclusions.


He has absorbed what these court appointed scientists say/said/made of things and in relationship to the degree to which they were able to back it up when questioned, he will compile his sequences of deliberations in relation to what he ascertained in relationship to what others put forward and what evidence he views as being REAL, and so then arriving at his conclusion, not all on his own, but having actually viewed EV ERYTHING, not just these court-appointed people; for one thing, the last-mentioned did not manage to present strong angles underpinned by concrete reasoning, what they said was not anything different to what the defence teams' experts already put forward which was already rejected by entire ranks of judges.
The court appointed people as regards expertise appeared to be lawnmower mechanics on a day out to the Ferrari lab. They were simply out of their league and in fact, instead of providing concrete foundations they based their stuff literally on thin air/hearsay.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

A couple of days ago, someone commented that it appeared that the DNA report was written as a critique of the DNA analysis rather than as an independent review of the DNA evidence - as though C&V thought it was their job to undermine the DNA evidence. That started me wondering that, if this was true, where did they get that idea. It had to have come from Judge Hellman. When the report was first leaked, many suspected that C&V had been influenced by some of the US friends of Knox/Mellas that claimed expertise in DNA analysis. I can understand today's rejection of another lengthy DNA report as there comes a time when the case needs to be wrapped up ... however ... if C&V found DNA on the knife blade, then we know the sample that was a match to Meredith didn't get there from contamination in the lab. If it was retested, it would once and for all determine whether Meredith's DNA is on the knife. If a second test confirms the earlier findings, there can be no doubt about guilt. By refusing a retest, the answer will never be known and it leaves hanging the possibilities of contamination in the lab - even though dirty machines have been ruled out.

I find it to be an unusual ruling. Does this mean that they powers that be in Italy have had enough of the bad press and they want to move on? Does this mean that those that make the most noise are given what they want? Does this mean that the Judge has already formed an opinion that the knife DNA is irrelevant, or that it is sound evidence, and no further testing is required? If it is sound evidence, then no further testing is required. If it is not sound evidence, then testing the DNA found by C&V clarifies the situation.

Is the court prepared to ignore all the other evidence and make a ruling on guilt or innocence based on these two pieces of DNA? If DNA was not part of the trial, would the guilty verdict be upheld? If DNA was the only factor in deciding guilty or innocence, why would prosecutors bother with other evidence?

Regarding the discussion about a reduction in sentence, I too have to wonder on what grounds the sentence would be reduced. Is there a point of law that could change the verdict such that the pair are still found guilty, but of a lesser offence? How long will it be before Guede is appealing his sentence on the same basis: that the DNA was faulty, that he was nothing more than an innocent bystander?

Looking at the photo of Knox today, I think we see the same woman that we saw during the first trial; the woman that treated the entire process like a joke and who thought sexy was the key to freedom.
Top Profile 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Wouldn't any new testing suffer the same questions/doubt/objections as the first test?

I see nothing to be gained by either side with any further testing, am I missing something?



There's certainly something to be gained if they test the knife and find Meredith's DNA on the blade. That constitutes a 're-test'...a re-test that the defence and C&V claimed there wasn't enough material to do and constitutes their primary argument for rejecting the knife!


But will not the same old arguments of contamination and collection still be put forward?

I see what you mean by showing C&V wrong tho.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

A quick summary of today's events (imported from .org). Thanks Kermit for your translations! Google Trans gives me a headache.


FAST TRANSLATION:
http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=97611#p97611

After retiring briefly to their chambers, the judges of the Assize Court of Appeal of Perugia on Wednesday morning, rejected the Prosecution's request for new testing of DNA evidence in the trial of Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox. "No" was also the reply to the request to hear testimony again by Aviello Luciano, made by the prosecution on Wednesday morning. The Court has considered "superfluous" establishing a new technical test, and "unnecessary" the testimony of the police informant. With these issues dealt with, on September 23, the date fixed by the Court, we will enter the final phase of the trial with the closing arguments of the prosecutor. Other hearings have already been scheduled for 24, 26 and 27 September for the statements by the civil plaintiffs and the defence teams. Then the verdict.

End of the war between the expert witnesses

"The investigations carried out by experts and the evidence they have provided", said the court's presiding judge in court, with regards to the technical testing, "allows this court to form a belief/conclusion." Prosecutor Manuela Comodi explained on Wednesday her request to the Court, speaking of "objective notes," (appunti oggettivi - Italians!!!! help!!, I guess, something "objective indications") concerning the report carried out by the experts appointed by the Court of Assizes of Appeal. The prosecutor described the report as "hopelessly flawed." In particular, the prosecutor asked the Court to order a bio-statistical analysis and that the (DNA) traces found on the knife be analysed using kits with the latest technology.

The Prosecutor: inadequate and unreliable experts

"If the appointment of an expert is intended to establish the truth," said Comodi, "this must be attempted to be achieved." For the prosecutor, "the experts did not respond to questions that the Court had asked them. They dispursed doubts, saying that anything is possible. The task of an expert though", Comodi said, "is not to insinuate doubt, but to give more certainty to those who must take decisions." Comodi then spoke of the two experts' "inadequacy and unreliability".

The Defence teams are contrary

During the morning the defence teams of Knox and Sollecito were strongly opposed to Prosecutor Comodi's requests. They accused her of "playing a three card trick" (??? "fare il gioco delle tre carte"), according to lawyer Luca Maori. "It's a shame," said the lawyer, "in such an important trial, where the lives of two people are still and frozen for four years, that people still play these games." For lawyer Maori "when things go bad, they try to bring water to their mill (idiomatic expression). From the beginning," he continued, "and even in the first trial the prosecution has always been contrary to the requests for (third party) experts that we made. Now that things are not going well that changes."

Aviello? Unreliable

Lawyer Maori had also rejected new testimony by ex-police informant Aviello Luciano, "considered by the investigators themselves to be a completely unreliable person." "And at this point," asks lawyer Maori, "they want to hear him testify again? And then before the Court, what will he say? Retract the retraction of the retraction? It's really just another way to waste time. We need to get to the end of this trial as soon as possible," said lawyer Mauri, "and close this matter." Luciano Ghirga, lawyer for Amanda Knox, also says "not at all" to the new requests by the prosecution.

Umbria24

(Translated by Kermit)
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Zorba wrote:
what they said was not anything different to what the defence teams' experts already put forward which was already rejected by entire ranks of judges.



Actually, they said a lot of things different...not least inventing another 17 profiles on the clasp at the last minute, which they neither evidenced nor mentioned in their report, 17 profiles none of the other experts had noticed...

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Jester wrote:
A couple of days ago, someone commented that it appeared that the DNA report was written as a critique of the DNA analysis rather than as an independent review of the DNA evidence - as though C&V thought it was their job to undermine the DNA evidence. That started me wondering that, if this was true, where did they get that idea. It had to have come from Judge Hellman. When the report was first leaked, many suspected that C&V had been influenced by some of the US friends of Knox/Mellas that claimed expertise in DNA analysis. I can understand today's rejection of another lengthy DNA report as there comes a time when the case needs to be wrapped up ... however ... if C&V found DNA on the knife blade, then we know the sample that was a match to Meredith didn't get there from contamination in the lab. If it was retested, it would once and for all determine whether Meredith's DNA is on the knife. If a second test confirms the earlier findings, there can be no doubt about guilt. By refusing a retest, the answer will never be known and it leaves hanging the possibilities of contamination in the lab - even though dirty machines have been ruled out.

I find it to be an unusual ruling. Does this mean that they powers that be in Italy have had enough of the bad press and they want to move on? Does this mean that those that make the most noise are given what they want? Does this mean that the Judge has already formed an opinion that the knife DNA is irrelevant, or that it is sound evidence, and no further testing is required? If it is sound evidence, then no further testing is required. If it is not sound evidence, then testing the DNA found by C&V clarifies the situation.

Is the court prepared to ignore all the other evidence and make a ruling on guilt or innocence based on these two pieces of DNA? If DNA was not part of the trial, would the guilty verdict be upheld? If DNA was the only factor in deciding guilty or innocence, why would prosecutors bother with other evidence?

Regarding the discussion about a reduction in sentence, I too have to wonder on what grounds the sentence would be reduced. Is there a point of law that could change the verdict such that the pair are still found guilty, but of a lesser offence? How long will it be before Guede is appealing his sentence on the same basis: that the DNA was faulty, that he was nothing more than an innocent bystander?

Looking at the photo of Knox today, I think we see the same woman that we saw during the first trial; the woman that treated the entire process like a joke and who thought sexy was the key to freedom.


Nice post J. Wonder if it is the same 3 month reduction only for transporting the knife that is mentioned so often... if the knife/dna is thrown out?

IIRC there is no 'reduction' of charges available. It is either guilty or not guilty.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

dgfred wrote:
Michael wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Wouldn't any new testing suffer the same questions/doubt/objections as the first test?

I see nothing to be gained by either side with any further testing, am I missing something?



There's certainly something to be gained if they test the knife and find Meredith's DNA on the blade. That constitutes a 're-test'...a re-test that the defence and C&V claimed there wasn't enough material to do and constitutes their primary argument for rejecting the knife!


But will not the same old arguments of contamination and collection still be put forward?

I see what you mean by showing C&V wrong tho.


No, listen...the major contention by the defence and C&V is that there was no re-test performed on the knife. In order to make a profile finding considered reliable, a re-test must always be performed. That is their argument. Dr Stefanoni had not performed a re-test (as there was not enough material at the time to do a re-test) and because a re-test was not performed, the evidence must be rejected (per C&V and the defence). The point of a re-test is to rule out contamination and confirm the finding. However, it appears C&V found DNA on the knife and with the newer technology available today and which they had, they could have extracted a profile from the DNA they found. This would have constituted as being the required re-test they insist should have been done. They did not do that. If further investigations are performed and a profile is extracted (and it's Meredith's), that would also constitute the required re-test. Do you see?

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Yes, but what if no dna of Meredith is found?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Zorba wrote:
what they said was not anything different to what the defence teams' experts already put forward which was already rejected by entire ranks of judges.



Actually, they said a lot of things different...not least inventing another 17 profiles on the clasp at the last minute, which they neither evidenced nor mentioned in their report, 17 profiles none of the other experts had noticed...



So yeah if it's meaningless/no value then what thy said is nothing more than what the others could make anyone believe

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

guermantes wrote:
A quick summary of today's events (imported from .org). Thanks Kermit for your translations! Google Trans gives me a headache.

.
Hey Guermantes!

Well, they're not really translations, just smoothed over Google Trans, with a touch of applying Spanish syntax and style. They're readable, however, be careful with my verb tenses as in some situations there's a long stretch of understanding from a definitive "he did it", to a wishy washy "he could have been able to have done it"
:)
Top Profile 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

What if someone else's dna is found? Wouldn't they still claim contamination or improper collection if Meredith's dna is found?

Really, I'm not trying to be dense Michael... sometimes I can't help it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Thanks Zorba. This is the part I most wanted:


Quote:
The findings made by the experts - said the president - and their consultants' evaluations allow this court to form a just and reasoned conviction. For this new expertise is not indispensible.



I want clarification that he's emphasised that he's taking into account the testimony/findings of BOTH C&V and the experts of ALL the parties. I 'think' that's what he's giving.



exactly, even if some others seem to imagine they've already made his mind up for him.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
No, listen...the major contention by the defence and C&V is that there was no re-test performed on the knife. In order to make a profile finding considered reliable, a re-test must always be performed. That is their argument. Dr Stefanoni had not performed a re-test (as there was not enough material at the time to do a re-test) and because a re-test was not performed, the evidence must be rejected (per C&V and the defence). The point of a re-test is to rule out contamination and confirm the finding. However, it appears C&V found DNA on the knife and with the newer technology available today and which they had, they could have extracted a profile from the DNA they found. This would have constituted as being the required re-test they insist should have been done. They did not do that. If further investigations are performed and a profile is extracted (and it's Meredith's), that would also constitute the required re-test. Do you see?

.
I see. :)

This is not about doing a test, but about performing the re-test which couldn't be done at the time.
Top Profile 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit wrote:
Michael wrote:
No, listen...the major contention by the defence and C&V is that there was no re-test performed on the knife. In order to make a profile finding considered reliable, a re-test must always be performed. That is their argument. Dr Stefanoni had not performed a re-test (as there was not enough material at the time to do a re-test) and because a re-test was not performed, the evidence must be rejected (per C&V and the defence). The point of a re-test is to rule out contamination and confirm the finding. However, it appears C&V found DNA on the knife and with the newer technology available today and which they had, they could have extracted a profile from the DNA they found. This would have constituted as being the required re-test they insist should have been done. They did not do that. If further investigations are performed and a profile is extracted (and it's Meredith's), that would also constitute the required re-test. Do you see?

.
I see. :)

This is not about doing a test, but about performing the re-test which couldn't be done at the time.


I must be going blind then. Would a re-test still be LCN? Would the same protest of contamination and improper collection still be re-hashed? I still see no benefit for anyone really, but do see Michael's points earlier.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Jester wrote:
A couple of days ago, someone commented that it appeared that the DNA report was written as a critique of the DNA analysis rather than as an independent review of the DNA evidence - as though C&V thought it was their job to undermine the DNA evidence. That started me wondering that, if this was true, where did they get that idea. It had to have come from Judge Hellman.


That's a scary thought. I certainly agree with what you said about C & V...that they went at it as though their actual task was to destroy the evidence...I mean, they tried to throw everything, even the kitchen sink...stuff that wasn't even directly relevant, at it. I'm not sure I'm paranoid enough to think Hellman specifically directed them to do that. I'm more inclined to hypothesise, that he was overly vague in his instructions, leaving room for misunderstanding of what he was requiring. Either that, or they had their own agenda going on...or they got corrupted behind the scenes by one or more of the parties (or their affiliates) involved in the case.

Jester wrote:
Regarding the discussion about a reduction in sentence, I too have to wonder on what grounds the sentence would be reduced. Is there a point of law that could change the verdict such that the pair are still found guilty, but of a lesser offence?


No. The only chance of reduction is if one or more charges are dismissed. And there's no more mitigation to add.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

dgfred wrote:
Kermit wrote:
Michael wrote:
No, listen...the major contention by the defence and C&V is that there was no re-test performed on the knife. In order to make a profile finding considered reliable, a re-test must always be performed. That is their argument. Dr Stefanoni had not performed a re-test (as there was not enough material at the time to do a re-test) and because a re-test was not performed, the evidence must be rejected (per C&V and the defence). The point of a re-test is to rule out contamination and confirm the finding. However, it appears C&V found DNA on the knife and with the newer technology available today and which they had, they could have extracted a profile from the DNA they found. This would have constituted as being the required re-test they insist should have been done. They did not do that. If further investigations are performed and a profile is extracted (and it's Meredith's), that would also constitute the required re-test. Do you see?

.
I see. :)

This is not about doing a test, but about performing the re-test which couldn't be done at the time.


I must be going blind then. Would a re-test still be LCN? Would the same protest of contamination and improper collection still be re-hashed? I still see no benefit for anyone really, but do see Michael's points earlier.



Yes, it would still be LCN. But what's important, is it would also still be the re-test that the Defence and C&V insist is required. They could not then say, the knife must be rejected because there was no re-test...which is what they've been saying up until now.

Of course, they could (and would) still claim contamination. But the important thing is they would no longer be able to claim there had been no re-test. And the fact there had been no re-test, was their main argument for why the knife should be rejected. And any re-test done, further rules out contamination. They would no longer have an argument for contamination. The only argument they'd have left is that it's small (LCN), which isn't an argument at all, since LCN evidence is used as standard in Italian trials.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit wrote:
Michael wrote:
No, listen...the major contention by the defence and C&V is that there was no re-test performed on the knife. In order to make a profile finding considered reliable, a re-test must always be performed. That is their argument. Dr Stefanoni had not performed a re-test (as there was not enough material at the time to do a re-test) and because a re-test was not performed, the evidence must be rejected (per C&V and the defence). The point of a re-test is to rule out contamination and confirm the finding. However, it appears C&V found DNA on the knife and with the newer technology available today and which they had, they could have extracted a profile from the DNA they found. This would have constituted as being the required re-test they insist should have been done. They did not do that. If further investigations are performed and a profile is extracted (and it's Meredith's), that would also constitute the required re-test. Do you see?

.
I see. :)

This is not about doing a test, but about performing the re-test which couldn't be done at the time.


Both.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Did u see that Michael, Pisa has a new-un on the Daily Seig Heil, and in it, he says that now even Comodi expcts them to be released.

I don't know if I accept anything he says.

There are worse places than prison, hell in the mind is one.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

zorba wrote:
Did u see that Michael, Pisa has a new-un on the Daily Seig Heil, and in it, he says that now even Comodi expcts them to be released.

I don't know if I accept anything he says.

There are worse places than prison, hell in th mind is one.



I don't know if you read what Kermit wrote earlier, but apparently Comodi has done this before...it's a 'tactic' of hers. I don't know what to make of it as a tactic, it seems an odd one to me, but apparently it is...

Of course, Pisa wouldn't know this, since he's never covered her previous trials. Maybe that's exactly why she picked him out to pass it on to (this sucker will do, he'll print it)...

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

dgfred wrote:
Jester wrote:
A couple of days ago, someone commented that it appeared that the DNA report was written as a critique of the DNA analysis rather than as an independent review of the DNA evidence - as though C&V thought it was their job to undermine the DNA evidence. That started me wondering that, if this was true, where did they get that idea. It had to have come from Judge Hellman. When the report was first leaked, many suspected that C&V had been influenced by some of the US friends of Knox/Mellas that claimed expertise in DNA analysis. I can understand today's rejection of another lengthy DNA report as there comes a time when the case needs to be wrapped up ... however ... if C&V found DNA on the knife blade, then we know the sample that was a match to Meredith didn't get there from contamination in the lab. If it was retested, it would once and for all determine whether Meredith's DNA is on the knife. If a second test confirms the earlier findings, there can be no doubt about guilt. By refusing a retest, the answer will never be known and it leaves hanging the possibilities of contamination in the lab - even though dirty machines have been ruled out.

I find it to be an unusual ruling. Does this mean that they powers that be in Italy have had enough of the bad press and they want to move on? Does this mean that those that make the most noise are given what they want? Does this mean that the Judge has already formed an opinion that the knife DNA is irrelevant, or that it is sound evidence, and no further testing is required? If it is sound evidence, then no further testing is required. If it is not sound evidence, then testing the DNA found by C&V clarifies the situation.

Is the court prepared to ignore all the other evidence and make a ruling on guilt or innocence based on these two pieces of DNA? If DNA was not part of the trial, would the guilty verdict be upheld? If DNA was the only factor in deciding guilty or innocence, why would prosecutors bother with other evidence?

Regarding the discussion about a reduction in sentence, I too have to wonder on what grounds the sentence would be reduced. Is there a point of law that could change the verdict such that the pair are still found guilty, but of a lesser offence? How long will it be before Guede is appealing his sentence on the same basis: that the DNA was faulty, that he was nothing more than an innocent bystander?

Looking at the photo of Knox today, I think we see the same woman that we saw during the first trial; the woman that treated the entire process like a joke and who thought sexy was the key to freedom.


Nice post J. Wonder if it is the same 3 month reduction only for transporting the knife that is mentioned so often... if the knife/dna is thrown out?

IIRC there is no 'reduction' of charges available. It is either guilty or not guilty.


Thanks. So the idea is that the sentence would still stand, but that the transporting the knife conviction would be removed. That hardly makes a difference worth mentioning.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Jester wrote:
A couple of days ago, someone commented that it appeared that the DNA report was written as a critique of the DNA analysis rather than as an independent review of the DNA evidence - as though C&V thought it was their job to undermine the DNA evidence. That started me wondering that, if this was true, where did they get that idea. It had to have come from Judge Hellman.


That's a scary thought. I certainly agree with what you said about C & V...that they went at it as though their actual task was to destroy the evidence...I mean, they tried to throw everything, even the kitchen sink...stuff that wasn't even directly relevant, at it. I'm not sure I'm paranoid enough to think Hellman specifically directed them to do that. I'm more inclined to hypothesise, that he was overly vague in his instructions, leaving room for misunderstanding of what he was requiring. Either that, or they had their own agenda going on...or they got corrupted behind the scenes by one or more of the parties (or their affiliates) involved in the case.

Jester wrote:
Regarding the discussion about a reduction in sentence, I too have to wonder on what grounds the sentence would be reduced. Is there a point of law that could change the verdict such that the pair are still found guilty, but of a lesser offence?


No. The only chance of reduction is if one or more charges are dismissed. And there's no more mitigation to add.


I wish I could say that Judge's are always immune to the wiles of a female party in a dispute, but I know that isn't true. At one point in my life, I was divorcing someone that was very senior in the judicial system. We had to have a special mediated divorce with a judge where we hashed everything out away from the prying eyes of the public, criminals and other curiousity seekers. At one point, during the 12 or 15 hours of mediation, the Judge turned to me and winked. I knew at that moment that everything would be okay for me ... and it was. That particular Judge had a reputation for being a hardass, but I didn't see that in him. In another situation, a young woman was speeding and she decided to appeal the fine. She arrived in court with a very tight t-shirt and very short skirt. She was attractive. The prosecutor leaned over and said ... she's going to walk because of how she's dressed. She did. Sometimes Judge's just have a soft spot and nothing filters through it. I guess we'll see how this turns out at the end of the month, but rejecting the possibility of determining once and for all if the DNA on the knife belongs to Meredith seems like closing the door on determining the truth ... or, it could be that Judge Hellman has already decided that the knife is not the deciding factor in guilt or innocence, and has allowed this review for the sake of giving the appearance of hearing everything the defendants have to say.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Knox Appeal: The Defense Counters (14th Hearing)

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

WILL SAVIVE

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
zorba wrote:
Did u see that Michael, Pisa has a new-un on the Daily Seig Heil, and in it, he says that now even Comodi expcts them to be released.

I don't know if I accept anything he says.

There are worse places than prison, hell in th mind is one.



I don't know if you read what Kermit wrote earlier, but apparently Comodi has done this before...it's a 'tactic' of hers. I don't know what to make of it as a tactic, it seems an odd one to me, but apparently it is...

Of course, Pisa wouldn't know this, since he's never covered her previous trials. Maybe that's exactly why she picked him out to pass it on to (this sucker will do, he'll print it)...


I think the tactic is to put the Judge on notice that impartiality could come into question.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
zorba wrote:
Did u see that Michael, Pisa has a new-un on the Daily Seig Heil, and in it, he says that now even Comodi expcts them to be released.

I don't know if I accept anything he says.

There are worse places than prison, hell in th mind is one.



I don't know if you read what Kermit wrote earlier, but apparently Comodi has done this before...it's a 'tactic' of hers. I don't know what to make of it as a tactic, it seems an odd one to me, but apparently it is...

Of course, Pisa wouldn't know this, since he's never covered her previous trials. Maybe that's exactly why she picked him out to pass it on to (this sucker will do, he'll print it)...



Agree Michael,

There, where we all saw how hardly anyone in paperland stuck up for the actual victim, Meredith, & those most hurt, Meredith's family, we tried to see something good where possible, but no use supporting people who turn out to be as bad as the rest, like Pisa is, and even Barbie, I went out to chop some wood and when I got back she had been abducted by aliens! You know something that really upset me, just the other day, was Barbie naming Meredith as Kercher, Kercher this, Kercher that, it's so cold... at least just write her full name then, for the couple of extra words whyever not, she is not the accused, even if Knox's family would have everyone believe otherwise.

Anyhow, yes, me. I do not believe it's over till it's over, strange tactic then eh.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Jester wrote:
Michael wrote:
Jester wrote:
A couple of days ago, someone commented that it appeared that the DNA report was written as a critique of the DNA analysis rather than as an independent review of the DNA evidence - as though C&V thought it was their job to undermine the DNA evidence. That started me wondering that, if this was true, where did they get that idea. It had to have come from Judge Hellman.


That's a scary thought. I certainly agree with what you said about C & V...that they went at it as though their actual task was to destroy the evidence...I mean, they tried to throw everything, even the kitchen sink...stuff that wasn't even directly relevant, at it. I'm not sure I'm paranoid enough to think Hellman specifically directed them to do that. I'm more inclined to hypothesise, that he was overly vague in his instructions, leaving room for misunderstanding of what he was requiring. Either that, or they had their own agenda going on...or they got corrupted behind the scenes by one or more of the parties (or their affiliates) involved in the case.

Jester wrote:
Regarding the discussion about a reduction in sentence, I too have to wonder on what grounds the sentence would be reduced. Is there a point of law that could change the verdict such that the pair are still found guilty, but of a lesser offence?


No. The only chance of reduction is if one or more charges are dismissed. And there's no more mitigation to add.


I wish I could say that Judge's are always immune to the wiles of a female party in a dispute, but I know that isn't true. At one point in my life, I was divorcing someone that was very senior in the judicial system. We had to have a special mediated divorce with a judge where we hashed everything out away from the prying eyes of the public, criminals and other curiousity seekers. At one point, during the 12 or 15 hours of mediation, the Judge turned to me and winked. I knew at that moment that everything would be okay for me ... and it was. That particular Judge had a reputation for being a hardass, but I didn't see that in him. In another situation, a young woman was speeding and she decided to appeal the fine. She arrived in court with a very tight t-shirt and very short skirt. She was attractive. The prosecutor leaned over and said ... she's going to walk because of how she's dressed. She did. Sometimes Judge's just have a soft spot and nothing filters through it. I guess we'll see how this turns out at the end of the month, but rejecting the possibility of determining once and for all if the DNA on the knife belongs to Meredith seems like closing the door on determining the truth ... or, it could be that Judge Hellman has already decided that the knife is not the deciding factor in guilt or innocence, and has allowed this review for the sake of giving the appearance of hearing everything the defendants have to say.



I know that happens...but I'm a man, so I'm not allowed to say it does...so I'll leave you to say it :)

And it's not just rejecting determining whether it belongs to Meredith, but also rejecting the main defence and C&V demand...that there must be a re-test. Of course, if Hellman goes on to accept the knife as the murder weapon, none of this is materially important...but it certainly damn well is if he goes on to reject it AND acquits!

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

zorba wrote:
Michael wrote:
zorba wrote:
Did u see that Michael, Pisa has a new-un on the Daily Seig Heil, and in it, he says that now even Comodi expcts them to be released.

I don't know if I accept anything he says.

There are worse places than prison, hell in th mind is one.



I don't know if you read what Kermit wrote earlier, but apparently Comodi has done this before...it's a 'tactic' of hers. I don't know what to make of it as a tactic, it seems an odd one to me, but apparently it is...

Of course, Pisa wouldn't know this, since he's never covered her previous trials. Maybe that's exactly why she picked him out to pass it on to (this sucker will do, he'll print it)...



Agree Michael,

There, where we all saw how hardly anyone in paperland stuck up for the actual victim, Meredith, & those most hurt, Meredith's family, we tried to see something good where possible, but no use supporting people who turn out to be as bad as the rest, like Pisa is, and even Barbie, I went out to chop some wood and when I got back she had been abducted by aliens! You know something that really upset me, just the other day, was Barbie naming Meredith as Kercher, Kercher this, Kercher that, it's so cold... at least just write her full name then, for the couple of extra words whyever not, she is not the accused, even if Knox's family would have everyone believe otherwise.

Anyhow, yes, me. I do not believe it's over till it's over, strange tactic then eh.



When you actually start to think about it, stop and take stock, it becomes more clear that it is (a tactic). There are three prosecutors on this appeal...it's only Comodi saying this. The Prosecutor General isn't...Mignini isn't. Likewise, neither is Maresca or Pacelli. The only one singing a bum note among those that believe in guilt is Comodi...who has form for doing so in previous trials. And there's no doubt, she deliberately picked Pisa (why not her native Italian media?).

And anyway, Comodi fed this to Pisa. And who does Barbie hang with? Pisa (amongst others like Andrea). It's easy to see why Barbie has come over all fuzzy wuzzy. That's what comes with hanging out with bad company ;)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Jester wrote:
Michael wrote:
Jester wrote:
A couple of days ago, someone commented that it appeared that the DNA report was written as a critique of the DNA analysis rather than as an independent review of the DNA evidence - as though C&V thought it was their job to undermine the DNA evidence. That started me wondering that, if this was true, where did they get that idea. It had to have come from Judge Hellman.


That's a scary thought. I certainly agree with what you said about C & V...that they went at it as though their actual task was to destroy the evidence...I mean, they tried to throw everything, even the kitchen sink...stuff that wasn't even directly relevant, at it. I'm not sure I'm paranoid enough to think Hellman specifically directed them to do that. I'm more inclined to hypothesise, that he was overly vague in his instructions, leaving room for misunderstanding of what he was requiring. Either that, or they had their own agenda going on...or they got corrupted behind the scenes by one or more of the parties (or their affiliates) involved in the case.

Jester wrote:
Regarding the discussion about a reduction in sentence, I too have to wonder on what grounds the sentence would be reduced. Is there a point of law that could change the verdict such that the pair are still found guilty, but of a lesser offence?


No. The only chance of reduction is if one or more charges are dismissed. And there's no more mitigation to add.


I wish I could say that Judge's are always immune to the wiles of a female party in a dispute, but I know that isn't true. At one point in my life, I was divorcing someone that was very senior in the judicial system. We had to have a special mediated divorce with a judge where we hashed everything out away from the prying eyes of the public, criminals and other curiousity seekers. At one point, during the 12 or 15 hours of mediation, the Judge turned to me and winked. I knew at that moment that everything would be okay for me ... and it was. That particular Judge had a reputation for being a hardass, but I didn't see that in him. In another situation, a young woman was speeding and she decided to appeal the fine. She arrived in court with a very tight t-shirt and very short skirt. She was attractive. The prosecutor leaned over and said ... she's going to walk because of how she's dressed. She did. Sometimes Judge's just have a soft spot and nothing filters through it. I guess we'll see how this turns out at the end of the month, but rejecting the possibility of determining once and for all if the DNA on the knife belongs to Meredith seems like closing the door on determining the truth ... or, it could be that Judge Hellman has already decided that the knife is not the deciding factor in guilt or innocence, and has allowed this review for the sake of giving the appearance of hearing everything the defendants have to say.



I know that happens...but I'm a man, so I'm not allowed to say it does...so I'll leave you to say it :)

And it's not just rejecting determining whether it belongs to Meredith, but also rejecting the main defence and C&V demand...that there must be a re-test. Of course, if Hellman goes on to accept the knife as the murder weapon, none of this is materially important...but it certainly damn well is if he goes on to reject it AND acquits!


It happens everywhere ... in the courts, in academia between instructors and students, with police officers ... the right flutter of the doe eyes, and the appearance of naivity and innocence goes a long way in smoothing the rough edges in life. I learned a long time ago that it's sometimes better to keep one's mouth closed and let someone imagine whatever they want based on what they see. Knox learned the power of exploiting men through seduction when she arrived in Europe. She took it too far in her interactions with Meredith ... wanting Meredith to put her on a pedestal as well, or wanting to put Meredith in her place. Meredith paid for this with her life. Knox has refined how she interacts with men since her time in jail - just look at her in court interacting with her lawyers, or the politician that dreams of being with her, or the prison religious guy that wants to take her home with him. For each of them, she becomes who they want her to be. She probably sized up Judge Hellman and put on her best "I'm the perfect granddaughter you always wanted" facade. Today in court, we see her again trying to look like the 14 year old instead of the 24 year old ... anything to emphasize youth, innocence and naivity.

I'm truly at a loss to see how the evidence of the case can be reduced to two pieces of evidence ... I'm as baffled about this as Meredith's sister (per her letter). At the outset of the appeal, points like the staged break-in were rejected for appeal. That says to me that the decisions made by the first jury regarding that point (as well as other rejected appeal points) stand. How can they be ignored in the appeal if they were considered valid at the outset of the appeal?
Top Profile 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Yes, a pretty woman seems to get my attention pp-( ... but then again if you see one trying to 'use' her looks to an advantage, it is irritating in a way. huff-))
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

dgfred wrote:
What if someone else's dna is found? Wouldn't they still claim contamination or improper collection if Meredith's dna is found?

Really, I'm not trying to be dense Michael... sometimes I can't help it.



Sorry, only just saw this one. Someones else's DNA SHOULD be found...Rafs...It was a 'dirty knife' after all, according to C&V, and it was HIS knife, so shouldn't his DNA be found on it if it really hadn't been cleaned as they are trying to argue?

The fact is, his DNA wasn't on it. Dr Stefanoni found only one single profile (not just only a single profile...but no stray alien alleles either)...there wasn't even a hint of another profile on that knife. Look at the graphs...we have them here on PMF. The only profile on that blade is Meredith's and that's the only profile they'll find (but they won't find any, as there'll be no re-examination).

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

dgfred wrote:
Yes, a pretty woman seems to get my attention pp-( ... but then again if you see one trying to 'use' her looks to an advantage, it is irritating in a way. huff-))


It's a delicate game, often with the most powerful tool being "less said". It's that demure thing.


Last edited by Jester on Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Jester wrote:
I'm truly at a loss to see how the evidence of the case can be reduced to two pieces of evidence ... I'm as baffled about this as Meredith's sister (per her letter). At the outset of the appeal, points like the staged break-in were rejected for appeal. That says to me that the decisions made by the first jury regarding that point (as well as other rejected appeal points) stand. How can they be ignored in the appeal if they were considered valid at the outset of the appeal?



Star question...

And I very much liked the rest of your post.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

You are right... as usual.

I believe AK has always been a little 'off' with her game.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Jester wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Yes, a pretty woman seems to get my attention pp-( ... but then again if you see one trying to 'use' her looks to an advantage, it is irritating in a way. huff-))


It's a delicate game, often with the most powerful tool being "less said".



To be fair though...the guys do it too, I mean I must confess...I've batted my big brown eyes every now and then. That was 'ago' of course...I never do things like that now.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Jester wrote:
I'm truly at a loss to see how the evidence of the case can be reduced to two pieces of evidence ... I'm as baffled about this as Meredith's sister (per her letter). At the outset of the appeal, points like the staged break-in were rejected for appeal. That says to me that the decisions made by the first jury regarding that point (as well as other rejected appeal points) stand. How can they be ignored in the appeal if they were considered valid at the outset of the appeal?



Star question...

And I very much liked the rest of your post.


Thanks ... so if we take this from the top, and assume everything is on the up 'n up, then we have all sorts of evidence, like the lies, the false accusations, the staged break-in, the luminol revealed evidence, the absence of alibi and so on, all still in evidence. We may have two of the several pieces of forensic evidence rejected by the court. Logically, in my opinion, the verdict should still stand, albeit without evidence of the murder weapon.
Top Profile 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Jester wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Yes, a pretty woman seems to get my attention pp-( ... but then again if you see one trying to 'use' her looks to an advantage, it is irritating in a way. huff-))


It's a delicate game, often with the most powerful tool being "less said".



To be fair though...the guys do it too, I mean I must confess...I've batted my big brown eyes every now and then. That was 'ago' of course...I never do things like that now.



Haha Michael! I bet you still have some 'pull' sun-) . My eyes are dark brown too... but some have told me it was because I was full of dookie. sh-))
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

dgfred wrote:
Michael wrote:
Jester wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Yes, a pretty woman seems to get my attention pp-( ... but then again if you see one trying to 'use' her looks to an advantage, it is irritating in a way. huff-))


It's a delicate game, often with the most powerful tool being "less said".



To be fair though...the guys do it too, I mean I must confess...I've batted my big brown eyes every now and then. That was 'ago' of course...I never do things like that now.



Haha Michael! I bet you still have some 'pull' sun-) . My eyes are dark brown too... but some have told me it was because I was full of dookie. sh-))


I'm guilty as well ... but in my case it's the sea blue eyes. Some time ago, there was some discussion about what colour Knox's hair really is and how she's a bit chameleon like with the way that her hair changes colour. It's germanic hair ... I have the same. It is a mixture of blond, red and auburn and depending on the light, a different colour seems to come though. Many women have this hair colour but don't know it because they start dying their hair at a young age and never stop.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Jester wrote:
Michael wrote:
Jester wrote:
I'm truly at a loss to see how the evidence of the case can be reduced to two pieces of evidence ... I'm as baffled about this as Meredith's sister (per her letter). At the outset of the appeal, points like the staged break-in were rejected for appeal. That says to me that the decisions made by the first jury regarding that point (as well as other rejected appeal points) stand. How can they be ignored in the appeal if they were considered valid at the outset of the appeal?



Star question...

And I very much liked the rest of your post.


Thanks ... so if we take this from the top, and assume everything is on the up 'n up, then we have all sorts of evidence, like the lies, the false accusations, the staged break-in, the luminol revealed evidence, the absence of alibi and so on, all still in evidence. We may have two of the several pieces of forensic evidence rejected by the court. Logically, in my opinion, the verdict should still stand, albeit without evidence of the murder weapon.


We do, but that's not in question...what is, is if the court is disposed to remember it or not.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

dgfred wrote:
Michael wrote:
Jester wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Yes, a pretty woman seems to get my attention pp-( ... but then again if you see one trying to 'use' her looks to an advantage, it is irritating in a way. huff-))


It's a delicate game, often with the most powerful tool being "less said".



To be fair though...the guys do it too, I mean I must confess...I've batted my big brown eyes every now and then. That was 'ago' of course...I never do things like that now.



Haha Michael! I bet you still have some 'pull' sun-) . My eyes are dark brown too... but some have told me it was because I was full of dookie. sh-))


Your humour is almost English :)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Jester wrote:
Michael wrote:
Jester wrote:
I'm truly at a loss to see how the evidence of the case can be reduced to two pieces of evidence ... I'm as baffled about this as Meredith's sister (per her letter). At the outset of the appeal, points like the staged break-in were rejected for appeal. That says to me that the decisions made by the first jury regarding that point (as well as other rejected appeal points) stand. How can they be ignored in the appeal if they were considered valid at the outset of the appeal?



Star question...

And I very much liked the rest of your post.


Thanks ... so if we take this from the top, and assume everything is on the up 'n up, then we have all sorts of evidence, like the lies, the false accusations, the staged break-in, the luminol revealed evidence, the absence of alibi and so on, all still in evidence. We may have two of the several pieces of forensic evidence rejected by the court. Logically, in my opinion, the verdict should still stand, albeit without evidence of the murder weapon.


We do, but that's not in question...what is, is if the court is disposed to remember it or not.


If the court has forgotten the bigger picture, then I think there is something not on the up 'n up.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

And the answer is clear...that is where the prosecution have to go with their closing...reminding the court of the bigger picture...moving it away from the three evidence items that have dominated this appeal from the start...

In fact, this was exactly what the core of my intended bog article was to be about.

Working title:

'Where does the Prosecution Go From here?'

I shouldn't have said that...'spoilers'. But that's the theme and it's key.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Has Andrea Vogt not posted an article yet?

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

from Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Molto speculation 2day on #amandaknox trial w/emotions running high. End of day no1 really knows how this is going to play out. #patience

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

More from Barbie. I never saw the question, so her answer's kind of criptic:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
RT @Allison_01: @BLNadeau evidence in original trial - disregarded? resp: THE big Ques? Absent frm appeal/all rides on closing arguments?

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Knox/Sollecito DNA battle – who won?

MAUNDY GREGORY

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

I would agree that the bigger picture is most important ... and also seeking the truth of what the lying lovebirds did on the night of Nov 1. 2007. The truth includes the fact that the break in was staged and there is simply no way around that without changing the facts of the case (ie: claiming that Filomina left her clothes strewn all over the floor all the time, or that there is glass beneath her window on the ground but no one has ever bothered to photograph it). The luminol revealed evidence cannot be omitted without pretending that trace evidence is fruit juice. The bathmat footprint cannot be attributed to Guede and can be attributed to Sollecito. The alibi claim that Knox was at the apt falls apart with the evidence that the computer was not used between 8:40 and about 6 AM ... and no backlit keyboard proves otherwise. There is so much more to this case than the DNA on the knife blade that the Rome academics decided not to re-test.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

From Barbie...again, a reply to a question:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
reply to @clrthrn when I left the court 2day it seemed all summed up w/knox free, but talking to other journos and experts, again dubious.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Jester wrote:
The truth includes the fact that the break in was staged and there is simply no way around that without changing the facts of the case...


It doesn't include it...it's the core of it. The staged break-in is where it all starts and where it all ends.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Not sure what to make out of this...from Barbie:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
Speculation/gossip in PG: judge helmann hoping to be president of local perugia judiciary. Can he risk overturning his peers?

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
other gossip from streets of Perugia on #amandaknox: this judge actually remembers circumstantial evidence in case, talks about it to pals.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Regarding the last...I sincerely hope he does, considering all the evidence in this case is circumstantial. If he didn't remember any of it...he wouldn't know there was a case...and a trial..and an appeal...

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

But the last tweet from Barbie proves my point I made earlier. She is of the view that in this case there is circumstantial evidence...and direct evidence. When in fact, there is no direct evidence, never was...never is in nearly all cases.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

I believe they are dotting the i's and crossing the t's to verify the convictions.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

anyone with bbc 2 look right now doc on psychopaths, etc, vastly good

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

so the mix of genes and environment determine whether a perion, a psychopath will end up in prison or in the boardroom

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

zorba wrote:
so the mix of genes and environment determine whether a perion, a psychopath will end up in prison or in the boardroom


Bullshit. The prison and the board room are interchangeable. I can't remember a single convict that robbed the world of the trillions of dollars that the board room feckers have. The difference is, if you GET to the board room, then you escape jail...like monopoly, the board room is 'Free Parking'. When you get there, you are given a license to be a thief. Steal what you like for as long as like and if you go too far (break the bank AND get caught), then they'll just pension you off at several hundred thousand a year, millions in shares combined with many other thousands in consultancy fees for something else nobody else has heard of...meanwhile, the taxpayer will pay to fix the bank you broke that's too big to fail, as well as work an extra ten years before they retire, pay double into their pensions, par higher tax, suffer higher inflation...all to bail out the institution you robbed blind and pay for your nest egg.

What idiot invented the line 'Crime doesn't pay'? Don't rob banks, join them...they'll teach you how to do it properly...and give you a knighthood for doing it.

Genes have nothing to do with it.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

FROM BARBIE:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
For those sending me death threats (again) I'm reporting what I hear/see/report. No need to kill messenger. #amandaknox


If anyone is doing that...whoever it is, that is unacceptable. There's no excuse for that, by anybody. On no level is that okay.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Amanda Knox "hopeful" after blow to prosecution

HUFFINGTON POST

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
FROM BARBIE:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau
For those sending me death threats (again) I'm reporting what I hear/see/report. No need to kill messenger. #amandaknox


If anyone is doing that...whoever it is, that is unacceptable. There's no excuse for that, by anybody. On no level is that okay.


No wonder she has toned down what she writes and become vague on sources. Death threats are dangerous. Clearly, someone thinks that if they can control the media, they can control the appeal ruling. Some of the lunatics that thought the jury arrived at a guilty verdict because they were unsequestered is expanding that insane thought and now thinking that the appeal decision can be controlled by the media.


Last edited by Jester on Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Amanda Knox "hopeful" after blow to prosecution

HUFFINGTON POST


As Yummi pointed out on the other board, is Hellman really going to overturn the decisions of 16 professional judges and 12 lay judges without debating the evidence in court ? Plus Barbie's comment about hellman hoping to be the President of the Perugia legal whotsit ??? He'd only be treading on Massei's toes, and I'm sure he'd have some say over Hellman's appointment.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

smacker wrote:
Michael wrote:
Amanda Knox "hopeful" after blow to prosecution

HUFFINGTON POST


As Yummi pointed out on the other board, is Hellman really going to overturn the decisions of 16 professional judges and 12 lay judges without debating the evidence in court ? Plus Barbie's comment about hellman hoping to be the President of the Perugia legal whotsit ??? He'd only be treading on Massei's toes, and I'm sure he'd have some say over Hellman's appointment.


Additionally, overturning the verdict would mean contradicting the ruling of the Supreme Court, which determined that Guede did not act alone. I suppose Guede could have acted with other unknown parties, but there is no evidence of other unknown parties.
Top Profile 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Jester wrote:
--- snip ---

Does this mean that the Judge has already formed an opinion that the knife DNA is irrelevant, or that it is sound evidence, and no further testing is required? If it is sound evidence, then no further testing is required. If it is not sound evidence, then testing the DNA found by C&V clarifies the situation.

--- snap ---


It seems obvious that the court doesn't need any more opinions about the DNA on the knife in order to form an opinion about guilt or innocence. That much is clear. Otherwise they would have insisted in another test. I cannot imagine how this is "positive" for Amanda Knox. In my opinion, they don't need more experts, as Raffaele Sollecito has tried to explain Meredith's DNA on the blade away. No matter what Barbie Nadeau tweets, I don't see them walk.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael, you'll enjoy this article ...

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2011-09-07.html
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Not sure if this has already been posted (too many posts today!) but here is CNN's Matthew Chance interviewing Curt Knox outside the courthouse. Matthew's job is to look good and throw some softball questions at Curt (yada, yada, yada).

Father of Amanda Knox: prosecutors "have no case left"
(VIDEO)

CNN

Quote:
Even the prosecutor's office told CNN that its attorneys are less certain of the outcome. The prosecution is still confident that the verdict will be upheld, but are aware that it could go either way, the office said.


Has the prosecutor's office now moved onto the streets of Perugia? Because Matthew Chance tweeted this morning that "prosecutors privately concede possibility conviction may be overturned later this month...met them earlier with other journos."

Perhaps he could tell us more about how he contacted the prosecutor's office right there and then. :)
Top Profile 

Offline nicki

Forensics Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:27 am

Posts: 847

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 12:19 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Jester wrote:
Michael, you'll enjoy this article ...

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2011-09-07.html

I am not a fan of Ann Coulter, and I disagree with her final remarks on "liberals". However, her post is strictly based on facts and I am pleased to see that there is at least one public speaker in the US who hasn't drunk the FOA kool-aid.
Thank you Jester for sharing.

_________________
"A pensare male si fa peccato, ma molto spesso ci si azzecca" mike
Top Profile 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 1:26 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

I don't believe there is anything to worry about today. So, they refused the test, and Aviello. Aviello's means nothing. For sure, the Judge and Jury remember very well how that went down.

I keep in my mind, it is not the Judge returning the verdict. It is the Jury.

It was not the knife and clasp alone, that found them guilty. The prosecution will remind everyone about ALL the other evidence. And, as the defence lawyers have not had these issues addressed, it looks as though they don't have a leg to stand on.

The prosecution will make a strong stand on the mixed blood, the evidence of the break in, and multiple murderers.

So, Hellman is a lenient judge. This doesn't rest with him, does it?

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 2:23 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Exactly Cap. Although I think in Italy the judge can overrule the jury? It is just so tiring to see the media jump all over the 'innocence stuff'. Nobody expected a re-test, but yet the denial comes as a huge victory for the Knox camp? So weird.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 3:04 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
zorba wrote:
so the mix of genes and environment determine whether a perion, a psychopath will end up in prison or in the boardroom


Bullshit. The prison and the board room are interchangeable. I can't remember a single convict that robbed the world of the trillions of dollars that the board room feckers have. The difference is, if you GET to the board room, then you escape jail...like monopoly, the board room is 'Free Parking'. When you get there, you are given a license to be a thief. Steal what you like for as long as like and if you go too far (break the bank AND get caught), then they'll just pension you off at several hundred thousand a year, millions in shares combined with many other thousands in consultancy fees for something else nobody else has heard of...meanwhile, the taxpayer will pay to fix the bank you broke that's too big to fail, as well as work an extra ten years before they retire, pay double into their pensions, par higher tax, suffer higher inflation...all to bail out the institution you robbed blind and pay for your nest egg.

What idiot invented the line 'Crime doesn't pay'? Don't rob banks, join them...they'll teach you how to do it properly...and give you a knighthood for doing it.

Genes have nothing to do with it.


Yes and you are not a specialist Michael in the relevant fields on these matters , not a person who can make such a sweeping statement; you can make the statement but it's invalid, I think you might need to take a look at your last statement, it's not fact-based at all.


Well, I can assure you, that this particular documentary, was anything but bullshit.

The man revealing so much, had been approached as a specialist in brain scanning graphs, etc, to analyse a batch of profiles, the owners of which, he knew nothing about. He had already analysed the profiles and carried out extensive research on Serial Killers, known psychopaths, he as a person and one of a certain number of experts, trying to find out if there is something that makes serial killers and unfeeling psychopaths do what they do. A determining feature, recognised/established, of people like Bundy, was that they (often) acted as two different people, the guy who in everyday life could act normally and nobody know a thing about the other bit of them, being even likeable, the one thing that was different, them murdering people, and the main characteristic, often, most often, being that they felt no guilt, never shed a tear, and did not feel regret about doing what they did.

Thr analyst had found corresponding markers in the scans, had been doing so for some ime, but he and others had not gained all knowledge of what it all could mean.

When he analysed the batch he had been given, he did not know that they were all taken from serial killers and was amazed ion seeing that all of them had certain same markers.

Later, he had been talking to his mother who suddenly came up with; maybe it'd be good for you to take a look closer to home. It turned out, there had been 16 murders associated with members, somewhere in his family tree. He was shocked, but she said maybe you'd better take a look at yourself too.
He was reviewing a number of these scans and one stuck out as having so many of the markers he'd been allocating as those adherent to the serial killing psychopaths he'd analysed, and was shocked to find out (that it was his own) from his own scans and his DNA, that he had the most markers of that type.
Family members, were not quite so shocked, as they had experienced him as someone they sometimes , now and then, could fear, but he was a top specialist, a person who had never harmed anyone. He realised with these insights, that he had been lucky, but that he, if he had not been as lucky and had been born into a different, less privileged environment, he may well have, in fact he was certain he would have, very easily have become a very difficult person indeed, even a (serial) killer. He had certain markers, he said he was someone, who could blow an aunt's birthday off because here was a party somewhere, but the thing was, he'd blow it off, and not feel an iota of guilt about doing so, he just did not care.

Part of what the scanning and DNA markers showed him, was that a feature found in the serial killer was visible, in the scans/ & DNA profiles, as part of the colour chart that was either highlighted in one area or simply not visible in one (other or more) area(s), as those scans go, and that one main/importanty marker, of a serial killer, is the unpredictability, the unpredictability that his own family had always seen in his very own behaviour that they never quite understood with him, like him blowing off auntie's birthday or anything like that, which shocked them but he did not FEEL anything about, he'd just do it.
He was shocked to realise tings when and after he took an honest look at himself but, his own family were not shocked by what he found out.

That's why Bundy, people thought he was a nice guy, he otherwise acted normally, but had this one part of him, that meant he did what he did not feeling anything for his victims and unable to stop doing it, again, and again.

I will look up who that guy was, for me then, as it was a very insightful, revealing, relevant documentary, certain findings led to certain methods and ways of dealing with certain criminals, in America, some able to get off of a death sentence because of what was determined about them.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 3:17 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

max wrote:
Exactly Cap. Although I think in Italy the judge can overrule the jury? It is just so tiring to see the media jump all over the 'innocence stuff'. Nobody expected a re-test, but yet the denial comes as a huge victory for the Knox camp? So weird.



Th career judges' (more than one judge, in this case two career judges) votes count singularly, more than the votes of the lay judges do.

A jury system does not exist in Italy, there are no jurors, they are lay judges and do not decide who is found guilty, they decide together with the career judges, the professionals, eg, trained in law.

They also receive syummaries explaining the meanings of important legal matters that would otherwise go over their heads as they do, over the jurors' heads sitting in on the American & UK jury systems.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 5:11 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

It's been a while since I studied any psychology, but I did take quite a few courses in the field. Many years ago, psychologists thought they could study the brains of murderers and find something unique about them. They cut out the brains of murderers or geniuses, preserved them, dissected them ... but there was nothing unique. It was then decided that it wasn't possible to look at he brain and see differences, but that was pre-DNA.

It's not surprising that psychologists have returned to examining whether there are unique identifiers in people that give them a predisposition towards psychopathic behavior. Until about the 1990s, there were two categories of dangerous murderers: sociopaths and psychopaths. Sociopaths were the people that lacked empathy and could coldy and rationally do terrible things to others without feelings any guilt or remorse. Sociopaths are not necessarily murderers, and can function quite well in society. Psychopaths were more the crazy kind of murderer ... still without remorse, but more nuts when committing murder. Today, those two categories have been combined to one new label: Antisocial Personality Disorder.

I think the sociopathic personality is by far the more interesting personality, as the cold, rational, calculating approach that they have to life can cause them to commit murder because of a curiosity, but can also give them the tools to become extremely successful in a particular field. Russell Williams, the former high ranking Canadian military guy lived much of his life climbing the ranks until one day, in his 50s, he started stalking and murdering women. He appears to have made the switch because he thought he could get away with it, but he was probably always inclinded to do what he did. He was always a calm, cold, rational, calculating man that became powerful in his field. When he reached the peak of success, he started murdering on the side. He's an interesting case. Another book I read recently is "Men Who Eat Darkness" about a Japanese man with a similar personality. He was also extremely successful, in his 50s, but on the side he lured, drugged, abused and sometimes murdered women. It would be interesting to see if DNA markers are similar in men like this. The downside with this type of theory is that people could be identified and labeled at birth even though there is no guarantee that the negative aspects of their genetics will dominate.

Personally, I think Knox has sociopathic tendencies. She becomes the person that she thinks others want her to be in each relationship. If she's with a health freak that likes climbing, that's who she is. If she's with a druggy that likes classical music, that's who she is. Even Sollecito noticed when they first met that she didn't understand music ... it didn't reach past her ears. She's a compulsive liar, telling whoppers for no reason other than to get out of trouble. She has no remorse and no empathy - we all know how she reacted after the murder. She does not react appropriately in situations and relies on mimicking others to know how to act, and then still she often gets it wrong. Knox has more behavioral traits of a sociopath than most, but everyone has some. Sociopaths are highly manipulative, always looking out for number one without any concern or consideration for consequences to others ... very selfish people.
Top Profile 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 5:49 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

OK, I'm not sure I understand the procedure.

Who exactly decides on this appeal? Must it be unanimous?

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 6:09 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Is it possible that Judge Hellman refused the prosecution's request for a retest because he thought it may become a can of worms where the defence then throws in the luminol and other blood evidence and the case drags on while more and more of the denied appeal items are dragged into the appeal? I'm beginning to see this as something that the prosecution wanted. They capped any request for additional items to be considered during appeal. If the Judge does not need to have this DNA retested to form an opinion, perhaps he will put it in the category of questionable evidence knowing that it does not compromise the case.

I somehow think it can be assumed that the court will not find fault with the forensic lab. That would be like shooting themselves in the foot. It's difficult to believe that the knife was contaminated in the field, and we can't forget the story Sollecito told about the knife being at his apartment. The bra clasp can be tossed out. Although the DNA on the blade was LNC DNA, it was agreed by all parties that it could be a match to Meredith, with one party declaring it was a definite match.

I am inclined to think that the Italian court is very professional, that it is immune to the wiles of a 24 year old woman pretending to be a 14 year, that the totality of the case will be reviewed with very little change in circumstances from the first trial.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 6:12 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

capealadin wrote:
OK, I'm not sure I understand the procedure.

Who exactly decides on this appeal? Must it be unanimous?


It didn't have to be unanimous in the first tiral, so I would assume that it doesn't have to be in the appeal - not sure. In the first trial, it was unanimous even though it didn't need to be - a very strong confirmation of guilt.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 7:04 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

I was just looking at the headlines about this case, and one after the other, the claim is that Knox got away with not seeing the DNA on the blade re-tested - what a victory! Has everyone forgotten that this is what Knox and Sollecito wanted? The Rome Academics made a blanket decision that the sample was too small and so they did not test it, but it can be done. Why is it now a victory that it will not be done? Did the lovebirds reject the re-testing because the first answer they got was the one they wanted - that contamination is possible, although not proven, and that's good enough - but it would be too time consuming scary to have the DNA tested. Didn't we know long ago that contamination is always a possibility, but without proof it can be nothing more than a hypothetical inductive argument without knowing for sure? So, hypothetically, DNA evidence that is collected could be contaminated. Did it happen? Not likely in the lab, and with the knife, not likely in the field. With the clasp, perhaps it was contaminated in the field, but it's highly unlikely ... DNA doesn't disassociate with a cigarette butt after it is put there, jump onto a spec of dust, fly down the corridor, duck under the door and carefully land on a bra clasp - having shed Knox's DNA during the journey. That's absurd.

I think the sound some heard when they perceived victory was the mallot hitting the anvil. No more evidence will be considered during the appeal.

It's an interesting legal direction. Now, if the lovebirds are affirmed guilty, they cannot suggest that the DNA would have given no results so it's unfair. More or less, the DNA on the blade has been matched to Meredith and more or less, contamination has been ruled out on the knife. The knife evidence is shakey, but it's not out of the picture. That mixed blood of Meredith with Knox's DNA in Filomina's bedroom is not shakey.

The winds have turned is an interesting remark. A couple of months ago, the DNA report completed by the Rome academics was running the show, to some extent. Today, the winds changed. Comodi and Stefanoni were under attack, but the winds turned. Perhaps this is what is meant ... I missed the rest of the quote posted by Kermit earlier today ... something about the Judge?
Top Profile 

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 7:58 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Jester wrote:
Is it possible that Judge Hellman refused the prosecution's request for a retest because he thought it may become a can of worms where the defence then throws in the luminol and other blood evidence and the case drags on while more and more of the denied appeal items are dragged into the appeal? I'm beginning to see this as something that the prosecution wanted. They capped any request for additional items to be considered during appeal. If the Judge does not need to have this DNA retested to form an opinion, perhaps he will put it in the category of questionable evidence knowing that it does not compromise the case.

I somehow think it can be assumed that the court will not find fault with the forensic lab. That would be like shooting themselves in the foot. It's difficult to believe that the knife was contaminated in the field, and we can't forget the story Sollecito told about the knife being at his apartment. The bra clasp can be tossed out. Although the DNA on the blade was LNC DNA, it was agreed by all parties that it could be a match to Meredith, with one party declaring it was a definite match.

I am inclined to think that the Italian court is very professional, that it is immune to the wiles of a 24 year old woman pretending to be a 14 year, that the totality of the case will be reviewed with very little change in circumstances from the first trial.


Just a passing thought about the effects that Knox's behaviour of trying to assume the naivete and innocence of a 14 year old. I work with a 30 year old gay man who tries to assume the loveable, innocent cudly persona of a 13 year old or at least how he imagines one. His most constant refrain is that people ''like, think I'm 13 or 14'' giggle giggle. It's a cover for getting away with doing no work. It only works on selected females who are themselves not interested in doing any work and jump at the chance to spend their time gossiping and talking about clothes and shopping. He constantly congratulates himself on the success of this grossly exagerated persona. But those who are taken in do so willingly for their own motives. Everybody else is variously repulsed, angered or resigned to it.

I think the same problem faces Knox's acting up. She has had to assume this posture of childlike naivete to explain away her behaviour. But she is facing professional people whose entire working life is spent weighing people who are putting on masks to excuse or deny their behaviour. The only people fooled are herself and her willing dupes, her family. We've seen it before. Remember the tales of how the judges and jurors had wept at her speeches? How the jurors could not meet Curt's eye because they knew it was a wrong conviction? How Amanda was going to stand up and show them the 'real' Amanda? How her appeal speech had been powerful and emotional and frankly devastating? But then when we listen to the real thing we hear nothing but a confused, erratic, rambling bleat with little rhyme or reason that irritated instead of enlightened. Her performance on the stand in the trial was self defeating, showing a desperate attempt to confuse with 'white noise'. To show how 'confused' she had been she tries to be as confusing as possible. It is a truly childish strategy and it doesn't work with adults. Every judge she has come up against so far has found her personality to be disturbed and disturbing. It's unlikely to be having a favourable impact on another one even when shorn of its most gratuitous displays such as THAT t-shirt.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 8:07 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

SqueakEMouse wrote:
Jester wrote:
Is it possible that Judge Hellman refused the prosecution's request for a retest because he thought it may become a can of worms where the defence then throws in the luminol and other blood evidence and the case drags on while more and more of the denied appeal items are dragged into the appeal? I'm beginning to see this as something that the prosecution wanted. They capped any request for additional items to be considered during appeal. If the Judge does not need to have this DNA retested to form an opinion, perhaps he will put it in the category of questionable evidence knowing that it does not compromise the case.

I somehow think it can be assumed that the court will not find fault with the forensic lab. That would be like shooting themselves in the foot. It's difficult to believe that the knife was contaminated in the field, and we can't forget the story Sollecito told about the knife being at his apartment. The bra clasp can be tossed out. Although the DNA on the blade was LNC DNA, it was agreed by all parties that it could be a match to Meredith, with one party declaring it was a definite match.

I am inclined to think that the Italian court is very professional, that it is immune to the wiles of a 24 year old woman pretending to be a 14 year, that the totality of the case will be reviewed with very little change in circumstances from the first trial.


Just a passing thought about the effects that Knox's behaviour of trying to assume the naivete and innocence of a 14 year old. I work with a 30 year old gay man who tries to assume the loveable, innocent cudly persona of a 13 year old or at least how he imagines one. His most constant refrain is that people ''like, think I'm 13 or 14'' giggle giggle. It's a cover for getting away with doing no work. It only works on selected females who are themselves not interested in doing any work and jump at the chance to spend their time gossiping and talking about clothes and shopping. He constantly congratulates himself on the success of this grossly exagerated persona. But those who are taken in do so willingly for their own motives. Everybody else is variously repulsed, angered or resigned to it.

I think the same problem faces Knox's acting up. She has had to assume this posture of childlike naivete to explain away her behaviour. But she is facing professional people whose entire working life is spent weighing people who are putting on masks to excuse or deny their behaviour. The only people fooled are herself and her willing dupes, her family. We've seen it before. Remember the tales of how the judges and jurors had wept at her speeches? How the jurors could not meet Curt's eye because they knew it was a wrong conviction? How Amanda was going to stand up and show them the 'real' Amanda? How her appeal speech had been powerful and emotional and frankly devastating? But then when we listen to the real thing we hear nothing but a confused, erratic, rambling bleat with little rhyme or reason that irritated instead of enlightened. Her performance on the stand in the trial was self defeating, showing a desperate attempt to confuse with 'white noise'. To show how 'confused' she had been she tries to be as confusing as possible. It is a truly childish strategy and it doesn't work with adults. Every judge she has come up against so far has found her personality to be disturbed and disturbing. It's unlikely to be having a favourable impact on another one even when shorn of its most gratuitous displays such as THAT t-shirt.


As soon as I read about Knox pretending to be 14 and a gay man pretending ... pretending to be what he thinks a woman is? ... a parody, of course.

And still, she has that weird sociopathic trait of being oblivious to what it appropriate in situations. She doesn't know what to do, now to dress, whether to do her cartwheel stretches - dragging out the perception/act that she's a restless teenager, or how to hide her winking, relaxed attitude towards the court. She and Sollecito seem to exist in their own private world, even today.
Top Profile 

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 8:07 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

smacker wrote:
Michael wrote:
Amanda Knox "hopeful" after blow to prosecution

HUFFINGTON POST


As Yummi pointed out on the other board, is Hellman really going to overturn the decisions of 16 professional judges and 12 lay judges without debating the evidence in court ? Plus Barbie's comment about hellman hoping to be the President of the Perugia legal whotsit ??? He'd only be treading on Massei's toes, and I'm sure he'd have some say over Hellman's appointment.



I think the media have a natural tendency to focus exclusively on what is being discussed in court at that particular moment. The dna evidence is under contention so they interpret that as the totality and make or break of the case. A perception eagerly reinforced by helpful family and supporters who insist that without the knife and clasp there is no evidence. It also makes for a more gripping narrative.

The judges however must weigh all the evidence in their decision and explain how they got there. To overturn the case would have to include rejecting all the other scientific evidence and staged break-in and show why. It's a step too far. It's made out to be a cliffhanger. I think she fell off long ago.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 8:18 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

SqueakEMouse wrote:
smacker wrote:
Michael wrote:
Amanda Knox "hopeful" after blow to prosecution

HUFFINGTON POST


As Yummi pointed out on the other board, is Hellman really going to overturn the decisions of 16 professional judges and 12 lay judges without debating the evidence in court ? Plus Barbie's comment about hellman hoping to be the President of the Perugia legal whotsit ??? He'd only be treading on Massei's toes, and I'm sure he'd have some say over Hellman's appointment.



I think the media have a natural tendency to focus exclusively on what is being discussed in court at that particular moment. The dna evidence is under contention so they interpret that as the totality and make or break of the case. A perception eagerly reinforced by helpful family and supporters who insist that without the knife and clasp there is no evidence. It also makes for a more gripping narrative.

The judges however must weigh all the evidence in their decision and explain how they got there. To overturn the case would have to include rejecting all the other scientific evidence and staged break-in and show why. It's a step too far. It's made out to be a cliffhanger. I think she fell off long ago.


I have to wonder if Barbie is sleeping a bit in court. I think we're used to hearing what is being discussed in court. Instead, lately, we're hearing more about Knox nodding off in court, how hot it is, that someone is bickering with another, oops, all wrapped up for the day and ... it doesn't look good ... but some are saying that there's a political angle.

That is the weakness in the Knox/Mellas clan perception ... that the case is dismissed other than the three points considered under appeal. The case was not dismissed. Three pieces of evidence are being reviewed, but the case was accepted except for these three pieces of evidence. The case will not be decided on the review of three pieces of evidence. This limited DNA review did not lead to the review of additional evidence and the appeal is over ... except for the crying.

So where does the reduction of sentence fit into all of this victory? Is the idea that Guede had his sentence reduced to 16 years so the same will happen with the lovebirds?
Top Profile 

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 8:56 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

The propaganda campaign has had to explain away every reverse, dismiss every piece of evidence, smear every participant to keep the campaign rolling. But there comes a time when there is nowhere left to run and all that is left is self delusion.

Have you seen the parodies that people make from the film Downfall? It's a great movie of the last days in Hitler's bunker. Somebody made a parody from it with their own subtitles added. A golfer I think is suing. It soon became a craze because it's hilarious and very easy to do because you just add your own subtitles. The funniest I saw was in the 2010 election as Gordon Brown rants at his generals to have the traitors of the Lib Dems shot. The propaganda van moves through a wilderness of rubble denying that there is any debt problem. Brown and his generals then study a map and Brown moves non-existent reserves of activists to the front. The news comes in that Norwich has fallen and provokes a new outburst of hate and bile against the disloyalty and incompetence all around.

The Knox campaign is pretty much at that stage. There are no real options left for winning so all that remains is the impotent rage at all around who must be corrupt or perfidious or incompetent. Any and all are blamed except in the one direction where blame truly lies... inwards.

I don't buy the talk of a political angle. This is the mirage that the US side dangled in front of themselves from the start. That the way to free Knox was politically. They convinced themselves that the media was the key to influencing politicians and the court. Now desperately repeating it like some auto hypnosis mantra they are waiting for the big victory that will turn the course of the war. If you say it enough it gets repeated by the media who on the whole are only too happy to take the gripping narrative. It's about to be the repeat of the miracle that saved Frederick the Great. It's the war-winning secret weapon that so oft promised with winks and confident assurances just goes off with a whimper. It's waiting for Steiner's attack to break the siege of the city. The truth is that Steiner has buggered off westwards because there is no more mileage in self sacrifice for the Fuhrer.

When politics comes into play it is done so quietly and covertly like a card trick. The players hiding behind deniable fronts. It is not crassly done in front of the cameras for all to see the sleight of hand and be outraged. The judges will have to not only decide but show their reasoning. There is no room for the card trick even if they wished to play one which is itself just a hope of others turned outwards. There is no Megrahi compassionate release farce on the horizon. Not unless Curt has some VERY large oil wells to negotiate with and Berlusconi is probably too busy with his own legal troubles to be much interested anyway. The threat of a boycott from Seattle just wasn't up to the standard of Gaddafi's threatened holy war either.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 9:00 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Classes started again this week for people like Knox, her sister Deana and Paxton, but none of them are able to continue their post-secondary studies for one reason or another. Their decisions cannot be blamed on someone else, like Knox. They're big kids and they seem to be simply blowing it off. Some classes start next week, but life goes on, everyone is passing them by. Knox is born in 1987 and today's high school graduates were born in 1994. Knox's only hope in life is that she will be released early enough that someone will remember her and turn her into a celebrity. Trump may die of old age before that happens.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 9:20 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

SqueakEMouse wrote:
The propaganda campaign has had to explain away every reverse, dismiss every piece of evidence, smear every participant to keep the campaign rolling. But there comes a time when there is nowhere left to run and all that is left is self delusion.

Have you seen the parodies that people make from the film Downfall? It's a great movie of the last days in Hitler's bunker. Somebody made a parody from it with their own subtitles added. A golfer I think is suing. It soon became a craze because it's hilarious and very easy to do because you just add your own subtitles. The funniest I saw was in the 2010 election as Gordon Brown rants at his generals to have the traitors of the Lib Dems shot. The propaganda van moves through a wilderness of rubble denying that there is any debt problem. Brown and his generals then study a map and Brown moves non-existent reserves of activists to the front. The news comes in that Norwich has fallen and provokes a new outburst of hate and bile against the disloyalty and incompetence all around.

The Knox campaign is pretty much at that stage. There are no real options left for winning so all that remains is the impotent rage at all around who must be corrupt or perfidious or incompetent. Any and all are blamed except in the one direction where blame truly lies... inwards.

I don't buy the talk of a political angle. This is the mirage that the US side dangled in front of themselves from the start. That the way to free Knox was politically. They convinced themselves that the media was the key to influencing politicians and the court. Now desperately repeating it like some auto hypnosis mantra they are waiting for the big victory that will turn the course of the war. If you say it enough it gets repeated by the media who on the whole are only too happy to take the gripping narrative. It's about to be the repeat of the miracle that saved Frederick the Great. It's the war-winning secret weapon that so oft promised with winks and confident assurances just goes off with a whimper. It's waiting for Steiner's attack to break the siege of the city. The truth is that Steiner has buggered off westwards because there is no more mileage in self sacrifice for the Fuhrer.

When politics comes into play it is done so quietly and covertly like a card trick. The players hiding behind deniable fronts. It is not crassly done in front of the cameras for all to see the sleight of hand and be outraged. The judges will have to not only decide but show their reasoning. There is no room for the card trick even if they wished to play one which is itself just a hope of others turned outwards. There is no Megrahi compassionate release farce on the horizon. Not unless Curt has some VERY large oil wells to negotiate with and Berlusconi is probably too busy with his own legal troubles to be much interested anyway. The threat of a boycott from Seattle just wasn't up to the standard of Gaddafi's threatened holy war either.


I found the political angle unusual coming from B Nadeau. It would be underhanded to suggest that the Judge would cave to self-serving judicial decisions in favour of his political career. It was almost like damage control emerged before it was needed, and rumours of the judge vying for a political position were released when they were not needed; when there was no evidentiary advantage. Basically, the Judge was alleged to be in alignment with his own political career and that would influence his decision. Is that really what Nadeau thinks?

The PR guy was never up to the task, having recommended that Curt bring his daughters to the verdict in exchange for plane tickets - it was all supposed to be part of the show where the courts were pressured by US media to release the convicts, and the other daughters, unsure of how to act, were supposed to be there. The TV show didn't work out, that day. I hope the PR guy was fired, but if not, he's no better off today. He calls it wrong, he advises wrong and he'll never be more than the bowling ball for amanda league with his fundraising. Where's the golf tournament?



The PR gang attempted to politicize Knox why ensuing the interests of a neighbour who happened to be a judge and the father of Knox's schoolmate, a crazy ex-lawyer Bremner and harassing Hillary Clinton. None of it worked. I last heard from Knox's mother that they didn't know how deep their financial hole was and from the stepfather that he took a line of credit by claiming that he was doing home improvements. What exactly are they doing with that money? Bowling with the PR guy?
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 2:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Regarding the death threats, Barbie has tweeted:

BLNadeau Barbie Latza Nadeau @
@somealibi thx! I'm not only 1 getting them & not a new phenom. Have good hunch frm who& bark worse than bite. emotions high at this moment.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 2:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

SqueakEMouse wrote:
Jester wrote:
Is it possible that Judge Hellman refused the prosecution's request for a retest because he thought it may become a can of worms where the defence then throws in the luminol and other blood evidence and the case drags on while more and more of the denied appeal items are dragged into the appeal? I'm beginning to see this as something that the prosecution wanted. They capped any request for additional items to be considered during appeal. If the Judge does not need to have this DNA retested to form an opinion, perhaps he will put it in the category of questionable evidence knowing that it does not compromise the case.

I somehow think it can be assumed that the court will not find fault with the forensic lab. That would be like shooting themselves in the foot. It's difficult to believe that the knife was contaminated in the field, and we can't forget the story Sollecito told about the knife being at his apartment. The bra clasp can be tossed out. Although the DNA on the blade was LNC DNA, it was agreed by all parties that it could be a match to Meredith, with one party declaring it was a definite match.

I am inclined to think that the Italian court is very professional, that it is immune to the wiles of a 24 year old woman pretending to be a 14 year, that the totality of the case will be reviewed with very little change in circumstances from the first trial.


Just a passing thought about the effects that Knox's behaviour of trying to assume the naivete and innocence of a 14 year old. I work with a 30 year old gay man who tries to assume the loveable, innocent cudly persona of a 13 year old or at least how he imagines one. His most constant refrain is that people ''like, think I'm 13 or 14'' giggle giggle. It's a cover for getting away with doing no work. It only works on selected females who are themselves not interested in doing any work and jump at the chance to spend their time gossiping and talking about clothes and shopping. He constantly congratulates himself on the success of this grossly exagerated persona. But those who are taken in do so willingly for their own motives. Everybody else is variously repulsed, angered or resigned to it.

I think the same problem faces Knox's acting up. She has had to assume this posture of childlike naivete to explain away her behaviour. But she is facing professional people whose entire working life is spent weighing people who are putting on masks to excuse or deny their behaviour. The only people fooled are herself and her willing dupes, her family. We've seen it before. Remember the tales of how the judges and jurors had wept at her speeches? How the jurors could not meet Curt's eye because they knew it was a wrong conviction? How Amanda was going to stand up and show them the 'real' Amanda? How her appeal speech had been powerful and emotional and frankly devastating? But then when we listen to the real thing we hear nothing but a confused, erratic, rambling bleat with little rhyme or reason that irritated instead of enlightened. Her performance on the stand in the trial was self defeating, showing a desperate attempt to confuse with 'white noise'. To show how 'confused' she had been she tries to be as confusing as possible. It is a truly childish strategy and it doesn't work with adults. Every judge she has come up against so far has found her personality to be disturbed and disturbing. It's unlikely to be having a favourable impact on another one even when shorn of its most gratuitous displays such as THAT t-shirt.


Bravo SqueakE, nice post. I agree with both of you regarding the court's perspective.


Last edited by dgfred on Thu Sep 08, 2011 2:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 2:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

smacker wrote:
Michael wrote:
Amanda Knox "hopeful" after blow to prosecution

HUFFINGTON POST


As Yummi pointed out on the other board, is Hellman really going to overturn the decisions of 16 professional judges and 12 lay judges without debating the evidence in court ? Plus Barbie's comment about hellman hoping to be the President of the Perugia legal whotsit ??? He'd only be treading on Massei's toes, and I'm sure he'd have some say over Hellman's appointment.


Good to see you again Smacker. As for Hellman, he's got a LOT of evidence to overturn and he will have to explain how he overturns each piece in his report. Some task.

As for Barbie's tweet, she's just relating rumour and gossip (and she made it clear that's what it was). 90% of rumour isn't true.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 2:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

nicki wrote:
Jester wrote:
Michael, you'll enjoy this article ...

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2011-09-07.html

I am not a fan of Ann Coulter, and I disagree with her final remarks on "liberals". However, her post is strictly based on facts and I am pleased to see that there is at least one public speaker in the US who hasn't drunk the FOA kool-aid.
Thank you Jester for sharing.


Yeah, I agree with your view of it, a good factual article overall. On the 'liberal' thing though, she does sort of have a point. She's mainly talking about the US media, rather then members of the public. And it does tend to be the liberal US media that has jumped on the Knox bandwagon, whereas the right wing US media, such as Fox News for example, hasn't. That said, I don't think this is a Democrat/Republican issue, which she keeps trying to make it and if there is ever a problem with the things she writes, it that she always has to try and draw it along political party lines and that does take away from the strength of the content.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 2:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Knox/Sollecito DNA battle – who won?

MAUNDY GREGORY



I just want to highlight again the above linked article. Maundy Gregory echoes my views regarding the knife and I think he pretty much nails it. I have to say, I also pretty much share his perspective on the bra clasp.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 2:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

I find it highly ironic that the defence objected to the prosecution calling for a re-test on the knife and called it a victory (along with their supporting media), when it was they that were originally calling for the knife to be re-tested. They got their independent review, but the re-test wasn't done. The prosecution then call for that re-test that wasn't done to be done, and the defence objects in dismay. What's wrong with that picture? I find it strange that none of the media see anything wrong with it. I'm betting Judge Hellman is able to see it.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 2:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Jester wrote:
It's been a while since I studied any psychology, but I did take quite a few courses in the field. Many years ago, psychologists thought they could study the brains of murderers and find something unique about them. They cut out the brains of murderers or geniuses, preserved them, dissected them ... but there was nothing unique. It was then decided that it wasn't possible to look at he brain and see differences, but that was pre-DNA.

It's not surprising that psychologists have returned to examining whether there are unique identifiers in people that give them a predisposition towards psychopathic behavior. Until about the 1990s, there were two categories of dangerous murderers: sociopaths and psychopaths. Sociopaths were the people that lacked empathy and could coldy and rationally do terrible things to others without feelings any guilt or remorse. Sociopaths are not necessarily murderers, and can function quite well in society. Psychopaths were more the crazy kind of murderer ... still without remorse, but more nuts when committing murder. Today, those two categories have been combined to one new label: Antisocial Personality Disorder.

I think the sociopathic personality is by far the more interesting personality, as the cold, rational, calculating approach that they have to life can cause them to commit murder because of a curiosity, but can also give them the tools to become extremely successful in a particular field. Russell Williams, the former high ranking Canadian military guy lived much of his life climbing the ranks until one day, in his 50s, he started stalking and murdering women. He appears to have made the switch because he thought he could get away with it, but he was probably always inclinded to do what he did. He was always a calm, cold, rational, calculating man that became powerful in his field. When he reached the peak of success, he started murdering on the side. He's an interesting case. Another book I read recently is "Men Who Eat Darkness" about a Japanese man with a similar personality. He was also extremely successful, in his 50s, but on the side he lured, drugged, abused and sometimes murdered women. It would be interesting to see if DNA markers are similar in men like this. The downside with this type of theory is that people could be identified and labeled at birth even though there is no guarantee that the negative aspects of their genetics will dominate.

Personally, I think Knox has sociopathic tendencies. She becomes the person that she thinks others want her to be in each relationship. If she's with a health freak that likes climbing, that's who she is. If she's with a druggy that likes classical music, that's who she is. Even Sollecito noticed when they first met that she didn't understand music ... it didn't reach past her ears. She's a compulsive liar, telling whoppers for no reason other than to get out of trouble. She has no remorse and no empathy - we all know how she reacted after the murder. She does not react appropriately in situations and relies on mimicking others to know how to act, and then still she often gets it wrong. Knox has more behavioral traits of a sociopath than most, but everyone has some. Sociopaths are highly manipulative, always looking out for number one without any concern or consideration for consequences to others ... very selfish people.


There may well be biological markers, like a deficiency of the empathy hormone, Oxytocin. Antisocial Personality Disorder tends more towards Psycopathy than Sociopathy, but that's my opinion.
An Overview Of Modern Thinking On The Criminal Mind
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php ... /#comments
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 2:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Interesting reads of some good info this morn (and a great visual, Jester.)
Kudos to all for sharing

FWIW
As I understand the Italian 'jurors' decision of guilt or innocence, the Presiding Judge, Assistant Judge, and lay jurors as noted above all have singular votes.

A simple majority is required for and basis of the guilty/not guilty decision.

The Presiding Judge (Hellmann) cannot override the majority vote.

His more weighted opinion based on his training and position is measured in because only if the vote is a tie.....then whatever vote the Presiding Judge casts, *counts twice* to break the tie in his favor.

His credentials are also informally measured in because common sense dictates that the lay jurors weigh his expert counsel and suggestions during their deliberations and before they vote.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 3:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
smacker wrote:
Michael wrote:
Amanda Knox "hopeful" after blow to prosecution

HUFFINGTON POST


As Yummi pointed out on the other board, is Hellman really going to overturn the decisions of 16 professional judges and 12 lay judges without debating the evidence in court ? Plus Barbie's comment about hellman hoping to be the President of the Perugia legal whotsit ??? He'd only be treading on Massei's toes, and I'm sure he'd have some say over Hellman's appointment.


Good to see you again Smacker. As for Hellman, he's got a LOT of evidence to overturn and he will have to explain how he overturns each piece in his report. Some task.

As for Barbie's tweet, she's just relating rumour and gossip (and she made it clear that's what it was). 90% of rumour isn't true.


Thanks Michael........From Yummi's comments, the key point was that Hellman has chosen not to debate the majority of the evidence...staging, alibis, blood mix, bathmat footprint, alibis, phone and computer records etc, therefore (I believe what Yummi is saying) is Hellman cannot overturn that evidence. Therefore, logically, the original verdict must stand.......

btw, was watching NBC4 here this morning; Curt and Mellarse interviewed. It's like watching another trial.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 4:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
And it does tend to be the liberal US media that has jumped on the Knox bandwagon, whereas the right wing US media, such as Fox News for example, hasn't.


Hi Michael. You seem to have a pretty high opinion of Fox News... watch the videos below ;)

Italian Court Rules Out New DNA Tests in Knox Case

FOX NEWS

Freedom for Amanda Knox?

FOX NEWS
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 5:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

This post by Popper on our sister site is worth re-posting in full (for you Michael, since you don't read over there.) Popper quietly and expertly unravels common misconceptions about the Italian system of justice and shows that it was Comodi's "duty" to ask for re-tests and a retraction and/or correction of Aviello's false testimony. I find Popper's comments about what happened yesterday in court very helpful.

Popper wrote:

"A few observations, some in response to other posts:

1. Comodi made an "impeccable" decision to ask for new experts and Aviello.
In Italy the PM is a judge and must seek the truth - even if this is not compatible with the best trial strategy for conviction. Therefore when it emerges an expert has not done a test he/she could do it follows a PM should ask for another expert and test. Same goes for Aviello who admitted to lying - even if Comodi does not really care about him [wasn't he a defense witness ?], he is clearly a criminal lying for whatever reason.

The impression left by the rejection of the request is therefore often wrong if seen through the eyes of the US
system
which focuses ONLY on the battle between Prosecutor and Defense. AK and RS have gained nothing by this rejection. Court is not the press and Ghirga knows this means nothing (and says it in the article I reported and translated above).

2. the choice of Comodi could also be tactical in order to understand something from the response of the court and behave accordingly (eg. waste less time talking about certain matters in the final discussion). I could go into the analysis of the words pronounced by Hellman (which I agree with Yummi are not so good for AK/RS) but this is not objective evidence. I also rarely discuss AK/RS personal actions not linked to the crime...leave that to magicians.

3. I do not believe fully in Comodi's words to Pisa. First they are not reported at all in the Italian press. Second she may have said something much more generic [good examples by other posters] and Pisa reported it as an unlikely moaning. She may have said such generic thing as a joke and Pisa did not understand it. I do not believe for one second that she can seriously think she will lose, she has a very solid case with a half confession and a direct witness plus lots of evidence. Comodi however will not win any prize if she wins or loses as long as best effort is made to find the truth. More importantly, unlike in the US - there is no prize to say "we will certainly win". In Italy if you say that you are often considered a fool rather than a "confident" person, a loser rather than a winner.

4. In Italy there is no jury, just a Court of appeal (in this case Corte d'assise d'appello). If we do not digest this concept we will not understand a lot of things, including the fact that press excitement today is irrelevant in the case. Every member of the court of appeal knows much more than us or the press and they will have to write a motivation report (see Yummi discussion on what is compatible and what is not, very relevant, this is the logic of judges).

5. [somebody had asked] prosecutor and defense can say what they want in final discussion. Appeal is an AUTOMATIC - it must be asked but cannot be refused - FULL REVIEW of all aspects of a case by a new court, even if the court can decide to rediscuss in trial only some of the evidence

6. I attached the article above about "Amanda is very worried" said by Ghirga as this is the truth. It is Amanda who should be worried not Comodi

7. Fox News reporting of secondary or tertiary sources (Pisa or someone quoting Pisa) - if unverified with Comodi and I am sure they are unverified - is disgraceful. Fox News interpretation of the events is wrong (but this is not new, always "blinded by prejudice" to say it with Jane Austen) filled with lack of knowledge and racism "...in an Itaaaalian jail..." "...took the whole summer off...[forget that without requests of defense trial would have ended last February]" "...a piece of prusciutoo...". A bit disgusting I must say. Murder should be treated more seriously. One thing the expert said right: "Investigation is deductive reasoning". True, in fact the reasoning lead you straight to the two defendants as numerous pieces of solid evidence. It seems AK's half confession is forgotten. I have never seen in my lifetime - if not in politics - such bias, such racism, ignorance and misrepresentation of events by the press as in this case [even if AK/RS were innocent]. Shame on them."

Posted by Popper: Thu Sep 08, 2011 12:26 pm

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=97759#p97759
-------------------------------------

P.S. Re-posting is easier for me than writing my own comment, so sometimes I take on this extra task of re-posting with the idea that I'm making myself more useful. :)
P.P.S. Emphasis in bold is mine.


Last edited by guermantes on Thu Sep 08, 2011 7:47 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 5:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Here's what Ghirga said outside court at the end of yesterday's hearing (the Anglo-media would have done better by quoting him instead of Comodi):

Perugia, 7 set. - (Adnkronos) - Amanda e' "molto preoccupata" dall'esito delle udienze. Lo ha detto l'avvocato Luciano Ghirga, uno dei suoi difensori. Secondo il legale tuttavia "la rinnovazione della perizia non ammessa uguale esito del processo favorevole e' un'equazione giuridicamente non consentita".
"E' una presa d'atto - ha aggiunto - del lavoro dei periti. Ci troviamo tra l'altro di fronte a un caso piuttosto raro di ampia rinnovazione dibattimentale. Una sfida in avanti anche giuridicamente. C' e' tutto - ha concluso l'avvocato Ghirga - per delle belle difese".

"Amanda is very worried about the outcome of the last hearings" said Luciano Ghirga, one of AK's lawyers. According to Ghirga, "the equation - rejection of new expert opinion equals favourable verdict - is not possible from a legal point of view". "It is an acknowledgment of the work of the experts" he added. "We find ourselves in a rare case of wide rediscussion of evidence" etc.

7/09/2011
http://www.libero-news.it/news/816675/O%20...%20upata.html

Posted by Popper: Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:07 am
Top Profile 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 7:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

guermantes wrote:
Michael wrote:
And it does tend to be the liberal US media that has jumped on the Knox bandwagon, whereas the right wing US media, such as Fox News for example, hasn't.


Hi Michael. You seem to have a pretty high opinion of Fox News... watch the videos below ;)

Italian Court Rules Out New DNA Tests in Knox Case

FOX NEWS

Freedom for Amanda Knox?

FOX NEWS


I also generally like Fox News.
But the above video does nothing for my appreciation.

Shep Smith in the video is even more error prone than Stevie the sniper.

EXAMPLES
1) Those (horrible) Italians take ...the whole summer ..... off while (poor) Knox sits in an hot jail
2) Those horrible Italians invented the name Foxy Knoxy

Just two among many for Shep to be ashamed of making.
His two panelists are overwhelmed by Shep's customary animated 'soundbites' and do little other than chirp an occasional...Oh Yeah


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 9:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Guermantes -

Thanks for bringing Popper's post over. I knew pretty much the contained facts already...except for the one of Comodi being 'obliged' by duty to request the knife re-test that wasn't done. I, like most other people, assumed it was purely a tactic and a means of exposing the failure of C&V, perhaps even gaining/verifying evidence against Knox in the bargain. It transpires it's all those things, but in her duty as a judge she was also duty bound to request it. What's more interesting, is that 'duty bound' part is a 'technical/legal' requirement and and that is a basis for grounds to appeal should Hellman reject the knife AND acquit.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 9:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

guermantes wrote:
Michael wrote:
And it does tend to be the liberal US media that has jumped on the Knox bandwagon, whereas the right wing US media, such as Fox News for example, hasn't.


Hi Michael. You seem to have a pretty high opinion of Fox News... watch the videos below ;)

Italian Court Rules Out New DNA Tests in Knox Case

FOX NEWS

Freedom for Amanda Knox?

FOX NEWS



No, I don't like Fox at all, I see them as a political (and money making) entity rather then a news broadcaster and most of what they broadcast isn't actually news, but spin and politically loaded opinion. That wasn't the point I was making. The point I was making is, unlike broadcasters such as CBS for example, they have not embarked on a campaign of advocacy for Knox over these past few years. They've actually shown minimal interest in the case and in the past, they haven't opinionated on it (a rare thing for Fox, since they tend to opinionate on everything else they report). They've actually covered it very little. If that has changed recently, it's only because even Fox (which being right wing, takes a tough stance on law and order issues) is eventually going to succumb to the endless waves of non-stop propaganda and ignorance being constantly put out by the other US networks, especially as not hitherto having much interest in the case they themselves are ignorant of the factual details of the case. It is a case of if something is repeated enough, loudly enough, it becomes 'true'...at least in the world of US media and infotainment.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 9:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

guermantes wrote:
Here's what Ghirga said outside court at the end of yesterday's hearing (the Anglo-media would have done better by quoting him instead of Comodi):

Perugia, 7 set. - (Adnkronos) - Amanda e' "molto preoccupata" dall'esito delle udienze. Lo ha detto l'avvocato Luciano Ghirga, uno dei suoi difensori. Secondo il legale tuttavia "la rinnovazione della perizia non ammessa uguale esito del processo favorevole e' un'equazione giuridicamente non consentita".
"E' una presa d'atto - ha aggiunto - del lavoro dei periti. Ci troviamo tra l'altro di fronte a un caso piuttosto raro di ampia rinnovazione dibattimentale. Una sfida in avanti anche giuridicamente. C' e' tutto - ha concluso l'avvocato Ghirga - per delle belle difese".

"Amanda is very worried about the outcome of the last hearings" said Luciano Ghirga, one of AK's lawyers. According to Ghirga, "the equation - rejection of new expert opinion equals favourable verdict - is not possible from a legal point of view". "It is an acknowledgment of the work of the experts" he added. "We find ourselves in a rare case of wide rediscussion of evidence" etc.

7/09/2011
http://www.libero-news.it/news/816675/O%20...%20upata.html

Posted by Popper: Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:07 am



Actually, of all the senior defence lawyers, Ghirga is the least prone to engaging in spinning to the media (Bongiorno's the worst for it, but that comes of being a politician and an ambitious one to boot). Just the opposite, he tends to tell it how it is. He is rather honest and has little time for propaganda. I see him as a gentleman really and as a lawyer, he's old school (in a good way). He's the defence lawyer I have the most time for when he has something to say.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:42 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

There is an interesting retrospective being addressed by members of PMF.org: What drew them to the case?
The answers hint at really interesting reasons. There seems to be a personal element that attracted them.

In my case, I don't watch the news and haven't bought a newspaper in 4 years now. But when Huffington Post brought in over 70 Knox threads a year, I was attracted to the sheer strangeness of the Knoxii. I think I made a thousand comments there, until I got tired of the um, circular nature of their thinking.

So, since I dislike the media (Huffy Puffy has really pushed the Amanda, unjustly accused line of US MSM) I wan't influenced by them. But the three most important things that leaped out at me from the beginning were:

1) The false accusation,
2) The staged break in, and,
3) I have an ear for lies; they obviously were lying.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

It will be interesting to see how much Hellman will accept of Massei's reasoning and how much he will accept from Rudy's trials now his docs have been entered into evidence as well. One thing you don't see discussed much is the statements made by Rudy which will now be added to the evidence that AK + RS were in the cottage. This is simply an extra piece of evidence that wasn't there before.

Looking at the Rudy's Supreme Court Sentencing Report you seem some small differences. For example, they reason from Curatolo's testimony that RS+AK went to the basketball court after the murder and not before as in Massei's reasoning. Also, the TOD is a bit earlier. From Rudy's statements he left about 22:30. This would mean they all left just before the broken down car arrived, or even ...they all ran away because the broken down car arrived. They might have thought the guy heard the scream and was calling the police. I tend to agree more with the version from Rudy's trials. Curatolo saw them in a heated argument. It would make more sense IMO if that was after the murder.

I believe this is one of the main reasons why Hellman asked Curatolo to come back. To hear more about this difference in reasoning between the courts. I hope he follows my reasoning :) and sets the TOD at shortly after 22:30. This will end any discussions on TOD and significance of when exactly the tow truck left. I also think the series of strange activity on Meredith's phone after 22:00 was the start of the attack, and not Meredith playing with her phone. Anyhow, I will just wait patiently to see how Hellman will fit the pieces of the puzzle together. Most importantly of course is the confirmation of the guilty verdicts.
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 2:20 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

What attracted me to this case was the 'blog wars' :) I didn't follow the case exactly from the beginning. Then the weird spinning. For example, AK's DNA/luminol evidence was all 'normal', and RG's traces were 'all over'. Weird.

There is also a lot of 'little' evidence that attracts me to this case:
- Covering of the body is a sign that the killer is close to the victim.
- Locking of the bedroom door points to the killer is someone living in the house.
- Blood on the water tap. Who has blood on the water tap? What are the chances of that happening innocently in the context of this bloody murder?
- Rudy's bloody shoe prints. No shuffling around to place the duvet over Meredith's body, not going to the small bathroom, not turning around to lock the bedroom door, not stopping at the front door of the cottage.
- Statement analysis. What innocent person speaks of "my involvement"?
- The 9 pound rock. Just too big :)
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 7:39 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

max wrote:
It will be interesting to see how much Hellman will accept of Massei's reasoning and how much he will accept from Rudy's trials now his docs have been entered into evidence as well. One thing you don't see discussed much is the statements made by Rudy which will now be added to the evidence that AK + RS were in the cottage. This is simply an extra piece of evidence that wasn't there before.

Looking at the Rudy's Supreme Court Sentencing Report you seem some small differences. For example, they reason from Curatolo's testimony that RS+AK went to the basketball court after the murder and not before as in Massei's reasoning. Also, the TOD is a bit earlier. From Rudy's statements he left about 22:30. This would mean they all left just before the broken down car arrived, or even ...they all ran away because the broken down car arrived. They might have thought the guy heard the scream and was calling the police. I tend to agree more with the version from Rudy's trials. Curatolo saw them in a heated argument. It would make more sense IMO if that was after the murder.

I believe this is one of the main reasons why Hellman asked Curatolo to come back. To hear more about this difference in reasoning between the courts. I hope he follows my reasoning :) and sets the TOD at shortly after 22:30. This will end any discussions on TOD and significance of when exactly the tow truck left. I also think the series of strange activity on Meredith's phone after 22:00 was the start of the attack, and not Meredith playing with her phone. Anyhow, I will just wait patiently to see how Hellman will fit the pieces of the puzzle together. Most importantly of course is the confirmation of the guilty verdicts.



Remember also, there was the Micheli Report which Hellman now has full access to (Massei wasn't permitted to consider the part pertaining to Guede's trial) which exposes one set of testimony (Christian's) that the defence submitted to Massei as being fake. But, the thing is, Micheli also had the murder at an earlier time.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:29 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Yah, it is interesting to compare reports. I looked for the sentencing report from Judge Giovanni Borsini (Rudy's first appeal) but I don't think it is available. Maybe it wasn't all that interesting? I don't really remember why it is not available.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 9:26 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Amanda Knox and the murder of Meredith Kercher: Media forgetting the real victim

Radell Smith, Atlanta Crime Examiner
September 8, 2011

EXAMINER

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 9:28 am   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

max wrote:
Yah, it is interesting to compare reports. I looked for the sentencing report from Judge Giovanni Borsini (Rudy's first appeal) but I don't think it is available. Maybe it wasn't all that interesting? I don't really remember why it is not available.



You might find it in 'The Range' ;)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Guermantes quoting 'Popper' wrote:
2. the choice of Comodi could also be tactical in order to understand something from the response of the court and behave accordingly (eg. waste less time talking about certain matters in the final discussion). I could go into the analysis of the words pronounced by Hellman (which I agree with Yummi are not so good for AK/RS) but this is not objective evidence. I also rarely discuss AK/RS personal actions not linked to the crime...leave that to magicians.


Guermantes (or somebody), could you kindly bring over Yummi's post that Popper is referring to...in regard to Hellman's words and what that means for Raffaele and Amanda? Thanks in advance.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

[quote="guermantes"]This post by Popper on our sister site is worth re-posting in full (for you Michael, since you don't read over there.) Popper quietly and expertly unravels common misconceptions about the Italian system of justice and shows that it was Comodi's "duty" to ask for re-tests and a retraction and/or correction of Aviello's false testimony. I find Popper's comments about what happened yesterday in court very helpful.

Popper wrote:

(...)

3. I do not believe fully in Comodi's words to Pisa. First they are not reported at all in the Italian press. Second she may have said something much more generic [good examples by other posters] and Pisa reported it as an unlikely moaning. She may have said such generic thing as a joke and Pisa did not understand it. I do not believe for one second that she can seriously think she will lose, she has a very solid case with a half confession and a direct witness plus lots of evidence. Comodi however will not win any prize if she wins or loses as long as best effort is made to find the truth. More importantly, unlike in the US - there is no prize to say "we will certainly win". In Italy if you say that you are often considered a fool rather than a "confident" person, a loser rather than a winner.

end of quote]




And just to add...Nick Pisa really seems to be the only one having this Comodi/acquittal fantasy, and some others have probably copied him.
I read an abc article from Wednesday (I believe) by Phoebe Natanson who also quotes Comodi. There Comodi says that she accepted the court's decision and (probably as an answer to a preliminary question) that that decision could lead one to think of the possibility that AK/RS could be set free. Very different from what Nick Pisa said.

Michael, isn't the Hellman quote you're looking for already somewhere on .net, the one where he says a re-test was superfluent for the court to take a decision?
I have no time right now to do a transfer, sorry, but maybe later in the day. Or maybe guermantes is getting back first :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Hi Ava. It's not the Hellman quote I'm wanting, it's the post by Yummi and his analyses of what it means for Amanda and Raffaele.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 2:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Hi Ava. It's not the Hellman quote I'm wanting, it's the post by Yummi and his analyses of what it means for Amanda and Raffaele.



I see. But then maybe guermantes should look for it, there are millions of posts over there, and I'm not sure which one exactly she was referring to.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

This might be the reasoning

___________________________________________________________

Yummi:

By logic – keeping in mind the implications of elements - the outcome seems to me quite established for conviction.

Two news articles in Italians with some details:

http://www.tmnews.it/web/sezioni/top10/ ... 1736.shtml

http://www.umbria24.it/meredith-la-cort ... 57786.html

_______________________________________________________________________________

Kermit:

The Google translation is quite understandable, but in any case, here's a fast translation of the first one.

http://www.tmnews.it/web/sezioni/top10/ ... 1736.shtml

ITALIAN:
E' stata respinta dalla Corte d'Appello di Perugia la richiesta del pm Manuela Comodi di "appaltare" una terza perizia - nuovamente super partes - per confermare i profili genetici di Amanda Knox e Raffaele Sollecito sulla presunta arma del delitto e sul gancetto di reggiseno di Meredith Kercher, la studentessa inglese uccisa quasi quattro anni fa a Perugia.

"La rinnovazione della perizia appare superflua a prescindere dalla sussistenza o meno delle lacune evidenziate dalla procura generale e condivise dalle parti civili", ha detto in aula il presidente della Corte che poi ha considerato chiusa l'istruttoria dibattimentale e ha rinviato il processo al prossimo 23 settembre, quando è previsto l'inizio della requisitoria da parte della procura generale. Altre udienze sono state gia' fissate per il 24, il 26 e il 27 settembre prossimi per le arringhe delle parti civile e delle difese, a cui seguirà la sentenza di secondo grado.

Una richiesta dell'accusa per ribaltare il giudizio su Dna e reperti dato dai periti della Corte d'Appello che avevano bocciato le analisi della biologa Patrizia Stefanoni che avevano contribuito alla condanna in primo grado dei due ex findanzati per l'omicidio della ragazza inglese. Bocciata anche la richiesta della procura generale di risentire in aula il testimone Luciano Aviello. L'ex collaboratore di giustizia sarebbe stato chiamato in aula per affermare di aver preso soldi dalla famiglia Sollecito per cercare di scarcerarlo. La Corte d'Appello ha dichiarato chiuso il dibattimento.

I due no alle richieste dell'accusa sono andati nella direzione dei desiderata delle difese di Amanda e Raffaele. L'avvocato Luca Maori, difensore del ragazzo pugliese, non ha lesinato critiche all'atteggiamento della Procura. "Si chiede di ascoltare in aula Aviello, quando è stato considerato dai Pm inattendibile. Ora però che cambia posizione diventa un teste importante. Stessa cosa per la perizia dato che prima l'accusa si è sempre opposta a quella che era una nostra richiesta che la Corte d'Appello ha accettato. Quando le cose non vanno bene si cerca di portare acqua al proprio mulino.".


FAST TRANSLATION:

The Court of Appeals of Perugia has rejected the request by Prosecutor Manuela Comodi to undertake a third report - again, non-partisan (Kermit: I suppose with an expert not nominated by either Defence or Prosecution) - to confirm the genetic profiles of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito on the alleged murder weapon and the bra clasp of Meredith Kercher, the British student murdered in Perugia nearly four years ago.

"Repeating the testing is unnecessary, regardless of whether there are gaps highlighted by the prosecution and shared by the plaintiffs," the presiding judge said in the courtroom, who then declared the hearing closed and postponed the trial to next September 23, when the prosecution starts the closing arguments. Other hearings have already been set for September 24, 26 and 27 for the statements of teh civil plaintiffs and the defence, followed by the verdict and the appeals trial.

The request by the prosecution was aimed at countering the conclusions concerning DNA and review done by the Court of Appeals expert witnesses (C&V) who had rejected the analysis done by Biologist Patrizia Stefanoni and which contributed to the conviction in the first trial of former boyfriend and girlfriend for the murder of English girl. The Prosecution's request to hear in court (K: again) the witness Aviello Luciano was also rejected. The ex-police informant would have been called in court to confirm that he received (Kermit: not sure if tense is sure or hypothetical) money from the Sollecito family to facilitate his release. The Court of Appeals declared the hearing closed.

The two "no"s given to the prosecution requests have gone in the direction of the wishes of Amanda's and Raffaele's defence teams. Lawyer Luca Maori, defending the young man from Puglia, has spared no criticism of the attitude of the prosecutor. "He asks the court to listen to Aviello (K: the mafiosi), when he had been considered unreliable by the prosecutor. Now when he changes his posture (K: Aviello), however, he becomes an important witness. Same thing for the first testing since the accusation is always contrary to that which we requested and that The Court of Appeals agreed. When things go wrong they try to bring water to their own mill (Yummi, please explain the expression)."

_______________________________________________________________________

Kermit:

Fast translation of Yummi's second article:

http://www.umbria24.it/meredith-la-cort ... 57786.html

ITALIAN:
La Corte d’assise d’appello di Perugia mercoledì mattina, dopo una breve camera di consiglio, ha detto no alla richiesta dei pm di una nuova perizia sulle tracce di Dna nel processo a Raffaele Sollecito e ad Amanda Knox. Un no è arrivato anche a una nuova deposizione di Luciano Aviello, richiesta sempre mercoledì mattina dall’accusa. La Corte ha ritenuto «superflua» la realizzazione di una nuova perizia e «non indispensabile» la deposizione del pentito. Chiuso il dibattimento quindi dal 23 settembre, data stabilita dalla Corte, si entrerà nella fase conclusiva del processo con la requisitoria del pm. Altre udienze sono state già fissate per il 24, il 26 e il 27 settembre prossimi per le arringhe delle parti civile e delle difese. Quindi la sentenza.

Stop alla guerra delle perizie «Gli accertamenti effettuati dai periti e gli elementi forniti dai consulenti – ha detto il presidente della Corte in aula parlando della perizia – consentono a questa corte di formarsi un convincimento». Illustrando mercoledì la sua richiesta alla Corte, il pm Manuela Comodi ha parlato di «appunti oggettivi» alla perizia svolta dai periti incaricati dalla Corte d’assise di appello, perizia definita dallo stesso pm «irrimediabilmente lacunosa». In particolare il pm ha chiesto alla Corte di disporre un’analisi bio-statistica e che le tracce trovate sul coltello vengano analizzate tramite kit di ultima generazione.

Il pm: periti inadeguati e inaffidabili «Se la nomina di un perito è volta all’accertamento della verità – ha detto la Comodi – questo tentativo è doveroso che sia fatto». Per il pm «i periti non hanno risposto ai quesiti che la Corte aveva posto loro. Hanno lanciato dei dubbi dicendo che tutto è possibile. Il compito di un perito però – ha detto la Comodi – non è quello di insinuare dubbi, ma di dare ulteriori certezze a chi ha poi il compito di decidere». La Comodi ha poi parlato di «inadeguatezza e inaffidabilità» dei due esperti.

Le difese si oppongono Nel corso della mattinata le difese della Knox e di Sollecito si erano duramente opposte alle richieste del pm Comodi, accusata di «fare il gioco delle tre carte» secondo l’avvocato Luca Maori. «E’ una vergogna – ha sottolineato il legale – che in un processo così importante, dove la vita di due persone è ferma e congelata da quattro anni, si possano ancora fare questi giocherelli». Per l’avvocato Maori «quando le cose non vanno bene si cerca di portare acqua al proprio mulino. Fin dall’inizio – ha proseguito – e anche nel processo di primo grado l’accusa si è sempre opposta alle richieste di perizia che noi avevamo avanzato. Adesso, che le cose non vanno bene dobbiamo cambiarle».

Aviello? Inattendibile L’avvocato Maori si era anche espresso contro una nuova testimonianza dell’ex pentito Luciano Aviello, «ritenuto dagli stessi investigatori persona assolutamente inattendibile». «E a questo punto – si è chiesto l’avvocato Mauri – lo vogliono sentire un’altra volta? E poi davanti alla Corte cosa dirà? Ritratterà la ritrattazione della ritrattazione? E’ veramente un altro modo per perdere tempo. Dobbiamo arrivare alla fine di questo processo il prima possibile – ha concluso l’avvocato Mauri – e chiudere questa vicenda». Un «no assoluto» alle nuove richieste dell’accusa era arrivato anche dall’avvocato Luciano Ghirga, legale di Amanda Knox.


FAST TRANSLATION:

After retiring briefly to their chambers, the judges of the Assize Court of Appeal of Perugia on Wednesday morning, rejected the Prosecution's request for new testing of DNA evidence in the trial of Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox. "No" was also the reply to the request to hear testimony again by Aviello Luciano, made by the prosecution on Wednesday morning. The Court has considered "superfluous" establishing a new technical test, and "unnecessary" the testimony of the police informant. With these issues dealt with, on September 23, the date fixed by the Court, we will enter the final phase of the trial with the closing arguments of the prosecutor. Other hearings have already been scheduled for 24, 26 and 27 September for the statements by the civil plaintiffs and the defence teams. Then the verdict.

End of the war between the expert witnesses

"The investigations carried out by experts and the evidence they have provided", said the court's presiding judge in court, with regards to the technical testing, "allows this court to form a belief/conclusion." Prosecutor Manuela Comodi explained on Wednesday her request to the Court, speaking of "objective notes," (appunti oggettivi - Italians!!!! help!!, I guess, something "objective indications") concerning the report carried out by the experts appointed by the Court of Assizes of Appeal. The prosecutor described the report as "hopelessly flawed." In particular, the prosecutor asked the Court to order a bio-statistical analysis and that the (DNA) traces found on the knife be analysed using kits with the latest technology.

The Prosecutor: inadequate and unreliable experts

"If the appointment of an expert is intended to establish the truth," said Comodi, "this must be attempted to be achieved." For the prosecutor, "the experts did not respond to questions that the Court had asked them. They dispursed doubts, saying that anything is possible. The task of an expert though", Comodi said, "is not to insinuate doubt, but to give more certainty to those who must take decisions." Comodi then spoke of the two experts' "inadequacy and unreliability".

The Defence teams are contrary

During the morning the defence teams of Knox and Sollecito were strongly opposed to Prosecutor Comodi's requests. They accused her of "playing a three card trick" (??? "fare il gioco delle tre carte"), according to lawyer Luca Maori. "It's a shame," said the lawyer, "in such an important trial, where the lives of two people are still and frozen for four years, that people still play these games." For lawyer Maori "when things go bad, they try to bring water to their mill (idiomatic expression). From the beginning," he continued, "and even in the first trial the prosecution has always been contrary to the requests for (third party) experts that we made. Now that things are not going well that changes."

Aviello? Unreliable

Lawyer Maori had also rejected new testimony by ex-police informant Aviello Luciano, "considered by the investigators themselves to be a completely unreliable person." "And at this point," asks lawyer Maori, "they want to hear him testify again? And then before the Court, what will he say? Retract the retraction of the retraction? It's really just another way to waste time. We need to get to the end of this trial as soon as possible," said lawyer Mauri, "and close this matter." Luciano Ghirga, lawyer for Amanda Knox, also says "not at all" to the new requests by the prosecution.

__________________________________________________________________

Yummi:

If you look at the news articles, including the Italian press, they seem to lean more towards predicting a favourable outcome to Knox, compared to weeks ago. But what the journalist write as opinions is less meaningful to me today: putting together information from the last days and 30 July hearing, I fell now more confident for conviction compared to a month ago.
The logic of Pratillo Hellman's court, the set of expert reviews and hearing, it appears more clear to me in the end.

I want also to recall that Vecchiotti's questioning brought up a couple of further important new elements, among them, as she admitted that, a laboratory contamination of the knife was unlikely after all, that's what she answered when Comodi told her that it was analyzed in the laboratory two weeks after Meredith's DNA items.

We don't know what exactly the judges know about the rest on some details: about the properties of TMB tests for example. But we know that they rejected all other requests and denied all reviews asked by the defence, as audiometric tests to Nara or demands to dismiss Amanda's statements, or take new footprints or questioning Rinaldis' work.
I don't see how an appeal could lead to overturning a verdict and avoid discussion of these topics. This forclosure of topics in discussion is the most striking choice of Hellman's court after all.

______________________________________________________________

Yummi:

Overturning an unanimous verdict by 16 prof judges and 12 lay judges... without debating the evidence in court? Let's be serious...

__________________________________________________________________


Last edited by Jester on Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Michael wrote:
Guermantes quoting 'Popper' wrote:
2. the choice of Comodi could also be tactical in order to understand something from the response of the court and behave accordingly (eg. waste less time talking about certain matters in the final discussion). I could go into the analysis of the words pronounced by Hellman (which I agree with Yummi are not so good for AK/RS) but this is not objective evidence. I also rarely discuss AK/RS personal actions not linked to the crime...leave that to magicians.


Guermantes (or somebody), could you kindly bring over Yummi's post that Popper is referring to...in regard to Hellman's words and what that means for Raffaele and Amanda? Thanks in advance.


Hi Michael, just looked through all the posts from Sep 7 on the .org forum (not read them all obviously but enough to become goggle eyed!) and found these two posts by Yummi. I believe these are the posts that Popper was referring to in his analysis of day's events.

The original Italian word in #1 is "convincimento", which means "conviction", (firm) "belief" (idea held as true), "conclusion". The same word is again used in an article that Kermit translated this morning (I'll post his translation next).

#1 - Yummi wrote;

"The most important was the judge's explanation why they don't need any further evidence "the elements we have already were enough to reach a convincement" - this is what the judge said.
Could be - theoretically - the convincement there is no evidence, or the convincement about the truth. The word "convincement" has anyway a different sound than "doubt".

Posted by Yummi: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:24 pm

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewto ... 544#p97544


#2 - Yummi wrote:

"If you look at the news articles, including the Italian press, they seem to lean more towards predicting a favourable outcome for Knox, compared to weeks ago. But what journalists write as an opinions is less meaningful to me today: putting together information from the last days and 30 July hearing, I feel now more confident for conviction compared to a month ago.
The logic of Pratillo Hellman's court, the set of expert reviews and hearing, it appears more clear to me in the end.

I want also to recall that Vecchiotti's questioning brought up a couple of further important new elements, among them, as she admitted that, a laboratory contamination of the knife was unlikely after all, that's what she answered when Comodi told her that it was analyzed in the laboratory two weeks after Meredith's DNA items.

We don't know what exactly the judges know about the rest on some details: about the properties of TMB tests for example. But we know that they rejected all other requests and denied all reviews asked by the defence, as audiometric tests to Nara or demands to dismiss Amanda's statements, or take new footprints or questioning Rinaldi's work.
I don't see how an appeal could lead to overturning a verdict and avoid discussion of these topics. This foreclosure of topics in discussion is the most striking choice of Hellman's court after all.

Posted by Yummi: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:41 pm

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewto ... 689#p97689


Last edited by guermantes on Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Jester, excellent - you beat me to it, again! :)
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

The Amanda Knox Trial Explained

SEATTLEST


(having a bit of a debate with our old friend Steve Shay there at the moment)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Thanks Jester! :) :) :)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Jester, sorry to be picky....but these two urls are broken, would it be possible to have the fixed versions?:

http://www.tmnews.it/web/sezioni/top10/ ... 1736.shtml

http://www.umbria24.it/meredith-la-cort ... 57786.html

EDIT: Actually, stand down Jester, only the Kermit links are broken, not the Yummi links (and they are the same) so I can use those :)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Thanks too Guermantes! :) :) :)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit's translation of an article from Corriere Della Sera, available online at

http://archiviostorico.corriere.it/2011%20...%208034.shtml

Kermit wrote:

"Here's a FAST TRANSLATION of H9's linked article:

PERUGIA - This is the Press in all its glory (K:??), there's no room for chance: an American network, in exchange for the exclusive interview with an acquitted Amanda, has (would have) offered the Knox family a private flight back home after the verdict. Top secret negotiations that in the end overlap with other rumours, who knows how well founded, that refer to remunerative proposals with five zeros (Kermit: dollars? euros? five zeros with a number in front? Lira?).

Certainly, however, one thing is sure: the war between the U.S. media has begun. The objective, now that an acquittal seems possible (Kermit: ... to them), is her, and to be able to say on the air this sentence: "Amanda Knox, tell us everything."

Curt Knox, her father, denied any offer: "Right today I will get the tickets for my loved ones, to have them come here to Perugia for the verdict, return trip tickets. Amanda's ticket? No, I respect the Court, I'm awaiting their decision."

He says some more, a few moments after the Court of Appeals rejected the Prosecution's request for new testing: "I am happy, it's a signal that the Court believes what the two experts appointed by the court have maintained." That is, said bluntly, that the scientific forensic evidence was not very based on science.

Now, it is clear: the prosecutors claim that their "case contains much more", while the defence teams swear otherwise. For Giulia Bongiorno, "the (C&V) report has demolished the prosecution's only evidence". This is a battle that's getting more and more controversial and fierce now that Amanda Knox's and Raffaele Sollecito's appeal is about to end, after having been condemned in their first trial to twenty-six and twenty-five years.

After the hearing, prosecutor Manuela Comodi spoke sitting in a downtown bar/café (Kermit: it's "bar", but in the Euro sense, otherwise it sounds like she's in a lounge in the US sense): "I knew that the Court would turn down the request for a new test. After all, the extreme trust that the judges place in the experts was perceived in the courtroom: they (the judges) didn't even pose them (C&V) one question ...".

Her thoughts concerning the contribution made by the experts in the appeal are more than clear: "The prosecutor's office deems these experts inadequate for performing a new analysis, we ask the Court to appoint others, because the two already appointed (Carla Vecchiotti and Stefano Conti of La Sapienza University - Corriere ed), have not responded to the Court's questions. "

The judges, after one hour of deliberation in their chambers, rejected (the request). Now there is only room for closing arguments and replies. Then, at the end of the month, there'll be the verdict.

Giulia Bongiorno, Raffaele Sollecito's defence lawyer: "They were opposed to the expert review at the end of the first hearing, and now they want another. Personally, I have never doubted being able to get an acquittal."

Manuela Comodi isn't flustered: "If need be, we already have grounds for an appeal to the Supreme Court."

Almost four years after the murder of English student Meredith Kercher, the perception of the Stars-and-Stripes-media, is that compared to the first trial, something could change (Kermit: how many of these media have taken the hand of Marriott? how many have spoken to other sides in this case, and when they have done so, how many have not been pre-fed Marriott cue cards?). The reporters speak to one of Amanda's lawyers, Luciano Ghirga, immediately after hearing. He smiles: "The non repetition of the (C&V) review does not automatically mean that the verdict is acquittal. Of course, what has happened is important."

In court, prosecutors had requested to look into three issues: the biostatistical calculation of the likelihood that the profile identified on the bra clasp belongs to Sollecito, the analysis of an evidencial item that had never been examined (identified as item "I" on the knife) and to hear again testimony from one of the witnesses.

The Court said no: "It is unnecessary, because the findings made by the experts and the evidence provided by the consultants allow this Court to form its own reasoned conviction/conclusion (Kermit: "convincimento")." It's impossible to be sure what that is. But there's another statement, by Amanda's father that perhaps says something more than a hope: "We are still in the tunnel, but now we see light."

Author: Alessandro Capponi

(Translated by Kermit)

Posted by Kermit: Fri Sep 09, 2011 10:28 am

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewto ... 923#p97923
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

guermantes wrote:
Jester, excellent - you beat me to it, again! :)


Cheers ... I had a minute to spare and thought I'd have a look for it.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

http://www.tmnews.it/web/sezioni/top10/ ... 1736.shtml

http://www.umbria24.it/meredith-la-cort ... 57786.html

I just edited my comment to repair the links.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Kermit wrote:

AMANDA SPEAKS (er, through lawyers)

PARTIAL TRANSLATION OF:
http://www.ilquotidianoitaliano.it/noti ... 3470.html/

ITALIAN:
“Durante il processo di primo grado avevo paura di entrare in quel banco, sentivo tutti ostili, sentivo che quando parlavo e piangevo, quando cercavo di spiegare che non c’ero quella notte e in quella casa, tutti facevano spallucce, tutti sorridevano beffardi. Adesso tutto è cambiato. Ora i giudici non mi odiano più, ho qualcuno che mi ascolta senza lo sguardo greve dell’accusa”, afferma Amanda Knox tramite il suo legale .... "Ho sempre creduto di riuscire a far emergere la verità, ho sempre creduto di poter uscire da quel carcere in cui la mia vita s’è congelata. Non ho più nessuno, il carcere ti azzera”, ribadisce Amanda.


FAST TRANSLATION:

"During the first trial I was afraid to go to the stand/bench, I felt everyone was hostile, I felt that when I spoke and I weeped when I tried to explain that I was not there that night and in that house, everyone showed indifference, they all had mocking smiles. Now everything has changed. Now the judges don't hate me anymore, I have someone who listens to me without the heavy gaze of the prosecution", said Amanda Knox through her lawyer .... "I have always believed I would succeed in making the truth emerge, I always believed I would get out of that prison where my life has frozen. I no longer have anything, prison annihilates you," Amanda underlines.

Posted by Kermit: Fri Sep 09, 2011 11:23 am

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=97933#p97933
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

guermantes wrote:
Kermit wrote:

AMANDA SPEAKS (er, through lawyers)

PARTIAL TRANSLATION OF:
http://www.ilquotidianoitaliano.it/noti ... 3470.html/

ITALIAN:
“Durante il processo di primo grado avevo paura di entrare in quel banco, sentivo tutti ostili, sentivo che quando parlavo e piangevo, quando cercavo di spiegare che non c’ero quella notte e in quella casa, tutti facevano spallucce, tutti sorridevano beffardi. Adesso tutto è cambiato. Ora i giudici non mi odiano più, ho qualcuno che mi ascolta senza lo sguardo greve dell’accusa”, afferma Amanda Knox tramite il suo legale .... "Ho sempre creduto di riuscire a far emergere la verità, ho sempre creduto di poter uscire da quel carcere in cui la mia vita s’è congelata. Non ho più nessuno, il carcere ti azzera”, ribadisce Amanda.


FAST TRANSLATION:

"During the first trial I was afraid to go to the stand/bench, I felt everyone was hostile, I felt that when I spoke and I weeped when I tried to explain that I was not there that night and in that house, everyone showed indifference, they all had mocking smiles. Now everything has changed. Now the judges don't hate me anymore, I have someone who listens to me without the heavy gaze of the prosecution", said Amanda Knox through her lawyer .... "I have always believed I would succeed in making the truth emerge, I always believed I would get out of that prison where my life has frozen. I no longer have anything, prison annihilates you," Amanda underlines.

Posted by Kermit: Fri Sep 09, 2011 11:23 am

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=97933#p97933


Murderers should be annihilated.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -   

Nick Pisa in Rome
3:51PM BST 09 Sep 2011

Amanda Knox says 'they finally believe me' over murder of Meredith Kercher

Jailed Amanda Knox on Friday spoke of her relief that ''finally they believe'' me as hopes rise for her and her family that she will be cleared of the murder of Meredith Kercher.

THE TELEGRAPH

----------------------------------

Being the accomplished liar that she is, she doesn't stop at just one untruth. :roll:
Obviously determined to escape a murder conviction.
Top Profile 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 44 of 46 [ 11433 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46  Next


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], The Machine and 0 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

  

Judge Massei Sentencing Report     The Meredith Kercher Fund     The Murder Of Meredith Kercher Wiki     True Justice For Meredith Kercher     Judge Nencini Sentencing Report 


29,421,723 Views