Amanda Knox Trial

clintl said:

And the court-appointed independent investigators for her appeal thoroughly refuted both the findings of the evidence itself and competency of the methods used to collect it. None of that is credible any more. Or, at least, none of it should be.

Click to expand...

From the Perugia Murder File website:

Dr. Stefanoni's investigation and forensic findings were independently reviewed by Dr. Renato Biondo, the head of the DNA Unit of the scientific police, in 2008. He provided confirmation that all the forensic findings were accurate and reliable and he praised the work of Dr. Stefanoni and her team.

The Kerchers hired their own DNA expert, Professor Francesca Torricelli, who also confirmed that Meredith's DNA was on the blade of the double DNA knife.

Raffaele Sollecito knew that Meredith's DNA was on the blade of the knife, which is why he claimed on two separate occasions that he he had accidentally pricked Meredith's hand whilst cooking.


From the same thread:

It also should be noted that it isn't 'required' that there be a high enough amount for an independent retest in Italian courts, since as standard under Italian law, Amanda and Raffaele's legal teams were invited to be present when the tests were performed so they could observe that they were performed correctly and the results were accurate. They declined the invitation. This is one of the reasons their complaints on the knife DNA were rejected by Judge Massei




ETA: I don't know if Knox is guilty or innocent. I'm in neither camp on this one. Just for reference.

Here in the US, it wouldn't even matter whether she were guilty or not.
When the prosecutors have been proven to have presented a bunch of false evidence, the defendant goes free.

Bracken said:

Here in the US, it wouldn't even matter whether she were guilty or not.
When the prosecutors have been proven to have presented a bunch of false evidence, the defendant goes free.

Click to expand...

What would happen in America isn't relative to the case and the outcome.


Here is a blog post from the True Justice for Meredith Kercher site, which is linked to the Perugia Murder Files site. It is "a summary of the Massei report, the document that sets forth and explains the Court’s reasons for unanimously convicting Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito for their role in the murder of Meredith Kercher, Knox’s roommate, after a long, thorough and fair trial. The original idea of the volunteers who took part in the project was simply to produce a useful and accurate guide to this case for the average reader. It seems to us that Wikipedia aspires to the same goal but has gone seriously off track in this particular case."

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C443/


PS I also do not know if she is guilty or innocent. But there are just too many things that do not add up at all, and make no sense to her story. Rudi Guede was certainly not alone that night. I'm sure that AK was at least in the house at the time of the murder. If she's innocent it's good if she goes free; but she lied so many times on so many things...

Bracken said:

Here in the US, it wouldn't even matter whether she were guilty or not.
When the prosecutors have been proven to have presented a bunch of false evidence, the defendant goes free.

Click to expand...

What false evidence is this? (I'm not being facetious, I'm genuinely interested) The DNA evidence has not been proven false, but cannot be attributed with certainty:

Regarding the blade, the experts said: "We believe that the technical tests are not reliable."


The experts also said the original testing did not follow any of the recommendations of the international scientific community for dealing with "low-copy number" DNA testing, which requires fewer human cells than traditional genetic testing methods.


They also said that "international procedures for inspection and international protocols for gathering and sampling exhibits have not been followed."


"It cannot be ruled out that the result obtained ... may stem from contamination," according to the 145-page report.

....

However, the review concurred with the original testing in saying that the genetic profile on the knife's black plastic handle could be attributed to Knox. The knife was found at Sollecito's apartment.


All of which means we're still pretty much at square one: nobody really know for certain.

crunchyblanket said:

Example of balanced reporting from Italian press, from Corriere della Sera.

Click to expand...

You mean this article that is dated for the day of her conviction... I'm just going to concede that there was likely some decent reporting done on the case. My gripe isn't with the Italian media, it's with a judicial system that allows itself to be influenced by sensationalized media.

I've seen the same thing happen in the US. I could bring up articles for you if you like. I guess it would only be fair.

crunchyblanket said:

I ask you again. If the Italian media were so hopelessly biased against Knox, why would La Repubblica and Corriere della Sera bother running the story that Guede told his cellmate that Knox and Sollecito weren't in the house that night?

Click to expand...

I must have missed this question the first time. It's not a biased media that I'm necessarily worried about. The media will sensationalize whatever they can to make money in any country. They do it in the U.K., they do it in the U.S., clearly they do it in Italy. They ran this story because Knox is big news.

I stand by my criticism of a flaw in that judicial system--not so much flawed Italians.

crunchyblanket said:

What false evidence is this? (I'm not being facetious, I'm genuinely interested) The DNA evidence has not been proven false, but cannot be attributed with certainty:

Click to expand...

That article is from a month ago and does not even include the actual report. It's all conjecture. Feels like you're opportunity posting just to make her seem guilty. You'd fit in great with the prosecution.

Did anyone read the part of the ABC report where the court laughs at video of the forensic team collecting evidence on the scene?

A ripple of laughter went through the courtroom at one point as the court was shown video of the detectives collecting DNA evidence, and doing the exact opposite of what the experts had just described was the proper method.

Click to expand...

Maybe not proven false, but apparently proven ridiculous.

The issue of the "ripple of laughter" is discussed on the PMF forum: Monday 25th July, 6.44 pm, post by "stilicho" and onwards. Apparently the source is unreliable. Other less biased reports do not speak of laughter and chuckling, for instance the BBC.

Bracken said:

Of course, there's no telling for sure, but from what I've read, Amanda Knox was railroaded by overzealous investigators and a corrupt court system. It seems to me she's innocent.

Click to expand...

Rolling Stone did an interesting article on this and it made her seem quite innocent. There were a lot of huge irregularities in the case, not the least of which was a forced confession printed in Italian (which at the time she was not fluent in) and signed by Amanda after hours of grueling interrogation.

That she stayed in Italy while Guede fled the country say a lot, IMO.

Devil Ledbetter said:

That she stayed in Italy while Guede fled the country say a lot, IMO.

Click to expand...

I don't think so. Guede was (practically) homeless; there was nothing at all, normally, to connect him to the murder if he fled. He could easily have hopes of disappearing. Not so Amanda. If she had fled it would have been obvious that she was guilty as she lived in the property; and she would doubtless be found. Where would she flee to, anyway? How could she hope to stay underground and not get caught, alone in Europe? Yes, she has family in Germany but that would be the first place to look for her.

I don't read ANY newspaper reports; they are almost invariably biased, and almost never present all the facts. The Perujia Murder Files and True Justice for Meredith Kercher are the only places where you can get the entire trial and evidence from beginning to end translated into English, and can judge for yourself.

There is a lot more evidence than the knife and the bra strap. For instance:

-- the mixed blood samples of Amanda and Meredith)
-- Sollecito’s bloody footprint on the blue bathmat
-- the Luminol footprints
-- the three traces of Meredith’s blood in Amanda’s room
-- the mobile phone and computer records that provide irrefutable proof that Knox and Sollecito lied
-- Amanda’s telephone calls and conversations with Filomena and the postal police on 2 November 2007
-- Amanda’s false and malicious accusation against Diya Lumumba which she didn’t retract the whole time he was in prison
-- the staged break-in; obviously staged by someone who lived there, and could only have been by her/Sollecito. (Why stage a break-in if you are innocent?)

-- the lack of significant defensive wounds on Meredith, showing that she could not have been killed by one person

I followed the truejustice site's documentation of the case. There are too many little things to mention, but the main reason I believe she is guilty is her own behavior and lies surrounding the whole thing, the biggest lie being implicating her boss and leaving him in jail so long.

And then there's the cleanup. She and Rafael were caught in the midst of a cleanup that morning, including washing Meredith's clothes. Amanda couldn't have seen Meredith's body from where she was standing, and yet she screamed about seeing a foot.

If it were Guede alone, why was the scene staged, when he certainly didn't stage anything (his evidence was everywhere)? The neighbor heard multiple footsteps running in different directions after the scream that night.

Amanda's blood was mixed with Meredith's in the bathroom in multiple places. Amanda says it's from her pierced ears.

The diaries are a huge part of it, and I admit the cartwheels at the police station do make me suspicious.

I think Amanda was angry at Meredith (over job issues and things Meredith had said about Amanda, probably) and Raffael had a knife obsession. I think they were probably setting Meredith up to be raped or nearly raped originally. I think they were trying to frame Guede and hurt Meredith. They never thought they'd be in trouble for any of it. It must not have gone how they planned, imho.

aruna said:

I don't read ANY newspaper reports; they are almost invariably biased, and almost never present all the facts.

Click to expand...

Indeed the Rolling Stone article is biased toward Ms. Knox's innocence. However, they do make a case that much of the "evidence" was not properly collected, the confession was coerced, the suspects were allowed, even encouraged to run roughshod over the crime scene, etc. Which means the list of evidence in the murder file case may or may not be as damning as it appears on the surface.

Gale Haut said:

I stand by my criticism of a flaw in that judicial system--not so much flawed Italians.

Click to expand...

That's a perfectly reasonable response.

Feels like you're opportunity posting just to make her seem guilty. You'd fit in great with the prosecution.

Click to expand...

I have no opinion on whether she's guilty or not. She might be, she might not be. I'm just interested in the case.

Devil Ledbetter said:

Indeed the Rolling Stone article is biased toward Ms. Knox's innocence. However, they do make a case that much of the "evidence" was not properly collected, the confession was coerced, the suspects were allowed, even encouraged to run roughshod over the crime scene, etc. Which means the list of evidence in the murder file case may or may not be as damning as it appears on the surface.

Click to expand...

Yet a lot of the evidence is based soley on their own behaviour and words; and I'm not talking about cartwheels here. For example Amanda herself said that the bathroom was clean the day before the murder; the next day, after the murder, she herself noticed the traces of blood; and it was her blood mixed with Meredith's. The defence has never contested these DNA results; because it is a minefield for them. They just don't want to go there.

Sollecito said that he had pricked Meredith with the knife by mistake, when she had been at his house, and that's how her blood got on it. So he is admitting it's her blood? And yet Amanda says that Meredith never went to RS's house...

To this day RS has never confirmed Amanda's claim that she was with him at his home all night.


Then there is the staged break-in; obviously done in panic, without much consideration. Who could have done this, but Amanda and/or her boyfriend?

Remember that there is a huge PR campaign running for Amanda, and it is that campaign that delivers much of the "information" printed in most of the media. Does Rolling Stone actually have an Italian-speaking journalist sitting in the courtroom? I very much doubt it.

I haven't studied the most recent incidents thoroughly (haven't got the time), but it seems that the Sollecito family paid a jailbird EUR 30000 to give false testimony under oath.

aruna said:

Does Rolling Stone actually have an Italian-speaking journalist sitting in the courtroom? I very much doubt it.

Click to expand...

Quick observation...

I don't know why it should sound ad populum far-fetched for a goliath in the international print/digital media game to have a credible journalist in that courtroom. But continue...

Rolling Stone may be a goliath in the US but not elsewhere; so can hardly be called an international goliath. However, your observation is justified and I will find out if RS does have a credible journalist sitting in.

Remember that journalists are people too, and if they want to believe in Amanda's innocence will see everything from that perspective. Even the Inedpendent (A very highly respected UK goliath) has a very biased journalist reporting.

aruna said:

Rolling Stone may be a goliath in the US but not elsewhere; so can hardly be called an international goliath. However, your observation is justified and I will find out if RS does have a credible journalist sitting in.

Remember that journalists are people too, and if they want to believe in Amanda's innocence will see everything from that perspective. Even the Inedpendent (A very highly respected UK goliath) has a very biased journalist reporting.

Click to expand...

Well, I didn't have to do much searching!

The True Justice website has actually singled out that very RS article in a blog post, calling it a "Deeply Ugly, Inaccurate And Callous Piece Of Junk," only repeating the myths propagated by the Knox PR campaign.

Surely, it’s not too much to ask to expect anybody writing an article about the shocking sexual assault, torture and murder of Meredith Kercher for them to have done their due diligence? And to made sure that every single claim presented has been verified by the official court documents or independently corroborated by a number of of objective and reliable sources?
And for the San Francisco-based Rolling Stone editors even in their decline to check out their writers’ submissions?
In this piece, I will analyze some of the numerous wrong claims made by Nathaniel Rich in his article for Rolling Stone The Neverending Nightmare of Amanda Knox and compare them (as he should have done) to official court documents such as the Micheli report, the Massei report, Rudy Guede’s final sentencing report by the Supreme Court, and testimony at both trials.

Click to expand...

(ETA: sorry, wrong link posted; now corrected)

aruna said:

Well, I didn't have to do much searching!

The True Justice website has actually singled out that very RS article in a blog post, calling it a "Deeply Ugly, Inaccurate And Callous Piece Of Junk," only repeating the myths propagated by the Knox PR campaign.


(ETA: sorry, wrong link posted; now corrected)

Click to expand...

That's a pretty interesting link. It corrects a lot of things I had thought were true, for example the 'satanic ritual' accusation, and that Knox had refused to leave Italy. I had known about the PR campaign surrounding the trial (a pretty big reason for my initial interest) but it seems to be bigger than I had thought.

Of course, it still doesn't conclusively prove Knox's guilt. Or her innocence, for that matter.

That Rolling Stone article is a sad example of journalism. It's just a shill for Amanda Knox million dollar PR campaign. I can understand that her parents want to do everything they can to bring her home, guilty or innocent, but that a national magazine is willing to help a murderer go free is pretty depressing. I mean, guilty or innocent, Rolling Stone should look at the situation objectively and let the reader decide. Instead, they just try and manipulate the facts.

These are just taken from the first page:

The article claims that Amanda Knox was in panic about the locked door (and that they even tried to break it down before anyone else was around), but according to the postal police: "the panic caused by that locked door was not expressed in any way and Amanda did not speak of that locked door in the phone conversation she had with Romanelli [one of the roommates]; it was instead Romanelli who asked Amanda about Meredith." (p. 92)

And according to Marco Zaroli (boyfriend of Romanelli): "'I believe it was one of the officers of the postal police that said there was a locked room and Amanda said however that Meredith was in the habit of locking the bedroom even to go to the shower and this reassured us‛." (p. 93)


Phone records show that when Amanda tried to call Meredith because she was supposedly "in a panic" she called 3 times, lasting 16 seconds, 3 seconds, and 4 seconds. Obviously, in those last two instances, that's not even enough time to the phone ring more than once or twice. (p. 323) Phone records also show that the postal police actually showed up before the calls to the real police were even made. The postal police showed up unexpectedly.

Also, the article ignores the fact that Raffaele had a dedicated cleaning woman for his apartment and "that everything needed to clean up some water was already there," (p. 85). He already had a mop, there was no reason to go and get another.

(Page numbers refer to the Massei Report)

If a rapist-murderer doesn't even bother flushing the toilet (Ruede), what's all this about locked doors, wiped up blood, and moved bodies anyway?

It would be a very sad coincidence if Amanda and Solecito just happened to go to an apartment with a dead body to clean up that morning, simply by chance. But their other statements and behavior paint an even stranger picture than that one big coincidence.

There isn't a great deal of DNA evidence and such, but the circumstantial evidence is damning. They can't even agree on a story for their whereabouts.

Rain Gnome said:

And according to Marco Zaroli (boyfriend of Romanelli): "'I believe it was one of the officers of the postal police that said there was a locked room and Amanda said however that Meredith was in the habit of locking the bedroom even to go to the shower and this reassured us‛." (p. 93)

Click to expand...

my bold

And immediately afterwards Romanelli (the Italian roommate) said that Meredith never locked her bedroom door; the only time was when she left to go to England. Who are we to believe?

Amanda and Raffaelle said they had tried to break down the bedroom door, but couldn't; yet just a while later the door was easily broken down. And later on, Amanda told her English friends that Meredith's through had been slashed; yet she had not entered the room and the body had been covered with a duvet. How did she know this?

It's fairly certain they were right there during the murder and know exactly what happened. How much they were involved -- well, that's what we don't know.

The latest entry in True Justice for MK is a Powerpoint presentation that goes through all the evidence and all the events one step at a time. Highly recommended for anyone following the case.

There isn't a great deal of DNA evidence and such, but the circumstantial evidence is damning. They can't even agree on a story for their whereabouts.

Click to expand...

What interests me is that there is more DNA evidence than in the Casey Anthony case, and yet this trial seems to be held to a higher standard than that of Casey Anthony. She is widely considered guilty on the basis of circumstantial evidence, whereas Knox, in some circles at least, is widely considered innocent despite a similar amount of circumstantial evidence plus some DNA evidence.

There's a lot about this case that fascinates from a writer's point of view.

I think the "attractive innocent abroad" meme spreads easily and is very compelling. In myself, I was aware of it in that story about the honeymoon killing in South Africa. I couldn't believe, and didn't want to believe, that the husband in question is guilty. In the meantime I just withhold my opinion, and wait and watch. It's just so tragic. It's important, though, to keep the victim in focus rather than the accused.

crunchyblanket said:

What interests me is that there is more DNA evidence than in the Casey Anthony case, and yet this trial seems to be held to a higher standard than that of Casey Anthony. She is widely considered guilty on the basis of circumstantial evidence, whereas Knox, in some circles at least, is widely considered innocent despite a similar amount of circumstantial evidence plus some DNA evidence.

Click to expand...

I'd guess that part of this is motive-related: Casey Anthony had a clear and understandable--if exceedingly distasteful--motive. And her behavior while her daughter was "missing" seemed to confirm that motive.

robeiae said:

I'd guess that part of this is motive-related: Casey Anthony had a clear and understandable--if exceedingly distasteful--motive. And her behavior while her daughter was "missing" seemed to confirm that motive.

Click to expand...

Well, that's certainly true. Is there something in the human psyche that needs there to be a reason before we can readily attribute blame? In the Casey Anthony case, the motive was obvious - an awful motive, but one we can accept because it allows us to attribute blame to that person.

robeiae said:

I'd guess that part of this is motive-related: Casey Anthony had a clear and understandable--if exceedingly distasteful--motive. And her behavior while her daughter was "missing" seemed to confirm that motive.

Click to expand...

This is the thing that bothers me so much about this Amanda Knox case. The family of the victim is left stranded with only the certainty that something horrible happened to their loved one. The facts don't assemble into anything like a coherent narrative. There have been so many lies tossed up that it threatens the hope of any of it ever making even a little bit of sense.

It's difficult to imagine any innocuous motive for all their lying, but I'm also not comfortable with "well, it couldn't have been anyone else" as the deciding element.

It's a mess, that's for sure.