Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.
Would this be allowed in the UK? I am most shocked.(26 Posts)
Here So the lawyer of someone not directly involved, is allowed to come and do a character assassination? I have to say that my personal belief is that these charges are all a load of hooey, and in fact they have the rapist/murderer safely locked up - as dictacted by the proper forensic evidence/DNA found.
I am most interested to know how this would all stand up if this took place in the UK court system....
And I find it incredibly odd that Sollecito is appealing simultaneously, has also been found guilty of murder, but no one is hurling such horrid character asignations to him.
Quite! The press in this case ( and the way it has been whipped up by the prosecution) is truly appalling. You are quite right that they left the "nice" italian boy alone. The whole thing stinks!
The well-connected, equally handsome, convicted murderer Italian boy.
Yes - he was obviously led astray by the "evil" American woman!
I thought they just hadn't come to him yet? The lawyer insulted the devil and cast aspersions on the good character of witches.
That's not on...........
Oh, make no mistake on his own face as beautiful as hers, Tyr, he was and is, a much bigger, stronger person than she. He is wealthy and well-connected, but even more so Italian and male, and not some black immigrant to the EU like Guede, but a handsome, young, man of a well-connected, wealthy Italian family. So she is a she-wolf, and he, far taller and stronger, is some pawn in the game of the murder of which he, despite the best representation money, of which his family has in spades, can buy. He is as guilty as she is in terms of conviction. She, the woman, the American who can speak Italian as fluent as any, is the witch of Perugia.
If you had to pin me down I would say Guede acted alone, the evidence is certainly dodgy, and Miss Know was then the immature, silly, rather uncaring housemate, with her equally silly, immature, uncaring lover.
Do two rights make a wrong? It's unknown at present. But if she is a witch then he is her warlock, for she was with him all the way, with his blue eyes and fine bones. You want to have a beauty contest then they are neck and neck, and obviously in the stakes of wealth as well.
The girl is still dead, and no miscarriage of justice will bring her back.
The joys of living with the Italian justice system
Some posters seem to be a little confused as to who is who.
This lawyer does not represent Knox's co-defendant, Sollecito, as some posters seem to think. He represents Patrick Lumumba, Knox's employer, who was initially implicated in a statement Knox signed saying she saw him and Meredith Kercher, the murdered girl, entering Kercher's room on the night of the murder. Lumumba subsequently sued Knox for defamation and the trial was held alongside the murder trial.
Knox signed a confession which she subsequently retracted. This was ruled inadmissible for the criminal case as the police did not read Knox her rights and they did not provide a lawyer or an interpreter. The interview which led to this confession was not recorded and Knox alleges she was hit, shouted at and denied food and water although the prosecution deny these allegations. This confession was part of the evidence in Lumumba's defamation case and was therefore seen by the jury. As the cases were both heard at the same time, the same jury was used for both the defamation case and the murder trial. The jury were therefore placed in the position of seeing a confession they were supposed to take into account for the defamation case but ignore for the murder trial.
In the UK it is unlikely that Lumumba would have been able to successfully sue Knox for defamation on the basis of a statement she made to police. If he attempted to do so the case would be heard separately from the criminal case. It would not be heard by the same jury.
prh47 - I can't understand why Lumumba's lawyer should even be present in court at this time, let alone speaking as part of the summing up, when he has nothing at all to do with the criminal case.
I too believe Guede acted alone - that's why his dna was all over the crime scene - and the other two's wasn't.
I don't know enough about the Italian legal system to say for sure but I presume it is because the civil case and the criminal case were heard together at the original trial. I know Meredith Kercher's parents are convinced that Knox and Sollecito are guilty but I too don't think the evidence supports that verdict.
I am also quite shocked that the prosecution is pushing to extend their sentences to Life, when the guy that admitted it has had his reduced to 16 years.
Well admitted being there to be more accurate....
The whole thing has an air of alice in wonderland about it. The evidence and crime scene were more than just incompetently handled, it was criminal in itself! The trial was a circus and this appeal is just as bizarre.
At the bottom of it all, almost forgotten is an innocent murder victim who has been let down by a system that has f****d up so comprehensively that the murderer/s will probably get of scott free regardless of whether it is Knox or her boyfriend, or someone not even in the frame.
Very like the rape and murder of the schoolgirl caroline dickinson in france. I actually have more faith in the british police than the european ones any day!
Sneezecake - they DID catch the person that did this. He is currently serving 16 years. His DNA was all over the crime scene and on the body. That was the reason they found him. Trouble is, the police/prosecutors had ALREADY decided in advance that the other 2 did it as part of a twisted sex game gone wrong. The forensic evidence for THAT is flimsy to say the least, but they did all they could to twist the evidence to fit the "facts" as they wanted to see it. Guede was arrested later.
Basically as far as Knox and Sollecito are concerned, there is some undetermined DNA on the end of a knife found in his kitchen - a knife that did not match all the wounds, and a bit of Sollecito's DNA found on a bra clasp that had been knocking round in the dust for (I think) 47 days! That is it. The rest is purely circumstantial/media drivel.
Just to add to what Portofino says, Guede's DNA was found on and inside Kercher's body, on her shirt, bra and handbag. His bloody handprint was on a pillow under her back.
The knife had Knox's DNA on the handle. That is agreed by both sides. At the original trial the prosecution expert stated that Kercher's DNA was on the blade and that there was "presumed biological material" (presumably blood) on the blade. The experts appointed by the appeal court to review the evidence described the original expert's contention that there was "presumed biological material" on the blade as arbitrary and not supported by any scientific evidence. They also found that the DNA testing was seriously faulty. Their tests found no evidence of DNA on the blade. They concluded that any DNA found in the original tests was due to contamination caused by the failure to follow basic procedures. And some experts have expressed the view that this knife was much bigger than the murder weapon.
The bra clasp had indeed been in the apartment for 47 days after the murder before it was recovered. The experts in the appeal again found arbitrary conclusions in the original examination not supported by any scientific evidence, this time concerning the existence of presumed flaking cells. They again found a mixture of poor procedures, incorrect interpretation of the results and a strong possibility of contamination.
Then there were the footprints. According to the prosecution these were made by Knox's bloody feet following the murder. The judge in the original trial accepted this despite the fact that the footprints tested negative for blood and there were no comparable footprints in the room where the murder took place. The judge appears to have accepted the assurance of the prosecution's forensic expert that she could tell by looking at a luminol reaction (the method used for finding the footprints) whether it involved blood or another substance. That claim is nonsense.
Yes - my understanding of the footprints was that bleach/cleaning products also gives a strong reaction, and that if someone had walked in the corridor with wet feet, say after a shower, it would have "rehydrated" a previously cleaned floor. No blood was found there. The bathroom was sprayed with luminol which glowed red. The photos were shown in the press to give the impression that there was some kind of "bloodbath" in there.
As I recall, there were traces of blood in the sink - someone tried to clean themselves up there. Amanda's DNA was found in the sink - unsurprising as this was a bathroom she used. She did live there after all.
Is it this guedes DNA found on the body? The man from the bar who was ruled out early on? sorry I've not really followed the case regarding the evidence as its such an untidy case. It was all so badly handled and confused no wonder the jury convicted. Amanda knox and her bf do not fit the profile for this type of killing, and the murder has all the trademarks of a sexual crime and these are usually carried out by single men. Folly a deux crimes are few and far between and 2 middle class thrill killers like leopold and loeb coming together as the prosecution says knox and bf were, is really stretching the imagination.
PS if you watched the 'body farm' this week was it realistic to let the doctor off scott free? I think involuntary manslaughter. He at least concealed a body (crime) and the GMC should have struck him off on the duty of care maxim.
Rudy Guede admits being on the premises at the time of the murder but denies being the murderer. He was convicted of murder and sexual assault and sentenced to 30 years. This was subsequently reduced to 14 years. The court says this was because he was the only defendant to apologise to the Kercher family for his "failure to come to her rescue".
The man from the bar who was ruled out was Knox's employer, Patrick Lumumba. Knox's statements implicated him and he was arrested by the police but subsequently released. He sued Knox for defamation on the basis of her statements to the police. The civil trial for defamation was held alongside Knox and Sollecito's criminal trial for murder. This thread was triggered by statements made by Lumumba's lawyer to Knox and Sollecito's appeal.
There is a reasonable summary of the case on Wikipedia here.
Lumumba was Amanda's boss - she had been working at his bar. They found a black man's hair at the crime scene, and when they looked at Amanda's phone there was a call/message from him that night - telling her she didn't need to come in to work. So black man's hair > Amanda knows a black man > Amanda "confesses" under duress that Lumumba had been at the apartment that night.
Of course, this was all complete nonsense.
It seems very unfair that it is Amanda who was accused of defamation, when it seems more likely that it was the police who concocted the ridiculous story
Now really - when Guede was identified and arrested - he had fled to Germany - they really should have started looking at this from scratch. But the prosecution had invested so much time in the "sex game gone wrong" scenario by that they did not want to let it drop.
Sneezecake - I agree that they don't fit the profile for this crime. Plus, Amanda and Meredith were friends. She had only recently started seeing Sollecito. And none of them knew Guede at all. There was so much misinformation printed in the press that every one seems to believe.
Thanks for the link prh47. I've previously not read anything in any detail and was certainly influenced by newspaper coverage into thinking the pair guilty. But to say the evidence is flimsy is a massive understatement. To allege that a brady and hindley relationship developed over a few weeks is ridiculous. That type of behaviour takes far longer to develop and slowly evolves, not straight in with murder.
So no plausible motive, no compelling forensic evidence, witness evidence hazy in the extreme!
It has the hallmarks of a break in (method used previously by Guede-criminals stick to what they know) sexual assault, murder and robbery by one person. Why on earth this nonsense about satanic rituals etc etc.?
Yes amanda knox's behaviour in court was a bit bizarre but from the evidence both were innocent. Glad I live in UK where they have a good idea of collecting evidence.
They had been seeing each other ONE week. I posted the OP because I was most disturbed at all the talk of evil and AK being the Devil incarnate by a lawyer who has nothing to do with the criminal charges. He's not a witness - he just shouldn't have BEEN there imho. It stinks.
The coverage of the acquital has at least cleared this point up. It seems that Knox was also appealing against the verdict in the defamation case brought by Lumumba, hence the reason for Lumumba's lawyer being present. She lost that appeal but the sentence was reduced to the time she has already served. This highlights another difference between the UK and Italian systems in that defamation is purely a civil matter in the UK whereas in Italy it is a criminal offence.
Join the discussion
Already registered? Log in with:
Please login first.