Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

The sad case of Meredith Kercher

933 replies

FreeGeorgeJackson · 03/12/2009 18:11

I feel for her parents. The trial seems to have gone on for ages doenst it?
I cant see ( form what i read) how kNox will get off.

OP posts:
NotanOtter · 05/12/2009 23:05

df i remember you on here from way back - but this was not your moniker ( any hints ?)

DuelingFanjo · 05/12/2009 23:38

I was someone else, actually I still post as beanieb in TTC threads.

Is it my ranty, won't let it go style that you recognise

BitOfFun · 06/12/2009 00:00

Oh wow- I loved you I always thought you had the most gorgeous nostalgic pics on your profile

NotanOtter · 06/12/2009 00:03

yes bitoffun i agree!
fab profile that's how i recognised her

DuelingFanjo · 06/12/2009 13:46

In defence of the Italian Legal system this is a really good piece to read.

It's a good defence against accusations that the Italian system is archaic.

Also explains the situation RE statements given by Knox

"Was it legal for Knox not to have an attorney present when police questioned her?

Yes and no.

Amanda Knox's interrogation falls into a gray area of the law because she came voluntarily to the police station and was being interviewed in the beginning as someone who could become be a witness, not a suspect.

Then, in the course of questioning by police in November 2007, she blamed Patrick Lumumba for the slaying, and said she was present at the scene of the crime. Lumumba was innocent. Knox has since denied she knows anything about the slaying and says she wasn't in the flat the night Kercher was killed. Lumumba is suing Knox for slander.

The law is very clear: A suspect must not be interrogated without a lawyer.

Once a suspect, an interrogation must be interrupted, the suspect read his or her rights to remain silent and be provided a lawyer. Italian law does not allow waiver of one's right to counsel. Even if a suspect doesn't want a lawyer, the authorities are required to appoint one.

If a suspect's freedom of movement is hindered, the interrogation must be videotaped.

In Knox's case, a video or audio recording of the entire police interrogation authorities have denied that any such recordings exist could identify when police began treating Knox as a suspect and what procedures were followed.

In fact, Italy's Supreme Court has already said that some of her early statements may not be used against her because they were made without an attorney present."

And how the judgement is made

"Do jurors have to find Knox guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

Yes. The concept of proof beyond a reasonable doubt has long been a part of Italy's justice system. It was formalized and passed into law in 2006.

Knox's defense lawyer Luciano Ghirga said his team will remind jurors that, even after more than 40 hearings, everything is still in doubt.

The court's ruling (which is not called a verdict in Italy) is made by an eight-member jury: six laymen and two professional judges. They will vote, and the majority rules. In the case of a tie, the presiding judge Giancarlo Massei gets a second vote to break the tie. "

blinks · 07/12/2009 13:12

you absolutely have to read up on the chief prosecutor Giuliano Mignini and his previous work on 'The Monster of Florence' case.

the tactics he uses and the way that the prosecution can lay out their theory (in this instance YEARS) before any court proceedings have even taken place, have made an enormous difference in the general idea that AN, in particular, is a beast/harlot/whore/psychopath.

she wasn't shopping for 'lingerie' in the days following the murder as way publicised but had to buy clean underwear as all of her clothes were locked in her flat (which was the murdersite).

i've watched the footage of them 'snogging' and they're clearly doing it in a comforting manner, lots of little pecks on the lips, not an lusty snog in any way... very misleading.

'foxy noxy' is a nickname given to her for her skills on the soccer pitch.

the DNA evidence is wholly refutable, mainly because she lived in the same place as the murder scene and the way the key forensic evidence was gathered was a long time after the initial search for evidence. DNA dust is very very different from fingerprints, semen and blood (all found to convict Rudy Guede). Even if the murderscene was 'cleaned' as the prosecution suggests, surely they're not such master cleaners that they could remove all signs of any bodily contact with the victim but leave direct evidence of Rudy Guede's presence. The bra clasp was found on the floor 46 days after Meredith was found, that's 46 days of being kicked around with the other debris on the floor, as documented photographically. There's were also five different people's DNA found on the clasp, not just the three accused.

Rudy Guede's criminal background isn't widely publicised and his CLOSED-DOOR trial was fast tracked with plea bargain... he was a known burglar who carried a knife. he'd been interrupted in the process of burgling several properties with a knife in the run up to the MK murder and on each occassion, released by police with no charge. there is suggestion that, with his drug dealing history, he may have been a police informant, hence the obvious leniency (he was caught breaking into the same nursery school twice in two days, both times interrupted and carrying a knife- the police decided to put him on a train out of town instead of charging him...........mmm interesting).

The police themselves were the first people to implicate Patrick Lamumba, suggesting his name to AN during interrogation after reading a wholly benign text message from her to him ('see you later'). Their theory was that he was the third man in their sordid 'satanic sex party gone wrong' (a bizarrely similar theory to the Monster of Florence case by the way).

I absolutely believe that she was interrogated illegally. The police say there's no recording of this interrogation and she wasn't provided with a lawyer... the only way they've gotten away with this is because she initially came to the station voluntarily, as a witness- legally a grey area.

Her behaviour, to me, is more of an innocent in an unusual situation. Taking pictures of her smiling in court, when the case has been going on for 2years, is very misleading. Is she expected never to smile at her family in the courtroom or her defense team, who must know her intimately by now. The fact that owning a vibrator or being sexually active was even taken into account, just underlines the weakness of the actual physical evidence... they've relied on drip feeding rumours instead.

The forensic evidence includes a 'murder weapon' that isn't even a match to a bloody imprint left on MK's bedsheets. it was also found 5 days after the murder, sat on a detectives desk for several days before being posted to the lab in an ordinary box. Hardly foresically safe.

The 'bloody footprints' are actually Luminol glowing footprints found in a hallway, and some may have been Amanda's, it is hard to know for sure because they were only compared with her feet, and found to be 'compatible.' Again, no controls were done. Meredith, Laura, Filomena (her other flatmates), none of the other resident's feet were compared to these footprints. The footprints were tested for blood, and it came out negative. No blood. So, why are they important? Amanda lived there, after all.

Important reading involves the Mario Spezi case and Douglas Preston arrest.

blinks · 07/12/2009 13:14

should say 2 years trial gone on, started jan 2009 so 11months

blinks · 07/12/2009 13:14

shouldn't

beanieb · 07/12/2009 16:18

Bravo Blinks You have summed it up really well.

"The forensic evidence includes a 'murder weapon' that isn't even a match to a bloody imprint left on MK's bedsheets. it was also found 5 days after the murder, sat on a detectives desk for several days before being posted to the lab in an ordinary box. Hardly foresically safe."

I also read (Though I am not sure if it's true) that no other knife from the drawer in Sollecito's flat was tested.

Could this be true? I wonder how they knew which one out of the others to test?

Also - thre are the reports that a prison doctor told Amanda Knox that she was HIV + (a mistake apparently) and she had to write down everyone she had slept with - the list then got leaked to the press. true?

dittany · 07/12/2009 16:29

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

beanieb · 07/12/2009 16:39

Yes - but really considering they found them guilty based partly on the DNA evidence on the one knife they had (Which is hotly contested) surely there being another knife isn't really that relevant any more - well unless they can find it?

How strange, Dittany, that the Newsweek piece starts with a statement by a known burglar who changed his own statement several times, had sexual contact with a woman he barely knew (supposedly consentual), who says he ran away and left a woman dying and then went to a night club, left an abundance of his own DNA at the scene and then ran away to a different country. It then moves on to the false statements by Amanda Knox, the catwheels and the vibrators ... all that before it even mentions the supposed murder weapon and the DNA!

Weird way to present a case if it's the DNA which firmly implicates them IMO.

this is interesting reading RE the DNA.

As is this new scientist piece.

DuelingFanjo · 07/12/2009 16:48

As they say in teh article:

"When this happens, samples can be rerun, but this doesn't appear to have been done in the Knox and Sollecito case. This means contamination cannot be ruled out, the open letter claims. The same lab may also have been running DNA profiles from other evidence in the case at the same time, it says, and tiny amounts of this could have contaminated the knife samples.

What's more, a sensitive chemical test for blood on the knife was negative, and it is unlikely that all chemically detectable traces of blood could be removed from the knife while retaining sufficient cells to produce a DNA profile. "No credible scientific evidence has been presented to associate this kitchen knife with the murder of Meredith Kercher,""

dittany · 07/12/2009 16:50

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

DuelingFanjo · 07/12/2009 17:19

Rudy Guede had not already been convicted when he made his statements about Amanda and Sollecito.

dittany · 07/12/2009 17:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

blinks · 07/12/2009 17:31

he also said several times upon his arrest that neither of the other two defendents were present that night.

until 'interrogation' began of course.

LeninGrad · 07/12/2009 18:08

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

blinks · 07/12/2009 18:10

the monster of florence case is to be turned into a film soon starring tom cruise so that'll be interesting considering Mignini's attempts at burying evidence and intimidating/arresting anyone who contradicts his original prosecution.

an investigation into him is on hold for the duration of the Kercher case... i wonder what his next move will be.

they're already suing Knox's parents for libel to silence THEM.... who's next i wonder.

blinks · 07/12/2009 18:13

and how would that have looked LG? to suddenly have to let them go after all that time/media hype/expence?

blinks · 07/12/2009 18:17

expense

blinks · 07/12/2009 18:27

also, surely the easiest thing for Guede to do, considering they always had Knox and Sollecito down as suspects, would be to imply THEY were the main perpetrators of the murder.

he was irrefutably there, his faeces is in the toilet, he left fingerprints all over the crime scene and it's been proven he had sexual contact with her. so, by initially denying the presence of either AN or RS, and saying the 'intruder' he discovered upon his arrival back in the bedroom after being on the toilet, who 'really killed her', looked like an average italian... it was only after lengthy interrogation that he said the main actually looked like Sollecito. No mention of AN. If either of them were there, he could easily have shifted the blame onto them and said he was more of a bystander.

it makes no sense from his point of view, unless he's made a deal to finger them and get a quick and closed trial (which he got)... his appeal is up on the 19th Nov so we'll have to see what comes of that.

LeninGrad · 07/12/2009 18:29

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BitOfFun · 07/12/2009 18:33

I think it's much more plausible that the burglar/drug dealer/knife-carrier Guede acted alone.

blinks · 07/12/2009 18:42

MUCH more plausible.

LeninGrad · 07/12/2009 18:43

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Swipe left for the next trending thread