The sad case of Meredith Kercher

[FreeGeorgeJackson]

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.

From the "Friends of Amanda Website":

"Meredith Kercher, a British student living in Perugia, Italy, was brutally murdered on the night of November 1, 2007. The crime involved a sexual assault and a struggle that left behind DNA, bloody shoe prints, and bloody fingerprints, all belonging to one man ? Rudy Guede."

• Not correct. Knox's and Sollecito's DNA were found , as were their footprints, set in Meredith's blood.

"Guede, and Guede alone, is responsible for Meredith's tragic death."

• Not according to the autopsy reports which found that Meredith was attacked by multiple assailants.

The authorities were under intense pressure... So they jumped the gun. Before they knew about Guede, they arrested three innocent people:
?Amanda, who was Meredith's housemate
?Raffaele Sollecito, who was Amanda's boyfriend
?Patrick Lumumba, who ran a bar where Amanda worked part-time.

• No mention here of the fact that it was Amanda herself who implicated Patrick?

"Lumumba was released after about two weeks because he had an airtight alibi."

• So nice, kind, honest Amanda let him spend 2 weeks in jail, knowing she had falsely accused him?

"But the authorities ...merely substituted Guede for Lumumba as the third participant.
The problem with this theory is twofold.
?First, it is pure speculation. Amanda and Raffaele have never shown the slightest tendency toward violence or sexual aggression, nor have they ever been involved in group sex, nor is there evidence of a relationship between them and Guede."

• And where is the evidence that Guede had a tendency towrads violence or sexual aggression? AK admitted knowing RG and smoking spliffs with him.

"?Second, there is no real evidence that more than one person assaulted Meredith Kercher, or that Amanda and Raffaele were present when it happened."

• So the autopsy findings were wrong? And the DNA on the bra clasp, and the woman's bloody shoeprint found under Meredith, and the DNA on the murder weapon found at RS's home are of no significance?

"Everyone agrees this murder involved a violent struggle. That is why Guede left so much physical evidence in his wake. But Amanda and Raffaele left none of the physical evidence one would expect if they had been involved in the crime. The few traces the police have come up with are so weak and ambiguous they prove nothing of importance and should have no place in a fair trial."

• Not according to the 19 judges who examined the evidence during the court and in the pre-trial hearings.

"Wrongful prosecution happens all over the world, often when police and prosecutors take a public stance that later proves unsupportable. That is what has happened in this case. The authorities got out ahead of the evidence, they announced that they had solved the crime, and now they refuse to admit they were fundamentally wrong in their initial assessment."

• But they admitted they were wrong about Patrick - why not admit they were wrorng about AK and RS, too?

And the real gem? From a different page:

"[Amanda] was questioned many times in the days following Meredith Kercher's murder, and she consistently told the same story ? the truth."
She has yet to come up with a coherent account of what she was doing the night of the murder and the follwoing morning which fits in with the established facts.

Anyway, this really is my final post on this topic.
Poor Meredith.

Scarlet - there really is no need to be so rude. For what it's worth, when I first started reading about this case a few weeks ago I avoided both the sites set up to support the victim/amanda knox as I didn't want to get biased information.

Do you speak italian? If so can you copy and paste the bit in that report which says that Sollecito's lawyer identified Knox's DNA on the bra?

If not then can you link to the source in English?

"Can I just ask DF, do you really believe AK to be innocent, or just that the evidence was too flawed for a successful prosecution to take place? "

both.

"Surely the highly expert defence lawyers (possibly the best that money can buy) will have gone through all the evidence in as detailed a manner as you,and discounted it, and would have then been able to convince the jury of her and RS's innocence"

sadly I think they did try to do this but failed to convince the court that the evidence was contaminated. Perhaps the report from the judge will make this clearer why as I don't think the evidence is anything but circumstantial once you take away the terrible DNA evidence.

it was widely reported around 31st january 2007 that mystery DNA which was not any of the suspects was found on the bra

"Police investigating the murder of British exchange student Meredith Kercher in Italy have found mystery traces of DNA on her bra, it was revealed today.

The three traces - believed to be from two males and a female - do not match up with any of the three suspects currently being held over the 21-year-old's death.

The discovery will prompt speculation that somebody else may have been involved in the killing, though one of the suspect's lawyers said police were not making that assumption.

... They had already identified DNA belonging to Guede and Sollecito on the garment.

Associated Press"

Am still intrigued by this idea that Amanda Knox's DNA was found on the bra by someone working on Sollecito's team.

NB - I mean what's the source to say "Sollecito's forensic expert claimed to have found Knox's DNA on the bra".

I have searched the name "Vinci" in the Micheli reports and it doesn't come up anywhere

just (translated online)

"There was a trace of organic material due to K, while the handle of that knife, close dell'attaccatura blade and thus the point at which those who contested in theory have exerted more pressure, there was a separate track from which it was possible to extract DNA from the K.. On the other hand, the closing of the bra hooks, adhesive to the strip of cloth torn dall'indumento and recovered only after removing the corpse (as shown in the first minutes of the visit), there are other tracks, mixture of DNA bearing the victim's and S. These results were deemed by their defenses particularly controversial search for the possible unreliability of investigations because of the small biological material available, you complained to the risk of contamination of the finds (especially grievance related to the limb of a bra, already identified by the forensic team on the night between 2 and 3 November, but actually collected and examined only after a second visit on 18 December 2007). "

Nothing at all that I can see in the Micheli about Sollecito's forensic expert finding Knox's DNA on the bra.

the guardian (and other papers) do report that DNA of all three accused could be on the bra.

Seems it was being used as a defensive move by the lawyers.

Although debate on this subject seems to have petered out I have to post this just so very interesting

I've read your link DF - it was interesting but flawed I thought....
The point about not explaining away a strange fact by an even stranger one is not quite fair to the prosecution - surely what they were doing was using an even stranger fact to explain away a whole bunch of strange ones, not just one.

I didn't understand the mathematical/probability stuff but in any case I don't see how probability can be applied to random actions by flawed humans.

I also went at "washing machine rumors".
They weren't "rumours"; that was testimony in court by one of the housemates who was there that morning. Equating it to "the changing stories, suspicious behavior, short phone calls" merely comes across as a feeble attempt to dismiss a truth they don't like.

'I didn't understand the mathematical/probability stuff but in any case I don't see how probability can be applied to random actions by flawed humans.'

It can't.
The author of that site is not nearly as clever as s/he thinks s/he is.

to be honest I didn't understand the mathematical probablility stuff and I would assume that people who think they are guilty would just say they are 100% guilty.

There's some other interesting stuff there about the way our minds work and also about the shortness of the phonecalls made to Meredith's phone etc which I think makes interesting and thought provoking reading.

I think by washing machine rumours they might mean stuff like the washing machine was still going or that it had all amanda's clothes in it or that the clothes had all been bleached which are all rumours you can find on the internet.

Testimony from Filomena was that it was still warm & most of the clothes were Meredith's.

Clearly it wasn't Meredith who'd turned it on

agree Kathy. Found that site just an awful lot of posturing. And I don't have a firm opinion on the case.

I wonder if they DNA tested the washing machine?

Have to say also that according to testimony given at the trial by a friend of Meredith's (Robyn) Knox did tell others at the police station that Meredith's throat had been cut and other stuff about the way she died.

However Robyn also said that Knox had explained that it was Filomena Romanelli (housemate) who had told her. Makes perfect sense that this would be the case as wasn't it Filomena Romanelli's boyfriend who broke the door down and didn't both Filomena Romanelli and her boyfriend testify that they saw the policeman go into the room and lift the duvet? Incidentally the policeman denied this.

I'm interested in exactly what was presented in evidence about the events of that morning.

Blog here is a little at odds with the Justice version But I can see some erroneous assumptions.

I still think that phones off/switched on early at the same time is more attributed to lost signal during those hours. (e.g. Phone companies reduce power to cells over night). What did they say about whether they switched their phones off/on or not?

it does seem from all the timelines I have read that Filomena's estimations of times are all a bit skewiff. Certainly I hope the case wasn't decided on the timelines created because there's so much doubt involved in all the timings.

I am interested BTW, people here who think there was a clean up. Do you think Amanda and Rafaelle were interrupted by the postal police?

the cellphone & CCTV timings aren't estimates.

Have you read the timeline (& comments) on truejustice carefully, DF?

How do you explain that there were no fingerprints of AK anywhere in the cottage except on a glass in the kitchen? They must have gone mad with that cleaning spray...

Yes - I have read them.

I am more and more amazed by what I am reading to be honest.

People have said here and elsewhere on the internet and in the press that Amanda Knox knew the method of the murder before it was made public but I am finding reports in Italian papers ( from the trial Testimony) with people who were at the house when the door was broken down testifying that they heard about the fact that she had a stab wound to the neck while waiting outside the house (from the policeman I think). People like Luca Altieri, Marco Zaroli and Paola grande.

they also testify that Battistelli (the postal officer) did enter the room and lift the Duvet. This was all said in court and all denied by Battistelli.

I am just finding all of that a bit suspect. To have so many witnesses testify that he did enter the room and for him to say he didn't. To have them say that he told them about the neck wound...

ok, but why did she mention the wardrobe?

And as all the other housemates were also there when the door was kicked in, & presumably also there when/if that information was broadcast, why did AK feel the need to tell them, & why did they mention that she had told them, unless the information was actually news to them?

Please link to these testimonies in the Italian press.

Someone asked I think?

the testimony is in many different papers la nazione, ANSA. would have to look for links online as I am reading these on a work newspaper database.

Altieri says of the moment the door was broken ""breaks down the door and I balance forward ... I hear screams of Filomena and Paola said that a foot behind me ', I get up and see a pool of blood" He then described how the policeman went into the room and then after came and told everyone in the garden about what he had seen.

There is certainly a lot of uncertaintly about the timings. On the surface the True Justice site seems to make sense but having compared the accounts it doesn't all add up.

Eg, they state that AK must have been at the cottage when she first rang MK. She was making calls to pretend an alibi. So she is therefore fully aware that phone records can be checked. Yet RS phones the police apparently after the Postal police arrive, but presumably he also knows a record will be made?

The thing about her calling her mother then forgetting about the call.....

Then TJ site claims that the postal police took a more acceptable 15 mins to look round. The place is tiny. I would say 3- 5 mins to look in each room and then have a discussion about whether to knock down the door......

I have a 4 bed house over 3 floors. When we have visitors from Uk it rarely takes more than 5 mins to show them the whole place on the way up to the guest room.

Filomena's recollections didn't tie up with the real call times. No-one is doubting her though, or questioning her as to why she got it wrong.

I think a lot happened in a short period of time, so I would not expect anyone to remember exactly what time everything occurred. I am interested though in the order everything happened....

Telegraph Feb 09

'The American allegedly claimed to have been the first to have found Miss Kercher ? an account which contradicts evidence heard last week from Italian police, who said they were the first to discover the murder after the door to Miss Kercher's bedroom was kicked in on their orders.
"Amanda kept saying 'I found her, how do you think I feel?'" said Miss Butterworth, who had dinner with Miss Kercher the night before and was one of the last people to see her alive.'

None of that squares even remotely with the timeline on truejustice.

'"She seemed proud to have found the body. I heard her say that Meredith was in the closet with a blanket over her. I also remember her talking on the phone and she was saying things like 'It could have been me.'"'

'I heard her say that Meredith was in the closet with a blanket over her.'

Testimony from those who were right there when the door was kicked open puts AK elsewhere, so she didn't see into the room at the time; so why did she mention the closet?

Still waiting for a reasonable (non-incriminating ) explanation of this...

yes, but it just sounds like she was being stupidly territorial about having been the one who realised something was wrong, effectivly laying claim to having 'found' her, which though a silly boast isn't a crime. She was the first on the scene so perhaps in her own mind she did 'find her'.

I don't think that her saying this is in any way incriminating. Particularly not if the policeman did tell the housemates what he had seen when he went into the room. She doesn't seem to have been the only person present who heard about Meredith's injuries. You should also bear in mind that with the language barrier any English speaking Italian learner may have heard the Italian for Wardrobe/closet and put two and two together and that's being generous towards the policeman who I think actually did go into the room and did come out and tell the housemates and their friends/partners what he had seen.

Do you think that she and Sollecito were surprised and disturbed mid clean up by the postal police?