Monday, February 03, 2014

Guide For Smart Media: Note Extensive Hard Evidence In Exceptionally Fair, Careful Legal Process

Posted by Media Watcher



[Accurate Italian media recreation of attack based on masses of closed court evidence 2009]

Vital media history in 2009

In Italy and Europe generally the guilt of the two is almost universally perceived.

One reason is that although about 1/4 of the trial in 2009 was behind closed doors (quite the opposite of the “tabloid storm” and “show trial” Americans have been told about)  Italians in particular got to find out about the long (15 minutes), remorseless, highly sadistic attack on Meredith.

Late in the attack, she let out a huge scream. It may have been then that Knox forced in the final stab. At the end Meredith was left lying on her back on the floor, in immense pain, with her hands clutching her neck, trying to stop the life-blood running out.

Meredith had been undressed post-attack, her phones had been removed to stop her calling for help, and her bedroom door was locked. Cruel and barbaric in the extreme.

US reporting from trial in 2009 was actually for the most part good. Andrea Vogt and John Follain and Barbie Nadeau and Ann Wise all did exceptional jobs. Even one of Seattle’s own newspapers (Hearst’s Seattle PI) ran many unflinching reports.

Italy’s foreign media portrayed a sharp and incisive prosecution, a defendant (Knox) who was a disaster in her two days on the stand, and a floundering, half-hearted defense, which was really spinning its wheels. 

Vital media history in 2010

It was only in 2010, after trial, with an automatic appeal coming up, that the defense campaigns (acting largely illegally under Italian law) took advantage of a number of quirks in the situation to try to dupe Americans into believing the conviction was flawed.

The Italian system speaks mostly through its public documents, not police or prosecutors or judges, and the 2009 trial judge (Massei) issued a superb, very long explanation of why guilt was found, in Italian, in Spring 2010.

This compelling Italian document was posted online in Italy by the Justice Ministry in Rome, and widely read and summarised in the media in Italy itself. And so the logic and legitimacy sunk in.

In the United States, in sharp contrast, not one media outlet translated that report. Not one.

The only accurate translation into English was prepared by the Italian speakers and lawyers on our sister website, PerugiaMurderFile dot Org.

With US and UK media news cutbacks around the world, and especially in Italy, the media since has largely accepted the spin straight from the defense campaign, as exceptionally propagated by the Associated Press and a couple of “tame” networks in the US. 

As a consequence, the coverage has become overwhelmingly biased in favor of Amanda Knox.

Today’s US media state of play

Misleading and false information about the prosecution case and the evidence presented has been repeated so often that many people now accept as fact outright lies.

This includes the absurd claim by defense attorney Ted Simon that “there is no evidence.”  (Which ironically even Ted Simon himself disputed - see post below - in an NBC Dateline report that was taped before he signed on to represent Amanda Knox.)

It didn’t have to be this way.  Reporters from the NYTimes, Rolling Stone, ABC, CNN, and others have done their readers/viewers a huge disservice, by distorting the factual record, and by supporting a false narrative in which it’s simply unthinkable that an attractive young woman could ever be caught up in a crime so heinous.

Which ignores the fact that shocking crimes have often been committed by people who seem incapable of such violence, which in this case means “too white, too young, too female, and with the types of connections - including to a King County Superior Court judge - that most criminals simply don’t have.”

Fortunately, Harvard’s formidable law professor Alan Dershowitz is among the many prominent attorneys who have reviewed the facts of the case more dispassionately and has said more than enough evidence was presented to support a guilty verdict.

Now the defense, with the complicity of much of American media, seems intent on fueling anti-foreigner bias in order to circumvent an extradition request from Italian authorities, which would come after the Court of Cassation finally signs off. 

Pointers for smart media

As someone who has read through all of the available court documents and much of the media, and who has more than 25 years’ experience helping national media to understand complex, technical stories, here’s my take on the issues the media should consider as they continue to write about this case:

One - Formidable Legal Experts Say the Evidence is Strong

First off, before ever repeating or suggesting that there is a lack of evidence, remember that renowned civil rights attorney and Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, who has been on the winning side of 13 of 15 murder and attempted murder cases, has said that the evidence supports a guilty verdict and that none of this media frenzy would even be happening if Knox were not a young, attractive, white female.  (include link here to Dershowitz on CNN). 

Two - Italy’s Justice System Has Important Differences from the U.S.

As Dershowitz has explained, there is no “double jeopardy” because Italy has a three-stage process, and we are nearing the end of the second stage.

In this case, Knox was first found provisionally guilty by the trial court.  An appellate court decision to reverse that decision was set aside by the Supreme Court and a second appellate court has now weighed in.  Once this appellate court publishes its rationale, the decision is again subject to appeal.  If appealed, the appellate decision will not become final until the Supreme Court weighs in. 

Unlike in the U.S., at all levels of the three-stage judicial process (original trial, appeal, appeal to Supreme Court) in Italy, juries and judges are required to explain the rationale behind their decisions in legal documents.  These documents are important and anyone who reports on this case should read the underlying source documents.

It is an enormous benefit for defendants to understand how and why a jury convicted, because it makes the chances of filing a quality appeal much higher.  Italy does many things to protect the rights of defendants, and requiring juries to defend their decisions to convict are among them. 

Three - Amanda is a Convicted Felon for the False Accusation

Because the Supreme Court has already affirmed the calunnia verdict for her false accusation of Patrick Lumumba, Amanda is now a convicted felon.  Remember that Patrick Lumumba was a man she worked for and she stood by her accusation for several weeks, never formally withdrawing it.  Lumumba was only cleared when his alibi was independently verified. 

Four - The Questioning was Not Unusually Harsh

On the question of whether Amanda was treated unfairly and/or questioned harshly, in the aftermath of a murder, people are questioned fiercely here in the U.S. all the time.  Amanda was not considered a suspect until she put herself at the scene of the crime and until her alibi(s) clearly conflicted with those of Raffaele Sollecito.

She was not a reluctant witness.  In fact, she volunteered to answer questions on the night Sollecito was being questioned.  (The prosecution asked him to come in alone.)  Knox and Sollecito have each offered numerous, conflicting accounts of what they were doing on the night in question.

Five - Study the Cell Phone Evidence

The cell phone evidence is compelling.  Few American media have paid any attention to the cell phone evidence, but the original jury gave it significant weight and it was discussed at length in the original sentencing report.  You should read it.

Six - Look at the Photos of the Blood in the Bathroom

The DNA evidence is also compelling.  There is clear evidence of Amanda’s DNA mixed in with Meredith’s blood in multiple places in the bathroom.  The photos that show the amount of blood ““ all Meredith’s - in the bathroom Amanda and Meredith shared is compelling.  Amanda has said she assumed the large amounts of blood were from someone being messy after having a period.

Once you take a look at the blood on the faucets, you realize that given the sheer amount of blood, a woman having a period would have had to stand up over the sink and drip blood from the pelvis down onto the handles to make that scenario real. 

Instead, of course, given that Amanda herself said the bathroom did not have obvious blood earlier that evening, the blood had to have come from someone (and it couldn’t be Guede given that his footsteps led from the murder scene to outside) who was cleaning up after the murder and was covered in Meredith’s blood.

There is also mixed DNA of Meredith and Amanda in Filomena’s bedroom.  No one has offered a plausible “innocent” explanation for how a blood spot with mixed DNA from Meredith and Amanda could have ended up in Filomena’s bedroom.

Seven - What was the Lamp Doing in Meredith’s Locked Bedroom?

A lamp from Amanda’s room was found locked in the bedroom where the murder took place.  It’s difficult to imagine any scenario where a lamp would be taken from another room and locked into the scene of the crime other than that it was used to look for evidence during the cleanup and then inadvertently forgotten.

And again, keep in mind that Guede’s bloody footprints lead directly from the bedroom to the entrance of the flat.  He took off just after the murder happened and never returned.

Eight - Rudy Guede Did Not Act Alone

The break-in was clearly staged and there was no credible defense argument given to refute that.  Again, given that Guede’s footprints led directly from the scene of the murder to the front door, he clearly was not involved in any after-the-fact coverup/cleanup, which meant someone else was.

Nine - Consider Amanda’s Middle of the Night Call to Her Mom

Amanda called her mother in the middle of the night Seattle time before the murder was even discovered.  It was the first and only time she’d done this from Italy.  When asked about it, Amanda claims to not remember having made the call.

It defies credibility to suggest that it was mere happenstance that Amanda decided to call her mother after the murder, wake her up from a sound sleep, and then not remember she had done it.  Instead, the far, far more likely scenario is that she realized she was in serious trouble and reached out to her mother instinctively.

And this happened before a body was even discovered.

Ten - “Contamination” Resulting in Sollecito DNA - How Again?

The defense claimed that there was contamination of the bra clasp and that’s why the DNA from Sollecito was not reliable.  Contamination had to be the defense claim because there was no question that it was actually Sollecito’s DNA.  Keeping an open mind, how would Sollecito’s DNA get on the bra clasp even through contamination?

There was only one other spot of Sollecito’s DNA found in the apartment and that was a mixed DNA trace (Amanda and Raffaele) on a cigarette butt.  Sollecito’s DNA was never near the bra clasp or near the equipment that was used to do the testing on the bra clasp at the time the bra clasp was tested.

In fact, at the time the DNA on the bra clasp was tested, it had been more than seven days since any DNA testing from the crime had been done in that lab and everything had been thoroughly cleaned.  How did any DNA from Sollecito get transferred to the bra clasp?

And if you agree with the defense claim that “when it comes to contamination, anything is possible,” then you should consider whether that same standard should also be applied to the thousands of people in U.S. prisons who have been convicted of murder or rape in part on the basis of DNA evidence.

Eleven - DNA on Knife - Study the Analysis with an Open Mind

The DNA evidence from the knife was considered questionable because the method used was relatively new and frankly, some people didn’t seem to understand the underlying math/analysis that supported the conclusion that it was Meredith’s DNA.

Sollecito himself tried to create a plausible alternative scenario by claiming that Meredith’s DNA ended up on the knife when he accidentally pricked her on a night she had dinner at his flat.  Except that that dinner never happened.  He’d known Amanda only a week, and of course Meredith never went near Sollecito’s flat.

Twelve - Should the U.S. Abandon Its Treaty Obligations Because of Popular Opinion?

An Italian jury convicted Amanda Knox of murder in Italy, and that conviction has now been upheld by an Italian Appellate Court that reviewed all of the evidence.  The decision has now been supported by renowned legal experts here in the U.S. who have also closely examined the evidence presented.

If the U.S. is going to refuse to extradite Knox on the basis of popular opinion which has been inflamed by shoddy reporting, then we should acknowledge that the court of public opinion is the only one that matters and perhaps we should consider whether the U.S. or any country needs jury trials at all.

Perhaps we should just poll the public after highly publicized trials and let that verdict be the one that stands.

We are ready to help

There are multiple other pieces of evidence and issues linked to here to consider beyond my list above. They are all here on this site and the Wiki and the two PMFs (links in left column above).

Content on those 4 sites is for the most part presented by successful, highly qualified lawyers and experts i(including some who are Italian) in all of the relevant fields. 

If you are going to write on or report about this case, please consider starting by reading the actual court documents, beginning with the document that was written by the judge and jury involved in the original trial.

Relying on the defense PR team and on previously published media reports will not help you understand the case because so much of what has been reported is completely and wildly inaccurate.

Also you have a responsibility to get reporting on this case right because if and when Italy submits an extradition request for Amanda Knox, it’s important to not fan the flames of a potential international incident by blowing this case up into something it’s not.

It is is a murder trial where the weight of the of evidence is strong enough to convince a Harvard law professor who has worked on many murder cases that Knox’s guilt will likely be affirmed by Italy’s highest court.




Comments

Excellent!

Posted by sikandar on 02/03/14 at 04:17 PM | #

Excellent summary, Media Watcher.

A point regarding Amanda Knox’s lamp. No fingerprints were found on it, (or even, on Meredith’s phones)

This points to an extensive clean-up, likely by the person who covered Meredith’s body with a quilt, and used the lamp to search for anything that might have been left behind, an ear-stud, for example.

Posted by Ergon on 02/03/14 at 04:29 PM | #

@Media Watcher

Thank you. Succinct advice indeed for the media. You wouldn’t think journalists would need to be reminded that they “...have a responsibility to get reporting on this case right…”, but they certainly do. Pretty shameful.

Also, quite apart from this case, it does make you wonder about the veracity of everything else the media are feeding us.

Very graphic and disturbing recreation at the top.

Posted by Odysseus on 02/03/14 at 05:08 PM | #

very good

Posted by Popper on 02/03/14 at 05:15 PM | #

Perfect Summary that should be mandatory reading for all USA media..print and electronic!!
Thank You!!!

Posted by fotomat1 on 02/03/14 at 05:23 PM | #

Very well presented.

One small point: Apart from the clear evidence that Guede’s bloody shoeprints walked out of Meredith’s bedroom and down the corridor to exit the house.

There is also the other possibility that, to have created the bloody footprint in the small bathroom mat and the other (luminol) bloody footprints elsewhere, Guede would have needed to have two extra sets of footprints, each of a different size to his own!

Even more amazingly, the “extra” Guede footprints would also need to match those of Knox and Sollecito!

Hey presto, they do!

Posted by Mealer on 02/03/14 at 05:45 PM | #

I too have a couple of questions:

1. How many times they have switched off their phones?

2. How many times they have washed their feet with fruit juice?

3. Can Amanda explain her money withdrawals and deposits around the time of the crime?

4. No, not about the cartwheels. From Follain: “As Mignini showed the young women the knives, Amanda suddenly started to sob. She broke down in tears, her body trembling. Napoleoni thought Amanda must be upset at being in the cottage for the first time since the day Meredith’s body was found. Amanda was helped to a sofa but she kept crying…” I am just curious to know how many times Amanda cooked in RS’s flat after the murder was discovered…

Posted by chami on 02/03/14 at 06:42 PM | #

Excellent summary of the case against Knox. For me, the mixed DNA alone is enough to prove guilt. I’m returning to commenting here after a long break. The first appeal verdict hit me for six. Good to see you’re all keeping up the excellent work. Credit to all of you. However, I do find that photo at the top of the article to be very upsetting.  Not sure it contributes anything to the article.  I think I will find it hard to sleep tonight. Poor Meredith.  Best wishes to you all.

Posted by Janus on 02/03/14 at 07:02 PM | #

This site is not exclusively for insiders. Revering Meredith has always had to co-exist with a campaign. The post is addressed primarily to new media who are coming by the site, and we are very aware there are key things they simply don’t know.

The absence of the true nature of the attack in the American media has allowed the American media to sanitise the case and the perps a lot, and also in many cases to ascribe the crime to one man.

In the Italian media that image is not alone. Something very similar was in the Lifetime movie, a few were briefly shocked, but comments on the movie (which many thought quite good) moved on to other things.

The intro text to the post relates. There are over 100 pages in Massei which are far worse - though a point here is that the media have kept Massei out of sight, and wittingly or not given the perps a huge break.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 02/03/14 at 08:02 PM | #

Hi, Peter

I appreciate the explanation. And yes, the reality of what was done to Meredith has been sanitized by a biased media.

I don’t even find the image shocking, really, just terribly, terribly sad.  Thanks for all your good work.

Posted by Janus on 02/03/14 at 08:18 PM | #

Hi Janus

Glad you understand. Way back we were accused of sanitizing the cruel facts ourselves. The Micheli report, which is about 1/3 on the attack and autopsy, was never posted here or on PMF in full - we did a sanitised 4-part summary instead.

The point where we realised enough was enough and we were NOT putting justice for Meredith first was around the time of this post.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/italians_have_for_a_long_time_known_how_depraved_and_cruel_the_final_s/

The Italian media really had carried unflinching whole-truth reports (without reader protest) while we blinked.

Since then, we have been franker (so was John Kercher in his book, and so was Maresca in court) and we receive many more serious notes of appreciation than we do reserve.

Scroll down below to the 12 December post by Cardiol MD: “Why Meredith Might Have Survived If The Attackers Had Cared And Called For Help Very Fast.”

The medical image there (not Cardiol’s first) also tells a hard truth. Cardiol has been as unflinching on the autopsy as our psychologists have been on the twisted psyches.

We think the whole truth serves justice’s interests best.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 02/03/14 at 08:49 PM | #

Mediawatcher,

Good article. There are some errors in the section where you discuss the blood evidence:

1.“The photos that show the amount of blood – all Meredith’s - in the bathroom Amanda and Meredith shared is compelling.  Amanda has said she assumed the large amounts of blood were from someone being messy after having a period.”

There wasn’t that much blood in the bathroom and it was not all Meredith’s, some of it was Amanda’s.

2. “Once you take a look at the blood on the faucets, you realize that given the sheer amount of blood, a woman having a period would have had to stand up over the sink and drip blood from the pelvis down onto the handles to make that scenario real.”

First, AFAIK there was only one faucet that had blood on it, Amanda’s blood, by the way. No woman having a period needs to stand up over the tab dripping blood in order to have that little amount of blood end up there, it could’ve just ended there via someone’s hands, for example. From the photo, the blood on the tap looks in fact like a smear made by a hand. Or a droplet of water and blood mixed up from washing bloody hands etc. Amanda’s blood could theoretically have been from her having a period, or from her ears, mouth, nose, hands; all we know for sure is that it was not her period blood because from several court testimonies it appears that she told multiple witnesses that her period started on the morning of the 4th of November IIRC. In any case it was a few days after the murder that her period started.

Underhill’s written an excellent page on other DNA evidence on the Wiki where you can see that the tab and the bathroom didn’t have that much blood:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Other_DNA_Evidence#The_wash-basin

You can click on the photos to see them in larger format.

In Meredith’s room, on the other hand, there were large amounts of blood.

Posted by Rumpole on 02/03/14 at 10:25 PM | #

A most excellent summation, Media Watcher! Kudos to you for writing it, and to Pete for publishing it! Thank you!

Posted by Earthling on 02/03/14 at 11:56 PM | #

Here in a separate comment, I’d like to make some additions/corrections if I may, in the spirit of making this more attractive to any media editors who might read it.

POINT 1:

“...has said that the evidence supports a guilty verdict and that none of this media frenzy would even be happening if Knox were not a young, attractive, white female.  (include link here to Dershowitz on CNN).”

Link needs to be added.

POINT 3:

“Remember that Patrick Lumumba was a man she worked for and she stood by her accusation for several weeks, never formally withdrawing it.  Lumumba was only cleared when his alibi was independently verified.”

Between these two sentences, perhaps a sentence would be good discussing how Amanda wrote a note to the police the next day, after sleeping, in which she wrote (in English) “I stand by” her accusations against Lumumba of the previous night (although she added that it seemed “more unreal” and conveyed a dream-like quality to those recollections). This was hardly the “retraction” that many claim she gave the following day.

POINT 6, last paragraph:

“There is also mixed DNA of Meredith and Amanda in Filomena’s bedroom.  No one has offered a plausible “innocent” explanation for how a blood spot with mixed DNA from Meredith and Amanda could have ended up in Filomena’s bedroom.

You might want to add that this spot of mixed DNA was found associated with a luminol footprint, which indicates that the Meredith DNA was her blood from the night of the murder as someone who had stepped in her blood went to that Filomena’s bedroom, where the broken window occurred. This strongly implies that the window was broken after the murder, not before. Also, it was not just some skin cells from Meredith that happened to flake off in that spot - it was definitely blood. The ridiculous defense argument is that it is “turnip juice” - so where did Meredith’s DNA come from?

POINT 7:

“And again, keep in mind that Guede’s bloody footprints lead directly from the bedroom to the entrance of the flat.  He took off just after the murder happened and never returned.”

After this, you could add something to the effect that, Guede was seen later that night in town dancing at a disco, to further emphasize that witness evidence states that he could not have returned to the flat that night.

“We Are Ready To Help” section, second paragraph:

“Content on those 4 sites is for the most part presented by successful, highly qualified lawyers and experts i(including some who are Italian) in all of the relevant fields.”

“4” should be spelled out. Need to fix “i(including)”.

——

Thanks for a tremendous effort, Media Watcher. I realize some of these comments can’t be added as they would lengthen the post inordinately. However, I think some are very important as antibodies to the FOA myths. Thanks.

If you wish, Pete, after these above issues are disposed of, you may remove this comment.

Posted by Earthling on 02/04/14 at 12:17 AM | #

As you may soon be reporting, Judge Nencini shot his mouth off to the media about the case, and now has drawn some complaints.

When I read the US report on the Corriere interview I was befuddled.  I asked myself why in God’s name he would consent to such a thing.

In the US, (and probably the UK) judges are restricted by professional ethics from commenting about a pending case;  that probably means that they cannot comment until appeals are definitively closed after many years.

I don’t know if such professional restrictions are the standard in Italy.  Even if they are not, I would still have advised Judge Nencini to SHUT THE HELL UP !!

Anything and everything that is not done by the book will be fodder for the defense.

Posted by Gonzaga on 02/04/14 at 12:22 AM | #

These comments were particularly trenchant:

“And if you agree with the defense claim that “when it comes to contamination, anything is possible,” then you should consider whether that same standard should also be applied to the thousands of people in U.S. prisons who have been convicted of murder or rape in part on the basis of DNA evidence.”

“If the U.S. is going to refuse to extradite Knox on the basis of popular opinion which has been inflamed by shoddy reporting, then we should acknowledge that the court of public opinion is the only one that matters and perhaps we should consider whether the U.S. or any country needs jury trials at all.

Perhaps we should just poll the public after highly publicized trials and let that verdict be the one that stands.”

“Also you have a responsibility to get reporting on this case right because if and when Italy submits an extradition request for Amanda Knox, it’s important to not fan the flames of a potential international incident by blowing this case up into something it’s not.

It is is a murder trial where the weight of the of evidence is strong enough to convince a Harvard law professor who has worked on many murder cases that Knox’s guilt will likely be affirmed by Italy’s highest court.”

Very well done, thanks again, Media Watcher!

Posted by Earthling on 02/04/14 at 12:24 AM | #

Hi Gonzaga

Re “shot his mouth” We were holding off on any opinion for a reason. There are several very different descriptions of what was said, and either he did several interviews, or one or more was made up.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 02/04/14 at 12:28 AM | #

Alternatively, Pete, you can just leave my points up there as “my” additions. But the typo can be removed. 😊

Also, although I’m very appreciative of Dershowitz’s recent comments, in the most recent, he seems to feel the need to end with a statement to the effect that “there is reasonable doubt.” To my mind, there is no doubt that AK and RS were involved in the murder of Meredith.

Posted by Earthling on 02/04/14 at 12:33 AM | #

@rumpole,

You are accurate.  It was Amanda’s blood on the tap and blood with mixed DNA from both Amanda and Meredith in the sink.

For anyone who wants to read more, please read the original Massei report on pages 279-280.

It was Amanda herself who said she noticed the blood in the bathroom the morning after the murder and she thought it could have come from menstrual blood Meredith had not yet cleaned up.

This is a case where the defense worked hard to explain away evidence by coming up with imagined scenarios that strain credulity at every turn.

The Massei jury concluded that the blood and mixed DNA was left in the bathroom during the cleanup after the murder.

Posted by Media Watcher on 02/04/14 at 12:55 AM | #

Hi, Gonzaga,

Of course the defense makes a fuss because they have nothing else and they all look like fools.

The media makes a fuss because most of them ARE fools and that’s what they live on (please don’t tell me they aren’t, I don’t see how a convicted felon and murderer can make it to Good Morning America, they jump on the judge, not on this creature from hell).

Personally I don’t think he said much, I don’t think he violated the secrecy of deliberations, and he wasn’t partial when he said that Sollecito probably deprived himself of a better defense when he didn’t take the stand.

Had he not given any interviews at all, I can easily imagine the Knox campaign shouting that the judge is a coward, that he doesn’t even have the guts to explain his decision in an informal interview.

It’s a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation, and we’ll probably have to put up with this crap well after Amanda Knox is taken into custody.

Posted by Bjorn on 02/04/14 at 01:18 AM | #

About the Nencini comments, I agree with Bjorn and Pete. The comments made by Hellmann after his verdict were much more egregious, because he even brought his own verdict into question: “They may have done it”? Hello? You just set them free.

Let the proper authorities respond in Italy, but if they didn’t censure Hellmann, I don’t see how they can censure Nencini.

Posted by Earthling on 02/04/14 at 03:01 AM | #

I have to say that men don’t understand how messy the whole bathroom can be of blood when somebody is having their periods. So, theoreticly the blood can go to the sink, light switch, shower, walls etc from hands. BUT, clearly this blood was from somewhere else, since there is a man’s foot print on mat that was soaked on blood. That would be impossible to explain with period blood. OR Amanda would have said so. ALSO, any normal woman would be extremely embarressed if her menstrual blood would be on the walls of her toilet, and some friend would see that. Normal woman would immediately clean those stains away, surely. There is no change any hygiene woman would not care if her menstrual blood is there on the toilet. yak!

Posted by Poppins on 02/04/14 at 08:02 AM | #

well said Poppins.
I believe I read that menstrual blood was ruled out at an early stage because:
-it had been established that none of the women were at this time.
- menstrual blood is of a different type for testing, and it wasn’t this. (I’m sure I read this).

of course that wouldn’t prevent the defence from asserting it was, or indeed any “best truth” that came to mind.

either way, the mixture of AK’s and Meredith’s blood does not have an innocent explanation, combined with the timing. It is not an easy thing to do, mix blood. As you say, Poppins, any normal hygienic woman would clean up immediately, and never make an excuse not to.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 02/04/14 at 11:32 AM | #

A journalist or a lawyer listed some of the evidence incriminating Knox on ABC and there was a point I was not familiar with, that, if corroborated, could be listed under cell phone evidence. The point was that cell phone activity located Knox at Sollecito’s apartment when she called Filomena and told her about the break-in(while they always maintained - for obvious reasons- that they only discovered the break-in when they returned to the house)

Posted by Xarta on 02/04/14 at 02:18 PM | #

@Xarta…very significant, if correct.
I believe it is widely accepted (in the judiciary) that the break-in was staged?.. despite the wild roamings about it in the media.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 02/04/14 at 02:29 PM | #

The ad for Michael Winterbottom’s new movie might confuse people into thinking it’s just about the case, but this article gives a slightly different synopsis.

http://variety.com/2014/film/news/amanda-knox-face-of-an-angel-kate-beckinsale-1201084722/

Hasn’t been released yet, expected to come out around about the time a certain case is being heard before the Supreme Court 😊

Posted by Ergon on 02/04/14 at 04:55 PM | #

The image above is indeed horrifying, showing three persons attacking at once.

Posted by believing on 02/05/14 at 01:16 PM | #

Hi, believing, the picture above IS horrifying, but necessary to show, the horrifying torture with knives and sexual assault leading to the murder.

At this point the defense has only just started a very dirty war, with the purpose being to mobilize public opinion to put political pressure on John Kerry and the Dept. of Justice to put up roadblocks against extradition for Amanda Knox.

Raffaele Sollecito will be fighting this through his lawyers, hoping for a mistrial, hoping to convince the Italian Supreme Court in a last desperate attempt to avoid jail, and, quixotically, to aid Amanda Knox. I believe he will lose the case, of course, but can’t answer for what the governments of Italy and the US will do afterwards.

It is therefore up to us, to educate the public about the true nature of this terrible crime, and, make sure that PR and money can never, ever, overcome justice.

Posted by Ergon on 02/05/14 at 04:30 PM | #

I’m amazed after all the moral high ground wailing and gnashing of teeth on this site about how awful the Knox family, Sollectio family and friends are, disrespectful to the victim and her family that you could print such an offensive photograph. True it may be a re-creation of imagined events, but for the Kercher family and Meredith’s real friends this must hit like a blow to the solar plexus. Personally, I find it offensive.

Posted by mojo on 02/07/14 at 09:46 AM | #


Make a comment

Smileys



Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Authors Of “Math On Trial” Bring The Explanations Of The Hard DNA Evidence Up To Date

Or to previous entry Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz And Philly Lawyer Ted Simon Both Claim The Devil’s In The Details