Reflecting On Andrea Vogt’s Fine Report “Knox: Innocent Abroad Or “˜Getting Away With Murder’?”

Comments

Quoting Skeptical…
“Let’s wait and see how this court weighs the two contested items in the overall scheme of things.”

I suggest that only an intimidated court would dismiss the murder weapon.
(a) Why did Amanda admit to her parents in a recorded conversation that she was very very worried about that knife?
(b) Why did she concoct that fantasy about Sollecito’s having (maybe) put the knife in her hand while she slept & pressed her hand to give her fingerprints to the handle?

And Sollecito (whose bra clasp I would also refuse to disallow—not least in conjunction with his footprint in blood on the bathmat.)
(c) Why did Sollecito explain to the police that he had accidentally pricked Meredith’s hand while cooking?

Amanda’s fantasy shows openly her fear that her fingerprints will be found on the murder weapon. She invents a story that is hugely improbable: she sleeps through this maneuver on Sollecito’s part.
Notice that her fantasy implicitly blames Sollecito, even as she accuses Sollecito of blaming her.

Sollecito’s explanation confesses to the fact of Meredith’s blood on the blade without questioning it.

The Roman professors overstated the case, invoking standards like those required in a surgeon’s operating room.  With the convenience of hindsight they imagined a well-crafted detective story instead of considering trained professional police who came upon a messy murder scene & took all sorts of precautions NOT to contaminate the evidence or interfere with its placement (one example: restraining the coroner’s examination lest he destroy any slight item of evidence by moving & examining the body.)

Amanda must not walk free: & I don’t believe that could happen.

Like Skeptical Bystander, I live in Washington State. I’ve always thought Knox is guilty.  Her actions and words have always pointed to her guilt.  As the recently posted transcript of her prison conversation with her mom and stepdad shows, she might have ended all of the speculation and turmoil early on by admitting her invoolvement in Meredith’s murder if her family hadn’t shushed her.  Knox has been riding the wave of her supporters’ creation ever since. Just before her conviction, her family was saying she’d be home for Christmas.  This time they’re saying she’ll be home for Thanksgiving. During this limbo period before the summations, deliberations and verdict, Knox’s supporters are having a heyday, trying to make her acquital seem inevitable.  However, this isn’t American Idol where people call in and determine the winner.  Knox’s fate is in the hands of six Italian jurors and two Italian judges who probably don’t read Ground Report.

Posters,

I’m sick to the stomach at the possibility of any acquital.

What are the chances of this? How solid was the defence’s appeal? Was it really that bad as reported?

In summing up, does Guede’s Cassation judgement come into play?

I’ve asked this before: surely, she would not be allowed to leave the country pending an appeal?

PLEASE, can someone advise?

AK & RS were convicted as a result of many pieces of evidence. They have not been allowed to appeal most of these pieces. If the court has allowed two pieces to be challenged, does that mean that the court believes that if these two pieces are overturned that there is a good possibility of acquittal? What I’m trying to get at is that (my) common sense says that if the court believes that 2 pieces of evidence out of a total of (say) 14 pieces of evidence will not change the overall picture, then why do they allow an appeal? The scary conclusion that I have come to is that the court may believe that for ‘justice to be seen to have been done’ that there is a distinct possibility of acquittal. Otherwise they would be wasting everyone’s time. Can someone with a Legal background maybe clear up my confusion?

While the US has been busy executing people today, I happened to read about this case which shows that people are convicted on less evidence than there is against Knox/Sollecito:

Two friends met a woman in a bar. One of the men—SW—was flirting with the woman. At closing the bartender said the woman left in her car followed by the two men in their truck.

The woman was found shot in the head the next morning in a ditch. DNA of both men was found inside the woman. There was a bloody piece of duct tape that was never tested.

Police went to the motel where men were staying and found one of the men—CF—who showed them his friend’s gun in one the drawers. The woman’s DNA was subsequently found on the gun. CF was interrogated as a witness and gave several conflicting statements.

Meanwhile SW was arrested while trying to flee. SW told police he had dropped CF at the motel and then went home with the woman and had sex with her. Then they returned to the motel and found CF asleep. SW said he and the woman went out driving. At some point—he was doing drugs—he realized he had shot the woman in the head so he hid her body and fled.

A month later CF revised his statement to essentially match SW’s except that he remembered having sex with the woman while he was half asleep.

SW was sentenced to death but died of a brain tumor. CF was also convicted and sentenced to death based upon his changing statements and forensic testimony indicating that SW was not strong enough to carry the victim alone.

So I ask: Which is the stronger case for conviction, Knox/Sollecito or Cleve Foster? Does the fact that Cleve Foster has neither “all-American good looks” nor “Harry Potter charm” have anything to do with it?

@Terence - that’s my fear too. I’m a cynic. We have the court appointing ‘experts’ that obvioulsy are not and biased; then the Prosecutor is denied a re-test? Why?

Mignini says that the requests for re-tests should have been done immediately, not 2 years later? Why did the Court allow it? I think you right Terence, i think they’ll walk !!!

@Zoff - Cynicism aside and considering the amount of evidentiary items agains thse two I find it inconceivable that they will walk.

@Terence - The defense has not questioned or challenged any of the evidence apart from the DNA of the knife and bra clasp. They are betting on these tow items to cast doubt as to all the other evidence which is ridiculous of course. The best they can hope for is a reduced sentence.

So to sum up, tomorrow should see some fireworks.
Don’t forget that they can’t convict one and let the other off so it’s either all or nothing that’s why I’m optimistic

I say that the evidence is conclusive (vs. the “consistent with but not conclusive” wavering of Skeptical’s lawyer-friend quoted above.)

I thought less highly of Ms Vogt’s report (the particular report) than Skeptical. A gifted reporter she is mindful of her readership (& even so she took a ton of abuse for this wavering article!)

Both Amanda & Raffaele (& each separately) show in explicit statements high concern about the implicating knife. Amanda expressed anxiety & has effectively conceded her “fingerprints,” Raffaele acknowledges the stated fact: Meredith’s blood on the blade.

So then on top of this (low copy number notwithstanding) to find by careful testing an exact match for Meredith on the blade & Amanda’s DNA on the handle is simply damning. Overall, the conclusiveness of the prosecution’s case is the sum of all evidence (& much evidence) but the knife evidence in context—vs Skeptical’s wavering about “contested” evidence—is enough for conviction. This is why it has been the target of the defense’s attack.

Whatever the obfuscations of defense, the Sun Also Rises…

@Zoff and Terence

Rest assured that these two pieces of evidence have nothing to do with why there was an appeal.  Under the Italian system, you get two appeals, so the Court didn’t have to make a decision based on any particular evidence.  There would have been an appeal even if the Defense had found no evidence that could be reasonably questioned. And there will be another appeal regardless of how this one ends: if they are declared innocent, the Prosecution will appeal; if they are confirmed guilty, they will move on with the second appeal.

So the reason why these two pieces of evidence were re-examined is not because the Court believed them to be of utmost importance, but because the Defense could prove that they could be questioned.  Fair enough, since what we are interested in is the truth.

Even if the judge decides that this evidence is too ambiguous to be considered, there is an entire body of evidence which points to AK, RS, and RG. RG has already received a final “guilty” verdict based on the same evidence, and his court report concluded that he could not have done this alone given the evidence. The decision could not be reasonably overturned just based on the knife and bra clasp, since there are still footprints, mixed blood, cellphone records, etc. which place the defendants at the crime scene.  Plus, neither has been able to provide a coherent, believable, consistent narrative to explain their whereabouts and movements on the night of the murder.

Obviously, anything could happen in the next few days, but I think it’s reasonable to expect that the verdict be upheld.

Here last news from AK&RS;’s lawyers: evidence this time directly against RG.

http://www.tgcom.mediaset.it/cronaca/articoli/1022148/mez-difesa-convinta-questa-foto-inchioda-rudy-sarebbe-entrato-in-casa-per-rubare.shtml

Here last news about Meredith’s mother letter.

http://www.video.mediaset.it/video/tgcom/da_assegnare/247132/mez-dove-sono-finite-le-prove.html

Now.

May be worth to remember to all non-italian posters that, as Rocco Girlanda clearly pointed out, AK&RS;’s case, and in particular the unlikely charges invented by prosecution, is obviously linked [in his mind] to Silvio B case(s). Enough?

ncountryside,
My Italian is woeful, but as far as I understand that TGcom article they’re saying that a small cut found on Guede PROVES that he must have climbed in the window, cutting himself on the glass on the way, and then attacked Meredith.

Is this really what they’re saying? And are they saying it in order to try to create doubt? It just comes across to me as desperate.

Spencer
Yes, that is correct, and “due to this” their clients “are unrelated with the murder”.

A quick translation of the letter from here:
http://www.tgcom.mediaset.it/cronaca/articoli/1022141/la-mamma-di-meredith-che-fine-hanno-fatto-le-prove-che-hanno-inchiodato-i-colpevoli.shtml

“My daughter Meredith was killed while she was in the safest place: in her bedroom. Who killed her knew her well, but her confidence had been betrayed. For me it is inconceivable all that.

I had my daughter killed in her home. Not in a park, not in a street. We haven’t found her body in a garden.

I had talked with her the day before the murder. She was happy. She promised me that she would be back to celebrate my birthday. She had bought the chocolate that she wanted to give me.

During these four years I have never stopped thinking about her. And it is as if I always had her near me.

She loved Italy, she was fascinated by Perugia.

I do not care about the names of those convicted, I do not care whether they are called Rudy, Amanda and Raffaele. For me it’s just that my daughter was killed by someone who at first instance was found guilty and convicted.

In that trial there were many evidences, I wonder what happened to them now. They tell me that would no longer be valid but they are two and all the others? What has changed from the first trial?

I accepted the ruling of the Court of Assizes, and I accept what will be decided by the Court of Appeal and all the others will have to do like me without any distinction.

I want justice done for my daughter. “

Thanks ncountryside.

So according to AK’s and RS’ lawyers Guede cut his finger while breaking the glass to climb in through Filomena’s window. Without bleeding anywhere. So it looks as if we are back to the discredited lone wolf/breaking in through the window theory again.

Or is this a feint? If so I can’t think what else they have in mind.

Guede’s own explanation for the cut, whether you believe him or not, is that he fought with an assailant wielding a knife.

It is so sad, to see the Kerchers have to fight to remind people not to forget their daughter. I hope the court hears them, and not the arguments emanating from American PR. Only then will they have justice, and, closure.

Where next:

Or to next entry An Overview Of What The Italian Media Are Saying In Advance Of The Final Appeal Sessions

Or to previous entry Several Cautious Overviews Of The Possibilities In The Final Sessions Of The Appeal