Monday, April 08, 2013

Experienced Trial Lawyer: There’s Far More Evidence Than UK/US Courts Need For Guilt

Posted by SomeAlibi

The false claim “there is no evidence”

Some amateur supporters of Knox and Sollecito have committed thousands of hours online to try and blur and obfuscate the facts of the case in front of the general public.

Their goal is simple: to create an overwhelming meme that there is “no evidence” against the accused, and thereby try to create a groundswell of support. Curt Knox and Edda Mellas and Ted Simon have all made this “no evidence” claim many times.

At least some some of the media have eagerly swallowed it.

The amateur PR flunkies make up myriad alternate versions of what created single points of evidence, often xenophobic scare stories designed to trigger emotional reactions, which they hope will be repeated often enough to become accepted as “the truth”.

And where things get really tricky, another time honored tactic is to go on at great length about irrelevant details, essentially to filibuster, in the hope that general observers will lose patience with trying to work it all out.

But time and again we have shown there is actually a great deal of evidence.

Evidence is the raw stuff of criminal cases. Let me speak here as a lawyer. Do you know how many evidence points are required to prove Guilt? One evidence point if it is definitive.

A definitive evidence point

If you’re new to this case or undecided, what is an easy example of ONE definitive evidence item that might stand alone? Might quickly, simply, and overwhelmingly convince you to invest more time into understanding the real evidence, not that distorted by the PR campaign?

In fact we have quite a choice. See the footprint which was second on that list.

Now see the table above. I recommend the use of this table of measurement to avoid the lengthy back and forward of narrative argument which so lends itself to obscuring the truth. I would like to present you with this single table of measurements to give you pause to question whether this line that there is “no evidence” is really true or whether it might be a crafted deception.

I present here a summarized view of critical evidence which suggests with devastating clarity that Raffaele Sollecito was present the night of the murder of Meredith Kercher. No lengthy text, no alternate versions, just measurements.

This FIRMLY places Sollecito in the very room where Meredith was attacked and killed.

In the small bathroom right next to Meredith’s bedroom was a bathmat. On it was found a bloody naked right footprint of someone walking straight towards the shower in the bathroom. The blood is that of Meredith.

The footprint is not Amanda Knox’s - it is too big - but we can compare it to the prints taken of Rudy Guede and Raffaele Sollecito.

In Judge Massei’s report the multiple measurements were detailed in the narrative over many sentences and, in that form, their immediate cumulative impact is less obvious. It is only by tabulating them, that we are forcefully hit by not one but two clear impressions:

The measurements are extremely highly correlated to the right foot of Raffaele Sollecito in twelve separate individual measurements. In themselves they would be enough for a verdict of guilt in all but a few court cases.

But they also show a manifest LACK of correlation to the right foot of Rudy Guede, the only other male in that cottage on the night. Have a look for yourself.

If you were the prosecution, or indeed the jury, and you saw these measurements of Raffaele’s foot versus the print, what would you think? Answer the question for yourself based on the evidence admitted to court.

Then, if you compare further, exactly how plausible do you find it that the measurements of the bloody imprint are Rudy Guede’s instead?

Not only are some of the individual measurements of Rudy’s imprint as much as 30% too small, but the relative proportions of length and breadth measurements are entirely wrong as well, both undershooting and overshooting by a large margin (70% to 150%).

Conclusions that must follow

Presented with those numbers, would you consider those measurements of Rudy Guede’s right foot to show any credible correlation to those of the footprint on the mat?

Supporters of the two have tried frantically to create smoke screen around this - the wrong technique was used they say (ruled not so by the court) / they are the wrong measurements (all 32 of them? that Raffaele’s are matching exactly or within a millimetre but Rudy’s are out by as much as -30% to +50%...?).

The severity of the impact on the defence is such that there was even a distorted photoshopped version circulated by online supporters of Raffaele and Amanda until they were caught out early on in coverage. But it is hopeless, because these are pure measurement taken against a scale that was presented in court and the data sits before you.

Have a look at the measurements and understand this was evidence presented in court. Whose foot do you think was in that bathroom that night? Rudy Guede? Or was it Raffaele Sollecito on twelve counts of measurement?

And if you find for the latter, you must consider very seriously what that tells you both about the idea there is “no evidence” in this case and who was in the cottage that night…


Thanks SA for creating this table of measurement. It should be sent to every journalist who claims Knox and Sollecito are innocent. It would be great if Diane Sawyer asked Amanda Knox her opinion about it, but I’m sure David Marriott has strictly forbidden her from asking Knox any tough questions.

The bloody footprint is damning evidence against Raffaele Sollecito. How could Hellmann think the bloody footprint matched Guede’s foot? As far as I’m concerned, Hellmann is an accessory after the fact. There should be an official inquiry into the decision to replace an experienced trial judge with someone as inexperienced and incompetent as Hellmann.

Posted by The Machine on 04/09/13 at 12:28 AM | #

Hellmann wrote that Vinci placed his grid differently and arrived at different measurements.  He also wrote this about the prosecution experts’ report:

“On the other hand, on p. 19 of their report, Rinaldi and Boemia objectively emphasized some points of considerable discrepancy in the dimensions of the bathmat print and Sollecito’s reference print, which are actually in opposition with their conclusion of probable identity.”

What are these “some points of considerable discrepancy”?  Odd he’d bring them up and then not explain what they were.

Posted by Stilicho on 04/09/13 at 12:55 AM | #

I’ve never seen a clearer picture of who owns the bathmat print. Raffaele’s print in Meredith’s blood plus his DNA on her bra clasp places him at the crime scene. If he was there, Amanda was there. They are lying about everything.

On a sad aside:  Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher has died. She was a staunch friend of the US and of Reagan, and pulled Britain out of a downward economic spiral. Prime Minister David Cameron has lauded her. Even those against her politics saw she commanded respect. She was a lady of iron, a true Briton.

Posted by Hopeful on 04/09/13 at 01:21 AM | #

Here’s SomeAlibi’s reply to my question above:

“Hellman was hell bent on acquitting the two whatever the costs and if we assume that Cassation followed both the prosecution’s lines that the conclusion was flawed seriously in both law and logic, we can therefore dismiss this conclusion. Beyond that, if you see that there are 12 points of measurement in-line with Sollecito, the standard deviation suggesting improbability is beyond all possibility. This is even before you get to the utter lack of correlation of Guede’s print by +/- 50% which is so great a relative distinction as to be absurd.”

Posted by Stilicho on 04/09/13 at 01:42 AM | #

I believed that the print was Raffaele’s when we were told that Guede’s foot was longer & narrower than this barefoot evidence in blood.

And now this masterly presentation is decisive. Add in the bra clasp & Sollecito is visibly present at the crime.

So yes, Amanda will return after all, if only because she must. Raffaele won’t stand trial alone. Neither he nor his father would consent to that. Win or lose, they’re in it together all the way.

Posted by Ernest Werner on 04/09/13 at 02:38 AM | #

This made it so much more clear - I like the table format and the correlations.  I hope this is what they showed in court and if so, how is it possible that Hellman could be so blind as not to see the evidence right before his eyes?  Add to that the fact that it was a single bare-footed print without any others leading up to it, which makes it clear that the others were washed away, and that Rudy Guede’s footprints in shoes ran straight out the front door.  There is no logical explanation for it to be Rudy’s footprint on the bathmat.

Posted by believing on 04/09/13 at 04:11 AM | #

Earth-shattering. Wow.

Thanks SA.

Posted by TruthWillOut on 04/09/13 at 04:51 PM | #

Good work SA.
It is perfectly clear that it is the bloody footprint of Sollecito on the bathmat and absolute proof he was there.
It is beyond me how anyone could argue otherwise.

Posted by DF2K on 04/09/13 at 06:24 PM | #

Apologies for TJMK going offline for several hours earlier. We reported it quickly. The problem was not at “our” level it was at the level of the entire huge data center in Arizona.

That is a big commercial operation, we use a hoster who mostly hosts big firms. Exactly what happened we may never be told, but it could have been commercial or political attack, as signs are it was a deliberate attack.

The Chinese and IRan have been attacking bank sites here and also the anti-spammer Spamhaus (in Geneva) has been in a huge battle with a major spam hoster.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 04/09/13 at 07:31 PM | #

WOW ! ! !

Powerful post. And strong evidence of Raffaele Sollecito’s guilt in the murder of Meredith Kercher.

Amanda Knox claims to have spent the whole night in question with Sollecito. So with Sollecito’s alibi, there goes Knox’s.

Some alibi indeed!

Posted by devorah on 04/09/13 at 08:19 PM | #

Devorah mentions Sollecito’s alibi.  In court his alibi was that he was at his place (provable to mid evening) and then he was on the internet while Knox was out.

In his book he didnt wind that back fully, but he sure tried hard to say that whether Knox was involved or not, he sure wasnt.  He said he was emailing during the night but NOT ONE email record shows up in the hours he claims.

He ridicules the shoeprint and footprint tests as incompetently handled and disposed of by the defense experts. He really doesnt address this bathmat footprint, and shrugs it off like he hardly knows it exists.

But see below. What are Bongiorno and Sollecito looking at?!


Posted by Peter Quennell on 04/09/13 at 09:01 PM | #

Great Job!

A table like this can beat the Smith and Weston!

But I also agree that by placing the grid in a different way (which Hellman did try) you can make Sollecito look good (I mean his foot can can finally smile) but it cannot be made to fit RG’s foot!

Somehow I like to see measurements because it is difficult to make numbers lie.

Posted by chami on 04/09/13 at 09:20 PM | #

Cassation made one extremely ominous remark about the evidence which is of strong relevance here.

Unproven claims of professional mishandling dont matter a damn to the courts. They want ONLY the bottom line facts. And no mishandling has ever been proven. The illegally appointed and under-qualified DNA experts C&V experts tried hard but came up empty handed at the end of the day.

So all those huge efforts of underqualified experts like Greg Hampikian the DNA Man (he is not qualified in forensic DNA) or Steve Moore or the others over there have gone out the window at one blow.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 04/09/13 at 10:15 PM | #

Lot of excellent articles posted lately and this one is no exception. Very hard to argue with such logical, clear points. Thank you SomeAlibi, this must have taken quite some amount of work….

Posted by Sara on 04/09/13 at 11:18 PM | #

Here’s a prediction for you. I predict that after the Arias trial the US public will be clamoring for more. The trouble for the Knox bunch is that because of the Arias trial the general public is becoming better acquainted and more knowledgeable with the intricacies of the legal system. That being so and in view of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary I don’t see Knox getting an easy ride by any means.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 04/10/13 at 01:28 AM | #


Posted by True North on 04/10/13 at 09:32 PM | #

Hi True North,

This is good news. Hopefully, the book will be put on hold in America too.

Posted by The Machine on 04/10/13 at 09:42 PM | #
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Knox Book Put On Hold In UK As Legal Implications Of Blood Money For Still-Accused Finally Sink In

Or to previous entry Giuliano Mignini Promotion Places Him First In Line For Prosecutor General of The Region Of Umbria