Sunday, June 21, 2009

Trial: Defense Witness Makes A Claim About The Second Knife

Posted by Peter Quennell

Click above for the report from an unnamed BBC correspondent. The key parts are quoted below.

The issues today were the role of the second smaller knife which the prosecution had already proven part of the crime; and the size of Meredith’s room.

The stab wound in the neck of a British student killed in Italy was from a shorter knife than the one thought to be the murder weapon, a court was told.

A coroner said that Meredith Kercher was killed with a 3ins to 3.5ins knife, a lawyer for the Kercher family said. But prosecutors say a 6.5ins knife found at the home of one of the accused matched Ms Kercher’s wounds…

Coroner Francesco Introna was called to give evidence for the defence, according to a lawyer representing the Kercher family, Francesco Maresca.

Prosecutors say a 6.5ins knife found at Mr Sollecito’s house matched the wounds and could be the murder weapon. They also say the knife had Ms Kercher’s DNA on the blade and that of Ms Knox’s on the handle.

As well as questioning the length of the knife, Mr Introna also said that no more than a single attacker could have assaulted Ms Kercher, according to Mr Maresca.

However, when cross-examined by prosecutors, Mr Introna conceded he had never been to the house where Ms Kercher was killed and used forensic data to work out the size of the bedroom.

Mr Maresca said that when the court went to inspect the scene of the crime in April, six or seven people could fit into the room.

The reporting today as the defense launches into its portion of the trial to attempt to rebut the evidence seemed thinner than earlier in the trial.


We’re wondering about the rather thin reporting, which might perhaps be explained by an over-saturation of claims from the defense over the previous months. 

One of the big surprises of the prosecutions’ presentation of the case was… the many surprises. Not blockbusters, maybe, but a lot of small things which had been held back until the jury was present.

There was plenty new to be reported, and the media accordingly did so.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 06/21/09 at 05:31 AM | #

Perhaps it’s the reporting again, but this seems a very weak defence witness. He has merely restated the prosecution case that one of the knife wounds is incompatible with the recovered knife. That in all probability there were two knives involved escapes him. Instead he jumps to the conclusion that there was one attacker and the police have the wrong knife.But other wounds WERE compatible with the knife found.

Further he concludes that there was one attacker because the room was so small. A room he has never visited. He is not a crime scene analyst. He appears to be giving testimony outside his expertise. Couldn’t Bongiourno find a true expert to back up her claims? Claims that are demonstrably false from the detailed testimony of the crime scene analysts with their proper measurements and computer graphics that show proprtions and probable positions of the people involved. Even more graphically by the photographs of a number of policemen in the room at the same time and ludicrously when the court has seen for themselves by going there. Ever seen the competitions of ‘How many people can you get in a phonebox’? Surprising how little space is required for people. Nor do we know where the attack started, only where it ended.

Bongiourno & co have already suffered problems getting a true computer expert to back up their claims. I think two in turn were appointed and then quietly dropped. It’s early in their side of the case but are we going to see their much vaunted scientific theories propounded by paper tigers?

Posted by Faustus on 06/21/09 at 11:28 AM | #

I agree with Faustus. Dr Introni is a top forensics entomologist,which means he’s an expert in establishing accurate TOD and identification of unidentified murder victims based on the analysis of insects feeding on decomposed bodies.Of course he is very familiar with crime scenes dynamics, but he focuses on specific aspects that are not relevant in this case.

Furthermore, as Mignini pointed out, he has not been in the murder room, and he has not seen the cadaver. I wonder why the Sollecitos did not hire someone more focused on the crucial arguments of the trial. Perhaps because none was available?

Posted by Nicki on 06/21/09 at 11:55 AM | #

Faustus, surprisingly enough I heard the wrong-knife ideas and the too-small room idea on Fox News this morning, the 17th June.

Geraldo also proudly pronounced that therefore Amanda will walk.

Quite unbelievable the things people commit to the airwaves.

Someone should email him Hellodlai’s evidence summary.

Posted by LIBBY on 06/23/09 at 04:33 AM | #
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 How The Media Should Approach The Case If Justice Is To Be Done And SEEN To Be Done

Or to previous entry National Public Radio Joins The Fair And Objective Wing Of The US Media Coverage