Amanda Knox gets 26 Years

[Ninjahedge]

I know better than to read your posts after addressing me directly twice Fab.

Cool your jets and come back later when you can be civil and I might even read your post!

[ZippyTheChimp]

Said another, "I think in today's courts the judge and jury have to be at the scene while the crime is being committed to get the right verdict. Flawed DNA theory worked for O.J. and it worked for Knox."

To say "flawed DNA theory worked for OJ and it worked for Knox" is one of the stupidest lines they could have used. There is nothing simiilar about the cases, except that the victims were both killed by knives.

Agree. An uninformed remark.

Flawed DNA had nothing to do with the OJ verdict. However, the two cases are similar in one respect. A faulty and mishandled trial by the prosecution led to the OJ acquittal; a faulty and mishandled trial (#1) by the prosecution led to the Knox conviction.

*"Faulty and mishandled" is perhaps being too kind to Mignini & Co, when misconduct may better fit; but both prosecutions displayed an arrogance that resulted in justice not being served.

[Fabrizio]

It was the DNA evidence in Knox trial no. 2. Without the CV report I doubt Knox would be free today. That is seen as the thing that made the difference. Knox lawyers even mention this.

------

Note Ninjy's modus operandi: he responds to a post (that was not even addressed to him) in a snarky manner.

No problem: he'll be answered in the same way. (dish it out Bub, and I'll serve it back).

That results in the usual Ninjynutjob tantrum.

If you can't take it, then don't start in the first place.

[GordonGecko]

this is apparently the story/thread that will not die

[Fabrizio]

DNA and the OJ trial:

Samples from bloody footprints leading away from the bodies and from the back gate of the condominium were tested for DNA matches.^[8] Initial polymerase chain reaction testing did not rule out Simpson as a suspect. In more precise restriction fragment length polymorphism tests matches were found between Simpson's blood and blood samples taken from the crime scene (both the footprints and the gate samples).^[7][8]

Police criminalist Dennis Fung testified that this DNA evidence put Simpson at Nicole Brown's townhouse at the time of the murders. But in cross-examination by Barry Scheck, which lasted eight full days, most of the DNA evidence was questioned. Dr. Robin Cotton, of Cellmark Diagnostics, testified for six days.^[12] Blood evidence had been tested at two separate laboratories, each conducting different tests.^[12]

Despite that safeguard, it emerged during the cross-examination of Fung and the other laboratory scientists that the police scientist Andrea Mazzola (who collected blood samples from Simpson to compare with evidence from the crime scene) was a trainee who carried the vial of Simpson's blood around in her lab coat pocket for nearly a day before handing it over as an exhibit. While two errors had been found in the history of DNA testing at Cellmark, one of the testing laboratories, in 1988 and 1989, the errors were found during quality control tests and had not occurred since.^[12] In the 1988 test, one of the companies hired for DNA consulting by Simpson's defense also made the same error.^[7]

What should have been the prosecution's strong point became their weak link amid accusations that bungling police technicians handled the blood samples with such a degree of incompetence as to render the delivery of accurate and reliable DNA results almost impossible. The prosecution argued that they had made the DNA evidence available to the defense for its own testing, and if the defense attorneys disagreed with the prosecution's tests they could have conducted their own testing on the same samples.^[12] The defense had chosen not to accept the prosecution's offer.^[12]

On May 16, Gary Sims, a California Department of Justice criminalist who helped establish the Department of Justice's DNA laboratory, testified that a glove found at Simpson's house tested positive for a match of Goldman's blood.<sup>[12]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O._J._Simpson_murder_case</sup>

[ZippyTheChimp]

It was the DNA evidence in Knox trial no. 2. Without the CV report I doubt Knox would be free today. That is seen as the thing that made the difference. Knox lawyers even mention this.

Well of course, that's the difference in Knox 1 and Knox 2; but it has nothing to do with all the evidence that should have led to a Simpson conviction, evidence that was missing in the Knox trial.

To anyone that followed the Simpson trial on live TV, it was obvious that the courtroom was out of control, including the conduct of Judge Ito. In most cases, courtroom confusion works to the advantage of the defense; the jury usually loses confidence in the prosecution, who bring the case to the courtroom.

And it must be remembered: Simpson got the benefit of the doubt with an acquittal; Knox got the opposite.

[Diocletian]

So, the details of Hellmann's report are starting to trickle through, and it looks like some of the things he is saying include:

1. The cops totally contaminated the crime scene, rendering the traces (clasp, "mixed" DNA, etc.) useless as against Knox/Sollecito. (Does this get Stefanoni off the hook at the expense of the cops?).

2. The TOD was 10:15 PM (still seems late to me).

3. The alibi might be true, but was not absolutely proved. Conversely, no showing that Knox/Sollecito lied about their alibi.

4. Knox had been put under severe stress by the cops when she made the allegation against Lumumba, but neverthless, she is guilty of colunnia. Strange--just how much stress are the cops allowed to subject a person to in Italy? I guess the Supreme Court will tell us.

5. Rudy killed Meredith.

6. The crime scene was not staged.

[Fabrizio]

I have a feeling this going to be as muddled as the Massei report.

[dougm]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...zvO_story.html

Italian court says evidence that was used in the Knox murder conviction just didn’t hold up

By Associated Press, Updated: Thursday, December 15, 9:46 AM


MILAN — The Italian appeals court that cleared Amanda Knox in the slaying of her British roommate gave the reasons for its ruling on Thursday: the evidence that had been used by a lower court to convict the American and her Italian boyfriend of murder just didn’t hold up.
Those shortcomings included no murder weapon, faulty DNA, an inaccurate time for the killing, and insufficient proof that Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were even at the location where the crime occurred. So said the Perugia appellate court in its long-awaited reasoning behind its October ruling that reversed the lower court’s convictions.

[dougm]

I have a feeling this going to be as muddled as the Massei report.

It has to be better than that one -- Massei is a really low bar!

[Diocletian]

My faith in Italian justice is restored.

Massei is still a nitwit and Mignini is a nut and the Perugian cops are evil and incompetent. But I think they're outliers.

[dougm]

Wow! Now what are the residents of guilterdom going to say, that Judge Hellmann was paid off by the PR Supertanker?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...udge-says.html

[lofter1]

Looks like the moderator at the Telegraph has his work cut out for himself tonight. Reams of comments being removed:

"Because your post is libelous and thus against the DT site Ts&Cs. That's why its been deleted."

[Fabrizio]

From the telegraph:

"He said it was wrong that the American had been portrayed negatively for practising yoga and performing cartwheels in a Perugia police station as she waited to be questioned over the murder. The "gymnastic exercises", he said, were her way of relieving stress rather than a sign of callousness or lack of compassion towards Miss Kercher."

The cartwheels were brought up by a cop during questioning at the trial. He told what he saw and said that he admonished Knox for it.

But all of this was not even mentioned in the Massei Report. So I don't understand why it is brought up here.

[Diocletian]

But all of this was not even mentioned in the Massei Report. So I don't understand why it is brought up here.

That's easy. It's because the British and Italian press and the prosecution spent years trashing this 20-year-old-girl eight ways from Sunday, and Hellmann thinks the whole sordid mess is appalling.