Amanda Knox's innocence is no technicality. She is "plainly innocent."

[pnwmom]

An excellent summary of the case and the evidence by S. Michael Scadron. Scadron a retired 30-year veteran Senior Trial Counsel with the United States Department of Justice. At DOJ, his cases focused on the standards for scientific evidence.

http://www.groundreport.com/Business/Amanda-Knoxs-Innocence-Is-No-Technicality/2941571

In the event Seattle native Amanda Knox, and her Italian boyfriend, Raffaele Sollicito, are ultimately acquitted of murder in connection with the 2007 brutal slaying of Amanda’s British housemate, Meredith Kercher, it cannot be said that their exoneration resulted from a technicality, as has been suggested in some quarters. The court-appointed experts in the appeals trial demolished the credibility of the only physical evidence that the prosecution presented connecting them to the crime – a large knife from Raffaele’s kitchen and a bra clasp belonging to the victim. Far from a technicality, the findings of the neutral experts strike at the core issue of guilt vs. innocence.

SNIP


The testimony of the court-appointed experts has eliminated the only items of evidence connecting Amanda and Raffaele to the crime scene. Moreover, taking into consideration (1) the lack of any forensic evidence of the young couple in Meredith’s room where the murder took place; (2) the overwhelming evidence of Rudi’s presence in the room; and (3) the fact that neither Amanda nor Raffaele had any meaningful connection to Rudi, there is no reason to believe that the young couple had any involvement whatsoever in the crime. To the contrary, Amanda and Raffaele are plainly innocent.

Once the knife and clasp are eliminated from the case, there is no probative evidence remaining to link Amanda or Raffaele to the crime. It has been suggested that there is a mountain of other evidence to consider. There may well be, but none of it is probative of the ultimate question of guilt or innocence.

The most enticing argument is that of mixed blood in the bathroom or other places in the cottage. The difficulty with this argument is that there never has been evidence of mixed blood, only evidence of Amanda’s DNA mixed with Meredith’s blood. Such evidence tends to prove only that both girls lived in the cottage in close proximity with one another, and nothing more.

SNIP

[mainer]

1. The "motive" sounded like a prosecutor's sex fantasy

An orgy threesome that turned into bloody ritualistic violence? It sounded far-fetched from the start.

[pnwmom]

10. Far fetched from the start -- even more so when you learn that the prosecutor

Mignini, has a history of falsely accusing people of satanic murders -- and has even been found guilty of prosecutorial abuse regarding those cases (though he is allowed to continue as prosecutor while he appeals his conviction).

[jberryhill]

2. When do they expect to have this thing wrapped up?

[pnwmom]

7. The most recent guess-estimate is October 3.

But there have been so many delays till now, who knows?

[KT2000]

3. Was Sollicito

included in this appeal?

[pnwmom]

8. Yes, he was, but the prosecutors like to focus on the witch. Their theory

is that Amanda cast a spell on the two men (her boyfriend and the burglar she didn't know.)

Supposedly, she and the boyfriend were in the house when they heard Meredith and Rudy having sex, and they decided to join in and kill her.

[Canuckistanian]

4. Good thing she wasn't tried in a Georgia or Texas court

She'd be dead by now.

[pnwmom]

14. Troy Davis shows that we also have evil prosecutors. So does the Duke rape case.

But that doesn't lessen the concern for Amanda and Raffaele. They deserve their freedom.

[Fire Walk With Me]

5. Innocent?

[pnwmom]

9. Innocent. Try reading the article. There is enough doubt in this case

to fly a 747 through.

[Fire Walk With Me]

12. I can't bear to look at her, and now it's reached where I can't even bear to see her name.

[polly7]

13. In your opinion. There are many others out there, plus the trial

transcripts that show otherwise.

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Want-to-read-Italian-report-on-why-Amanda-Knox-886123.php

A very interesting message thread with details I hadn't heard anywhere else.

http://nourishingobscurity.com/2009/12/02/why-i-think-amanda-knox-is-guilty/

And then there's this:

She first tried to pin the blame on Patrick Lamumba, destroying his life.

A comment from the thread: "This accusation alone puts her guilty in my mind. That accusation alone tells me who and what she really is. There was absolutely no reason whatsoever for anyone to have done that unless they were trying to shift the blame….Pete"

That accusation, plus all the lies, plus all of the evidence add up to guilty, imo, and I hope Meredith Kercher and her family get justice.

[pnwmom]

15. That was the trial transcript of the first trial, led by a judge who

wouldn't even allow the defense to examine the DNA evidence -- even though he himself, in his report, said that the whole case hinged on the evidence.

Since then, in the appeals trial, the new judge appointed independent forensic experts from the University of Rome who demolished the police lab claims about DNA evidence. There is no longer any physical evidence tying Amanda or her boyfriend to the murder. And the only witnesses who testified for the prosecution (a heroin addict who said he used that night and a deaf woman who said she heard running footsteps) were also completely discredited during the appeals trial.

As for Patrick, Amanda never "tried" to pin the blame on him. After an overnight interrogation (following several days of interrogation) with no attorney or translator present, the police finally got her to sign a statement saying she could "imagine" being in the kitchen covering her ears in order not to hear Meredith and Patrick in the bedroom. A few hours later, Amanda withdrew the statement, saying that she didn't believe her "vision" could be real. Though Italian law requires all interrogations to be videotaped -- and the videotape system existed and was used for other purposes during that time period, no such tapes have ever been provided. The police say they couldn't tape the interrogations because of budgetary reasons. They also couldn't or wouldn't provide any written transcript. So the Supreme Court said this non-confession confession was inadmissible -- but the same jury was allowed to hear it anyway, because the civil and criminal trials were held at the same time with the same jury. In other words, the jury was allowed to consider the non-confession confession for the civil trial, but they were supposed to ignore it for the criminal trial.

[polly7]

18. "0330 At Amanda's request, she is heard again"

Tuesday 6th Nov, 2007

0145 Whilst Raffaele is still being questioned in a room elsewhere, Amanda changes her story and accuses Patrick Lumumba. At this point, all questioning is halted and Amanda is informed of her new status as 'Suspect'. The statements from this session could not be used against Amanda, as she was a 'Witness', but could be used against others. This signed statement is one page long

0330 At Amanda's request, she is heard again (the 'sponateous statement'), this time under the official status of 'Suspect' and in the presence of Prosecutor Mignini who has been called in, as there is no lawyer present for Amanda and only Judges can hear suspects. Here, Amanda repeats her accusation of Patrick Lumumba, but this time with a full story and details. The High Court would later rule that this statement could be used neither against Amanda or others, as she was a 'suspect' and no lawyer was present. This statement is five pages long

0545 Amanda's questioning is halted and her statement signed. She is formaly under arrest at this point. At some point shortly after this time, Amanda is taken for breakfast, after which she is retained in custody, as is Raffaele

Early Morning Patrick Lumumba is arrested and taken into custody as a 'Suspect' on the back of the testimonies provided by Raffaele and Amanda

Daytime Amanda requests a paper and pen, where she writes and signs a two page statement confirming her previous statements, although here she phrases it as a 'vision'. This is handed in to police officers as a "gift". This statement is legally defined as 'Spontaneous' (voluntary), reffered to as the 'Memoir', 'Memorial' or 'Two Page Note' and can be used against both Amanda and others. This document has been ruled admissible in the trial. Amanda and Raffaele are later transfered to Capanne prison to await their hearing to confirm their legal 'Suspect' status

http://perugiamurderfile.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2

This man had his life ruined over their lies.

[Liquorice]

6. K&R The way Amanda has been treated is a travesty. Italy has a particularly

sexist culture. The front page of Yahoo news right now has an article titled, "Amanda Knox a promiscuous 'she-devil': appeal court told." I hope she will be able to come home soon.

[FourScore]

11. Very interesting. I hope she and Raffaelo are acquitted. n/t

[saras]

16. Some people need to have their meds adjusted, and they aren't involved in the trial.

Why do people think that any old boneheaded, evidenceless, deliberately hateful opinion is somehow the equal of a whole court case, or the scientific summary of thousands of studies, or statistics indicating the opinion of two thirds of the whole nation?

In most cases, other people really don't give two tiny turds for your opinion - if they want anything, they want the data you used to form the opinion from.

[pnwmom]

17. Mignini, the prosecutor in this case, needs his meds adjusted.

If he isn't sent to prison for prosecutorial abuse (he is appealing a conviction on this charge related to another supposed sex/murder/cult/ritual case), then he should be ordered into psychiatric treatment somewhere.