 |
| Amanda Knox Appears in Court to Appeal Her Murder Conviction |
Knox and her boyfriend found Kercher's door locked, and when no one responded to their knocking, they called the police. Strangely enough, Knox and her boyfriend were soon accused of the crime, even though there was no obvious motive.
Later, a drug dealer was convicted of the rape and murder of Kercher and sentenced to a long term. However, a rogue Italian prosecutor insisted on prosecuting Knox and her boyfriend. This same prosecutor was later convicted of illegal methods in another trial and has a reputation for personal ruthlessness.
Knox was subjected to hours of interrogation and under extreme pressure to admit a role in the slaying. She finally did testify to a false scenario involving another party who allegedly murdered Kercher. This testimony was later proven to be completely false, so why would she give false testimony unless it was to cover up her own guilt?
That question is easy to answer. It is not difficult to obtain false testimony by putting a witness under duress. I saw this demonstrated in a television program a few months ago. A man from Brazil was suspected of killing a woman in a forested area; the American prosecutor was so sure the suspect did it, that he interrogated the suspect long and hard, insisting that the suspect confess. The suspect finally did confess, telling the prosecutor what he wanted to hear. It was later found that the man had been in Brazil at the time of the murder and could not possibly have participated in the crime. His confession under duress was completely false. Another prosecutor on the same show explained that it is not difficult to obtain false confessions using aggressive interrogation methods.
Confessions under duress are often false, and this is exactly what happened to Amanda Knox. Both she and her boyfriend should be freed at once, and the rogue prosecutor given Knox's cell in her absence.
Related website: Injustice in Perugia, a site detailing the wrongful conviction of Amanda Knox and Raffael Sollecito.
Related articles:
Amanda Knox Verdict: Guilty of Murder
Amanda Knox / Meredith Kercher: Rare Video of the Crime Scene
Doubts Grow as to Fairness of the Amanda Knox Conviction
Amanda Knox Conviction Questioned
Ann Coulter is Wrong on Amanda Knox: Claims Knox is Guilty on O'Reilly Factor
Amanda Knox Prosecutor, Giuliano Mignini, Convicted of "Abuse of Office"
A New Bombshell in the Amanda Knox Conviction: She Didn't Do It
The evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito is overwhelming. They gave completely different accounts of where they were, who they were with and what they were doing on the night of the murder. Neither Knox nor Sollecito have credible alibis despite three attempts each. All the other people who were questioned had one credible alibi that could be verified. Innocent people don't give multiple conflicting alibis and lie repeatedly to the police.
ReplyDeleteThe DNA didn't miraculously deposit itself in the most incriminating of places.
An abundant amount of Raffaele Sollecito's DNA was found on Meredith's bra clasp. Judge Massei pointed to the extremely clear RFU peaks associated with the DNA test, the lowest of which was 30% higher than the RFU test widely used for minimum reliability and the highest of which was more than 200% higher. Of the 17 loci tested in the sample, Sollecito's profile matched 17 out of 17. Dr. Torricelli for the Kerchers affirmed that the alleles (peaks) in the sample constituted the biological profile of Raffaele Sollecito.
According to Sollecito's forensic expert, Professor Vinci, Knox's DNA was on Meredith's bra.
Amanda Knox's DNA was found on the handle of the double DNA knife and a number of independent forensic experts - Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli - categorically stated that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade.
There were five instances of Knox's DNA mixed with Meredith's blood in three different locations in the cottage.
Knox tracked Meredith's blood into the bathroom, the hallway, her room and Filomena's room, where the break-in was staged. Knox's DNA and Meredith's blood was found mixed together in Filomena's room, in a bare bloody footprint in the hallway and in three places in the bathroom.
Rudy Guede's bloody footprints led straight out of Meredith's room and out of the house. This means that he didn't stage the break-in in Filomena's room or go into the blood-spattered bathroom after Meredith had been stabbed.
Sollecito left a visible bloody footprint on the blue bathmat in the bathroom. Knox's and Sollecito's bare bloody footprints were revealed by luminol in the hallway.
It's not a coincidence that the three people - Knox, Sollecito and Guede - who kept telling the police a pack of lies are all implicated by the DNA and forensic evidence.
Amanda Knox voluntarily admitted that she was involved in Meredith's murder in her handwritten note to the police on 6 November 2007.
Stogie said...
ReplyDeleteHarry, your comments are a repeat of a lot of lies and disinformation, all of which is convincingly refuted at this website:
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/
Here is a highly summarized refutation of your points:
1. The knife you refer to was a kitchen knife found in Sollecito's kitchen. It was not the same knife that killed Kercher. The murder knife had left clear impressions on Kercher's sheets in blood and they were not a match. Further, the alleged DNA of Kercher on the kitchen knife was extremely minute, to the point where no definitive identification could be made.
2. Meredith's bra strap had laid on the floor of her apartment for 47 days before it was found and then mixed with other junk found in the apartment. It had DNA on it from four separate persons. Did they all kill Kercher? This is obviously a case of evidence mishandling by the police and contamination of the evidence.
3. Sollecito left no bloody footprint on the bathroom mat; it was clearly that of Guede, not Sollecito. An expert in such evidence so testified and the website I gave you above has photos and a discussion of this evidence.
4. I haven't yet researched your claim that Knox's DNA and Kercher's blood were found together, but if so, so what? Knox would have normally left her DNA anyplace she touched in the cottage, and blood spatters falling upon that DNA do not prove that the two occurred together. This is a very weak argument.
5. The bloody footprints in the hallway were very indistinct, but if they were of Knox and Sollecito, they could easily have been picked up from the common bathroom where Guede washed up after murdering Kercher. In other words, it proves nothing.
Neither Knox nor Sollecito have credible alibis despite three attempts each.
ReplyDeleteNo credible alibi??? They were home watching TV as nearly half the people in the country are doing at any given minute. Gee I hope a murder never happens when YOU are at home with your significant other watching TV. Obviously you'd get convicted as such you'd have "no credible alibi."
People make it sound like Amanda Knox had just taken out a five million dollar life insurance policy on Meredeth Kercher. As if there is a real motive to even suspect her as doing anything other than coming home in the morning and finding a crime scene. These cops were as retarded as those in West Memphis who set those three high school boys up as "Devil Worshipers" because they were Metallica fans.