Amanda Knox to face murder retrial

[grahameb]

Two other cases i've been involved with also highlight the dangers inherent in "expert speak" - in the first, a knife was chosen as the murder weapon, on the basis that it was "consistent with" the fatal wound. There were other knives which were discounted. It has since emerged that (a) the chosen knife is not consistent with the fatal wound, and does not have the victim's blood on it. One of the discounted knives, however, is consistent with the fatal wound, and has the victim's blood on it, and has the blood of another victim who was stabbed, but not killed,  by the same person, and  has the DNA of someone who is NOT serving a prison sentence for murder. There is no DNA of the person who is wrongly serving the sentence on what is clearly the murder weapon. This information was available at the time of the original trial, but was ignored.

And then there's the case of Kevin Nunn. Sperm heads were found on the victim's body. The accused had been vasectomised 14 years earlier. The biologist, giving expert testimony, said she was "not qualified" to comment on whether a vasectomised man could have produced the sperm heads found on the body. She also suggested that the sperm heads could have been transferred from a gym bench onto the victim, either directly, or from a towel laid on the bench then used by the victim to dry herself. Worse, the jury returned a guilty verdict!

And it all hinged on the magical word "expert". Of course experts can contradict other experts at a whim. As with the Jeremy Bamber appeal application. The defence photographic expert was contradicted by the CCRC "expert" and so Bamber's application was denied. It is a mockery of the word "justice".

[lookout]

Two other cases i've been involved with also highlight the dangers inherent in "expert speak" - in the first, a knife was chosen as the murder weapon, on the basis that it was "consistent with" the fatal wound. There were other knives which were discounted. It has since emerged that (a) the chosen knife is not consistent with the fatal wound, and does not have the victim's blood on it. One of the discounted knives, however, is consistent with the fatal wound, and has the victim's blood on it, and has the blood of another victim who was stabbed, but not killed,  by the same person, and  has the DNA of someone who is NOT serving a prison sentence for murder. There is no DNA of the person who is wrongly serving the sentence on what is clearly the murder weapon. This information was available at the time of the original trial, but was ignored.

And then there's the case of Kevin Nunn. Sperm heads were found on the victim's body. The accused had been vasectomised 14 years earlier. The biologist, giving expert testimony, said she was "not qualified" to comment on whether a vasectomised man could have produced the sperm heads found on the body. She also suggested that the sperm heads could have been transferred from a gym bench onto the victim, either directly, or from a towel laid on the bench then used by the victim to dry herself. Worse, the jury returned a guilty verdict!

Sandra,,have you ever thought of involving yourself with Jeremys' case ?.

[Denn15]

Sandra,,have you ever thought of involving yourself with Jeremys' case ?.

Be carefull what you wish for

[nugnug]

i think this guys going to be aquited which will make knoxs aquital a foregone conclusion.

[guest154]

Be carefull what you wish for

 

[sandra L]

Hi, Lookout, I have followed Jeremy's case for many, many years. (Coincidentally, I was "involved", in a very minor way, with the case way back in 1997 - 2001). It always appeared to me that Jeremy had a strong team fighting his corner.

When I got involved in this work in 2003, it was very much a case of trying to help people who came to me - I didn't "involve myself" in cases unless I was asked to do so; although I clearly supported several cases, I wasn't "involved" with them, as such.

Hope that answers your question.

[lookout]

Hi, Lookout, I have followed Jeremy's case for many, many years. (Coincidentally, I was "involved", in a very minor way, with the case way back in 1997 - 2001). It always appeared to me that Jeremy had a strong team fighting his corner.

When I got involved in this work in 2003, it was very much a case of trying to help people who came to me - I didn't "involve myself" in cases unless I was asked to do so; although I clearly supported several cases, I wasn't "involved" with them, as such.

Hope that answers your question.

Hi Sandra,,thankyou so much for getting back to me.I often wondered why you hadn't taken on Jeremys' case,,so now I know. Although on many an occasion,I've often referred to the case as a complex one,,but really,,it isn't,, as it's not too difficult to follow providing you're conversant with a certain way of life and its characters. Experience in this counts for a lot.

[lookout]

Is Amanda a psychopath ?

[maggie]

Is Amanda a psychopath ?

D'you think, lookout?   I am not too clued up about the case but did watch the recent Panorama programme. From what I could glean it looked pretty unlikely that she was involved?Am I wrong?

[lookout]

D'you think, lookout?   I am not too clued up about the case but did watch the recent Panorama programme. From what I could glean it looked pretty unlikely that she was involved?Am I wrong?

No,,I don't think she's involved,Maggie,,,but saying that,,I'm not conversant with the mind of a psychopath,,only that they don't show emotion and are pretty convincing people.
However,,the knife which was found,was allegedly stated that it had Amandas' DNA on it,but-----------it was found in the knife drawer. Now we have a scenario similar to that of the silencer at WHF,,in that the said knife in Knoxs' case was used,then put back in the drawer ! . Silencer put back in cupboard.I don't think so either !
DNA was found on the handle of the knife,,which belonged to Amanda,,though naturally would have been because it was used to cut up meat and veg,etc.

You see,Maggie,,like Jeremy,,Amandas' behaviour in court was under question,,except that her unflinching attitude resulted in her doing " cartwheels " at the end of the trial.
Similarly,Merediths' family and friends,are still of the belief that Amanda was the killer,,and like Jeremy,,they have the public and some media on their side.
What this retrial will throw up will be interesting.

[maggie]

No,,I don't think she's involved,Maggie,,,but saying that,,I'm not conversant with the mind of a psychopath,,only that they don't show emotion and are pretty convincing people.
However,,the knife which was found,was allegedly stated that it had Amandas' DNA on it,but-----------it was found in the knife drawer. Now we have a scenario similar to that of the silencer at WHF,,in that the said knife in Knoxs' case was used,then put back in the drawer ! . Silencer put back in cupboard.I don't think so either !
DNA was found on the handle of the knife,,which belonged to Amanda,,though naturally would have been because it was used to cut up meat and veg,etc.
You see,Maggie,,like Jeremy,,Amandas' behaviour in court was under question,,except that her
unflinching attitude resulted in her doing " cartwheels " at the end of the trial.
Similarly,Merediths' family and friends,are still of the belief that Amanda was the killer,,and like
Jeremy,,they have the public and some media on their side.
What this retrial will throw up will be interesting.

Oh I see. As far as her being psychopathic I believe it's impossible to tell by looking
at her on tv in the same way it's impossible for certain psychologists to state Jeremy is a psychopath from a distance.  Psychopaths are intelligent, manipulating people who hide behind various masks and require particular and indepth tests to establish their personality traits etc.  It's believed there are far fewer psychopathic women than men however all psychopaths are narcissistic.
Personally, I don't believe we can make any assumptions from misplaced behavior when a person is in a hugely stressful situation or is dealing with shock and grief. A clever psychopath would show emotion but not feel it.  I would believe in a court of law or similar a psychopath who was trying to appear innocent would have his mask of humility and empathy well and truly on, far too clever and calculating to show any sign of lacking emotion.
We know from Jeremy Bamber's background and schooling that it is likely his behaviour was learned by
conditioning ie. Men don't cry, stiff upper lip in public etc.     The passage in Wilkes' book after he was found guilty and he cried in his cell after he was taken down was very moving imo.

I agree it could be a very interesting retrial and hope Meredith's family finally get to the truth, think that's the most important result we can hope for.

[lookout]

 Again here,there was no time of death recorded as the police had prevented the coroner from taking the temperature until midnight,the night after the murder ! So the coroner then had to judge by stomach contents at the approximate time of death,,as food hadn't entered the duodenum.
This SHOULD have happened in Sheilas' case.A lot was down to the coroner in that case,,but wasn't.
So-called experts in Merediths' case " judged " the time of death as being between 9pm and 1am,,but the coroner had said that because stomach contents hadn't cleared,,that death hadn't taken place beyond 10pm.
This is another farce,,most likely brought to attention by the police who made a pigs ear of that evidence.

[Denn15]

Latest:

http://news.sky.com/story/1173912/knox-prosecutor-seeks-30-year-jail-term