Monday, September 14, 2009

Trial: Judge Massei Rejects Feeble Defense Bid To Throw Out DNA Evidence

Posted by Peter Quennell


So the trial has resumed, amid conjecture that it might last for additional months if the DNA evidence is to be independently assessed.

That possibility seems to have disappeared in a hurry. Raffaele Sollecito’s lawyer Giulia Buongiorno (above) made a request that some of the DNA evidence be thrown out.

Judge Massei speedily and very firmly ruled against. He clearly appears to consider the evidence and the procedures that were followed to be sound.

First, the DNA analyses in question were performed in the presence of defense experts, who did not make any comment at the time. And second, no substantive DNA information was wrongly withheld from the defenses and so the defendants’ rights were not violated.

[Judge Massei] added that relevant documents had been made available a month-and-a-half ago, suggesting that defence teams had enough time to review the DNA findings.

Our takes on the DNA component of the case (which our legal watchers say is far from being make-or-break evidence in this case) can all be found here.




Comments

That is two snaps up for Judge Massei! Where is this new evidence from the defense? I can’t wait any longer!

Posted by tigger34 on 09/14/09 at 08:35 PM | #

Why is the DNA evidence according to your legal experts not good enough for a make or break case?

Posted by LReik on 09/14/09 at 10:16 PM | #

A round of intoxicating potions goes to tonight’s priceless poster on the impotent Perugia Shock:

(This stuff is worth repeating on a respectable blog!)

“Anonymous said…

Why do the FOA constantly repeat over and over again about Guedes DNA being found in the room, on Merediths body, in Merediths body and on her purse and regard that as undoubted proof of his guilt?

Didn’t the same forensic officers collect these samples with the very same techniques that the FOA and the defence say caused contamination and false positives due to shoddy practices?
Seems a bit selective to me.
But then of course the Knox camp are not able to see things from a logical perspective with the cornerstone of their defence built on lies.

To recap:
Forensic samples taken by the same people you are trying to discredit:
Knox and Sollectio DNA = false.
Guede DNA = 100% true.
It just doesn’t fit FOA and that is why nobody is buying your constant whining.
Knox is going down.
You are going to have to learn to live with it.
You will in time realize that you have been had, that you’ve been took, by Amanda.
Foxy Knoxy indeed.”

My Hogwart’s hat is off to you. Cheers!

Posted by Professor Snape on 09/15/09 at 08:30 AM | #

Hi LReik. The DNA evidence is regarded as undeniably strong, but even if part of it is discounted (which seems unlikely after today), the rest of the body of evidence is voluminous and appears much more than enough in itself for a very clear verdict.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/15/09 at 09:29 AM | #

Just to clarify- we are still on with the trial yes? My boyfriend came home yesterday and told me he’d heard on a mainstream radio station in the UK that the DNA evidence was no longer going to be usable and therefore the trial would be jeopardised- please say this isn’t true!!

Posted by Ginny on 09/15/09 at 02:21 PM | #

I love this picture of Raffaele and Giulia Buongiorno. I think any mother must identify in some way with this picture—the kid explaining why black is white and he’s completely innocent (especially love the hand gestures) and “Mom” (Giulia) clearly not buying any of it. Or so it seems to me.

Posted by beans on 09/15/09 at 05:15 PM | #

Beans wrote:

“I love this picture of Raffaele and Giulia Buongiorno. I think any mother must identify in some way with this picture—the kid explaining why black is white and he’s completely innocent (especially love the hand gestures) and “Mom” (Giulia) clearly not buying any of it. Or so it seems to me.”

Either that or she’s looking desperately for the nearest exit. Maybe both.

Posted by Skeptical Bystander on 09/15/09 at 05:31 PM | #

Body language speaks louder than words.

Guilia Buongiorno looks skeptical and Raffaele Sollecito seems cornered. Maybe one of those embarrassing moments when he explains that he couldn’t hurt a fly despite all the evidence indicating something else.

Posted by Nell on 09/16/09 at 01:35 AM | #

Yep, Guilia Buongiorno looks totally unimpressed in this photo. Must be difficult to have a high profile case like this slowly turn bad on you…it doesn’t sit well. She’s looking more sceptical by the minute….

Posted by TT on 09/16/09 at 02:10 AM | #


Make a comment

Smileys



Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry New York’s The Daily Beast Reports Knox’s Lawyers Preparing Her For A Guilty Verdict

Or to previous entry With Trial Set To Resume,  New In-Depth Overviews By Barbie Nadeau And Andrea Vogt