Quote:
Originally Posted by Poker Reference
I'm not joking. Rudy was convicted of the same murder without any knife evidence to speak of. That we have anything knife-related in this trial is something of a blessing considering how often murder weapons disappear down ravines and storm drains.
|
Eh the evidence that Rudy was present when Meredith died is overwhelming and didn't require the actual murder weapon. His footprints are right next to the bed that has the bloody knife imprint on it and his DNA on the purse on that bed. That gets you fairly close the knife being in his hand. Couple that with his shoe and handprint on the pillow underneath the body and his DNA inside her and I'd say you have decent evidence he was involved in the murder. Call me crazy.
Quote:
|
- Carried the knife to Meredith's house. (obv?) Knife wasn't actually Raffaele's but instead came with the apartment he rented, which is inventoried by landlords and could be identified by the landlord as missing.
|
So that particular knife was inventoried? Can you prove that? Raf had a knife collection why did they carry this knife to the murder. If they carried it to the murder for the purpose of murdering are you arguing this was premeditated? Please provide a believable narrative supported by the evidence. I argue you can't do it.
Quote:
|
- DNA but no blood means it's from tissue. Fat, skin, muscle, etc.
|
No blood *anywhere* on the knife yet it has starch from vegetables meaning it didn't get cleaned all that well. It's also amusing that the pro-guilt folks argue that cleaning destroyed the DNA in the bare footprints yet here they argue it didn't.
Quote:
|
- Raffaele said her DNA should be on the blade. What is your explanation for this and why should it not be counted as evidence against him?
|
I've explained this before you just choose to ignore it. The dude was in prison fighting for his life, freaked out having panic attacks and facing evidence that he couldn't explain. He didn't tell anyone the story you think points towards his guilt nor did they offer this as an argument in court. So it's pretty clear this wasn't a *statement* as you like to call it.
Quote:
|
- Amanda was "very worried" about the knife.
|
If you were innocent and got charged with murder and your fingerprints and DNA all over the murder weapon would you be very worried about it?
Quote:
|
- Stephanoni corrected C+V and said it was talc particles from the gloves, but if it was not clean, as you say, and contamination is achieved very easily, should there not have been Raffaele DNA on his own knife either by prior contact or from mingling with his other knives?
|
Not necessarily. It's funny that you all hitch your wagon to Stefanoni simply because she agrees with your predetermined outcome of guilt. You aren't objective in the least.
Quote:
|
- With the acknowledgement of Amanda and Raffaele that the knife is very important and the fact that two knives had to be used as indicated by the injuries to Meredith, and it is in fact compatible with her biggest injury, whether "the" knife matches the bed print is rather beside the point, isn't it.
|
No, that's just a bunch of stuff you said. In reality all of the forensic experts said the wounds could have been been inflicted by one person and one knife. That you choose to ignore that and state otherwise as fact is amusing but doesn't make your assertion fact.
Quote:
|
This is excluding the DNA analysis itself. So where exactly does it fail?
|
Everywhere. It fails the basic logic test of why did they carry a kitchen knife over to Amanda's place and kill Meredith with it. You can't even answer the very first question with anything that doesn't result in laughter.
Two Plus Two
Linear Mode
