The Forgotten Killer: Rudy Guede and the Murder of Meredith Kercher (Kindle Single) by Douglas Preston, John Douglas, Mark Olshaker, Steve Moore, Judge Michael Heavey, Jim Lovering, Thomas Lee Wright Page A
Authors: Douglas Preston, John Douglas, Mark Olshaker, Steve Moore, Judge Michael Heavey, Jim Lovering, Thomas Lee Wright
Ads: Link
10-minute walk from the murder scene. This crime was one of opportunity; it was disorganized and unplanned. Why would the perpetrator transport a knife to the crime scene from another location?
More disturbing to me was that I saw on video how the knife was collected. A detective opened a drawer of silverware in which maybe a half-dozen sharp, pointed knives sat. He chose one knife—the largest one—as the one and only knife to test. Eureka! It was the murder knife. Except, it wasn’t. As an investigator, you want to collect every sample you can. It’s like panning for gold: You want to sift through
everything
in your search. Leaving behind knives that could have been used in the murder made no sense even for a rookie investigator.
In short, it was not the action of somebody looking for truth; it was the action of somebody creating his own truth.
Then, in trial, the prosecution’s own pathologist stated with certainty that that knife could be absolutely ruled out for all but one of the wounds in the victim’s neck. It was the wrong size. It was too big. It wouldn’t even fit in the stab wounds. The one wound it couldn’t be ruled out for was the slash on Meredith’s neck, which was almost certainly made with the knife that made the other wounds in the struggle. No sharp object, even a shard of glass, can be ruled out as the object that created that wound. But it is almost a certainty that whatever knife caused the rest of the wounds caused the slash.There was no reason to switch knives, even if one was at hand—or in an apartment five to 10 minutes away.
Even more disturbing, there was an imprint on the white sheet of the victim’s bed—of a knife that fit the wounds. The killer had placed it on the sheet, and it made a perfect imprint in blood. And it was not the same knife as “collected” from the drawer so far away.
Prosecution/Investigatory Misconduct
In my years of experience, I’ve learned that in every trial, there always seems to be two camps: the side that wants all the evidence entered into court and carefully examined, and the side that wants all the evidence suppressed, disregarded, and ignored. Evidence (correctly collected and interpreted) represents truth. The people on the side that wants the evidence suppressed usually knows that the truth does not favor them. In the Meredith Kercher murder trial, the prosecution tried to keep evidence out. Obviously, they knew that the truth did not favor their prosecution.
Suppression of Evidence
•
Mignini fought having the handle of the “murder weapon” removed.
That would be
the first thing I would have asked to have done
as an investigating agent. Blood from a knife used in a murder will frequently find its way between the tangand the handle of a knife, and if I suspect that the killer used this knife and then attempted to clean it, I know he can’t clean between the tang and the handle. Take it off!
Prosecutors didn’t want the handle off because it would prove that the knife wasn’t used in the murder.
And they were right. On October 31, 2013, one day short of six years since the day of the murder, yet another forensic test showed that the alleged murder knife had absolutely no trace of the victim on it. Only Amanda’s DNA was found, which is understandable given that she used the knife to prepare meals at her boyfriend’s house. And the presence of her DNA on the knife proves one other crucial thing: It wasn’t cleaned with bleach to remove DNA. Her DNA wouldn’t have survived a bleaching.
•
Refusal to test the semen stain on the pillow used to prop up the victim’s hips.
You have a sexually assaulted victim, and you find a semen stain on the pillow directly below her pelvic area. What do you do? You test. Obviously. You don’t need to have watched
CSI
to know that. But the Perugia police and prosecutor have so far successfully fought any
More disturbing to me was that I saw on video how the knife was collected. A detective opened a drawer of silverware in which maybe a half-dozen sharp, pointed knives sat. He chose one knife—the largest one—as the one and only knife to test. Eureka! It was the murder knife. Except, it wasn’t. As an investigator, you want to collect every sample you can. It’s like panning for gold: You want to sift through
everything
in your search. Leaving behind knives that could have been used in the murder made no sense even for a rookie investigator.
In short, it was not the action of somebody looking for truth; it was the action of somebody creating his own truth.
Then, in trial, the prosecution’s own pathologist stated with certainty that that knife could be absolutely ruled out for all but one of the wounds in the victim’s neck. It was the wrong size. It was too big. It wouldn’t even fit in the stab wounds. The one wound it couldn’t be ruled out for was the slash on Meredith’s neck, which was almost certainly made with the knife that made the other wounds in the struggle. No sharp object, even a shard of glass, can be ruled out as the object that created that wound. But it is almost a certainty that whatever knife caused the rest of the wounds caused the slash.There was no reason to switch knives, even if one was at hand—or in an apartment five to 10 minutes away.
Even more disturbing, there was an imprint on the white sheet of the victim’s bed—of a knife that fit the wounds. The killer had placed it on the sheet, and it made a perfect imprint in blood. And it was not the same knife as “collected” from the drawer so far away.
Prosecution/Investigatory Misconduct
In my years of experience, I’ve learned that in every trial, there always seems to be two camps: the side that wants all the evidence entered into court and carefully examined, and the side that wants all the evidence suppressed, disregarded, and ignored. Evidence (correctly collected and interpreted) represents truth. The people on the side that wants the evidence suppressed usually knows that the truth does not favor them. In the Meredith Kercher murder trial, the prosecution tried to keep evidence out. Obviously, they knew that the truth did not favor their prosecution.
Suppression of Evidence
•
Mignini fought having the handle of the “murder weapon” removed.
That would be
the first thing I would have asked to have done
as an investigating agent. Blood from a knife used in a murder will frequently find its way between the tangand the handle of a knife, and if I suspect that the killer used this knife and then attempted to clean it, I know he can’t clean between the tang and the handle. Take it off!
Prosecutors didn’t want the handle off because it would prove that the knife wasn’t used in the murder.
And they were right. On October 31, 2013, one day short of six years since the day of the murder, yet another forensic test showed that the alleged murder knife had absolutely no trace of the victim on it. Only Amanda’s DNA was found, which is understandable given that she used the knife to prepare meals at her boyfriend’s house. And the presence of her DNA on the knife proves one other crucial thing: It wasn’t cleaned with bleach to remove DNA. Her DNA wouldn’t have survived a bleaching.
•
Refusal to test the semen stain on the pillow used to prop up the victim’s hips.
You have a sexually assaulted victim, and you find a semen stain on the pillow directly below her pelvic area. What do you do? You test. Obviously. You don’t need to have watched
CSI
to know that. But the Perugia police and prosecutor have so far successfully fought any
Similar Books
