Monday, May 25


Meredith Kercher Murder -

The Rest of the Weekend's Proceedings . . .

"Sollecito's attorney, Giulia Bongiorno, questioned the methods Stefanoni used to collect the bra clasp and identify Sollecito's DNA on it." [Vogt]

The collection of the bra clasp was delayed because of its sensitive location: as far as I know, it was situated under a pillow upon which the cadaver was resting. It is understandable that a CSI forensic team would be reluctant to disturb a woman's cadaver and its context in order to hurriedly bag a piece of evidence. Would they be expected to toss the corpse if it had been that of a blonde Swedish woman? I think not.

If Bongiorno contends that this is the only piece of evidence linking her client to the Scene of the Crime, she is mistaken. Sollecito's fingerprints were found on Kercher's bedroom door, as I noted in an earlier entry. Breaking down an inside door means popping a light lock designed more for privacy than for safety, and is generally done with the shoulder or foot, not with one's fingers. There is no legitimate reason why his fingerprints should be on her door, in my opinion.

And then, there's the blue bathmat:

"Two weeks ago, the court heard that a nude footprint in Kercher’s blood found on a blue bathmat was likely Sollecito’s, and Stefanoni further testified that Sollecito’s DNA was found on the clasp of the bra that had been cut off Kercher’s body during the assault." [Nadeau]

Certainly, Defense is entitled to challenge Prosecution's evidence, but there has been an additional intense effort to spin the evidence simply to confuse the public.

:: Vogt :: - - [Nadeau] - - [Pisa]