10/14 thru 11/11 [Archive] - In Session Message Boards

KnoxCase

10-14-2009, 12:01 PM

I came across a site that deals with the science of the knife wounds and blood patterns.

Be warned- It has very graphic visuals of the wounds.

Alternate Theorys- Perugia Murder

What is interesting is the scenario also agreed its most likely one attacker from behind with logical and believable inputs. The victim in the kowtow position.

The murder and blood associated to the crime, everywhere near the victim is fact.

No other footprints, no other fingerprints, nothing of multiple attackers are in this room....it would be impossible for multiple attackers, in this bloody up close event, to not leave anything, not even the other "attackers' be covered in blood. Nothing of bloody clothing of the accused was found either. They went through the room and Rafaele's and nothing was found, Amandas clothes were also found to be clean.

If somehow people can fantasize, and place other humans in this murder scene, as Mignini trys, you have a better imagination than I.

Also the mystery of someone holding Merediths arm has been mentioned (again without leaving any evidence on her) is logically explained at this site too.

More believable is she was holding herself up with one arm, from the floor. The other arm free most likely. No one was holding it and standing beside her in the puddle of the blood.

It was one attacker, from behind, imo.

dgfred

10-14-2009, 12:04 PM

KnoxCase

10-14-2009, 12:08 PM

Hey Michael,
You stated that Amanda was not asked to 'imagine' in the interrogation... but it was mentioned more than once that she 'imagined'
that Patrick was there. Right???

the interrogation is only corruption, sadly enough.
listen to none of it as it wasn't a fair interrogation.

instead it was done in the dark, with no legal representation.

they should be ashamed, imo. it's like the waterboarding incident.

a mental railroad job from hell.....unless you've been thru it, an average person cannot comprehend it.

watch the Michael Crowe film I posted here. Its just one example of this theory of finding the truth.

some feel it is a "fair" way to operate and treat people, others want it abolished (like myself).

If it were filmed, then I could make a better decision of fact on this matter.

But unfortunately, the secret police interrogators chose not to film it, chose not to allow legal representation of the accused, and chose to pressure and coerce the kid to say whatever they wanted.

only then was it over.

its a crime, imo.

dgfred

10-14-2009, 12:14 PM

But over half the stuff Amanda has written and said are not supported by facts... not just the police interrogation is what is questioned.

KnoxCase

10-14-2009, 12:36 PM

It is much too difficult to explain away the conflicting/changing alibis and the conflicting/lying stories both Amanda and Raf have told. Why would Rudi clean up other's footprints/stains and leave his own? Question meant for knoxcase.

there was no cleanup in the bedroom. thats false. it was too bloody, the cleanup would have been too noticeable. we cannot forget these are supposedly stoned college kids, not professional forensic trained mafia hit men.

if you mean in the bathroom, I don't know, but I don't see any possibility some stoned college kids can precisely clean up them self and leave others, without being obvious. Its more speculation.
It definately wasn't Amandas footprint.

- clean-up?...the mop and bucket were found to be clean, and the forensic lab surely went thru it with a perfection.

- Rudy explains a bloody towel scene, he states he was in there 2 times at least. I suspect the footprint is his. Its not Amandas.

- Obviously Amandas DNA is everywhere in the bathroom, especially a sink. Yours is too most likely.

I guess due to focusing only on the prosecutions case, they didn't check everything for the other residents DNA, and footprints, and other girls footprints all over the cottage. Defense side said they didn't check the guitar and other items for her fingerprinys...there would be no reason for her to clean-up, she lived there...Rafaele was a guest.

if your asking me for answers your asking someone who doesn't know!
I'm just reading articles myself, and coming to my own conclusions.
I've jumped from guilty to innocent to guilty to innocent....but as this case winds down, I am leaning heavily for one attacker, Rudy. and recently, agree he was standing behind her when he made the fatal blow. To silence her, as throat attacks are known for. I don't believe the Left Hand theory, yet...it could have been right hand.

I know I'm a minority here, but it's still somewhat open minded and decent, but I don't have any answers...I only recommend people do their own searches and use the court documents as much as possible, pictures not media articles. The media like always is very biased for the most part.

Motive: Robbery....Rudy thought the cottage was to be empty. He didn't have a cellphone, cellphones were taken, he needed money for rent it was the new month, he didn't have a job,...he was on record for breaking and entering and carrying knifes... I don't buy his "date" scene as Merediths friends testified hours before her murder she said nothing of a "date" and had told them she was tired and going to study, which is why she borrowed Amandas lamp....

I'm unclear whether he was in the cottage when Meredith came in, or if he put a knife to her throat in the driveway and forced/followed her into the cottage at 9pm.

thats my interest...will probably never know obviously.

dgfred

10-14-2009, 12:42 PM

Bloody footprint on bathroom mat, couldn't have been the only one and others had to lead up to it... somebody cleaned it up and the print wasn't the size of Rudi's foot anyway.

Why is there a footprint of Rudi's shoe, but other bloody footprints are from bare feet?

What about the broken window glass 'on top' of Filomena's clothes?

I'm VERY suspicious of both their cell phones being turned off and their changing alibis.

KnoxCase

10-14-2009, 12:48 PM

It was nothing like that KnoxCase. Amanda was questioned in the police station's public waiting room, she was hardly dragged off to the dungeons and tortured with thumbscrews. She was also being questioned as a 'witness'...since when are witnesses required to have a lawyer present?

The second time she spoke to police that night was at her 'own' insistance. She demanded to be heard. Prosecutor Mignini had to be dragged out of his bed at 3 am in order to accommodate her demand to be heard. In this case, it wasn't an interrogation, it wasn't even a questioning session, it was a 'statement'...she wanted to be heard, she talked, they listened. It was in giving this statement, Amanda gave the detailed story of how Patrick raped and murdered Meredith. The police didn't even ask for this statement. They wanted to go to bed.

I fail to see where the water boarding comes in or how it even compares to it.

you can say that not being there.

the fact is numerous people all say the same story...the interrogations were kept in private "in the dark", and no legal representation was offered or allowed per Raffaele. Even Patrick said it was pressured and scary....Amanda said the same thing. Preston, Spezi....even the Manager for Led Zepplin in his book talks of this pressured coerced interrogation method as I posted. I have heard of it here in the states too. It goes on, this is not a new thing. Amanda just said the way it was, the way she felt, and even apologized for the interrogators.

film it.
thats all I'm saying.

if its so innocent, film it. its unfortunate they didn't film it, its unfortunate a neutral party wasn't there. she asked to call her mom they said "no", per her story.

Raffaele was Italian, he asked for help and they refused him, as I read it.

I admit I'm biased because as I said I know for a fact the deals that are made here too, interrogations threats, its scary as hell.
Most people cave in and sign papers to go home, to get away from the situation.

thats my 2 cents...

I fail to see Edgardo Giobbi as a "one stop" guilty or innocent " verdict shop as he claims interrogations are.

I fail to believe the police on this one subject. Video cameras are cheap, they were more than witnesses in reality, they were phone tapping them (not everyone else).... they should have filmed it!!

this debate wouldn't even be going on.

filming can help the police too, in cases like this.

the connection to waterboarding is if we pressure, threaten and scare people, they'll tell us anything we want them to.

have you watched the Michael Crowe video posted here....it shows an example of police interrogation, just as this case states. eerily similar.

its not anti-police either...a fearless policeman and detective and DA is what freed the innocent kid.

Jester

10-14-2009, 12:58 PM

No, Amanda wasn't an Erasmus student. Amanda went to the University of Strangers. It was basically a language college and was not arranged via UW. It was fully arranged by Amanda herself. Meredith was an Erasmus student (only Europeans are eligible for Erasmus courses anyway) and she went to the University, not the language college Amanda went to.

Thanks for that clarification. Haven't Amanda's family, or someone related to her, been saying that she was a scholarship recipient? Did her parents think that she was?

dgfred

10-14-2009, 01:01 PM

Does anyone know for sure about the 'leak' anyway? Was it pasta overflowing or a busted pipe... is there any evidence pointing one way or the other about whether this was true or not?

Jester

10-14-2009, 01:49 PM

you can say that not being there.

the fact is numerous people all say the same story...the interrogations were kept in private "in the dark", and no legal representation was offered or allowed per Raffaele. Even Patrick said it was pressured and scary....Amanda said the same thing. Preston, Spezi....even the Manager for Led Zepplin in his book talks of this pressured coerced interrogation method as I posted. I have heard of it here in the states too. It goes on, this is not a new thing. Amanda just said the way it was, the way she felt, and even apologized for the interrogators.

film it.
thats all I'm saying.

if its so innocent, film it. its unfortunate they didn't film it, its unfortunate a neutral party wasn't there. she asked to call her mom they said "no", per her story.

Raffaele was Italian, he asked for help and they refused him, as I read it.

I admit I'm biased because as I said I know for a fact the deals that are made here too, interrogations threats, its scary as hell.
Most people cave in and sign papers to go home, to get away from the situation.

thats my 2 cents...

I fail to see Edgardo Giobbi as a "one stop" guilty or innocent " verdict shop as he claims interrogations are.

I fail to believe the police on this one subject. Video cameras are cheap, they were more than witnesses in reality, they were phone tapping them (not everyone else).... they should have filmed it!!

this debate wouldn't even be going on.

filming can help the police too, in cases like this.

the connection to waterboarding is if we pressure, threaten and scare people, they'll tell us anything we want them to.

have you watched the Michael Crowe video posted here....it shows an example of police interrogation, just as this case states. eerily similar.

its not anti-police either...a fearless policeman and detective and DA is what freed the innocent kid.

Richard Cole, the Zeppelin manager that you've mentioned a couple of times, was arrested for suspected terrorism in Rome. Suspected terrorists are in their own category when it comes to questioning, a category that indeed includes waterboarding. That case has nothing to do with the investigation and questioning of suspects in Meredith's murder. That said, Richard Cole still didn't confess. Amanda did.

Jester

10-14-2009, 02:18 PM

Yes, I think she had a scholarship, but I can't swear to it. She was supposedly an honours srudent.

This doesn't make sense. If she was not affiliated with the University of Washington when she went to the language college in Perugia, who could have awarded her a scholarship? If she was taking a leave, then the scholarship would have been given to someone that was a student.

Jester

10-14-2009, 02:23 PM

Does anyone know for sure about the 'leak' anyway? Was it pasta overflowing or a busted pipe... is there any evidence pointing one way or the other about whether this was true or not?

I read somewhere the the pipe had broken before and that Raffaele had it repaired. Apparently it broke again on the night of the murder. Rather than wipe up the water, Raffaele and Amanda decided to get stoned, watch a movie ... and then walk back and forth through town with a mop the following day. Some people that really need a mop would buy one for a few dollars rather than walk around town with a mop.

Jester

10-14-2009, 02:25 PM

No, if there was a scholarship it was for the UW, not for studying in Perugia. That had to all come out of her own pocket.

Right, but she would not be awarded a scholarship if she was on leave from the University. If she took a leave, then the scholarship for attending UW would be suspended. Are you saying that she may have received a scholarship to attend UW when she finished high school?

Jester

10-14-2009, 02:54 PM

Yes, that's what I'm saying.

That makes sense. She received a UW scholarship for one year at UW, but she was not on scholarship while in Perugia. Universities usually have loads of money for students that study overseas ... everything from research grants to travel grants. When taking part in University endorsed study abroad program, it's pretty easy to put together $10,000-$15,000 in grants and scholarships. Either Amanda was not eligible for that money, or she really did want to distance herself from any kind of structured, monitored program.

Jester

10-14-2009, 03:49 PM

It appears you are suggesting that people can not be coerced by police into making false confessions. If so, you are wrong.

Amanda voluntarily wrote a statement implicating Patrick and much more. She gave that statement to police, calling it a gift. It was indeed the gift they needed to put her in jail. There was no coercion when she wrote that statement. No one forced her to voluntarily make a false confession. She wrote it freely and without solicitation. End of story.

Any information given prior to being a suspect is inadmissible in court, so it doesn't really matter what she said when she claims she was coerced to make a false confession. Those confessions are not part of the proceedings.

Jester

10-14-2009, 03:56 PM

Actually, the answer to both his/her questions is "yes". Yes, there are people who know for sure. And, yes, there is also evidence that there was a leak. The broken pipe is the evidence of that.

I thought the pipe was taken apart ... that a bottom section was removed. That's done by taking a wrench and loosing then fasteners. If my sink was leaking, I would either tighten the fasteners, or put something under it to catch the leak. I wouldn't take the bottom part of the pipe off.

Jester

10-14-2009, 04:19 PM

It's evidence that the pipe was broken on the day police looked at it days after the murder. That's all.

The whole leak/mop story sounds absurd to me.

pixiejoolz

10-14-2009, 05:38 PM

No, I meant false confession, as I said. And I'm not the least bit surprised that you're unaware that they happen. You don't appear generally well informed on such matters.

You post is confusing to me. I think we all know that there is such a thing as a false or coerced confession, so your personal sniping is really pointless.

What false confession are you talking about? When did Amanda confess - falsely or otherwise -to having anything to do with the murder?

I thought that the only lie she told that has already been proven 100% to be a lie is that the bartender was the killer. That's a false accusation, not a false confession. jmo

Jester

10-14-2009, 06:59 PM

You post is confusing to me. I think we all know that there is such a thing as a false or coerced confession, so your personal sniping is really pointless.

What false confession are you talking about? When did Amanda confess - falsely or otherwise -to having anything to do with the murder?

I thought that the only lie she told that has already been proven 100% to be a lie is that the bartender was the killer. That's a false accusation, not a false confession. jmo

In Amanda's voluntary statement, she implicates Patrick and says that she doesn't remember if she was at her house on the night of the murder. I reads like a false allegation, and a weak confession that she was at the house at the time of the murder. There was no coercion during this statement.

"In my mind I saw Patrik in flashes of blurred images. I saw him near the basketball court. I saw him at my front door. I saw myself cowering in the kitchen with my hands over my ears because in my head I could hear Meredith screaming. But I've said this many times so as to make myself clear: these things seem unreal to me, like a dream, and I am unsure if they are real things that happened or are just dreams my head has made to try to answer the questions in my head and the questions I am being asked.
...

I stand by my statements that I made last night about events that could have taken place in my home with Patrik
...

In these flashbacks that I'm having, I see Patrik as the murderer, but the way the truth feels in my mind, there is no way for me to have known because I don't remember FOR SURE if I was at my house that night."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1570225/Transcript-of-Amanda-Knoxs-note.html

A flashback relates to an earlier occurrence, not an imaginary event.

Jester

10-14-2009, 07:21 PM

Well...I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt, even though it can't be proven. I can take it or leave it. It certainly at least would explain some things that need explaining and I find them hard to explain any other way. A leak and need for a mop provides a tangible reason for their suddenly heading to the cottage that night. Otherwise, we have to accept that for some 'unknown' reason, they just suddenly decided to change what had been the theme of the evening (watching a touchy feely movie, having a dinner together, being happy they both find they have an evening off) to "Right. Let's go to the cottage."

I certainly have less of a "problem" accepting the leak then I used to. The problem I had with it was when the time for it was put at 23:00, which also just happened to be the time publicised as Meredith's estimated time of death. It was just one massive, overly convenient coincidence too far for me. In short, it was a major red flag. Once the time was correctly adjusted for the leak to have occurred some time before 21:30, then the 'amazing convenient coincidence' goes away. Suddenly it's not so incredible.

It also would explain their dual fixation on the need for a mop in both of their stories. We know the mop wasn't used in the clean-up. So then why else the fixation on it, unless because the need for it was actually the dynamic that sent them to the cottage on the night of the murder in the first place? They both have told lies. But liars normally mix truth with lies.

So the leak was around 9:30, Raffaele and Amanda headed to the cottage to get the mop, maybe met up with Rudy on the way, maybe Rudy was asking about Meredith, maybe Amanda said she'd be home and to join them on their way to the cottage ... maybe once they got the cottage things got out of hand.

pixiejoolz

10-14-2009, 09:12 PM

In Amanda's voluntary statement, she implicates Patrick and says that she doesn't remember if she was at her house on the night of the murder. I reads like a false allegation, and a weak confession that she was at the house at the time of the murder. There was no coercion during this statement.

"In my mind I saw Patrik in flashes of blurred images. I saw him near the basketball court. I saw him at my front door. I saw myself cowering in the kitchen with my hands over my ears because in my head I could hear Meredith screaming. But I've said this many times so as to make myself clear: these things seem unreal to me, like a dream, and I am unsure if they are real things that happened or are just dreams my head has made to try to answer the questions in my head and the questions I am being asked.
...

I stand by my statements that I made last night about events that could have taken place in my home with Patrik
...

In these flashbacks that I'm having, I see Patrik as the murderer, but the way the truth feels in my mind, there is no way for me to have known because I don't remember FOR SURE if I was at my house that night."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1570225/Transcript-of-Amanda-Knoxs-note.html

A flashback relates to an earlier occurrence, not an imaginary event.

Everything about that so-called statement screams "lie" to me. She sounds like she thinks she is starring in some really bad soap opera and she's writing her part as she goes along.

It's amazing that in a statement to the police anyone would actually says things like "in these flashbacks" and "flashes of blurred images." You can't tell if she is a delusional psycho, she's channeling Squeaky Fromme or she is just someone who is accustomed to having any wild nonsense she spouts blindly accepted by other people. Any way you parse it, Amanda and reality don't live near each other, imo.

Emerald

10-14-2009, 09:49 PM

Actually, the answer to both his/her questions is "yes". Yes, there are people who know for sure. And, yes, there is also evidence that there was a leak. The broken pipe is the evidence of that.

JMO

The leak at RS's apartment has absolutely nothing to do with the murder of Meredith Kercher. EXCEPT to establish important time line elements. It also establishes gaping holes in Amanda's 'memory' of events.

Amanda Knox has some serious issues which she refuses to even mention, much less explain.

----Filomena's broken window. Immediately noticed by RS upon entering the apartment. Not even mentioned by Amanda. Oh, that's right, Amanda didn't see it in the hours she was there alone in the apartment that morning after the murder.

----Amanda is so concerned about stuff at her own apartment that she goes whining back to RS for help. Oh, that's right, Amanda cleans RS's apartment before she takes RS back to her own apartment.

----Amanda, out of the blue, decides to go into great detail about a totally innocent person's (Patrick Lumumba) participation in the crimes against Meredith Kercher. In her fictitious rendition about Patrick, Amanda includes facts of the crime which had not yet been released by the police. How did AK know these details?

Larry King Live, Thursday Oct 15, 9pm est on CNN he will be interviewing the parents of AK.

Emerald

10-14-2009, 10:28 PM

One striking element is missing in all of Amanda's fictitious accounts......

Any sympathy, concern or mention of the VICTIM, Meredith Kercher.

Jester

10-14-2009, 11:09 PM

One striking element is missing in all of Amanda's fictitious accounts......

Any sympathy, concern or mention of the VICTIM, Meredith Kercher.

She was in so much shock on November 2, the day Meredith was found murdered, she thought she'd write a song, but instead she was hungry.

I think Amanda's mother has a bit of doubt about her innocence. Her mother doesn't understand how Amanda could completely forget phoning her ... a bit like mom isn't buying into it all.

Emerald

10-14-2009, 11:45 PM

She was in so much shock on November 2, the day Meredith was found murdered, she thought she'd write a song, but instead she was hungry.

I think Amanda's mother has a bit of doubt about her innocence. Her mother doesn't understand how Amanda could completely forget phoning her ... a bit like mom isn't buying into it all.

It will be interesting to watch the interview on LKL. I like to see besides hear the answers.

Have it set to record in case I forget.

Emerald

10-15-2009, 12:04 AM

She was in so much shock on November 2, the day Meredith was found murdered, she thought she'd write a song, but instead she was hungry.

I think Amanda's mother has a bit of doubt about her innocence. Her mother doesn't understand how Amanda could completely forget phoning her ... a bit like mom isn't buying into it all.

I was positively stunned when those diary entries were posted. Not only no sympathy for what the victim, Meredith Kercher, experienced, AK seemed a bit peeved that the other room mates did not experience the same fate.

JMO

Jester

10-15-2009, 12:18 AM

I was positively stunned when those diary entries were posted. Not only no sympathy for what the victim, Meredith Kercher, experienced, AK seemed a bit peeved that the other room mates did not experience the same fate.

JMO

Amanda saying that Laura, Filomina, and Raffaele are f-ed up confuses me. Doesn't that phrase usually mean that someone's head is a bit messed up? I don't understand why Amanda would say that about others ... unless she was really meaning herself. Does that make sense in some other context that I'm missing?

Emerald

10-15-2009, 12:52 AM

Jester

10-15-2009, 01:12 AM

JMO

AK means she thinks she is superior to those people. Manipulative people think that about everyone. Those the manipulator cannot control are dismissed as not being worthy of the time to try and manipulate. AK knew immediately she had lost control of the situation. Filomena did not follow the script when she arrived with her boyfriend being commanding and exacting. Not at all the fictional scene AK imagined.

That's how I understood the "f****d" entry.

JMO

I agree that she believes that she is superior, and I guess that makes sense then that she thinks others are messed up ... in a way ... as a put down. That comment was part of the diary that she wrote at the police station after the murder was discovered. Filomina's friends were suspicious of Raffaele and Amanda when they were warming up in the car after the police arrived, even searching their car afterwards. Filomina had disagreed with Amanda about whether Meredith always locked her door, and Laura wasn't even there. Filomina's boyfriend helped break down the door. Raffaele had given her a place to sleep and eat for a week (since they'd met) and continued to give her a place to stay after the murder. He even gave her his clothes to wear. Amanda had no rational reason to say that Filomina, Laura, and Raffaele were messed up ... but I guess that doesn't really matter because Amanda doesn't seem to be a very rational woman.

Emerald

10-15-2009, 02:17 AM

Jester

10-15-2009, 04:00 AM

I did not know Filomena was suspicious of AK from the very beginning. Searched the car? Filomena or police?

--AK expected Filomena to 'discover' the crime scene. She insisted to RS Meredith's locked door was common. Therefore, RS did not do more to open the door.

After the bedroom door was opened, did AK make any attempt (in front of Filomena or Police) to see what was behind it? Or did AK immediately flee the apartment to sit in th car or on the stoop?

The more details revealed, the more intriguing this case is.

JMO

I believe it was Filomina's friend and her boyfriend that were immediately suspicious of Amanda and Raffaele. A&R were in their car to warm up while the police arrived at the scene and before they all went to the police station. I think that the friends gave Raffaele and Amanda a ride to the police station. The friends found the comments and actions of Raffaele and Amanda so odd that they searched their car afterward to see if A&R had hidden anything in their car.

My understanding is that as soon as Meredith's door was opened, police quickly closed it, and right away told everyone to go outside.

Emerald

10-15-2009, 04:12 AM

Did the boyfriend testify? I'd like to know what he was looking for in the car.

Jester

10-15-2009, 04:27 AM

Did the boyfriend testify? I'd like to know what he was looking for in the car.

I was just looking for where I read it, but didn't find the link yet.

Jester

10-15-2009, 04:32 AM

"1350 Phones seized, reported by Bartolozzi at 14:00

Evening PG and LA take RS and AK to Perugia police station in their car. PG and LA have stated that during the trip RS was constantly asking them questions regarding the murder and investigation of a manner that caused them to become so concerned and suspicious, they thorougly checked over the interior of the car after RS and AK got out, for ‘incriminating evidence’ they were afraid the pair may have ‘planted’ there. The ‘suspicious’ behaviour of the couple continued inside the police station, which was noted and reported by multiple witnesses"

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmktimeline

Emerald

10-15-2009, 04:57 AM

Emerald

10-15-2009, 05:42 AM

Early Morning Patrick Lumumba is arrested and taken into custody as a ‘Suspect’ on the back of the testimonies provided by Raffaele and Amanda

Amanda's statement about Patrick Lumumba has been discussed quite a bit. What was Raffaele's statement? Did both statements say the same thing as if rehearsed?

Jester

10-15-2009, 01:16 PM

Thanks for the link.

So, while Filomena's boyfriend was dealing with the police, AK and RS were in AK's room? Not with the police? If that's correct, it reinforces my belief AK knew what was behind that bedroom door before it was opened.

Yes, Amanda and Raffaele went into Amanda's room and closed the door when the police arrived. It was at this time, most likely, when Raffaele phoned his sister, and Amanda phoned her mom. Raffaele then phoned the police. During testimony, Amanda said she knows what Raffaele said in the phone call with police, but not in the phone call Raffaele made to his sister.

Jester

10-15-2009, 01:26 PM

Amanda's statement about Patrick Lumumba has been discussed quite a bit. What was Raffaele's statement? Did both statements say the same thing as if rehearsed?

Raffaele says nothing about Patrick, as his statement has him in his apartment throughout the night. Even though both were questioned by police (I suspect Raffaele's questioning was a little harsher than Amanda's questioning), only Amanda made false accusations and partial confessions. Raffaele does say that Meredith's DNA got on the knife in his kitchen because Meredith had dinner at his apartment. Amanda says during testimony that Meredith did not have dinner at his apartment. I think it's because their stories don't match that they were arrested ... no alibi.

pixiejoolz

10-15-2009, 01:43 PM

Raffaele says nothing about Patrick, as his statement has him in his apartment throughout the night. Even though both were questioned by police (I suspect Raffaele's questioning was a little harsher than Amanda's questioning), only Amanda made false accusations and partial confessions. Raffaele does say that Meredith's DNA got on the knife in his kitchen because Meredith had dinner at his apartment. Amanda says during testimony that Meredith did not have dinner at his apartment. I think it's because their stories don't match that they were arrested ... no alibi.

I think you just summed up a crucial part of the prosecution's case with two very simple words: no alibi. jmo

Jester

10-15-2009, 02:23 PM

I think you just summed up a crucial part of the prosecution's case with two very simple words: no alibi. jmo

The only real alibi that Raffaele and Amanda gave was that their memories were erased from smoking pot ... a fairy tale that the judge rejected. After that, their stories are all over the place. When reading through the translated transcript of Amanda's testimony, I was surprised that she also referred to what she had to say as a story. Her lawyer should have not only told her to listen to the question, and only answer that question, but also to present her information as facts, not stories.

pixiejoolz

10-15-2009, 05:37 PM

It should be noted that it's not particularly relevant whether or not she specifically used the word "coerced".

Any intelligent observer capable of being even remotely objective would not hesitate to acknowledge Ms. Knox's version of events includes police conduct that is clearly coercive.

That same intelligent, objective observer would also not hesitate to acknowledge that Ms. Knox's "version of events" (love that description, BTW!) has already been proven to include one HUGE, UGLY LIE: her accusation of rape and murder against a man who wasn't even present. If Knox had been able to pull it off, Lumumba would be rotting in prison to this day. jmo, of course.

Jester

10-15-2009, 05:50 PM

pixiejoolz

10-15-2009, 05:59 PM

Amanda accused Patrick in her voluntary statement. She voluntarily stands behind those accusations. She describes Patrick's involvement, and then goes on to say that she doesn't remember if she was there other than in a flashback (also known as a recalled, vivid memory).

Was her voluntary statement false? If so, why would she make false claims against Patrick when there was no coercion, or anyone even requesting that she make a statement? Did she really expect that she could describe parts of the murder and not implicate herself? How could she know anything about the murder if she were not there?

Just a theory: perhaps she isn't as clever a liar as she thinks she is.

Or perhaps she just thought that her lie about Patrick would be swallowed whole, so no one would care about the inconsistencies in her story. Actually, I guess that just circles right back to not being as clever a liar as she thinks she is. jmo

Jester

10-15-2009, 06:17 PM

Just a theory: perhaps she isn't as clever a liar as she thinks she is.

Or perhaps she just thought that her lie about Patrick would be swallowed whole, so no one would care about the inconsistencies in her story. Actually, I guess that just circles right back to not being as clever a liar as she thinks she is. jmo

It was a huge oversight for her to claim that she had flashbacks to the night of the murder and that Patrick was a rapist murderer, and to then expect that she was not implicating herself. Michael said it best in saying that Amanda wanted to be perceived as a victim ... that scary Patrick frightened her so much that when she heard Meredith scream in the back bedroom, while she was standing next to the exit, she just covered her ears.

floorplan http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t189/zed0101/knoxautocadfloorplan2.jpg
(created in autocad based on Kermit's original work)

Jester

10-15-2009, 06:54 PM

Hi Jester. I think also, she didn't expect the police as a result to immediately arrest Patrick and drag him to jail on the back of her accusation. It's likely she assumed that they'd just some time the next day go and see Patrick and he would explain he was working in the bar the previous night and the police would apologise for disturbing him and leave him be. In the meantime, they'd be off her case, let her go and probably leave her alone as from that point they'd see her as 'unreliable'. Of course, after they spoke to Patrick she'd offer an apology to them and give some sort of excuse. Since they didn't let her go, she immediately got to work on her excuse because she knew they'd find her accusations to be a pack of lies, so she sat down and set about writing her two page note which contained her excuse.

It backfired terribly because not only did they arrest Patrick, but there was a set of unfortunate circumstances that made the situation worse. This being that police would find that Patrick's phone was pinged in the area of the cottage the night of the murder, that Patrick changed his phone sim the next day, that he didn't tote up his bar receipts until after 11 pm that night and because his bar was quiet that night and the few witnesses who could place him there and give him his alibi took days to track down.

I agree. Amanda's CSI based idea about how the investigation would unfold was way wrong. She also didn't realize that police had tapped her phones (she should have followed the Joran v.d. Sloot case to better understand Roman law) and were aware that her mother was arriving soon. She may have thought that she would leave the country when her mother arrived ... but that was not an option. You're probably quite right in that she assumed the police would go after Patrick, investigate for a few days, and that she would buy herself some time.

Emerald

10-16-2009, 12:52 AM

Emerald

10-16-2009, 01:09 AM

Amanda Knox's parents will be interviewed on Larry King Live Friday Oct 16, 9pm est (2100 hrs).

Earlier I posted they would appear Thursday night. Either I was wrong or they were bumped for the story of the balloon incident with the little boy.

Anyway, it will be Friday night. I'm very interested to SEE the interview live and unscripted. A transcript cannot capture nuances.

JMO

Jester

10-16-2009, 01:22 AM

Jester

10-16-2009, 01:26 AM

JMO

Y'all are giving AK way too much credit for thinking through her accusation 'confession' of Patrick Lumumba.

Take everything AK said and instead of Partrick Lumumba, say Rudi Guede.

There you have the whole story.

For some reason, throughout this trial, AK has been very careful NEVER to implicate RG. Even though he has bee tried and sentenced for his role in the crime.

JMO

One does have to wonder about the one black guy instead of the other black guy scenario. It's interesting that Amanda mentions a gorgeous black guy that she met when she first arrived in Perugia ... in her myspace page. I don't have the link handy, but it's posted on the last thread.

It's almost like she picks a black guy in case anyone saw them together ... but maybe she feels a little responsible for involving Rudy, and a little upset with Patrick for reducing her work responsibilities to that of standing on the street handing out fliers instead of working the crowd and serving drinks ... while Meredith was being promoted to mixing drinks behind the bar.

Jester

10-16-2009, 01:46 AM

Here it is: http://thedeadkidsofmyspace.com/foxyknoxy03blogs.html

September 2 in Perugia with her sister:
"then, deanna and i went to grab a sandwich at the same cafe and i bumped into the most beautiful black man i have ever seen. he said he'd see me when i come back from germany. eheheheh"

Jester

10-16-2009, 02:00 AM

I first heard about this murder when it was briefly covered on CNN in November 2007. I didn't think of Amanda and Raffaele as wrongly accused. I thought of Amanda as a student that went overseas, thought the world was her oyster, and that she proceeded to party like a wild animal until it ended in murder. I didn't even bother following the case until several months later when there were murmurings about a possible wrongful arrest. In the subsequent months, I read several reports to better understand the facts, to form my own opinion about whether she was indeed an out of control student who was away from home and without restraint, or whether she was a sweet, innocent, hard-working student who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. After wavering for a long time, I have come to the conclusion, based on the evidence, her statements, and her demeanour surrounding the time of murder, that Amanda cannot be completely innocent.

I wonder if she can see what's in store for her, or whether she is still optimistic.

Jester

10-16-2009, 02:33 AM

Read this, and watch the videos ... even though they are in Italian ... to better understand Meredith Kercher, the victim.

We already know far too much about Amanda ... and none of it is very good.

In 2007, when Meredith was murdered, her mother was 63, her father 68, so we know they waited until they were older to have children. Meredith's sister, aged 25 ... her mother was 38 when she was born, father was 43.

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C300/

Emerald

10-16-2009, 03:05 AM

September 2 in Perugia with her sister:
"then, deanna and i went to grab a sandwich at the same cafe and i bumped into the most beautiful black man i have ever seen. he said he'd see me when i come back from germany. eheheheh"

I'm just now beginning to understand the timeline.

AK went to Germany after finding the apartment in Perugia? Therefore, she was well aware of her financial needs. Yet, decided to blow $$ in Germany when she had the opportunity to acquire some while still enjoying the new experience.

Did Deanna go with Amanda to Germany?

You know, even in Amanda's court testimony, she seems indignant that her lies are questioned. Like AK is saying anything she lies about is okay, because she is 'creative' (:rolleyes:).

When someone can show or tell all their 'creativity' in 10 minutes (guitar/songwriting, gymnastics, imaginary stories, etc) they aren't very creative at all. Plus, AK has a history of blaming her own inappropriate behavior on everyone else.

Represented herself as a martyr for the arrest in Washington...... Gymnastics in the Police station...... Interrupting situations with (repeated same chord) guitar playing...... moving in with a man she had just met...... desire to "kill for a pizza"...... etc.

JMO

Jester

10-16-2009, 05:42 AM

I had an epiphany ... Amanda Knox should have blamed her cartwheels, splits, and backflips on having a body stone. Maybe she can weave that into her appeal.

Yes, Amanda and her sister went to Perugia in early Sept to check things out. Then they went to Germany, I think in the Hamburg area, where they stayed with an Aunt, and visited their grandmother. Then she went to Berlin where she was to work in the gov't office for two weeks, and I think her sister did something else ... not sure. Amanda spent a morning at work, then walked off the job, but she did not give up the two free weeks in her uncles' friend's apartment in Berlin. She partied for the two weeks, and then went to Perugia.

Amanda was paying 300 Euros in rent per month. In her mind, she may have been calculating one dollar to one Euro. Rent was in fact 450 US$/month. She needed nearly $3000 in rent alone to finish off the school year.

Emerald

10-16-2009, 08:28 AM

JMO

Since Amanda did not have a scholarship, she would be responsible for tuition, books and supplies. The rent included only the building, possibly the utilities too. Food, toiletries and sundries are not cheap either.

Partying with alcohol and drugs is very expensive. Even if others were inviting her to partake as a friend, that would get old in a hurry. Raffaele was on a controlled allowance.

Did AK work in US? Where did she get the $8000 stated in her account? Was it a US grant or student loan?

JMO

Emerald

10-16-2009, 10:50 AM

I've been googling around for info. Now that I have so many more directions to go (thanks Jester and Michael), it's easier to find stuff.

One thing I found was that Amanda does not come from a wealthy family, but they are very comfortable. I do wonder, though, what future generations will think when they find so much inheritance spent on this. The Family is already selling rights to the likes of John Grisham.

Nothing I've found is Amanda's Family showing any sympathy for Meredith's Family.

I would like to add if the so-called FOA have any further ideas about how more can be learned, please tell me. It's not necessary to attack when you do. The google trend is most definitely running against Amanda's innocence. So, I can only read what appears. Where is the other stuff?

JMO

Emerald

10-16-2009, 11:05 AM

As far as I understand it, Amanda was to be studying out there for a term, or semester, rather then the whole year. I'll see if I can get confirmation on that.

Thanks Michael. I've been reading a lot at Perugia Murder File site. Great links that lead to other links. Which leads to info for googling. Different directions.

Nancy Grace is not my favorite entertainer, but whenever she tries to have people on there to talk about the case, it's impossible to get them to answer a question. Reporters will try, but those FOA refuse to answer coherently. Can't understand their minutia replies unless you already know what they are talking about.

For instance, Nancy Grace asked about the RS DNA on the bra, making the very good point if it really was his DNA then AK was there too since AK and RS say they were together all night. The FOA would not answer the question.

It was also stated on the same show AK reported seeing blood on RS's hands that night. Thought it was from the dinner fish.

Did AK make that statement to Police?

Emerald

10-16-2009, 12:33 PM

Michael, have you ever gotten a reply about the question of Amanda's confession involving Patrick Lumumba? You've asked several times here, but I've read no reply.

JMO

Jester

10-16-2009, 03:09 PM

As far as I understand it, Amanda was to be studying out there for a term, or semester, rather then the whole year. I'll see if I can get confirmation on that.
Where was she studying again? I seem to be finding all sorts of conflicting information.

Jester

10-16-2009, 03:31 PM

Here's a link to the course calendar at the University of Strangers, where I guess Amanda was a student (page 22):

http://www.unistrapg.it/pdf/clic/francese.pdf

It looks like she could enrol from Oct. 1 - Dec 23. There were other options for length of study.

Emerald

10-16-2009, 04:01 PM

AK was in Europe for probably @ 7 weeks. Not that it matters. All it took was one bad decision. All these people were acquainted for a very short time.

n/t

10-16-2009, 09:45 PM

What's next in Knox trial?

In the United States, jury deliberations begin immediately following closing arguments but in Italy everything is scheduled. The prosecution delivers closing arguments on Nov. 20 and 21. Sollecito's attorneys get their opportunity on Nov. 28 and 30. Knox's attorneys won't get their chance until December 1 and 2.

Rebuttal arguments are scheduled for December 3. The jury won't begin its deliberations until Dec. 4 and they are expected to return a verdict by Dec. 6.

http://www.king5.com/topstories/stories/NW_101009WAB-amanda-knox-trial-KS.203a2de1b.html

Jester

10-16-2009, 10:07 PM

http://larrykinglive.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/16/amanda-knoxs-parents-shes-innocent/

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/06/perugia200806

Jester

10-16-2009, 11:55 PM

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0910/16/lkl.01.html

Jester

10-17-2009, 01:13 AM

From the transcripts:

"KING: I -- I gather you're as strong as John on this. John, what would an appeal be like?

JOHN: Well, ironically, both sides could appeal. I mean, Amanda can be acquitted --

KING: Really?

JOHN: She could leave the country, and then, on appeal, they could convict her and seek to extradite her back to Italy, after an appeals court -- KING: Whoa.

JOHN: -- would convict her. And there's -- there's such a level of vindictiveness here, I could see that almost happening."

I think this bolded statement demonstrates such a narrow minded perception of judicial systems that are different from those in the US. Many countries provide for both the defence and prosecution appealing a ruling, yet that provision in Italian law takes on the label of "vindictiveness". Different is bad, or what is the thinking?

Emerald

10-17-2009, 01:52 AM

Just watched LKL.

I don't expect anything but blind faith from Amanda's Family. These other people were disgusting. John Q Kelly has not ever met Amanda's Family, but that didn't stop his blathering. IMO, he's just appearing for face time and appearance fees. Maybe Joe Tacopina refused too appear and lie for the Family?

The interview was totally "Amanda is innocent". The word 'railroad' was used quite a bit. Again, not a single word of sympathy for Meredith Kercher. Plus, not a single word for RS. Amanda is being 'railroaded' because she is an American. I think we are supposed to, as Americans, rally to her defense because of it?

Larry King needed at least one commentator with a different perspective. None of the evidence was considered in this appearance, except to say they (Italian Justice) have none.

JMO

Emerald

10-17-2009, 02:39 AM

Hi Emerald. Well, one of the purposes of PMF (Perugia Murder File) when it was created, was to be a clearing house for case related data. It also provides primary data in the form of professional translations that are unobtainable anywhere else. At the same time, we also have case specific data especially created by our senior members (such as Kermit's powerpoints on the context , and Nicki's powerpoints explaining DNA...she's a professor of micro-biology at the University of Milan, so it's all quite professional) and we have developed our own sources directly involved in the case, so it's also a primary source of information as well. Actually, I think this is the first time such a site has been created for one single specific case.

As for Nancy Grace, it probably is the hardest interview the FOA have ever had to face. Normally, their PR man David Marriott, doesn't allow interviews without an agreement that they'll be sympathetic, no hard questions will be asked and no other dissenting voices will be included. Therefore, the FOA have never been directly tested head on by the media. Unfortunately, despite that, they've been afforded much air time and print space because the prosecution rarely speak and the Kercher family never do. The media hates voids and so they've resorted to filling them with the Knox PR, be it from the FOA, or directly from the Knox/Mellas family (although in reality, one and the same thing).

The blood on Raffaele's hands as mentioned by Amanda, was from her prison diary.

Bumped for relevance. This is most likely why the Larry King interview was so one-sided. Usually, LK will not allow this. I'm miffed.

Emerald

10-17-2009, 02:40 PM

Emerald

10-17-2009, 02:55 PM

From the LKL interview:
"Many people asked her to leave, but she said no. 'I'm going to stay. I'm going to try and help. I'm going to try and finish school,' " Mellas said.

What, exactly does this mean? Maybe if I ignore it, it will go away. AK would have been extradited to Italy to stand trial. The evidence is the same whether she fled or not.

JMO

Jester

10-17-2009, 08:17 PM

JMO

I'm still miffed why AK's Family did that appearance on LKL. There has been no buzz and support on the news channels. So, basically, all the Family has done is put a negative light on this for AK.

They want it believed the reason this is happening to AK is because she is American. RS is Italian. He is in the same court with the same charges.

I just don't understand AK's Family reasoning. Doesn't make sense.

JMO

The interview was very one-sided. Here's the CNN news article that followed: http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/16/italy.seattle.knox.parents/index.html

Here's one statement that is contradicted my Amanda's own diary writings: ""She was extremely upset, and her roommate testified that when she found out it was Meredith that was killed, she was very upset. She cried; she did all of that. But by the time those photos were taken, it was hours later, and she was being comforted by Raffaele."

In Amanda's diary, written at the police station immediately after the murder, she wrote 'how strange, I think I'll write a song, I'm hungry', and other completely unaffected comments.

The family seems to be suggesting that police had tunnel vision, that they made an error in judgment when they decided that there was evidence of more than one murderer, and that once they focused on a multiple assailant theory they could not back out even though they were wrong.

Jester

10-17-2009, 08:28 PM

From the LKL interview:

What, exactly does this mean? Maybe if I ignore it, it will go away. AK would have been extradited to Italy to stand trial. The evidence is the same whether she fled or not.

JMO

Below is the same comment in the CNN news article. The family has pretty much announced that they wish Amanda had violated police directives and left Italy. They are also implying that, had she left Italy, she would not have been successfully extradited. I expect the prosecution will be very interested in statements like that when it comes to the question of whether Amanda should be released during appeal.

When will the family finally realize that everything they are doing is going against their hopes and wishes!

"After the murder, Mellas said, friends and family told Knox to leave Italy -- to either come home or stay with relatives in Germany -- but Knox refused because she wanted to help find the killer and prove that she had nothing to do with it.

"Many people asked her to leave, but she said no. 'I'm going to stay. I'm going to try and help. I'm going to try and finish school,' " Mellas said.

Looking back, her parents wish Knox had left. Now, all they can do is wait -- and hope things turn out how they believe they should.

"We have to believe that what they're hearing in court -- and it's so clear that she had nothing to do with it -- then they'll come out with the right answer," Curt Knox said. "I mean, that's -- that's what we have to believe.""

Jester

10-18-2009, 12:01 AM

Hi Jester. Of course, that is only so much propaganda. The FOA argue, that because the ILE had accused them, they couldn't then let them go in order to save face. But the proof of this being complete nonsense is the fact that they happily turned around and let Patrick Lumumba go, despite arresting him and validating his arrest in two court hearings. He was let go the same day Rudy Guede was arrested. If the ILE truly believed Amanda and Raffaele to be innocent, they could have easily and it would have been the ideal opportunity, to have also let them go on the same day as Patrick. Indeed, how much easier would it have been for the ILE to simply blame everything on the lone black man, Rudy Guede, rather then also include two white, well connected, middle class white kids? It would be far from being the first time a black man has taken the fall for a crime. It would have solved so many problems for the ILE. The idea that the ILE felt trapped into prosecutiong two white students is a myth, since in reality, the opposite would have been the far easier path for them to take...let them go, blame the black man.

The following is my observations from following various cases over the last couple of years, and is nothing more than my generalized perception of cross border murders/disappearances ... because I look for patterns ...

There are two other cases that come to mind where media came out swinging about the injustices of foreign legal systems, rather than looking at the facts of the case within the context of foreign justice systems. Joran v.d. Sloot, a Dutch citizen in Aruba, was found guilty by the media in the disappearance of an adult student from Alabama. For at least a year the Aruban legal system, the Dutch, and the Arubans were labeled as corrupt and incompetent for not doing what the US media wanted. If he had been an American who was accused of having something to do with the disappearance of an Aruban, the reaction could well have been very different. Ryan Jenkins, a Canadian, was accused of murdering and dismembering his wife, then returning to Canada before committing suicide. Again, the media found him guilty without trial. US police first released false information (armed and dangerous ... not true) to the media, and later went so far as to state that the media coverage could have influenced his decision to commit suicide (hanging by a belt ... no weapon). In the case of Amanda Knox, she has been found innocent by the media and, again, we hear that all too familiar complaint about incompetence and corruption in a foreign legal system ... echoing exactly what we've heard before, particularly in the case of Joran v.d. Sloot.

In fact, Canada, Britain, The Netherlands, Aruba, Italy, and several other developed countries, have legal systems that have more in common with each other than they do with the US legal system. Each time there is a cross border crime involving a US citizen, the US media seems to conclude the if the victim is from the US, the other party is guilty (without trial) and if the accused is from the US, that the accused is innocent.

You are quite right. If Patrick was released two weeks after being arrested, based exclusively on alibi and in spite of witness statements implicating him, then there is no reason to assume that Amanda and Raffaele could not have been released had they been able to provide any alibi ... any consistent facts about what they were doing the night of the murder. Amanda placed herself at the murder by knowing facts about the case that she could not have known without being present during the murder. Raffaele placed himself with Amanda. DNA confirms they were both present during the murder. The fact that they are in jail has nothing to do with the personalities of the employees of the justice system, and everything to do with the evidence. Still, the media has clumsily omitted the evidence, and instead focused on suggestions of incompetence and corruption in the justice system.

It's probably great knowing that the media has your back when involved in a crime in a foreign country ... but ... perhaps the media should be a little more impartial.

Jester

10-18-2009, 12:19 AM

Well, it won't be a matter for the prosecution but for the judge, but you're quite right, the FOA campaign and Knox's family's public attitude has guaranteed that Amanda upon conviction has absolutely no chance of being granted restricted freedom. They've essentially ensured the judge has no choice whatsoever but to remand her in custody.

Now, I have to say, I have some sympathy for Amanda on this point. This after all is not her fault. Rather it is that of those supposedly with the intent of trying to help her...but all they've done is made her situation far worse.

I absolutely agree. Although the support group for Amanda's freedom probably makes Amanda feel a little better about her situation, their actions have resulted in offending people, such as the prosecutor, that are doing no more than their jobs. Blatantly stating that Amanda should have fled the country as soon as her roommate was murdered suggests two things:
1. she is guilty and the only way to avoid conviction is to avoid getting caught; and
2. that if she is free at any time in the future, those who support her freedom will do everything they can to get her out of the country.

Emerald

10-18-2009, 02:18 AM

Jester

10-18-2009, 04:20 AM

IMO, the lack of media support for Amanda is an indication most do not believe AK is innocent. There has been enough 'buzz' from connected commentators (attorneys, columnists) the cause would have been picked up a long time ago.

The CNN homepage topics list is generated by public interest. The Amanda story quickly disappeared.

I was irritated when it was suggested AK should have fled after the crime. Leaving would not have changed the evidence. AK would have still been tried after a lengthy extradition process to have her returned to Italy.

Did the Amanda Knox Story disappear from mainstream TV because no one was interested, or because media was not convinced that she was innocent?

John Q Kelly, the neighbour, that woman who thinks Amanda is a restless teenager ... quite the string or people behind the golden egg (or whatever that fairy tale is ... where everyone grabs onto the golden goose feathers, or the person in front, and can't let go ... human chain).

I guess the question is whether the US would have given her up ... kinda like whether Switzerland will give up Polanski (I expect they will, and he'll argue judicial corruption). Maybe she could have hidden in the Honduras.

If it had to go through extradition and trial, I expect it would go worse ... cuz then you'd also have "fleeing the jurisdiction" to add to the "didn't bother to phone the police until several hours later" problem.

Emerald

10-18-2009, 04:34 AM

Jester

10-18-2009, 08:00 AM

Jester, IMO the public pressure would be against the AK Family to pressure AK back to Italy to stand trial.

Not much is being reported. But, I do know if it was felt she was being 'railroaded' there would be more public support.

The Family's PR machine is wrong in not allowing dissenting opinions when they appear. It would garner more support. This way, it seems like the Family doesn't really want all the facts out there. They don't, but this is not the way to handle it. Now, th AK Family is just coming across like "because I said so".

JMO

I agree ... if Amanda had fled Italy, public pressure (media, court decisions) in the US would have been in favour of her returning to face the accusations, especially given the evidence. The US would have had no alternative but to acknowledge that the evidence was compelling, and agreed to extradition based on current laws. Unless Amanda was in some country that did not have extradition agreements with Italy, like the Honduras, then she would be extradited and she will most likely spend the remainder for her life in a cage.

Too bad Amanda's parents were so eager to get on TV and talk about how they really wanted to get their daughter out of Italy because she was about to be convicted for the murder of a British woman named Meredith Kercher.

Jester

10-18-2009, 08:08 AM

Emerald

10-18-2009, 08:27 AM

Is the Prosecutor aware of that appearance by AK's Family?

Emerald

10-18-2009, 08:38 AM

I still believe there's a possibility for Amanda to be innocent ... if she can explain how she knew that Meredith had her throat slashed before the facts of the crime were released, and if she could walk through the scene as a witness without having a breakdown.

Yes, it's a possibility. Amanda would still need to face a trial even if she had fled Italy. Going to a country with no extradition treaty would not work, unless she planned to never travel home. Can't run from cyberspace.

Emerald

10-18-2009, 02:34 PM

Jester

10-18-2009, 03:57 PM

http://larrykinglive.blogs.cnn.com/

Larry King Live blogs. Several different articles with viewer comments. Most are negative LK only had on the one side guests. Amazing how little support for AK's Family.

Did you see the comments about how tourism will be effected if Amanda is found guilty? Visions of Natalie Holloway all over again.

Jester

10-18-2009, 07:54 PM

This looks like the full LKL interview
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/crime/2009/10/18/lkl.knox.family.long.cnn

Emerald

10-18-2009, 08:59 PM

Jester

10-18-2009, 09:20 PM

Because of the negative response to the recent show, I hope LK will allow a rebuttal panel. At least to make it clear not all Americans hate and feel superior to other cultures.

I thought it very odd the only attorney they could find was one who had never even met the Family and was not versed on the case. John Q Kelly? What an idiot.

JMO
I agree. It's a bit of a shock to see LK entertaining people that make such derogatory remarks about a foreign country ... and for no reason other than that their daughter is involved in the murder of a British woman in Italy.

Jester

10-19-2009, 09:38 AM

I read somewhere in the last couple of days (don't remember where) that Amanda's forensic expert quit sometime in May ... Springtime ... do we know anything more about that, and whether another one was hired?

Emerald

10-19-2009, 10:08 AM

Michael, there has been mostly negative feedback on that appearance. At least that's what I've read. Then, there's the feedback we cannot see..... like those to the private e-mails and comments of the show.

http://www.cnn.com/feedback/cnntv/

Here is the link to send feedback, comments and e-mails to the CNN shows.

JMO

Emerald

10-19-2009, 10:15 AM

It seems a new element has arisen. 'Suspected' semen on Meredith's pillow: Neither side has presented this in court.

Unless the semen stain is proved to be from that night, and belonging to someone besides RG or RS, I don't really understand the relevance to AK's case.

JMO

Emerald

10-19-2009, 10:22 AM

Yes, it's been mentioned a couple of times and it was also mentioned during the Larry King interview. The whole subject of the dissapearing defence expert is a mystery. No explanation has ever been provided. He left the case without even taking his fee. Make of it what you will.

Could he be subpoenaed to testify in the inquiry for the 2nd trial?

My first thought is the expert quit for nefarious activity on the part of the defense. Like bribery. That's because I don't find the AK Family and their methods attractive. Maybe he quit for personal reasons (health, family issues, previous commitments).

JMO

Jester

10-19-2009, 10:47 AM

Yes, it's been mentioned a couple of times and it was also mentioned during the Larry King interview. The whole subject of the disappearing defence expert is a mystery. No explanation has ever been provided. He left the case without even taking his fee. Make of it what you will.

Two things come to mind ... either he wasn't being paid on time, or maybe his interpretation of the DNA and other evidence did not help Amanda. If his results implicated Amanda, I could see her refusing to pay for that. That would also explain why a second expert was not hired ... as they could come to the same conclusion.

It's an interesting point though. The DNA is the point where the defence wanted an independent opinion ... and yet they didn't present their own expert to refute the evidence. It almost seems like the request was made to provide a new argument during appeal.

pixiejoolz

10-19-2009, 11:03 AM

Two things come to mind ... either he wasn't being paid on time, or maybe his interpretation of the DNA and other evidence did not help Amanda. If his results implicated Amanda, I could see her refusing to pay for that. That would also explain why a second expert was not hired ... as they could come to the same conclusion.

It's an interesting point though. The DNA is the point where the defence wanted an independent opinion ... and yet they didn't present their own expert to refute the evidence. It almost seems like the request was made to provide a new argument during appeal.

I would bet that his conclusions were unfavorable to AK's defense. And although it's complete conjecture, I wouldn't be surprised if the family made it so unpleasant for the expert that he was willing to walk away unpaid. jmo, of course.

Jester

10-19-2009, 11:35 AM

I would bet that his conclusions were unfavorable to AK's defense. And although it's complete conjecture, I wouldn't be surprised if the family made it so unpleasant for the expert that he was willing to walk away unpaid. jmo, of course.

Something was not above board ... for sure. I do consulting, and reasons for walking away from a contract are, for example, that there are problems with contract and payment, something is borderline unethical, the client is a pain in the butt, etc. If everything is on the up and up, then everything goes smoothly. It could be that ethics came into the mix. If the expert concluded that Amanda's DNA was on the knife (which is easily enough explained as she used knives at Raffaele's apt), on Meredith's bra, and that it could have been her footprint, then the defence would not want his testimony. They could have asked the expert to only present favourable evidence and suppress unfavourable evidence, which could have compromised the integrity of the expert. It's easier to quietly let the expert disappear. I think that if the experts conclusions were favourable to Amanda, she would have hired someone to replace the one that left.

Jester

10-19-2009, 11:39 AM

It seems a new element has arisen. 'Suspected' semen on Meredith's pillow: PERUGIA SHOCK (http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2009/10/defensive-strategy-for-knox-and.html)

Neither side has presented this in court.

There was a remark somewhere about the use of vaseline. Per the linked article, it's possible that it's vaseline. Why wouldn't the prosecution have the evidence tested? I can understand why the defence would be concerned about the results ... like a double-edged sword ... but the prosecution would have no reason to fear the results. Both semen and vaseline point to sexual activity, whether consensual or assault. Furthermore, the prosecution is interested in truth and fact, so this could add to their argument, or aid in the pursuit of truth.

Jester

10-19-2009, 12:06 PM

Well done :) The police returned to the cottage a few months after the crime and siezed certain specific items to be taken away for testing. One of these items was a small tub of Meredith's vaseline.

So it's quite possible that the evidence was tested by police, that it is vaseline, and that there's nothing more to it than conjecture. Prosecution would have no reason to introduce vaseline evidence on a pillow as it could have been left there at any time and it means very little. I don't remember where I read it, but I remember that it stood out as odd ... someone was asked whether Meredith used vaseline during sexual activity ... don't remember the context anymore.

Emerald

10-19-2009, 12:09 PM

There was a remark somewhere about the use of vaseline. Per the linked article, it's possible that it's vaseline. Why wouldn't the prosecution have the evidence tested? I can understand why the defence would be concerned about the results ... like a double-edged sword ... but the prosecution would have no reason to fear the results. Both semen and vaseline point to sexual activity, whether consensual or assault. Furthermore, the prosecution is interested in truth and fact, so this could add to their argument, or aid in the pursuit of truth.

Good question. It seems obvious, now, why the defense would not want it put in thhe line of evidence fire.

JMO

Emerald

10-19-2009, 12:21 PM

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/54907,people,news,oj-simpson-lawyer-john-q-kelly-slams-public-lynching-of-amanda-knox-meredith-kercher

John Q Kelly, the lawyer and nemesis of OJ Simpson, has called the case against Amanda Knox, the American student on trial in Italy for the murder of Meredith Kercher, "a public lynching".

The lawyer who masterminded the civil case against OJ Simpson, in which the former American football star was found liable for the death of his wife Nicole, was appearing on Larry King Live with Knox's parents, Edda Mellas and Curt Knox.

FWIW... John Q Kelly was the attorney representing the estate of Nicole Simpson for her children.

Robert Petrocelli was the lead attorney on the OJ civil case.

"This is actually a public lynching based on rank speculation and vindictiveness. It's just a nightmare what these people are going through."

John Q Kelly is an expert on this. His constant assault (day and night for many months) on Aruba and it's culture in the name of Natalee Holloway was egregious.

JMO

Jester

10-19-2009, 01:58 PM

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/54907,people,news,oj-simpson-lawyer-john-q-kelly-slams-public-lynching-of-amanda-knox-meredith-kercher

FWIW... John Q Kelly was the attorney representing the estate of Nicole Simpson for her children.

Robert Petrocelli was the lead attorney on the OJ civil case.

John Q Kelly is an expert on this. His constant assault (day and night for many months) on Aruba and it's culture in the name of Natalee Holloway was egregious.

JMO

I wonder what case J Kelly is talking about when he said this:

"There's no forensic evidence, there's no physical evidence: no motive, no opportunity, no confession, no substantive evidence whatsoever against Amanda."

I knew I'd heard of him before, but couldn't quite place it ... making derogatory remarks about foreign country's judicial systems seems to be his only weapon.

Emerald

10-19-2009, 02:20 PM

IIRC, Larry King said the AK Family had never met John Q Kelly until they appeared together on LKL. Even then, they appeared to be in different studios.

John Q Kelly was there for an appearance fee. No knowledge of the case.

Larry King really made a mistake with this one. He should have asked questions and had a representative of the facts of the case.

JMO

Emerald

10-19-2009, 03:09 PM

Too bad they could not dress as respectfully for the Courts as they did for the tv appearance.

KnoxCase

10-19-2009, 10:14 PM

******************
Supreme Court:Nov 2008
"she returned home at about 9 pm, telling her girlfriends not that she had a date but that she was tired and wanted to get to bed early.- The time of death is estimated to be around 11 pm on November 1 (if we presume the meal to have been consumed until 9 pm)."
***************
So here they use 2hrs. after eating to the time of death. Which was later found to be incorrect.
Of course we know the girls changed the time as testimony, and it was moved back closer to 6pm-7pm; they finished eating much earlier.
So why wasn't the time of death moved back 2hrs?
This Autopsy time of death, seems to be way off base for some reason. I think 9pm to 10pm, not 11pm to 12am.

This earlier time frame, of 9-10pm, fits Rudys story too.

Could it be Meredith surprised the burglar, who silenced her quickly with murder?
As Micheli mentioned in his report, possibly Rudy didn't flush, so as not to make himself known to the victim.

I think Rudy had murdered Meredith, much earlier than the 11pm.

Sifting thru his lies,(I think Merdith had a canceled phone call her last, to her mom around 9:10pm..not sure)

Rudy states the juice drink, talk, and sex was over about approx 9:20, and he heard the scream, mid-way into song 3, so approx 9:30pm...he says the murder occurred. The fight before the "unknown man" fled was 5 minutes...then he ran to Filomenas room and saw nothing out the window or a silhouette, then the towel scene, and he fled when he thought he heard noises.

Rudy states he was home cleaning up by 10:30pm, (the cellphones tossed in the bushes, with the last attempt to be used at 10:13pm- this specific location of cellphones being found in the bushes was midway to Rudys house, taking the back route so as not to be seen).
He has a alibi with friends by 11:30pm-00:00. midnight.

It seems more logical, than the early conspiracy theory of Raffaele and Amanda being in the crime scene, it's simpler and logical that Rudy did this alone. One doesn't have to speculate as much with Rudy's timeline.

Interesting too is, all the way thru Matteini, Riccareli, and the Supreme court it was believed that the infamous shoe print in the murder room was Raffaele's, damning evidence, but this was found conclusive that it was Rudys, later on. The prosecution and police all accepted this new fact. There was nothing of Raffaele in the crime scene then. For sometime nothing.

That's why there aren't any footprints or fingerprints, no hair, no bruises, cuts and blood DNA, of Amanda and Raffaele, in the crime scene.
Unless we are to believe they floated in air, during this physical atrocious murder. Its asking too much to believe in the prosecution's theory at this point of three adult humans tromping around in this room with a lot of blood on the floor.

I think Rudy's "toilet alibi" was very telling, he hadn't murdered anyone... yet, as there was no blood in Filomenas bathroom.
But he states at around 9:30pm he came out of the bathroom, never to return to the bathroom, at 9:30 the murder occurred....not 11pm.

jmo.

KnoxCase

10-19-2009, 10:59 PM

8:56 pm: After saying goodbye to Robyn on her way home from the English girls’ house, Meredith calls her mother while walking, but her call is interrupted for some unknown reason <TJMK>
-In evidence on Friday, Stefano Sisani, of the Perugia flying squad, revealed that a call to Kercher’s mother, Arline, in Coulsdon, Surrey, was made from her mobile at 8.56pm on the night of November 1. She used the phone daily to call her mother, who was ill. The call was cut off before she got through. <article?>
--

Found this translation. This little fact always made me wonder. Why do phone calls get cut-off?

and throw in, Raffaele pc last activity, accepted/ proven, was 9:10pm.

Emerald

10-20-2009, 09:03 AM

There's really nothing going on until the end of November. Unless somebody makes another inane tv appearance. Nothing to snark about.

The only important statements from the trial which have any bearing on the case would be the Kercher Family attorney statement and the verdict. The prospect of their statement is very sad, but their perspective will be interesting.

In the US, the Family of the victim is not heard directly by the court until the punishment phase of the trial. Except through direct testimony during the trial. This is one of the things about Italian trial system i especially admire.

Natalee Holloway case taught me about the Dutch Justice System. The trial of Amanda Knox has educated about the Italian Justice System.

Very eye-opening about the some glaring inadequacies in the US Criminal Justice System.

Emerald

10-20-2009, 01:24 PM

http://www.seattlecrimeblog.com/2007/11/articles/murder/amanda-knox-suspect-proud-to-find-meredith-kerchers-corpse/

Here is an article dated Nov 14, 2007. Not even 2 weeks after Meredith Kercher was murdered.

Robyn Butterworth, one of the last people to see Miss Kercher alive, told police in Britain that Amanda Knox, 20, "seemed proud" of being the first person to see the body.

Miss Butterworth, who was on the same university exchange programme as Miss Kercher, said she had run into Knox on the day Miss Kercher's body was found.

In a statement to the Northern Constabulary in Scotland, she said: "I went into the police waiting room. It was around 10.30pm. In the waiting room was Amanda, Meredith's flatmate.

"She kept talking about how she had found Meredith and seemed proud of being the first to find her. She behaved as if she was not upset."

Strange behavior from Amanda Knox or did she really discover Meredith then clean up?

Liars tells the truth in their lies.

JMO

Debb

10-20-2009, 02:25 PM

REF. American media coverage.

I have thought that the American media coverage was biased in her favor. I saw a 48 hours Mystery type special about the story about a year ago and thought it was pathetic. It was very biased in her favor IMO. I also saw a piece last week, I can't recall the details, but I think it was CBS news. They had a short interview with Amanda's father. The lead in to the story definitely gave the inpression that Amanda was innocent and more than "not guilty." Who are they scared of on this?

Jester

10-20-2009, 03:29 PM

http://www.seattlecrimeblog.com/2007/11/articles/murder/amanda-knox-suspect-proud-to-find-meredith-kerchers-corpse/

Here is an article dated Nov 14, 2007. Not even 2 weeks after Meredith Kercher was murdered.

Strange behavior from Amanda Knox or did she really discover Meredith then clean up?

Liars tells the truth in their lies.

JMO

By her own words, then, she was in the bedroom long before police arrived. She also described, for many, that Meredith bled out, adding to her claims that she knew all about the nature of the murder before any information was released.

If we only listen to what Amanda had to say in the 2-3 weeks after the murder, there is little doubt about her involvement. After she had a lawyer, her story changed, but that doesn't mean she's innocent.

Jester

10-20-2009, 03:30 PM

Emerald

10-21-2009, 08:21 AM

The only thing the US media coverage can do is irritate the Italian process. Some of the things I've read indicate the Prosecutor will not put up with any nonsense like the LKL interview. Has he responded yet? Do you think he will?

Emerald

10-21-2009, 03:18 PM

It seemed the AK Family was being very careful not to mention the Prosecutor..

Maybe the reason John Q Kelly was there, without any prior connection to the case may have been because the segment was bumped from Thursday night to Friday night. Those news shows have a list of 'talking heads' they can call on a moments notice. Perhaps JQK was the only one available for Friday night.

Emerald

10-21-2009, 05:31 PM

I agree, Michael. This case is very complex.

I believe AK is guilty of complicity in the crimes against Meredith Kercher. But, then, I don't have the burdensome task of deciding to condemn her to prison for virtually the rest of her life.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind the Italian courts are doing everything humanly possible to assure the proper conclusion.

pixiejoolz

10-21-2009, 06:47 PM

Does anyone remember way, way back at the beginning of this case, that Anne Bremner was somehow connected with it? I almost positive that remember her discussing it on Nancy Grace (I think Bremner is from Seattle, too); but not a peep since then about it. :confused:

Emerald

10-21-2009, 07:18 PM

Anne Bremner appears from time to time. There is never lengthy commentary.

pixiejoolz

10-21-2009, 07:52 PM

Anne Bremner appears from time to time. There is never lengthy commentary.

I've seen her on the show, but I haven't heard her mention this case. Do you know if she is still connected with it? TIA

Emerald

10-21-2009, 08:24 PM

dgfred

10-21-2009, 10:05 PM

Nobody "connected to the case (FOA)" says more than there is no evidence. NObody will take questions or discuss it.

It's baffling that Larry King even allowed the appearance.:confused:

Anne Bremner has the clout to bring this case to tv. So, I don't know what's up.

The things done/said and actual evidence are probably quite hard to explain away :unsure: .

Emerald

10-22-2009, 09:03 PM

Just a bit of trivia.

Washington is a death penalty state. If Amanda Knox was being tried at home, it's possible the prosecutor would be seeking the death penalty for her sentence.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/states-and-without-death-penalty

KnoxCase

10-22-2009, 11:09 PM

Nobody "connected to the case (FOA)" says more than there is no evidence. NObody will take questions or discuss it.

It's baffling that Larry King even allowed the appearance.:confused:

I know what you mean. I understand the train of thought behind the common statement, but it is a vague statement on the pro-defense side.

I think what they really mean is there is "no evidence they believe in" against the two college kids. Obviously the prosecution has presented their case.

The saying "no evidence" also is a refusal to accept the prosecutions presentation, to deny it as hear-say and nothing more than that. Its not that they aren't aware of the pieces of evidence presented by the prosecution.

You have read enough, you understand both sides and both views, i'll assume.

as for Larry King, its just a show and one that was pushed out to make room for Balloon Boy.
No one at my workplace even knows about this case but maybe one or two that heard of it for 10 seconds in a news clip.
Its not of interest where I am, at all...zero, nothing, no interest, not talked about, not discussed, nothing.

If it goes to appeal, all these forums will dissipate I suspect.

jmo...

Jester

10-23-2009, 02:41 AM

I know what you mean. I understand the train of thought behind the common statement, but it is a vague statement on the pro-defense side.

I think what they really mean is there is "no evidence they believe in" against the two college kids. Obviously the prosecution has presented their case.

The saying "no evidence" also is a refusal to accept the prosecutions presentation, to deny it as hear-say and nothing more than that. Its not that they aren't aware of the pieces of evidence presented by the prosecution.

You have read enough, you understand both sides and both views, i'll assume.

as for Larry King, its just a show and one that was pushed out to make room for Balloon Boy.
No one at my workplace even knows about this case but maybe one or two that heard of it for 10 seconds in a news clip.
Its not of interest where I am, at all...zero, nothing, no interest, not talked about, not discussed, nothing.

If it goes to appeal, all these forums will dissipate I suspect.

jmo...

If this is a single assailant murder, how do you explain the barefoot print evidence? There is clear footprint evidence of Rudy with shoes. Did Rudy take off his shoes, shorten his barefoot print during the murder, then put his shoes back on and run away ... after throwing a rock against the window ... using the toilet, ransacking a bedroom ... leaving a knife with Meredith's DNA at her roommates boyfriend's apartment?

I have tried to imagine how Meredith's blood could have gotten into the bathroom without Rudy entering the bathroom, and tried to ... unbelievable ... imagine that the bloody and luminoled footprints were made by Meredith stepping in her own blood, and I can't see a scenario where this works.

Could you please take a couple of minutes and explain how the single assailant theory works with the evidence of barefoot bloody prints on the matt, and luminoled footprint evidence?

I think most people have heard about this case, but they don't really care about it. Sure it's a college murder involving citizens from Britain, Italy, and the US, but there doesn't appear to be much curiosity about who did it. That much has been proven.

Forums can go here and there, but the electronic information will not disappear ... unless it's a blog.

Jester

10-23-2009, 03:04 AM

Jester

10-23-2009, 05:25 AM

There are two barefoot prints in the cottage. They belong to someone that was at the scene of the crime. This has not been disputed.

Rudy has been verified as being at the scene during the murder with shoe prints. He wouldn't take off his shoes after the murder, walk in blood, put his shoes back on, and leave? He kept on his shoes. Besides, the bloody barefoot print doesn't match Rudy's barefoot print.

If Rudy didn't take off his shoes, why are there two unexplained barefoot prints; one in blood, one luminol?

If there is only one assailant, it must have been Meredith that made the bloody footprint on the matt. How could she have walked in her own blood to the bathroom? Impossible. The theory that Rudy wiped up Meredith's footprints, but left his own feces in the other bathroom, is ...

Impossible.

Someone else was in the cottage at the time of the murder.

KnoxCase

10-23-2009, 09:42 AM

If this is a single assailant murder, how do you explain the barefoot print evidence? There is clear footprint evidence of Rudy with shoes. Did Rudy take off his shoes, shorten his barefoot print during the murder, then put his shoes back on and run away ... after throwing a rock against the window ... using the toilet, ransacking a bedroom ... leaving a knife with Meredith's DNA at her roommates boyfriend's apartment?

I have tried to imagine how Meredith's blood could have gotten into the bathroom without Rudy entering the bathroom, and tried to ... unbelievable ... imagine that the bloody and luminoled footprints were made by Meredith stepping in her own blood, and I can't see a scenario where this works.

Could you please take a couple of minutes and explain how the single assailant theory works with the evidence of barefoot bloody prints on the matt, and luminoled footprint evidence?

I think most people have heard about this case, but they don't really care about it. Sure it's a college murder involving citizens from Britain, Italy, and the US, but there doesn't appear to be much curiosity about who did it. That much has been proven.

Forums can go here and there, but the electronic information will not disappear ... unless it's a blog.

Luminol footprints were not tested for blood, one option. Many things make Luminol glow. Many people lived in the cottage and walked barefoot. The defense knows if they looked harder you can find other peoples footprints there, actually many footprints were found, but they were focusing on Amanda and Raffaele, obviously building a case for them not interested in Laura and Filomenas prints. Amanda said her fingerprints are all over the cottage on her guitar, the tv area her room...but the prosecution wasn't interested in this, and somehow media headlines "clean-up! no fingerprints and she lived there!!"
well who would cleanup a place they lived in? really...

And I am by no ways read up, nor intelligent, on the footprints, because they were not in the crime scene of the bedroom. I've seen them a bit. Amanda took showers there, Meredith probably has some footprints around too that will show up with Luminol, Filomena and Laura prints can be found with luminol, as I understand it. The footprints are a real weak point for me.... I tend to look at them as "blobs" no offense to anyone who is a "footprint expert"...but blobs they are.....now the police work on the shoeprints that are very clear, was amazing work how to their favor the police found the shoeprint was Rudy and not Raffaele as originally stated.(this also kind of ruins the conspiracy theory against the police too...)

But the barefootprint blobs, I don't know....one defense guy had a theory Rudy took his shoe off as he was cleaning up. its all speculation isn't it? Is it Raffales? or Rudys...its a frkn blob...I've seen the pictures, and both look like they can fit if you work it right. Too bad there wasn't a few others.

many don't believe Rudy was helping Meredith but trying a short lived attempt to cleanup but the blood was too much, and he fled. But Rudy states he was in the infamous bathroom, not once but twice, as the towels soaked in blood very quickly he returned to get another.
The bathroom mat footprint is the big question,as I understand it.
I don't know, on its own its not enough. How it got there?
Why were all the footprints in the crime scene LEft side? Idk?
But they nailed Rudy on those tennis shoe prints...excellent work.

yes, Rudy told he went to the bathroom twice with the bloody Towel scene, after looking out Filomenas window and story1) couldn't see anything it was dark ...story2) saw a silhoutte that could have been Amanda all the way up to the street by the gate.
But this is the hard part for me, Rudys early testimonys were "couldn't see anything"...the only light was the lamp in Merediths bedroom, it was dark. Then only after the "interrogation 4 months later, Rudy can amazingly point to Raffaele and Amanda! the magic Edgardo Giobbi INterrogator Lying Squad Close the Case again! whooola!

Rudy is the only one who can probably tell the truth, but he's a habitual liar it seems. So everything is partial truths, partial lies.

Reading his story though, some is interesting like how dark it was, only the bedroom light was on, the floor lamp....no one else would add that.

but yet, Meredith discussed guys openly with close friends, and she said nothing of a consensual date with Rudy.

how about Raffaeles DNA on the bra clasp?
I think its obviously contaminated with 5 other peoples mixed DNA...but yet it doesn't answer the question, How did Raffaele's DNA get on that bra clasp?
How did all the other peoples DNA get on the mixed dna Bra Clasp?
Its very damning for Raffaele. Its a High Peak, strong read, as I understand it....but yet its also contaminated with other peopels dna?

you mention the knife, but personally I think thats a real weak piece for the prosecution. almost 100% experts believe its not the murder weapon , wrong size. the dna was miniscule to allow a fair re-test, and the lab report shows "too low" was read by the tool that provides dna data.....and for me, it doesn't match the bloody knife pattern on the bedsheet in the crime room. it doesn't fit hardly at all. very weak.

I think Rudy knows, he probably tossed it, like he did his bloody tennis shoes. He was reading up on the case as he hid in Germany. This is why
Micheli didn't believe him often, when he tried to pin it on Amanda and Raffaele, it was facts released from the news, contradicting how dark out it was and no light in the cottage as he said.

Emerald

10-23-2009, 10:30 AM

Is November 1 Daylight Savings Time 2009, like when Amanda phoned her mom at 12:47 and it was 4:47 (not quite DST in Seattle until the 3rd or 4th).

I wonder if Amanda will think about that night on November 1 ... the night she lost an hour, gained an hour, or otherwise misplaced an hour in DST. Coincidentally, so did her boyfriend ... misplace an hour or two. They both claimed marijuana induced amnesia, but no one believes this. Reefer Madness is known to be a myth.

I'm a child of the '60s. There was some marijuana which had been laced with other potent drugs. I've often wondered if the pot AK and RS claim to have smoked may have been laced. They knew it, but won't admit it.

JMO

Jester

10-23-2009, 11:38 AM

And I am by no ways read up, nor intelligent, on the footprints, because they were not in the crime scene of the bedroom. I've seen them a bit. Amanda took showers there, Meredith probably has some footprints around too that will show up with Luminol, Filomena and Laura prints can be found with luminol, as I understand it. The footprints are a real weak point for me.... I tend to look at them as "blobs" no offense to anyone who is a "footprint expert"...but blobs they are.....now the police work on the shoeprints that are very clear, was amazing work how to their favor the police found the shoeprint was Rudy and not Raffaele as originally stated.(this also kind of ruins the conspiracy theory against the police too...)

But the barefootprint blobs, I don't know....one defense guy had a theory Rudy took his shoe off as he was cleaning up. its all speculation isn't it? Is it Raffales? or Rudys...its a frkn blob...I've seen the pictures, and both look like they can fit if you work it right. Too bad there wasn't a few others.

<snipped for space>

But ... back to my question ... in the single assailant theory, how is the bloody footprint on the matt explained? Either Rudy took off his shoes after the murder, traipsed in the blood ... or someone else was there. No? How many murderers who know there are 4 tenants, and know they could be discovered any moment, take off their shoes after they murder?

Even if it is a blob ... what is the explanation?

dgfred

10-23-2009, 12:59 PM

Plus the bloody footprints that had to lead up to the one on the mat were cleaned up. Why would Rudi do that?

Emerald

10-23-2009, 01:10 PM

It's understandable an immediate response is a try to assist a gravely wounded Meredith. The towels are evidence. Whoever was there, then tried to clean and stage the scene. Why would Rudy do this? Does the DNA on the towels only match Rudy and Meredith? Amanda lived in the home, so her DNA could be explained away on the towels.

The rifled rooms of the house were Filomena's and Meredith's. Very odd the only thing removed from Amanda's room (which is between the other 2) was the lamp for light in Meredith's room.

JMO

Emerald

10-23-2009, 01:13 PM

Plus the bloody footprints that had to lead up to the one on the mat were cleaned up. Why would Rudi do that?

dgfred, looks like we were posting at the same time.

If Rudy was hte one doing the clean up, why are his the only foot prints not cleaned up?

KnoxCase

10-23-2009, 03:22 PM

But ... back to my question ... in the single assailant theory, how is the bloody footprint on the matt explained? Either Rudy took off his shoes after the murder, traipsed in the blood ... or someone else was there. No? How many murderers who know there are 4 tenants, and know they could be discovered any moment, take off their shoes after they murder?

Even if it is a blob ... what is the explanation?

Like I said I don't know either. As someone said "it's up to Rudy to tell the whole story"...whether he will or not is up to him.

One person said it was Rudy took a shoe off, maybe to clean blood from his shoe? As you say maybe he took his shoes off for some cleanup?...we can guess all day. Rudy had been to the house and he knew no one was home, upstairs or downstairs. Maybe he did know the tenants would be gone except Meredith? He knew the boys well and had met Meredith and Amanda. He claims to have spoken to Meredith Oct 31, maybe she told him? But this is only guessing.

But its no different than guessing it was Raffaele hopping on one foot in blood? Why would he be there leaving one footprint, when there is nothing to show his blood ever met his foot in the bedroom?
....he has been found to not have even one footprint in the murder scene, so its impossible to have any testimony to it being Raffaele.
Its even more difficult to fantasize Raffaele left a barefoot there, when he has no bloody barefootprint in the bedroom.

Only Rudy has numerous shoe-prints in the bedroom Which we can assume made his shoes bloody. Maybe he took one off to clean his Nike? This makes more logic than dreaming up Raffaele dropped one footprint somehow in blood and left one print somehow.

"if I toy with this thought, this theory of Raffaele one solo bloody barefootprint... it doesn't make any sense!
His shoes were found to not have any blood on them, therefore he wouldn't need to wash his feet. He never admitted to being in the bathroom as Rudy did. So there's no testimony, no bloody tennis shoes, no bloody socks nothing....and they searched his house and took his shoes.
"if" we imagine a dream, he had been cleaning up blood in the murder scene bedroom, where are Raffaele's footprints in the murder scene? there aren't any. Nothing works easily for this "dream" of Raffaele.

"If" I was a juror, the bathmat footprint would not convince me of anything, or exclude anything. The Bathroom Mat Footprint, would be left in the pile of "non-conclusive samples" like the bloody knife print on the bedsheet. imo.

Using Logic- you got me wondering more about this...:blink:

Which is easier to be logical?

A) Rudy who says he was in the room in a bloody event, going back and forth to the bedroom in a bloody situation...and having blood on his shoe, so it is possible he took a shoe off to clean it in the bathroom.

or

B) Raffaele who has no footprints at all in the crime scene and says he never showered there.

Call in the experts!
The experts cancel each other out, one saying maybe Raffaele....one maybe Rudy...."blob". partial footprint, and when a foot is moving it can distort the print too, someone wasn't standing still intentionally leaving a print like they do in prison. non-conclusive.

Raffaele leaving one odd print in the bathroom? but none in the murder scene? Its doesn't sound right because it probably isn't right.

I'd have to choose (A)......
The Lone Wolf, Rudy works because its "more real".
Rudy has motive for theft, he has motive for sex, he has the preponderance of evidence against him in the crime scene and in and on the victim.
Rudy was arrested for burglary, not charged, but arrested.
He created a "date"...his hand in the purse? why would he not be the thief? No one elses hands was found to be in the purse, no one elses DNA or prints was in the purse.

He admits to being in blood, he admits blood on his shoes, and he admits to running into and out of the bathroom, he admitted to throwing away the bloody shoes in Germany....

He didn't explain the one bare footprint...I wonder if he ever will?

KnoxCase

10-23-2009, 04:13 PM

The other 'peoples' DNA on the clasp are Meredith's, which one would expect to find, Amanda Knox's and two unknown femlaes which is probably Laura's and Filomena's. But those one would expect to find there since the girls shared laundry facilities. The profiles aside from Meredith's and Raffaele's, are also very low, due to the point being almost unreadable. The amount of Raffaele's DNA on the clasp indicates it could only have got there by direct and vigorous conact. High profiles don't occur by contamination.

It's important because it doesn't matter if a sample is very low, if it's a non-noisy reading, as the profile on the knife was. One would expect a noisy sample if contamination was the cause. Then, combined with the fact Meredith's DNA has no buisness being on there and the fact that the knife matches the main fatal wound, then it's important.

Thats, interesting on the bra clasp, I'd never heard that it was females, only unknown. The laundry factor...

I've been reading on the "too low" and it's not good for the knife evidence. Applied Biosystems tool, using Geneie software...."too low" means not readable, I think was understood by non-technical people like the Judges and Jurors.

A person is not too turn up and amplify things for their convenience, these tools are not to be adjusted to force a reading. There was also no baseline. So I disagree on the knife.
Secondly it was not a proper amount. As good as these tools are they are not "magic machines" and need certain amounts for a good sample.
Legally it seems unfair there just isn't enough for a re-test should the jurors request it.

Among all the other issues with knife, the preponderance of the experts info also shows its not the right weapon for this stabbing.

A small knife, penknife, 3"...seems to be the majority on this issue.

Emerald

10-23-2009, 05:22 PM

KnoxCase,

Why would Rudi bother to clean anything after the crime, leaving so much more?

That's why the 'lone wolf' theory does not work for me. Well, that and the forensic evidence left by Amanda.

Also, Amanda's room was not touched.

ETA.... I'd like to know who locked Meredith's bedroom door AFTER the crime.

Emerald

10-23-2009, 08:28 PM

Is the 2nd level trial as long as the first one? Will it take months?

Emerald

10-23-2009, 09:02 PM

Devil's advocate......

Let's say for a moment the scream was Amanda when she realized what had happened. The running feet sound was Amanda. The next morning she returns to clean up, lock Meredith's door. Hoping someone else would officially 'discover' the crime.

When no one else appeared to 'discover' what had happened, Amanda summons Rafaele.

Amanda knew what was behind the bedroom door before police entered.

JMO

KnoxCase

10-23-2009, 10:08 PM

Stefanoni is the expert and is therefore on the cutting edge. Not the engineers that build the machines. She is best place to know what can and can't be done.

The knife is compatable with the fatal wound. It is not compatible with one of the smaller wounds. The prosecution have always maintained that more then one knife was probably used.

Oh no, this will never sell. The OEM's who build these tools are very sure of how they are to be ran. They have whats called specifications and calibrations that are industry standard.

Adjusting anything is like adjusting the speedometer on your car so it reads 55 instead of the true value of 64 (for example)...

I don't think anyone is going to buy the knife is compatible. Thats kind of a lost argument.

Its only a stretch, but that there might be more than one knife but the Kitchen knife is definately not the murder weapon.

KnoxCase

10-23-2009, 10:26 PM

Rudy Nov 18.

So the article implys he's going to try to pin it on Amanda and Raffaele....good luck with that.
Gee, he forgot no one buys his "date" alibi. Merediths friends kind of ruined that alibi.

oh.. so about that dna of his, inside and on Meredith..and his bloody tennis shoe prints everywhere in the murder location...and in Merediths purse.

I'm afraid not many professionals buy his "toilet alibi" either. basically he says within 7 minutes, aka 2.5 Ipod songs, some stranger ran in killed Meredith and fled while he was pooping during his date.

What is interesting is we are starting to hear his final story. He's not helping anyone, he's trying to be 100% innocent, alone, and blame it all on the two college kids. He's trying to maintain the date and toilet alibi's.

Unfortunately this means many questions will go unanswered.

KnoxCase

10-23-2009, 10:56 PM

Laura's was gone through too. Her bag was open and had been gone through and so forth. However, it wasn't in a mess like Meredith's and Filomena's.

As for the towels, no DNA has been taken from them.

Amanda's room had luminol revealed bare footprints that match Amanda. The luminol pint in the corridor that mathces Amanda is right outside Meredith's door, pointing towards it.
********
Torre also pointed out that the luminol footprints that investigators say are of Knox's bare feet cannot be because Knox's second toe is longer than her big toe, and that characteristic is not apparent in the lumino-enhanced prints. He also pointed out that the bare footprints of the other two women who lived in the house were not taken for comparison, nor were those of the victim.
********

I was just sifting thru old notes, and came across this about the footprints.

KnoxCase

10-23-2009, 11:32 PM

This is only a sample of a few knife testimony's, in brief.

I couldn't find the article mentioning the size of the bloody knife pattern. But here's some old snips...

****************
Armando Finzi, an assistant in the Perugia police department's organized crimes unit, first discovered the knife in Sollecito's kitchen drawer. He said the first thing he noticed upon entering the place was a "strong smell of bleach." He opened the drawer and saw "very shiny and clean" knife lying on top of the silverware tray.

"It was the first knife I saw," he said. When pressed on cross-examination, said his "investigative intuition" led him to believe it was the murder weapon because it was compatible with the wound as it had been described to him. With gloved hands, he placed the knife in a new police envelope, taped it shut with Scotch tape, then placed it inside a folder, he said. There were smaller and bigger knives in the drawer, but no others were taken into evidence from the kitchen, he said. A small knife was taken into evidence from Sollecito's bedroom, along with other items.

The Knife Poll:

1) Dr. Lalli Nov 5, states the fatal wound was a penknife.

2) Torre, who is a renowned forensic consultant in Italy and has worked on a number of high-profile cases, told the judges and jurors today he believes the three cuts to Kercher's throat were made by a smaller knife, with a blade that was, at most, 3 inches long. He feels the the big wide slash to her throat was made by the sawing action of the smaller knife.

3) (Kercher witness) Bacci said that the knife the prosecutors believe is the murder weapon is compatible with the largest and deepest cut in Kercher's throat but is not compatible with another, smaller wound. This is the first time a witness for the prosecution has mentioned the possibility that more than one knife might have been used

4) the judge-appointed forensic expert who reviewed the evidence in the weeks after the homicide raised questions about the compatibility of the knife as the murder weapon, testifying that it did not match one of the two knife wounds on the right hand side of Kercher's neck.
"A blade of that dimension going in 4 centimeters deep would have made a wider wound," Cingolani said. "Many other knives are probably more compatible with a lesion of that type."

5) The judge Mattenini, in her 19 page report, said it was not yet clear who inflicted the fatal wound, but her ruling said Sollecito's footprints were found in Kercher's room and identified the murder weapon as a knife with a 3.3-inch-long blade that the Italian usually had with him.
(of course the Raffaele footprints were later proven to be Rudys)

Jester

10-24-2009, 01:30 AM

<snipped for space>

Which is easier to be logical?

A) Rudy who says he was in the room in a bloody event, going back and forth to the bedroom in a bloody situation...and having blood on his shoe, so it is possible he took a shoe off to clean it in the bathroom.

or

B) Raffaele who has no footprints at all in the crime scene and says he never showered there.

So, with the single assailant theory, there doesn't seem to be any explanation for the other footprints without assuming the experts are wrong, or creating scenarios that are inconsistent with other facts. Rudy wouldn't clean up a couple of footprints, and leave other obvious evidence, so he didn't clean up. The luminol footprint is a footprint, not a blob, and the bloody footprint has been identified by experts as a footprint, not a blob. That leaves us with two unexplained footprints that are smaller than Rudy's foot, so they must belong to someone else. The single assailant theory seems to rely on the familiar claim that experts are wrong ... the only argument that has been presented by defence. If we assume experts are not wrong, then there is no alternative but to conclude there were 2-3 assailants.

Emerald

10-24-2009, 07:50 AM

I'm one who does not subscribe to AK as a party to the actual murder, but the periphery of the crime. Staging, coverup attempt and negligent in assisting the victim.

The cleaning of the footprints could have been an attempt to not leave a mess behind. The room mates had recently chastised AK about her housekeeping habits. She seems to exhibit an attitude of "if I ignore it, it will go away". From what I've observed of the AK Family PR, this is a common thread. So, maybe, it was "if i ignore what I just witnessed, cleaning the footprints will make it go away".

Judging by the things Amanda lied about immediately, shows she had time to consider what she deemed condemning to herself. The lies are on the same level as those told to make AK paint herself as completely innocent in the disturbing the peace crime. Like "It's not my pot. I'm just holding it for a friend"

Lots of platitudes and trivialities. But they seems to fit. So does the evidence.

KnoxCase

10-24-2009, 04:21 PM

I'm a bit of that perspective too....Emerald.
It's the middle "gray" area thats not fully answered for me.

Its not that I can't believe another theory, its that the ones presented are too polarized for me, and none fully work 100%, imo...

The Lone Wolf is my more logical stance, but there's some very compelling things that don't fit with it still.

There's little oddities that don't add up, like being stoned as a alibi. Stoned- doesn't work for me either. Forgetting whether you had sex doesn't work too well... changing stories, and I'm not talking about the coerced-interrogation.

The Mignini theory doesn't work for the Lone Wolf club, either, not at all actually.
It leaves out logical motive, it ignores way too much science. It expects one to believe in fiction.

the scientific things, I tend to appreciate more.
Autopsy, Alternate Theories-Perugia Murder website on stabbing angles and explanations that are extremely interesting explaining the blood patterns. on this site its a solo murderer form behind, but also brings the two college kids into it somehow, though in a minor way. Which is

Accusations have to be able to stand up to scientific work, and our current technology is the best we have for now.

What do you do with a miniscule DNA? that normally can be retested, but in this case the prosecution says it was ruined and the defense has to take their word for it.? and many other questions focused on this, not because the defense are trying to be vicious, but because this is one of the two most critical pieces presented to put someone in prison for life, for murder.
A knife taken, and ran to a lab, swabbed and ran in a Applied Biosystem 3130 using GeneMapper software revision 3.2.1.
"too low" readings noted....then something happened and numbers came up? Maybe the "too low" means nothing, maybe its normal procedure to get "too low", its obvious highly trained people work here, its known humans can make machines read whatever they want.

here's the link if your interested in learning how to operate one of these tools... http://www3.appliedbiosystems.com/cms/groups/mcb_support/documents/generaldocuments/cms_041468.pdf

and this is just basic 101, junior high level stuff....yikes:crying:
lol.. if you can grasp this stuff, you'd have a great secure job career!

you could operate one......you don't have to know how a computer is built to operate one correctly. The tool, if calibrated , will provide all the millions of calculations...amazing.

**********

Another gray area is Naras Super Hearing = Time of Death

Nara says later in the night.....Rudy says earlier during his 7 minutes of Ipod listening the murder occurred....

So like Nara's super hearing testimony. I don't know how the results would turn out?
But I think they need to to test it. Its a simple test to run, maybe a few hours once the equipment was setup. Help eliminate the gray-issues.... I personally think its impossible for Nara to hear this, but I've been wrong before.

but shouldn't the court be interested enough to run a simple test?

or are the courts in too much of a hurry?

and soon Rudy, trying to pin it all on Raffaele and Amanda, but this contradicts his earlier testimonys he couldn't see anyone because it was too dark?

a trial of "great confusion".

KnoxCase

10-24-2009, 05:13 PM

So, with the single assailant theory, there doesn't seem to be any explanation for the other footprints without assuming the experts are wrong, or creating scenarios that are inconsistent with other facts. Rudy wouldn't clean up a couple of footprints, and leave other obvious evidence, so he didn't clean up. The luminol footprint is a footprint, not a blob, and the bloody footprint has been identified by experts as a footprint, not a blob. That leaves us with two unexplained footprints that are smaller than Rudy's foot, so they must belong to someone else. The single assailant theory seems to rely on the familiar claim that experts are wrong ... the only argument that has been presented by defence. If we assume experts are not wrong, then there is no alternative but to conclude there were 2-3 assailants.

The defense are experts too and they disagree with the prosecution experts.

I shouldn't have used the word "blob", maybe a non-conclusive footprint pattern. The experts have reviewed this and that in itself makes it important to this case, obviously. Not in my top pieces of evidence list, because the experts can't agree on them. Now take the shoeprint of Rudys tennis shoe.,..here is an example that made a 100% statement.

Footprint Verdict?

so if this footprint evidence is so great a issue of guilt, then what is to be said when there are none? (as in the murder location)

The prosecution is: footprints = guilt.

So applying this formula, inverted, "if " Footprints = Guilt....then "No Footprints= Innocent"

.......no footprints were found of Amanda nor Raffaele in the murder location.

and "if" Amanda and Raffaele were not in the murder location, why would they cleanup a bloody cottage? they wouldn't, of course.

jmo......

Emerald

10-24-2009, 05:28 PM

The defense are experts too and they disagree with the prosecution experts.

I shouldn't have used the word "blob", maybe a non-conclusive footprint pattern. The experts have reviewed this and that in itself makes it important to this case, obviously. Not in my top pieces of evidence list, because the experts can't agree on them. Now take the shoeprint of Rudys tennis shoe.,..here is an example that made a 100% statement.

Footprint Verdict?

so if this footprint evidence is so great a issue of guilt, then what is to be said when there are none? (as in the murder location)

The prosecution is: footprints = guilt.

So applying this formula, inverted, "if " Footprints = Guilt....then "No Footprints= Innocent"

.......no footprints were found of Amanda nor Raffaele in the murder location.

and "if" Amanda and Raffaele were not in the murder location, why would they cleanup a bloody cottage? they wouldn't, of course.

jmo......

So far, I'm not believing RS was there until after the fact the next day. Amanda was there then night of and probably at the time of the murder. It's also possible the scream heard was Amanda before she fled to RS'.

In that case, what would Amanda have witnessed making her scream before fleeing?

Just an opinion.

Jester

10-24-2009, 11:45 PM

KnoxCase -

Experts for the defence have a vested interest. Their job is to offer an opposing theory to that of the prosecution's, always. It doesn't matter how far fetched that interpretation may be, as long as it is opposed to the prosecition.

But, another essential difference, a prosecition expert that does not find anything incriminationg against a suspect still retains their job. Neither do they get a bonus if they do so. Not so for defence experts. Their employment depends on and only as far as, they say something useful to the defence. Therefore, their 'opinions' do NOT carry the same weight. Instead, they must be judged purely on the strength of their interpretations based on the actual data.

We have to keep in mind that Amanda's expert disappeared in the Spring, and was not replaced. It's impossible that there are no other experts to replace the one that disappeared, so it could be that any expert hired by Amanda will not give the opinion she wants.

Jester

10-25-2009, 09:26 AM

Hi Jester. Indeed, some may not and may value their integrity and walk. But also some will. For example, Torre. Once he starts on a case he never quits. I think it can be said he's a 'serial defence expert'. He goes from one case to the next. His history isn't that good either, since he's lost nearly every case he's consulted on. One of the most recent and famous of which was the Cogne case.

Hello Michael. It's uncertain what happened to Amanda's defence argument, and experts, in the Spring of 2009, but it looks like if fizzled out ... or didn't have substance.

Amanda isn't going to claim unfair experts because she couldn't find one in her favour, dragging out the trial, is she?

KnoxCase

10-25-2009, 11:06 AM

I don't think it requires 'super hearing' at all. If you note the location of the cottage in relation to Nara's apartment the cottage sits at the base of a natural ampitheartre.

As for the test, the judge refused the test because the defence could have run the test any time leading up to and throughout the trial and failed to do so and instead left it, deliberately I feel, to the last moment after when buisness had been concluded.

Amplitheatre...well thats true, but this is why we use scientific tools and public testing with professionals to determine things.
Its not what you "think", or I think...thats the whole idea of proving something with scientific technology we have available.

This audio test is a very simple and low cost test to run. Its a very tried and true science, very old and well documented.
I think they will allow it, or request it be ran in the Appeal definitely, if it came to that.

The main point is for the time of death.
The "scream" won't by itself, prove innocence or guilt, it doesn't remove a murder occurred, but it helps clear away some of the "unknown". Was it 9:30pm most likely or 11pm? Does this matter?

you seem to place blame on the defense for late request, but the police never ran the test either...they are the ones who should have first verified the Nara claim.
The police should verify stories before accepting them as "the truth without proof" shouldn't they?
Is it their common practice to just accept what little old ladies say in the night as fact?

do you ever wonder?
why no one else heard this Jimi Hendrix decibel volume scream?
not one other apartment complex tenant....not anyone in the street, no one in a store or car driving by...
not even one other person heard this incredibly loud scream?

KnoxCase

10-25-2009, 11:14 AM

KnoxCase -

In the case of the DNA testing on the knife, only the defence experts have an issue with it. It is not only the defence experts that have said the test was good, but also the experts for the Kercher family who examined the exact same data, in this case Professor Francesca Torricelli testified to the validity of the work on the stand. This tells me everything really, since it is the Kerchers and their experts that can be referred to as the truly neutral parties in this case.

So you sound like you know the stance on every juror already?

"Only" the defense debates the DNA? Do we know what the judge and jurors think? They are in the courtroom too.

Obviously the prosecution believes in Stafani's work. Several posters not involved in this case find the DNA weak.

You use the Kerchers as an insinuation anything this lawyer says is golden, because he represents them. But this isn't the case, he's just a lawyer who has sided with the PM since the beginning it seems.

But even they didn't argue the knife wasn't the murder weapon....there might have been two! they changed the story too.

So how can this knife have DNA and not be the murder weapon?

You might be right, you might be wrong.... where's the bloody knife pattern the Kitchen Knife doesn't fit that either?

I think the Kitchen knife in its entirety is very very weak evidence at this point. I don't understand how others still hold onto the confidence in this knife as the murder weapon.

KnoxCase

10-25-2009, 11:31 AM

So far, I'm not believing RS was there until after the fact the next day. Amanda was there then night of and probably at the time of the murder. It's also possible the scream heard was Amanda before she fled to RS'.

In that case, what would Amanda have witnessed making her scream before fleeing?

Just an opinion.

you take this from the interrogation confession, obviously. Amanda heard the scream.

Alternate Theories website, I'm new to...mentions the same thing.
The Raffaele tale of her being gone until 1am...etc. thats the theory there I think. I don't fully know, but there is some really interesting perspectives on the knife angles and science. its hard for me to comprehend, there could be one attacker and yet the college kids are involved somehow....but who knows?

This "choosing" which tale to believe" really confuses me...and why is there so many tales, so many versions, one splintered off from another?

KnoxCase

10-25-2009, 11:39 AM

I strongly dissagree. It is the the actual scientists in the field, in the front line, that push the cutting edge, that move the field forward. The machine you refer to is already old, designed and built in a time when the field hadn't advanced (including its philosophy) to the point it has moved forward to now. The machine was built calibrated in line with protocols as they were 'then', not as they are 'now'.

Ir's also important to know, engineers will always set calibration to a point where they can absolutely 'guarantee' there won't be any failure. As a friend of mine recently pointed out elsewhere, it's like the submarine commanders in the movies, were maximum design depth is set at 100 metres, but they take the subs down to 200 metres to avoid the depth charges. They can easily handle those tolerances, just the engineers won't put in that in the guarantee in order to cover their behinds and those of their company.

What is important is not peak size, but peak to noise ratio. There was no noise. That rules out contamination. Contamination dictates a sample must be noisy.

The machine I refer to that you call old is the one Stafni used.

KnoxCase

10-25-2009, 11:40 AM

The Knife Poll:

1) Dr. Lalli Nov 5, states the fatal wound was a penknife.

2) Torre, who is a renowned forensic consultant in Italy and has worked on a number of high-profile cases, told the judges and jurors today he believes the three cuts to Kercher's throat were made by a smaller knife, with a blade that was, at most, 3 inches long. He feels the the big wide slash to her throat was made by the sawing action of the smaller knife.

3) (Kercher witness) Bacci said that the knife the prosecutors believe is the murder weapon is compatible with the largest and deepest cut in Kercher's throat but is not compatible with another, smaller wound. This is the first time a witness for the prosecution has mentioned the possibility that more than one knife might have been used

4) the judge-appointed forensic expert who reviewed the evidence in the weeks after the homicide raised questions about the compatibility of the knife as the murder weapon, testifying that it did not match one of the two knife wounds on the right hand side of Kercher's neck.
"A blade of that dimension going in 4 centimeters deep would have made a wider wound," Cingolani said. "Many other knives are probably more compatible with a lesion of that type."

5) The judge Mattenini, in her 19 page report, said it was not yet clear who inflicted the fatal wound, but her ruling said Sollecito's footprints were found in Kercher's room and identified the murder weapon as a knife with a 3.3-inch-long blade that the Italian usually had with him.
(of course the Raffaele footprints were later proven to be Rudys)

6) Mr. Introna testified that the cut on Ms. Kercher’s neck was made with a three-to-three-and-a-half-inch blade, ANSA said. The coroner, Francesco Introna

Emerald

10-25-2009, 03:45 PM

you take this from the interrogation confession, obviously. Amanda heard the scream.

Alternate Theories website, I'm new to...mentions the same thing.
The Raffaele tale of her being gone until 1am...etc. thats the theory there I think. I don't fully know, but there is some really interesting perspectives on the knife angles and science. its hard for me to comprehend, there could be one attacker and yet the college kids are involved somehow....but who knows?

This "choosing" which tale to believe" really confuses me...and why is there so many tales, so many versions, one splintered off from another?

KnoxCase, if you are asking a question, I'd be happy to discuss, but am confused.

My post was hypothetical if the scream Amanda heard was her own when she witnessed the aftermath of the game. Amanda was there for the initial portion of the game; not expecting the outcome of death.

Was the final murderous cut a result of a left to right (or right to left) slashing stroke? From behind or in front of the victim? Or the result of the victim falling into the blade held to her throat?

Emerald

10-25-2009, 07:32 PM

Question....

Why did the defense wait so long to request a 3rd opinion on the scientific evidence? What's the point in waiting until the trial is over?

KnoxCase

10-25-2009, 08:57 PM

The judges also cross examined all of the experts that took the stand.

I 'know' the judges 'think' that no more expert witnesses are necessary.

NO, Maresca speaks FOR the Kerchers. He is there to represent their views both in the court and to the media. Maresca has sided with nobody, except the Kerchers.

And I wasn't just referring to the Kercher's lawyer, but also to the Kercher's own experts who have testified on the stand and each have supported the prosecution evidence and interpretation.

Because the prosecurion believe more then one knife was used on the victim. Three attackers = potentially, three knives.

The hearing began with a request from the Kercher family lawyer Francesco Maresca to have the hearing heard behind closed doors, but this was rejected by Judge Massei. The application was made to "protect the dignity and" of Miss Kercher.
****
So Maresca is a paid lawyer, and he is being paid by the Kerchers or the city?

wait a minute?
Its 3 knives now? I haven't ever heard anyone state that before?

I just posted a list of experts disagreeing with the 6.5" knife. The knife the prosecution is running around with is weak.
and btw, this 6.5" Kitchne Knife is the only piece, a weak piece, of evidence, that puts the accused in the room. I never came across even one article or report that mentioned 3 knifes being used?

3 knives? You think Mignini will say there was 3 knives in his closing?

I'm still open to any new evidence though, but it appears to be a theft murder/rape of one person....by one person. jmo.

the police evidence that convicted Rudy is very strong, clear footprints, fingerprints, dna in and on the victim, footprints in blood, confession by the accused of being there, and his motive seems believable.

KnoxCase

10-25-2009, 09:09 PM

KnoxCase, if you are asking a question, I'd be happy to discuss, but am confused.

My post was hypothetical if the scream Amanda heard was her own when she witnessed the aftermath of the game. Amanda was there for the initial portion of the game; not expecting the outcome of death.

Was the final murderous cut a result of a left to right (or right to left) slashing stroke? From behind or in front of the victim? Or the result of the victim falling into the blade held to her throat?

I was just reading an old article, that some felt that is similar what happened. The murder wasn't intended, and they weren't in the room, the murder was an accident but they were all there. call it the "game theory". ??????????

Emerald

10-25-2009, 09:41 PM

KnoxCase,

Why shouldn't the victim's Family have a voice in the judicial process?

KnoxCase

10-26-2009, 07:53 PM

KnoxCase,

Why shouldn't the victim's Family have a voice in the judicial process?

I never said they shouldn't.
But it is obvious someone hurting so much, like a family would, can make emotional decisions instead of hard decisions based on facts and evidence.

Maybe another theory will emerge?

One things for sure, Rudy is going to try to pin the entire crime on the two college kids, and try to convince the court the sex was consensual and not a rape, and that he's not a burglar who carried knifes around, and that he was trying to save Meredith. It was a left handed Italian man. He couldn't see anything because it was dark and the only light on in the cottage was a lamp and when he looked out Filomeans window it was too dark to see....until he talked to Mignini, then he said he could tell it was Amanda up by the gate, by the road a silhoutte...and it was Raffaele who murdered Meredith.

Why do you think Rudy, who doesn't side with Amanda & Raffaele, why didn't he place them both in the murder location?

Emerald

10-26-2009, 08:26 PM

I never said they shouldn't.
But it is obvious someone hurting so much, like a family would, can make emotional decisions instead of hard decisions based on facts and evidence.

Maybe another theory will emerge?

One things for sure, Rudy is going to try to pin the entire crime on the two college kids, and try to convince the court the sex was consensual and not a rape, and that he's not a burglar who carried knifes around, and that he was trying to save Meredith. It was a left handed Italian man. He couldn't see anything because it was dark and the only light on in the cottage was a lamp and when he looked out Filomeans window it was too dark to see....until he talked to Mignini, then he said he could tell it was Amanda up by the gate, by the road a silhoutte...and it was Raffaele who murdered Meredith.

Why do you think Rudy, who doesn't side with Amanda & Raffaele, why didn't he place them both in the murder location?

JMO

AK and RS are doing everything they can to avoid accusing RG. I have not heard from their defense, "Hey! You have the murderer convicted and serving time. What do you want with me?"

RG's second level trial will start before the closing statements for AK and RS begin. That should be very interesting.

What would happen if RG just said, "Yeah, I did it ALONE"? Would his sentence be any different?

Pierre

10-26-2009, 09:09 PM

I never said they shouldn't.
But it is obvious someone hurting so much, like a family would, can make emotional decisions instead of hard decisions based on facts and evidence.

Maybe another theory will emerge?

One things for sure, Rudy is going to try to pin the entire crime on the two college kids, and try to convince the court the sex was consensual and not a rape, and that he's not a burglar who carried knifes around, and that he was trying to save Meredith. It was a left handed Italian man. He couldn't see anything because it was dark and the only light on in the cottage was a lamp and when he looked out Filomeans window it was too dark to see....until he talked to Mignini, then he said he could tell it was Amanda up by the gate, by the road a silhoutte...and it was Raffaele who murdered Meredith.

Why do you think Rudy, who doesn't side with Amanda & Raffaele, why didn't he place them both in the murder location?

I dont believe a word rudy says. He would have called LE if he was just there for a date with Merideth. He's a liar theif and murderer.

Emerald

10-26-2009, 09:46 PM

I dont believe a word rudy says. He would have called LE if he was just there for a date with Merideth. He's a liar theif and murderer.

I totally agree, Pierre.

I also believe Amanda Knox could have interceded to help the victim instead of just herself.

JMO

Emerald

10-27-2009, 02:21 PM

No matter how it's presented, I can't explain away the evidence against Amanda Knox. The physical and her own words. Amanda was there when the murder was being committed. She witnessed the murderer leaving the scene.

What I'm having a problem with is Amanda being involved in the actual murder. Can't put the evidence together to make Amanda culpable.

Do I think Amanda deserves to be held responsible for the lying, cover up and staging? Indeed I do. Meredith Kercher could have been helped by Amanda Knox. Possibly still be alive. Instead, AK chose to try to cover her own presence at the crime scene, flee and make up lies to misdirect the investigation.

That's the way Amanda was taught, because that's exactly what her Mother says she advised Amanda to do. Basically, 'ignore and it will go away'. The facts of the evidence do not change, even if AK fled to US, Germany or Mars.

JMO

Jester

10-27-2009, 02:28 PM

KnoxCase, I find it rather offensive that you would dismiss the validity of the Kercher family's views so. It is highly wrong to label victims of crime as being incapable of reational, measured and objective thought. Are they emotional about the death of their daughter/sister? You bet! However, give them more credit in being able to view the evidence in a non-hysterical manner.

The Kercher family have no interest in seeing just 'anyone' convicted of Meredith's murder, only those who were actually involved. In fact, they are probably even more interested in that then anyone else, since they have the highest interest in seeing that the justice is served properly and there's no injustice. Also remember, they are not left to merely sink or swim in a sea of evidence and legalese or make 50/50 decisions on the basis of emotion. They also have the advice, counsel and interpretation of two highly experienced lawyers.

And certainly, the history of the system does not support you preconceived notions about family's of victims. In the Italian system, it is actually far from uncommon that the victim's family will actually disagree with the prosecution in court and argue against the prosecution opinion, or argue strongly their belief in the accused's innocence. On many occasions in the past have actually put in motions to the judge that he/she dismiss evidence or even a whole case or have leniency in sentencing. The function of the victims in the Italian system is a further check and balance on it, not only to ensure the prosecution prosecutes a case vigorously, sure or correctly, but also the other way, in that the prosecution don't force a wrongful conviction.

This is also reflected elsewhere. Just for example, the Lockerbie Pan-Am bombing of 1989. The majority of the relatives of the British victims here in the UK, actually strongly believe in the innocence of of the convicted bomber Al-Magrahi and have been quite vocal in that belief.

In reading the transcripts of Amanda's testimony, I have to say that I really enjoyed the questioning by the lawyer representing Meredith. He was very to the point, and asked questions that tried to get to the bottom of what Amanda meant when she said that she "imagines" this or that. He put her on the spot, so to speak, regarding some of her unbelievable claims.

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=165
See examination by FM (Francesco Maresca)

Emerald

10-27-2009, 04:36 PM

I've read part of the linked testimony of AK. Very interesting.

Don't understand why her attorney allowed those rambling responses. The more she spoke, the more AK contradicted herself. RS's attorney had to step in with objections.

Kind of seems like AK's attorney doesn't have a lot of faith in his client's innocence.

JMO

Pierre

10-27-2009, 04:58 PM

I totally agree, Pierre.

I also believe Amanda Knox could have interceded to help the victim instead of just herself.

JMO

The "extreme sex orgy" doesnt make any sense at all,IMO.

Emerald

10-27-2009, 06:05 PM

The "extreme sex orgy" doesnt make any sense at all,IMO.

FWIW

I don't believe it was an "extreme sex orgy" either. I DO, however, believe Amanda Knox was in the house when Meredith Kercher was in distress, trying to clean the scene afterward to deflect the investigation of her presence.

JMO

Emerald

10-27-2009, 06:37 PM

Emerald

10-27-2009, 07:31 PM

Was AK's computer checked for usage the night of the crime?

KnoxCase

10-27-2009, 09:35 PM

AK's pc was fried by the prosecution's computer expert.
So then the expert destroyed Merediths hardrive too.
I think another one was destroyed, but I lost count.

I think most assume it was irrelevant.
Assuming, all it held was pictures that were meaningless, showing Amanda and Meredith happy friends.
Defense believe it held more proof there wasn't any connection to Rudy, (furthermore proving there wasn't a premeditated planned drugged sex orgy rape/murder.via pc activity that was destroyed.)

The defense offered to have the manufacturer repair the hardrive, but Judge Matteini said "no" and denied Amandas legal team of this. The defense team offered to pay for the repair, but the Judge refused them.

The Judge made some comment, the evidence wasn't used against Amanda or for her. so the hardrive didn't matter at all.
something really abrasive.

Of course remember, this was Mattenini who also convicted Patrick to prison and accused the 3" knife to be Sollecitos...and stated Patrick wanted to have sex with someone non-willing (Meredith). It was a very colorful fantasy-fiction story she wrote in her report. In hindsight, its slanderous and embarrassing to her no doubt. In her favor she had very little proof at the time, only MIgnini's fiction accusations still uncontested.

KnoxCase

10-27-2009, 09:38 PM

I was just flying through some time-line, and comparing theories.

1) Mignini's...we all know. Threesome drugged ritual sex rape murder etc..

2) Rudys "Toilet Alibi"...7 minutes on the toilet

3) The Raffaele apartment alibi...

1) Amanda on the stand, in public, said they left from the cottage to Raffaeles at 4-5pm. to go watch the movie.
2) Jovana Popovic said on the stand she first stopped by the Raffaeles apt. at 5:30-05:45pm. (This verifys the story)
2a) Amanda states she was listening to music on Raffaeles computer, before the movie, and the door rang and it was Jovana Popovic.
2b)Popovic stated that on November 1st, she passed by Raffaele’s around 5:30-5:45pm to ask if he could drive her in his car to the bus station, to pick up a suitcase that was due to arrive from Milan on a bus at midnight that evening. Since others were busy, and Raffaele had a car and it was late at night she asked him to do her this favor.
When she buzzed his door she was invited up, and Raffaele was there with Amanda. She requested the favor of him, he thought for a minute, and then he agreed to take her to the bus station at midnight. She arrived at her appointment at 6pm (15-20minute walk).

3) 6:30pm 18:30 pc activity, (either downloading the film or watching it...It was the first time to watch per Raffaele so he probably had to download it.) Marcotti for the prosecution.
4) 8:15pm So now we get to Patrick's message.
AK: Okay.
So, Patrick's message came, I believe you said, at 8:15.
AK:Yes.
More or less. What did it say exactly?
Okay, taking a step backwards, the message of Patrick arrived before dinner?
Yes, I think we had only just started watching the film, or it was before
the film. I don't know if we started the film first, or were just starting
to put it on.

- 8:35 pm Amandas Cell phone is off.

5) Popovic returns 8:40pm, speaks to Amanda, who came to door on the street and Raffaele was upstairs, but Popovic declined coming inside, Raffaele was upstairs, as I read it. Popvic testimony.

6) 8:42 Raffaele receives last call from his Dad.
- 8:42 pm Raffaeles cellphone is off.

7) Experts tend to agree last pc usage was 9:10 - 9:17pm, assuming the movie was over. (was the movie paused during the interruptions?)

8) Amanda on the stand-
Um, around, um, we ate around 9:30 or 10, and then after we had eaten and he was washing the dishes, well, I don't look at the clock much, but it was around 10. And...he...um...well, he was washing the dishes and the water was coming out and he was very "bummed", displeased, he told me he had just had that thing repaired. He was annoyed that it had broken again.
**Yes. And did you eat dinner?
Yes. But it was very late when we ate.
Fish?
Yes. Fish and a salad.
And then something happened to the faucet of the sink?
**
So, I wanted to know something else. At what time did the water leak in Sollecito's house? After dinner, I don't know what time it was.
Towards 9, 9:30? 21, that's 9? No, it was much later than that.
A bit later? How much? We had dinner around...10:30,
so that must have happened a bit later than that.
Maybe around 11
*****
So you talked a bit. Then what did you do?

Then we smoked a joint together. What we did is, we said all right, let's
find some rags, but he didn't have a "mop" how do you say "mop"? he didn't
have one, and I said "don't worry, I have one at home, I'll bring it tomorrow,
the leak is in the kitchen, it wasn't like it smelled bad or anything, we
could just forget about it for the night, and then think about it tomorrow.
So, we went into his room, and I think I...yes...I lay down on his bed,
and he went to the desk, and while he was there he rolled the joint, and
then we smoked it together.

Did you fall asleep together?

Yes, first we made love, and then we fell asleep

********
Defense says they found a 00:58 pc activity on Raffaeles pc.

***************

which is more believable?

Emerald

10-27-2009, 10:28 PM

LG: To make a jump in time, did you also wake up together?

AK: Probably, but I can't be quite sure, because sometimes I wake up early in the morning, I don't remember well.

Then immediately in the same testimony:

LG: Now we come to the morning of Nov 2nd. What did you do the next morning, when
you woke up?

AK: So, when I woke up, I don't remember what time it was, but I think around 10, 10:30, I was there and I saw that Raffaele was still sleeping, so I watched him for a little while, then I said, okay, I'm going home to take a shower and change.........

Then I took this mop that was near my room that was
in a closet thing near my room, and I went to Raffaele's house, locking the door behind me, because all the time I was doing these things, nobody had come back to the house. So um, I thought, strange, okay, let's see what Raffaele says, because I didn't know what to think, and so I wanted to talk it over with him. When I got back to his house, I...he was in the bathroom, and I started to clean up the floor in the kitchen, but it was by now almost dry, just a bit of water left because it had evaporated. Then he came out and we made breakfast, and while we were preparing it and drinking coffee, I explained to him what I had seen, and I asked him for advice, because when I went into my house, everything seemed in order, only there were these little weird things, and I couldn't figure out how to understand them.

JMO

Amanda Knox left RS's house as soon as he went to sleep. Went to her own house. Returned to RS's.

Why did she not notice the water evaporated that morning before she says she left RS's @10:30?

Frankly, for me, her 'alibi' is complete BS. Details....Details....Details UNTIL we come to the detail of what time she woke. Was RS awake or not? Same testimony. Different replies. Amanda Knox was not there beside RS when she woke!

Emerald

10-27-2009, 10:57 PM

Why did this attorney allow his client to ramble like this? He was the one doing the questioning when AK was weaving her obvious lies. Well rehearsed, but badly scripted.

JMO

Jester

10-27-2009, 11:34 PM

JMO

Further reading of linked testimony.... It seems Amanda Knox has 'selective' confusion. When she accuses someone else, the details are graphic. When it comes to taking responsibility for the choices she made, that's when the convenient confusion happens.

IMO

It's actually quite remarkable how Amanda's confusion and memory come and go depending on what she is being asked. It's worse when the known answer implicates her.

Jester

10-27-2009, 11:35 PM

Was AK's computer checked for usage the night of the crime?

Her hard drive was damaged, and Amanda's position is that it happened in the hands of the forensic analysts. They have accepted responsibility ... nothing was retrieved.

Emerald

10-28-2009, 12:01 AM

I'm just now beginning to delve into the intricacies of AK's lies. I knew they were there, but never knew where to find the details.

It's possible the jury will not find AK guilty. Doubtful, but it cannot be discounted completely.

After reading the transcript, I believe even more strongly AK left RS that night after he fell asleep. RS was her alibi.

If RG had not opted for a fast track trial, would he have been tried with AK and RS? Could they have opted for individual trials?

JMO

KnoxCase

10-28-2009, 08:49 AM

I don't think Amanda alone has much in the changing stories dept.
Really if you remove the secret interrogation false confession, there's only one story for her. She may be vague, elusive.

The real craziness, and changing stories, comes when Raffaele talks. imo.

Thats when the craziness starts!
"she might have been gone"...."i pricked merediths hand with that knife"...."what I told you was b(*&(&it"...."she took the knife while I was sleeping"..."i can't remember if we had sex"..."i can't remember if Amanda was with me or not"..."I think we went to a party..".."i wnet home and Amanda went downtown.."

wow????

Let's look at what each person saying in public, in their own words. Their "final story".

1) Mignini will state his final argument. In great detail I hope. Maybe he can be more convincing. But he's laid out his story.

2)Rudy soon will have his last chance to tell the truth (or his final tale).....Nov 18.

3) Amanda was on the stand putting in a story as her "public appearance". June 2009.. we can call that done.

4)???????Raffaele????? very unknown?? He remains silent. I'm still curious what is his "final story" of that night?

Here's a few Raffaele statements...

a) I was too stoned can't remember
b) We spent it together
c) Amanda was gone all night until 1am
d) I went home alone , Amanda stayed in the town centre
e) I was sharpening my knife for a drugged sex ritual murder rape

is it?

a) can this be the truth...is he really that burnt out on smoke? or is he lying? I tend to not believe anyone can be that stoned and go to college, so I assume he's lying...but then why?

b) possibly true...Amanda backs this alibi. the Amanda timeline looks normal and convincing to me. A typical DVD movie evening.

c) possibly, they could have gone to the cottage.
The last witness to see them at the apartment was Popovic at 8:40pm....Raffaele and Amanda could have been gone shortly after this... who knows?
How do they prove they watched a DVD movie.

d) not true, as Popovic saw Amanda at Raffaele's twice, 5:30-5:45pm..and at 8:40pm..Raffaele obviously too stoned to remember. How much pot does he smoke anyway??? geeeez.... he can't remember sex, can't remember if he was alone or with Amanda, can't remember if she was watching a movie with him or not?
sounds very suspicious.

e) Possibly true, Popovic saw Amanda at 8:40pm not Raffaele...
Did Raffaele go to the cottage and kill Meredith alone?
This would go along with Rudys theory.....

f) the interrogation, "crap".....I don't believe anything said by anyone for Nov 5-6. (see Michael Crowe case)

g) the diary stuff.."I pricked Merediths finger with that knife"....say what?:confused:.....geeez.

a trial of great confusion, as they say. especially with Raffaele's tale.

I'm curious which one will people believe?
Will he speak up at the Appeal, if it goes to that?

Can he give a written statement? Or does he sit and hope the prosecution flops?

so many questions still.

KnoxCase

10-28-2009, 09:26 AM

KnoxCase, this is rather unfair and as it happens, untrue. Matteini did not write 'her' fantasy, nor was it 'Mignini's', she wrote the fantasy she'd been fed by Amanda via Amanda's voluntary statement in the presence of Mignini on the night of the 5th/morning of the 9th Nov. A voluntary statement which at it happens, was also partially supported by the evidence recovered at that point (evidence of multiple attackers at the cottage and a faked break-in indicating invlovement of a resident). Neither is it 'slanderous', slander is a precise legal term and by using it you are implying Matteini acted illegaly. Matteini is a 'judge' and by that token her report was a 'legal judgement' and a completely honest one, based on the evidence provided at that point. A legal judgement cannot be slanderous.

So your saying a professional Judge of the court writes a 19 page report based off some 20yr old girl?

No, I don't think your right on this.

It seems obvious, the Mignini theory is by and far the foundation of Mattenini's report.

Amanda never said Patrick wanted to have sex with an unwilling participant, amanda never said it was Raffaeles 3" knife....

you give Amanda way too much blame.

I'll add, the interrogation info was part of the Matteini's foundation for her report.
But all the same, it was very incorrect..in hindsight. A verdict based off incorrect assumptions.

KnoxCase

10-28-2009, 09:44 AM

yes I agree. there's no eye witness for them after that time-stamp.

and even more so...no cellphone tower call support, no internet activity until, 00:58 if the recent defense time stamp is believed, not much of anything but Amandas story, as Raffaele remains silent.

How does a person prove they were watching a movie for a few hours?
Or how does a person prove they were sleeping in bed through the night?

the prosecutions burden is to create proof they were at the cottage at those hours of the murder. and supply evidence they were involved and in the murder location.
and they have to create a convincing story-theory, which I think Mignini's has really become hard to believe.

i'm like a few others, the real story isn't known. there's a very mysterious "missing links" or else, we are exaggerating too much, imagining too much.....

Mignini failed to put the three together, imo. so far.

did Rudy create his story based off the news he read while in Germany?

or is there some really bizarre, cover-up with lies bouncing around for the three?

but Rudy is screwed, so why would he have any motive to cover for Amanda and Raffaele....so that theory fails, imo. They are not connected or helping each other.

the problem is big for the prosecution, because Mignini failed to prove the three did this together, as a planned cohesive team against Meredith.

jmo.

KnoxCase

10-28-2009, 10:00 AM

Jester

10-28-2009, 10:19 AM

the interrogation and confessions of Nov 5-6 are very suspicious to many.

from a different perspective than yours, this piece of time and events actually make the police look their worst.

for many the interrogation and the pressured confessions paints a very bad picture of the police and their rush to force a confession.
the Michael Crowe case and many others find the interrogations leaving the accused as victims.

its the same with waterboarding.....you torture someone enough and they'll say crazy stuff....maybe even tell you what your demanding to hear....tell you what you want to hear... the police know this, is abuse and is why they don't film it and have defense legal representation there. especially in a murder investigation.

the police were tapping phones and whatever else....I don't buy for a second their interrogation was by chance, and sadly the police "secrecy" puts them in a bad light. jmo.

Its why I say Nov 5-6.....I discredit it all. However the diary stuff is not much different.

You seem to be very pro-Court, very pro-the System, pro-the police=good, accused = bad.....prosecution=right, defense =wrong...

anything they do is honest and abiding?

Have you watched the Michael Crowe video I posted? Whats your input on that? It sounds exactly like what Amanda, Raffaele, and Patrick refer too, in that they were coereced, pressured, threatened, frightened.

My sons and his firends hadd the same thing happen during interrogations, the police threatened them , screamed at them all in private, no cameras of videos.....theratened them to be raped in prison by their "inside contacts" in jail....scare tactics.

So you weren't there. You only have your opinion, based off your life experiences. No one was there at Amanda's interrogation....not even a defense lawyer.

I see no reason to introduce conspiracy theory to this murder. We have citizens from Britain, United States, and Italy related to this murder. Do you really think that the prosecution is going to break the law with that outspoken international audience scrutinizing every detail of the trial? I think not. That, my friend, is just common sense. Furthermore, we've already been around this circle where it's suggested Amanda's rights were violated during questioning, it turns out that the early questioning is not included in the trial, it turns out that only her voluntary statement is relevant and included, so it turns out that it doesn't really matter what she admitted to during early questioning. No reason to rehash, and rehash, and rehash that same discussion. What matters is what Amanda said when she was not being questioned ... what she voluntarily wrote down, labeled a "gift", and hand delivered to police.

Also, in response to another comment that you have made several times, the cottage is the crime scene, not the few square feet underneath Meredith's body. The crime scene is defined by the location of all evidence relating to the murder ... and that is throughout the cottage, including the broken window in another bedroom, the blood in another room, the footprints and DNA in hallways and other rooms, and the front door of the cottage.

KnoxCase

10-28-2009, 10:32 AM

And to conclude, the police and prosecution believe and still believe that Amanda's voluntary statement is actually essentially true, only that in her statement Amanda substituted Patrick Lumumba for Rudy Guede.

they kind of have to stick to the Mignini-theory. thats their job. that can't start testifying against their own now.

I think the Mignini theory/story is known.
I think the Amanda theory/story is known.
I think the Rudy story is known.

the Raffaele theory/story isn't truly known. this is the more interesting imo.

Mignini says all of them were raping and stabbing in the room Amanda the holder of the murder weapon, Rudy says Raffaele murdered Meredith alone with Amanda in the driveway-doorway, Raffaele and Amanda lawyers claim Rudy did it alone....

someones wrong.

so in the murder location-

evidence shows only Rudy's dna in and on Meredith.
evidence shows only Rudys footprints.
evidence shows only Rudys traces to Merediths purse.
evidence shows Rudys hand and fingerprints on the pillow.
evidence by accused own undisputed confession is Rudy was there before the murder, during the murder and last to leave the murder location.

disputed-
everything else.

n/t

10-28-2009, 10:35 AM

Emerald

10-28-2009, 01:18 PM

I don't believe Amanda was at RS's the whole night. She left long before 10:30 that next morning.

This, I've surmised by Amanda's own words in the court testimony.

dgfred

10-28-2009, 03:14 PM

That is my problem- there is NO need for dishonesty by either of them if they were not involved at all. The entire gist of the case for me.

pixiejoolz

10-28-2009, 03:55 PM

That is my problem- there is NO need for dishonesty by either of them if they were not involved at all. The entire gist of the case for me.

Exactly. Why lie if you aren't involved? Why lie even if you are peripherally involved when you are being charged with murder?

Oh wait, I forgot: Amanda didn't lie, she just "followed suggestions" made by LE. :rolleyes:

Emerald

10-29-2009, 12:58 AM

It's perplexing AK's attorney allowed the rambling answers. The more AK spoke, the more she contradicted EVERYthing she wanted the court to believe.

It wasn't just a few statements. Lengthy narratives. It was RS's attorney who would object.

Can someone tell me what was going on please?

JMO

KnoxCase

10-29-2009, 08:03 AM

how do you prove you were sleeping?

Maybe Nara Super-Ears was there in the murder scene too? can she prove she was home sleeping?

Maybe she was there, she heard a scream.hmmm?

And its very hard to believe a human can hear a scream thru a cement building, across a noisy road, over a parking garage, thru a parking lot and thru the walls and glass of a apartment. very suspicious, she admits she was awake at the time of the murder. Nara had access, and was familiar with the area and the cottage. She had all night to do the cleanup. Nara seems highly suspicious to me.

Why would Nara lie about hearing the scream?

not to mention no one else heard this Led Zepplin volume scream. not one person, not the cocaine addict in front of the cottage, not the Albanian bum mumbling witness, no one. very hard to believe Nara.

yes Nara might need to prove she was really in her apartment.

I think Nara had bleach under her sink to and knifes in her drawer.
Naras DNA was found in her bathroom sink too. Probably could find Nara footprints in her hallway with luminol if they look.

*********

I think Rudy laid the duvet on Meredith. Only his footprints are in the murder location. Only his hand prints, only his fingerprints. No one cleaned up the murder location in the bedroom. There is no proof anyone was in Merediths bedroom but Rudy.

There's no proof, thats the problem with Migninis ritual sex threesome drug rape murder in the bedroom theory.
(the LCN knife and the BRa Clasp is the piece to debate)

and there's no footprints of Nara....no fingerprints of Nara..no DNA of Nara in or on Meredith or in Merediths purse...only Rudy.

nothing on Nara, Amanda, Raffaele, or Patrick.

only Mignini's fictional ritual sex rape murder theory that people are finding harder and harder to believe.

KnoxCase

10-29-2009, 09:15 AM

the shopkeeper.

that one failed in front of Massei.
I had to look that up, that was a real media, hyped up one.
the shopkeeper.

But then was Massei's turn to pose questions.
And Massei didn't forget about that crucial event of the shopkeeper claiming to have seen Amanda buying bleach.
He made the fateful question: DID YOU SEE AMANDA KNOX COMING TO THE STORE THAT MORNING?
And Marina's answer was simple: NO.

Marina Chiriboga

*******
Marina Chiriboga didn't receive the call to the stand, she had changed address. But today they found her and they brought her to the courtroom. The beautiful Latina had been cleaning at Raffaele's place as long as her pregnancy allowed her, and she was also working at the infamous Conad store owned by the genius of memory Marco Quintavalle.
After the crime she had been interviewed by Sollecito's lawyers and then by the police about something important at that time and (for someone) still important now: the bleach. She confirmed the two bottles of Ace bleach had been in Raffaele's apartment since the summer and in exactly the same conditions, and on the same place, in which they were found after the crime, one still sealed and the other one half full. So, those who still believed in it can say definitely goodbye to the bleach legend,
*********************

Emerald

10-29-2009, 12:49 PM

According to Amanda's testimony, she was.....

Awake before RS

Confused about whether or not RS was awake at the same time

Wakes early (is 10:30 early?)

Left to get mop

Didn't notice the floor was almost dry "from evaporation" until she returned with the mop. (RS had a maid. Why didn't he have a mop?)

------------ Amanda is a blatant liar about the timeline. Convenient confusion. :rolleyes:

------------

In her jailhouse diary, written within days of the murder, Amanda Knox totally disparages the friends of Meredith. States she would "kill for a pizza".

JMO

Emerald

10-29-2009, 01:26 PM

Jester

10-29-2009, 03:20 PM

how do you prove you were sleeping?

Maybe Nara Super-Ears was there in the murder scene too? can she prove she was home sleeping?

Maybe she was there, she heard a scream.hmmm?

<snipped for space>

Amanda and the neighbour both reported hearing a scream at about the time that Meredith was murdered. That makes two witnesses that independently corroborate each other. Why do you doubt that there was a scream?

Jester

10-29-2009, 03:24 PM

I think Rudy laid the duvet on Meredith. Only his footprints are in the murder location. Only his hand prints, only his fingerprints. No one cleaned up the murder location in the bedroom. There is no proof anyone was in Merediths bedroom but Rudy.
<snipped for emphasis>

Each day you state that there was no evidence of anyone but Rudy in Meredith's bedroom.

How do you explain DNA from Amanda and Raffaele on Meredith's bra, an article of clothing that Meredith was wearing when she was attacked, and which was in the bedroom? That is evidence of Amanda and Raffaele in the bedroom. Do you just ignore it?

Jester

10-29-2009, 08:47 PM

It's funny you mention the fingers in the ear thing. If you look at Amanda's account of that night it included a long shower with Raffaele (although, he recalls no such shower taking place). The description of this shower is quite specific...but only in 'certain' areas. They had a long shower (according to Amanda) and Raffaele 'cleaned her ears'. Now, people get intimate in showers, there's nothing abnormal about that...but what always jarred with me is her reference to his cleaning her ears (not...he washed my hair or scrubbed my back, those things aren't mentioned at all, all emphasis is put on the ears which is actually a little odd...red flag).

A good liar always mixes lies with truth. After a murder a shower would indeed have been needed. And if someone had stuck their fingers in their ears to drown out a scream or other unpleasant sounds during the course of the crime and those fingers were bloody, one may well imagine that they may well need someone to help clean their ears after. I also can't help but remember Meredith's blood mixed with Amanda's DNA on the cotton bud dispenser in the little bathroom...

Very interesting point. I too thought Amanda's story about Raffaele cleaning her ears, and her comment to him about how she hadn't met anyone that was as neat and tidy as she was before she met Raffaele, was very out of place and odd. We know that Amanda is not a neat and tidy woman at all, but that's beside the point.

I hadn't put it together with the ear cleaners in the small bathroom at the cottage ... but ear cleaning, two sets of bare footprints, and Amanda's far too detailed and personal description of Raffaele cleaning her ears ... another interesting connection.

Emerald

10-29-2009, 09:28 PM

Jester

10-30-2009, 01:41 AM

Amanda rambles on and on. In diaries, official court testimony and initial statements given to police. The attorney has no control over AK's idiot diary entries or what she said to police. In court (official testimony), he had the option to stop her, but didn't. :confused:

RS's attorney objected to AK's pontification, but her own attorney did not. As a matter of fact, AK's attorney was asking the questions to which she gave the incriminating answers. If the transcripts had not designated the speaker, I would have thought AK's attorney was acting as prosecution. :scared:

I agree that he should have stopped her many times. He should have instructed her to listen to the question, and only answer the question. Instead, questions were answered with rambling diatribes starting with well, ... and often ending with ... and I was confused. She even cried to the judge a couple of times about wanting to tell her story. Story? Who tells stories when accused of murder? She mentions flashbacks, as though it means something different than vivid memory of previous experience.

Her mother even seemed resigned to the fact that Amanda would be convicted, and discussed optimistic views about the appeals process in a video on the day the judge released the decision regarding an independent expert (that was a can of worms, in my opinion).

Jester

10-30-2009, 01:51 AM

Amanda seems headstrong, and we know that she is prone to doing odd things. Her mother described this as part of who she is (singing at the top of her lungs in jail, climbing on the bars, the cartwheels, + more) ... as though it was normal. It could be that Amanda's lawyer cautioned her against testifying, advised her to only answer the question, told her to straighten up in court ... and she chose to do it her way ... wearing an All You Need is Love night-shirt. Maybe she wanted to be heard, demanded to tell her real story ... an attempt to negate the other stories she told ... but to only succeed in adding one more version to the existing stories.

I'm not sure what her lawyer was doing, but I do agree that it sounds like he thinks she's guilty.

Emerald

10-30-2009, 04:08 AM

Did Amanda have the option NOT to testify in the civil portion of the trial?

Jester

10-30-2009, 07:05 AM

Did Amanda have the option NOT to testify in the civil portion of the trial?

As far as I can understand of the Italian system, Amanda and Raffaele had their trials separated, but because so many of the facts were identical, they were still heard together. There will be separate verdicts.

She had as much option as Raffaele had to not speak. She chose to speak ... that is the only way that she could have told her story.

There has been some suggestion that she was only speaking in response to the suit from Patrick, or that she was only asserting her right to speak ... but really ... it's just one more story (her words) on top of all the other stories. Why didn't her lawyer silence her ... like Raffaele was silenced.

The only story that anyone would believe was true would be the one that connected with the first story ... and that didn't happen.

We all know that after the first story comes embellishment, so ... what did she have to say about her first story. She pretended it was a confusion, and invented yet a new story. That was a bad move in terms of freedom.

Emerald

10-30-2009, 07:24 AM

Emerald

10-30-2009, 07:42 AM

No, the accused never has to take the stand unless they want to. Moreover, if they 'do' take the stand, they can refuse to answer any questions they want or completely halt the testimony any time they wish. And they are not obliged to tell the truth when/if they testify.

Wow! Even more confusing why her attorney would allow AK to say all that stuff.

In US, they can opt out of testifying in a criminal trial. Can be called in civil trial with no option.

Emerald

10-30-2009, 08:08 AM

Has the earring been found?

Maybe it was lost in the battle?

Emerald

10-30-2009, 08:20 AM

Has Amanda received the verdict for the civil portion of her case? Is it being heard as part of the criminal portion?

Emerald

10-30-2009, 09:00 AM

JMO

Since the Gov't has been found guilty and fined, seems there's really no way Amanda will not be found guilty.

Will she get credit for time already served awaiting trial?

dgfred

10-30-2009, 10:05 AM

Sure would be a 'flight' risk... with her family/friends saying she is being railroaded.

KnoxCase

10-30-2009, 10:33 AM

I read Rudy Guede will tell in his appeal trial AK and Meredith were arguing loudly that night.

Don't know that I can believe RG's attorneys would be so open about their clients strategy.

Never the less, RG's trial will be interesting. I was not really involved in the first one.

You know, if AK's Family had gotten positive feedback after the Larry King appearance, they would have been appearing everywhere. Apparently, it wasn't good.

JMO

As I read the same articles, Rudy is only holding onto the same story.
I think it was version 3 or 4.

The one where he heard someone talking over his Ipod. But he didn't mention screaming unless he's going to again have new improved, version 7 or 8?

If you really want to know the most about Rudys tales read the Judge Micheli report. Even though it can't answer everything its the best first hand document available. Micheli couldn't get a clear answer other than Rudy was lying.
Most of his information was based off the media hype, Micheli believed.
Its why Rudy never tried to blame Patrick, I suppose.

It will be interesting. But its a basic old game of blaming someone else.

To believe Rudy 100% he is innocent, I would have to :

1) believe his date story
2) believe the "toilet alibi"

but its likely Rudy could present something believable, a small new bit of info, along the way.

Nov 1 only...

Rudy and Mignini's tales both fail miserably. JMO

Amanda's Nov 1 story, staying home is a bit more logically in its simplicity, looking at the timeline I put together previously posted.
But there is the entire night following 8:42pm until the Postal Police show up Nov 2 that is only their word against the world.

Further suspicion arises from Raffaele's responses, he alone adds gas to the fire of suspicion. I been reading about LCN DNA and Raffaele's bizarre comments....something isn't right, Raffaele alone can make things seem much worse than even Amandas aloofness.

dgfred

10-30-2009, 10:40 AM

First I have heard about the earring deal. Does anyone have a pic of her ear missing the ring and red? I am wondering if it got pulled out during a struggle, instead of when she put her fingers in her ear(?).

KnoxCase

10-30-2009, 10:44 AM

I see no reason to introduce conspiracy theory to this murder. .

You can call it what you like but it goes on everyday, unfortunately, the police aren't a bunch of Andy Griffiths and Barney Fifes.

I don't think of it as a huge conspiracy, its more like a few humans ignoring some evidence and magnifying other to make their case strong.

I was reading an actual police report yesterday from a lawyer who showed me the police had actually written that the reason they pulled over someone is they "smelt the marijuana through their car vents as the car drove by"....this was their reason for pulling them over.
this is reality.

everyone was released except for the one person they have been trying to bust over and over. why I don't know.

but the fact is that some police lie. the bend the rules.

the Micheal Crowe case is linked here. You should watch it. It shows corrupt police work, but at the same time it was a good DA and police detective who found the kid innocent too.

like Rudy, murderer/rapists unfortunately don't tell the truth either.

Rudy, like Judge Micheli hints, very likely put Amanda and Raffaele into his story after reading media news.

KnoxCase

10-30-2009, 10:47 AM

(bolding mine)
In Italy?

You weren't there either but yet you compare your sons and his friends experience to this case. I think it's totally irrelevant.

my point was "it does happen", police do lie at times, interrogations are sometimes corrupt. it is not a accusation but a proven fact.

it is irrelevant except in the case of people who tend to think police=good, accused=bad.

people who still want to live in denial that presidents of nations have a dark side sometimes, they are human. Police are humans and there's all types.

KnoxCase

10-30-2009, 10:58 AM

KnoxCase, you are using sophistry here. As you well know, there is no evidence of Nara in the apartment and neither has she been caught telling multiple lies.

It isn't simply a case of Amanda and Raffaele having to prove they were sleeping, since that only accounts for only a small part of the night/evening. It is a case of their having to prove in the face of the evidence that says otherwise, that they weren't at the cottage and weren't involved in any of the crimes that were committed there.

But on an end note, as it happens there is proof they 'weren't' sleeping when they said they were. Amanda claimes to have got up first around 10 -10:30 am and Raffaele was still sleeping. Yet we know one of them went on the computer just before 5:30 am and turned on Raffaele's cell phone at 6 am. Then there is the shopkeeper who saw Amanda enter his shop at 7:45 am. Not sleeping then! And if innocent, why lie about that?

is it any different than falsely accusing Raafele and Amanda...

theorys.

All the Mignini votes have anymore is theorys and accusations they can't prove...who got up when, there is no proof of murder here? When they woke up? How lame....

Who cares when they woke up, they could just say they don't know...
who knows when they get up?

Have you ever woken up and hit snooze and went back to bed on a Holiday off?

JMO...it means very little.

If a person can't convince they were in the murder location on Nov 1, the rest is only a pile of accusations.

I agree there is no proof they weren't somewhere else Nov 1 from 8:42pm until the Postal Police arrive.
But the Mignini isn't doing well at putting evidence they were either.
What does he have of proof they were NOT at the apartment?
What does Mignini present in evidence the three communicated and planned this drug sex orgy party?

So to start trying to "trip" them up, the "gotcha game".....you said you awoke at 9:45a,m...but yesterday you said it was 10:13am...so your a murderer? it seems very desperate to me.

I can see in your posts, there is nothing they can say or do to get you to change your mind.Even if they are found innocent, you will still believe in the Mignini Theory.

Thats fine, I will always think Mignini is fiction an injustice is being done, Rudys theory is even easier to believe than Mignini's theory.
Amanda's theory is even yet easier to believe.

Now if Raffaele comes open and says 100%, his final statement Amanda was NOT there...then that would change my vote.
But Raffaele is silent and has said many things.

Raffaeles story is still foggy, imo. Several times he distanced himself from Amanda?
Why?

Is it to scare her, in that he knows he did stab Meredith like Rudy says?
And that Amanda is so disliked by the Italians, he can use this?

theorys abound, in this case of great confusion...

KnoxCase

10-30-2009, 11:06 AM

KnoxCase

Amanda covered her ears when she heard the scream. Perhaps it was to Amanda covering her ears and screaming to drown out the crime she was witnessing, but choosing NOT to report or intercede?

Maybe Meredith would be alive today if Amanda had chosen the right path. Instead, AK opted to stage and cover her own presence to try and thwart the investigation.

Apparently, this is what AK's Family had taught her. Edda Mellas (AK's Mother) wanted AK to leave the country. Didn't change the evidence of the case for Rudy Guede. Wouldn't have changed the evidence of the case for Amanda, either.

JMO

Emerald again you refer only to what the prosecutions "interrogation secret service" reported.

This false confession the defense call it, the confession the prosecution call it is a debated issue.

Watch the Micheal Crowe link...this is the defenses and Amandas tale, pretty close, very similar.

If you remove the interrogation, you only have Amandas one story.
The defense say its the trurth, the prosecution claim its a contrived alibi.

so the skeptical ask questions about the interrogation, and you make your own mind up. as a separate event in this case.

the interrogation, will be a chapter of itself in the forth coming books.

Head investigator Edgardo Giobbi, as quoted: “We were able to establish guilt by closely observing the suspect's psychological and behavioral reactions during the interrogations. We don't need to rely on other kinds of investigation as this method has enabled us to get to the guilty parties in a very quick time."

Did the interrogators cause Amanda to give false testimony against Patrick? This is not a new concept. Coerced false confessions have been widely studied in the Netherlands.

Here is an interesting paper regarding the use of interrogation techniques to obtain information from crime witnesses and suspects.
http://alternatetheories-perugiamurder.blogspot.com/2009/10/post-55-could-amanda-knoxs-false.html?showComment=1256848949775#c102517424361 3092371

but watch the Michael Crowe video, its not long and very eerily similar.

I knew nothing of interrogations until this case. And then things my son and his friends say about the police, started openning my eyes to the reality, there is no Mayberry RFD anymore.
Police taking drugs, screwing teenagers, corrupt gang ties...etc...

There are many good ones too, I only keep repeating there is a mix of humans. Not all people in jail are bad people, maybe their falsley accused or maybe too poor to fight the system.

KnoxCase

10-30-2009, 11:18 AM

Each day you state that there was no evidence of anyone but Rudy in Meredith's bedroom.

How do you explain DNA from Amanda and Raffaele on Meredith's bra, an article of clothing that Meredith was wearing when she was attacked, and which was in the bedroom? That is evidence of Amanda and Raffaele in the bedroom. Do you just ignore it?

no not at all...these two pieces are the entire case. imo.

without this evidence there is no murder charge against them per Mignini's theory.

the bra clasp and LCN DNA Knife is the "threesome theory".
there is nothing to believe three drugged kids were in that room without these pieces of evidence.

not that there isn't more, maybe the cleanup many hold onto, maybe they were in another room covering their ears...who knows.

I think the bra clasp is left to be decided because there wasn't just Raffaele and Merediths DNA, there was other people. Some say girls DNA(PMF), some say mens DNA (FOA) .
It has all the defense negatives too though it is a stronger DNA sample.

The Knife is very weak as I keep repeating. LCN was refused to be good enough, the FBI refuses to use it for example, its too unreliable.
The sample quantity is so miniscule it can read about anything, and there is what they call noise that can give false peaks...its just a new thing found to be unreliable.
In addition to this I have been reading the manuals on the LCN, Applied Biosystem sites and if one does decide to try and use this "un-proven science"....there are many requirements that have to acompany it.

one is having numerous samples of the same dna to repeat the test numerous times to confirm it.
also many control-runs have to be ran to confirm even the tiniest, smallest adjustment of calibration cannot be changed or different between tests to skew the data, due to the miniscule amount of a LCN sample...

so imo, this piece of DNA, LCN , is very weak. Now to substantiate the DNA we have autopsy experts. Most of them say it is NOT the murder weapon, while only one says "maybe there was more than one knife?"

"too low" is not a good thing, in the engineering data sample world...in laymens terms. this I have about 30yrs experience in.

the fact there are no footprints etc in the bedroom...of the two kids, makes it again in the defense favor that it doesn't substantiate the claim three people were in the room stabbing and fighting and holding Meredith down while on drugs and having sex.

and again it doesn't match the size of the bloody-knife pattern on the sheet either.

its just an opinion....but nothing makes this a strong piece of evidence.

dgfred

10-30-2009, 11:19 AM

I'll get a hold of it for you. I did have all the case photos on an external HD but it decided a few weeks ago to die on me and refuse to spin up. I've put a request in for the pic and I'll post the link for you as soon as I have it.

Thanks Michael :thumbup: ! And the more available pics you can post... the better :wink: .

KnoxCase

10-30-2009, 11:34 AM

delete this message

KnoxCase

10-30-2009, 11:35 AM

But the fact it 'does' happen, is not evidence in and of irself that it happened in this case. And after all, it is an argument that can be used in every single arrest/prosecution.

Moreover, I think it also requres pointing out that in a good many cases where there has been a corrupt policeman, the accused has also in fact been guilty. It does not by default mean the accused is innocent of the crime.

I agree totally. Its another muted argument.

Which is why, maybe in the near future, they will film these type events, like most departments are doing these days. It would eliminate this legal-argument for both sides would benefit. Become more transparent.

Having legal representation will help too. Its painful for change but over time I think everyone benefits from it. Yes it will create even more police work, more people, more money for the budget, more jobs too....
and the benefits are obvious.

pixiejoolz

10-30-2009, 12:15 PM

Emerald again you refer only to what the prosecutions "interrogation secret service" reported.

This false confession the defense call it, the confession the prosecution call it is a debated issue.

Watch the Micheal Crowe link...this is the defenses and Amandas tale, pretty close, very similar.

If you remove the interrogation, you only have Amandas one story.
The defense say its the trurth, the prosecution claim its a contrived alibi.

so the skeptical ask questions about the interrogation, and you make your own mind up. as a separate event in this case.

the interrogation, will be a chapter of itself in the forth coming books.

Head investigator Edgardo Giobbi, as quoted: “We were able to establish guilt by closely observing the suspect's psychological and behavioral reactions during the interrogations. We don't need to rely on other kinds of investigation as this method has enabled us to get to the guilty parties in a very quick time."

Did the interrogators cause Amanda to give false testimony against Patrick? This is not a new concept. Coerced false confessions have been widely studied in the Netherlands.

Here is an interesting paper regarding the use of interrogation techniques to obtain information from crime witnesses and suspects.
http://alternatetheories-perugiamurder.blogspot.com/2009/10/post-55-could-amanda-knoxs-false.html?showComment=1256848949775#c102517424361 3092371

but watch the Michael Crowe video, its not long and very eerily similar.

I knew nothing of interrogations until this case. And then things my son and his friends say about the police, started openning my eyes to the reality, there is no Mayberry RFD anymore.
Police taking drugs, screwing teenagers, corrupt gang ties...etc...

There are many good ones too, I only keep repeating there is a mix of humans. Not all people in jail are bad people, maybe their falsley accused or maybe too poor to fight the system.

I don't buy the comparison between Michael Crowe, who was only fourteen, to Amanda Knox, who was twenty when they were respectively questioned and accused of murder. Psychologically and emotionally, you can't equate the two because that six year age difference is also a world of difference in gullibility, suggestibility and and response to coersion.

I'm not saying a twenty year old can't be coerced, but I'm simply not seeing it in the transcripts. My reading of her verbal responses to questions is that she is fairly bright, very evasive and someone who loves being the center of attention - until it leads to a conclusion that she doesn't like, in this case, a criminal accusation. jmo

Emerald

10-30-2009, 02:59 PM

Emerald again you refer only to what the prosecutions "interrogation secret service" reported.

This false confession the defense call it, the confession the prosecution call it is a debated issue.

Watch the Micheal Crowe link...this is the defenses and Amandas tale, pretty close, very similar.

If you remove the interrogation, you only have Amandas one story.
The defense say its the trurth, the prosecution claim its a contrived alibi.

so the skeptical ask questions about the interrogation, and you make your own mind up. as a separate event in this case.

the interrogation, will be a chapter of itself in the forth coming books.

Head investigator Edgardo Giobbi, as quoted: “We were able to establish guilt by closely observing the suspect's psychological and behavioral reactions during the interrogations. We don't need to rely on other kinds of investigation as this method has enabled us to get to the guilty parties in a very quick time."

Did the interrogators cause Amanda to give false testimony against Patrick? This is not a new concept. Coerced false confessions have been widely studied in the Netherlands.

Here is an interesting paper regarding the use of interrogation techniques to obtain information from crime witnesses and suspects.
http://alternatetheories-perugiamurder.blogspot.com/2009/10/post-55-could-amanda-knoxs-false.html?showComment=1256848949775#c102517424361 3092371

but watch the Michael Crowe video, its not long and very eerily similar.

I knew nothing of interrogations until this case. And then things my son and his friends say about the police, started openning my eyes to the reality, there is no Mayberry RFD anymore.
Police taking drugs, screwing teenagers, corrupt gang ties...etc...

There are many good ones too, I only keep repeating there is a mix of humans. Not all people in jail are bad people, maybe their falsley accused or maybe too poor to fight the system.

This is not the Michael Crowe case.

The police were not asking the questions when Amanda Knox was testifying UNDER OATH.

dgfred

10-30-2009, 04:58 PM

Hey Michael, thanks for the pic.

I don't really see any redness or inflamation though.

Jester

10-30-2009, 08:27 PM

Dgfred -

Here you go :)

Amanda with inflamed ear missing earring pic:

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=20365#p20365

You'll have to right click and save the picture to you computer and then view it in whatever photo viewing app you have so you can blow it up. That version that someone's just posted up for me is a little small.

I'm not seeing it ... is it the one at the bottom?

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t189/zed0101/knoxear.jpg

Emerald

10-30-2009, 09:12 PM

I understand the earring being a talking point. But... Michael Crowe???? Interesting adult/mature choices are being compared to mental and emotional badgering of a child.

Amanda Knox told insipid lies in testimony. In a public courtroom. It was her C*H*O*I*C*E.

cantstandnuts

10-30-2009, 10:49 PM

Dgfred -

Here you go :)

Amanda with inflamed ear missing earring pic:

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=20365#p20365

You'll have to right click and save the picture to you computer and then view it in whatever photo viewing app you have so you can blow it up. That version that someone's just posted up for me is a little small.

I'm missing something. I really don't see any injury, even blown up. :confused:

Emerald

10-31-2009, 04:14 AM

People aren't ignoring you. There's just not a lot going on to discuss right now. In a few weeks, Rudy's 2nd level trial will begin. Maybe we will get reports as it happens.

It's obvious what the prosecution and defense will say in their statements before the AK/RS verdict.

I'm interested in what the attorney for the Meredith Kercher Family will say. In the US, it is not a common, valued perspective to have the victim give their point of view in the guilt/innocence phase.

JMO

Jester

10-31-2009, 02:12 PM

Yes, the bottom one. I would say in her ear lobe but she doesn't have one does she?

As for the inflamation, many have said it appears to be so to them, others have even stated it appears to be slightly cut or torn. On that, I reserve judgement. However, the stud/earring is missing from the bottom piercing which does raise the question of 'why'.

This isn't only a case involving lots of big questions, but one that has a myriad of little clues too. Some of these may mean something in the scheme of things, while others may not. There are so many little details. It is one of the facets of this case that makes it so interesting. What I've learned since following this case from the beginning is that just when you think you know everything, something new pops up to surprise you.

I've zoomed into the ear as much as possible without loosing much more resolution. I would agree that there appears to be a stud or earring missing on the bottom piercing, and it looks like there is a slight line or tear. I'm going to try working with colour a bit today to see if there's redness. By removing or adding colour, somethings an irregularity like redness is more evident.

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t189/zed0101/KnoxBigEar.jpg

Jester

10-31-2009, 06:30 PM

Hi Jester. This may be of some help in aiding you to gauge it. A poster on PMF has posted a 'before' and 'after', consisting of two shots of Amanda's ear blown up. One shot is the picture I linked to here from just after the murder, the other is from one of Amanda's recent appearances in the trial: HERE (http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=20367#p20367)

In the shot from just after the murder, I see a definite crease/cut/tear/ running from the bottom hole to the edge of the hole. This isn't there in the pic taken during the trial. Amanda is also helpfully not wearing a stud/earring in the newer shot so it's perfect for comparison.

Thanks. The recent picture shows just the hole where the earring would go. The other picture, immediately after the murder, has that same piercing hole looking torn ... more than just a hole in the skin.

Emerald

11-01-2009, 12:32 AM

Halloween is my all time favorite Holiday.

But for the past few months, I've really been involved with this case.

Not feeling so festive.

Jester

11-01-2009, 04:08 AM

Halloween is my all time favorite Holiday.

But for the past few months, I've really been involved with this case.

Not feeling so festive.

The 2 year anniversary is coming up. I wonder if Amanda will take time to remember Meredith, or if she will be pre-occupied with her own situation. By her own words, she says that she hardly knew Meredith, and we know that right after the murder she was more interested in pizza than her murdered roommate. My guess is that Amanda will be singing at the top of her lungs, writing her diary, and lamenting her lot in life rather than remembering the person at the centre of her situation.

Emerald

11-01-2009, 04:36 AM

Emerald

11-01-2009, 04:51 AM

Whoever changed the time did it in the wrong direction. My posting clock is 2 hours off.

Spring forward. Fall back.

Jester

11-01-2009, 07:39 AM

It was either AK's Mother or Father who commented that she did not know Meredith very well therefore she should not be expected to grieve the loss. I was dumbfounded. AK brought strangers into the home, walked around naked in front of the roommates and their guests, interrupted private conversations with rude remarks and annoying loud singing with lousy guitar playing.

It's just amazing how callous and completely removed the Family and Amanda can be from the gruesome murder.

The more they publicly speak, the more I believe Amanda's guilt. Seemingly, AK is emulating what she was taught.

Will Amanda ever tell the truth? She has testified under oath telling several completely different versions in the same extended paragraph.

JMO

I think Amanda said in her own testimony that she didn't know Meredith as anything more than a roommate for a couple of weeks. Her parents tried to minimize the time the she had known Raffaele and Meredith. I had originally read that Amanda and Raffaele had known each other for 2 weeks before the murder ... making Amanda's frequent sleepovers seem okay ... but then her dad said they'd only known each other for 8 days ... making the instant sleepovers (everyday) following the time they met look like female obsessive. Guys like at least every third day off. Amanda didn't give any days off from the time they met until after the murder ... now the guy, Raffaele, has every day off.

Amanda's fishiness with the mop ... what the heck is that anyway. If I've known someone for a week, I'm not walking through the city streets in a foreign country with a mop in my hands (that no one saw?), no matter what. Are we to believe that Amanda is blowing off positions with the German Federal Govt and at the same time she's the town mop girl? Why didn't anyone see an odd amercan girl wandering through town with a mop? That's a sight to see, especially if the girl is pretty ... like the Italians thought of Amanda ... pretty american girl walking through streets at 10 (coffee time) with a mop ... and no one remembers?

Did anyone see Amanda in the street with the mop?

Soon enough, it'll be coined an "amanda knox" when an experienced female mounts a virgin male and doesn't let him go for two weeks ... only to end in the murder of the female's roommate by the inexperienced boyfriend.

Amanda is admittedly guilty of bringing many different strangers to the house for sex in the shared cottage... to the disgust of Meredith. We know they were not old friends because Amanda had only been in Italy for a couple of weeks before she imposed on many. She brought strange men to her home, and she instantly moved in with other men like Raffaele? Sounds like a really creepy roommate ... even if she is from Seattle.

Jester

11-01-2009, 07:40 AM

Whoever changed the time did it in the wrong direction. My posting clock is 2 hours off.

Spring forward. Fall back.

Fall back. It's 2 for an hour, so it turns to 2, then 2:59, and then it goes back to 2 ... only twice a year

pixiejoolz

11-01-2009, 09:38 AM

Emerald

11-01-2009, 06:07 PM

When the whole picture is put together Amanda's inconsiderate, entitled behavior is exactly what her Family exhibited in Italy. They dressed inappropriately for court, the younger sister had to be asked to leave, showed no sympathy to Mededith Kercher's Family by being photographed and interviewed as tourists in front of the crime scene, etc.

In several interviews, AK's Mother has expressed regret AK did not flee to another Country. Fleeing does not change the facts of the evidence. Fleeing did not protect Rudy Guede from facing Justice.

The AK Family appearances have not done anything to recruit new supporters. As a matter of fact, it seems to have had the opposite affect on those people who never really looked at the case until now. Otherwise, there would be a clear and loud outcry.

Whatever the AK Family is paying their PR team is a total waste.

JMO

Emerald

11-01-2009, 06:12 PM

My posting clock is still 2 hours off. Somebody moved it ahead 1 hr instead of BACK 1 hr.

Spring forward....Fall back

Any one listening?

:lol:

Emerald

11-01-2009, 07:13 PM

Testing...

TY Michael. It's working properly now.

...............

I wonder if Larry King will do a follow up show? I also wish there was some way to know the feedback they received from the last appearance by the AK Family. The blog had some interesting entries, but many people prefer to send a private e-mail.

JMO

Emerald

11-01-2009, 09:15 PM

Occasionally, there is a very brief item on the major news channels (FoxNews, MSNBC, CNN, HLN). Not so much any more since the case is in limbo for a while.

Interesting the tone and inflections of the newscaster. In the reports I heard/saw, the newscaster seemed very dismissive of the fact they even had to waste their time reporting on it. My impression was they felt the conclusion was obvious.

I could be wrong. Prefer to watch when people say things. Transcripts cannot transmit feelings.

Of course, the court must deal with the bare facts. They are human, so I can't expect they will not be affected by the feelings they have. Perception is what it's all about.

Franklin

11-01-2009, 11:00 PM

The Amanda Knox case is just like the Michael Crowe case. Analogous to the Crowe case, when Sollecito heard from the investigators innuendo that Amanda, the strange new American girl was implicating him, he thought about it and realized he really couldn't vouch for her every minute of the previous night. (He slept some of the time)

In the Crowe case some of the boys seemed to try to outdo each other in contriving stories to implicate each other. The police were acting like little gossippy school girls saying to each boy in turn "guess whats the latest..... Now he's saying this and that about you. Are you going to let it stand?" And then the retalliation stories would grow ever larger than life.

It's not just children who are manipulated into making up stories. In the Los Angeles Rampart Scandal, more and more police got dragged in as they willingly did what Amanda did, and made up or embelished stories to "stay on the winning team" (i.e. the side of the interrogators) One after another like dominos, these cops wove big stories of beating and bribes and frameups and extortion and drugs. I think the higher ups let the momentum of these cases fizzle out because there would be no more police force left if they all accused each other. (or perhaps because the stories were really true and they couldn't let the public confidence be more shaken)

I think Amanda was a low-life (like most people) who would do anything to stay on the side of power and popularity. I think she was trying to help the police by embelishing the first story about the innocent black guy, and then through psychological trickery the cops got her to feel accepted if she accused Herself. (If indeed she did, since I don't believe serial liars in law enforcement any more than serial liars who are defendants)

This is not a far out scenario. There are hundreds of cases now of people who have falsely confessed or falsely accused others of rapes and murders where DNA has eventually proven them to be liars and forced the exoneration and release of these innocent victoms of police narcissism.

Emerald

11-01-2009, 11:11 PM

Amanda was not being tortured, pressured or threatened when she testified under oath in court.

I understand the attempt to liken this to 'Michael Crowe'. But, it doesn't work here.

What else do have?

JMO

KnoxCase

11-02-2009, 12:37 AM

I disagree, I think Crowe case works very similar to this case. geeez they even have him write it down. Raffaele was denied legal help, PAtrick said they scared the hell out of him too...all three were lying?
I don't think so.

Sounds like a "fishy" interrogation system to me...pressured and scary, rush to judgment, medieval.

Head investigator Edgardo Giobbi, as quoted: “We were able to establish guilt by closely observing the suspect's psychological and behavioral reactions during the interrogations. We don't need to rely on other kinds of investigation as this method has enabled us to get to the guilty parties in a very quick time."
He says this on film about the Kercher case. Very closed minded, ignorant thing to say. JMO.

What Amanda said on the stand and in public without the scary-crew, slapping and creating chaos, was she was at the apartment all night.
Same as she said Nov 4, Nov 7, 2007 to Nov 2009. One story.

The prosecution hasn't really proven she wasn't at the Raffaele apt.
The prosecution hasn't proven the threesome took part in a drug sex Halloween ritual rape/murder either.
The prosecution hasn't proven they were all planning this attack.

The only thing the prosecution has presented that isn't just fictional and hear-say, is the Knife and the miniscule LCN DNA that was non-blood, that was so invisible it can't be retested by any other court.
Its being debated. But I already mentioned that.

now more interesting, imo... will you believe Rudy? or Mignini?

we will have contradicting tales!

Rudys Grande' Finale' story will come to light more and more....
"the man with a million tales!"

So coming Nov 18, 2009 I predict Rudy will be drilled for changing stories, making anything he says unbelievable...but, I think he'll say Raffaele was the killer.
Amanda was there at the door, and the argument was of money.
Rudy was pooping and had consensual sex and he tried to save her, he fled because (doctor will speak as to why Rudy fled).

Will anyone believe this?

I wonder if Rudy will tell everyone where the "real" murder weapon is?
The one that matches the bed sheet pattern. Now that would be hard evidence.

Emerald

11-02-2009, 12:58 AM

Emerald

11-02-2009, 04:46 AM

It seems like the Michael Crowe incident is suddenly a new talking point. It has absolutely no relevance in the Italian Justice System. Italian law students do not even study it; nor have most even heard of it most likely.

What's the point? I've asked this several times, but get no reply from those who continually post about "Michael Crowe".

Is this a new campaign by the fabulous (:rolleyes:) PR team?

JMO

Emerald

11-02-2009, 05:33 AM

Thanks for the link, Michael

They [Kercher parents] hope now, two years after the intense shock, that the conclusion of the trial will bring them some closure.

Very clear they believe the right people are on trial.

JMO

KnoxCase

11-02-2009, 10:31 AM

JMO

Rudy will say it was Amanda there that night.

As far as the Prosecution not proved Amanda was not at Raffaele's all night, neither has Amanda's team convinced me she was at RS's all night. From AK's testimony, I have surmised she was NOT at RS's apartment all night.

Michael Crowe was a child. Amanda Knox is an adult, who was deemed mature enough to travel 8,000 miles to live on her own. Big difference.

Perception is everything.

Do you think Raffaele was even there? If not, then Mignini's theory doesn't work. His theory is all three were holding Meredith down and stabbing her and involved in the rape and burglar/theft.

Rudys Theory-
Why do you think Rudy says Rafaelle as the killer?
Amanda was only in the doorway or driveway in Rudys storys. (at least the ones after 4 months and post speaking to Mignini)
Do you think she should get a life sentence for being present if thats all it was?

Rudy repeatedly says after his talking to Mignini, that he knows it was Raffaele as the murderer. The left handed knife, unknown Italian is Raffaele per Rudy. March 2008.

The earlier Skype he said he wasn't even at the cottage on Nov 1.
He mentions Amanda was not there. He couldn't see because it was too dark in the cottage. He couldn't see anything outside Filomenas window...

The Crowe link, is only one example, and proof, that interrogations like this exist. Thats all. There are many that can't seem to comprehend, or they live in denial, that police do such things. So it does relate to this case in that the interrogation is suspicious behavior by the police.
Most average people can't comprehend an interrogation, they've never been thru one, so they tend to think things like this don't exist.

I only repeat it because the police should have been more transparent.
They should have made effort to allow legal representation. Hopefully someday they'll change the laws over there so accused people get legal representation and the interrogations are filmed.

All this secretive questioning and bizarre outcomes, reflects badly on the police. imo. Why did they hide everything? Why did they not allow the accused Legal Representation before proceeding?

KnoxCase

11-02-2009, 10:35 AM

If that's not enough, PM Mignini has promised a surprise.

words like this make Mignini sound like a corrupt human playing with the case as if its something to boost his ego and career.

why would anyone in his position withold evidence for the truth?

does Mignini think this is a legal game, just another case to "win or lose"?

He doesn't care for the Kerchers, he is playing games, hiding the truth, hiding evidence....

no wonder he's on trial for Abuse of Power...

pixiejoolz

11-02-2009, 10:37 AM

(snipped to address specifics))

[QUOTE=KnoxCase;13606340]I disagree, I think Crowe case works very similar to this case. geeez they even have him write it down. Raffaele was denied legal help, PAtrick said they scared the hell out of him too...all three were lying?
I don't think so.

Sounds like a "fishy" interrogation system to me...pressured and scary, rush to judgment, medieval."

First of all, as I have posted before, the brain of a fourteen year old is entirely different than the brain of a 20 yr. old, and the comparison between this case and the Crowe case is, putting it kindly, disingenuous.

"Writing it down," is standard procedure in any interrogation in which there is a confession or admission, so what's the big deal?

Amanda wasn't denied legal counsel.

Patrick said they scared the hell out of him. So what? I'd be scared to death if I was being interrogated too, even if - like Patrick - I had NOTHING to do with the crime, but was being accused of it by a lying "witness." It would be, imo, a scary situation for anyone, except, apparently AK, who seemed to treat it like an ongoing experimental fiction narrative.

"Fishy interrogation system" is unclear. Are you talking about the Italian system? The American system? Or both? And "medieval" is just a tad overly dramatic, as well as incorrect. Were whips, hot pokers or a rack used? Didn't think so.

jmo

KnoxCase

11-02-2009, 10:47 AM

Here's another theory-

********
My own guess as to what happened -- Knox was stoned, Sollecito was stoned; Knox brought some acquaintance (Guede) into the apartment and everything went wrong. The police sized up the situation and her behavior and that of Sollecito and concluded they knew something - they tried to BS their way out (in the course of which she accused her former employer - Lumumba) and their stories fell apart. Since then everything has been an effort to get out of the stories they told at the beginning and come up with something consistent with all the evidence. They have not succeeded.

********

A few things wrong with this.
1) He assumes the interrogation is correct and totally ignores Amandas Nov 4th testament preceding the interrogation. (shows a slanted perspective to guilt)

2) There is no proof of them communicating with Rudy on Nov 1.

3) Why would their cell-phones be off if they were just messing around, going to walk around town? Very unlikely they would turn off their cellphones.

This theory doesn't explain anything about the actual murder, the missing footprints in blood of three stoned -kids...

4 people, 4 different stories....Mignini, Amanda, Raffaele, Rudy...

KnoxCase

11-02-2009, 10:57 AM

"Fishy interrogation system" is unclear. Are you talking about the Italian system? The American system? Or both? And "medieval" is just a tad overly dramatic, as well as incorrect. Were whips, hot pokers or a rack used? Didn't think so.

jmo

both. Crowe case was the US.

Raffaele did ask for help he was denied. (supposedly...who knows who to believe anymore). A foreigner should be given legal counsel.

it was suspicious behavior by the police. it happens all the time this corrupt pressured procedure....is imo, a direct descendant of the twisted ways of the system.

the accused should have had legal representation. jmo.

the police should film the interrogations, especially in murder cases.

Cameras are being placed everywhere, and I think its great.

Italy has cameras, wire tapping...etc..they have the technology.
They didn't film it, because they didn't want to intentionally, I suspect.

Emerald

11-02-2009, 07:25 PM

Do you think she should get a life sentence for being present if thats all it was?

Wow! As opposed to the 'life sentence' of the victim because Amanda refused to intercede? Should "oops!" be sufficient? BTW, I don't believe Amanda is facing a life sentence.

I don't comprehend the talking point of Amanda being tortured into a confession. She was not being questioned when the Patrick statement was offered. They had to rouse the investigators to come to the station as witnesses.

JMO

KaraokeDiva

11-02-2009, 08:04 PM

Stupid question but is all the testimony/trial finished up? We are just waiting on a verdict now, right???

Emerald

11-02-2009, 08:25 PM

KaraokeDiva

11-02-2009, 08:34 PM

There will be closing statements by the attorneys at the end of Nov. The verdict is expected early December.

I find it interesting the Meredith Kercher Family has an attorney throughout this process. In Italy, he was even a part of the Criminal trial testimony process. Asking questions.

The Kerchers are citizens of UK. Don't know if they would have the same representation in Court. I know we don't in the US. Too bad.

JMO
Wow...they run trials a lot differently over there in Italy, don't they?!?!

Usually the victim's family is not represented by anyone...only marginally by the prosecuting atty... but he/she is representing the state, not the victim.

Thanks for your response.

Franklin

11-02-2009, 09:39 PM

Someone said that 14y/o minds are different from 20/y/o minds. That is not always true. People stop developing morally at different ages. A borderline will still have the selfishness of a baby their whole lives. Other people will develope conventional morality as a teenager, and a very few people will advance to develop "Post-Conventional" morality after that. Most will stop maturing in this measure and maintain their previous levels of morality their whole lives. It has nothing to do with IQ, that is a totally different thing.

I never said that Amanda was beaten or tortured. I am saying that she is a sychophant who only senses the direction of the wind and tries to jump on board the bandwagon. The U.S. has a long history of woman like this falsely accusing black men in order to attain attention from men in power, (ref. the patrick accusations) Witch hunts, southern lynchings, and some links between the day-care witch-hunts and Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy (a female psychological illness).

I think Amanda was an overly enthusiastic sychophant and her grasping for a feeling of importance in "helping" the police backfired on her and dragged her in.