Amanda Knox found guilty for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy #15

[Linda7NJ]

"Violence is another prominent feature of Japanese Manga and Anime. Besides the works such as AKIRA or Gantz whose main theme is violence itself, Manga and Anime for younger target including One Piece it’s cumulative sales surpassed 2.5 hundred million copies in 2011, Dragon Ball, or NARUTO depict violence with no restraint as well."



http://www.cool-jp.com/articles/anime/anime_fs_freedom_02.php?article_id=131&parent_category_id=2

Thank you Otto.

IMO it's interesting but I would certainly need way more information before I considered any of it relevant.

As a fan of horror movies and my interest in true crime...as well as my rare googling of bizarre sexual fetishes that I didn't have any idea what they were....I'm not so quick to say its at all relevant.

IMO I'd be more concerned if he was obsessed with rapes & murders in a real sense...not a cartoon.

I guess I just don't have enough info about HIS interests.

....shrug....

What do you think Otto?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[otto]

Thank you Otto.

IMO it's interesting but I would certainly need way more information before I considered any of it relevant.

As a fan of horror movies and my interest in true crime...as well as my rare googling of bizarre sexual fetishes that I didn't have any idea what they were....I'm not so quick to say its at all relevant.

IMO I'd be more concerned if he was obsessed with rapes & murders in a real sense...not a cartoon.

I guess I just don't have enough info about HIS interests.

....shrug....

What do you think Otto?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Heavy Metal Magazine is probably similar to violence in Japanese Manga Anime. My understanding is that there was some concern with Sollecito's interest in the depiction of violence.

 

[ashleigh_schwartz]

Where does this come from that AK and RS should have wounds, it a 3vs1 attack and Meredith's 40+ wounds help prove that.

How would you suppose RG(as lone wolf) avoided defensive wounds and no RG DNA under her nails. I mean he would need to restrain her, undress her, stab her from 2 separate directions and cover her mouth.
All this talk of DNA of RG being "all over" is tiresome. It was found in 4 places. In fact his defense argued that so little was found on the cuff of the jacket, it proved he didn't restrain her. If DNA was so easily left RGs would actually be all over Meredith, but in reality DNA isn't that easy to find or leave.

If we really wanna get technical the DNA on the blue hoodie shouldn't count, it was as "contaminated" as the bra clasp.

How do you know it was a 3 versus 1 attack? Was there any evidence that Meredith was restrained? You say it was a 3 versus 1 attack like you know that for sure.

Usually, when someone uses a knife to stab someone, they also have wounds or cuts on their hands, and there should be traces of blood on them and their clothes.

Rudy's DNA was in and on Meredith. His DNA, along with Meredith's, was found on her purse. His shoe prints were found in the bedroom and hallway. His handprints were found on the wall and her pillow case. His handprint was also found under her naked body. He had a cut on his right hand when he was arrested. He fled the country and admitted he was there. That is not "little," which is why he was still convicted. His defense attorney may have argued that it was so "little," but that does not mean that is true.

I still find it hard to believe that Knox and Sollecito were able to clean up a crime scene that well while leaving Rudy's DNA behind, and if they were in on it together, why would Rudy allow the "masterminds" to leave behind such obvious evidence such as excrement, handprints, and shoe prints, which would surely get him arrested? He would almost have to be brain dead to let them do that, and if they framed him, why not come forward? His initial defense never mentioned Amanda and I find it hard to believe that he would not throw them under the bus to not end up spending life in prison when he was arrested.

It does not make sense and my point is further validated by the fact that none of these theories as for why they did it make sense, either. If this were in an U.S. court, they would not be convicted either due to insufficient evidence.

 

[otto]

How do you know it was a 3 versus 1 attack? Was there any evidence that Meredith was restrained? You say it was a 3 versus 1 attack like you know that for sure.

Usually, when someone uses a knife to stab someone, they also have wounds or cuts on their hands, and there should be traces of blood on them and their clothes.

Rudy's DNA was in and on Meredith. His DNA, along with Meredith's, was found on her purse. His shoe prints were found in the bedroom and hallway. His handprints were found on the wall and her pillow case. His handprint was also found under her naked body. He had a cut on his right hand when he was arrested. He fled the country and admitted he was there. That is not "little," which is why he was still convicted. His defense attorney may have argued that it was so "little," but that does not mean that is true.

I still find it hard to believe that Knox and Sollecito were able to clean up a crime scene that well while leaving Rudy's DNA behind, and if they were in on it together, why would Rudy allow the "masterminds" to leave behind such obvious evidence such as excrement, handprints, and shoe prints, which would surely get him arrested? He would almost have to be brain dead to let them do that, and if they framed him, why not come forward?

It does not make sense and my point is further validated by the fact that none of these theories as for why they did it make sense, either. If this were in an U.S. court, they would not be convicted either due to insufficient evidence.

Meredith had 43 injuries. Why are there no defensive wounds?

 

[Yellow]

I find it funny that the judge in this case explicitly says he does not find it to be a "necessary measure" to enforce this sentence at this point. Umm. You believe 2 people stabbed a girl for kicks and yet you don't think such dangerous criminals should be in jail now.? You are fine with them walking the streets?

Yeah, this case is not about politics.

Also, I believe in US courts it is improper to base a verdict when the fact finder improperly relies on evidence, here, the judge explicitly says he is holding it against RS that he did not testify, which was his right to do. I am not completely sure but I know if a prosecutor made those remarks at trial that woud be immediate grounds for a mistrial. However I wonder if any convictions were overturned on appeal where the jury admits it improperly attributed guilt bc the defendant did not testify. That was a really stupid thing for the judge to admit, if I was RS's lawyer that would be grounds for an appeal.

They obviously held it against AK that she was not there.

I hope this judge talks more bc I think the more he talks the more we will find out all the improper things this jury relied on.

 

[ashleigh_schwartz]

Meredith had 43 injuries. Why are there no defensive wounds?

At the time Rudy was arrested, there was still a cut visible on his hand. Why is there no evidence of restraint?

 

[otto]

At the time Rudy was arrested, there was still a cut visible on his hand. Why is there no evidence of restraint?

There is. We actually discussed this in great detail a few weeks ago, going through various scenarios based on Meredith's injuries.

There is no explanation for why Meredith has no defensive injuries.

 

[ashleigh_schwartz]

There is. We actually discussed this in great detail a few weeks ago, going through various scenarios based on Meredith's injuries.

There is no explanation for why Meredith has no defensive injuries.

What is the evidence that Meredith was physically restrained by a third party? Going through scenarios when you are already biased is not evidence that she was restrained. It is speculation.

You did not answer my other questions.

 

[SMK]

I find it funny that the judge in this case explicitly says he does not find it to be a "necessary measure" to enforce this sentence at this point. Umm. You believe 2 people stabbed a girl for kicks and yet you don't think such dangerous criminals should be in jail now.? You are fine with them walking the streets?

Yeah, this case is not about politics.

Also, I believe in US courts it is improper to base a verdict when the fact finder improperly relies on evidence, here, the judge explicitly says he is holding it against RS that he did not testify, which was his right to do. I am not completely sure but I know if a prosecutor made those remarks at trial that woud be immediate grounds for a mistrial. However I wonder if any convictions were overturned on appeal where the jury admits it improperly attributed guilt bc the defendant did not testify. That was a really stupid thing for the judge to admit, if I was RS's lawyer that would be grounds for an appeal.

They obviously held it against AK that she was not there.

I hope this judge talks more bc I think the more he talks the more we will find out all the improper things this jury relied on.

I know what you mean, but I can't be as cynical about this Judge.

1. I would imagine he believes the defendants are not liable to offend in this manner again: Not being together, not being as young, not using drugs (we assume) and having done 4 years in prison.

2. I don't think he is saying, "Because Sollecito didn't go on the stand, we convicted him." I think he's saying that they were unconvinced by his attorneys' arguments.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Every speck of blood and every inch of the murder room were not tested. That would be impossible and unnecessary. IMO

The coroners report also proves there was more than one assailant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

How do you know it was a 3 versus 1 attack? Was there any evidence that Meredith was restrained? You say it was a 3 versus 1 attack like you know that for sure.

Usually, when someone uses a knife to stab someone, they also have wounds or cuts on their hands, and there should be traces of blood on them and their clothes.

Rudy's DNA was in and on Meredith. His DNA, along with Meredith's, was found on her purse. His shoe prints were found in the bedroom and hallway. His handprints were found on the wall and her pillow case. His handprint was also found under her naked body. He had a cut on his right hand when he was arrested. He fled the country and admitted he was there. That is not "little," which is why he was still convicted. His defense attorney may have argued that it was so "little," but that does not mean that is true.

I still find it hard to believe that Knox and Sollecito were able to clean up a crime scene that well while leaving Rudy's DNA behind, and if they were in on it together, why would Rudy allow the "masterminds" to leave behind such obvious evidence such as excrement, handprints, and shoe prints, which would surely get him arrested? He would almost have to be brain dead to let them do that, and if they framed him, why not come forward? His initial defense never mentioned Amanda and I find it hard to believe that he would not throw them under the bus to not end up spending life in prison when he was arrested.

It does not make sense and my point is further validated by the fact that none of these theories as for why they did it make sense, either. If this were in an U.S. court, they would not be convicted either due to insufficient evidence.

I agree that these two specific people could have escaped a conviction here in the USA. If these were two people whose faces weren't splashed across the media...I believe they both would be serving life sentences.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

At the time Rudy was arrested, there was still a cut visible on his hand. Why is there no evidence of restraint?

There is. Rudy's DNA was on her wrist


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Madeleine74]

The bottomline for me is that there are no posters on Interweb forums or arguments that will ever be evidence in this (or any) case. I don't care how many times or how many ways someone hashes out their theories (which is really all that can be done). The evidence just isn't there for AK and RS BARD. Whether it "should be there" or not doesn't matter. Making up theories and stories around what is imagined is not evidence. It will never be evidence.

There is no evidence that proves either AK or RS were in the apt *at the time of the murder* nor in MK's room at the time. Yes there's evidence of AK in the apartment and there may be evidence of RS as well, but if they weren't there participating in a murder they aren't guilty, IMHO.

They may be horrible, unlikeable, sleazy, cold, manipulative, weird sociopaths, but if the totality of the evidence fails to place them at the scene of the crime as it was happening, or otherwise planning this crime, they are not guilty (again, IMHO).

 

[Footwarrior]

What is the evidence that Meredith was physically restrained by a third party? Going through scenarios when you are already biased is not evidence that she was restrained. It is speculation.

You did not answer my other questions.

It comes from not understanding how fast bruises and other injuries are acquired in an actual fight. Meredith's injuries are consistent with a short but brutal struggle with one person.

Remember that Rudy had a substantial advantage in size and weight, in addition to being armed with a knife. (A knife matching the outline in blood left on Meredith's bed.)

 

[ashleigh_schwartz]

Every speck of blood and every inch of the murder room were not tested. That would be impossible and unnecessary. IMO

The coroners report also proves there was more than one assailant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know not every speck of blood was tested, but if you want to throw two people in prison for life, you should have at least sufficient evidence that they committed the crime. All I have seen are people stating with certainty that Knox and Sollecito are guilty because of their "demeanor" or because they do not think they are "acting how an innocent person should act."

What in the coroner's report proves that there was another assailant? What in it proves that it was Knox and Sollecito?

Better yet, why did Knox and Sollecito murder Meredith if it is true that they did?

 

[ashleigh_schwartz]

There is. Rudy's DNA was on her wrist


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rudy's DNA was on her wrist . . . but not the DNA of Knox and Sollecito. You and Otto were implying that she was restrained by a third party (Knox or Sollecito) and not Rudy.

 

[Amber29]

How do you know it was a 3 versus 1 attack? Was there any evidence that Meredith was restrained? You say it was a 3 versus 1 attack like you know that for sure.

Usually, when someone uses a knife to stab someone, they also have wounds or cuts on their hands, and there should be traces of blood on them and their clothes.

Rudy's DNA was in and on Meredith. His DNA, along with Meredith's, was found on her purse. His shoe prints were found in the bedroom and hallway. His handprints were found on the wall and her pillow case. His handprint was also found under her naked body. He had a cut on his right hand when he was arrested. He fled the country and admitted he was there. That is not "little," which is why he was still convicted. His defense attorney may have argued that it was so "little," but that does not mean that is true.

I still find it hard to believe that Knox and Sollecito were able to clean up a crime scene that well while leaving Rudy's DNA behind, and if they were in on it together, why would Rudy allow the "masterminds" to leave behind such obvious evidence such as excrement, handprints, and shoe prints, which would surely get him arrested? He would almost have to be brain dead to let them do that, and if they framed him, why not come forward? His initial defense never mentioned Amanda and I find it hard to believe that he would not throw them under the bus to not end up spending life in prison when he was arrested.

It does not make sense and my point is further validated by the fact that none of these theories as for why they did it make sense, either. If this were in an U.S. court, they would not be convicted either due to insufficient evidence.

I agree with the court that has convicted AK and RS as acting along with RG, that's what I'm basing my 3vs1 on. The evidence she was restrained is in the lack of defensive wounds. IMO

The same concept applies to RGs DNA on the purse that applies to jacket and the bra clasp. It's either valid or it's not, why is it ok to claim contamination on the bra clasp but RGs DNA stands? His hand print wasn't found on the wall, that print only contained MKs DNA and was unidentifiable. He had a cut on his right hand, why was none of his blood found at the scene? Not on any doors, bathroom, no where. RGs clothes were not recovered from the murder night. RG has only confessed to being there, he maintains his innocence in her murder. He's quite the liar but he had to admit to being there.

 

[Linda7NJ]

The bottomline for me is that there are no posters on Interweb forums or arguments that will ever be evidence in this (or any) case. I don't care how many times or how many ways someone hashes out their theories (which is really all that can be done). The evidence just isn't there for AK and RS BARD. Whether it "should be there" or not doesn't matter. Making up theories and stories around what is imagined is not evidence. It will never be evidence.

There is no evidence that proves either AK or RS were in the apt *at the time of the murder* nor in MK's room at the time. Yes there's evidence of AK in the apartment and there may be evidence of RS as well, but if they weren't there participating in a murder they aren't guilty, IMHO.

They may be horrible, unlikeable, sleazy, cold, manipulative, weird sociopaths, but if the totality of the evidence fails to place them at the scene of the crime as it was happening, or otherwise planning this crime, they are not guilty (again, IMHO).

I totally disagree. On all assertions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

It comes from not understanding how fast bruises and other injuries are acquired in an actual fight. Meredith's injuries are consistent with a short but brutal struggle with one person.



Remember that Rudy had a substantial advantage in size and weight, in addition to being armed with a knife. (A knife matching the outline in blood left on Meredith's bed.)

The coroner and two juries disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ashleigh_schwartz]

I agree with the court that has convicted AK and RS as acting along with RG, that's what I'm basing my 3vs1 on. The evidence she was restrained is in the lack of defensive wounds. IMO

The same concept applies to RGs DNA on the purse that applies to jacket and the bra clasp. It's either valid or it's not, why is it ok to claim contamination on the bra clasp but RGs DNA stands? His hand print wasn't found on the wall, that print only contained MKs DNA and was unidentifiable. He had a cut on his right hand, why was none of his blood found at the scene? Not on any doors, bathroom, no where. RGs clothes were not recovered from the murder night. RG has only confessed to being there, he maintains his innocence in her murder. He's quite the liar but he had to admit to being there.

You are doing a strawman. I never mentioned the DNA on the jacket.

The police state that there was a visible cut on Rudy's hand when he was arrested. We are trusting the Italian justice system and the evidence they have brought forth, so why would you not trust them on that?

Lack of defensive wounds is not evidence of restraint. One can only speculate that she was restrained, but there is no evidence of physical restraint other than Rudy's DNA on her wrist, as someone claimed.

You claimed there was "little" evidence of Rudy when it was more than just a "little." Your argument revolves around Rudy and speculation but no evidence of Knox and Sollecito actually doing it, which, in my opinion, is crucial if you are going to throw someone in a foreign prison for 25 or 28 years.