Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
sherlockh said:
The cottage was sealed from Nov 7th till Dec 18th. Why not just say it is too bad the bra clasp wasn't collected right away? It is implied that people were walking around for 47 days and anything could have happened. Why this exaggeration?

It is the same with the interrogation. The false accusation happened within an hour or two, but that doesn't sound good so we add all hours Knox was within a 100 meters of the police station in the previous days to make it more believable.

Same with the DNA on the bra clasp. Four males is an exaggeration, but there is a reason for this. One other male could still be easily explained, even two, so it must be more, so we get some more stutter and turn that into 'other males'.

Luminol evidence. It is exaggerated that this could be 'anything else'. When you check the list there is only a few items that react to Luminol like blood does and they don't make any sense.

Then for Guede the smallest evidence is accepted as proof. Fake break-in. Dust on clothes proves Guede did it even though whoever got the rock could have gotten dust on his/her shoes. A bloody hand print proves Guede did it but somehow it doesn't matter that the sexual assault shows he had no blood on his hands. He is a necrophiliac anyway...etc..

Everything is exaggerated to make the innocent case more believable. That wouldn't be necessary if there really was a case for innocence IMO.
Click to expand...

Thank you for bringing the case back to earth and keeping it grounded.
 
SMK said:
Two above BBM and enumerated:
1. This exaggeration has been bandied about as fact: Ergo, I took it as fact. I really thought many people milled about and sauntered in and out for 47 days (CSI people and Mignini and the like.)

2. It certainly does create a din and a roar in which one cannot even think straight anymore, and that may be its purpose: To distract. I feel spun around by facts and counterfactuals and revisions, to the point where I feel this case is about something else entirely.
Click to expand...

I think that many people present opinions in good faith, but there are always those that have an agenda, and that present a point with a special twist ... with the hope that the actual facts are unknown and that new ones can be rewritten. Guede is a good example of this.

It's well known that he was a young man, a month or two older that Knox with no criminal record, who lived in an apartment near that of Sollecito. He had recently lost his job. In order to demonize him, it is still, six year later, suggested that he is an older man, a homeless drifter, and a drug addict/dealer with a criminal record. Knox and Guede were the same age, with Sollecito being older, yet we have yet to hear about Guede and Knox being "kids". It's always that Knox and Sollecito are "kids" while Guede is presented as a hardened criminal.

Even pointing out the above facts about Guede is sufficient to trigger remarks such as: defending a hardened criminal convicted of murder. The fact is that Guede was no different than Knox when the murder occurred.
 
otto said:
I think that many people present opinions in good faith, but there are always those that have an agenda, and that present a point with a special twist ... with the hope that the actual facts are unknown and that new ones can be rewritten. Guede is a good example of this.

It's well known that he was a young man, a month or two older that Knox with no criminal record, who lived in an apartment near that of Sollecito. He had recently lost his job. In order to demonize him, it is still, six year later, suggested that he is an older man, a homeless drifter, and a drug addict/dealer with a criminal record. Knox and Guede were the same age, with Sollecito being older, yet we have yet to hear about Guede and Knox being "kids". It's always that Knox and Sollecito are "kids" while Guede is presented as a hardened criminal.

Even pointing out the above facts about Guede is sufficient to trigger remarks such as: defending a hardened criminal convicted of murder. The fact is that Guede was no different than Knox when the murder occurred.
Click to expand...
Yes, I will say that when reading Hendry's well-laid out theory of the lone wolf killer, I was completely convinced that Guede was a criminal to his fingertips, and acted alone as the drifter and druggie and lustful creature he was. I still have trouble viewing him in any other manner. I am afraid a sub-conscious racism may be at work there, even in myself (although consciously I hold no such view). I guess Guede was speaking to thousands in America when he said, "black man found, black man guilty." :(
 
otto said:
I think most withdrew their signatures, leaving one or two.

If Hampikain is an acceptable expert that has something to offer to the trial for the murder of Meredith Kercher, why didn't he testify as a trial expert? Did the defense not value his opinion? Could he not qualify as an expert? Would his "anything is possible" statement fail to stand up in court?
Click to expand...
Is it documented anywhere that most withdrew their signatures?
 
SMK said:
Well, no, but the judgment had to be accepted.

We don't fully know that Ryan Ferguson is innocent (plenty of odd things abound in that story) but since his conviction is overturned, and the ruling is final, it has to be respected.

Knox and Sollecito may in the end be wrongfully convicted or acquitted, but where does one draw the line. It would be up to the families to continue fighting.

I recall a case (and I will have to look it up; it had to do with someone on an army base, in connection with the rape and murder of a nieghbor) where a man was "falsely accused " then found to be innocent. Years later, DNA proved his guilt.
Click to expand...

You might be talking about Timothy Bailey Hennis. He is now on death row for the second time. It wasn't a neighbor. it was the rape and murder of a young mother and two of her toddlers.
 
lonetraveler said:
You might be talking about Timothy Bailey Hennis. He is now on death row for the second time. It wasn't a neighbor. it was the rape and murder of a young mother and two of her toddlers.
Click to expand...
I think you may be right; I now remember the children. Thank you so much for that info. ETA: Yes, I googled it - and it is indeed the case I was referring to Thank you~~!!!
 
SMK said:
Yes, I will say that when reading Hendry's well-laid out theory of the lone wolf killer, I was completely convinced that Guede was a criminal to his fingertips, and acted alone as the drifter and druggie and lustful creature he was. I still have trouble viewing him in any other manner. I am afraid a sub-conscious racism may be at work there, even in myself (although consciously I hold no such view). I guess Guede was speaking to thousands in America when he said, "black man found, black man guilty." :(
Click to expand...

I see Knox and Guede has having much in common. They were the same age, restless and eager to experience life without parental input. Guede wanted to be a chef but the restaurant where he was apprenticing went under. That meant that he had to re-evaluate his career goals. Knox had completed a year at University and was taking a year out (gap year) of her studies to travel and learn another language; study at a language school for a few months. It seems that they both enjoyed soft drugs, clubbing, partying, open sex and a carefree lifestyle without boundaries. Guede had stolen a laptop from a law office and Knox was working illegally. They both seemed to view the law as optional. For those that lean towards stereotyping, take away Guede's black skin, and suddenly, he's as innocent appearing as Knox.

I see Sollecito as different. He was older by a few years, he wasn't taking a year out (gap year), he was in the final stage of his four year degree. He had a daily drug habit, just like Knox, but he seemed to be able to separate the party persona from the goal based persona. He had a plan and a future that he was going to step into just a few weeks after meeing Knox.
 
otto said:
Guede had stolen a laptop from a law office and Knox was working illegally. They both seemed to view the law as optional.
Click to expand...

You make it sound like Guede was just passing by, saw a laptop, and slipped it into his backpack, when in fact he broke in to the office in an eerily similar way to this murder. And do you really mean to compare breaking into an office and stealing with working illegally?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
jgsmith said:
You make it sound like Guede was just passing by, saw a laptop, and slipped it into his backpack, when in fact he broke in to the office in an eerily similar way to this murder. And do you really mean to compare breaking into an office and stealing with working illegally?
Click to expand...

Actually, there was nothing similar about how Guede broke into the law office and the staged break-in at the cottage, unless you count "break in" as similar. In the case of the law office, Guede climbed onto the balcony and entered through the French doors. That was an option at the cottage, but that didn't happen. If the cottage break had been via the French doors on the balcony, then definitely we could say that the break in was similar. In fact, there is nothing similar about the break in at the law office and a staged break-in with a window broken with a rock. There is nothing similar between walking through a door and smashing a second story window.

I am saying that Knox and Guede both viewed the law as optional - something that didn't apply to them. Knox broke the law in Italy, as did Guede. Knox was stealing from Italians by illegally taking a job that belonged to an Italian citizen. Guede was stealing from a lawyer by taking a laptop. Both wanted to illegally benefit financially to the detriment of others.
 
otto said:
I see Knox and Guede has having much in common. They were the same age, restless and eager to experience life without parental input. Guede wanted to be a chef but the restaurant where he was apprenticing went under. That meant that he had to re-evaluate his career goals. Knox had completed a year at University and was taking a year out (gap year) of her studies to travel and learn another language; study at a language school for a few months. It seems that they both enjoyed soft drugs, clubbing, partying, open sex and a carefree lifestyle without boundaries. Guede had stolen a laptop from a law office and Knox was working illegally. They both seemed to view the law as optional. For those that lean towards stereotyping, take away Guede's black skin, and suddenly, he's as innocent appearing as Knox.

I see Sollecito as different. He was older by a few years, he wasn't taking a year out (gap year), he was in the final stage of his four year degree. He had a daily drug habit, just like Knox, but he seemed to be able to separate the party persona from the goal based persona. He had a plan and a future that he was going to step into just a few weeks after meeing Knox.
Click to expand...

Please provide a link to the bolded and underlined. thanks
 
When you think about it, it' almost like the first thing Knox wanted to do when she arrived in Italy was break the laws. Smoking pot was her vice, and that was one of the first things she located in Italy - friends with access to drugs. She apparently wrote in her book that one of the first points that she and Sollecito established was the mutual vice of drug abuse. She probably established the same common interest with Guede. The next thing she did was take a job, even though she was not legally entitled to work in Italy. When her roommate was murdered, she voluntarily went to the police station and falsely accuses an innocent man of murder. Within 6 weeks of Knox's arrival in Perugia, we hear from her mother that Knox is stuck a backwards, medieval town in Italy, falsely accused of murder by a crazy prosecutor that turns a blind eye to police brutality.

After Knox's description in her myspace page about Berlin, where she also burned bridges, it's not much of a stretch to question how far she wanted to go without being accountable.
 
Harmony2 said:
Please provide a link to the bolded and underlined. thanks
Click to expand...

I will. It might take me a day or two to find the information. My laptop blue screened yesterday, so I'm using an antique laptop that is slow. I'll have a new machine in a week.

I'll provide links for:

  • Knox was working illegally.
  • Sollecito had a daily drug habit, just like Knox
 
otto said:
When you think about it, it' almost like the first thing Knox wanted to do when she arrived in Italy was break the laws. Smoking pot was her vice, and that was one of the first things she located in Italy - friends with access to drugs. She apparently wrote in her book that one of the first points that she and Sollecito established was the mutual vice of drug abuse. She probably established the same common interest with Guede. The next thing she did was take a job, even though she was not legally entitled to work in Italy. When her roommate was murdered, she voluntarily went to the police station and falsely accuses an innocent man of murder. Within 6 weeks of Knox's arrival in Perugia, we hear from her mother that Knox is stuck a backwards, medieval town in Italy, falsely accused of murder by a crazy prosecutor that turns a blind eye to police brutality.

After Knox's description in her myspace page about Berlin, where she also burned bridges, it's not much of a stretch to question how far she wanted to go without being accountable.
Click to expand...

Otto, I know you have posted before about Amanda's feeling of jealousy for her roomates. A lot of people have problems understanding what a motive would be for Amanda. Even though there is no need to prove a motive, but it's just natural reaction for everyone, including me.

I feel, MOO, that Amanda was a very insecure person. Perhaps still is, but I don't think as much now because probably all of the attention has boosted her self-esteem. She took great pride is being "different" and not like the "typical" girls. She thought "those girls" were shallow, and she had a superior intellect. I really believe she thought this. I'm not talking about just the roomates, I'm talking about girls in general. And she also took pride in voicing her opinion and not being afraid to voice her opinion, and to say how she felt, even if it was not the "right" thing to say at a certain moment.

So here she goes to Perugia, where she's roomed with what she perceives as being very "typical" girls. These girls are more lady-like, modest, and mature than her. They have fun, but know where to draw the line. Amanda didn't know where to draw the line. She thought it was ok because she was just "liberal" and they were just too conservative, but in reality it stemmed from her low self-esteem. And probably deep down, she knew this. She kind of secretly wished she could be more like them, be able to draw that line, but she just couldn't. This led her to sometimes get into things too deep.

Most people can't understand that. They don't realize that she probably didn't want to be like that, she just couldn't control herself. She didn't have "normal" abilities of moderation. The others could do drugs and not go in too deep, perhaps a few joints every now and then. Amanda couldn't do that. I am sure she probably experimented with some (or maybe a lot) of hard drugs in Perugia, not just marijuana (MOO).

All of this led to a kind of jealousy of Meredith and probably the other girls in her villa as well. Kind of a simmering kind of thing, which just exploded one night with the influence of hard drugs and alcohol and shady people.

JMO.
 
aa9511 said:
Otto, I know you have posted before about Amanda's feeling of jealousy for her roomates. A lot of people have problems understanding what a motive would be for Amanda. Even though there is no need to prove a motive, but it's just natural reaction for everyone, including me.

I feel, MOO, that Amanda was a very insecure person. Perhaps still is, but I don't think as much now because probably all of the attention has boosted her self-esteem. She took great pride is being "different" and not like the "typical" girls. She thought "those girls" were shallow, and she had a superior intellect. I really believe she thought this. I'm not talking about just the roomates, I'm talking about girls in general. And she also took pride in voicing her opinion and not being afraid to voice her opinion, and to say how she felt, even if it was not the "right" thing to say at a certain moment.

So here she goes to Perugia, where she's roomed with what she perceives as being very "typical" girls. These girls are more lady-like, modest, and mature than her. They have fun, but know where to draw the line. Amanda didn't know where to draw the line. She thought it was ok because she was just "liberal" and they were just too conservative, but in reality it stemmed from her low self-esteem. And probably deep down, she knew this. She kind of secretly wished she could be more like them, be able to draw that line, but she just couldn't. This led her to sometimes get into things too deep.

Most people can't understand that. They don't realize that she probably didn't want to be like that, she just couldn't control herself. She didn't have "normal" abilities of moderation. The others could do drugs and not go in too deep, perhaps a few joints every now and then. Amanda couldn't do that. I am sure she probably experimented with some (or maybe a lot) of hard drugs in Perugia, not just marijuana (MOO).

All of this led to a kind of jealousy of Meredith and probably the other girls in her villa as well. Kind of a simmering kind of thing, which just exploded one night with the influence of hard drugs and alcohol and shady people.

JMO.
Click to expand...

That's certainly what came up early on. Patrick told media that Knox had been flirting too much and working too little, so her job had been changed from server to handing out fliers at the door. Meredith had been offered a job behind the bar because of her skill in mixing mojitos, but she hadn't accepted. As far as I know, she also wasn't allowed to work in Italy. Both Knox and Meredith should have been on student visas. I doubt a language student would be granted a work visa, and I doubt an Erasmus student would need to work.

That, along with the impression that Knox was not accepted by Meredith or her friends, and wasn't included in the legal profession social circles (Laura, Filomina), Meredith had a boyfriend downstairs, Knox had a hook up downstairs ... excluded, a loner ... it leaves one with the impression that Knox may have been jealous of Meredith. Meredith was more lady like than Knox. Knox thought it was okay to hang her "joke" vibrator in translucent packaging in the bathroom. Meredith was horrified and didn't get the joke.

I very much agree with your assessment about Knox's insecurities around women and how that played out, or backfired on her more often than not. Bursting into song at a restaurant falls into the category of insecurity that you describe above.
 
sherlockh said:
The cottage was sealed from Nov 7th till Dec 18th. Why not just say it is too bad the bra clasp wasn't collected right away? It is implied that people were walking around for 47 days and anything could have happened. Why this exaggeration?

It is the same with the interrogation. The false accusation happened within an hour or two, but that doesn't sound good so we add all hours Knox was within a 100 meters of the police station in the previous days to make it more believable.

Same with the DNA on the bra clasp. Four males is an exaggeration, but there is a reason for this. One other male could still be easily explained, even two, so it must be more, so we get some more stutter and turn that into 'other males'.

Luminol evidence. It is exaggerated that this could be 'anything else'. When you check the list there is only a few items that react to Luminol like blood does and they don't make any sense.

Then for Guede the smallest evidence is accepted as proof. Fake break-in. Dust on clothes proves Guede did it even though whoever got the rock could have gotten dust on his/her shoes. A bloody hand print proves Guede did it but somehow it doesn't matter that the sexual assault shows he had no blood on his hands. He is a necrophiliac anyway...etc..

Everything is exaggerated to make the innocent case more believable. That wouldn't be necessary if there really was a case for innocence IMO.
Click to expand...

This doesn't look sealed to me.

3yve.jpg


Door looks wide open.

6fp4.jpg
 
otto said:
I see Knox and Guede has having much in common. They were the same age, restless and eager to experience life without parental input. Guede wanted to be a chef but the restaurant where he was apprenticing went under. That meant that he had to re-evaluate his career goals. Knox had completed a year at University and was taking a year out (gap year) of her studies to travel and learn another language; study at a language school for a few months. It seems that they both enjoyed soft drugs, clubbing, partying, open sex and a carefree lifestyle without boundaries. Guede had stolen a laptop from a law office and Knox was working illegally. They both seemed to view the law as optional. For those that lean towards stereotyping, take away Guede's black skin, and suddenly, he's as innocent appearing as Knox.

I see Sollecito as different. He was older by a few years, he wasn't taking a year out (gap year), he was in the final stage of his four year degree. He had a daily drug habit, just like Knox, but he seemed to be able to separate the party persona from the goal based persona. He had a plan and a future that he was going to step into just a few weeks after meeing Knox.
Click to expand...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...er-trial-Rudy-Guede-was-violent-to-women.html

In the document, Abukar Mohamed Barrow, known as “Momi”, accused Guede of drinking too much, taking drugs and trying to steal the handbags of young women during nights out on the town.

“Rudy was often drunk. I know he took cocaine. Often he was off his head with the drugs that he was taking. And when he was like that he would be a nuisance to girls, he’d block their path and try to hassle them. When we were in crowded places he stole their bags,” Barrow testified, according to excerpts of his evidence printed in the Italian press.

[video=youtube;yfA7rrmfedE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfA7rrmfedE[/video]

Maria Del Prato "We all had the feeling he was a dangerous person"
 
MichaelSmith said:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...er-trial-Rudy-Guede-was-violent-to-women.html

In the document, Abukar Mohamed Barrow, known as “Momi”, accused Guede of drinking too much, taking drugs and trying to steal the handbags of young women during nights out on the town.

“Rudy was often drunk. I know he took cocaine. Often he was off his head with the drugs that he was taking. And when he was like that he would be a nuisance to girls, he’d block their path and try to hassle them. When we were in crowded places he stole their bags,” Barrow testified, according to excerpts of his evidence printed in the Italian press.

Maria Del Prato Discusses Rudy Guede Breaking Into Her Nursery. - YouTube

Maria Del Prato "We all had the feeling he was a dangerous person"
Click to expand...

Knox testified in court that she was not afraid of Guede (ref: court transcripts). Either she had no natural instincts similar to people that believed Guede to be a dangerous person, or he didn't appear as scary as stated above to women.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 115 more.
Total: 2,246 (members: 116, guests: 2,130)

Online statistics

Members online
116
Guests online
2,130
Total visitors
2,246
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,096
Messages
18,118,458
Members
230,994
Latest member
truelove
Back
Top