Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#5

[Yellow]

I don't understand what you mean by "deal". The Italian legal system does not include the concept of "plea deals". There are no deals. There are two options: fast track trial, regular trial. Guede chose fast track, Knox and Sollecito chose regular trial.

So I guess in Italy, people cannot plead guilty to things? It is common here for multiple defendants to plea to a lesser offense, in exchange for testimony,

I also think this case was so personal to some people that they would have taken RS telling a story where he hid in the room hearing of the stabbing in exchange for immunity. Immunity deals are done all the time. Does Italy not give immunity deals?

 

[Yellow]

True, but then you must take into consideration the crazy motives people attribute to Amanda:

Jealousy of Kercher over her refinement and "stealing" her LeChic job, wanting to push boundaries, looking for a thrill, wanting to humiliate Kercher and be "the Queen Bee", etc. They believe Amanda had strong and insane motive to want to prank/haze Meredith. (which escalated to murder)

Evidence of any of this besides some complainants she did not clean the toilet properly?

 

[otto]

So I guess in Italy, people cannot plead guilty to things? It is common here for multiple defendants to plea to a lesser offense, in exchange for testimony,

I also think this case was so personal to some people that they would have taken RS telling a story where he hid in the room hearing of the stabbing in exchange for immunity. Immunity deals are done all the time. Does Italy not give immunity deals?

In Italy, suspects cannot make a deal. There are no deals.

 

[SMK]

BBM: her description of the scene is only suspect because others say she never saw it after the door was forced.

HOWEVER:

Who knows what she was told by those who did see the scene? I can't believe everyone assembled gazed on MK's body in silence, so who knows what AK overheard?

In the horror of discovering MK's body, it is highly unlikely that anyone was keeping track of AK's movement. So I don't put any faith in the testimony that she never saw the inside of the room.

And that doesn't even begin to deal with what LE may have leaked to her during her various interrogations.

This sort of "only the killer could have known" evidence is regularly shown to be based on hasty and false assumptions by LE. (See WM3, for example.)

I have in fact discovered that a forensic pathologist named Luca did leak details of the crime while riding in a car with Knox and Sollecito. I was very disappointed to read this in Follain's text, as when reading the PDF file of Dr. Galati's appeal to the Italian Supreme Court, I assumed I was reading absolute empirical fact. *Seething*.......ETA:Or was this AFTER she had already revealed the info??? Can anyone help?

 

[otto]

Evidence of any of this besides some complainants she did not clean the toilet properly?

Natalie Hayward, friend of Meredith in Perugia:

"In addition, she said tensions between the two women, who shared a flat, had been building up for weeks.

Miss Kercher was "frustrated" with the University of Washington student's refusal to do her share of the cleaning, and felt uncomfortable that Knox kept a vibrator in a transparent wash bag in their shared bathroom. Relations were not improved by Knox's insistence on strumming her guitar all the time, Miss Hayward added.

...
The two British women first met Knox when she took a room in early October in the hillside cottage where Miss Kercher lived. They helped her settle in, then all three went for lunch together.

"She was clearly a powerful person," said Miss Hayward. "She talked about herself a lot. She talked about her friends as though they couldn't live without her. She was very different to Meredith. She was used to being the centre of attention."

...
In the hours after the body was found, Knox and a group of Miss Kercher's British friends were called to a local police station for questioning.

"She was acting very differently to everyone else," Miss Hayward said. "We felt shell-shocked, half dead. She seemed a bit too OK. It wasn't normal. That in itself doesn't mean she's the culprit, but when you put it with everything else..."

Miss Hayward and the other British girls were suspicious that Knox seemed to have knowledge of the crime scene, despite police saying she had not seen inside the bedroom, where Miss Kercher lay in a pool of blood with her throat cut. The horrific scene was only revealed when police directed that the door be kicked in.

...
Miss Hayward said: "I remember her talking to her stepfather on the phone and saying that she had found the body and it was in the cupboard and it was in a blanket. It was odd because she hadn't been in the room. We were so traumatised we didn't take it in at the time."

Miss Hayward, deeply upset and trying to comfort her grief-stricken friends, said she hoped that her friend had not suffered too much. Knox allegedly replied: "What do you think? She *advertiser censored***** bled to death."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...chers-friend-Perugia-can-be-a-dark-place.html

 

[aa9511]

No, I would not venture to accuse innocent people of lying. I think some people saw the exact same evidence differently, interpreted her actions differently than others. For others, I think it was just sloppy work, failing to cross the ts on everything. For others, some may be telling the compete truth and some of AK's words were a little bizarre. for still others, I think they were looking for things against AK and innocent things like buying underwear were blown out of proportion. For still others, it could be they were confused - they themselves may not remember the events of that day and are -without meaning to - giving wrong info. For still others, perhaps quiet people, they might have joined on the prosecution bandwagon perhaps they themselves were bullied to get in line- maybe they feared themselves being subject to the prosecutor for this or other crimes or being accused of perjury if they changed their tale. Or maybe they did not remember and felt that maybe the prosecution is saying the correct thing and so they go along w the prosecution even though they are not completely sure. For others, they may be telling part of the story - perhaps there is a clarifying detail but the prosecution does not ask them the question to bring that detail out. Still others have swayed to the prosecution side and lied and embellished so as to get money or publicity in the tabloids. For still others, maybe they felt that if they came on AK side they would be ridiculed by their friends or family so they just went along with the prosecution or kept it vague. Any lower level working in the Italian justice system was not going to risk their job to help out AK - if the boss thought AK did it they had a duty to present that case. Finally some of it could be translation issues. I would not want to be only 2 months in country in a foreign lanaguage and have my words subject to scrutiny. It could also be translation issues with how she is. I think she appears cold (not warm and bubbly) and her personality hurt her, maybe attempts at dark humor came across the wrong way.

And I might add, I think alot of this occurs in all cases, not just this one.this case was just different bc I think you had more people who had friends or family with strong views of AK's guilt based on the tabloid reports. I think for alot of people to stand up for AK they would have been vilified. Even the American press at that time made it out to be that sex story as fact. I can recall the day I first heard about it on one of the morning shows where they almost reported as fact the story of a sex orgy gone wrong.

I think my post was indirectly supported by all of this.

It could be that alllllllllllllllllllllll of those people have various "problems," such as being either confused, scared, partly truthful, unsure, prejudiced, misunderstood, sloppy, careless, timid, etc.. - OR IT COULD BE THAT just 3 PEOPLE ARE LYING BECAUSE THEY"RE GUILTY. I know which one makes more sense to me personally.

 

[SMK]

Evidence of any of this besides some complainants she did not clean the toilet properly?

No, I assume this was all inference. :blushingalthough there was Patrick's story and then I see Otto has posted some testimony )

 

[otto]

Robyn Butterworth, Friend of Meredith in Perugia

"Ms Butterworth also told how Knox’s promiscuous lifestyle had made Leeds University student Meredith uncomfortable on several occasions. One episode that prompted unease came when Meredith found a sex toy and condoms in a bathroom she shared with Knox."

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/84715/Friends-testify-against-Foxy

Knox's Roommate

"Ms Mezzetti testified that she had noticed a new and unexplained scratch on Ms Knox's neck the day after the murder, though she only mentioned it to police during her seventh interrogation. The testimony reduced Ms Knox to tears."

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/84715/Friends-testify-against-Foxy

 

[SMK]

Robyn Butterworth, Friend of Meredith in Perugia

"Ms Butterworth also told how Knox’s promiscuous lifestyle had made Leeds University student Meredith uncomfortable on several occasions. One episode that prompted unease came when Meredith found a sex toy and condoms in a bathroom she shared with Knox."

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/84715/Friends-testify-against-Foxy

Knox's Roommate

"Ms Mezzetti testified that she had noticed a new and unexplained scratch on Ms Knox's neck the day after the murder, though she only mentioned it to police during her seventh interrogation. The testimony reduced Ms Knox to tears."

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/84715/Friends-testify-against-Foxy

Did Ms. B say whether Meredith confronted Amanda directly on these issues? In other words, was Amanda aware of this particular information? I recall something to the effect that Knox was shocked and dismayed to hear this testimony.

 

[otto]

No, I assume this was all inference. :blushingalthough there was Patrick's story and then I see Otto has posted some testimony )

"But the American girl was spending her time with far too many peculiar people, in the opinion of her three housemates, who didn’t appreciate running into these conquests at breakfast. Meredith seems to have been the most put off by Amanda’s active social life.

...
Meredith told her tight circle of British friends, Amanda had acquired several boyfriends in succession.

This was by no means Meredith’s only complaint. There are rumors of anger over the rent money, and she found Amanda sloppy about her personal habits. Meredith’s close friends also found Amanda a bit odd. “Amanda’s behavior always struck me as strange,” one of these friends would later tell police. “The first time I met her we were eating in a restaurant, when all of a sudden she began to sing in a loud voice. It was very strange and out of place.”

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

 

[SMK]

"But the American girl was spending her time with far too many peculiar people, in the opinion of her three housemates, who didn’t appreciate running into these conquests at breakfast. Meredith seems to have been the most put off by Amanda’s active social life.

...
Meredith told her tight circle of British friends, Amanda had acquired several boyfriends in succession.

This was by no means Meredith’s only complaint. There are rumors of anger over the rent money, and she found Amanda sloppy about her personal habits. Meredith’s close friends also found Amanda a bit odd. “Amanda’s behavior always struck me as strange,” one of these friends would later tell police. “The first time I met her we were eating in a restaurant, when all of a sudden she began to sing in a loud voice. It was very strange and out of place.”

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

Much appreciated.

 

[SMK]

Re the unexplained scratch: Was it gone by the time she was interrogated? ( I am assuming, yes)

 

[otto]

Re the unexplained scratch: Was it gone by the time she was interrogated? ( I am assuming, yes)

It is visible in some of the early photos - don't know about later.

 

[Simply Caustic]

Quite frankly we do not know what would have happened if he ratted her out. He would very likely have done it for a deal, given the lack of evidence against him. He would not need to worry about AK testimony at a trial bc there would not be one for him. AK could say all she wanted at her trial and it would come down to whether you believe RS or AK. It would be a better situation than the one he is in now bc he likely would have been given no time or very little time. I mean if the killer RG is getting out soon, surely someone like RS would have been out by now to continue his life.

Point is, as most cases w co defendants, usually there is a deal of some sort where one rats the other out. We don't see any of that here. Mignini would have loved the press conference, bc he would see it as affirmation of his position. He wanted to get AK and w RS testimony he would have a conviction pretty much assured.

Moreover this trial is significant risk to RS if indeed he knows something or was not as intimately involved. He is facing life in prison. If he was there but was a secondary participant anyone in their right mind w a decent lawyer would take a deal rather than take the risk.

My only point of contention would be that the testimony of an alleged co-conspirator/accessory before/after the fact, MUST NECESSARILY (in IL law) be truthful and NOT skirt the 'dealmakers' culpability in the crime - in order to fulfill their part of the bargain - the immunity from prosecution.

Were the prosecution to discover that they dealmaker had lied regarding their guilt/culpability - perhaps, even, been a party to the murder when they had testified/made a deal for immunity from prosecution based upon simply accessory status - well, that would negate the deal. Even the opposing side of the coin - lied to pin it on her, simply to get out - also a negating circumstance. It would be SUCH a risk to take - guilt notwithstanding. I don't think any inference regarding his guilt/innocence can be drawn from his decision not to accept an immunity agreement.

So, were he to pin it on Amanda simply for a deal - should he have lied in any serious fashion, he would be negating the deal for himself.

Note: This is IL law. I'm unsure as to the intricacies of other US states but I would wager it's in a similar vein. The question of course is how it works in Perugia but I wanted to offer my views...

*JMO of course

 

[SMK]

It is visible in some of the early photos - don't know about later.

Yes, I see it is described here, but could not find an image which showed it:

Flatmate saw scratch on Knox's neck soon after Kercher killing

Accused student attacks 'exaggerated' evidence of British witnesses at her Perugia murder trial

Amanda Knox, the American student accused of the murder of Meredith Kercher, had a new scratch on her neck hours after the killing, a witness testified yesterday at her trial in Perugia.

Laura Mezzetti, 29, an Italian woman who shared an apartment with Kercher and Knox, told the court she saw the scratch on 2 November 2007 at the police station where they were waiting to be questioned. Kercher's body had been found earlier that day in their apartment in Perugia.

"Amanda had a wound to her neck, and I noticed it because it was known that Meredith had been killed by a wound to her neck," said Mezzetti. "She had a scratch to her neck. I was afraid that Amanda, too, might have been wounded. I was worried and I looked at it really intensely," Mezzetti said.

Mezzetti said she observed Knox's scratch from a few yards away. She described the wound as "vertical, less than 1cm (0.4in) thick". She said it was red and gestured that it was under her chin.

Mezzetti said she did not see any scratch when she saw Knox two days earlier, during breakfast at the apartment. She said she did not see Knox until two days later at the police station. As she heard Mezzetti describe the scratch, Knox appeared to cry.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/feb/15/meredith-kercher-knox-trial

 

[otto]

Yes, I see it is described here, but could not find an image which showed it:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/feb/15/meredith-kercher-knox-trial

 

[SMK]

Ah, OK, I see ..... Thanks very much, Otto.

 

[geevee]

Is there any idea of when something will be heard from the court?

 

[SMK]

Otto, I also see there is a brief 2013 discussion about it here:

http://gator941.hostgator.com/~mich...&start=0&sid=ba7d2ef32dcebdcb47990a898322bacf

 

[SMK]

Is there any idea of when something will be heard from the court?

Prosecution and civil parties will be in court Nov 25,26
Then Knox and Sollecito defenses December 16, 17
Then rebuttals and jury deliberation Jan 9-10