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

[otto]

Right, I understand this. But in the accounts I've read, Guede has Meredith calling Amanda "that *advertiser censored* of a doper" and that "drugged up tart", and to me that doesn't sound like Meredith. Unless she was really furious...but I get the conjecture as to motive...

I know Guede described conflict between Meredith and Knox, conflict that was confirmed by family, friends and roommates. If Guede says that Meredith was upset that Knox was stoned as often as she ate pasta, then either Guede has remarkable insights into human nature, or he witnessed conflict between Knox and Meredith.

The alternative is that he imagined it and coincidentally it was true.

 

[SMK]

I know Guede described conflict between Meredith and Knox, conflict that was confirmed by family, friends and roommates. If Guede says that Meredith was upset that Knox was stoned as often as she ate pasta, then either Guede has remarkable insights into human nature, or he witnessed conflict between Knox and Meredith.

The alternative is that he imagined it and coincidentally it was true.

Yes, I would agree, there is truth to it. He may have just worded it a bit differently than Meredith did. Just a different style, but that is only an intuition.

 

[geevee]

Exactly. Knox hadn't slept at the cottage since she met Sollecito. She was dropping in at the cottage to eat, get stoned, repeatedly strum one chord on the guitar and as a place to bring men she hardly knew. There is no doubt that Meredith had to study because the text book she borrowed for an exam had to be returned the following day.

So if AK wasn't staying there at night, why is her lamp in MK's room all that out of the ordinary? MK may have needed more light for studying and AK wasn't spending evenings in the cottage.

Just thinking.

 

[geevee]

Exactly. No DNA belonging to Knox was on her lamp. Her DNA was on Sollecito's knife in his apartment, even though she had only known him for a couple of weeks, but it was not on the lamp she used for six weeks.

The absence of Knox's DNA in Meredith's bedroom is a non-issue since it is not even where it should be.

Perhaps someone should ask Knox why she kept her lamp on the floor of Meredith's bedroom.

Was AK ever asked about the lamp?

 

[Nova]

The bedroom is 12' x 11'6". The bed is 3' x 6'. The desk is est: 3' x 2'. We have 138 square feet. Subtract the bed, desk, night stand (1' x 1') and wardrobe (est: 3' x 2') and we have
138 - 18 - 6 - 1 - 6 = 138 - 31 = 107 square feet.

How is 107 square feet not enough space for three people to attack one person?

The issue has never been whether four people could fit in the room.

The issue is whether three people could attack and restrain a fourth person with only one of the attackers leaving any evidence of his presence in such a small space. And the answer is almost certainly no.

But thank you for finding the dimensions.

 

[sherlockh]

As was stated upthread earlier today, I think Crini should have been a little more broad as to motive, as headlines such as this look slightly ridiculous:

http://www.independent.ie/world-new...have-triggered-kerchers-killing-29787279.html

That is not exactly what he said though. He said Meredith triggered an argument because of the 'impolite invasion' by Knox (bringing 2 guys). The dirty bathroom made things 'explode'. I think he should have left the 2nd part out. We can't know for sure if Meredith discovered the dirty bathroom (not her bathroom), but it is not impossible either. JMO.

 

[whoanellie]

Was AK ever asked about the lamp?

i'm wondering the same thing.

 

[Nova]

That still doesn't explain how he stabbed her and restrained her at the same time. Yes, he could have restrained her in the beginning, but what about the point when he starts stabbing her, and the evidence then shows that she was restrained while being stabbed? He would have had to restrain both her arms, legs, and mouth at the same time as stabbing her.

It is sheer speculation that MK fought back (and even more speculation that she fought back in the manner you describe).

Not all women (or men, I suppose) do, because we do not socialize middle-class women to fight back physically.

That's why self-defense classes for females have become so common.

Most theories (including that of the prosecutor) assume MK was taken by surprise. And who knows which wounds came first? Maybe she was simply too stunned to fight back.

So it would be nice if we could stop insisting that MK flailed away with her head, trunk and all four limbs as if it were proven fact.

 

[sherlockh]

The issue has never been whether four people could fit in the room.

The issue is whether three people could attack and restrain a fourth person with only one of the attackers leaving any evidence of his presence in such a small space. And the answer is almost certainly no.

But thank you for finding the dimensions.

Sollecito left his DNA on the bra clasp inside the murder room. A bloody female shoe print compatible with Knox's size was found on the pillow case inside the murder room. DNA traces on the kitchen knife confirm that it was used inside the murder room and handled by Knox. The Luminol footprints in front of Meredith's room going to Knox's room prove that she was inside the murder room. Mixed DNA/blood traces in bathroom/Filomena's room prove that she was inside the murder room. Staged crime scene/fake break in/alibi lies/false accusation all prove that they were involved. Just repeating the 'no evidence' claim over and over does not make it true. JMO.

 

[whoanellie]

As was stated upthread earlier today, I think Crini should have been a little more broad as to motive, as headlines such as this look slightly ridiculous:



http://www.independent.ie/world-new...have-triggered-kerchers-killing-29787279.html

"slightly" is a bit of an understatement. After multiple proceedings in multiple courts with multiple prosecutors over the course of 6 years they still do not have a plausible and coherent theory of the crime. There is talk of mountains of evidence against Amanda and that there has been a failure to look at the big picture. Yet if the reports of todays closing argument are correct - and thanks for the link - the prosecution's itself can't come up with a coherent picture of the murder. Their theory of what occured keeps changing and frankly it doesn't get any less ridiculous.

 

[Nova]

Exactly. Knox hadn't slept at the cottage since she met Sollecito. She was dropping in at the cottage to eat, get stoned, repeatedly strum one chord on the guitar and as a place to bring men she hardly knew. There is no doubt that Meredith had to study because the text book she borrowed for an exam had to be returned the following day.

Making it all the more likely that MK simply borrowed the lamp because she didn't expect AK to come home after 9pm.

#mountain #molehill

 

[sherlockh]

It is sheer speculation that MK fought back (and even more speculation that she fought back in the manner you describe).

Not all women (or men, I suppose) do, because we do not socialize middle-class women to fight back physically.

That's why self-defense classes for females have become so common.

Most theories (including that of the prosecutor) assume MK was taken by surprise. And who knows which wounds came first? Maybe she was simply too stunned to fight back.

So it would be nice if we could stop insisting that MK flailed away with her head, trunk and all four limbs as if it were proven fact.

But they all scream? The wounds and bruises prove that she was held down and immobilized by multiple people. 2 Different knives from opposite angles, bruises on legs and arms, lack of defense wounds, sexual assault, strangulation. Guede is not an octopus JMO.

 

[whoanellie]

:floorlaugh:

Making it all the more likely that MK simply borrowed the lamp because she didn't expect AK to come home after 9pm.

#mountain #molehill

But according to Otto:

It is a fact that Knox's lamp was moved to Meredith's bedroom during the murder or clean up.

Why are you arguing with the facts?:floorlaugh:

 

[sherlockh]

Was AK ever asked about the lamp?

Yes, she was asked. She did not notice her lamp missing (even though it was her only one). She does not know if Meredith had a lamp like that.
http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=165#p17374

 

[sherlockh]

"slightly" is a bit of an understatement. After multiple proceedings in multiple courts with multiple prosecutors over the course of 6 years they still do not have a plausible and coherent theory of the crime. There is talk of mountains of evidence against Amanda and that there has been a failure to look at the big picture. Yet if the reports of todays closing argument are correct - and thanks for the link - the prosecution's itself can't come up with a coherent picture of the murder. Their theory of what occured keeps changing and frankly it doesn't get any less ridiculous.

They don't need to explain every single minute of what happened that night. The only ones that can explain that are Guede, Knox, and Sollecito. Of course the scenario is ridiculous. It ended in murder after all. JMO.

 

[Amber29]

Making it all the more likely that MK simply borrowed the lamp because she didn't expect AK to come home after 9pm.

#mountain #molehill

So was she studying on the floor at the foot of her bed? It's not just the lamp being in there but where it is in there.

 

[aa9511]

Yes Meredith's keys are missing and were never found.

Ah. I do not understand why people would think Rudy would go through the trouble of first of all, finding her keys. Secondly, figuring out which key is for her door. Third, locking the door. :scared::scared:

That makes no sense at all in the lone-Rudy theory. A closed door, maybe, although I find that also not very probable in a murder done by a "random" person. But a locked door??!

 

[Amber29]

Yes, she was asked. She did not notice her lamp missing (even though it was her only one). She does not know if Meredith had a lamp like that.
http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=165#p17374

So all you get is evasive answers about the lamp. More I don't know..

 

[Nova]

The prosecution said that there is a prosecution duty to conjecture a motive. His mention of conflict between Meredith and Knox is supported by testimony from friends, family and roommates. His reference to Guede further speaks to motive.

I've yet to see any evidence of conflict between MK and AK, only claims that MK was annoyed by AK's behavior.

Is it possible Meredith actually killed Amanda? Then perhaps MK disguised herself as the dead AK and took her place! That would explain why others found AK's later behavior "odd".

 

[Amber29]

Ah. I do not understand why people would think Rudy would go through the trouble of first of all, finding her keys. Secondly, figuring out which key is for her door. Third, locking the door. :scared::scared:

That makes no sense at all in the lone-Rudy theory. A closed door, maybe, although I find that also not very probable in a murder done by a "random" person. But a locked door??!

Exactly not to mention his bloody shoe failed to leave a print while locking the door.
Why would RG bother locking Meredith's door only to leave the front door open?

Although IMO it makes perfect sense for someone who is going to tell their roommate, I don't know where Meredith is her door is locked.