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

[Amber29]

I wonder if it was on or plugged in. If not plugged in, she could have been borrowing it and put it by door to remember to give it back,

If it was on, that would be a little weird. I don't see any reason any one - MK, RG, AK, etc.,- would even do that.

The only thing that it could be is maybe there was not a desk that the line would stretch to in order to plug into a wall outlet; not sure if that is the case or if people knew where the outlets were but MK could have had computer, etc plugged in the outlets near her and maybe an outlet by the door was the only available outlet and the cord was too short to both plug in and put it of the table. Most times you would just use an extension cord but maybe she used it only temporarily and did not have one

No lights were on when she was found but surely lights were on that night.

None of that makes since considering Meredith had her own lamp and an overhead light.

 

[aa9511]

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.

I'm sorry, I just don't believe if she was being stabbed with a knife, she wouldn't have tried to protect herself and get away.

I believe the reflexes are a basic HUMAN reaction. Such as, when you have a knife possibly coming at your face and neck, a HUMAN instinctively puts their hands up to protect themselves. That would have resulted in defensive cuts on her hands, had her hands been free.

I do not believe this, I'm sorry.

 

[otto]

He was probably rinsing blood from his pant leg when he made the print (Dan O. at JREFF is one poster who has commented on this extensively). Without doing experiments, it is difficult to say, but I would not expect much DNA deposition from a single hand washing. I would expect DNA on the towels, but they were not stored properly. I would think that brushing/flossing one's teeth and spitting out is a better way to deposit DNA. Saliva has DNA, and cheek cells are commonly used to obtain reference DNA.

Isn't that's bit like adding new information to the known facts? There's no evidence of Guede in the bathroom, so where does the "he washed his clothes in the bathroom" come from?

 

[aa9511]

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.

Good point. And a brutal, awful murder at that.

But yet people want it all tied up with a nice little ribbon on top.

 

[otto]

I went to the bookstore earlier and checked out some of Amanda's book while I was there (did not buy it thought, I'm going to see if the library has it).

I just did a cursory glance of some parts, like the morning after the murder. All I can say is, Amanda contradicted HERSELF in HER OWN BOOK, on the events leading up to the murder, what RS and she were doing that night, etc.. LOL. I could not believe my eyes.

In one place she states they cooked fish and made salad at 9:15 pm. Then in another part, she says, I can't remember much from that night, blah, blah, but what I can CLEARLY REMEMBER is that we ate late, at around 11 pm.

LOL!!!!!!!

And I was very surprised when she said she had seen Filomena's room, but didn't think that much of it (HELLO WHAT ABOUT THE BROKEN WINDOW????).

And she says, I don't remember, everythign was sooooooooo fuzzy, I might have read, I might have had sex, I might have this, I might have that.........and yet goes on in a later part to RECALL HER AND RS MINUTE DETAILS OF THEIR CONVERSATION.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Her changing alibi included eating at 11, then 9:30 and finally, based on the phone call from Dr Sollecito, they ate at 8:30. If she wrote in her book that they ate at 11, she's still lying.

Claiming that she saw the broken window is consistent with what Sollecito reported at the time. He said that when he arrived Filomina's bedroom door was open and the window was broken.

 

[aa9511]

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.

bbm

Oh yes, Rudy left the front door open, only to have it closed again by Amanda and RS. Closed while they were cleaning up. Closed for the rest of the time.

Amanda and RS only needed that door "open" to promote their burglar/murderer theory. You know, it adds a bit of oomph to the whole break-in, having the standard open door and all.

MOO.

 

[Amber29]

I'm sorry, I just don't believe if she was being stabbed with a knife, she wouldn't have tried to protect herself and get away.

I believe the reflexes are a basic HUMAN reaction. Such as, when you have a knife possibly coming at your face and neck, a HUMAN instinctively puts their hands up to protect themselves. That would have resulted in defensive cuts on her hands, had her hands been free.

I do not believe this, I'm sorry.

I agree it would be a natural reaction to put your hands up.

Strangely, it makes me think of woman throwing their arm across the passenger seat automatically when slamming on the brakes while driving. Even with no child there it's just natural to do that and I laugh at myself when I do it.

 

[miley]

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

There's more to it though. In the first trial, the prosecution mentions the lamp just enough to tease the jury, then links it to their guilt by sneaking it into their video animation. Ak and RS are seen grabbing the lamp and taking it into MK's room. Ironically, it wasn't a consideration in the second trial and now that video has vanished.

 

[aa9511]

The bra clasp is hopelessly compromised. Apparently, you think AK had one shoe on and one shoe off since you list both her shoe print and her bare footprint as evidence of her presence in the murder room.

Etc. and so forth. All wishful thinking, if you ask me.

Couldn't she just have taken off her shoes? After all, she was there for a while with the clean-up/cover-up. Doubt she would want to track bloody shosprints all over the house.

 

[Yellow]

2 theories of her guilt?? No, IIRC, those theories had her COVERING-UP. That is all. Covering-up the murder without participating in it, for whatever odd reason. That is what your theories were. And IIRC, in one you had heard sitting in the kitchen or the living room.

In not one of your theories did you have her actually participating, as in either restraining her or stabbing her, or helping RS or RG restrain or stab Meredith. Believe me, I would have remembered if you had said something along those lines.

Yes post 170. I proposed 2 scenarios of her guilt, one supposing facts not in evidence that there was some sort of prearranged meeting and the three go to the cottage and a second presupposing that the murder was going on and AK and RS just decide to join in.

I also did not see anyone advocating ( at least in recent posts) that all evidence in the house should not be considered. It should IMO and in many people's mind the evidence is not sufficient to warrant a murder conviction. Others feel differently and may see the evidence differently and they can get to guilt beyond a reasonable doubt with such a largely circumstantial case.

We will see in about 6 weeks I guess what the court thinks about it.

 

[Yellow]

I wonder how jury selection works in the Italian justice system, I know there were some professional judges on the original jury, but were some ordinary lay people there and how are they chosen? Do parties have the option like in the US to hire jury consultants or do they pretty much get an assigned panel whose job is to hear cases? I am talking about the trial court. I assume the appellate court is all professionals.

On another note, what happened to the cottage? Are there plans to tear it down? I recall reading that the women who owned the cottage (another victim in this horrible tragedy IMO) had trouble either renting or selling it. I wonder what the status is now for her. I cannot imagine people living there, though I know people lived in Jon Benets house afterward and I guess they do other murder houses as well.

 

[aa9511]

Perhaps RG was making sure he'd have time to get out of the country. He wouldn't have known AK wasn't coming home that night (supposedly) and he may have wanted to make sure the murder wasn't discovered until morning.

The bloody linen may even suggest an aborted attempt to cover up the crime by cleaning the room.

As Amber pointed out, so he wanted to delay the body being found but left the front door wide open?! And if he supposedly looked through her keys to find the one to lock her door, couldn't he have looked through and found the key to lock the front door? Surely her keychain had the key to the front door on it.

Also, so he thought Amanda could be possibly coming back that night, and yet he chose to still come to burglarize the place and rape and murder in the same place, where he expected Amanda to come home later that night?

 

[TorisMom003]

Couldn't she just have taken off her shoes? After all, she was there for a while with the clean-up/cover-up. Doubt she would want to track bloody shosprints all over the house.

What cleanup? And if Amanda really wanted a black man to take the fall for the crime why not use the black man who's DNA was all over and in Meredith?

 

[aa9511]

RG didn't rush out of town though. He danced the rest of the night away in a nightclub.

LOL!

Yes, he was in such a hurry and rush to get out of town......he went to a dance club. In the same town.

 

[sherlockh]

The bra clasp is hopelessly compromised. Apparently, you think AK had one shoe on and one shoe off since you list both her shoe print and her bare footprint as evidence of her presence in the murder room.

Etc. and so forth. All wishful thinking, if you ask me.

It is not compromised at all. That is just your opinion. I thought we had to state clearly that our opinions are not facts? Contamination theories are laughable IMO. There isn't even any source for contamination.

Knox and Sollecito came back later to leave their bloody footprints. They didn't run off on bare feet. They had their shoes on. Guede however did not fly around from the body to the bed, to the wall, to the bathroom. There is clear evidence of staging and cleaning since he would have left bloody shoe prints. Knox had every opportunity to clean her shoe prints.

The crime scene becomes very easy to 'read' if you just keep an open mind and not go into an endless series of improbable scenarios. There is no proof that Sollecito didn't touch the bra clasp. That can never be proven, so why not keep an open mind? JMO.

 

[aa9511]

I suppose it's possible Meredith wanted a lamp on her floor next to the door. Seems odd to me, though. Any thoughts on why Meredith would want to put a lamp there?

And why she wouldn't just put her own lamp there if she needed it on the floor?

 

[Yellow]

No lights were on when she was found but surely lights were on that night.

None of that makes since considering Meredith had her own lamp and an overhead light.

Maybe MK simply wanted more light for studying. Maybe at some point that week, her lightbulb went out and she did not have another one so she borrowed the lamp. Maybe she wanted to look for something under her bed and wanted a direct light source to do that.

In any event I don't see how it matters because why would RG, RS or AK be doing with that lamp either if the room was supposedly well lit? I don't think anyone has proposed any nefarious action with respect to the lamp; peoplejust say oh, AK lamp was in the room too. it could have also been that AK pencil case was in the room, that would be of no relevance without tying the object to the murder since she lived there. I don't think even the prosecution is saying it was a murder weapon, if so, I would suspect there would be MK's blood on it, and if so the lamp would be very compelling.

Outside of AK DNA being in that lamp (which would at least put her in the murder room, though it still would not prove she did the murder unless it could be established by the other roommates that the lamp was definitely in AK until MK arrived home; that would make the circumstantial case at least a little stronger), so outside of any DNA of blood, etc. what relevance does it have and why didn't the prosecution even bother to do DNA testing on it if so important?

 

[MichaelSmith]

I wonder how jury selection works in the Italian justice system, I know there were some professional judges on the original jury, but were some ordinary lay people there and how are they chosen? Do parties have the option like in the US to hire jury consultants or do they pretty much get an assigned panel whose job is to hear cases? I am talking about the trial court. I assume the appellate court is all professionals.

On another note, what happened to the cottage? Are there plans to tear it down? I recall reading that the women who owned the cottage (another victim in this horrible tragedy IMO) had trouble either renting or selling it. I wonder what the status is now for her. I cannot imagine people living there, though I know people lived in Jon Benets house afterward and I guess they do other murder houses as well.

Just a few days ago the cottage was in the news.

http://www.lanazione.it/umbria/cronaca/2013/11/24/987093-intossicati-villa-meredith.shtml

Perugia, November 24, 2013 - Eight people were poisoned by carbon monoxide gas in the house tonight the 'horrors', the house in Via della Pergola where he was killed the British student Meredith Kercher . 're all Moroccans also between their two children, one month and one year of age. Fortunately, fortunately no one is serious. The gas was leaking from a brazier. The alarm was raised by one of the tenants. On the spot of the 118 ambulance and fire services. Yesterday had been well both cases of poisonings in the province.

"The cold weather and the severe economic crisis - said the company hospital - have a close relationship with the latest episodes of intoxication. "

THE FACTS - The young man who rented the two apartments of the house, a Moroccan aged 24, he reported that, after cooking the meat using a brazier , both he and the other occupants have experienced headaches and dizziness.

The episode - according to what has been learned - had two distinct phases: during the night, around 4 pm, Dr. Paola Hare has provided first aid to three adults , who occupied the ground floor of the chalet. This morning around 7am Dr. Barbara Rovella took charge of two mothers and their children , as well as a boy of 23 years.


In mid-morning, two of the patients were discharged from the ward brief observation of the emergency room, reported the doctor on duty, Max Sicilians. The two infants hospitalized this morning at the structure of Pediatrics and intoxicated in a very light in Via della Pergola were discharged late in the afternoon. They will instead remain still ricoveratib (but are expected to resign for a day tomorrow), the two brothers of Moroccan origin in Marsciano intoxicated during the night of Friday.

 

[aa9511]

The prosecution never established who staged that crime scene. They never proved it was AK. Given RG threw rocks before when he burglaries, that was his most operandi.

As I mentioned multiple times, I never said or believe you need DNA or forensics tying you to scene in all cases. Scott Peterson - no real physical evidence of how she was killed but a very compelling circumstantial case with a strong motive; Casey Anthony - another case that had very strong circumstantial evidence with the added bonus of having some forensics tying her car to the dead child, but I think you could get to at least 2nd degree murder even if they did not have the smell evidence. These are just 2 examples of largely circumstantial cases that I think are strong.

Here the circumstantial case is weak and the absence of DNA in the murder room is telling. Think Peterson (which had a much stronger circumstantial case than this but suppose this case was as strong as Peterson). Suppose DNA of some third party were found on Lacey's body, on her clothes, in the home, went to the bathroom in the home, making it no doubt that this third party killed her. Suppose this third party who did not know the victim admits he was in the house. If you had that scenario in the Peterson case, would that bring reasonable doubt about his guilt if a third party's DNA connected the third party to the crime? Or would one still think, it is a definite fact that well Scott must have joined with this unknown stranger to kill his wife? He saw some stranger killing her so he decided to join in?

This AK case does not even have any motive unlike the Peterson case where there was a strong motive (still sick, but strong).

I would be interested in know if there have been any cases anywhere where people join in with total strangers to commit crimes at the spur of the moment against their friends, families, even acquaintances. Not just murder, any crime. I never heard of any.

If I had evidence that Peterson cleaned-up after said murder, and staged the murder scene to make it look like a burglary committed by the third person, and then find his DNA mixed in with his wife's (the victim's DNA), and then his stories about finding the body don't make sense, and oh yeah, his alibi is a lie and his story of what he was doing that night is a lie.........then YES I WOULD BELIEVE HE PARTICIPATED IN THE MURDER OF HIS WIFE.

 

[Yellow]

Meredith wasn't a middle-class woman. She was a British student that had that had trained in martial arts.

"Her father John also described how Meredith was strong and had been trained in karate, insisting she would have tried to fight off her attackers. Meredith’s family were speaking in court about the impact of her murder in Perugia, Italy"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ith-Kercher-fought-end-family-tell-court.html

I believe MK would have fought back as that would be a natural instinct, unless she was somehow taken by surprise or immobilized

That said, one can have all the self defense training, etc in the world. But MK is simply no match for RG. Thousands of women are murdered every year by men coming into their home and attempting rape and sometimes they kill them. The vast majority of women - even women skilled in martial arts - are simply no match for a strong 6 foot guy. You also practice such skills in a classroom setting, no one knows how you would react or use those skills if you were suddenly frightened in the safety of your home. I don't think MK was some big women, I think she might have been petite, small boned. Also we do not know what she went through. She might have thought he was using the knife as a weapon not to kill her but to frighten her for a rape so she would not scream. So she may have been too frightened to use her skills, bc she probably in her wildest dreams did not think RG would actually kill her.