whoanellie
Member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2013
- Messages
- 277
- Reaction score
- 4
What is interesting is the follow up after Comodi's lie about the 12:00 phone call "on record".
Both Comodi and Massei ask for the reason of the call.
The reason of the actual call is self evident - there was the broken window, traces of blood, a friend was missing. All of it alarming enough to contact her family for advice.
So the question is quite dumb itself when put in factual context. It makes sense only with the time of the call falsified.
Amanda maybe wouldn't have remembered the call, but she would have pointed all this out if she was told the real time of the phone call.
Agreed. To me, there is absolutely nothing suspicious about the call itself. She grew increasingly alarmed about what she found at her home and her inability to locate Meredith. She grew so concerned that she called her mother in the early morning hours in Seattle. Under normal circumstances it would be an inappropriate time to call. November 2nd in Perugia were not normal circumstances for Amanda.
The fact that she couldn't remember the call doesn't make the call suspicious. Amanda was A) Human and B) under stress. Human beings have imperfect memories especially when they under stress. That is my experience.
I do not buy the idea that just because she says she forgot about the call it must be suspicious.
I would appreciate it if someone could "connect the dots" to make a pro-guilt argument regarding Amanda's phone call to her mother. What is it specifically about the call or her failure to remember it that points to guilt? If you think the call is suspicious what do you think she told her mother in that call. It would be very helpful to me if someone could paint the picture for me.