Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#7

[aa9511]

Why would someone take one shoe off by untying it, loosening the laces and then have the other shoe taken off without untying it or loosening the laces unless they were interrupted while taking off their shoes? Where does one usually sit in their bedroom when taking off their shoes?

Depending on who one believes the footprint in blood on the bath mat in the bathroom belongs to, there may be evidence of Guede in the smaller bathroom.

While stone is slippery when wet, one can manage quite well in rubber soled sneakers without slipping. Also there is a window with bars that can be used to hold onto under the window that was broken into. If a man in dress shoes can make it up to the second floor window then I see no reason why a man who is younger and in sneakers couldn't make it up to the second floor window.

I thought the bars were added after the murder. So there would really be nothing to hold on to.

I would find it incredibly difficult to climb on a vertical slippery surface when it's wet. Considering that there were easier ways to get in, why would he choose the hardest one? I dunno, I know he's dumb, so who knows?

 

[quesarita]

Is there some alternate timeline that shows what AK and RS were doing instead of sleeping/making love/turning on and off bedside phones? I mean, specifically, a timeline that says they did this murder at ..., cleaned up the scene from ... to ..., went to and from each others homes x number of times? If someone were to ask me and my boyfriend to prove questions in a similar situation, it would be impossible to answer accurately. We get up in the middle of the night, come back to bed, check phones, turn them off, turn them back on, go back to sleep. If I were interrogated about the details of a particular night, my replies could easily be picked apart, but it doesn't mean I was somewhere else.

 

[Sigh Sister]

That would explain why the prosecutor stated on November 25, 2013 that it was raining on the night of the murder.

So ... back to the discussion prior to once again having to prove by link that it rained, Guede did not scale a 13' stone wall(which would have been slippery), he did not leave prints in the mud below the window, and he did not leave evidence of grass and mud in Filomina's bedroom. He did not remove the glass from the exterior of the window sill. He did not drop a single shard of glass on the ground outside the window. He did not leave any evidence that he was in Filomina's bedroom.

The only reason to attempt to place Guede in the bedroom is to explain the broken window, but there is nothing to suggest that anyone climbed through the window. We have a broken window, and we have Guede in the cottage.

Why do you think that explains it? The link says rain on the 30th and none on the 31st and 1 st?

 

[otto]

Is there some alternate timeline that shows what AK and RS were doing instead of sleeping/making love/turning on and off bedside phones? I mean, specifically, a timeline that says they did this murder at ..., cleaned up the scene from ... to ..., went to and from each others homes x number of times? If someone were to ask me and my boyfriend to prove questions in a similar situation, it would be impossible to answer accurately. We get up in the middle of the night, come back to bed, check phones, turn them off, turn them back on, go back to sleep. If I were interrogated about the details of a particular night, my replies could easily be picked apart, but it doesn't mean I was somewhere else.

There is. Obviously there is a scenario that was presented by the prosecution in order to secure a conviction.

 

[quesarita]

But then why was the jacket off when she was found? If her jacked was already pulled up, like her shirt was, her breasts and body were still exposed. What would be the need to then take her jacket off, if it was already up the way you said, pinning her arms?

Sorry, I had read that the jacket was pulled up but not off, somewhere on here, yesterday; that is what I based that comment on. If you pull someone's jacket up from the bottom 1/2 way and trap their arms in the sleeves it's pretty binding, very hard to get out of and their arms are above their head.

 

[otto]

Why do you think that explains it? The link says rain on the 30th and none on the 31st and 1 st?

The journalist report about the Prosecutor's statements on November 25, 2013 about the facts surrounding the murder clearly states that it rained on the night of the murder. What link contradicts the prosecutor's statement?

 

[Amber29]

Is there some alternate timeline that shows what AK and RS were doing instead of sleeping/making love/turning on and off bedside phones? I mean, specifically, a timeline that says they did this murder at ..., cleaned up the scene from ... to ..., went to and from each others homes x number of times? If someone were to ask me and my boyfriend to prove questions in a similar situation, it would be impossible to answer accurately. We get up in the middle of the night, come back to bed, check phones, turn them off, turn them back on, go back to sleep. If I were interrogated about the details of a particular night, my replies could easily be picked apart, but it doesn't mean I was somewhere else.

But there isn't just the turning on and off and computer activity. That's a small piece of the puzzle.

They changed the time they ate dinner to help cover time.
There is a witness that placed them in the piazza that night
A shop owner that placed AK in his store around 7am.

Now couple all this with their story and the inconsistencies, even if you don't want to agree. How can you question why others do?

 

[Katody]

How does opening a program and playing music for 30mins at 5:32am and turning on his cell phone at 6am not contradict that they slept until 10am?

Is it possible to play music on a computer for half an hour and than sleep for few more hours?

There are so many contradicted points in the "alibi" that I can't believe it can be stated that what they say they did is fact.

RS told multiple stories, including the one of amanda going out that night.

Where and when did he tell the story of Amanda going out? Why isn't it mentioned in Massei?

It's not anyone's job to make up excuses for these lies, that is not how reasonable doubt works. If RS was awake at 530am playing on his computer instead of sleeping, he should've mentioned that guess he smoked too much pot he can't remember. Then again he can't even keep that lie straight.

Did anyone ask him about it? As judge Nencini emphasized, the prosecution never requested to hear him.

 

[otto]

Sorry, I had read that the jacket was pulled up but not off, somewhere on here, yesterday; that is what I based that comment on. If you pull someone's jacket up from the bottom 1/2 way and trap their arms in the sleeves it's pretty binding, very hard to get out of and their arms are above their head.

Meredith was not wearing her hoodie when she was found.

 

[Katody]

That's what I'm saying. There are plenty of statements in the Massei report where he summarizes a claim made by the defense or prosecution. That is not necessarily the conclusion of the court after hearing all the evidence.

What Massei concludes is that given the violence and number of injuries (43), a 0.6 cm cut on Meredith's hand is not consistent with clear defensive wounds.

Logical reasoning wasn't Massei's strength.

 

[aa9511]

I don't see any documentation in your post indicating that anything you wrote above is true.

I remember very vividly both Amanda and Raffaele stating in the courtroom that they did spend the night together. No evidence was ever presented that proving it false.

I have no idea what you are talking about when you say "that was proven to be a lie". There is evidence they used the computer in the form of metadata and additionally the logs that were accepted into the case file by the current court.

That a lot of metadata had been overwritten while the PC was in the hands of the police doesn't logically mean there was no further activity. Simply the data is no longer there. Even Massei accepted this if you care to read his conclusion.

There is evidence they ate the dinner in the form of Mr. Sollecito's testimony. That they don't remember the exact time doesn't make it false.

Finally, there is no credible evidence that they didn't sleep until 10 in the morning. Sorry but Quintavalle really doesn't cut it. On Curatolo don't get me even started.

"Amanda and Raffaelo stated in the courtroom that they spent the night together" - so should we believe it just because it was in the "courtroom." As if defendants haven't lied in court before? Or should we believe it because this time was "for real" - when they had given inconsistent statements before?

So you say the data is not there....doesn't mean they couldn't be lying. There is nothing there to "prove" they were at the house during the time of the murder.

Someone turned music on at 5:30 am or so, technically someone wasn't sleeping all the way till 10 am.

Either way, if we take the viewpoint that there is nothing to disprove their alibii, there also isn't anything there to prove it.

And I find it difficult to understand why we should believe each of them .....because the other supports their alibi? When they are BOTH DEFENDANTS in the case? I don't get that. At the least, their statements supporting each other's alibi should just cancel each other out.

My point was and continues to be, that they are both defendants in the case. Thus, there needs to be a necessary queestioning of the motives behind what they say .

I'm not saying, say they're guilty because their alibi story might not add up. I'm saying, the veracity (sp?) of their alibi should be taken in light of their status as defendants, in light of the other evidence in the case, and in light of their credibility throughout the case.

And obviously, if one chooses to believe them, that's find. But to say we shouldn't even question what they say, I don't find that understandable. They are defendants in the case, we should question what they say because they have every reason to lie if they are guilty.

 

[Sigh Sister]

Sorry, I had read that the jacket was pulled up but not off, somewhere on here, yesterday; that is what I based that comment on. If you pull someone's jacket up from the bottom 1/2 way and trap their arms in the sleeves it's pretty binding, very hard to get out of and their arms are above their head.

RG was bigger and stronger than Meredith and had a knife. He also had the element of surprise. I don't get why people buy into the theory there HAD to be multiple attackers. He could have easily restrained her by straddling her and pinning her arms with his knees/legs. That is only one way.

 

[otto]

Logical reasoning wasn't Massei's strength.

On what is this claim based?

 

[Sigh Sister]

The journalist report about the Prosecutor's statements on November 25, 2013 about the facts surrounding the murder clearly states that it rained on the night of the murder. What link contradicts the prosecutor's statement?

The link SMK provided

 

[Katody]

I thought the bars were added after the murder. So there would really be nothing to hold on to.

I would find it incredibly difficult to climb on a vertical slippery surface when it's wet. Considering that there were easier ways to get in, why would he choose the hardest one? I dunno, I know he's dumb, so who knows?

The bars were there on the night of the murder.

Also, it wasn't raining that night, as evidenced by others upthread.

 

[SMK]

That would explain why the prosecutor stated on November 25, 2013 that it was raining on the night of the murder.

So ... back to the discussion prior to once again having to prove by link that it rained, Guede did not scale a 13' stone wall(which would have been slippery), he did not leave prints in the mud below the window, and he did not leave evidence of grass and mud in Filomina's bedroom. He did not remove the glass from the exterior of the window sill. He did not drop a single shard of glass on the ground outside the window. He did not leave any evidence that he was in Filomina's bedroom.

The only reason to attempt to place Guede in the bedroom is to explain the broken window, but there is nothing to suggest that anyone climbed through the window. We have a broken window, and we have Guede in the cottage.

I think perhaps as telling is that the Postal Police suspected a staging, or said to the effect, "this is no burglary". The clothes tossed around seemed inauthentic to them, as blouses and skirts tossed all over the place are not the legitimate marks of a burglar.

 

[otto]

RG was bigger and stronger than Meredith and had a knife. He also had the element of surprise. I don't get why people buy into the theory there HAD to be multiple attackers. He could have easily restrained her by straddling her and pinning her arms with his knees/legs. That is only one way.

Smashing a window more or less excludes the element of surprise.

 

[Katody]

On what is this claim based?

As I posted above, there are many possible reasons why Meredith wasn't defending herself when stabbed that eluded Massei.

Massei is good with dirty old man's fantasies, as his reconstruction of the crime indicates. He is not good with logic.

 

[Sigh Sister]

Smashing a window more or less excludes the element of surprise.

Not if he was already there when she got home

 

[Katody]

Smashing a window more or less excludes the element of surprise.

When we make the rather dumb assumption that Meredith was home when he smashed the window.
Logic. Logic.