There's no question that it is a foot print on the bath mat. Don't you think it's odd that Knox seemed to believe that Meredith's blood fell onto the bath mat in the shape of a perfect footprint?
Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#8
- Thread starter Harmony 2
- Start date
- Status
There's no question that it is a foot print on the bath mat. Don't you think it's odd that Knox seemed to believe that Meredith's blood fell onto the bath mat in the shape of a perfect footprint?
:giggle::rotfl::floorlaugh:
SMK, do we have any proof that Rudy is the one who got the towels? No, we don't. Just because someone says it's true doesn't make it so.
So it's ok to believe Amanda had knowledge of the sexual assault and other details, prior to the reports being released, because of various reasons such as Luca and media reports, but it's not logical that Rudy might have heard from somewhere that there were towels in the room? Or that he might have been there when Amanda and/or RS went and got the towels?
I don't think any of them got the towels to "help" her, as is the rumour, I guess based on Rudy's word which I don't buy. Do we really think they thought they could "help" her, seeing the state she was in, the blood flowing out of her, the stabs and wounds on her neck? And why would they want to "help" her at that point? If she survived, she'd ID all of them.
I don't think for a minute those towels were to help her. I think they got scared at the amount of blood coming out, they just wanted to stop the blood from making a big mess and going who-knows-where.
What about his clothes? So are you saying he took his clothes off and took a shower??
Omg. So what about his clothes, where did he put his clothes when he took them off? How come there are no bloody spots/smears in teh place where took off his clothes and put them in the bathroom....probably on the floor.
I do not get this at all.
And don't forget that according to Amanda, Filomena's door was closed (that's why she didn't see the broken window). So it would make logical sense that, after seeing a dump in her (Filomena's) bathroom, seeing her door closed, she would logically go and check to see if maybe Filomena came back during the night and maybe that would explain the dump. Maybe it was Filomena, maybe it was some guy friend of hers. Or, maybe Meredith had some guy with her in her closed room that took a dump in that bathroom.
Remember, Amanda thought Meredith was in her room sleeping. Why would she automatically see some poo in the toilet and think it was from a burglar, when she hadn't even seen the broken window yet! And none of the other signs in the bathroom gave her any pause.
Nothing wrong with British virgins. In Italy you can not lie as a witness. This can have legal consequences. You can lie as a suspect though. So we have several witnesses that tell the same story and that means they are unreliable? Then we have the suspect Knox who keeps changing her story. I don't see the logic why one would be unreliable and not the other.
MichaelSmith
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2012
- Messages
- 631
- Reaction score
- 0
Who says she thought that seeing the poo?
redheadedgal
Former Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2007
- Messages
- 4,659
- Reaction score
- 104
It's in his book.
Amazon.com: Honor Bound: My Journey to Hell and Back with Amanda Knox eBook: Raffaele Sollecito, Andrew Gumbel: Kindle [email]Store@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com[/email]/images/I/51lCC3zWS%2BL.@@AMEPARAM@@51lCC3zWS%2BL
I think quote that long would anger the mods.
I think he just took his shoe off and rinsed his pant leg while wearing them. Bloody water dripped down to his foot. He then stepped onto the bathmat leaving the many diluted traces and the footprint there.
Given his behaviour in the investigation it is hard to believe that those things didn't happen. If he was running around like a loose cannon with everything else, why do you think he was objective and sober when it came to his treatment of witnesses he considered advantageous to his theory? IMO he would have been just as out of control with them as the rest of the case, which makes whatever they say suspect, particularly the witnesses that appeared out of nowhere.
I don't see her changing the story apart from the night of the unrecorded interrogation.
Let's see...
http://www.amandaknox.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Trascrizioni-2009-Feb-7-Romanelli-Battistelli-v-Altieri-Altieri-v-Grande.pdf
That's vary interesting, officer Battistelli is caught in blatant lies not by one but two separate witnesses. I wonder if there were consequences.
Apparently it was very important for the prosecution to pretend that no one entered the room and no one had seen the body.
Well said.
It's not a question to those who know there was a murder.
I don't think it was obvious to the unsuspecting who seen it first.
I pointed out a few inconsistencies (there are many more) but multiple witnesses were simply liars. On the other hand, Knox and Sollecito are stressed and confused so whatever they say is ok.
Same with the interrogation. We have a detailed recording on paper by the interpreter, confirmed by several police officers being present. On the other hand we have Knox's explanation full with vague confusions and 'don't remembers'. Interpreter is a liar, and all police officers are liars.
The 'old' lady who heard the scream and multiple people running away within minutes (indicating multiple attackers and no time for Guede to have been cleaning up in the bathroom) is a liar. Even though the wounds on Meredith and evidence in the cottage indicate multiple attackers, and other witnesses (incl. Knox and Guede) speak of the scream as well.
The store owner is a liar because he was reluctant to come forward. Even though he can give a detailed description and another worker confirms he said he saw Knox at his store early in the morning.
The homeless man is a liar because he took drugs. Even though he gives a detailed account of what they were doing there, and there isn't any law that says drug users can't be witnesses.
I don't see what else is there to discuss if witnesses who give a detailed account are considered to be liars for the only reason that they give incriminating information about Knox and Sollecito. Now suddenly a witness is believed for no other reason then that he has something bad to say about a police officer. Somehow Knox attracts supporters that become emotionally involved which destroys all objectivity IMO.
That's not correct. I believe Luca Altieri and not the postal cop Battistelli for a logical reason.
Luca Altieri had absolutely no reason to lie, especially given the serious consequences you've outlined before, yet he never relents, despite the pressure on the witness stand.
Battistelli's story doesn't add up logically (he claims he never entered the room or checked if the victim needed help in any way, yet he phones his superiors reporting a dead body, and doesn't call for an ambulance). He does have a reason to lie, namely to support the theory of the authorities.
I think the statement and the circumstances under which it was extracted from Amanda on the interrogation night has all the staples of coerced false confession.
I don't think anyone would disagree that miscarriages of justice do happen. Very often precipitated by police errors or misconduct during investigation and followed by the "blue wall of silence".
I don't think anyone would disagree that miscarriages of justice do happen. Very often precipitated by police errors or misconduct during investigation and followed by the "blue wall of silence".
MichaelSmith
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2012
- Messages
- 631
- Reaction score
- 0
Then you don't understand what weighing the evidence and witness credibility means or how trials work.
- Status