Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #10

[dgfred]

This kind of instance is different than what the OP was talking about. Tampering with evidence and obstruction of justice would be soemthing like changing the scene of the crime ON PURPoSE.

For example, FR should have been charged with that by the defense for changing around things in the room with the broken window. Of course she did not do it on purpose, but they could have tried to have a case to have her charged. But her moving things around in an alleged burglary scene wouldn't make her a partner in crime.

Same for AK if she'd covered the body and locked the door.

Now, if you are committing a crime, like robbery with others and one of your partners shoots someone in the commission of the robbery, then yes, you will be charged with murder in the US even though you did not pull the trigger or order your partner to do so.

IMO the court would never charge someone for running into their room to check to see if anything was stolen or damaged. Especially if the police were right there too.

Her 'moving things around' doesn't factor into a burglary of one's OWN STUFF.

This was what I think jjenny was saying. If AK let RG in or was in any way involved in what happened... she is just as guilty as the one (if not her) that struck the fatal blows.

 

[wasnt_me]

I agree that this is what most likely happened.... she did not know how to deal with what she saw, went into a state of metal overload putting off how to deal with it, and then she got caught up it in all. If she were guilty, I think she would have fled.

I gotta agree. I can't imagine what the convo was like after the murder.

RG: okay, well I'm done. Y'all just clean up here, and I'm off. Remember, CYOA!

(cover your own assets...)

 

[Allusonz]

Since he run off to another country, I doubt he had plans of telling this story.

I agree

I as well believe that ILE never dreamed they would be put under this much scrutiny over this particular murder.

 

[dgfred]

Neither would I !!! If i did though I would not leave a blasted work order there if I was the repairman that did commit it

There doesn't have to be a work order left there, that is what you don't understand. There would be a record of the appointment at the workplace AND the customer would likely have some kind of record of the call or appointment too. Sorry for not being clear. I will drop the subject.

 

[Allusonz]

IMO the court would never charge someone for running into their room to check to see if anything was stolen or damaged. Especially if the police were right there too.

Her 'moving things around' doesn't factor into a burglary of one's OWN STUFF.

This was what I think jjenny was saying. If AK let RG in or was in any way involved in what happened... she is just as guilty as the one (if not her) that struck the fatal blows.

It sure helps contaminate a crime scene. No one should of been allowed in that cottage except for the forensics team and even at that they had way to many of them doing what I am uncertain

 

[Allusonz]

There doesn't have to be a work order left there, that is what you don't understand. There would be a record of the appointment at the workplace AND the customer would likely have some kind of record of the call or appointment too. Sorry for not being clear. I will drop the subject.

Does not mean that repair person had arrived at that particular residence yet. They usually are scheduled for many throughout a day so what is your point?

 

[wasnt_me]

Yah, but that was not the issue. The issue as explained on p60 of the Motivations report was why AK decided to break a window. Only MK and AK could have opened the door. Even if it is possible that MK would have opened the door then still AK would have come under suspicion as well since she was the only other candidate for opening the door that night.

Which makes no damn sense because we know the door latch is no good and the door can come open if not properly locked. She could have just blamed it on that, if she were the murderer. It'd be easy for her to say maybe MK didn't properly lock the front door and RG slipped in.

Maybe AK, who was the last to leave the house, did NOT properly lock the door and it came open while no one was home, allowing RG entrance.

Maybe in AK's guilt, she staged the break in, because she feared people would blame her for leaving the door in that state.

I don't ascribe to this, because I believe the break in is real, but it might be plausible that she staged it over her guilt for not properly securing the house when she left with RS at 4pm.

 

[dgfred]

Then why the supposed "date" with MK? This is where this argument again fails.

What do you mean???

The 'date' was his trying to explain the reason he was there in the first place.
Only reason was an excuse to point away from himself as the murderer and to put himself in a good light.

The boy's downstairs said he 'fancied' AK... it doesn't get any clearer regarding that IMO.

 

[Allusonz]

No, otto, YOU claimed that somebody was saying MK and RG were "buddies"! It is your word and your contention.

What was actually said here was that RG was a friend of a friend of MK's. That's all.

Thank you !!!

 

[dgfred]

It sure helps contaminate a crime scene. No one should of been allowed in that cottage except for the forensics team and even at that they had way to many of them doing what I am uncertain

Nobody knew it was a murder scene yet tho. The police were right there with her and witnessed the glass on top of the clothing just like she did. There really is no controversy regarding this and is not being considered under appeal.

 

[Allusonz]

What do you mean???

The 'date' was his trying to explain the reason he was there in the first place.
Only reason was an excuse to point away from himself as the murderer and to put himself in a good light.

The boy's downstairs said he 'fancied' AK... it doesn't get any clearer regarding that IMO.

So he fancied AK but made a date with MK. Something wrong with this logic

 

[wasnt_me]

I fail to see why they press this point in the Motivation report. If they are implying that because Rudy had fun in this cottage, he would not think of robbing it when all were out, they were born yesterday. Robbers can easily rob friends' homes at which they have received kindness and hospitality, and I know this for a fact.

Yeah, SMK and check out the line "filled with friends and girls with which he could socialize..."

That sounds really sick in light of what happened to MK. and in light of the fact that he's been proved to have at LEAST participated.

 

[Allusonz]

Nobody knew it was a murder scene yet tho. The police were right there with her and witnessed the glass on top of the clothing just like she did. There really is no controversy regarding this and is not being considered under appeal.

Does not matter whether it was a murder or not it was considered to be a burglery. Thus still a crime scene

 

[jjenny]

So he fancied AK but made a date with MK. Something wrong with this logic

What date?

 

[dgfred]

What date?

Good luck jjenny :great: :crazy: .

 

[jjenny]

Good luck jjenny :great: :crazy: .

I will need it.
:floorlaugh:

 

[Allusonz]

What date?

Dont know was RG's story not mine or AK's

 

[wasnt_me]

The above, by the way, is only one example of why I find the Massei Report unconvincing. I don't know about anyone else, but I was really excited when I first downloaded it, because I expected to really be fully convinced of the guilt of AK and RS. It was with a sinking feeling of disbelief that I began to see really, really sloppy logic and inference. Hasty deduction. Conjecture and musing. NOT what I expected.

The report is full of very narrow-minded conclusions. Such as the one I pointed out which said that the father, knowing what time RS got up everyday called him and since AK never mentioned the call, that means she wasn't there to hear it. OR it could mean she was tired and knocked out-sleep.

They said that AK had no reason to go home and take a shower at the cottage since she'd taken one and washed her hair the night before.

OR--if she showered and then she and RS had sed afterward, then I can understand why she'd want a shower. To jump to the conclusion of why she'd need a shower, rather than looking at what RS and AK told them is insane. They stated that they'd had sex, so isn't it logical that she might WANT another shower? Maybe she ran out of clothes and needed to get a change from home, but they say she should have brought her clothes with her because she and RS had plans to go to a nearby city.

What time were these plans? maybe she thought she had time to go home and shower. I don't get it. Because she didn't bring a change of clothes with her to RS's, she's a lying murderer.

 

[jjenny]

Dont know was RG's story not mine or AK's

Not a very believable story, was it? Or he wouldn't be in prison right now.

 

[wasnt_me]

:waitasec:On second thought, why is it that breaking a window with a rock from the inside would not send any glass outside?

I don't know if you saw all my scenerios about the window and the breakin from thread nine. I was obsessed with it. But logically, there will be glass on the ground either way. So it was poor investigating. There were leaves on the ground a new leaves had probably fallen that would mask the glass. They didn't "observe" very hard for it.

I say glass would have fallen outside even if the green shutters had been closed because, at somepoint, they would have opened the green shutters, and glass that had been stacked against them would fall. At least some of it would have to. Probably not a lot but some of it.