Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #10

[otto]

but....but....Amelie was harmless, the movie uplifting, and most of all, Amelie did not become a convicted sex murder.....:waitasec:

The character is a lonely woman with a compelte disconnect from normal social interaction.

 

[otto]

Well, we do not know if he was treated coldly as a child---and a military person has to be objective, cold, i can almost see that helping a certain type to kill---Amanda was a flower child type....

Amanda liked to pull pranks, and had her quirks.

 

[otto]

I just can't believe Italian law is so unjust.

If AK let RG in knowing he planned to commit a crime, that's one thing. She would be guilty of murder under "felony murder" concepts in the U.S.

But I can't believe Italian law holds everyone who opens a door criminally liable for everything a person at the door later does.

Amanda is just the sort of person that you would want in the next room during a murder?

 

[SMK]

I just can't believe Italian law is so unjust.

If AK let RG in knowing he planned to commit a crime, that's one thing. She would be guilty of murder under "felony murder" concepts in the U.S.

But I can't believe Italian law holds everyone who opens a door criminally liable for everything a person at the door later does.

Right, when I have said Amanda may have felt responsible, I meant she may have told Guede no one would be home, and he might find some $$$. Not that he ought to go kill her. But you are right, we cannot be responsible for all the actions of anyone we allow in.

 

[Nova]

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.

I absolutely agree about the repeated leaps of illogic in MR.

 

[Nova]

Isn't that interesting. That's looks like a Freudian slip ... Amanda explaining how Rudy got into the house without mentioning the broken window.

By that time, ILE had told AK there was "proof" the broken window was staging.

Since AK wasn't there and had nothing to do with the murder, she believed the police and assumed MK opened the door for RG.

No slip and nothing Freudian about it.

If one thinks about it, that conversation is actually exculpatory to AK.

 

[otto]

Right, when I have said Amanda may have felt responsible, I meant she may have told Guede no one would be home, and he might find some $$$. Not that he ought to go kill her. But you are right, we cannot be responsible for all the actions of anyone we allow in.

We are, however, responsible for our actions during a murder. Keep in mind that Meredith's bedroom was locked with a key, and that no one called for help. In fact, there is evidence that the Knox attempted to obfuscate the scene.

 

[otto]

I absolutely agree about the repeated leaps of illogic in MR.

Summarizing 11 months of trial into 427 pages could give the impression of "leaps of illogic", but the alternative was to give up a year of your life, learn Italian and get the facts first hand. I guess most of us are satisfied with that summary ... even though we are getting the summary and not the encyclopedia version. Speaking of which, I think the wikipedia article is turning into an encyclopedia ... maybe in a couple of years we can read all 11 months of trial in detail.

 

[Nova]

...but I doubt you use bars to get high along with weed and alcohol.I've seen some kids that can't remember a thing....total black outs.

It's been a couple of decades since I've tried weed, and I almost never drink in public because I don't drink and drive. But I can attest that you are right about alcohol increasing the effects of xanax.

How commonly is xanax used for recreation? I wonder because I don't find it has the pleasurable effects of, say, valium.

I can certainly see RS forgetting that he woke up for half an hour and played music, but I have trouble imagining forgetting a murder. But you may be right...

 

[SMK]

The character is a lonely woman with a compelte disconnect from normal social interaction.

who harms no one....Amanda had college classes, family, friends, jobs, and a boyfriend.....I was more of an Amelie than she....

 

[otto]

By that time, ILE had told AK there was "proof" the broken window was staging.

Since AK wasn't there and had nothing to do with the murder, she believed the police and assumed MK opened the door for RG.

No slip and nothing Freudian about it.

If one thinks about it, that conversation is actually exculpatory to AK.

So even though she was not being coerced, she adjusted her story to match someone else's story? That's weird.

And when was it again that she knew the break in was staged???

 

[SMK]

By that time, ILE had told AK there was "proof" the broken window was staging.

Since AK wasn't there and had nothing to do with the murder, she believed the police and assumed MK opened the door for RG.

No slip and nothing Freudian about it.

If one thinks about it, that conversation is actually exculpatory to AK.

As always, swift and brilliant. I give ye 5 big stars. :blowkiss:

 

[otto]

who harms no one....Amanda had college classes, family, friends, jobs, and a boyfriend.....I was more of an Amelie than she....

Pranks harm others ... they are jokes at the expense of others and for the amusement of the prankster.

 

[SMK]

Pranks harm others ... they are jokes at the expense of others and for the amusement of the prankster.

Is throat slashing a prank, though?:waitasec:

 

[otto]

As always, swift and brilliant. I give ye 5 big stars. :blowkiss:

Don't be too quick. Knox, in discussing how Rudy entered the cottage, talks about Meredith letting him. That is a Freudian slip, not a statement that clears her of involvement of the murder. She knew the window was broken, and if she, in good faith, believed that someone broke into the cottage ... she would not have discussed Meredith letting Rudy in.

 

[otto]

Is throat slashing a prank, though?:waitasec:

Pranksters prey on the vulnerability and naivity of others.

 

[Nova]

It seems like we're theorizing that all bad people look and act a certain way that makes them identifiable and if we don't see them look and act that way, they cannot be criminals. People with no history of childhood problems, and those with perfectly upstanding lives, have been known to commit horrible crimes. Appearance and personal history is not a factor in determining whether someone does evil things to other people. It is a point that lawyer raise to attempt to get clients with childhood problems out of taking full responsibility for their actions.

You are technically correct, otto, but to my knowledge no one has come up with another crime remotely similar to what is claimed here: that a young woman joins in the rape and murder of a friend with two young men she barely knows, two young men who do not know one another.

So people look for some explanation of how this unique crime could occur.

 

[SMK]

How is it a Freudian slip, if, as Nova says, the police had already make AK aware that the crime scene was staged. So she now believes Rudy or whomever came in via the door, and muses as to whether he might have mentioned Meredith's boyfriend to get her to let him in. Where is the slip, where is the Freud????????????

 

[Nova]

What makes them different? Criminals come from all walks of life. Why should we expect that these three criminals have some blatant history of problems?

Furthermore, if we want to look at problems in them, we can find them ... but there is no correlation between bad childhood and criminal behavior, so what is the point?

Additionally, I think I can probably predict the direction the discussion would take if we started dissecting Knox, Sollecito and Guede for problems ... someone would mention that Meredith smoked pot too ... and so on. It would become some sort of comparison between the murderer and the victim. Why go there ... again?

BBM: really? Since when? Previously your point was that there is no perfect, absolute correlation, and I believe that to be true. But I've never heard anyone claim there is no correlation at all.

BTW, it is a tad odd to see you of all people arguing that one's past has no predictive value in re criminal behavior when you have devoted so many posts to the character assassination of AK. But whatever...

 

[Nova]

Amanda is just the sort of person that you would want in the next room during a murder?

Well, there's a non sequitur if I ever saw one.