Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #11

[wasnt_me]

AK did meet Guede though.
Why wouldn't she recognize him?

maybe it's dark. Maybe she's high. Maybe she didn't see his face as he jetted past her. I said your guess is as good as mine on this theory. You got any theories as to why not?

 

[Nova]

How does one ascertain that it was digital versus penial? I'm confused.

I don't know that one can unless seminal fluid is found as well. As far as I know, skin cells are skin cells.

I was merely speculating that if semen were found on the pillow, that might indicate the penetration was digital. But there could have been penile penetration that was withdrawn before ejaculation.

Good point.

 

[jjenny]

maybe it's dark. Maybe she's high. Maybe she didn't see his face as he jetted past her. I said your guess is as good as mine on this theory. You got any theories as to why not?

Before coming up with theories as to why not, would I not have to believe that scenario makes sense in a first place? I don't understand why they would not have reported it to police right away. But assuming that for whatever reason, they didn't-why, as they stood accused of murder, did they not reveal the "real story" if they just happened upon the murder but had nothing to do with it?

 

[wasnt_me]

I do see what you mean. Can you find the account, and post it and link it?:waitasec:

Yeah, I saw it on the perugia files site while I was looking at those slideshows I posted. I have to go find it, but here's an article about the tow truck driver:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...dith-Kercher-murder-house-claims-witness.html

 

[Nova]

As for motive, the only one right now that I can buy that would incllude AK and RS is that like I'd said in the other thread, RG had been hounding AK to set him up with MK. maybe she saw him in the square the afternoon of the murder, if that's where she went (alone or with RS), and she gave in and said to just go on over to the house and try it. (not meaning to break in and rape etc).

Then later, since she doesn't have to work, she gets RS to take her to the house to get some clothes for her trip and see if RG actually went over there.

OR,

she could have seen him in the square and he was boasting to her that he had plans with MK that night. Maybe AK didn't believe it and later, since she didn't have to work, asked RS to take her over there to see what was going on.

For her not to just call MK, I'd have to ask if we know how to tell if a phone is off because it's off, or because it ran out of battery and is charging? They never gave that as an excuse for turning them off, but cell phones can't be on 24/7 without recharging. They shut off. Or maybe her battery was low, so she was trying to conserve battery. I don't know. HOw do they defend turning off their phones?

Anyways, I am ONLY GUESSING at these theories so no, they don't contain all the answers and if you have a question about them, your guess for an answer is as good as mine.

I don't believe a phone has to be off to recharge, it just has to be plugged in. Our cell phones show a display while charging and ring if a call comes in. Once they are fully charged, they show you a message demanding that you unplug them to save energy, but they remain on.

In fact they HAVE to be on to recharge. You can set them not to receive calls, but they have to be on.

***

Knowing that MK had a relatively new boyfriend, I have trouble believing AK encouraged RG to "court" MK. Perhaps in jest, I suppose; I keep hearing AK enjoyed pranks and that would qualify. But if her only involvement were telling RG that MK was at home, I think she'd have called the police when she found the body, not begin an elaborate staging.

The only way I can see AK and RS doing the staging but not the murder is if for some reason they proposed RG rob MK as payment for drugs. I'm not saying there's any evidence this happened, just that it's the only reason that occurs to me that they would feel so involved they would stage a break-in.

 

[wasnt_me]

Before coming up with theories as to why not, would I not have to believe that scenario makes sense in a first place? I don't understand why they would not have reported it to police right away. But assuming that for whatever reason, they didn't-why, as they stood accused of murder, did they not reveal the "real story" if they just happened upon the murder but had nothing to do with it?

But this is why I politely said that I was guessing at a theory, and that I didn't have all the links or answers, because I'm crossing over to the other side to theorize about the crime from a more guilty viewpoint. I stated that I couldn't answer any questions anyone might have about the theory because I was still formulating it. I hoped saying all that would prevent other posters from pressing me to uphold a theory that is not complete and in the end, might not be viable. So I'm confused as to why I'm not being asked the questions.

 

[Nova]

I think skin cells are very specific, ruling out the other.

I just said the opposite, but I was guessing. SMK may well be right here.

As any man will tell you, there's a big difference between nerve endings in the penis and a finger, but I'm assuming nerve endings don't reside within skin cells.

 

[Nova]

I agree and I have always felt if AK and RS were involved at all, it was only in tampering or obstruction. That said, I think it would have to go a bit further than what you have proposed - although it is in the right direction - in order for them to feel responsible enough to see and examine the scene without immediately calling police. So I would propose something like yours, but maybe with also a suggestion of forcing himself on her , due to a bit of prankish resentment perhaps(such as, "she will love it, just don't take no for an answer") never dreaming it could escalate to violent murder. As we both say, this is MERE theorizing and speculation.

This scenario is possible. But AK wasn't a hardened criminal with a history of fending off LE. (Obviously not, since they got her to make a false statement so quickly.)

In your scenario, I think a tearful call to police, crying "I never thought he would take it so far" makes more sense than staging a break in. True, such a call might have implicated her in the crime, but AK didn't seem to know that: in her false statement, she put herself at the scene with PL without apparently realizing that doing so would make her criminally responsible.

 

[wasnt_me]

I don't believe a phone has to be off to recharge, it just has to be plugged in. Our cell phones show a display while charging and ring if a call comes in. Once they are fully charged, they show you a message demanding that you unplug them to save energy, but they remain on.

In fact they HAVE to be on to recharge. You can set them not to receive calls, but they have to be on.

***

Knowing that MK had a relatively new boyfriend, I have trouble believing AK encouraged RG to "court" MK. Perhaps in jest, I suppose; I keep hearing AK enjoyed pranks and that would qualify. But if her only involvement were telling RG that MK was at home, I think she'd have called the police when she found the body, not begin an elaborate staging.

The only way I can see AK and RS doing the staging but not the murder is if for some reason they proposed RG rob MK as payment for drugs. I'm not saying there's any evidence this happened, just that it's the only reason that occurs to me that they would feel so involved they would stage a break-in.

Oh, my phone can be off while charging. That's frequently how I know it needs charging, because it goes dead. Then I plug it up. I have to physically turn it on later, but as its charging, it has a battery icon showing, only. It cannot receive calls unless I press the on button hard.

I can't give reasons that they wouldn't call the police right away, but I know that it has happened in crimes where innocent people did not call the police right away. They were also supposedly doped up, so who knows what was on their minds IF they walked in on something like that. I certainly cannot say. I'm on the innocent side, standing by the fence, because I really do not understand their accounts and witness testimony, but I cannot reconcile the real evidence inside the house to guilt for murder. So I'm trying to reconcile in my mind how the evidence in the house can line up with what witnesses I might possibly lend some credibility to have said.

It's not exact and I'd appreciate everyone bearing with me while I do it. Speaking in general to everyone, if you don't believe it, that's okay, I'm not 100% believing it, either. I said I was formulating an alternate theory, not making a case to present in court.

 

[Nova]

Again, only guessing, but if AK DOES like to have all the male attention, she could have been a little resentful that RG was interested in MK (even if AK didn't even want RG, she could have been jealous. Some women are that way), and sent him over there out of spite, already of course knowing MK didn't want anything to do with him.

IF AK did this and we're just guessing, I really don't think she did it with the intention that he'd force himself and wind up murdering.

This theory, as it formulates, also clears RS of knowing who the heck RG is, because AK was the one who was seeing RG in the square. And if RS came into the house, saw RG, then RG ran out, it might stand to reason that RS and AK were seen with a knife, out on the streets.

It's POSSIBLE that one of them grabbed the knife to chase RG down. They got to the street, noticed the broken down car and people, and that might have been when AK COULD HAVE yelled at that man by the trash can.

When they couldn't catch RG, they went back in the house to deal with the truama they see with MK.

Maybe the Breakin was still real, as RG broke in the house to get to MK, but AK and RS were too traumatized to call the police right away. I have no good guess or excuse as to why not, but maybe they didn't and after waking up the next day, realized they had to do something.

This goes back to my question of RG, though, talking about how AK had slept in the house with all that blood. Why did he write that in the diary? I'm supposing maybe AK and RS could have remained in the house for a LONG time, and RG knew because he'd watchd the house. And he assumed that she'd stayed there.

THIS IS ALL GUESSING. JUST STREAM OF THOUGHT. it is not intended to be a real theory or complete theory. please do not treat it as such.

I know you're just thinking out loud, so please take my response in the same vein:

But wouldn't all of that have come out by now? If that were RS' only involvement, he's had no incentive not to say so. If that were AK's only involvement, she'd have been better off just saying so and hoping for a minimal sentence.

 

[SMK]

I just said the opposite, but I was guessing. SMK may well be right here.

As any man will tell you, there's a big difference between nerve endings in the penis and a finger, but I'm assuming nerve endings don't reside within skin cells.

Actually, I was just guessing, too. :blushing:

 

[SMK]

I know you're just thinking out loud, so please take my response in the same vein:

But wouldn't all of that have come out by now? If that were RS' only involvement, he's had no incentive not to say so. If that were AK's only involvement, she'd have been better off just saying so and hoping for a minimal sentence.

Well, is there a possibility that the shame of having parents, family, public believing in total innocence, and it snow balling into books written, and innocence clubs formed, and the chance of getting off 100% originally (not wanting to admit ANY involvement) could counter this???:waitasec: Just musing....

 

[Nova]

Even assuming that they walked in murder, but didn't call the police (by the way I find it hard to believe that two young healthy people not prone to hysterics would be so shocked as to not call the police), why did they not mention Guede's name as they were questioned afterwards?

Indeed. Sorry to beat a dead horse, here, but all the scenarios that have AK and RS coming on the crime scene after the fact and then deciding to stage a cover up make no sense to me at this point.

Immediately after the murders, when both AK and RS did in fact make false statements to police, I could have entertained the notion that they did nothing but the cover up. But by the time they got to trial, their lawyers would have had to know they were better off confessing to tampering with evidence (the Italian equivalent, of course) than risking a conviction for murder.

 

[wasnt_me]

This scenario is possible. But AK wasn't a hardened criminal with a history of fending off LE. (Obviously not, since they got her to make a false statement so quickly.)

In your scenario, I think a tearful call to police, crying "I never thought he would take it so far" makes more sense than staging a break in. True, such a call might have implicated her in the crime, but AK didn't seem to know that: in her false statement, she put herself at the scene with PL without apparently realizing that doing so would make her criminally responsible.

Yes, her putting herself at the scene is partly what makes me try to flesh out this theory. I personally still do not think the break-in was staged, OR that RG staged it before AK and RS arrived, based on my LOOSE theory that I'm developing. I have decided that I don't think AK would have known RG's plans that night. So I'm now theorizing that she and RS just drove to her house simply to pick up clothes for the trip the next day or something innocuous like that.

Maybe they wouldn't call the police because they moved her to see if she was alive and they think they caused her to suffocate in her own blood. Maybe because they were in the room touching her, they thought they'd be blamed. Maybe they were just drugged up and not thinking clearly. But when they woke up, they decided that they to deal with it that next morning. Maybe they went back to RS's and when they returned to the cottage, they were hoping that they'd dreamed the whole thing.

I personally, if this WERE the true scenerio, would have called the police off the bat. Maybe their phones were at RS's house charging, BUT that doesn't mean you don't go to a neighbor or somewhere and make the call. That's why I'd asked if the house had a landline.

I just don't have the answer for why they wouldn't call the police, but I do believe it happens in other cases where the cops ask why a person didn't. These cases are completely different and it may not be a fair comparison, but the only thing that comes to mind right now is battered wives who don't call. Like I said, that's a stretch in comparison, but it's all I got until I research.

 

[Nova]

In turn, I ask why, if you got all night to set up a burglary, why don't you set up a burglary? Why don't you take a couple laptops or something out the house and dump them somewhere?

Good question.

 

[jjenny]

Indeed. Sorry to beat a dead horse, here, but all the scenarios that have AK and RS coming on the crime scene after the fact and then deciding to stage a cover up make no sense to me at this point.

Immediately after the murders, when both AK and RS did in fact make false statements to police, I could have entertained the notion that they did nothing but the cover up. But by the time they got to trial, their lawyers would have had to know they were better off confessing to tampering with evidence (the Italian equivalent, of course) than risking a conviction for murder.

Agreed. I'd think we would have heard from either AK or RS at least some version of this story by now, if all they did is to happen upon a murder.

 

[wasnt_me]

I know you're just thinking out loud, so please take my response in the same vein:

But wouldn't all of that have come out by now? If that were RS' only involvement, he's had no incentive not to say so. If that were AK's only involvement, she'd have been better off just saying so and hoping for a minimal sentence.

Thanks. I agree. maybe they compounded the error by not calling and police and assumed that would make them responsible. Maybe it's a weak theory after all, but I'm really just trying to see the other side somehow. But I cannot see this outright murder and sex thing by the three of them. That is what makes the least sense to me. Actually, RG's story makes more sense to me than that sex game gone wrong theory.

I wasn't directing the statements at you. I just feel that someone will come in here and tell me how it's "nonesense" again, so I want to make sure everyone understands that I'm not asserting this stuff as fact.

 

[jjenny]

I know you're just thinking out loud, so please take my response in the same vein:

But wouldn't all of that have come out by now? If that were RS' only involvement, he's had no incentive not to say so. If that were AK's only involvement, she'd have been better off just saying so and hoping for a minimal sentence.

And we haven't heard anything even remotely resembling this story from either one of them. There are two of them, so if they showed up and witnessed murder, I'd think at least one of them would have admitted it by now.

 

[Nova]

Yeah, I saw it on the perugia files site while I was looking at those slideshows I posted. I have to go find it, but here's an article about the tow truck driver:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...dith-Kercher-murder-house-claims-witness.html

Thanks. Notice the tow truck driver got to the cottage at 11, so now if the dark car belonged to RS, then AK, RS and RG had to meet, conspire, rape and kill MK, get the car and drive it to the cottage--all within an hour and 15 minutes.

 

[wasnt_me]

Actually, I was just guessing, too. :blushing:

So now my guess is that you cannot tell the difference, and if it's in the records as a digital assault, it's because they found no semen inside MK. But I think they make an error of not recognizing the semen outside of MK.