Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #11

[SMK]

Thanks!

Sniped from what he says:
"What took place bore more resemblance to the Inquisition than to an interrogation." !!!

For 8 hours! OMG! Overnight. Without food or water. In a police station. In a foreign country. In a foreign language. By a dozen different officers. Without being allowed a lawyer.

Yes....so much for the "2 hours" :razz:

 

[wasnt_me]

Yeah, even so, I want a breakdown because I'm sure Otto got something significant out of the 145am thing. So if they started at 1030pm, which I think they probably started more like 1045pm, and went to 145am, that was 3 hours, but what is it that happened at 145am? Otto said it was some sort of statement, but didn't give great detail of what it was about, just that it was the implication of patrick. From this link we read, seems she didn't give that up until 6am. So I'm confused about that.

Otto must know his stuff, so I can't believe he's completely incorrect. There is just a confusion to sort out.

 

[flourish]

I agree, but it the "inside rocking throwing thinking" was FORCED into the puzzle because they say there was no glass outside on the ground. We have read and shared many theories and argued many times that glass could have been on the ground, beneath the fallen leaves. That's why Otto and I debated so much about whether the investigators did a real search of the outside. they took no pictures of the area beneath the window and in the report, they only say that they "observed" that there was no footprints or glass. Hendry offers an excellent theory as to why there were no huge and noticable glass fragments outside.

There were. Otto and I debated this, too, I think in thread 9 or 10. There were grates and terraces; however, as you see in the youtube videos added in this thread, you don't need leverage to scale a short wall.

I extensively wrote about this window in threads 9 and 10. Did you miss those posts? It was back when Otto kept saying stuff like the balcony was more secluded for a break-in, so therefore it was staged. Glass wasn't outside so therefore it was staged. And I illustrated why RG chose the window and how it's possible to only get minute pieces of glass outside the house. In that thread, someone had been talking about how glass broke when they hit windows with golf balls. I can pull the theories forward if they'll help.

It's okay, I can go find them, thank you for offering, though :blowkiss:

I read that the idiot conducting this experiment let himself be discredited for a very dumb reason. It was because the green shutters appeared to be only "slightly" open the day after the murder. The experimenter said he didn't account for the green shutters being closed.

That's so stupid. All he had to say was RG climbed on the lower grate, pulled the green shutters back, got down, threw the rock in, and once RG was in the house, he pulled the shutters inward to keep from being seen when he turned on the lights. Dauh!

OR he could have said the wind probably blew them.

I can't help but note you said this guy lets himself get discredited. :innocent::angel:

Oh, AND

They should have checked that laundry mat for blood, too, if they believed AK had gone there with some unknown man to wash shoes. But, that would probably open a whole nother can of worms! they probably don't want to do that because they find more "unknown blood and dna" from other crimes ILE botched.

Wouldn't it be more weird if they didn't find unknown dna,etc. from biological material in a laundry? I mean, that's kinda why we do laundry, no, to cleanse environmental and biological material and whatnot out of our clothing?

Yes, but not knowing much about marijuana, I have to ask were the plants valuable enough to steal? Theft was in Guede's past, but not AK and RS's. And Sollecito came from a very affluent family, and must as a student have received money from his father. Guede was the poor one. Would AK and RS really want those plants enough to steal them? I actually do not know, so maybe someone else can answer the question.

It would depend on how mature the plants were and what stage they were in, etc., as far a I know and understand...you can't just pluck some random material off an immature plant and stick in your pipe and smoke it (heh) you have to, like, clip and groom them and harvest the buds, which is the smokable stuff. So, I don't know that we have enough information to know about that, although I find that general theory quite intriguing, of course. :giggle:

You are so right. All other scenarios are complicated, convoluted, and raise tons of questions. The lone wolf robber covers all the bases ----except WHY did AK and RS so arouse suspicion that 3 1/2 years later they are where they are? I want to believe it was something more than Mignini's craziness, but its hard.....

Respectfully, isn't this entire case and all the discussion and news/"news" surrounding it, on both sides, complicated, convoluted, and obviously raising 11 threads so far of questions? If the "lone wolf robber" story was that obvious and simple, we probably would have shut up about it a while back. :cow:

Riiight! Consciousness of innocence!

Really? So no one would think it was suspicious if, while the investigation continued, AK, who was the first one to find the body and was a witness of probable importance, fled home? :deal: :snooty:

And, again, :cow:

 

[wasnt_me]

From: http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/FBI2.html


In the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case, we have a conflict between an implausibly small amount of highly suspect “evidence” that is alleged to be at the scene vs. a vast amount of missing evidence that would have HAD to be at the scene if Amanda and Raffaele had participated at all, and even more so if they had participated in the way the prosecutors allege. While the prosecution’s evidence is scant, contrived and likely non-existent; the mountain of missing evidence is absolutely overwhelming and compelling. And they both can’t be right because they are mutually exclusive.

If Amanda and Raffaele had actually killed Meredith in company with Rudy Guede, the evidence would show it. Instead, this is what we have:

1. There is absolutely no evidence of Amanda Knox in the room at the time of the murder, nor is there evidence that she participated in any way.
a. No blood
b. No hairs
c. No fingerprints
d. No footprints
e. No saliva
f. No DNA

2. There are absolutely no items of Amanda’s which have any blood on them

a. No clothes
b. No shoes
c. No socks
d. No underwear

3. Amanda had not a scratch on her the morning after the attack

a. No cuts
b. No bruises
c. No lacerations

4. There was absolutely no blood found in Raffaele’s apartment or Amanda’s room.

a. Nothing on the floors
b. Nothing on knives
c. Nothing on carpets
d. Nothing on walls
e. Nothing on clothes
f. Nothing on utensils
g. Nothing on doorknobs

5. There was no escape attempt by Amanda or Raffaele
a. Rudy escaped to Germany shortly after the attack
b. Amanda did not attempt to flee
c. Raffaele did not attempt to flee

6. There were NO psychological indicators of potential violence in Amanda
a. No motive
b. No homicidal fantasies or preoccupation
c. No violent intentions or expressed threats
d. No weapons skills
e. No pre-attack planning
f. No stalking
g. No job problems
h. No loss or personal stressors
i. No lack of conscience
j. No anger problems
k. No depression or suicidality
l. No paranoia or other symptoms
m. No isolation
n. No history of violence
o. No history of criminality
p. No domestic partner violence.

Based on the preceding, AMANDA’S INVOLVEMENT IN THE MURDER IS NOT JUST UNLIKELY, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE. The prosecution is missing all evidence needed to convict Amanda Knox, and hasn’t provided any plausible reason for it's absence.

If you dispute any point of that, go to the link above and read his detailed analysis about it first. whatever section you disagree with, just go to that one on the link, because he has it all neatly sectioned off.

 

[SMK]

From: http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/FBI2.html


In the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case, we have a conflict between an implausibly small amount of highly suspect “evidence” that is alleged to be at the scene vs. a vast amount of missing evidence that would have HAD to be at the scene if Amanda and Raffaele had participated at all, and even more so if they had participated in the way the prosecutors allege. While the prosecution’s evidence is scant, contrived and likely non-existent; the mountain of missing evidence is absolutely overwhelming and compelling. And they both can’t be right because they are mutually exclusive.

If Amanda and Raffaele had actually killed Meredith in company with Rudy Guede, the evidence would show it. Instead, this is what we have:

1. There is absolutely no evidence of Amanda Knox in the room at the time of the murder, nor is there evidence that she participated in any way.
a. No blood
b. No hairs
c. No fingerprints
d. No footprints
e. No saliva
f. No DNA

2. There are absolutely no items of Amanda’s which have any blood on them

a. No clothes
b. No shoes
c. No socks
d. No underwear

3. Amanda had not a scratch on her the morning after the attack

a. No cuts
b. No bruises
c. No lacerations

4. There was absolutely no blood found in Raffaele’s apartment or Amanda’s room.

a. Nothing on the floors
b. Nothing on knives
c. Nothing on carpets
d. Nothing on walls
e. Nothing on clothes
f. Nothing on utensils
g. Nothing on doorknobs

5. There was no escape attempt by Amanda or Raffaele
a. Rudy escaped to Germany shortly after the attack
b. Amanda did not attempt to flee
c. Raffaele did not attempt to flee

6. There were NO psychological indicators of potential violence in Amanda
a. No motive
b. No homicidal fantasies or preoccupation
c. No violent intentions or expressed threats
d. No weapons skills
e. No pre-attack planning
f. No stalking
g. No job problems
h. No loss or personal stressors
i. No lack of conscience
j. No anger problems
k. No depression or suicidality
l. No paranoia or other symptoms
m. No isolation
n. No history of violence
o. No history of criminality
p. No domestic partner violence.

Based on the preceding, AMANDA’S INVOLVEMENT IN THE MURDER IS NOT JUST UNLIKELY, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE. The prosecution is missing all evidence needed to convict Amanda Knox, and hasn’t provided any plausible reason for it's absence.

If you dispute any point of that, go to the link above and read his detailed analysis about it first. whatever section you disagree with, just go to that one on the link, because he has it all neatly sectioned off.

:rocker:TRIED TO GIVE YOU APPLAUSE, BUT THE SMILEYS WOULD NOT COME UP, GRRRR

 

[wasnt_me]

I can't help but note you said this guy lets himself get discredited. :innocent::angel:

I know. He was an idiot to let that happen. :loser:

Wouldn't it be more weird if they didn't find unknown dna,etc. from biological material in a laundry? I mean, that's kinda why we do laundry, no, to cleanse environmental and biological material and whatnot out of our clothing?

of course.:slapfight: leave it to me to forget about the obvious. (don't mean anything by the icon. I just like the
:slapfight: icon. Heee heee..)

It would depend on how mature the plants were and what stage they were in, etc

Maybe they were after weed that the BF had already matured and stored somewhere to roll up?

Really? So no one would think it was suspicious if, while the investigation continued, AK, who was the first one to find the body and was a witness of probable importance, fled home? :deal: :snooty:

I think she's says it's that way because AK did NOT run back to America.

 

[wasnt_me]

I love this quote:

Putting a knife in Amanda’s hand is like putting a trumpet in my hand. It doesn’t mean that I know what to do with it. I am a firearms instructor. I can tell you that a knife or firearm in an inexperienced person’s hands is more dangerous to them than others. The thought that you could put a knife in Amanda’s hands, and the very first time, have her inflict fatal wounds (especially without injuring herself in the process) is ludicrous.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/FBI2.html

I don't think it's ludicrous, though, cause I'm sure it's happened that someone inexperienced with a knife has killed someone else with a knife before, but I agree that it's ludicrous that AK goes uninjuried in this incident. Esp if, for the first time, she's wielding that big old kitchen knife as a weapon.

 

[flourish]

Respectuflly snipped by me for emphasis

Maybe they were after weed that the BF had already matured and stored somewhere to roll up?

Perhaps

I think she's says it's that way because AK did NOT run back to America.

Catch-22, different perspectives on the same thing, etc.

 

[wasnt_me]

Excellent summation of the core issues in this case:

For instance, at the crime scene, we have the following undisputed facts: A window was broken by a thrown rock; a grate below the broken window allowed access to the cottage, and a known burglar (who is also known to carry a knife) is present in the cottage. A female resident of the cottage, who we know to have returned about 9:00 – 9:30 p.m. is grabbed in her room, stabbed and raped. Her purse is rifled, $300 stolen, and the burglar escapes the country. These are facts.

However, from this scenario, the detectives incredibly come to the conclusion NOT that a simple (but horrible) resident-surprises-burglar, burglar-rapes-and-robs-resident case has occurred—NO. From this simple scenario, we have the tortured hypothesis of a Dean’s List exchange student from America engaging in a drug-fuelled orgy with a new boyfriend and an African stranger, and/or stumbling on her roommate being raped, and siding with the rapist, stabbing her friend and cottage-mate in the throat with a knife that isn’t in the cottage.

The detectives in this matter chose to believe that this opportunistic “clustered crime scene” killer did nothing to hide his footprints, fingerprints, DNA, or shoeprints, hair or bodily fluids, but then decided to break a window and steal cash to stage a burglary. This defies any human logic.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/FBI3.html

 

[Nova]

*Sigh* It's my own fault for opening this :worms:I thought I made it clear that my sharing that was a "FWIW" and not meant to be a direct comparison between myself and AK.

So FWIW, I was 21, everyone was speaking United States English, I was not a "true-crime aficionado," and no, it wasn't my roommate who had been murdered--it was my child.

I am so sorry for your loss, flourish.

I don't pretend I can begin to imagine what that was like or how you ever survived it.

 

[Nova]

From what I gleaned watching the ID In Cold Blood show - her flatmates did not like her... she not popular with them... they tolerated her.... meanwhile, AK was a bit naive about to how a click can act against you...

You may be right, Steve, but we know AK socialized with MK on a regular basis. We know AK was on the phone many times with Filomena during the days between the murder and AK's arrest.

My sense is that the conflict between the flatmates has been exaggerated, probably by ILE, certainly by the press.

 

[Nova]

thanks for this info, so it WAS true about being interrogated all those hours---Otto kept saying only 2. Of course it makes sense, she wanted to leave.....

The number of hours is the total for that night, not the number of hours before she implicated PL. She made at least three statements over the course of that night of interrogation.

It is the first one that came more or less 2 hours after that latest round of questioning began. So otto is right about that, AFAIK.

The other number we hear is 40 hours. That's a total one of the defense attorneys came up with for the hours of interrogation between the discovery of the body and AK signing the PL statement.

 

[Nova]

I just read a theory on PMF. I don't know how much it holds water, but they were supposing that RG, RS, and AK got together to steal the plants from the boys downstairs, and MK somehow caught them.

They were thinking AK got the keys from MK somehow because she was watching the cat and watering the drugs.

Their scenerio is convoluted because they are trying to incorporate ALL the witnesses who heard screams, saw them at the square, the fact that RS or AK brought RS's kitchen knife, the whole nine.

I can't get with their theory of how it happened, but I was interested in their point about the drugs downstairs being attractive.

What if they did get together to do this, and while AK and RS were downstairs doing it, RG decided to crap upstairs, and MK freaked out when she saw him? He started fighting her and all that, and then AK and RS walked in on it?

Everyone is entitled to speculate, but there is nothing in AK's or RS' history that suggests they would commit such a crime. They were friendly with the boys. I think they could have asked for some seeds if they wanted to grow their own supply.

 

[SMK]

Excellent summation of the core issues in this case:

For instance, at the crime scene, we have the following undisputed facts: A window was broken by a thrown rock; a grate below the broken window allowed access to the cottage, and a known burglar (who is also known to carry a knife) is present in the cottage. A female resident of the cottage, who we know to have returned about 9:00 – 9:30 p.m. is grabbed in her room, stabbed and raped. Her purse is rifled, $300 stolen, and the burglar escapes the country. These are facts.

However, from this scenario, the detectives incredibly come to the conclusion NOT that a simple (but horrible) resident-surprises-burglar, burglar-rapes-and-robs-resident case has occurred—NO. From this simple scenario, we have the tortured hypothesis of a Dean’s List exchange student from America engaging in a drug-fuelled orgy with a new boyfriend and an African stranger, and/or stumbling on her roommate being raped, and siding with the rapist, stabbing her friend and cottage-mate in the throat with a knife that isn’t in the cottage.

The detectives in this matter chose to believe that this opportunistic “clustered crime scene” killer did nothing to hide his footprints, fingerprints, DNA, or shoeprints, hair or bodily fluids, but then decided to break a window and steal cash to stage a burglary. This defies any human logic.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/FBI3.html

and yet..........Knox and Sollecito have been imprisoned for 3 1/2 years......forums exist where attorneys and experts speak of how confident they are that the appeal will fail, and that the convictions will be upheld. It is a nightmare beyond nightmare....I can only pray that Providence will send some intervention, and that the 2 will be freed, and their families will sue for millions.........

 

[Nova]

I understand, but under the actual REAL scenerio, there is nothing in that room to indicate RS's presence yet he sits in jail for the murder. I was linking him to being in there as a way to figure out how he could have touched the bra clasp (in my mind, probably didn't type that part out, so sorry about that.)

I haven't seen Otto in about a week. Nova, I think popped in last night.

It's nice to be missed, but jeeze, guys! I was only out of town for about 30 hours! I'm assuming otto got burned out on this case. I'm hoping he'll return when the appeal verdict is announced, if not before.

 

[Nova]

Have you read this steve moore's evaluation of Ak's declaration?

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/FBI7.html

No, I hadn't read it and it's the most specific account of the coercion in this case.

"Please don't yell at me..."

:sigh:

 

[Nova]

Yeah, even so, I want a breakdown because I'm sure Otto got something significant out of the 145am thing. So if they started at 1030pm, which I think they probably started more like 1045pm, and went to 145am, that was 3 hours, but what is it that happened at 145am? Otto said it was some sort of statement, but didn't give great detail of what it was about, just that it was the implication of patrick. From this link we read, seems she didn't give that up until 6am. So I'm confused about that.

Otto must know his stuff, so I can't believe he's completely incorrect. There is just a confusion to sort out.

IIRC, otto is measuring until the time ILE decided AK was a suspect rather than a mere witness. He believes this occurred after 2 hours because ILE stopped the interrogation and called in the prosecutor to hear AK's statement for himself. I'm not sure but I think the first of AK's several statements may have also been signed at that point; if so, it implicated PL.

If the above makes no sense, I'm sure the fault is mine. otto has thought about this carefully.

I also think the 8 hours counts the period until the so-called "gift statement" which is the last one AK gave that night and where she first mentions being struck and says her memories of the murder night are "more unreal than real" to me. And where she begs ILE to "don't yell at me."

 

[flourish]

It's nice to be missed, but jeeze, guys! I was only out of town for about 30 hours! I'm assuming otto got burned out on this case. I'm hoping he'll return when the appeal verdict is announced, if not before.

So either we worry too quickly, or you're logged on so much that we get worried after such a short absence Or both, LOL :seeya:

 

[wasnt_me]

It's nice to be missed, but jeeze, guys! I was only out of town for about 30 hours! I'm assuming otto got burned out on this case. I'm hoping he'll return when the appeal verdict is announced, if not before.

Don't think about going missing. We'll call 9-11, 112, 118, whatever we have to call, even if we have to get RS to call for us! lol

 

[Allusonz]

Don't think about going missing. We'll call 9-11, 112, 118, whatever we have to call, even if we have to get RS to call for us! lol

OH NO not 112.....he might get attacked by the Italian swat team, taken to the hospital, tried to be deemed insane

Lets take our chances on the FBI, CIA

Actually, we could probably find him faster ourselves even with poo on our straight jackets :innocent:

Hope you enjoyed your trip Nova!!!

We promise not to yell....there might be wine, in Perugia and terrific company though