Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #12

[otto]

@Otto: This is an excerpt from IIP's account of the "beating" and the whole Patrick thing:

Amanda stated in court testimony that she was repeatedly slapped on the back of her head and called a stupid liar. The interrogator who slapped Amanda told her that she was trying to help her to remember. Amanda was told that they had proof that she was at the crime scene at the time of the murder. [. . . ]

Amanda was told that her boss, Patrick Lumumba was the man that attacked Meredith. She did not give Patrick's name to the police. His name was suggested to her.

The police took a text message on Amanda's phone out of context. The text from Amanda to Patrick, "see you later" was taken literally by investigators. In the US, this phrase, in the context that it was written, simply means goodbye. The police told Amanda the text meant that she planned on meeting Patrick on the night of the murder. The police also left out the second part of the message, "good night." When you put the phrase together, it explains the meaning even more clearly. Amanda had no intention of meeting Patrick that night. She was simply saying goodbye to Patrick in the text.

The interrogators told Amanda to imagine she was at the cottage. She was told to imagine that Patrick committed the crime. None of it seemed possible to Amanda. She tried to explain to the police that none of what they were saying made any sense. She knew that she was not at the cottage at the time of the murder. She had repeatedly told the interrogators the truth and now they wanted her to imagine something completely different.

The interrogators kept telling her over and over again to imagine that she was there. When she still could not imagine what they were saying, she was slapped across the back of her head.

Once again she was told to imagine that she was there. She still could not do it. She knew what they were telling her was simply not true. She was scared and confused. After many hours of interrogation, with nothing to drink, exhaustion started kicking in. Amanda was trying to remember, she was trying to help but it just did not seem possible.

Then came another slap across the back of her head! You stupid liar! You were in the cottage! You will spend 30 years in prison! You are protecting a murderer! You will never see your family again! You will imagine that this happened!http://injusticeinperugia.blogspot.com/p/illegal-interrogation-of-amanda-knox.html

What is IIP? Is that the crazy Bruce Fisher opinion blog? That guy is completely off the deep end, in my opinion.

 

[SMK]

What is IIP? Is that the crazy Bruce Fisher opinion blog? That guy is completely off the deep end, in my opinion.

:anguish::anguish:

 

[otto]

:anguish::anguish:

Is that the Bruce Fisher opinion blog?

 

[Allusonz]

Yes, she ought to have mentioned it, and cannot imagine why she did not, as she stood right there in court and imitated the strikes to her head.:waitasec:

ETACould it be that the cables, since they "did not reveal details of the conversations" as stated above, just did not mention it???

She did it is in her statement

 

[Allusonz]

I'm not sure what you're getting at. Everyone in Perugia that was questioned about Meredith's murder had an unwaivering explanation and alibi for what they were doing at the time of the murder except Rudy, Raffale and Amanda. The three of them had very messed up explanations of what they supposedly did on the night of the murder.

Their claims of staying at Raffaele's apt. could not be verified. That is, their claims of watching a movie, et cetera, and having dinner as late as 10 or 11 were proven false. They have been unable to provide an alibi that was not proven to be a lie. They do not have alibis.

Yes even the gentleman from sweden was questioned regarding Patrick Lumumba and ILE did NOT believe him

Police questioned a Swiss professor today who, together with other witnesses, said that he could back up Lumumba's claim that he was at his bar in Perugia on the evening of the murder. The professor, who has not been named, told police that he was at Lumumba's bar between 8 p.m. and 10 p.m.

Police questioned him for seven hours, but said that they had found his confirmation of Lumumba's alibi unconvincing. He was able to confirm that he had been at Lumumba's bar on the evening of the murder, but could not swear the bar owner had been present throughout. Giuseppe Sereni, Lumunba's lawyer, said he would produce 20 other witnesses to back up his client's alibi.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,310637,00.html

 

[Allusonz]

Ah, but there was an attempt to clean up the bloody barefoot prints. That is why they were not visible until revealed by luminol. If they had not been cleaned up, they would have been visible without luminol - right?

No Otto there was no clean up and the knife was not cleaned with bleach either

 

[Allusonz]

This information is going to work against Knox in her upcoming trial on Saturday because she did not mention and "beatings" until after meeting with her father.

"Records show a consular officer visited Knox on Nov. 12, a day before her father did. The cables do not reveal any details from the conversation between Knox and the consular officer, nor do they mention at any time concern about her treatment during interrogation or detention."

Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/amanda-kno...-has-monitored-Knox-1383417.php#ixzz1MjOPjb9I

She stated that she had been hit in the head in her statement. I seriously doubt we are privy to all the information in those

 

[Allusonz]

Ah, but there was an attempt to clean up the bloody barefoot prints. That is why they were not visible until revealed by luminol. If they had not been cleaned up, they would have been visible without luminol - right?

No bloody footprints......stated once again

You cannot clean up something that is invisable

 

[Allusonz]

Of course I don't think ILE published a list of persons of interest and their alibis. That was my point. I see nothing that justifies your confidence in ILE.

You know why I think Knox is innocent.

I don't believe they even cared about any other individuals or if there alibis were credible

 

[Allusonz]

Searching for news, found this:
"Knox father: DNA experts missing key info from Italy police"

http://www.google.com/hostednews/af...ocId=CNG.93d17015584f9064f404da9c7737315f.5f1

Surprise surprise they still have not released. Why am I so shocked. It is probably by now much like the fried hard drives, the bra clasp stored in a jar of liquid, etc etc etc

 

[Allusonz]

Several possibilities:

1. She did mention it, but since she wasn't injured, the diplomatic officer didn't think it worth noting in his cables to the U.S.

2. She did not mention it because she didn't want to admit that she perjured herself in response.

3. She did not mention it because she wasn't injured and didn't consider it all that important until the head blows became her defense for falsely implicating PL.

4. She did not mention it because it never happened.

Personally, I don't know why the alleged slaps to the back of AK's head are such a big deal. She never claimed she was tortured or injured; she never claimed she was in fear for her life.

She claims she felt pressured by the interrogators which is obviously TRUE (head slaps or no), because she gave them a very ill-advised statement.

Somebody in Italy needs to exercise a little common sense: the charge against her for slandering the police should be dismissed.

Yes she did Nova it is in her statement

 

[SMK]

So ... is that the Bruce Fisher opinion blog?

It is the "Injustice in Perugia", Bruce Fisher, Ron Hendry, Steve Moore, Mark Waterbury, site, and is home to numerous intelligent and articulated others -such as yours truly :seeya:- who believe that there is in fact injustice in the arrests and convictions of Knox and Sollecito.

 

[Allusonz]

This link btw provides alot of information with respect to what was said in the early days of all of this

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,310637,00.html

 

[otto]

No bloody footprints......stated once again

You cannot clean up something that is invisable

Blood evidence is left at crime scenes. It is cleaned up, making it invisible to the naked eye. Luminol is applied a couple of weeks later, and the evidence is revealed. That is what happened in this case.

 

[otto]

It is the "Injustice in Perugia", Bruce Fisher, Ron Hendry, Steve Moore, Mark Waterbury, site, and is home to numerous intelligent and articulated others -such as yours truly :seeya:- who believe that there is in fact injustice in the arrests and convictions of Knox and Sollecito.

Thanks ... looks to me like a list of self-proclaimed "experts" that would never be qualified as experts in a case like this in any courtroom anywhere.

 

[Nova]

I think it is #3. She did however tell her father as soon as he came the next day, I recall. I think the police should not have slapped her on the back of her head, calling her "a stupid little liar", and the interrogation ought to have been videotaped. I am willing to bet she would not be being sued for slander if it had. I know Italians, I had Italian father, uncles, aunts---the head slap is common. And it is a form of intimidation for sure.

Exactly. It's a form of intimidation and it worked. It isn't torture, it isn't a war crime.

Those who don't believe it happened may disregard it. Let's move on.

(That "Let's move on" isn't directed at any poster here. I'm talking about ILE.)

 

[SMK]

Thanks ... looks to me like a list of self-proclaimed "experts" that would never be qualified as experts in a case like this in any courtroom anywhere.

I do not know whether to :razz: or :anguish:

 

[SMK]

Sure it does. His opinion is no different than any opinion here. As I've said before, if I wanted to respond to the opinions of those posting on another website, I'd be posting there. If Bruce Fisher hadn't been banned from so many websites and discussion forums, he wouldn't have been forced to set up his own blog to have a voice.

I just find it odd to grab someone's posts from another website and post them here as though they are some sort of authority ... when they're nothing more than an opinion on a blog.

Well, gee, Otto----I have always, on various forums, posted excerpts from others as a way of synopsizing my own purview. Maybe it is a bad habit. But I was not saying, "Harken to THIS authority!". I was saying, this is where I am at, how I came to my conclusion.

 

[Nova]

I'm not sure what you're getting at. Everyone in Perugia that was questioned about Meredith's murder had an unwaivering explanation and alibi for what they were doing at the time of the murder except Rudy, Raffale and Amanda. The three of them had very messed up explanations of what they supposedly did on the night of the murder.

Their claims of staying at Raffaele's apt. could not be verified. That is, their claims of watching a movie, et cetera, and having dinner as late as 10 or 11 were proven false. They have been unable to provide an alibi that was not proven to be a lie. They do not have alibis.

What I getting at is that you know nothing about the alibis of other persons of interest except what ILE tells you. (That's the same group of geniuses that took two weeks to check PL's alibi and release him.) You're entitled to believe them, but I see no reason to do so. From where I sit, ILE (including the prosecutor) arrogantly assumed their "gut instincts" were correct every step of the way and so they simply ignored any evidence to the contrary and made up evidence where it doesn't exist. Witness the apparent failure to even process Filomena's room beyond a casual glance from a couple of cops and the room's occupant herself.

THEIR ENTIRE CASE against AK and RS hinges on the assumption that the break-in was staged, yet they never bothered to bring in a forensics expert to process the room and verify this essential argument!

That an Italian jury (lead by the trial judge) overlooked that sort of incompetence tells us a lot about the legal system in Italy, but nothing at all about Amanda Knox.

AK and RS alibi each other (except for a brief statement coerced from each of them). As far as I know, the same is true of Filomena and her boyfriend.

If you know otherwise, please provide a link.

 

[SMK]

What I getting at is that you know nothing about the alibis of other persons of interest except what ILE tells you. (That's the same group of geniuses that took two weeks to check PL's alibi and release him.) You're entitled to believe them, but I see no reason to do so. From where I sit, ILE (including the prosecutor) arrogantly assumed their "gut instincts" were correct every step of the way and so they simply ignored any evidence to the contrary and made up evidence where it doesn't exist. Witness the apparent failure to even process Filomena's room beyond a casual glance from a couple of cops and the room's occupant herself.

THEIR ENTIRE CASE against AK and RS hinges on the assumption that the break-in was staged, yet they never bothered to bring in a forensics expert to process the room and verify this essential argument!

That an Italian jury (lead by the trial judge) overlooked that sort of incompetence tells us a lot about the legal system in Italy, but nothing at all about Amanda Knox.

AK and RS alibi each other (except for a brief statement coerced from each of them). As far as I know, the same is true of Filomena and her boyfriend.

If you know otherwise, please provide a link.

Well stated. :rocker: