Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #13

[SMK]

No, I meant you are a kind and gracious person.

So is otto, for that matter, but I think it's a dangerous precedent to expect other posters to "guess" at how one is supporting one's argument.

Okie, thanks. :blushing:

 

[SMK]

I haven't researched this case in depth but I see a number of similarities between this case and the case of Casey Anthony.

In both cases the defendants have changed their story numerous times, thrown innocent people under the bus, taken the investigation as a joke and both have serious lack of remorse.

Ok these symptoms are no evidence of crime but are telling a lot.

I think there is ample evidence that Casey Anthony is truly a narcissist and a sociopath. All her friends and family attest to her constant and incessant lying, including huge and complicated tales involving dozens of people, jobs, events, that are only in her imagination; also: manipulating, stealing family and friends' checkbooks, credit cards, and lastly , the covering up of the negligent death of her daughter (my own belief is that it is not premeditated murder). Virtually NONE of Amanda Knox's friends and not a single family member will say of her what Casey Anthony's say about her. Indeed, they say Amanda was always gentle, kind, honest, and hard working. HUGE difference: HUGE.

 

[SMK]

Addendum: I think this is why in the Anthony case, the Defense is going for the theory that she suffered years of sexual molestation: They are attempting to explain a whole series of precedents which include lying, stealing, promiscuity, combative behavior, leading into felony theft, etc. With Knox, there are no precedents. I am not saying it is impossible for one like her to kill, only far less likely. Combine that with some questionable evidence, and you are dealing with a different story. Knox IMMEDIATELY recanted the story about PL; Anthony, if she is lying about her father, is willing for him to face huge - and gravely serious - felony charges in the state of Florida.

 

[SkewedView]

Classic attacks used against rape victims while attempting to discredit them:

"She dresses inappropriately"
"Her story didn't match up exactly each time she told it"
"She uses her attractiveness/youth to garner sympathy"
"She's a cold-hearted temptress that manipulates men"
"She's disrespectful"
"She didn't cry enough afterward"
"She used drugs/alcohol"
"She's promiscuous"
Use of cherry-picked images/text from social media - taken out of their original context and/or given some exaggerated implications by the commentator.

Any of these sound familiar?


NOTE - this is not an attack against any members here, as these attacks originated in the media and on certain blogs. Repeating them does no discredit to any members, as taken as individual arguments, any misogyny in the originator's intent is not readily apparent...that said, the character assassination that continues to be used against Knox on the net in general makes me feel like I'm watching MSNBC during the 2008 primaries again...

Hopefully this does not overly offend - I've been holding off on posting due to RL stress/fatigue making my tongue a little sharp, but I just couldn't hold this one back. My apologies if this crosses any lines.

 

[Nova]

Okie, thanks. :blushing:

Who you callin' an Okie?!

I'll have you know I was born 50 miles north of Oklahoma in Kansas. By the age of 7 weeks, I had already done everything there was to do in Kansas, so I left.

 

[Nova]

Classic attacks used against rape victims while attempting to discredit them:

"She dresses inappropriately"
"Her story didn't match up exactly each time she told it"
"She uses her attractiveness/youth to garner sympathy"
"She's a cold-hearted temptress that manipulates men"
"She's disrespectful"
"She didn't cry enough afterward"
"She used drugs/alcohol"
"She's promiscuous"
Use of cherry-picked images/text from social media - taken out of their original context and/or given some exaggerated implications by the commentator.

Any of these sound familiar?


NOTE - this is not an attack against any members here, as these attacks originated in the media and on certain blogs. Repeating them does no discredit to any members, as taken as individual arguments, any misogyny in the originator's intent is not readily apparent...that said, the character assassination that continues to be used against Knox on the net in general makes me feel like I'm watching MSNBC during the 2008 primaries again...

Hopefully this does not overly offend - I've been holding off on posting due to RL stress/fatigue making my tongue a little sharp, but I just couldn't hold this one back. My apologies if this crosses any lines.

I don't know who you feared offending, because I think your observation is right on the money.

Since I first encountered this case I have wondered how Mignini & Co. focused on AK as the mastermind of a SEXUAL attack. I realize females have done such things in the past, but I can't believe it is common for females.

Wouldn't it make more sense to expect that AK would feel a natural sympathy toward MK and intervene on her behalf? But except for the internet attempt to portray AK as a sociopath, that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone.

Where is the evidence that AK was oblivious to the special concerns of women and their vulnerability to violence? That certainly isn't how her sister portrays her.

 

[SMK]

Who you callin' an Okie?!

I'll have you know I was born 50 miles north of Oklahoma in Kansas. By the age of 7 weeks, I had already done everything there was to do in Kansas, so I left.

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[OldSteve]

I don't know who you feared offending, because I think your observation is right on the money.

Since I first encountered this case I have wondered how Mignini & Co. focused on AK as the mastermind of a SEXUAL attack. I realize females have done such things in the past, but I can't believe it is common for females.

Wouldn't it make more sense to expect that AK would feel a natural sympathy toward MK and intervene on her behalf? But except for the internet attempt to portray AK as a sociopath, that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone.

Where is the evidence that AK was oblivious to the special concerns of women and their vulnerability to violence? That certainly isn't how her sister portrays her.

BBM
The only proverbial "fly in the ointment" to what I BBM is how drugged up she was.... I have though it was possible that if she was really out of it, she might have actually been there when it happened, and actually saw what happened, but didn't do anything because she was so stoned she didn't know if what was taking place was real or a dream....
Now, that would make for a most interesting case in Ital. law- if a person is under the influence because of that doesn't do anything.... but then realizing the next day what happened, and not coming forward - wow ... but how could she come forward is it was a dream in which she was sure if it was RG or PL killing MK...

 

[otto]

A quote from someone that followed the Cooper trial: "The jury were the only people whose opinions mattered in the case." That is the bottom line in trials, yet some seem unwilling to accept the jury decision in the murder trial of Meredith Kercher. We saw the same reaction with the conviction of Scott Peterson. I think there are always some people that are cheerful over a verdict while others are saddened, but our opinions - and the opinions of those that have attached themselves to the case after the trial is over - should not matter.

 

[otto]

You are not getting the point. How many cases are said by the prosecution to be a satanic drug fueled sex orgy? You have brought up many other cases which posters have stated are not similar which include CA SP BC and the dynamics are not even close

Now you have him stating that she orchestrated it from another room after first stating that she was the one that plunged the knife

Wasn't the satanic cult theory tossed around in the case of Laci Peterson? It seems to be something that comes up from time to time. Regarding the murder of Meredith, it happened on the Day of the Dead, so it's not unusual to wonder if some drugged up crazies with unresolved feelings about a deceased relative, or other personal issues, went nuts on that particular day.

I have no idea what happened during the murder of Meredith other than what is in evidence. One of the murderers claimed to be listening to the assault and murder from the other room, but the DNA on the knife indicates that the person that claimed to be listening from a distance was in fact weilding a knife.

 

[otto]

That was very gracious of you to oblige otto, SMK, but he knows internet protocol perfectly well: if he wants to prove something with a source, it is HIS responsibility to provide a link.

Playing games and hinting at possible google searches is not only childish, but a way of denying that whatever you find is the source he actually meant. Personally, I'm not going there.

If otto wants to argue that AK and RS are reminiscent of some "thrill-kill" couple, then he needs to make the case himself. And he needs to account for time, because I've never heard of a couple who began a murder spree after knowing one another for only six days, much less included a third party they didn't know at all.

Let's backtrack for a minute. Malkmus wanted a traditional motive for the murder, such as life insurance policy or rape. I suggested that the murder may be motiveless, such as a thrill kill. That is my only point.

 

[otto]

You must be kidding.

Having different recollections about how they got to RS' apartment hours before the murder counts as two different alibis? Then you have rendered Mr. Kercher's remarks meaningless.

I don't know what the 9 alibis were. I'm here to discuss the case in order to gain a better understanding and, as such, am speculating on what those 9 alibis could be.

If you disagree, great. If you have alternate suggestions, I'm listening. If you want to bash my suggestions ... well, that's not very productive.

 

[otto]

No, I meant you are a kind and gracious person.

So is otto, for that matter, but I think it's a dangerous precedent to expect other posters to "guess" at how one is supporting one's argument.

What sort of supporting argument is required in pointing out that the thrill kill is a motiveless murder?

 

[SMK]

A quote from someone that followed the Cooper trial: "The jury were the only people whose opinions mattered in the case." That is the bottom line in trials, yet some seem unwilling to accept the jury decision in the murder trial of Meredith Kercher. We saw the same reaction with the conviction of Scott Peterson. I think there are always some people that are cheerful over a verdict while others are saddened, but our opinions - and the opinions of those that have attached themselves to the case after the trial is over - should not matter.

Yes, this is a very good point, and really is true and important so far as it goes. The different factor here to my thinking is that Knox and Sollecito are on appeal, so "the jury is still out" is indeed true.

 

[otto]

Yes, this is a very good point, and really is true and important so far as it goes. The different factor here to my thinking is that Knox and Sollecito are on appeal, so "the jury is still out" is indeed true.

The Brad Cooper case is on appeal too, but the jury has spoken and they decided that he is guilty ... so ... the jury is not really still out, they have in fact concluded their duties. There is nothing special about the appeal process in the murder trial of Meredith Kercher since it is automatic - that is, it's not like lawyers had to successfully argue for an appeal.

 

[otto]

Classic attacks used against rape victims while attempting to discredit them:

"She dresses inappropriately"
"Her story didn't match up exactly each time she told it"
"She uses her attractiveness/youth to garner sympathy"
"She's a cold-hearted temptress that manipulates men"
"She's disrespectful"
"She didn't cry enough afterward"
"She used drugs/alcohol"
"She's promiscuous"
Use of cherry-picked images/text from social media - taken out of their original context and/or given some exaggerated implications by the commentator.

Any of these sound familiar?


NOTE - this is not an attack against any members here, as these attacks originated in the media and on certain blogs. Repeating them does no discredit to any members, as taken as individual arguments, any misogyny in the originator's intent is not readily apparent...that said, the character assassination that continues to be used against Knox on the net in general makes me feel like I'm watching MSNBC during the 2008 primaries again...

Hopefully this does not overly offend - I've been holding off on posting due to RL stress/fatigue making my tongue a little sharp, but I just couldn't hold this one back. My apologies if this crosses any lines.

How can one assassinate the character of a convicted murderer? Haven't murderers done that all by themselves?

 

[otto]

I don't know who you feared offending, because I think your observation is right on the money.

Since I first encountered this case I have wondered how Mignini & Co. focused on AK as the mastermind of a SEXUAL attack. I realize females have done such things in the past, but I can't believe it is common for females.

Wouldn't it make more sense to expect that AK would feel a natural sympathy toward MK and intervene on her behalf? But except for the internet attempt to portray AK as a sociopath, that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone.

Where is the evidence that AK was oblivious to the special concerns of women and their vulnerability to violence? That certainly isn't how her sister portrays her.

It is indeed very difficult to understand why people that seem to have so much going for them choose to commit murder, yet it happens every day. Husbands, wives, students, children all commit murder for no good reason other than perhaps some twisted belief that they can outsmart investigators. Fortunately, murderers are basically stupid people, so they are eventually removed from society.

 

[otto]

Thank you for the cite, otto. As it points out, U.S. courts are waking up to the unreliability of "low copy" DNA results and beginning to refuse to admit them as evidence. Apparently, it's time Italian courts did the same.

Actually, the article states that the UK determined that LNC DNA is fit and robust, and that NY courts have denied a motion to exclude DNA because it was LNC DNA. In fact, the article states the opposite of what you claim in your comment.

 

[otto]

Where do you get the impression that they changed their stories numerous times? The only time I am aware of is during the interrogations on the evening of November 5. Before that night, RS and AK both said that they had spent the entire evening at RS' apartment.

During his interrogation on the 5th, RS changed his story to say that he couldn't be certain that AK hadn't left after he had gone to sleep. That same evening, AK signed two statements (Dowload available here)

Relevant info from first statement:
Relevent info from second statement:
Both RS and AK both imediately changed their story back to being at RS' apartement all evening. (Link to AK's Nov.6 letter)
Do you have any evidence that they change their stories at any other time, or are you basing your opinion merely on what someone else wrote? You may need to do a little more reseach before you claim that this case has parallels to Casey Anthony.

Edited to add: If you look at the downloaded statements, you will see the originals are writtn in Italian "legalese." AK had been in Italy less that two month at that point and was far from fluent. You might also notice that they both mistranslate her text message to PL. Her Nov. 6 note, which was handwritten in English, has the correct message.

Here's one example: The dinner hour time changed several times, but it was never changed to the correct time of earlier than 8:30 PM.

 

[otto]

Worth repeating.

I swear the pro-guilt people are writing a book on logical fallacies! Now we have false analogies to add to the recent appeals to unqualified authorities.

I swear that those refusing to accept the jury's decision are writing a book on defining the burden of proof as a sum of the parts such the parts may be in conflict with each other.