Meredith Kercher murdered - Amanda Knox convicted, now appeals #7

[Nova]

Raffaele and Amanda claimed they were doing drugs and drinking alcohol on the night of the murder, but there seems to be some effort to make this fact disappear. Either they were twisted out of shape, or they were not. If they were twisted out of shape, it could account for the alleged memory loss, weak or dishonest answers given to police and ever changing alibis. If they were not, the it really leaves me wondering why Knox lied to police and implicated an innocent man after 2 hours of questioning, alleging "physical and mental abuse for 14 hours. No food, water, no official interpreter." Someone with clear, honest memories doesn't get their facts completely turned around in two hours, especially when there's a language barrier for the first hour.

http://www.king5.com/news/investigators/60680497.html

You've now turned things around so that the language barrier was some sort of comfort to AK. If anything, the pressure of being interrogated in a language one only partly understands ought to increase the pressure and the likelihood that one might agree to anything to end the pressure.

I doubt lack of food or water had anything to do with it, but if you look at her statements, their lack of detail, their conforming to the investigator's theory, etc., it's quite easy to see how AK arrived at the statements she gave.

Whether she and RS consumed sufficient alcohol and cannabis to produce memory lapses on the night of the murder, I don't know. (FWIW my own experience with that combination invariably produced a deep sleep, not a desire to run around town with a foot-long steak knife, raping and murdering co-eds.) But a lot of AK's references to her memories being "unreal" or "vague" stem from her attempts to mitigate her own misstatements.

 

[Nova]

I agree that the only thing that would explain the way Amanda and Rafael acted would be that they really did not remember.
Is there any knowledge or rumors that they knew Rudy before this happened or was he a complete stranger to them?

As per posters here, AK had met Guede a couple of times at parties with the boys who lived downstairs. There is no evidence that RS had met him.

This is one of the reasons the prosecution's theory (I should say "theories") make no sense: they don't explain how two young men met and entered into a conspiracy to commit rape and murder, all in less than 2 hours.

 

[otto]

So Italians are more like whom, Martians?

In my experience (two trials that went to deliberation plus watching numerous interviews with jurors on TV), most Americans do take jury duty seriously. (At least those that show up for it do.) That doesn't mean they stop being human beings. That doesn't mean they magically become immune to their own prejudices and other human inclinations.

The legal system actually recognizes that there are limits to the information humans can set aside in their minds and, for that very reason, has rules to limit what can be put before a jury.

I'm not saying the Perugia trials erred in this regard. But I don't think any judge or attorney would argue that the rules of evidence are perfect, nor that they always compensate for pre-trial publicity, community pressure or all sorts of other prejudices that human beings hold.

Italy has a completely different history, culture, justice system, political system, education system and people than the United States. That does not make them Martians, it makes them people that live in another country. And it's great to hear that people in the United States take jury duty seriously. Let's give people in Italy some credit and assume that they too take jury duty seriously ... that they do not base verdicts on newspaper articles. Now if we can also stop assuming that courts in Italy should abide by US laws, it will be easier to interpret the trial and decisions in Italy.

 

[otto]

I agree that the only thing that would explain the way Amanda and Rafael acted would be that they really did not remember.
Is there any knowledge or rumors that they knew Rudy before this happened or was he a complete stranger to them?

Amanda had met Rudy a few times in the 3 or 4 weeks that she had been in Perugia. He had been at the club where she worked, and he played basketball with the guys that lived in the flat below the cottage. She had smoked pot with him while they were both partying with the guys downstairs. We know that Amanda made friends fast, so Rudy was one of the friends that she had made while living in Perugia ... knew him to see him, talk to him and party with him.

 

[otto]

You've now turned things around so that the language barrier was some sort of comfort to AK. If anything, the pressure of being interrogated in a language one only partly understands ought to increase the pressure and the likelihood that one might agree to anything to end the pressure.

I doubt lack of food or water had anything to do with it, but if you look at her statements, their lack of detail, their conforming to the investigator's theory, etc., it's quite easy to see how AK arrived at the statements she gave.

Whether she and RS consumed sufficient alcohol and cannabis to produce memory lapses on the night of the murder, I don't know. (FWIW my own experience with that combination invariably produced a deep sleep, not a desire to run around town with a foot-long steak knife, raping and murdering co-eds.) But a lot of AK's references to her memories being "unreal" or "vague" stem from her attempts to mitigate her own misstatements.

It's pretty hard to confess to anything when, per her parents, she didn't speak the language. We know that the interpreter didn't arrive until 12:30. That leaves one hour where she had an interpreter, and was able to communicate with police. Even if she could speak the language, two hours seems like an awfully short time for an honest, forthright, upstanding person to be completely confused and turned around regarding what happened on the night of the murder.

I see a liar who has been separated from her partner in crime being suddenly unsure of what story to give police. She wasn't prepared to tell the truth, but wasn't clever enough to spin a coherent lie ... thus we have the ever changing story, absence of alibi, false accusations, and then another big story about being tortured or deprived of the necessities of life and physically/verbally abused for 14 hours.

Amanda describes the events surrounding the murder as "flashbacks", which is an interesting term for a non-drug user.

 

[Nova]

Italy has a completely different history, culture, justice system, political system, education system and people than the United States. That does not make them Martians, it makes them people that live in another country. And it's great to hear that people in the United States take jury duty seriously. Let's give people in Italy some credit and assume that they too take jury duty seriously ... that they do not base verdicts on newspaper articles. Now if we can also stop assuming that courts in Italy should abide by US laws, it will be easier to interpret the trial and decisions in Italy.

Gee, otto, why do you suppose Great Britain bans almost all pre-trial publicity? Why are jurors ever sequestered? Why are gag orders ever imposed on trial principals?

The answer is that all or nearly all countries recognize that it is difficult-to-impossible for jurors to confine their focus to trial evidence alone. Even in Italy, there are rules of evidence, a recognition that jurors can be unfairly swayed and some care must be taken with the info that is put before them.

As I said, I've had good experiences on juries; but the experiences were good because whenever anybody mentioned something that was not part of the formal trial evidence, there was always someone else to gently remind everyone that we couldn't consider anything but the evidence presented (and our own common sense). In discussions here at WS, other posters have described very different experiences with juries where one or more people essentially bullied the others or insisted their prejudices were facts.

It happens.

Let's indeed give people in Italy some credit and assume they are human beings. They aren't supermen just because they returned the verdict you like.

As for demanding Italy conform to U.S. law, I don't know who has done that. Anyone is entitled, however, to believe in his own standards of justice (even while understanding that Italy isn't necessarily going to conform to his standards). And anyone is entitled to decide that Italy (or any other country) falls short of true fairness, just as most of us are entitled to believe that public beheadings in Saudi Arabia are barbaric.

 

[Nova]

Amanda had met Rudy a few times in the 3 or 4 weeks that she had been in Perugia. He had been at the club where she worked, and he played basketball with the guys that lived in the flat below the cottage. She had smoked pot with him while they were both partying with the guys downstairs. We know that Amanda made friends fast, so Rudy was one of the friends that she had made while living in Perugia ... knew him to see him, talk to him and party with him.

Thank you for the details. Unfortunately, you couldn't resist making AK and RG "fast friends," so one feels compelled to point out that a guy you know "from around" isn't necessarily someone you trust in a rape and murder conspiracy.

 

[otto]

As per posters here, AK had met Guede a couple of times at parties with the boys who lived downstairs. There is no evidence that RS had met him.

This is one of the reasons the prosecution's theory (I should say "theories") make no sense: they don't explain how two young men met and entered into a conspiracy to commit rape and murder, all in less than 2 hours.

Rudy was one of the people that Amanda befriended when she arrived in Perugia. She later met Raffaele and quickly befriended him too. She also befriended one of the guys that lived in the downstairs flat. It's interesting to note that one thing all of Amanda's new friends had in common was illegal drug use. For Amanda to get together with two guys that she had come to know while living in Perugia is nothing strange.

The two men met through Amanda. They most likely consumed drugs together ... since they all like drugs. No one suggested that they entered a conspiracy, but instead there is the possibility that Amanda decided to play a prank on Meredith (she was known to pull sick pranks on people when she lived in Seattle) and got Rudy and Raffaele on board. After letting Rudy and Raffaele in through the front door, it's possible they smoked some more, or drank some more, and then decided to have some fun with Meredith. Meredith was tired; having been out late celebrating Halloween the previous evening, and had borrowed a textbook to prepare for an exam. She had to return the textbook the following day. Meredith was probably in no mood for Amanda bringing men to the cottage. According to Rudy, Meredith, who had rent money in her room but had not yet given it to Filomina, confronted Amanda about missing money. We don't know if this is true. Something went wrong, whether it was a prank, or Meredith confronted Amanda (men visiting, noise, missing money???) which ultimately led to Meredith's assault and murder. The three then took Meredith's two cell phones and ran away. It looks as though Rudy ran home, changed and then went clubbing, while Amanda and Raffaele probably smooched a bit, and then decided to return to the cottage and clean up the scene. It looks as though they took the lamp from Amanda's room and put it on the floor to look for something. It was also discussed, long ago, that the blood pooling in Meredith was on her shoulder, yet she was found in a prone position covered with a duvet - suggesting that she was moved after she died. At some point, Amanda and Raffaele took the keys, locked the bedroom door, staged a break-in but ransacked the room before breaking the window, cleaned up and left.

 

[otto]

Gee, otto, why do you suppose Great Britain bans almost all pre-trial publicity? Why are jurors ever sequestered? Why are gag orders ever imposed on trial principals?

The answer is that all or nearly all countries recognize that it is difficult-to-impossible for jurors to confine their focus to trial evidence alone. Even in Italy, there are rules of evidence, a recognition that jurors can be unfairly swayed and some care must be taken with the info that is put before them.

As I said, I've had good experiences on juries; but the experiences were good because whenever anybody mentioned something that was not part of the formal trial evidence, there was always someone else to gently remind everyone that we couldn't consider anything but the evidence presented (and our own common sense). In discussions here at WS, other posters have described very different experiences with juries where one or more people essentially bullied the others or insisted their prejudices were facts.

It happens.

Let's indeed give people in Italy some credit and assume they are human beings. They aren't supermen just because they returned the verdict you like.

As for demanding Italy conform to U.S. law, I don't know who has done that. Anyone is entitled, however, to believe in his own standards of justice (even while understanding that Italy isn't necessarily going to conform to his standards). And anyone is entitled to decide that Italy (or any other country) falls short of true fairness, just as most of us are entitled to believe that public beheadings in Saudi Arabia are barbaric.

I don't really understand what the problem is regarding the jury. If you could please provide some factual information supporting the allegation that the jury acted improperly, then there's something to discuss. Without anything to support the allegation, it appears to be an attempt to discredit the jury for no reason other than some dissatisfaction with the verdict.

 

[otto]

Thank you for the details. Unfortunately, you couldn't resist making AK and RG "fast friends," so one feels compelled to point out that a guy you know "from around" isn't necessarily someone you trust in a rape and murder conspiracy.

Amanda and Raffaele became fast friends ... and we know that Amanda became fast friends with others. She and Rudy had spent time socially prior to the murder; socializing in a private home and enjoying some illegal drugs. For someone from Seattle, where drug use is looked upon far more seriously, Amanda would have viewed her shared illegal activities as a type of bonding experience ... not as something she would do with someone she couldn't trust.

 

[Nova]

It's pretty hard to confess to anything when, per her parents, she didn't speak the language. We know that the interpreter didn't arrive until 12:30. That leaves one hour where she had an interpreter, and was able to communicate with police. Even if she could speak the language, two hours seems like an awfully short time for an honest, forthright, upstanding person to be completely confused and turned around regarding what happened on the night of the murder.

I see a liar who has been separated from her partner in crime being suddenly unsure of what story to give police. She wasn't prepared to tell the truth, but wasn't clever enough to spin a coherent lie ... thus we have the ever changing story, absence of alibi, false accusations, and then another big story about being tortured or deprived of the necessities of life and physically/verbally abused for 14 hours.

Amanda describes the events surrounding the murder as "flashbacks", which is an interesting term for a non-drug user.

You are taking a fact (AK was less than fluent in Italian) and converting it to an extreme ("she didn't speak the language"). The truth is AK spent what was almost certainly a very difficult hour trying to deal with interrogators while only understanding some (not "none") of what they said.

That hour was following by another during which she didn't have a formal, professional interpreter, but was interrogated by someone who spoke English (we don't know how well) in addition to continued interrogation in Italian, some of which, at least, was reportedly translated for her.

All of this took place in the middle of the night and must have come as a great surprise to AK, since just before the questioning began, she was so unsuspecting as to hang out voluntarily in the police station and, according to you, perform joyful acrobatics. (For some reason you have yet to explain, this newly minted murderess had no fear of the authorities.)

People have broken and made false statements under far less stressful circumstances.

So AK told the police what they wanted to hear. And then almost immediately began trying to take it back without admitting to perjury.

And BTW, AK and RS do have alibis: they watched a movie, made love and slept through the night. That RS admitted he couldn't know what AK did while he was asleep is a common sense admission. To my knowledge, AK has never said RS left the apartment. The statement to that effect attributed to her is clearly facetious and sardonic.

 

[Nova]

Rudy was one of the people that Amanda befriended when she arrived in Perugia. She later met Raffaele and quickly befriended him too. She also befriended one of the guys that lived in the downstairs flat. It's interesting to note that one thing all of Amanda's new friends had in common was illegal drug use. For Amanda to get together with two guys that she had come to know while living in Perugia is nothing strange.

The two men met through Amanda. They most likely consumed drugs together ... since they all like drugs. No one suggested that they entered a conspiracy, but instead there is the possibility that Amanda decided to play a prank on Meredith (she was known to pull sick pranks on people when she lived in Seattle) and got Rudy and Raffaele on board. After letting Rudy and Raffaele in through the front door, it's possible they smoked some more, or drank some more, and then decided to have some fun with Meredith. Meredith was tired; having been out late celebrating Halloween the previous evening, and had borrowed a textbook to prepare for an exam. She had to return the textbook the following day. Meredith was probably in no mood for Amanda bringing men to the cottage. According to Rudy, Meredith, who had rent money in her room but had not yet given it to Filomina, confronted Amanda about missing money. We don't know if this is true. Something went wrong, whether it was a prank, or Meredith confronted Amanda (men visiting, noise, missing money???) which ultimately led to Meredith's assault and murder. The three then took Meredith's two cell phones and ran away. It looks as though Rudy ran home, changed and then went clubbing, while Amanda and Raffaele probably smooched a bit, and then decided to return to the cottage and clean up the scene. It looks as though they took the lamp from Amanda's room and put it on the floor to look for something. It was also discussed, long ago, that the blood pooling in Meredith was on her shoulder, yet she was found in a prone position covered with a duvet - suggesting that she was moved after she died. At some point, Amanda and Raffaele took the keys, locked the bedroom door, staged a break-in but ransacked the room before breaking the window, cleaned up and left.

AK and RS became close very quickly. There is no evidence AK was friends with RG to a similar extent.

The "prank" was invented by the prosecutor out of whole cloth. There is no evidence for it whatsoever. Not even the forensic evidence supports that fiction.

Yet, IIRC, the prosecutor was allowed to show the jury a video of the three attackers killing MK. That alone is enough to question the validity of the verdicts. I don't care whether it is allowed under Italian law (apparently it is); it's wrong.

 

[Nova]

Amanda and Raffaele became fast friends ... and we know that Amanda became fast friends with others. She and Rudy had spent time socially prior to the murder; socializing in a private home and enjoying some illegal drugs. For someone from Seattle, where drug use is looked upon far more seriously, Amanda would have viewed her shared illegal activities as a type of bonding experience ... not as something she would do with someone she couldn't trust.

Drug use is pretty common among college students everywhere in the U.S., Seattle included. It may carry stiffer penalties because we Americans have been conducting an insane and losing "War on Drugs" for 50 years, but kids are pretty casual about it.

Your conclusion as to what AK would consider a "bonding experience" is sheer, unfounded speculation.

 

[Nova]

I don't really understand what the problem is regarding the jury. If you could please provide some factual information supporting the allegation that the jury acted improperly, then there's something to discuss. Without anything to support the allegation, it appears to be an attempt to discredit the jury for no reason other than some dissatisfaction with the verdict.

You were the one who argued the jury was unassailable and immune to outside influences. I merely said they were human beings.

 

[otto]

You are taking a fact (AK was less than fluent in Italian) and converting it to an extreme ("she didn't speak the language"). The truth is AK spent what was almost certainly a very difficult hour trying to deal with interrogators while only understanding some (not "none") of what they said.

That hour was following by another during which she didn't have a formal, professional interpreter, but was interrogated by someone who spoke English (we don't know how well) in addition to continued interrogation in Italian, some of which, at least, was reportedly translated for her.

All of this took place in the middle of the night and must have come as a great surprise to AK, since just before the questioning began, she was so unsuspecting as to hang out voluntarily in the police station and, according to you, perform joyful acrobatics. (For some reason you have yet to explain, this newly minted murderess had no fear of the authorities.)

People have broken and made false statements under far less stressful circumstances.

So AK told the police what they wanted to hear. And then almost immediately began trying to take it back without admitting to perjury.

And BTW, AK and RS do have alibis: they watched a movie, made love and slept through the night. That RS admitted he couldn't know what AK did while he was asleep is a common sense admission. To my knowledge, AK has never said RS left the apartment. The statement to that effect attributed to her is clearly facetious and sardonic.

Why all the fuss about an interpreter if Amanda spoke Italian? Did she, or did she not, need an interpreter? If she needed an interpreter, then she was not able to provide information prior to having an interpreter. Since she did need an interpreter and stated in court that she had an interpreter, I think we have to believe that she had an interpreter. Since the interpreter was able to understand Amanda's accusations against Patrick, and Amanda reiterated the exact same accusations without any police presence or coercion, we can assume the interpretation was 100% correct.

Amanda signed her statement, written in English, at 1:45 in the morning; two hours after the questioning began. At 11 o'clock on Nov 5 she was talking to Filomina about whether they could still be roommates, then we have the gymnastics, and then the questioning.

Amanda made no effort to retract her statements. At 1:45 she accused Patrick, at 5:45 she accused Patrick, hours later she asked for pen and paper and again accused Patrick (this statement was admissible in court), and then two weeks later, after Patrick was released from jail, she then admitted that she knew he was innocent. Funny thing is that she couldn't know he was innocent unless she was there.

Regarding Alibis: Raffaele has stood by his claim that he does not know if Amanda was with him through the entire night, and Amanda has placed herself at the scene of the crime.

 

[otto]

AK and RS became close very quickly. There is no evidence AK was friends with RG to a similar extent.

The "prank" was invented by the prosecutor out of whole cloth. There is no evidence for it whatsoever. Not even the forensic evidence supports that fiction.

Yet, IIRC, the prosecutor was allowed to show the jury a video of the three attackers killing MK. That alone is enough to question the validity of the verdicts. I don't care whether it is allowed under Italian law (apparently it is); it's wrong.

Amanda slept with one of the guys downstairs (she can thank him for that cold sore she was sporting in court) and Raffaele even though she hardly knew them ... so that says to me "fast friends". Maybe she hadn't slept with Rudy, but that doesn't mean that he wasn't one of the first people she met and socialized with after arriving in Perugia. She knew Rudy better than she knew Raffaele in terms of having known him for a longer period of time.

The prank wasn't invented by the prosecutor, that was based on information from someone that knew Knox in Seattle ... a previous victim of her pranks. You can research information that came out in 2007 to get those details - I do not intend to research that to satisfy anyone's curiosity ... take it for what it's worth.

Re-enactments, whether real or virtual, are nothing new. Crime re-enactments are commonly used all over the world.

 

[otto]

Drug use is pretty common among college students everywhere in the U.S., Seattle included. It may carry stiffer penalties because we Americans have been conducting an insane and losing "War on Drugs" for 50 years, but kids are pretty casual about it.

Your conclusion as to what AK would consider a "bonding experience" is sheer, unfounded speculation.

It is speculation ... speculation that two people committing an illegal activity will form a kind of bond where they will keep the secret.

 

[otto]

You were the one who argued the jury was unassailable and immune to outside influences. I merely said they were human beings.

In context, there have been many comments and complaints on this forum about the jury not having been sequestered. It is worth noting that juries are rarely sequested in the US, but that's beside the point because we're talking about a trial in another country. It was not I that began discussing whether the jury acted improperly. I am merely asking for a factual, evidence based reason to suspect that the jury acted improperly. If there is no reason to suspect that they did something wrong, let's give the benefit of the doubt, assume innocence and take it for what it is: that the jury did not do anything wrong.

 

[otto]

The whole business of having an official interpreter is really quite funny. Knox speaks English, and if we are to believe what has been said about Anna Donnino (English-speaking interpreter) being a police officer, then what is the problem with an officer speaking Knox's native language during questioning? Should that not be allowed ... should police officers not be allowed to speak to witnesses in the witness's native language?

 

[SleuthyGal]

I agree that the only thing that would explain the way Amanda and Rafael acted would be that they really did not remember.
Is there any knowledge or rumors that they knew Rudy before this happened or was he a complete stranger to them?

BBM. We don't know how they acted; we only know what some people claim and what others have imagined. Their interrogations were not recorded (they should have been).

RS never met Rudy before. AK had met Rudy at least once before, as he was a visitor to the guys downstairs and was (supposedly) a drug connection to them. Rudy also met Meredith and apparently was attracted to her (i.e. told someone).