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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
And I maintain that there was no pressure, merely an attempt by Amanda to obfuscate the truth ... thus the lie about 14 hours.

Not admirable, and not someone you would want befriending your teenager.

Otto, since you believe there was no pressure and apparently that Amanda set out to accuse Patrick all on her own... I'd like to hear how you think the interrogation went, including ILE's misinterpretation of the text which is how Patrick was brought into it, why the interpreter had to resort to making Amanda think she'd been traumatized and no longer remembered going to the cottage that night, why the interrogation didn't end after the first 1:45 statement was taken, why the statement contains nothing more than what ILE presumed happened that night, and why after 4 days of stating that she'd been with Raffaele all night that on this night she decided to change her story and blame someone whom she knew was working at the bar during that time and would therefore have had an alibi.
 
I only brought it up to demonstrate that Knox made fast friends ... carelessly ... they they all had drugs in common.

There is not one piece of evidence that tipped the scales of justice for Knox, it was the totality of circumtantial and forensic evidence. Amanda was a bit loose, but that has nothing to do with the conviction. I suppose this speaks to character ... and her fast friends ... and the fact that she had known Rudy longer than Raffaele in the 2-3 weeks she had been in Perugia ... so it doesn't really work claiming that they met once or that she was any closer to one or another of her drug buddies.

In the only testimony anyone has cited, AK says she met RG once and then "saw him around" a few times. To say she "had known Rudy longer than Raffaele" is technically true but misleading all the same because in English, when we say we've known someone longer, we are implying we know that person better unless we say otherwise. There is NO reason to believe AK knew RG better than RS; in fact, there's no reason to believe AK knew RG except on the most casual basis.
 
I only brought it up to demonstrate that Knox made fast friends ... carelessly ... they they all had drugs in common.

There is not one piece of evidence that tipped the scales of justice for Knox, it was the totality of circumtantial and forensic evidence. Amanda was a bit loose, but that has nothing to do with the conviction. I suppose this speaks to character ... and her fast friends ... and the fact that she had known Rudy longer than Raffaele in the 2-3 weeks she had been in Perugia ... so it doesn't really work claiming that they met once or that she was any closer to one or another of her drug buddies.

Oh, please. You yourself have posted about how AK and RS seemed joined at the hip almost from the moment they met. Obviously, she was much closer to RS than to RG.

The problem with the "totality of circumstantial and forensic evidence" is that it has to be composed of actual circumstantial and forensic evidence. But the more we examine the supposed evidence, the less there is of it.

And even some of the most famous yet silliest claims--let's take the cartwheels for example--turn out to be less than they seem. For, as I've said, if AK was so carefree as to be at the police station voluntarily and doing cartwheels, then most likely she wasn't worried about police suspicions because she was innocent of the murder.
 
Laura's friend referred Amanda for the job at Patrick's Club: La Chic. Knox got the job as a server, but in no time Patrick found that she spent more time flirting with the customers than doing the job. He spoke with her, but it continued to be a problem. Meredith came in one night when Knox was there and asked about a drink. Patrick didn't know about the drink, so Meredith started mixing drinks ... mojitos or something ... and that night Meredith was offered a job, and Knox as dismissed with the option of handing out flyers on the street. Why did Knox accuse Patrick? Knox could have been upset about losing her job. She has done some odd things (I hope this is understood by now) and it is possible that she was angry with Meredith because of this change in job status. From there, anything is possible. Knox is known to be impulsive and not consider the long term possibilities, she by no means had enough money to complete her year long studies in Italy, and she doesn't seem to be embarrassed by anything. Why did she accuse Patrick ... most likely he was the only person she knew in Italy besides her professors and the out of town housemates ... who were probably all very thankful that they didn't text Knox and she left them sitting in jail for two weeks too.

This is what I meant about Occam's Razor. The more likely answer is exactly as AK testified: ILE misunderstood the meaning of AK's "see ya later" text and asked who she was texting. She told them PL and ILE assumed there had been a rendezvous. Things snowballed from there.

But I can't help smiling that after dozens of posts about how AK made friends too easily, you are now claiming she didn't know anyone in Perugia.
 
People are not that complicated. If they are eagerly waiting in the streets to hear the verdict, and a cheering roar consumes the town when the verdict is read, then I'm ready to conclude that the general population agrees with the verdict. If, in a democratic society, the majority agree, then that is how it is.

This point was raised in relation to whether the prosecutor should be considered a fool ... is the oj prosecutor considered a fool ... and is there any reason to believe that the verdict was not unanimous into the streets? And what does it have to do with a sensational dream team trial paid for and delivered in the United States ... different legal system.

It wasn't my analogy, but the point was that cheers in the streets are no guarantee that a verdict is correct.

Knox claimed that she was afraid of the man from the Congo, that he was obsessed with Meredith, that she let him into her cottage, and that he assaulted and murdered her roommate. That's pretty crazy since she said this after 2 hours, one of which was without an interpreter.

I don't know that she said all that after 2 hours. How do you know it?
 
I do believe her anger towards Patrick has a lot more to do with her accusing him of this crime than pressure from the police.
If she was so angry that she would implicate him in this crime and watch him get arrested I'm sure she was equally angry at Meredith.
I'm still completely on the fence.
Where can I read the trial transcripts?

AK must be very slow to anger then. She had several days to mention Lumumba to police, but did not.

Which begs the question of how she got so angry so fast as to organize an impromptu conspiracy to rape and murder MK?

As Malkmus has shown, AK's conflicts with MK over work, if any, were extremely minor. There's just no there there. AK did not kill MK over who got to mix drinks and she didn't accuse PL because he had interfered with AK's brilliant career as a bar hostess.
 
That is the question ... there was a growing falling out between Knox and Meredith where Knox phoned Meredith several times on Halloween evening and Knox was never invited to join Meredith with friends at a couple of parties. Amanda and Raffalle did nothing on Halloween night when there were parties all over town. There is reason to believe that Knox was upset with Meredith, stemming from losing her job, aggravated by being shut out, and looking for some payback. Knox was, after all, able to attract any man and could do as she pleased (even in Berlin) ... according to Knox.

Knox trial testimony can be found here: http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=165

The Judge's report, explaning the verdict, is 427 pages and can be found here: http://www.westseattleherald.com/si...ttachments/MasseiReportEnglishTranslation.pdf

and is linked here: http://www.westseattleherald.com/2010/08/10/news/amanda-knox-motivation-document-first-english-tra

There are additional translated documents that preceed the verdict ... available as well.

This is typical of the problem with the "abundance of ... evidence": girls who can't keep their hands off their new boyfriends do not go around killing girlfriends who aren't available on Halloween.
 
O/T lifetime channel 9PM EST the movie about Amanda Knox in Italy/trial etc.
 
Diving down into the gutter is what happens in order to try and make a murder case more than it is, weaving a salacious story around the defendants (even if the details are actually not salacious at all and even if some of the defendants weren't involved at all).

It says much more about the person hellbent on trying anything to reinforce a position when the facts available don't support it, than it does about anyone involved or thought to be involved in the crime. You are, at this point, looking into the vast abyss of the imaginer's mind, filled with tales of fiction.

At this point, reading the fevered caricature portrayals, one will come away knowing very little about those involved, and even less will be based on facts. I suspect that's the real intent. Why go with the truth when the truth is mundane and the evidence is not a slam-dunk?

Better to spread wild, unsubstantiated gossip and attack the imagined personalities when the evidential facts are weak.
 
O/T lifetime channel 9PM EST the movie about Amanda Knox in Italy/trial etc.

Good Morning,

Thanks for the reminder !

Will there be a "thread" for us to discuss the movie that will be aired tonight ?

Thanks.

Hope
 
The Knox PR machine is going to have a lot of work to do after movie night ... should be interesting. I wonder how many times Edda will have to say "oh that's just Amanda being Amanda".
 
How ironic Ms Subterfuge herself has defenders who claim others are the ones dramatizing and complicating matters.

If Ms Knox had not called attention to herself with her drama and lies the world wouldn’t have to vigorously refuse the particularly nasty toned brand of Kool-Aid offered up by her PR spin team.

On topic, imo, I don’t think she was angry in the traditional sense at Meredith, I think vengeful.


All IMO
 
Came across this article from 2007

"Then there is the other, secret side of this most enigmatic of accused murderers – the Amanda Knox who, ever since she was an impressionable teenager, has felt driven to aggressively compete with other women, most notably her own mother, for the attention of men."
...
Long before meeting Meredith, Amanda had begun to show a distrust of other women, which would manifest itself as she grew older in her inability to form close female friendships, outbursts of jealousy and increasingly rebellious and sexually aggressive behaviour.
...
She was beginning to host wild drinking parties and to take considerable risks in finding the men she hoped would help her emerge from her mother's shadow. By the time she arrived in Perugia three months ago, she had begun to brag to other girls that she could pick up just about any man she fancied. They included an Italian called Frederico with whom she had sex on a train. Italian authorities believe that, on that fatal night a week ago, Meredith may have become the latest and most terrible victim of her resentment of other attractive women.
...
Another family acquaintance said, however, that after Edda landed her new young husband – whose name she took, styling herself Edda Mellas – her older daughter began to subtly change.

'Amanda was prettier than Edda,' the friend said. 'But her mother had married this eligible guy and Amanda started to emphasise her own sexuality. Of course, this would have happened anyway at her age, but with Amanda I think it eventually became an obsession.'
...
After arriving in Perugia, Amanda seemed to be going out of her way to taunt and annoy other women. A fellow student at the Italian university said: 'When she introduced herself to the class she just went up to one random guy and didn't go up to anyone else. She talked a lot and laughed at her own jokes.'
...
Among them was student Daniel de Luna, 21, from Rome, who had a onenight stand with Amanda last month after meeting her on a weekend in Perugia. He told The Mail on Sunday: 'Yes, I know Amanda, I met her a couple of times but I'm not saying anything to you.'

But his friend Stefano Bonassi, who lives in the flat below the murder scene, told police in a statement that de Luna had 'a sexual rapport with Amanda'. Amanda was also dating one of the two men accused in the case, Raffaelle Sollecito, 24."

...



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492893/Foxy-Knoxy-girl-compete-mother-men.html
 
From Edda's court transcript:

First she claims that Amanda did not say that she accused Patrick, then later says the opposite.

"Did you speak about Patrick then?

Yes.

Did she tell you she accused him?

No.
She said she was very upset that Patrick was dragged into this horrible situation. She felt terrible.

Who dragged him into it?

She said that when she was interrogated all night long and told that she was going to jail for the rest of her life, she said she was lying, and they screamed at her and hit her. They told her that unless she came up with a possibility of someone she would go to jail for the rest of her life. They were also always putting a phone in her face saying we know you were meeting Patrick, we know. They told her she had to come up with some possibilities. Well, she said, maybe I imagine that Patrick was there. She said, I know that’s not true but maybe it could have happened."


When Edda was asked if she told anyone about Amanda admitting to falsely accusing an innocent man:

Did you ask your daughter to say Patrick had nothing to do that after your Nov 10 conversation?

No, I know she was speaking to her lawyers and listening to their counsel and those were the people she was speaking to.

Did you go to the police to say that Amanda said Patrick was innocent.

No, I do not speak Italian.

Did you go to the prosecutor?

No.

Did you tell anyone?

No.

Not even her lawyers?

I did not speak too often at that time, in the very beginning, to Amanda’s lawyers.

And after did you tell them?

Well they knew, they knew from Amanda.


http://www.kirotv.com/news/19800356/detail.html
 
Good Morning,

Thanks for the reminder !

Will there be a "thread" for us to discuss the movie that will be aired tonight ?

Thanks.

Hope

You may discuss it right here! It might be a nice change of pace while we wait for the results of the appeal :)

Salem
 
Regarding Amanda's close relationship with Raffaele:

CDV: And why did you want to introduce your mother to Raffaele? Did it seem like your relationship was particularly important? He was someone you wanted to introduce?

AK: Yes. I right away felt very intimate with Raffaele. I confided in him about everything. I really felt -- boom! Like that. He was very special.



Amanda Knox phoned her mother before the door was broken, and then has no explanation for calling before anything was known ... except "I don't remember":

MC: -- during the conversation you had with her in prison. Even your mother was amazed that you called her at midday, which was three or four o'clock at night, to tell her that nothing had happened.

AK: I didn't know what had happened. I just called my mother to say that we had been sent out of the house, and that I had heard something --

MC: But at midday nothing had happened yet in the sense that the door had not been broken down yet.

AK: Hm. Okay. I don't remember that phone call. I remember that I called her to tell her what we had heard about a foot. Maybe I did call before, but I don't remember it.

MC: But if you called her before, why did you do it?

AK: I don't remember, but if I did it, I would have called to--

MC: You did do it.

AK: Okay, fine. But I don't remember. I don't remember that phone call.



Even Edda asked Amanda why she phoned her before anything had happened:

MC: It's strange. You don't remember the phone call, but do you remember the conversation with your mother in prison?

AK: I had so many. But yes.

MC: This conversation must have been the one of the 10th of November. Do you remember when your mother said "But at 12, nothing had happened yet."

AK: I don't remember that.



Then, her memory suddenly improves:

FM: Do you remember how surprised your mother was that you didn't even remember about this phone call?

AK: I remember her being a bit surprised that I didn't remember very well. But in the end I explained to her that there was just so much movement going on right then, so much confusion, and the whole morning was so emotional, and so all the specific things got mixed up.
 
SEATTLE - A made for TV movie about Amanda Knox's murder trial airs Monday night on the Lifetime channel, but not without controversy.
...
Although Lifetime is not scrapping this film, it did cut the graphic murder scene out of the final version - the scene depicting Amanda stabbing her roommate, Meredith Kercher.
...
snipped from:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41703449

-----

I am wondering out loud :

If the scene depicting Amanda stabbing Meredith is cut out of the movie, then I guess the "murderer" of Meredith Kercher will be left up to the imagination of the viewers ? Or ... will they show someone else doing the stabbing ?

I understand they are leaving out the "graphic murder scene" ... but not showing us the murderer ?

I guess I may have to wait for the movie.

Hope
 
Otto, since you believe there was no pressure and apparently that Amanda set out to accuse Patrick all on her own... I'd like to hear how you think the interrogation went, including ILE's misinterpretation of the text which is how Patrick was brought into it, why the interpreter had to resort to making Amanda think she'd been traumatized and no longer remembered going to the cottage that night, why the interrogation didn't end after the first 1:45 statement was taken, why the statement contains nothing more than what ILE presumed happened that night, and why after 4 days of stating that she'd been with Raffaele all night that on this night she decided to change her story and blame someone whom she knew was working at the bar during that time and would therefore have had an alibi.

I understand that police were trying to get clarification on a text that Amanda sent to Patrick. For some reason, Amanda was not able to tell the truth, and instead accused Patrick of murdering Meredith. I have no idea why Amanda's alibi fell apart, but since Raffaele and Amanda were being questioned separately, it's possible that Raffaele stated that he could not be sure that he was with Amanda on the the night of the murder. He still stands behind that statement. Since Knox no longer had an alibi, police could have been looking for the truth. It's unfortunate that Amanda continued to lie.

Is it reasonable to assume that if Amanda had received a text from someone else that that person would have been accused of murder, or was there some reason Knox targeted Patrick?
 
SEATTLE - A made for TV movie about Amanda Knox's murder trial airs Monday night on the Lifetime channel, but not without controversy.
...
Although Lifetime is not scrapping this film, it did cut the graphic murder scene out of the final version - the scene depicting Amanda stabbing her roommate, Meredith Kercher.
...
snipped from:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41703449

-----

I am wondering out loud :

If the scene depicting Amanda stabbing Meredith is cut out of the movie, then I guess the "murderer" of Meredith Kercher will be left up to the imagination of the viewers ? Or ... will they show someone else doing the stabbing ?

I understand they are leaving out the "graphic murder scene" ... but not showing us the murderer ?

I guess I may have to wait for the movie.

Hope

I read somewhere that Rudy is depicted with Meredith after she is fatally attacked.
 
Diving down into the gutter is what happens in order to try and make a murder case more than it is, weaving a salacious story around the defendants (even if the details are actually not salacious at all and even if some of the defendants weren't involved at all).

It says much more about the person hellbent on trying anything to reinforce a position when the facts available don't support it, than it does about anyone involved or thought to be involved in the crime. You are, at this point, looking into the vast abyss of the imaginer's mind, filled with tales of fiction.

At this point, reading the fevered caricature portrayals, one will come away knowing very little about those involved, and even less will be based on facts. I suspect that's the real intent. Why go with the truth when the truth is mundane and the evidence is not a slam-dunk?

Better to spread wild, unsubstantiated gossip and attack the imagined personalities when the evidential facts are weak.

Unfortunately, you describe to a T how the prosecutor chose to try this case in the media.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
153
Guests online
4,009
Total visitors
4,162

Forum statistics

Threads
603,702
Messages
18,161,255
Members
231,833
Latest member
Pbarch
Back
Top