Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox Conviction Overturned #22

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow, how's this for a suspicious story from Kokamani: (after he faced down Amanda and Raffaelle)

I kept driving on being very frightened and thinking that they were quite dangerous, but I came to a crossroads just beyond the cottage where a van had broken down with a man, woman and child aboard. I had to back up and stopped near some rubbish bins to let them maneuver it out of the way. Rudy caught up to me and said, “hey man, I know you. You’re the guy from Agriturismo. Don’t you remember me?” At that point I recognized him as a guy who used to come to Agriturismo where I once worked as a waiter. I used to jokingly call him 'cousin' because my cousin is called Rudy.

I asked Rudy if he knew the other two saying they were crazy and that the young woman had a knife in her hand. He told me that there was a birthday party and that it was for cutting the cake and that, after all, it was none of my business. I was there with him for about 2 or 3 minutes and I thought I heard noises, like wood banging/being hit. Rudy said it was from the party and then asked me if I could loan him my car because he needed to move some furniture, first offering 100, then 200, and finally 250 Euro. I said no because I didn't trust him, though I could use some cash. Instead, I offered to help him move furniture stuff but during the day when it was light. He countered by asking me come back the following evening around 11pm. This extremely sounded odd and I became convinced that Rudy was stalling; trying to keep me there talking with him until all other cars in the area were gone, leaving me there alone there among 3 lunatics.

At that time I saw Raffaele in my rear view wing-mirror running up from the back with another knife, shorter than the one the Amanda had but wider with a pointed tip. I recognized that knife later in the photos in the papers. I took off, but Raffaele followed me almost to the traffic lights in Piazza Grimana, where he finally turned around. He seemed to be wearing something dark and wide at the top. I headed straight to a bar in Elce, but it was closed, and then to a cafe where I found some Albanian friends of mine. I told them I'd seen some crazy Italians with knives but they didn't want to hear about it and told me to drop it. I tried to show them the bad, dark photos I took, but they told me to forget about it because if I called the police it would only create problems for them. I later learned that a girl had been killed in the cottage with the garden where I ran into Rudy, Amanda, and Raffaele. I then saw pictures of Amanda and Raffaele in the paper and recognized them without a shadow of doubt as the knife wielding young man and woman who confronted me in my car. I didn't speak to anyone about this for a long time thereafter out of fear.

NOTE:
Kokomani knows about the broken down car and who specifically was in it. He states he was there. He gives a reason to excuse his car being parked there for no good reason. He confirms he knows Rudy from work, and he has been known to call him "cousin." He gives a reason to be seen talking with Rudy for several minutes. He states that he was in need of money. He states he took photos from that night. He states that he went to a cafe afterwards where he talked to some Albanian friends and said only that he saw some crazy Italians with knives (didn't specify Rudy, who he knew, and didn't state it was a man and a woman). He didn't come forward with this story until much later...

Wow.

EDITED TO ADD: I'm also noting that he is placing Amanda and Raffaelle out of the range of the CCTV camera and threatening him with knives. And that his testimony is coming after the news started showing the CCTV footage, which presumably had his car parked in frame.
 
Wow, how's this for a suspicious story from Kokamani: (after he faced down Amanda and Raffaelle)

I kept driving on being very frightened and thinking that they were quite dangerous, but I came to a crossroads just beyond the cottage where a van had broken down with a man, woman and child aboard. I had to back up and stopped near some rubbish bins to let them maneuver it out of the way. Rudy caught up to me and said, “hey man, I know you. You’re the guy from Agriturismo. Don’t you remember me?” At that point I recognized him as a guy who used to come to Agriturismo where I once worked as a waiter. I used to jokingly call him 'cousin' because my cousin is called Rudy.

I asked Rudy if he knew the other two saying they were crazy and that the young woman had a knife in her hand. He told me that there was a birthday party and that it was for cutting the cake and that, after all, it was none of my business. I was there with him for about 2 or 3 minutes and I thought I heard noises, like wood banging/being hit. Rudy said it was from the party and then asked me if I could loan him my car because he needed to move some furniture, first offering 100, then 200, and finally 250 Euro. I said no because I didn't trust him, though I could use some cash. Instead, I offered to help him move furniture stuff but during the day when it was light. He countered by asking me come back the following evening around 11pm. This extremely sounded odd and I became convinced that Rudy was stalling; trying to keep me there talking with him until all other cars in the area were gone, leaving me there alone there among 3 lunatics.

At that time I saw Raffaele in my rear view wing-mirror running up from the back with another knife, shorter than the one the Amanda had but wider with a pointed tip. I recognized that knife later in the photos in the papers. I took off, but Raffaele followed me almost to the traffic lights in Piazza Grimana, where he finally turned around. He seemed to be wearing something dark and wide at the top. I headed straight to a bar in Elce, but it was closed, and then to a cafe where I found some Albanian friends of mine. I told them I'd seen some crazy Italians with knives but they didn't want to hear about it and told me to drop it. I tried to show them the bad, dark photos I took, but they told me to forget about it because if I called the police it would only create problems for them. I later learned that a girl had been killed in the cottage with the garden where I ran into Rudy, Amanda, and Raffaele. I then saw pictures of Amanda and Raffaele in the paper and recognized them without a shadow of doubt as the knife wielding young man and woman who confronted me in my car. I didn't speak to anyone about this for a long time thereafter out of fear.

NOTE:
Kokomani knows about the broken down car and who specifically was in it. He states he was there. He gives a reason to excuse his car being parked there for no good reason. He confirms he knows Rudy from work, and he has been known to call him "cousin." He gives a reason to be seen talking with Rudy for several minutes. He states that he was in need of money. He states he took photos from that night. He states that he went to a cafe afterwards where he talked to some Albanian friends and said only that he saw some crazy Italians with knives (didn't specify Rudy, who he knew, and didn't state it was a man and a woman). He didn't come forward with this story until much later...

Wow.

EDITED TO ADD: I'm also noting that he is placing Amanda and Raffaelle out of the range of the CCTV camera and threatening him with knives. And that his testimony is coming after the news started showing the CCTV footage, which presumably had his car parked in frame.

Wow is right. I think we're going to see more about this guy...
 
I and others have posted links to these studies in response to your posts on numerous occasions, apparently in futility. As you recently stated, you don't click on links, so I don't see any point in doing so any longer. However, I'm sick enough to not feel like paraphrasing for you, especially given the tone of your response, so someone else will have to do so.

Obviously guilty people that don't lawyer up and are not convicted are not included in any study, so obviously any study cannot be complete.
 
I would really love to know just how in the hell that Miss Amanda Knox's "confession" was ever even viewed as a confession?!?! IMO it IS NOTHING EVEN REMOTELY RESEMBLING WHAT WE ARE ALL TOO FAMILIAR WITH IN A "FALSE CONFESSION".. Amanda's "confession" is not her confessing to murdering or being involved in Meredith's murder.. Im at a total loss of this even being referred to as a "confession".. Much less held up In a court of law.. And certainly how in the hell it held up in a slander case against Amanda on behalf of Patrik!?!? Anyone?!?
"Confession" below:
This is very strange, I know, but really what happened is as confusing to me as it is to everyone else. I have been told there is hard evidence saying that I was at the place of the murder of my friend when it happened. This, I want to confirm, is something that to me, if asked a few days ago, would be impossible.

I know that Raffaele has placed evidence against me, saying that I was not with him on the night of Meredith's murder, but let me tell you this. In my mind there are things I remember and things that are confused. My account of this story goes as follows, despite the evidence stacked against me:

On Thursday November 1 I saw Meredith the last time at my house when she left around 3 or 4 in the afternoon. Raffaele was with me at the time. We, Raffaele and I, stayed at my house for a little while longer and around 5 in the evening we left to watch the movie Amelie at his house. After the movie I received a message from Patrik [sic], for whom I work at the pub "Le Chic". He told me in this message that it wasn't necessary for me to come into work for the evening because there was no one at my work.

Now I remember to have also replied with the message: "See you later. Have a good evening!" and this for me does not mean that I wanted to meet him immediately. In particular because I said: "Good evening!" What happened after I know does not match up with what Raffaele was saying, but this is what I remember. I told Raffaele that I didn't have to work and that I could remain at home for the evening. After that I believe we relaxed in his room together, perhaps I checked my email. Perhaps I read or studied or perhaps I made love to Raffaele. In fact, I think I did make love with him.

However, I admit that this period of time is rather strange because I am not quite sure. I smoked marijuana with him and I might even have fallen asleep. These things I am not sure about and I know they are important to the case and to help myself, but in reality, I don't think I did much. One thing I do remember is that I took a shower with Raffaele and this might explain how we passed the time. In truth, I do not remember exactly what day it was, but I do remember that we had a shower and we washed ourselves for a long time. He cleaned my ears, he dried and combed my hair.

One of the things I am sure that definitely happened the night on which Meredith was murdered was that Raffaele and I ate fairly late, I think around 11 in the evening, although I can't be sure because I didn't look at the clock. After dinner I noticed there was blood on Raffaele's hand, but I was under the impression that it was blood from the fish. After we ate Raffaele washed the dishes but the pipes under his sink broke and water flooded the floor. But because he didn't have a mop I said we could clean it up tomorrow because we (Meredith, Laura, Filomena and I) have a mop at home. I remember it was quite late because we were both very tired (though I can't say the time).

The next thing I remember was waking up the morning of Friday November 2nd around 10am and I took a plastic bag to take back my dirty cloths to go back to my house. It was then that I arrived home alone that I found the door to my house was wide open and this all began. In regards to this "confession" that I made last night, I want to make clear that I'm very doubtful of the verity of my statements because they were made under the pressures of stress, shock and extreme exhaustion. Not only was I told I would be arrested and put in jail for 30 years, but I was also hit in the head when I didn't remember a fact correctly. I understand that the police are under a lot of stress, so I understand the treatment I received.

However, it was under this pressure and after many hours of confusion that my mind came up with these answers. In my mind I saw Patrik in flashes of blurred images. I saw him near the basketball court. I saw him at my front door. I saw myself cowering in the kitchen with my hands over my ears because in my head I could hear Meredith screaming. But I've said this many times so as to make myself clear: these things seem unreal to me, like a dream, and I am unsure if they are real things that happened or are just dreams my head has made to try to answer the questions in my head and the questions I am being asked.

But the truth is, I am unsure about the truth and here's why:

1. The police have told me that they have hard evidence that places me at the house, my house, at the time of Meredith's murder. I don't know what proof they are talking about, but if this is true, it means I am very confused and my dreams must be real.

2. My boyfriend has claimed that I have said things that I know are not true. I KNOW I told him I didn't have to work that night. I remember that moment very clearly. I also NEVER asked him to lie for me. This is absolutely a lie. What I don't understand is why Raffaele, who has always been so caring and gentle with me, would lie about this. What does he have to hide? I don't think he killed Meredith, but I do think he is scared, like me. He walked into a situation that he has never had to be in, and perhaps he is trying to find a way out by disassociating himself with me.

Honestly, I understand because this is a very scary situation. I also know that the police don't believe things of me that I know I can explain, such as:

1. I know the police are confused as to why it took me so long to call someone after I found the door to my house open and blood in the bathroom. The truth is, I wasn't sure what to think, but I definitely didn't think the worst, that someone was murdered. I thought a lot of things, mainly that perhaps someone got hurt and left quickly to take care of it. I also thought that maybe one of my roommates was having menstral [sic] problems and hadn't cleaned up. Perhaps I was in shock, but at the time I didn't know what to think and that's the truth. That is why I talked to Raffaele about it in the morning, because I was worried and wanted advice.

2. I also know that the fact that I can't fully recall the events that I claim took place at Raffaele's home during the time that Meredith was murdered is incriminating. And I stand by my statements that I made last night about events that could have taken place in my home with Patrik, but I want to make very clear that these events seem more unreal to me that what I said before, that I stayed at Raffaele's house.

3. I'm very confused at this time. My head is full of contrasting ideas and I know I can be frustrating to work with for this reason. But I also want to tell the truth as best I can. Everything I have said in regards to my involvement in Meredith's death, even though it is contrasting, are the best truth that I have been able to think.

[illegible section]

I'm trying, I really am, because I'm scared for myself. I know I didn't kill Meredith. That's all I know for sure. In these flashbacks that I'm having, I see Patrik as the murderer, but the way the truth feels in my mind, there is no way for me to have known because I don't remember FOR SURE if I was at my house that night. The questions that need answering, at least for how I'm thinking are:

1. Why did Raffaele lie? (or for you) Did Raffaele lie?
2. Why did I think of Patrik?
3. Is the evidence proving my pressance [sic] at the time and place of the crime reliable? If so, what does this say about my memory? Is it reliable?
4. Is there any other evidence condemning Patrik or any other person?
3. Who is the REAL murder [sic]? This is particularly important because I don't feel I can be used as condemning testimone [sic] in this instance.

I have a clearer mind that I've had before, but I'm still missing parts, which I know is bad for me. But this is the truth and this is what I'm thinking at this time. Please don't yell at me because it only makes me more confused, which doesn't help anyone. I understand how serious this situation is, and as such, I want to give you this information as soon and as clearly as possible.

If there are still parts that don't make sense, please ask me. I'm doing the best I can, just like you are. Please believe me at least in that, although I understand if you don't. All I know is that I didn't kill Meredith, and so I have nothing but lies to be afraid of.
 
I would really love to know just how in the hell that Miss Amanda Knox's "confession" was ever even viewed as a confession?!?! IMO it IS NOTHING EVEN REMOTELY RESEMBLING WHAT WE ARE ALL TOO FAMILIAR WITH IN A "FALSE CONFESSION".. Amanda's "confession" is not her confessing to murdering or being involved in Meredith's murder.. Im at a total loss of this even being referred to as a "confession".. Much less held up In a court of law.. And certainly how in the hell it held up in a slander case against Amanda on behalf of Patrik!?!? Anyone?!?
"Confession" below:

This phrase is the problem: " I stand by my statements that I made last night about events that could have taken place in my home with Patrik"

The note is not a confession. It is a confirmation of her earlier statements (not admissable in court) where she alleged that Patrick raped and murdered Meredith. The fact that she was able to place Patrick at the scene automatically means that she was at the scene. Therefore, although it is not a confession it is an admission of participating in the murder.

Although Knox claims in her statement that her memory of the murder doesn't seem real, she also said (this week) that it didn't seem real that she was landing in Seattle. I guess a lot of real things don't seem real for Knox.
 
Like many guilty people, she thought she could outsmart everyone.

Except that she is not guilty, so according your logic she must have NOT been trying to outsmart everyone.

What do you base your accusation of guilt on anyway, seeing that there was no evidence directly implicating her in the crime? The fantasy of the prosecutor is not evidence.
 
Except that she is not guilty, so according your logic she must have NOT been trying to outsmart everyone.

What do you base your accusation of guilt on anyway, seeing that there was no evidence directly implicating her in the crime? The fantasy of the prosecutor is not evidence.

There are an awful lot of people that did not accept the guilty verdict. Now there are some that are still convinced that Knox was guilty, but that the court found one point that created reasonable doubt. That was the probem with the Anthony case as well. I'm looking forward to both the motivations report (to understand more about that reasonable doubt) and third phase of this case.

I don't think Comodi suffers from fantasy regarding this case.
 
I would really love to know just how in the hell that Miss Amanda Knox's "confession" was ever even viewed as a confession?!?! IMO it IS NOTHING EVEN REMOTELY RESEMBLING WHAT WE ARE ALL TOO FAMILIAR WITH IN A "FALSE CONFESSION".. Amanda's "confession" is not her confessing to murdering or being involved in Meredith's murder.. Im at a total loss of this even being referred to as a "confession".. Much less held up In a court of law.. And certainly how in the hell it held up in a slander case against Amanda on behalf of Patrik!?!? Anyone?!?
"Confession" below:

That is because it is not a confession. It is being called a "confession" by people who want her to be guilty because otherwise they would have to face the fact that there never was a case against this girl.

I think the problem is one of human nature. There are some people (with a much higher proportion on boards like this) who believe that an accusation alone is evidence of guilt, particularly when that accusation comes from an authority figure such as LE or a prosecutor. Anything else doesn't matter, unless the facts conclusively prove it is someone else (and even then there will still be some that insist the original accused was guilty or somehow involved). Those people will ALLWAYS think the accused is guilty, even if there is nothing to back it up. They will seek out hidden meaning and "signs" to validate their belief, and to them that becomes evidence, even though it is not. They don't look at the facts alone and consequently end up being led by their emotions and expectations.

But, if there is no direct evidence that a particular thing happened, there is no evidence that it happened, and making a leap of faith to overcome that doesnt change that fact.
 
<modsnip> may have been released, but she's still a liar.

AK: "I did not kill. I did not rape. I did not steal."

This is a flat out lie and I have proof, because Amanda has stolen my heart like a thief in the night.

I wonder how the<modsnip>will answer this.
 
This phrase is the problem: " I stand by my statements that I made last night about events that could have taken place in my home with Patrik"

The note is not a confession. It is a confirmation of her earlier statements (not admissable in court) where she alleged that Patrick raped and murdered Meredith. The fact that she was able to place Patrick at the scene automatically means that she was at the scene. Therefore, although it is not a confession it is an admission of participating in the murder.

Although Knox claims in her statement that her memory of the murder doesn't seem real, she also said (this week) that it didn't seem real that she was landing in Seattle. I guess a lot of real things don't seem real for Knox.

It seems you should hold Kokomani in even more contempt and with even more suspicion, since he told a false story in court under oath (Even assuming Amanda and Raf did it, his story makes no sense). He made false statements in order to indict other people of murder, and I see plenty of evidence here that links him circumstantially to the crime. No forensic evidence inside, but I wonder if we compared his foot to the bloody footprint, if it would match better than Guede's. Maybe it does. If it does, you have a stronger case against him than Amanda and Sollecito, and he's caught testifying with worse stories. Even without the footprint, the evidence seems to lean more towards Kokamani as an accomplice: he knows Rudy, he was in the area, he knows information only a person there would know, and he has a criminal past.
 
<modsnip> may have been released, but she's still a liar.

AK: "I did not kill. I did not rape. I did not steal."

This is a flat out lie and I have proof, because Amanda has stolen my heart like a thief in the night.

I wonder how the <modsnip> will answer this.

I actually found the bolded line kinda funny :)

Not sure what <modsnip> are...
 
I bet nobody went cheering in that thread after CA was acquitted, nor would anyone put up smiley pics of CA and say what a 'sweet little mamma' she is. Also CA was convicted for lesser charges, just like AK.
Mayhap because I find Knox completely innocent?:maddening: Do you think all the "Welcome Home, Amanda" is because people believe she is a killer who got away with murder?
 
I bet nobody went cheering in that thread after CA was acquitted, nor would anyone put up smiley pics of CA and say what a 'sweet little mamma' she is. Also CA was convicted for lesser charges, just like AK.

That is a false comparison, as nobody on the CA thread thought that she was innocent. On the other hand, there are other threads where acquittals were met with happiness...one that comes to mind is the school teacher that was falsely accused of molesting kids in a trial that was a total railroad job. Can't remember her name off the top of my head...
 
That is a false comparison, as nobody on the CA thread thought that she was innocent. On the other hand, there are other threads where acquittals were met with happiness...one that comes to mind is the school teacher that was falsely accused of molesting kids in a trial that was a total railroad job. Can't remember her name off the top of my head...
SV,

Are you thinking of Tonya Craft?
 
I pointed out the PHRASE that was a problem for Knox. I didn't leave anything off the PHRASE that was problematic.

Personal remarks destroy the quality of the forum.
<modsnip>
Ms. Knox wrote, "And I stand by my statements that I made last night about events that could have taken place in my home with Patrik, but I want to make very clear that these events seem more unreal to me that what I said before, that I stayed at Raffaele's house." The second clause contradicts the first, and I suspect that is the point that Malkmus was making.
 
Wow, I stopped coming here so much since Amanda and Raf were acquitted... but blimey o'riley it seems even more lively than ever before!
 
Obviously guilty people that don't lawyer up and are not convicted are not included in any study, so obviously any study cannot be complete.

The studies I have previously posted use test subjects in carefully crafted experiments, often involving real LE to do questioning. They study how people behave in these circumstances, and draw conclusions from that data. The results across a wide range of studies have been remarkably, and disturbingly, consistent - innocence makes you more vulnerable to police questioning, not less, and strangely enough makes it more likely that the investigator will use overly aggressive tactics on you.

You are correct, however, that studies that attempt to use real world court data are drawing from woefully incomplete sources, and cannot really tell us anything that isn't anecdotal.
 
Wow, I stopped coming here so much since Amanda and Raf were acquitted... but blimey o'riley it seems even more lively than ever before!

I suspect that will be the case at least until the Motivational Report has been released, translated and thoroughly debated.

IMO, those who believe in guilt are quite justified in maintaining their doubts about this acquittal at least until that point, as right now there is no reliable way of knowing how this decision truly came about. It really isn't any less of a reasonable position than that of those that doubted the original trial's findings. So, for now at least, we have plenty of room for (hopefully) healthy debate.
 
I suspect that will be the case at least until the Motivational Report has been released, translated and thoroughly debated.

IMO, those who believe in guilt are quite justified in maintaining their doubts about this acquittal at least until that point, as right now there is no reliable way of knowing how this decision truly came about. It really isn't any less of a reasonable position than that of those that doubted the original trial's findings. So, for now at least, we have plenty of room for (hopefully) healthy debate.

Agreed. I just didn't anticipate it! My bad.

All this talk of Kokomani (sp?) is interesting... I hope they investigate him further because it would not shock me if he were more involved than he claims...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
196
Guests online
2,195
Total visitors
2,391

Forum statistics

Threads
599,745
Messages
18,099,119
Members
230,919
Latest member
jackojohnnie
Back
Top