WARNING:GRAPHIC PHOTOS Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #8

[SMK]

No, they just 'blew it off'. :waitasec:

well, people do that a lot, especially college kids who stay up late and sleep late---does not indicate anything really, no?

 

[minazoe]

well, people do that a lot, especially college kids who stay up late and sleep late---does not indicate anything really, no?

exactimo...none of it means anything..because the details are
meaningless.

it means nothing because they had nothing to do with Merideths's murder.

the fact that RS couldn't break down the door ...or maybe was even asked by Amanda to stop breaking the door before calling police is another meaningless event.

how does this attempt to break the door imply guilt? I would think that he stopped short ...because it was not within his personal jurisdiction to do so.

nothing except for the fact that they looked like a couple of unwashed burnouts that morning...caused this avalanche of BS to befall these poor kids.

nothing...not one thing.

 

[dgfred]

well, people do that a lot, especially college kids who stay up late and sleep late---does not indicate anything really, no?

Well, it was planned (to Gubio(sp)) IIRC and they had told RS's father of those plans. And according to their 'alibi' they didn't stay up late that night and there was computer activity in the morning... so no dice on the 'college kids' try.

 

[SMK]

exactimo...none of it means anything..because the details are
meaningless.

it means nothing because they had nothing to do with Merideths's murder.

the fact that RS couldn't break down the door ...or maybe was even asked by Amanda to stop breaking the door before calling police is another meaningless event.

how does this attempt to break the door imply guilt? I would think that he stopped short ...because it was not within his personal jurisdiction to do so.

nothing except for the fact that they looked like a couple of unwashed burnouts that morning...caused this avalanche of BS to befall these poor kids.

nothing...not one thing.

Yes, see that is the crux of the problem---once you view them as guilty - as Mignini did, and many other official and lay persons came to as well - then every last word and movement becomes a sign of their guilt. But if you take that away, show the evidence doesn't add up, then why does it matter why they said this or that? I keep seeing lengthy posts saying such things as , "I imagine Amanda was seething and told Meredith "we have to talk"; then Raffaele poked her with the knife, and then Amanda said......blah blah blah"-----------once guilt is supposed, you can paint whole scenarios , just as Mignini did in his closing arguments....

 

[SMK]

Well, it was planned (to Gubio(sp)) IIRC and they had told RS's father of those plans. And according to their 'alibi' they didn't stay up late that night and there was computer activity in the morning... so no dice on the 'college kids' try.

Not sure what you mean---------they changed their plans that they had informed Mr. Sollecito of, so there goes the "nice college kids" image? Not getting the point...ok, they maybe did not feel like going? Or am i supposed to realize that "an inconvenient murder" blew the picnic? :waitasec:

 

[dgfred]

What about:
AK- I was there. Patrick hurt Meredith. I am scared of him. He is bad.
RS- I accidently 'pricked' Meredith while cooking with her.

Don't leave much for 'painting'.

 

[dgfred]

Not sure what you mean---------they changed their plans that they had informed Mr. Sollecito of, so there goes the "nice college kids" image? Not getting the point...ok, they maybe did not feel like going? Or am i supposed to realize that "an inconvenient murder" blew the picnic? :waitasec:

No, only they turned their phones off, didn't mention change of plans, and didn't go in the morning as planned. No mentions of 'why'... but I imagine the murder did kind of put a crink in previous plans.

 

[SMK]

What about:
AK- I was there. Patrick hurt Meredith. I am scared of him. He is bad.
RS- I accidently 'pricked' Meredith while cooking with her.

Don't leave much for 'painting'.

I think Amanda had been asked to envision something with Patrick, so I see the police as behind this. As for the RS idea he wrote to his family that he "accidentally pricked Meredith"-YES that is very, very bothersome. That kind of talk indicates either some kind of guilt, or the Asperger autism theory of mind...

 

[dgfred]

But SMK,
If the police asked you to imagine a murder scene... would you use first person language (as AK did) or say someone else may have done it, but you don't know because you are 'imagining' things?????? Even if a police suggestion. Asking what 'you' would have said.

 

[SMK]

But SMK,
If the police asked you to imagine a murder scene... would you use first person language (as AK did) or say someone else may have done it, but you don't know because you are 'imagining' things?????? Even if a police suggestion. Asking what 'you' would have said.

well, Amanda made clear in her statement, "this seems unreal, like I am imagining it, where being at Raffaele's seems real"--the famous case in Cannaan , Conneticut (where the son was exonnerated after being found guilty of the rape and murder of his alcoholic mother ) had a full "confession" with tons of details, after police told him the polygraph "knew he did it" - as Mignini told Amanda they "knew" she was there.......

-this was the 1970s case of Peter Reilly. Reilly also said things like, "I see myself knifing my mother, slashing, jumping on her, but it is as if I am only imagining it"--(echoes of what Amanda said of "seems imaginary and less real than being at Raffaele's")

--Reilly languished in prison for 3 years while a "Free Peter" innocence project was conducted by authors and journalists-
http://antipolygraph.org/cgi-bin/forums/YaBB.pl?board=Policy;action=display;num=1074855842-happens all the time with false confessions.....Amanda's druggy state cannot have helped but is not a sign of guilt..
Reilly made a full confession after only 8 hours of interrogationhttp://law.jrank.org/pages/3235/Peter-Reilly-Trial-1974-1976.html

 

[Malkmus]

So you are thinking RS couldn't break the door? But Luca can?

Nobody knows the reason (you mention a possible one) they 'tried' to check on Meredith and 'tried' to break down the door. IMO they didn't REALLY want to bust down the door... but wanted it to look like they had 'tried' (not to get the lamp).

So are you thinking she/they were SO worried about Meredith... that she returned to RS's, ate something, called Filomena, went back to the cottage, tried to look thru her window, then 'tried' to break down the door but couldn't??? Maybe should have immediately called the police instead- if SO worried, or busted the door open all the way... which I'm sure even you will admit RS could have EASILY done.

Occam's Razor, Fred. The simplest explanation is that Raf tried to break the door down, failed, and that they then called the police. The fact that you can't really rationalize the point of partially breaking the door, but just feel like it's indicative of guilt goes against Occam's Razor. As does the failure of anyone to produce a plausible scenario of how these three committed the murder.

 

[SMK]

to answer the specific question, yes, at age 20, in a foreign country, i can picture saying, "I see Patrick, I cover my ears as Meredith is screaming"---supposing they had told me I had to have been there, and to paint them a picture.

 

[SMK]

Occam's Razor, Fred. The simplest explanation is that Raf tried to break the door down, failed, and that they then called the police. The fact that you can't really rationalize the point of partially breaking the door, but just feel like it's indicative of guilt goes against Occam's Razor. As does the failure of anyone to produce a plausible scenario of how these three committed the murder.

I agree, and this is why the Rule of Occam's razor exists....

 

[Malkmus]

No, only they turned their phones off, didn't mention change of plans, and didn't go in the morning as planned. No mentions of 'why'... but I imagine the murder did kind of put a crink in previous plans.

Yes, finding your roommate murdered would put a crink in one's plans for a daytrip.

 

[Malkmus]

to answer the specific question, yes, at age 20, in a foreign country, i can picture saying, "I see Patrick, I cover my ears as Meredith is screaming"---supposing they had told me I had to have been there, and to paint them a picture.

Constantly ignoring the fact that so many others have fallen into the same trap as Amanda gets very boring fast. The "I just can't believe a young, intelligent girl would do that" is not a valid form of argument, especially in the face of ample anecdotal evidence to the contrary.

 

[SMK]

Constantly ignoring the fact that so many others have fallen into the same trap as Amanda gets very boring fast. The "I just can't believe a young, intelligent girl would do that" is not a valid form of argument, especially in the face of ample anecdotal evidence to the contrary.

Bravo---the Peter Reilly case I cite above, from 1974, and a plethora of others have made everyone aware of just how dangerous it can be to get interrogated without an attorney present. If Amanda had refused to speak without an attorney present (i assume she had that right in Italy as she would have here) when the talk of "we know you were there, tell us what went on " began, the attorney would have jumped in with "Don't answer that!" and "if you have no evidence with which to arrest my client, we will be leaving now" :banghead:

 

[ziggy]

Constantly ignoring the fact that so many others have fallen into the same trap as Amanda gets very boring fast. The "I just can't believe a young, intelligent girl would do that" is not a valid form of argument, especially in the face of ample anecdotal evidence to the contrary.

The thanks button was inadequate!

:clap:

 

[dgfred]

Occam's Razor, Fred. The simplest explanation is that Raf tried to break the door down, failed, and that they then called the police. The fact that you can't really rationalize the point of partially breaking the door, but just feel like it's indicative of guilt goes against Occam's Razor. As does the failure of anyone to produce a plausible scenario of how these three committed the murder.

Uh no... he could have, and would have broken the door open if he wanted to. Their excuses for not doing it and their behavior afterwards while the police were there makes it plausible that they were not being 100% honest.

I'm not trying to rationalize it... and don't think it is indicative of guilt-those are your words and what you 'think' I think. I just know that a healthy experienced karate studying guy could have done it, and don't believe it when they/you say he couldn't. IMO it is not even relevant to the case now... I was just answering some statements by SMK and m.

I've seen no failure by the Italian courts to find them guilty. The failure I've seen is TRYING to explain away the evidence against them and the distorting statements they have made. Not to mention the problem with debating in good faith with those that use these 'tries' over and over. Your 'razor' doesn't apply to every situation and not every case as you well know. It may seem the easiest explanation for their actions and behavior, but that is only because it 'suits' your own points of view.

 

[Malkmus]

Well, that is the thing. Nobody can say exactly what happened. I speculated before on a possible scenario, but I think there are several on how it could possibly have started. If you want a scenario I refer to the judges report with which I don't totally agree but it describes rather well how they come to the conclusion that multiple attackers were involved. I have no idea who came into the room first or who did what first. The judges say it was RG that started, other people say it was all AK's idea. IMO it started as a 'joke' and quickly went bad. I don't believe the murder was intended. The most important is that all 3 are equally responsible.

Here is an interesting analysis of a real DNA expert's take on the case. He thinks it was more a fight than a rape attack. Warning (the article shows a very bloody picture of the murder room)
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...erdict-on-the-murder-of-Meredith-Kercher.html

Hi, Sherlock. I've read the judge's report and the scenario preposed is ludicrous and unbelievable. It's hard to repeat it here without laughing outloud, but here it is: The judge's report claims that Rudy came over to the cottage and while he was there Amanda and Raf were making out on the couch. He got so turned on sexually by seeing them make out that he decided to have his way with Meredith. When Meredith turned him down, he became aggressive. But instead of helping Meredith, Amanda and Raf then got turned on sexually by witnessing Rudy assault Meredith, so Amanda grabbed Raf's kitchen knife which she carries in her purse at all times, and the three of them stabbed the poor girl to death. Ridiculous.
Can you give me the gist of the scenario you believe? <modsnip>

The thing that gets me is that the same people who don't believe Amanda could give a false confession, also believe in a preposterous scenario such as the one in the judge's report. False confessions are well documented and Amanda's account of what happened bares all the hallmarks of one. But the scenario presented above is unprecedented. Why the incredulity towards something that is a recognized and well-documented phenomenon, but not towards the scenario it would take to involve all three together murdering Meredith of which there has never been anything like it before?

 

[SMK]

Hi, Sherlock. I've read the judge's report and the scenario preposed is ludicrous and unbelievable. It's hard to repeat it here without laughing outloud, but here it is: The judge's report claims that Rudy came over to the cottage and while he was there Amanda and Raf were making out on the couch. He got so turned on sexually by seeing them make out that he decided to have his way with Meredith. When Meredith turned him down, he became aggressive. But instead of helping Meredith, Amanda and Raf then got turned on sexually by witnessing Rudy assault Meredith, so Amanda grabbed Raf's kitchen knife which she carries in her purse at all times, and the three of them stabbed the poor girl to death. Ridiculous.
Can you give me the gist of the scenario you believe? I mean anything will sound better than the judge's report. <modsnip>

The thing that gets me is that the same people who don't believe Amanda could give a false confession, also believe in a preposterous scenario such as the one in the judge's report. False confessions are well documented and Amanda's account of what happened bares all the hallmarks of one. But the scenario presented above is unprecedented. Why the incredulity towards something that is a recognized and well-documented phenomenon, but not towards the scenario it would take to involve all three together murdering Meredith of which there has never been anything like it before?

Yes, I was absolutely stunned when I read the Massei Report - which I expected to convince me of guilt - and read that part about "it was too tempting, they had to follow it " ( AK and RS were just too turned on by Rudy attemting to get sexual with Meredith)---it sounded like the fantasy of middle-aged men...ludicrous