Amanda Knox Discussion-Friendly Thread

[concernedcitizen706]

There is no evidence of any of this. It’s one thing to have a theory based on evidence, but you are spitballing lots of ideas without evidence.

The evidence is Rafael's DNA on the knife, the bra clasp, the fact that there were multiple bruises on Meredith that looked like it was made by more than one person. Strange behavior of Amanda the next day. So yeah there is some indirect evidence for all this.

I'm trying to think of a scenario where Amanda and her boyfriend are not directly involved. But I do think it's possible that all three were directly involved as well. Certainly the Italian investigators who were at the scene thought that they were. So yes there is some evidence for all three being involved and for what I wrote above.

 

[FergusMcDuck]

The evidence is Rafael's DNA on the knife,

Never was. They found Meredith's DNA - allegedly - on a kitchen knife in Raffaele's apartment, which couldn't make any of the wounds on Meredith except the last one. On the bedsheet was the bloody outline of a smaller knife that matched all the wounds including the last one - and evidence suggests the last wound was made by a smaller knife. The DNA was found via a testing their lab wasn't accredited for, due to the large risk of contamination, after they had failed to find incriminating DNA on any object with regular testing.

the bra clasp,

The clasp was collected more than a month after the murder (along with the jacket Meredith wore when she died, just left there in the room), had been moved from its original place, in a room the police had turned upside down, picked up by an officer wearing visibly dirty gloves (as seen on video) before placed back down and photographed before being collected. Multiple male profiles were found on the clasp, all significantly weaker than Meredith's. Besides Raffaele's, none of the other profiles were compared to other people who had visited the apartment, because at that point the police had stopped looking for the killer and were trying to nail the ones they had decided did it.

the fact that there were multiple bruises on Meredith that looked like it was made by more than one person.

Six out of seven experts at the trial said otherwise.

Strange behavior of Amanda the next day.

Like what?

Well I'm trying to come up with a scenario where Rudy was involved in the attack, but Amanda and her boyfriend was also involved somehow.

Because of course Rudy has his DNA all over the place. However both Amanda and her boyfriend acted very weird, of course the false confession which I think goes beyond a normal false confession.

Have you read the two statements (written by the police) that Amanda signed? They are extremely limited and disjointed. It says the text was an agreement to meet up later, which we know was a police misconception. In fact, every single bit in those two statements comes from the police conception of the crime. Days before, Mignini sees Amanda break down while covering her ears and "reasons" that she's reliving the night, drowning out Meredith's screams - and in the second statement, the one written after Mignini had entered the interrogation room, it says Amanda covered her ears to drown out Meredith's screams.

There's nothing in those statements that wasn't put there by confirmation bias.

And also the fact that she happened to take the bloody mop over to her boyfriend's on that day of all days. That is not normal behavior.

As we keep saying, she never did that, because the mop wasn't bloody and wasn't cleaned with bleach. They found nothing incriminating on it.

I do not believe Rudy saw Amanda and her boyfriend at the apartment because the stories he gave lacked any convincing detail about them.

I was just reading up on it apparently Amanda met both Rudy and Patrick just a few weeks before the murder.

Patrick was her boss. She met him loads of times.

She met Rudy through the neighbors downstairs.

Rudy she met once, and she didn't remember his name - which we know is likely true because neither did the neighbours downstairs who actually hung out with him.

So I'm trying to think to think of possible Here's one. Perhaps the group had spoken about drugging and abusing Meredith before. Maybe because she was getting on their nerves, threatening to tell police about their drug use.

Meredith also used drugs at similar levels of Amanda and Raffaele. She was babysitting her boyfriend's cannabis plants when she died, and joked around about it with her friends. Meredith was no pride.

Maybe Patrick came over to their house before his work to sell them drugs.

Patrick wasn't a drug dealer. He was a bar owner and I'm unaware of any criminality except what the police tried to stitch him up with.

Rudy never dealt drugs either, to anyone's knowledge. His thing was burglary.

They also planned to confront Meredith that night. Meredith complained. So they slipped something in Meredith's drink.

Meredith was attacked before she got her outerwear off. She didn't have a drink that night. In fact they would not know of or when she'd be home since she was at a friend's watching a movie until almost 21:00.

And all three assaulted her while she was half unconscious. They left Meredith in her bed, and then they left.

Patrick was in his bar, talking to his customer at that time. The only DNA evidence of an assault was from Rudy.

Rudy had also heard there was going to be something exciting going on that night, and he also wanted to participate.

Rudy had no connection to any of them. There was no phone record, no emails, nothing.

So maybe he showed up later. He knocked on the door but nobody answered. He went to visit the downstairs neighbors, but they also weren't there. So he climbed in upstairs to figure it out. Maybe he really had to go to the bathroom too. So he went inside and went to the bathroom. And then Meredith woke up and saw him, and then he assaulted Meredith.

If you replaced "wanting to participate" with "doing a burglary" (which we know he liked to do) and "woke up" with "came home" (which we know she did), that's actually the real sequence of events.

Here's another scenario. Rudy had already broken in and was in Meredith's room. Maybe Amanda and her boyfriend were around the basketball court getting drugs. Then Amanda and her boyfriend came back in to the apartment after. They heard some noises from Meredith's room, the door was closed or mostly closed. It sounded pretty scary. But they did nothing to stop it. And instead they just left. They had some drugs in the apartment and they were afraid police would find the drugs. Plus they were high and they would get caught for being high. So they left. And then came back the next day to check it out and did their plan.

So everything happened as it actually did, except Amanda and Raffaele came over (why not just go back to Raffaele after the non-existent purchase?), heard the crime and left without leaving any evidence of their presence?

If there ever was a case that cried out for Occam's Razor, this is it.

 

[FergusMcDuck]

I feel pretty confident to say that Amanda bringing a bloody mop across town, over to her boyfriend's the morning afterwards, is pretty clear indication of guilt, in some way.

So since she didn't bring a bloody mop across town it isn't an indication of guilt then.

I mean, yes it could be a coincidence, I guess, but I think that's a very small chance. I'm going with 95% chance, she and her boyfriend are involved. How they're involved, I'm not sure exactly.

But you're basing it on something that didn't happen.

So the story is, the pipe under the sink broke the night before at the boyfriend's apartment, and then Amanda brought a mop over the next morning from her apartment, after btw she wiped up a bunch of blood in her bathroom,

Which she didn't do because there was no trace of a cleanup in the bathroom and the mop hadn't been used to mop up blood.

to clean his kitchen up. So they just let the water sit on the floor all night at the boyfriend's apartment? They didn't have any paper towels or dish towels there?

Not enough, apparently.

How about just getting some old t-shirts to wipe it up?

Why, when they could just borrow a mop from a place Amanda was going back to the next day anyway?

And second of all, was that Amanda's mop, or was that like the house mop? Does she have the right to take away the house cleaning supplies?

She borrowed it for an hour. Rights do not enter it, unless Filomena and Laura were far more high strung than we have evidence for.

Didn't Rafael have something to clean it up with? And if not, could he not buy his own mop, for his own apartment?

Raffaele had maid service. His maid brought the equipment when she came over.

Or couldn't Amanda by a mop from him on the way over?

Again, why, when she could just bring one over temporarily?

She apparently bought some other cleaning supplies, or was in a store looking at buying some, so she could have bought a mop at that point.

Quintavalle, who first said no one had come into his store, changed his story a year later and said he had seen her coming in (wearing a jacket she didn't own, but one he would have seen on TV - Raffaele had lent her his after they had been told to leave the house after Meredith was found) and looked at cleaning products. Even he said Amanda didn't buy anything, and his employee stood by her story that Amanda never came in.

For a normal person, if the pipes under the sink break and leak, first you turn it off so no more water is leaking.

How do you turn it off? It was an apartment, not a house.

And then you wipe it up with whatever you have. And then you buy a new mop, when you go out. Because you don't want to take away the mop from the other apartment.

Why wouldn't you?

You said Amanda and Raffaele acted weird, but if they did anything you suggest they would or wouldn't do above, that would be far weirder.

And the fact that these odd events just happened to occur, on the very day that Meredith was murdered? I don't know, that's too much of a coincidence for me.

A water pipe under a sink isn't odd. And the world doesn't stop because a crime happens.

I do believe it's possible she and the boyfriend were involved. But I do not believe they were involved with Rudy. So it's possible Rudy came afterwards.

This does not make any sense and contradicts the evidence.

The mop tested negative for blood but Raffaele's apartment smelled strongly of bleach.

The smell is completely irrelevant - another cop said Amanda couldn't have showered because she "smelled of sex". No objects in Raffaele's apartment had been cleaned with bleach, certainly not the mop.

 

[SMK777]

So since she didn't bring a bloody mop across town it isn't an indication of guilt then.



But you're basing it on something that didn't happen.



Which she didn't do because there was no trace of a cleanup in the bathroom and the mop hadn't been used to mop up blood.



Not enough, apparently.



Why, when they could just borrow a mop from a place Amanda was going back to the next day anyway?



She borrowed it for an hour. Rights do not enter it, unless Filomena and Laura were far more high strung than we have evidence for.



Raffaele had maid service. His maid brought the equipment when she came over.



Again, why, when she could just bring one over temporarily?



Quintavalle, who first said no one had come into his store, changed his story a year later and said he had seen her coming in (wearing a jacket she didn't own, but one he would have seen on TV - Raffaele had lent her his after they had been told to leave the house after Meredith was found) and looked at cleaning products. Even he said Amanda didn't buy anything, and his employee stood by her story that Amanda never came in.



How do you turn it off? It was an apartment, not a house.



Why wouldn't you?

You said Amanda and Raffaele acted weird, but if they did anything you suggest they would or wouldn't do above, that would be far weirder.



A water pipe under a sink isn't odd. And the world doesn't stop because a crime happens.



This does not make any sense and contradicts the evidence.



The smell is completely irrelevant - another cop said Amanda couldn't have showered because she "smelled of sex". No objects in Raffaele's apartment had been cleaned with bleach, certainly not the mop.

Why would investigators note that the apartment smelled strongly of bleach if it didn't? Bleach has a strong and unmistakable odor.
I agree that the comment about Amanda smelling like sex is stupid and irrelevant, but it was never entered into evidence nor mentioned in court.

 

[FergusMcDuck]

Why would investigators note that the apartment smelled strongly of bleach if it didn't? Bleach has a strong and unmistakable odor.
I agree that the comment about Amanda smelling like sex is stupid and irrelevant, but it was never entered into evidence nor mentioned in court.

Because it was the same idiot cop who took the kitchen knife from the drawer because it was "shiny" and he got an "investigative intuition" about it.

These weren't experienced and professional law enforcement officers investigating a crime. These were provincial cops bumbling through an investigation, acting like they were protagonists in a crime drama. Even Mignini said he wished the Carabinieri had handled the case instead

 

[Emi]

I've always stood up for Amanda and have constantly believed she is innocent

 

[otto]

Meredith also used drugs at similar levels of Amanda and Raffaele. She was babysitting her boyfriend's cannabis plants when she died, and joked around about it with her friends. Meredith was no pride.

RSBM
I'm not sure that's true. Meredith did not socialize with her roommates. The 21 year old and her British friends were taken aback by the brash student from Seattle. After the murder, Meredith's friends were so shocked they returned home.

Meredith was an Erasmus student. Minimum requirements are:

• A first degree equivalent to 180 credits or 180 ECTS from an internationally recognized university or college.
• A minimum of two year’s practitioner experience in the field of human rights. Practitioner experience may include regular employments, internships, and voluntary work.

In contrast, two months before arriving in Italy, Meredith's Seattle roommate was ticketed for throwing a loud party where there was rock throwing.

Joking about babysitting her friend's pot plants, and being so stoned she didn't know which was was up, are two entirely different situations. There's no reason to paint the victim with the suspect's brush.

"The two were like chalk and cheese - totally opposite in character," 24-year-old Giacomo Silenzi said.

"Meredith was calm, sweet and shy. Amanda was an extrovert and always showing off."
...

Before heading north to university, Meredith was educated at the £10,000-a-year private Old Palace School in nearby Croydon."

Profile: Meredith Kercher

A look at the life of the 21-year-old student who was killed in 2007 after embarking on what should have been a dream exchange trip to Italy.

www.bbc.com

 

[SMK777]

@otto @FergusMcDuck
@concernedcitizen706 @minazoe

I really wish more people would read James Raper's text. There is such incredible ignorance about the final court's ruling on Knox and Sollecito, and it bothers me to no end.

From James Raper's Justice on Trial: The Final Outcome

A blanket of silence seemingly descended over the case and indeed the matter is finished as far as the charges are concerned However surely the case warranted some further attention to inform the public, given what the 5th Chambers Report actually wrote in it’s Report?

***For a start how many people know that the 5th Chambers concluded that Amanda Knox was - contrary to her stated trial position, re-iterated in numerous television appearances - present in the cottage she shared with Kercher when the murder took place? It’s just that there was, apparently, insufficient evidence that she was actively involved, although the Court did note that there was ***compelling forensic evidence that she had washed blood off her hands at the cottage. Where has that ever been reported? Not by the media in the UK, not in the USA and not seemingly in Italy either.

***At the same time the Court upheld that Meredith Kercher died at the hands of more than one assailant, thus excluding that the Ivorian Rudy Guede was solely responsible. This, of course, begs a lot of questions, including why there was never any forensic evidence of another assailant in the cottage and why, if Knox was present but not an active participant, she did not seek assistance nor give evidence against Guede, and this other, or others, who have yet to be identified and brought to justice.

***How many people also know that the 5th Chambers appears to have exceeded it’s remit as a Court of Legitimacy by pronouncing on the sufficiency of the evidence; there being no provision under the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure that enables it to do this? That should have been the proper remit of the fact-finding judges of the lower courts but the 5th Chambers precluded a further remand on appeal. If the Supreme Court had some inherent constitutional power to override the Code this has never been remarked upon.

...In this book I shall reconsider the evidence and it’s evaluation. I shall look at the law that was applied both from an Italian and other perspectives.

There is in fact a considerable body of evidence in the case.

 

[SMK777]

Additional remarks from Raper's book, pp 725- 65

On a first reading of i[Knox'semail] and without knowing much else, her account seems entirely plausible. It is only when one looks at it again with reference to the other material in the case, and particularly once one has a degree of familiarity with the crime scene, that one realises that there are things she has said which do not make much sense. It begins to look then like the e-mail was prepared very much as an aide memoire for an alibi with which to deflect the investigators even if, ostensibly, it merely appears to be reassuring recipients that despite the unusual and horrific circumstances, everything was alright and they had nothing to be worried about.

It should also be remembered, incidentally, that the only judges who actually ever visited the cottage were those from the Massei trial. None of the appeal judges ever did.

.....She describes how she ran out onto the terrace at the back of the cottage to try and
see in through Meredith’s window. Take a look at the picture below. We see the terrace and Meredith’s bedroom window to the right.
For someone who was entirely familiar with where she lived, and who had admitted to much enjoying the spectacular view from the terrace, she must have known that there was no prospect at all of being able to see into Meredith’s bedroom from such a vantage point.

The panic she describes, Sollecito trying to break down Meredith’s door, none of this is reflected in their demeanour as described by the postal police when they arrive moments later. Neither do either of them mention any concern about Meredith to the postal police even while discussing her phones with them.

 

[FergusMcDuck]

RSBM
I'm not sure that's true. Meredith did not socialize with her roommates. The 21 year old and her British friends were taken aback by the brash student from Seattle. After the murder, Meredith's friends were so shocked they returned home.

She did, she just socialized more with her British friends. And the friends were indeed shocked and returned home - due to Meredith's murder (which understandably traumatized them), not anything to do with Amanda.

Meredith was an Erasmus student. Minimum requirements are:

• A first degree equivalent to 180 credits or 180 ECTS from an internationally recognized university or college.
• A minimum of two year’s practitioner experience in the field of human rights. Practitioner experience may include regular employments, internships, and voluntary work.

In contrast, two months before arriving in Italy, Meredith's Seattle roommate was ticketed for throwing a loud party where there was rock throwing.

How is that a contrast? Dedicated students still party. In fact, Meredith had been partying until well into the morning hours the night before, and didn't get up until around noon on November 1st. Amanda didn't party more than Meredith and there's no indication the studies of either one suffered.

Joking about babysitting her friend's pot plants, and being so stoned she didn't know which was was up, are two entirely different situations. There's no reason to paint the victim with the suspect's brush.

The distinction was painted by the police and media after Amanda's arrest. Meredith didn't just joke about babysitting pot plants, she smoked cannabis herself. And Amanda smoked, but she didn't get stoned out of her mind.

"The two were like chalk and cheese - totally opposite in character," 24-year-old Giacomo Silenzi said.

"Meredith was calm, sweet and shy. Amanda was an extrovert and always showing off."
...

And all of these contrasts somehow only came out after Amanda was arrested, and smeared in articles like this. For being "chalk and cheese", the two of them managed to get along well and never have any actual issue between them. The other roommates testified to this - all before Amanda was arrested, of course.

@otto @FergusMcDuck
@concernedcitizen706 @minazoe

I really wish more people would read James Raper's text. There is such incredible ignorance about the final court's ruling on Knox and Sollecito, and it bothers me to no end.

Raper is such an obsessed creep.

From James Raper's Justice on Trial: The Final Outcome

A blanket of silence seemingly descended over the case and indeed the matter is finished as far as the charges are concerned However surely the case warranted some further attention to inform the public, given what the 5th Chambers Report actually wrote in it’s Report?

***For a start how many people know that the 5th Chambers concluded that Amanda Knox was - contrary to her stated trial position, re-iterated in numerous television appearances - present in the cottage she shared with Kercher when the murder took place? It’s just that there was, apparently, insufficient evidence that she was actively involved, although the Court did note that there was ***compelling forensic evidence that she had washed blood off her hands at the cottage. Where has that ever been reported? Not by the media in the UK, not in the USA and not seemingly in Italy either.

Does James Raper even know what the Court of Cassation does? It isn't a fact-finding court, it evaluates the decision of the fact-finding court and determines if it was properly made. If it wasn't, it can either order a new trial or simply acquit. What the Court of Cassation determined is that Nencini ignored exculpatory evidence, and should have acquitted. If it was going to the signed statements of Nov 6th to determine Amanda had been in the apartment when Meredith was killed, it couldn't also ignore the total lack of material evidence that would put her in the room where Meredith died, much less in any connection with the actual murder. This is also true for the "washing blood off her hands" issue, which derived from Nencini's interpretation of Amanda's DNA being found in Meredith's blood in their shared bathroom - again, it didn't deal with the lack of evidence of Amanda participating in the actual murder, in the actual murder scene.

***At the same time the Court upheld that Meredith Kercher died at the hands of more than one assailant, thus excluding that the Ivorian Rudy Guede was solely responsible. This, of course, begs a lot of questions, including why there was never any forensic evidence of another assailant in the cottage and why, if Knox was present but not an active participant, she did not seek assistance nor give evidence against Guede, and this other, or others, who have yet to be identified and brought to justice.

The goal of the Court of Cassation wasn't to arrive at the ultimate truth of the case - it was determining the answer to the simple question: were Amanda and Raffaele guilty of the murder? And furthermore, not clashing with other decisions surrounding the case. Multiple assailants had been determined at the finalization of Rudy's verdict - because both the prosecution and the defense argued for it. The prosecution wanted to determine Amanda and Raffaele had done it with him, but since Rudy had separated his trial from the others by using the fasttrack option, they couldn't charge them together. That opened up the problem that while Rudy was obviously guilty, Amanda and Raffaele weren't - and stood a good chance of acquittal, as indeed happened. Marasca-Bruno didn't open the question of multiple vs single attacker because that wasn't the question asked of them. Based on the earlier verdict, Rudy committed the crime in concert with others. All Marasca-Bruno determined was that (based on the facts) those "others" weren't Amanda or Raffaele.

This obviously creates a huge problem, in that the police refuse to consider anyone else than Amanda and Raffaele as the accomplices, but that is a problem of their own making. The victims of their colossal mistake are, of course, the Kercher family.

***How many people also know that the 5th Chambers appears to have exceeded it’s remit as a Court of Legitimacy by pronouncing on the sufficiency of the evidence; there being no provision under the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure that enables it to do this? That should have been the proper remit of the fact-finding judges of the lower courts but the 5th Chambers precluded a further remand on appeal. If the Supreme Court had some inherent constitutional power to override the Code this has never been remarked upon.

This, however, is pure nonsense derived from Mignini, who has never got over losing this case. No Italian legal expert beyond a few sycophants has ever backed him up on this, it's his own bizarre interpretation of the law. If you've ever seen one of his extended whine-fests (he was featured on an online panel a few years back with a sympathetic law professor), you know where all this comes from.

...In this book I shall reconsider the evidence and it’s evaluation. I shall look at the law that was applied both from an Italian and other perspectives.

There is in fact a considerable body of evidence in the case.

Sure, James. Sure.

 

[SMK777]

Sure, James. Sure

From reading the book I have to agree with him. And in many instances he sides with Knox and Sollecito, (as do I); he doesn't have an axe to grind.

 

[FergusMcDuck]

Additional remarks from Raper's book, pp 725- 65

On a first reading of i[Knox'semail] and without knowing much else, her account seems entirely plausible.

Because it is.

It is only when one looks at it again with reference to the other material in the case, and particularly once one has a degree of familiarity with the crime scene, that one realises that there are things she has said which do not make much sense. It begins to look then like the e-mail was prepared very much as an aide memoire for an alibi with which to deflect the investigators even if, ostensibly, it merely appears to be reassuring recipients that despite the unusual and horrific circumstances, everything was alright and they had nothing to be worried about.

Yeah, that she was fine, which was a valid concern for them.

It should also be remembered, incidentally, that the only judges who actually ever visited the cottage were those from the Massei trial. None of the appeal judges ever did.

.....She describes how she ran out onto the terrace at the back of the cottage to try and
see in through Meredith’s window. Take a look at the picture below. We see the terrace and Meredith’s bedroom window to the right.
For someone who was entirely familiar with where she lived, and who had admitted to much enjoying the spectacular view from the terrace, she must have known that there was no prospect at all of being able to see into Meredith’s bedroom from such a vantage point.

Does Raper just expect no one to actually look at pictures?



Amanda says she climbed over the railing and leaned out so she could attempt to look into Meredith's window. No prospect? It might not be a sure shot, but there is obviously a prospect of seeing something - which you would only know if you tried.

The panic she describes, Sollecito trying to break down Meredith’s door, none of this is reflected in their demeanour as described by the postal police when they arrive moments later. Neither do either of them mention any concern about Meredith to the postal police even while discussing her phones with them.

Not only does Raffaele mention Meredith's locked door in the 112 call as a big issue, they led the postal police to the same door when they arrived.

 

[Tower]

The evidence is Rafael's DNA on the knife, the bra clasp, the fact that there were multiple bruises on Meredith that looked like it was made by more than one person. Strange behavior of Amanda the next day. So yeah there is some indirect evidence for all this.

I'm trying to think of a scenario where Amanda and her boyfriend are not directly involved. But I do think it's possible that all three were directly involved as well. Certainly the Italian investigators who were at the scene thought that they were. So yes there is some evidence for all three being involved and for what I wrote above.

None of that actually happened. You cannot claim valid DNA was found in this case when there was sloppy cross-contamination. The knife was simply not the weapon used to murder Meredith. If (and that is a huge IF) her DNA was on the knife, it was not due to blood or murder. Rafaelle’s DNA was not transferred to her bra clasp during any type of crime, but probably by police officers’ own contaminated gloves. The DNA collection and testing was not conducted by the most basic standards of preserving evidence. So that is not evidence and does not show any involvement by Amanda nor Rafaelle.

Strange behavior, interpreted by people who do not speak the same language or come from the same culture, is not evidence.

Bruises that looked like multiple people made them can clearly be shown to be poor, almost laughable misinterpretation of the autopsy evidence by inexperienced and biased examiners. Their hypotheses have been refuted.

There is NO evidence that Amanda and Raffaele had any involvement at all. All logic and evidence points to the infinitely more likely scenario that a serial burglar broke in and Meredith surprised him. Trying to do backflips to drag Amanda and Raffaele into this was and always will be ludicrous at best. One serial burglar, one murderer, no other evidence.

 

[SMK777]

There is NO evidence that Amanda and Raffaele had any involvement at all. All logic and evidence points to the infinitely more likely scenario that a serial burglar broke in and Meredith surprised him. Trying to do backflips to drag Amanda and Raffaele into this was and always will be ludicrous at best. One serial burglar, one murderer, no other evidence.

I wonder if Guede had been immediately apprehended, if it would have been simply "case closed".

There was a case many decades ago where a young Ivy league student was raped and murdered in her off-campus apartment. There was speculation for years that a prominent professor had done it. Decades later DNA proved that it was a random burglar who was in the habit of looking for apartments to rob when no one was at home. He mistook her apartment for empty and she surprised him. He was a 17 year old black drug addict.

I still wonder why Knox and Sollecito were never able to explain their bare footprints tracked in vegetable juice. There are other evidentiary problems. I guess some questions will never be answered.

 

[FergusMcDuck]

I still wonder why Knox and Sollecito were never able to explain their bare footprints tracked in vegetable juice. There are other evidentiary problems. I guess some questions will never be answered.

It was only Amanda's footprints, and it's hardly odd that you would find a young woman's bare footprints walking between her bathroom and her bedroom. Whatever set off the luminol will never be known - beyond it not being blood - due to the police not bothering to find out.

 

[SMK777]

From the closing of Raper's book:

"Hellmann told Italian radio two days after the verdict that the pair could be guilty of murder even though his court had acquitted them. He said Guede knew what happened but had refused to give evidence against them. “Maybe Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito also know what happened, but our acquittal verdict stemmed from the truth established at the trial. But the real truth can be different. They may be responsible but there isn’t the evidence. So, perhaps they too know what happened that night but that’s not our conclusion.” "

This rather sounds like a paragraph 2 acquittal, or the old version of “not proven“, but off the record.

...
Guede was charged with murder “in complicity with others” and he [was] convicted on that basis.

 

[FergusMcDuck]

From the closing of Raper's book:


Hellmann told Italian radio two days after the verdict that the pair could be guilty of murder even though his court had acquitted them. He said Guede knew what happened but had refused to give evidence against them. “Maybe Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito also know what happened, but our acquittal verdict stemmed from the truth established at the trial. But the real truth can be different. They may be responsible but there isn’t the evidence. So, perhaps they too know what happened that night but that’s not our conclusion.” This rather sounds like a paragraph 2 acquittal, or the old version of “not proven“, but off the record.

That is utterly ridiculous. No, that is not the meaning. The meaning is - there isn't evidence that they are guilty and therefore they are acquitted. That's how this works.

 

[SMK777]

That is utterly ridiculous. No, that is not the meaning. The meaning is - there isn't evidence that they are guilty and therefore they are acquitted. That's how this works.

That was the legal ruling. But Hellman himself says that "the real truth" may be different.

I ETAed the following into my last post, from Raper's section on the Hellman motivation report:

....Guede was charged with murder “in complicity with others” and he [was] convicted on that basis.

 

[FergusMcDuck]

That was the legal ruling. But Hellman himself says the truth may be different.

Which is true for any ruling. Hellman's comment doesn't mean anything special for Amanda and Raffaele. He is just stating the obvious.

I ETAed the following into my last post, from Raper's section on the Hellman motivation report:

....Guede was charged with murder “in complicity with others” and he [was] convicted on that basis.

Yes, I explained this earlier. The prosecution wanted to charge everyone together, but when Rudy opted for a fasttrack trial, they separated. The prosecution argued multiple attackers in both cases because that is what the prosecution aimed to prove. At Rudy's fasttrack trial no one argued against multiple killers, so that became the final conviction. But Amanda and Raffaele ended up acquitted so that meant Rudy's accomplices remain unknown from a legal perspective - and if that is to change, the police either needs to find the accomplices (good luck, since Rudy acted alone) or his verdict needs to be revised (and there is zero appetite for that in the Italian legal system).

 

[SMK777]

Which is true for any ruling. Hellman's comment doesn't mean anything special for Amanda and Raffaele. He is just stating the obvious.



Yes, I explained this earlier. The prosecution wanted to charge everyone together, but when Rudy opted for a fasttrack trial, they separated. The prosecution argued multiple attackers in both cases because that is what the prosecution aimed to prove. At Rudy's fasttrack trial no one argued against multiple killers, so that became the final conviction. But Amanda and Raffaele ended up acquitted so that meant Rudy's accomplices remain unknown from a legal perspective - and if that is to change, the police either needs to find the accomplices (good luck, since Rudy acted alone) or his verdict needs to be revised (and there is zero appetite for that in the Italian legal system).

I agree that since no "others" have ever been found or charged, Guede’s verdict should be revised.