Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#10

[SMK]

No. Their actions are entirely consistent with innocence. Convoluted attempts to twist their actions into some this is how a guilty person would act from a guilty perspective trying to seem innocent only makes that clearer.

BBM - I think some of their actions are not at odds with innocence, while others are suspect. Nothing is definitive. In the end, it is evidence which legally provides a guilty ruling. I don't know if the forensics are strong enough. There are indicators that cannot be entirely dismissed.

Even Hellmann acknowledged that this is what it boiled down to: He admitted that there was a possibility that the two knew more than they were saying or played some peripheral role in the slaying. But legally, the court could not find this.

Now his reasoning has been "razed to the ground" and the appeal process has been underway, begun anew. We'll have to see what the court's reasoning leads them to conclude.

 

[Katody]

But Guede insists he was not the killer, so in that sense he had consciousness of innocence, and was dancing his regrets away.

Leaving someone to die without help is not an innocent act in my book.

 

[SMK]

If that is the case then it exposes Mignini for what he is, because he would have been perfectly well aware of how the original interrogation was conducted and what they were pushing. So, he is surprised????

He can't wriggle off the hook that easily. It proves that the interrogation was improperly conducted and the statement improperly obtained. He knows that. He waves a hand and pretends that it doesn't really matter, but it does. In any American court the proceeds of this interrogation would have been deemed inadmissible as a result, and they should have been inadmissible in an Italian court as well. Not only that, it doesn't even agree with the known facts of the case that were subsequently determined.

I believe Mignini really was stunned. He perhaps should not have been. But the idea that the police put these images into Knox's mind really does seem to have not even occurred to him. When she covers her ears, he concludes she heard screams which shocked her. He may be right , he may be wrong. But this is his natural conclusion: He tells Follain this, without any irony.

 

[Katody]

Even Hellmann acknowledged that this is what it boiled down to: He admitted that there was a possibility that the two knew more than they were saying or played some peripheral role in the slaying. But legally, the court could not find this.

I remember him saying the two are absolutely innocent. He also said Guede surely knows what happened but he's not saying.

 

[Katody]

We'll have to see what the court's reasoning leads them to conclude.

Don't worry. The "reasoning" will be appropriately osmotic.

 

[quesarita]

I remember him saying the two are absolutely innocent. He also said Guede surely knows what happened but he's not saying.

Yes, even Rudy has admitted he was at the scene, so he would know who was there and what happened. I'm still not convinced that he would see protecting Amanda and Raffaele as in his best interest, but I understand the argument that others have put forward - that it was the only way he could maintain his "innocence".

 

[SMK]

Leaving someone to die without help is not an innocent act in my book.

Nor mine, of course.

 

[Harmony 2]

Stop personalizing posts and bickering back and forth... make your point and move on!

 

[SMK]

I remember him saying the two are absolutely innocent. He also said Guede surely knows what happened but he's not saying.

Hellmann said that the legal truth as he viewed and weighed the evidence was that, "these defendants did not commit these crimes." But he admitted that there may be truth outside of this, which under that ruling, was outside the courts.

 

[redheadedgal]

I was posting you a link of this review on how Knox's book might lead to trouble for her, by sex crimes specialist Linda Fairstein, as I was positive she had made a reference to how staying in Perugia made Knox look more guilty, not less---but that reference seems to have vanished????

Really driving me crazy, as I KNOW when I first read the piece she made claim about Knox going to Germany would have appeared more innocent. Maybe someone told her Amanda wasn't allowed to leave and she deleted? Any way, here is the piece:

http://www.bookish.com/articles/amanda-knox-memoir-may-be-evidence-against-her

her article includes many errors:

--it wasn't amanda's "idea" to "finger" PL
--there was no mixed blood from knox and kercher found
--the floor of the cottage was not "so bloody"
--the confirmed computer records for RS are not 9:10pm
--the cellphone shut off was explained... they wanted privacy and amanda did not want to be called into work
--the mop tested negative for blood

as far as this case is concerned, this author is not credible imo.

 

[MichaelSmith]

Not to mention it's not like RG high tailed it immediately. He went out the night and danced all night. He then went out again the next night dancing.

I've always felt like they wanted to stay near the investigation. Not to mention I believe Amanda was told she couldn't leave. As the British girls didn't leave until after talking to the police either. Iirc.

How diabolical!

Thanks to Crini acknowledging the new computer evidence that a cartoon was opened on Raffaele's computer at 9.26pm we have a new timeline that isn't contested. Crini tried to say Naruto crashed and they left immediately for the cottage arriving at 9.31pm

Why would they dash off to the cottage because a cartoon crashed? They go there and find Guede, who would have been an unwelcome guest and decided to help him kill Meredith?

What if the cartoon didn't crash and he watched it till 9.40pm and the attempted calls on Meredith's phone around 10pm are evidence she's dead and the 10.13pm mms is evidence the phones are no longer at the cottage.

What do you think about this?

 

[quesarita]

Yes, that is part of it.

Also, she would have extra-sensivity to anything which could potentially help make her look guilty to others. And extra-sensitivity to doing things which would make her seem innocent. Thus, getting on a plane and taking off would not seem strange to us, but to her it did. Because she knew what she had done, and she was sensitive to how others would view this act of leaving. At the same time, staying and being available to police was, in her mind, something to do to make her seem innocent.

So, supposin' Amanda is guilty of killing Meredith with Rudy, and she wants to appear innocent. Her 2 other roommates leave town after 1-2 days (innocent); and Rudy leaves town after 1-2 days. She knows they've all left. It seems she'd either want to do the same thing as the roommates, matching their behavior (innocent) or the same as the guilty Rudy, rather than being left to face the music.
To think that by staying she would somehow appear as innocent as the out if town roommates or safer than out of town Rudy is pretty bizarre - reminds me of the poison scene from the Princess Bride.

 

[aa9511]

As far as I know both Raffaele and Amanda were questioned for many hours. 5 or more at least. It's in the testimony and in the minutes of interrogation in case of Raffaele's.

Still, the case for guilt makes no logical sense. Pointing this out causes frantic attempts at changing topic, smoke and mirrors.

To you in might not make logical sense, others might think differently. I have not seen "frantic attempts at changing topic, smoke and mirrors."

I thought we were allowed to discuss anything we wanted pertaining to this case, within the bounds of the site. I don't think the terms say that we have to answer each and every single one of your questions, and if we don't answer each and every one (to your understanding), then what we believe is not logical or reasonable.

 

[aa9511]

He wasn't even asked about it.

You have no logical explanation for why would he change his story.
The hypothesis of guilt is very shaky. There's no reasoning, no logic, no explanation for anything substantial.

bbm

One can say the same thing about the other side. What good does that do any of us? We can do this all day - calling each other's side "no reasoning, no logic, no explanation for anything substantial"....it can go both ways. Is this what you want us to be doing the whole time on here - going back and forth calling each other illogical?

 

[aa9511]

This doesn't answer my questions, I'm afraid.

I answered your question. I believe your question was what is the negative in the guilt scenario of her leaving.

Here was my answer, from the post:

I have pointed out, repeatedly, what I think the negative repercussion of her leaving the country at that point were, coming from her point-of-view. It was a combination of two factors: her leaving might make her look suspicious (from her viewpoint of how others would perceive her), and her staying and being available to police would make her look innocent (from her viewpoint). So both of those lead to the goal of making herself seem as innocent as possible, from her point-of-view of how she thought others would view her actions.

Please do not pretend like I didn't answer your question.

It's ok if you didn't understand it, but please don't make it seem like it didn't answer it, when I did. So that you can come back and say that we don't answer your questions, that we are changing the topic, and that we are giving "smoke and mirrors."

When in reality, we are answering your questions.

If you don't understand it, please say so instead of saying that I didn't answer your question, when I CLEARLY did.

 

[aa9511]

So, supposin' Amanda is guilty of killing Meredith with Rudy, and she wants to appear innocent. Her 2 other roommates leave town after 1-2 days (innocent); and Rudy leaves town after 1-2 days. She knows they've all left. It seems she'd either want to do the same thing as the roommates, matching their behavior (innocent) or the same as the guilty Rudy, rather than being left to face the music.
To think that by staying she would somehow appear as innocent as the out if town roommates or safer than out of town Rudy is pretty bizarre - reminds me of the poison scene from the Princess Bride.

It is not bizarre at all to me. Anyway, she did not do what the truly innocent people did, either. She did not leave town like her roomates did. So if people are saying she is innocent because she stayed, then that does not match what the innocent people did, either.

I have repeated over and over again why Rudy and Amanda are not equal in this situation....Rudy could leave and no one around Meredith or the police would have noticed, because he was not "on the radar" from Day 1, until police got the evidence of him. I'm going to repeat what I said in an earlier post: no one thought on Day 1 after the murder was discovered, 'oh where is that guy by the name of Rudy Guede'? He could leave and no one would notice. Amanda, on the other hand, was Meredith's roommate, and her absence would have been noticed by people around Meredith, first of all and most notably, the other roommates. Also by police, who would naturally be questioning the people living with Meredith, and those who had contact with her in the last days of her life.

Yes, she should have gone when the roommates did. That would make sense and not be suspicious. But Amanda, knowing she was guilty, thought it would make her seem suspicious. Because she knew what she had done. And having that knowledge, and then getting on a plane and going away, in her mind that would make her seem suspicious to others. Like a hit-and-run, to put it into more understandable terms. Fleeing the scene. Trying to get away. Trying to run away. I believe that she thought her leaving would first, draw unwanted attnention to her and she did not want attention or closer examination of her, and second, would raise suspicions if investigators had any questions about her.

On the other hand, staying and being "available" to the police, she thought that would make her seem like she had nothing to hide. Like, she was just ordinary Amanda, nothing out-of-the-ordinary there. Just as some are saying to this day, that look, obviously she had nothing to do with it, look she still stayed there. She still answered police questions. She still cooperated with police. It is working on people, even to this day.

 

[quesarita]

It is not bizarre at all to me. Anyway, she did not do what the truly innocent people did, either. She did not leave town like her roomates did. So if people are saying she is innocent because she stayed, then that does not match what the innocent people did, either.

I have repeated over and over again why Rudy and Amanda are not equal in this situation....Rudy could leave and no one around Meredith or the police would have noticed, because he was not "on the radar" from Day 1, until police got the evidence of him. I'm going to repeat what I said in an earlier post: no one thought on Day 1 after the murder was discovered, 'oh where is that guy by the name of Rudy Guede'? He could leave and no one would notice. Amanda, on the other hand, was Meredith's roommate, and her absence would have been noticed by people around Meredith, first of all and most notably, the other roommates. Also by police, who would naturally be questioning the people living with Meredith, and those who had contact with her in the last days of her life.

Yes, she should have gone when the roommates did. That would make sense and not be suspicious. But Amanda, knowing she was guilty, thought it would make her seem suspicious. Because she knew what she had done. And having that knowledge, and then getting on a plane and going away, in her mind that would make her seem suspicious to others. Like a hit-and-run, to put it into more understandable terms. Fleeing the scene. Trying to get away. Trying to run away. I believe this is what she thought it would look like if investigators started having questions about her.

On the other hand, staying and being "available" to the police, she thought that would make her seem like she had nothing to hide. Like, she was just ordinary Amanda, nothing out-of-the-ordinary there. Just as some are saying to this day, that look, obviously she had nothing to do with it, look she still stayed there. She still answered police questions. She still cooperated with police. It is working on people, even to this day.

Honestly a, I did hear you the first few times you put this forward. IMO, the reason Amanda stayed in town if innocent is very straightforward and FWIW, also provides a reason for her to stay if guilty.

She was coming out of a phase when she was at least somewhat insecure about her attractiveness and sexuality; and for one solid week had been involved in an intense relationship with an older Italian grad student with his own place who thought SHE was the most exciting woman he'd ever met.

I M O she stayed in Perugia against common sense, and against her parents' wishes, and even though she didn't really have a legitimate place to live because she didn't want to part from Raffaele. You may sneer because you believe she's cold and calculating, but a calculating person would not have made that decision. In your own words, guilty Amanda believed there was nothing to tie Rudy to Meredith (except herself!) so she wouldn't consider him in her calculations.
I still maintain, despite your objections, that a guilty calculating Amanda would have followed the example of the innocent roommates and left town. If anything incriminating against her was found after she left, she would be 1000 X better off for being out of the country.
IMO she stayed because she was in the throes of euphoric new love, and I think that's why she was able to convince Raffaele to stay against his parents' wishes. And it fits with their oddness and inappropriateness in public.

 

[MichaelSmith]

It is not bizarre at all to me. Anyway, she did not do what the truly innocent people did, either. She did not leave town like her roomates did. So if people are saying she is innocent because she stayed, then that does not match what the innocent people did, either.

I have repeated over and over again why Rudy and Amanda are not equal in this situation....Rudy could leave and no one around Meredith or the police would have noticed, because he was not "on the radar" from Day 1, until police got the evidence of him. I'm going to repeat what I said in an earlier post: no one thought on Day 1 after the murder was discovered, 'oh where is that guy by the name of Rudy Guede'? He could leave and no one would notice. Amanda, on the other hand, was Meredith's roommate, and her absence would have been noticed by people around Meredith, first of all and most notably, the other roommates. Also by police, who would naturally be questioning the people living with Meredith, and those who had contact with her in the last days of her life.

Yes, she should have gone when the roommates did. That would make sense and not be suspicious. But Amanda, knowing she was guilty, thought it would make her seem suspicious. Because she knew what she had done. And having that knowledge, and then getting on a plane and going away, in her mind that would make her seem suspicious to others. Like a hit-and-run, to put it into more understandable terms. Fleeing the scene. Trying to get away. Trying to run away. I believe that she thought her leaving would first, draw unwanted attnention to her and she did not want attention or closer examination of her, and second, would raise suspicions if investigators had any questions about her.

On the other hand, staying and being "available" to the police, she thought that would make her seem like she had nothing to hide. Like, she was just ordinary Amanda, nothing out-of-the-ordinary there. Just as some are saying to this day, that look, obviously she had nothing to do with it, look she still stayed there. She still answered police questions. She still cooperated with police. It is working on people, even to this day.

They didn't leave town. They stayed because that's where they lived and worked and were trying to find another place to rent....with Amanda.

 

[aa9511]

Honestly a, I did hear you the first few times you put this forward. IMO, the reason Amanda stayed in town if innocent is very straightforward and FWIW, also provides a reason for her to stay if guilty.

She was coming out of a phase when she was at least somewhat insecure about her attractiveness and sexuality; and for one solid week had been involved in an intense relationship with an older Italian grad student with his own place who thought SHE was the most exciting woman he'd ever met.

I M O she stayed in Perugia against common sense, and against her parents' wishes, and even though she didn't really have a legitimate place to live because she didn't want to part from Raffaele. You may sneer because you believe she's cold and calculating, but a calculating person would not have made that decision. In your own words, guilty Amanda believed there was nothing to tie Rudy to Meredith (except herself!) so she wouldn't consider him in her calculations.
I still maintain, despite your objections, that a guilty calculating Amanda would have followed the example of the innocent roommates and left town. If anything incriminating against her was found after she left, she would be 1000 X better off for being out of the country.
IMO she stayed because she was in the throes of euphoric new love, and I think that's why she was able to convince Raffaele to stay against his parents' wishes. And it fits with their oddness and inappropriateness in public.

Hmm....Quesarita, you make good points about their love and infatuation with each other. I understand your point. But couldn't they have gone somewhere else, together? In Europe, it is very easy to get from place to place, I thought, and also US passport can get you into any country without need for visa. They could have gone to any city in Italy, to Germany, to Holland, to Paris, to London, or any other gazillion places in between. Or even Greece, Turkey, etc..

You have a very valid point. Just to me, it seems like they purposefully stayed in Perugia.

If they are guilty, then, the "being with each other" does not hold up, because they have been with each other in other places, meaning they could have both gone somewhere else together.

If they are innocent, then yes, the love and infatuation could have made her stay. Maybe she felt safe with Raffaele, and that overrode any fear she had of what had happened in her house.

But the love and infatuation still does not answer the many holes in their stories.

 

[redheadedgal]

You have a very valid point. Just to me, it seems like they purposefully stayed in Perugia.

yes, to finish school and be with each other... b/c they were innocent... unlike RG... who ran away.