Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#11

[redheadedgal]

hmmm....this is becoming very reminscient of Jodi Arias case (sorry, Redhead).

lol-- sweetie, for the last time, i don't mind... carry on! :detective:

does anyone believe it's possible meredith grabbed ahold of the lamp to use it as a weapon? did she throw it at guede? or maybe he grabbed it?

bumping my question... does no one believe this ^^^ could be a possibility?

 

[aa9511]

Exactly! It's odd, as if he's saying he's NOT just the "little boyfriend" and he's tired of being thought of and talked about that way. MOO

Yes, exactly. Two things I think of, 1. like I said earlier, maybe wanting to make himself out like a hero. 2. money-wise, maybe he wants to appear more "in it" now that he has the opportunity to make money off of it, such as his book and other publicity things.

 

[Katody]

No, I am stating for the record here that I do not agree with you that there are no actual signs of rummaging the room apart from the disputed clothes on the shelf. I never said that. I do think there was rummaging in the room, I have said that many many times in various posts, and I believe you know it.

Looking at the photos you posted, which things do you think are disturbed and which are as Filomena left them?

I have also asked you many times, when do you believe Rudy rummaged through Filomena's room? If I did not believe the room had been rummaged, why would I say that?

Because of misunderstanding? I wrote clearly I don't believe there was any rummaging. You followed with this question.

I have stated here that the room looks to me like it is very chaotic, and that I don't believe that Filomena left it like that. That means that either Rudy made it look that way, or Amanda and RS made it look that way.

Do you think the things on the table are chaotic because they were staged as such? What about the bags and shoes on the floor? Staged?

Now, as far as the wardrobe goes, both the cable and Rudy grasping it, if it tilted to the point where clothes started falling off the shelves, then IMO it would have fallen all the way to the ground (the wardrobe). How would it tilt to the point of clothes falling off, and then come back up again? There was no rocking motion. It's not like there was a shaking like as in an earthquake. It would have been direct pressure on it in the forward direction, not shaking. The cable putting direct pressure on it forward-direction. Or Rudy putting direct pressure on it, forward-direction.

It didn't tilt, it shook, twisting along vertical axis. Apparently you never had cheap and wonky ikea furniture. The shelf was overstuffed already and the outer stack of clothes tipped over and fell out.

 

[Amber29]

lol-- sweetie, for the last time, i don't mind... carry on! :detective:




bumping my question... does no one believe this ^^^ could be a possibility?

I don't know about this, could be a possibility yes I had never thought of it. It's defiantly a better scenario then some I've heard.

I just have to say because it was linked earlier and though I've seen it many times, I hate seeing that footage of MK crossing the road. It is so very sad knowing what happens to her in her home that night not long after that video footage.

 

[aa9511]

There is no evidence of motive for Amanda to send Rudy to rob or assault or attack Meredith. As far as I know there is no evidence of any ill-will on Amanda's part towards Meredith. Amanda and Rudy barely knew each other. Correct? Did Raffaele and Rudy ever meet? There are no phone calls, texts, or emails between Amanda and Rudy. When did they formulate this plan? There is little or no evidence that Amanda ever had the opportunity to ask Rudy to rob/assault/attack Meredith. And if Amanda sent Rudy to rob from Meredith was he just supposed to leave Amanda's belongings behind?

SMK's theory does absolve Amanda of any role in the physical attack on Meredith but it actually paints Amanda in a much more devious and diabolical light than even the prosecutors were willing to do. It actually requires that she set out to harm Meredith hours before she was attacked. There is absolutely no evidence that Amanda was capable of or had any motive to do such a thing.

As you suggest, SMK's theory does throw out much the evidence that has been used to implicate Amanda and Raffaele. The knife, the bra clasp, the identification of the bath mat print as Raffaele's, much of the eyewitness testimony all are inconsistent with SMK's theory.

The linguistic analysis is pure poppycock. It certainly wouldn't be accepted in any American court. I doubt it would ever be allowed in the Italian courts.

bbm

Again, what evidence did SMK throw out? I don't believe he threw out any evidence....I am not understanding your and Katody's viewpoint of this.

What do you mean, "the knife, the bra clasp, the bath mat print, the identification of the bath mat print as Raffaele's, much of the eyewitness testimony are all inconsistent with SMK's theory?"

SMK did not throw out any of that evidence. No more than the innocent-side has thrown it out.

He is saying that Rudy committed the murder, but Amanda and RS did the cover-up, staging.

That is not throwing away any evidence.

 

[aa9511]

lol-- sweetie, for the last time, i don't mind... carry on! :detective:




bumping my question... does no one believe this ^^^ could be a possibility?

Ok, thanks.

No, I don't think that's what happened. Why would she grab a lamp from Amanda's room, then take it to her own room before she threw it?

 

[redheadedgal]

But omg -- I think you may be right. He may in fact harbor massive resentment against her: Both for her emasculating overshadowing of him, and for basically having utterly destroyed his life. And yes, he does hold that power in his hands. And now that you have pointed this out as a veiled threat, yes, it may be a very pointed one, and aimed at her and hers. Feel kind of dumb now for having blathered on about Knox and Sollecito, and not having actually focused on the pages at hand....:blushing:

how is amanda to blame for destroying his life? if they're innocent, she didn't chose to be the friend/roommate of a murder victim. it wasn't her fault the police and prosecution focused on her. and if they're guilty, they both were involved, right?

 

[MichaelSmith]

Is there a link somewhere to the picture of the alleged stain?
What do you mean, lay there passively? She would have had to have lay somewhere passively for Rudy to slash her throat, in any case, correct? I do not think she lay passively, I think she was being restrained.

Yes. There's also photos in Professor Vinci's report.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/Vinci.pdf

 

[redheadedgal]

does anyone remember where we discussed the statement of RS where he said that what he'd told the police was a "sack of ****"? i can't find it...

 

[Harmony 2]

i said (and implied) no such thing re: both bolds. i was merely brainstorming as someone recently suggested.

imo this is one more example of trying to read too much into things, much like buying underwear and not attending a memorial means amanda is uncaring, selfish and not a true friend.


does anyone believe it's possible meredith grabbed ahold of the lamp to use it as a weapon? did she throw it at guede? or maybe he grabbed it?




thanks, but it wasn't all me. i amalgamated info from a few sites and added my own points.

Regarding the lamp, I read this theory elsewhere ( can't recall where) but I thought it was plausible. I recall reading that Meredith and her friends were looking at photos that night before she left to the cottage. The night before Meredith had dressed up for Halloween and perhaps she borrowed the lamp to use in photographing herself in costume before leaving to go out on the town. The lighting direction can convey moods in photos and lighting from below would add drama and an eerie feel to a photo. This video shows the effects lighting creates:

http://video.about.com/desktopvideo/Lighting--Effect-of-Direction.htm

Here is a photo of Meredith at a Halloween party:

link

 

[aa9511]

Looking at the photos you posted, which things do you think are disturbed and which are as Filomena left them?


Because of misunderstanding? I wrote clearly I don't believe there was any rummaging. You followed with this question.




Do you think the things on the table are chaotic because they were staged as such? What about the bags and shoes on the floor? Staged?


It didn't tilt, it shook, twisting along vertical axis. Apparently you never had cheap and wonky ikea furniture. The shelf was overstuffed already and the outer stack of clothes tipped over and fell out.

-Clothes everywhere, the things on her bed, some kind of blue bags on her bed, papers lying on floor, brown/beige plaid bag in the middle of the room (do you honestly think she would have left that there right in the middle of the room?), bag and stuff underneath the window, slippers strewn about, boots on floor knocked down and thrown about, clothes obviously next to and around the wardrobe, clothes under the window, clothes thrown on bed, I believe there is another purse in their somewhere seemingly thrown somewhere on the floor.....also I think there is a water bottle thrown on the floor somewhere in there....
I am not sure of the things on the white table, I just don't know....the things on the nightstand definately seem moved around like someone ruffled it up, I do not know about the white table b/c in the photos it doesn't show the entire table.....

-No, I was saying why would I ask you about "rummaging" if I didn't believe there was any rummaging in the room other than the "disputable" clothes? Because you said that I "guess we agree that there was no other rummaging besides the disputable clothes" or something along those lines. So I was trying to point out that I thought I had made it very clear in my past posts that I believe the room was made to look like it was rummaged-through.

-I answered this above. Table, I'm not sure as they don't have a full view of the entire table. Bags and shoes, definately yes.

-I don't think the thud of a one rock would cause even an Ikea wardrobe to shake. It's not like there was particularly heavy one, or like there was a number of rocks like in an earthquake or something. Rudy grasping on it to do what? I would think it would be trying to pull himself in through the window, that is if the door of the wardrobe was even open to begin with, and that would have put force on it forward-moving, so the wardrobe would have fallen down.

Actually the wardrobe has nothing to do with the window, I believe you are only putting the two together because that conveniently favors your argument. It would mean someone came in through the window, and also possibly account for why there would be no lights on in Filomena's room (because Rudy never actually looked through anything). I don't see how it helps your argument re: glass on top of clothes, because the actions you listed which would have resulted in the clothes falling off would have happened after the glass had already fallen onto the floor. I believe the only reason you are putting the two together is because they are in relatively close proximity to each other, and it favors your argument. Because I do not see how the wardrobe and the window, meaning the activity involved in physically breaking and entering through the window, has anything to do with the wardrobe. If the wardrobe was on the other side of the room, could you also make the argument that the, I guess, vibrations, from the rock made it tilt forward once to throw the clothes out, and then rock back to set itself back into place?

 

[aa9511]

Yes. There's also photos in Professor Vinci's report.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/Vinci.pdf

Well, it is a bit uncomfortable to talk about, but I would think it have blended in more with the pillowcase. That looks almost like old pillowcases which yellow over time (old ones I mean). I have seen a few like those. I don't know.

 

[aa9511]

Regarding the lamp, I read this theory elsewhere ( can't recall where) but I thought it was plausible. I recall reading that Meredith and her friends were looking at photos that night before she left to the cottage. The night before Meredith had dressed up for Halloween and perhaps she borrowed the lamp to use in photographing herself in costume before leaving to go out on the town. The lighting direction can convey moods in photos and lighting from below would add drama and an eerie feel to a photo. This video shows the effects lighting creates:

http://video.about.com/desktopvideo/Lighting--Effect-of-Direction.htm

Here is a photo of Meredith at a Halloween party:

link

That is interesting, but why wouldn't she just use her own lamp? Or why wouldn't she just take the quick photo or two in Amanda's room where the lamp was already plugged in? That way she wouldn't have to unplug it, take it to her room, then plug it back in just to take a couple of pics?

Also, it seems to me like Meredith was not really the type to go around borrowing other people's things. I'm not trying to make it sound like people who do are not doing the right thing - that's not it at all, it's just that my situation gives me more of an understanding of people like that. Because my sister is the type to never borrow someone's thing, no matter how small, without asking them first, and well, I am not that way. I will go around borrowing her everything, and it drives her crazy. Whereas she won't even borrow a hairband of mine without asking me first. Meredith seems to me to be more like my sister. I don't know if she would even go into Amanda's room without her being there or asking her permission.

I also have to add, beautiful girl.

 

[MichaelSmith]

Regarding the lamp, I read this theory elsewhere ( can't recall where) but I thought it was plausible. I recall reading that Meredith and her friends were looking at photos that night before she left to the cottage. The night before Meredith had dressed up for Halloween and perhaps she borrowed the lamp to use in photographing herself in costume before leaving to go out on the town. The lighting direction can convey moods in photos and lighting from below would add drama and an eerie feel to a photo. This video shows the effects lighting creates:

http://video.about.com/desktopvideo/Lighting--Effect-of-Direction.htm

Here is a photo of Meredith at a Halloween party:

link

I like your theory Harmony and don't think I've ever seen anyone suggest it before. I've switched many times between borrowed by Meredith or used by a cop. There's also the Guede grabbed it for some reason one.

People borrowing things without asking in these student share accommodation arrangements happens all the time and Amanda hadn't been sleeping there so probably wouldn't have noticed or minded a friend doing that.

 

[SMK]

So do you think maybe he thought there was a chance of them getting back together if they ever got out?

Maybe. Maybe so ......

 

[SMK]

I guess in the end my theory is neither here nor there:

In any case, the prosecution has her in a much worse position than I have placed her, no matter how "diabolical" I have made her: the prosecution has her wielding the knife which killed Kercher, conducting a clean up, and a simulation, stealing. In their scenario, Guede is at her beck and almost a bit player. I would say their's is the diabolical Amanda, and not mine.

As far as the neuro-linguistic analysis being "poppycock": It at least absolved her of murder and clean up. As things stand, she may be convicted of murder, theft, simulation, carrying a knife, sexual assault.

 

[SMK]

How does it work?
Being a latebloomer implying wishing "sexual harm"?
Never heard of such phenomenon, to be honest.

Actually, there is such a thing as "latency syndrome". But never mind. :furious: My theory doesn't need to be given any weight at all, as the prosecution doesn't buy it: They have Knox in a far more active role, committing murder, assault, theft, simulation, carrying a weapon - and seem poised to throw the book at her.

 

[SMK]

In Verona?

Who's footprint is on the bathmat in your scenario?

You get rid of most of the evidence and most witnesses in your scenario. It's ironic and sad that it makes it 'easier to prosecute'.

It's news. Did the analyst testify? In which trial?

Sorry, Katody - everything I have told you in my theory is a sack of s**t; but I was trying to absolve Amanda, and didn't think of the inconsistencies. :laugh:

 

[aa9511]

I like your theory Harmony and don't think I've ever seen anyone suggest it before. I've switched many times between borrowed by Meredith or used by a cop. There's also the Guede grabbed it for some reason one.

People borrowing things without asking in these student share accommodation arrangements happens all the time and Amanda hadn't been sleeping there so probably wouldn't have noticed or minded a friend doing that.

Funny how Amanda taking it in there is not even on your list of theories about what happened to Amanda's lamp.

You don't want to believe Amanda's lying, yet you are more than willing to believe that a cop is lying, when the prior would have much more incentive to lie in a guilty scenario.

The other person who's in your theory, Meredith, is dead and so we will never have any answer from her.

Guede is not talking, so we will never have any answer from him.

So that is 2/3 that cannot say anything, therefore you're left with the one which I think you want to believe did it, the cop. Funny how that works out in your favor.

 

[SMK]

In terms of a clean up: Can anyone suppose why Knox and Sollecito would have been in bare feet? I would think socks or shoes would give one a better chance of not being identified in a luminol test. Just wondering :waitasec: