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

[Katody]

Of course it could never have happened that way. No one believes that. An earlier altercation would had to have occurred in the afternoon. It would have had to serve as a catalyst for repressed tendencies.

What repressed tendencies? What altercation? Where is the evidence for one or the other?

It's not possible Meredith wouldn't tell the British girls. I don't believe a repressed tendency would manifest so drastically without some signs before.

:no:

 

[SMK]

I highly doubt there is a reliable source for this, originating from the case file.



When we forget to mention there were three other guys there that the girls actually knew well. Presentation is everything, isn't it? Amanda and MK smoked with their neighbors and Guede happened to be there. He was an acquaintance of the guys downstairs, not a friend of Amanda or Meredith.

I guess I am going on intuition and psychological theory - which isn't exactly what would serve as evidence in a court of law. I'll admit that. I have a strong sense of Guede being linked with Amanda. Probably past history of my own being projected here.

 

[Katody]

I had noticed, and now see it is confirmed by Hendry, that the glass shards were almost neatly stacked on the sill.

I cannot imagine Guede doing this during a break-in, nor can I imagine Knox and Sollecito doing this during a simulation:

Not puzzling. Guede had to clear the window frame from sharp pointed shards to reach in. If you watched the TV demonstration, it's clear that placing the pieces you're removing in front of you, on the wide and comfortable ledge is natural, quiet and fast way to do it.

Now let's see how the other side explains it

 

[Katody]

I guess I am going on intuition and psychological theory - which isn't exactly what would serve as evidence in a court of law. I'll admit that. I have a strong sense of Guede being linked with Amanda. Probably past history of my own being projected here.

What theory? So it is a feeling, or reasoning from theory?

 

[aa9511]

No, I don't think the problem with quoting negative attributes is that they're negative - the problem for me is that they seem to come out of thin air because people are trying to come up with a motivation for her to wish harm. I look for supporting testimony of some kind, and I'm not finding it.

I'm not that familiar with the Arias case, but IIRC there was someone who claimed to be an ex-boyfriend who said she stalked him in the same way:

"HLN host and journalist Jane Velez-Mitchell revealed new details about the Jodi Arias murder case, telling "Extra," "The biggest thing I found out that didn't come up in the trial is that Jodi Arias had stalked another boyfriend before… many years before... in pretty much the exact same way that she stalked Travis Alexander and terrorized Travis."

I have not heard of any such stalking being made known of a previous boyfriend, but I'm sure there was. I'm sure she, to some degree "stalked" all her ex-boyfriends. We heard some things here and there like about how they would cheat on her and she would want to get back together with them, but never outright stalking allegations. There could not even be outright stalking allegations towards Travis, because there was never a restraining order put out against her.

My point was, that with all the media attention surrounding the case, for goodness sake, being on HLN 24-7, and I followed the case throughout, and I did not hear much of anything negative coming from her past.

"the problem for me is that they seem to come out of thin air"- so where are the positive attributes coming from? I realize it must be an accumulation of things you have read about her in various places.

To me, she is lying about many things in her case. MOO. That leads me to believe that she is not the perfect little rose she is being made out to be. And it is not only "lying under pressure" during her interrogations. There are many things outside of interrogations. And even in her book years later, which she would have no reason to lie about.

I know you think accusing Patrick was all a big mistake, but I think she was doing it to put the blame on someone else for her own actions. That leads me to believe there is something in her character which allows for her to think it's ok to do that, to get herself out of something by inventing some story, some lie, or by placing the blame on someone else.

As usual, the difference is how we view her comes from our own different perspectives.

You can surely imagine how, if I look at the evidence and come to a conclusion that she's guilty, that would necessarily mean she has lied about things. And how all her lies and how this whole case and the way she has handled it will come across to me.

 

[SMK]

What repressed tendencies? What altercation? Where is the evidence for one or the other?

It's not possible Meredith wouldn't tell the British girls. I don't believe a repressed tendency would manifest so drastically without some signs before.

:no:

You're right. This is all speculation.

There is no evidence that they had an earlier altercation.

There is no real evidence (although there is a strong gestalt) of Amanda and Raffaelle having seething, repressed tendencies, a powder keg waiting for the spark.

It is likely that Meredith would have told the British girls that she had had such an altercation (unless it seemed subtle enough, and she felt the gathering was not the place to bring in such talk).

Follain's text said that the last phone call Stephanie Kercher got from Meredith, before she died, it was said, "Oh, I had a row with my American flat mate" but they then spoke of other things, and Stephanie never got a chance to ask what was the cause of the row.

 

[Amber29]

I think what you both really dislike is the logical consequences of your assertions.

This is not something you've done with 50 questions and twisting words into the meaning you want them to be.

I don't find anything I've said to be illogical or I wouldn't say it. It's all IMO which I've made clear and I'm entitled to.

I think they are guilty while you think they are innocent. Of course we see the evidence differently, there is alot that I think is seen through rose colored glasses and disagree with. I would never refer to it as illogical because I respect people's opinions.

The whole feel of the thread has changed, IMO it makes some not even want to participate because there is an almost "attack" feel.

There's a reason I'm not a poster on the forums dedicated to this case, and that's the reason.

 

[Katody]

The only problem is that there never was any personality disorder or we would have heard about in court.

bbm

Ok, I don't know if I am right about this or not, but I believe personality-things would come in for self-defense cases. Or else, in further phases such as death penalty consideration, after the guilty verdict has already come in.

So I guess if the defendant claims self-defense or mentally ill or something of the sort as their defense. Not sure, though, exactly how the law works on that in US, much less in Italy.

Mignini was able to get a mendacious Daily Mail article on court record as evidence. You think if there was something, anything, it would stay hidden?

Not a single person in Seattle or in Perugia came out with anything suggesting 'personality disorders'.

 

[SMK]

What theory? So it is a feeling, or reasoning from theory?

Both. Intuition which has its basis in experience, and in years of reading broad psychological theory (classical theory of Horney, Earnest Jones, Jung, etc)

 

[SMK]

Mignini was able to get a mendacious Daily Mail article on court record as evidence. You think if there was something, anything, it would stay hidden?

Not a single person in Seattle or in Perugia came out with anything suggesting 'personality disorders'.

I think it's clear that many people have personality disorders (within my own family, serious ones) that go undiagnosed, and the person's other successes more or less balance them out in everyone's eyes.

 

[Katody]

This is not something you've done with 50 questions and twisting words into the meaning you want them to be.

I don't find anything I've said to be illogical or I wouldn't say it. It's all IMO which I've made clear and I'm entitled to.

Sure. In my opinion the theory of clean up and staging becomes nonsensical when we actually try to flesh it out beyond bare assertions. Discussing the actual evidence from the guilt point of view is a minefield, I don't think it's anyone's fault here. If anything it's the prosecution's fault that they went forward with such garbage of a case.

Sticking to psychologizing is always a safe option. We can go forever about alleged psychopatology and repressed sexuality. I will analyze Mignini's and the Perugian "flying squad's" :seeya:

 

[aa9511]

I hate to harp on my own family history, but my family member whom I will call X so as not to violate privacy, had a kind of drug/friendship connection with this guy which I can imagine existed between RS and Guede: X actually knew this guy from a park-like hang out, and X was a Sollecito type: Sweet boy with a dark side.

Now consider:

• Guede lived 1 minute's walk down the street from Sollecito's apt, where Amanda and Raff were spending a lot of time
• Guede also hung at the basketball courts, where drugs could be bought, and which was on the way to the cottage
• Guede was taken by Meredith's prettiness
• Guede had smoked pot with AK and MK downstairs
• Guede came into LeChic
• Sollecito had drug problems such that his father threatened rehab
• One does not call or text this kind of connection as one does not want to leave an electronic record -- one meets face to face

bbm

I thought he was taken with Amanda's prettiness?

Yes, and it could have just been a "relationship" of convenience. For example, Raffaele only talked to Rudy if he needed something (such as drugs). I know there is no direct evidence backing this up, I'm just theorizing/speculating as to the supposed lack of connection.

Normally, when you have someone you basically use to get something you want, you don't really need to be calling them or texting them every day, nor would you probably want to.

For example, if a man is wanting a call-girl, he is probably not going to have that woman's phone number stored in his phone or be calling her or communicating with her regularly. He would find some discreet way to contact her when needed.

Also, as SMK mentioned, the proximity of Rudy's hangout to both Amanda and RS. If he was at the basketball courts a lot, if RS or for that matter Amanda needed anything, they would pretty much know where to find him and around what times.

JMO.

 

[Katody]

I think it's clear that many people have personality disorders (within my own family, serious ones) and they go undiagnosed, and the person's other successes more or less balance them out in everyone's eyes.

I'm not talking about diagnosis. There are always some signs long before anything criminal occurs.

 

[Katody]

Also, as SMK mentioned, the proximity of Rudy's hangout to both Amanda and RS. If he was at the basketball courts a lot, if RS or for that matter Amanda needed anything, they would pretty much know where to find him and around what times.
JMO.

And there would be witnesses.

 

[Katody]

I had noticed, and now see it is confirmed by Hendry, that the glass shards were almost neatly stacked on the sill.

I cannot imagine Guede doing this during a break-in, nor can I imagine Knox and Sollecito doing this during a simulation:

I wonder if anyone would chime in with some explanation. Amber, aa?

 

[aa9511]

Well it was, but it was back in the 1980s so has become a part of the past. I understand that just because it happened in my family, does not mean it happened with Sollecito, Knox, and Guede.

I am just trying to give a frame of reference for why I find such "secret connections" to be believable.

In our case, the guy was stopped by police (he was black, and that was enough for them, as the description my mother gave was a young black man) and was found to have items from our house in his car (jewelry and tech items) and when interrogated he spoke about how he was given knowledge by X. He was arrested for break and entry, rape, assault, theft and convicted. *He was also identified in a lineup by my mother and another family member who knew of him. There were legal ramifications for X as well.

My belief is that there might have been a connection with Guede not seen by others and not leaving a record of texts or emails. "Black man found, found guilty" is sometimes the truth.

Wow SMK, you have an extra layer of connection to and understanding of this case. It's very interesting to hear your unique perspective...thanks.

 

[SMK]

bbm

I thought he was taken with Amanda's prettiness?

Yes, he was initially but in many of the books I've read, it was said that he was taken even more with Meredith's. That she was British and spoke with a British accent may have charmed him as well.

 

[aa9511]

I think what you both really dislike is the logical consequences of your assertions.

:banghead::banghead:

What logical consequences? Have our minds been changed by these supposed logical conclusions/consequences? I don't think so.

Anyway.....

 

[SMK]

Wow SMK, you have an extra layer of connection to and understanding of this case. It's very interesting to hear your unique perspective...thanks.

Thank you for your kind words xx - I just hope my past experience isn't making it TOO believable to me that AK and RS were connected with Guede. Hard to tell how much I am projecting from my own history, and how much is intuition based on real cues and knowledge.... :waitasec:

 

[SMK]

And there would be witnesses.

Not necessarily. Not if Guede dropped by the apartment, or if they chatted with him at night at the basketball courts. How many people would have taken note of this brief relationship?