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

[aa9511]

Like seething and raging angry? Naah.. not that type. She would say it's no longer funny and walk away. She wasn't a five year old after all.

Why would Guede take part in something like this? And suddenly rape and murder her? That's a weak point of it.

Perhaps when the escalation level increased substantially, she did try to walk away. Perhaps they would not let her walk away.

 

[Katody]

By "cold an emotionless reasoning" and "cold logic and reason type," do you mean seeing Amanda's young, rosy-cheeked face and Raffaele's baby-face with cute little glasses and thinking, no way they could have hurt even a little fly.

No, I mean looking at the actual evidence and putting it together into a reasonable, logical scenario that does not defy common sense.

For example: Guede broke in, like was his habit, Meredith came home alone, he raped and killed her, then left. Simple, sensible, matches the evidence.

 

[Katody]

Yes Michael says he arrived the first time at 7:51. So does that mean he left and came back without the camera catching him?

Why not?

 

[aa9511]

I agree fully. I have even had that type of thing happen myself - not with a prank, but with someone saying things I hadn't been aware that they felt. It can be shocking. And if you are vulnerable, and drunk or stoned, it could be quite alarming. Guede had said that Meredith said, "I really can't stand that drugged-up tart" - doesn't really sound like Meredith, but maybe she was, as you say, letting some pent up frustration out, with insults.

Yes, it's like someone just turning on you suddenly. Out of nowhere. And perhhaps it goes back to the "disappointment" factor. She disappointed someone else in her life.

I think females would understand the emotion of this better than males do.

Normal people would get hurt, but just move on. But obviously, for Amanda to have been part of this, there is something about her that is not normal.

 

[Katody]

Perhaps when the escalation level increased substantially, she did try to walk away. Perhaps they would not let her walk away.

Why would Guede take part in this. He already had enough troubles with the police. Why would Raffaele do this? If there was some argument between the girls, neither of the Italians would understand what is being said.

I don't know. It seems so far fetched, completely contrived. Just like Crini's poo story.

I still like my own theory more.

 

[aa9511]

And then Guede out of nowhere rapes and kills her. OK.

I didn't say "out of nowhere." I said it was an escalation, and included everyone, not just Rudy.

 

[aa9511]

Yes, these are all apt illustrations.

This is why I am constantly checking myself, reigning myself in, as it were. Attempting to see both sides , and find the middle point, the balance....there is always the human temptation to be drawn in, bewitched by psychology and depths - and if these are all in keeping with the facts, fine.

But they have been known to lead one astray, and far away from the facts. And then you are like the shipwrecked sailor, who has followed the siren call to disaster. Reason has to reign in the deeper passions and inspirations.... Or it can draw you into madness.....

SMK, you are very deep today

 

[Katody]

I didn't say "out of nowhere." I said it was an escalation, and included everyone, not just Rudy.

Why would it include the guys? They don't understand woman nature and "disappointment" feelings. Not to mention the language barrier.

And speaking about human nature, when two girls fight, it's not in the nature of a man to join in.

 

[aa9511]

No one felt this way, until Hendry placed Guede as a lone wolf, coming in through that window. Hendry really has enormous power. He absolutely shifted the narrative....

So what did the innocence side think before Hendry came out? What did they think before lone-wolf, I mean?

Yes, anything and anyone can seem convincing without any side to debate it. I would love for someone to break this Hendry thing down piece-by-piece, point-by-point, pointing out the logic or illogic of it....and then let's see how his theory actually stands up. After that book comes out, then I will read Hendry and right afterwards this other book. One right after the other.

 

[aa9511]

Yes Michael says he arrived the first time at 7:51. So does that mean he left and came back without the camera catching him?

What about all the food he would have cooked up by then? Where did all of that go?

 

[aa9511]

No, I mean looking at the actual evidence and putting it together into a reasonable, logical scenario that does not defy common sense.

For example: Guede broke in, like was his habit, Meredith came home alone, he raped and killed her, then left. Simple, sensible, matches the evidence.

Except it doesn't match with the details.

 

[aa9511]

Why would Guede take part in this. He already had enough troubles with the police. Why would Raffaele do this? If there was some argument between the girls, neither of the Italians would understand what is being said.

I don't know. It seems so far fetched, completely contrived. Just like Crini's poo story.

I still like my own theory more.

bbm



I know you like your own theory very much.

 

[Amber29]

Why not?

Well one of the arguments I have always heard is that AK isn't on the camera. I've always said the camera doesn't see everyone who comes and goes from the cottage and the fact that some have RG coming and going multiple times means that's true. Tbh I don't even believe the 7:51 image is RG. So what time do you think RG broke in?

 

[Katody]

Except it doesn't match with the details.

I think it does. OTOH to match the prosecution's theory (or yours which is similar), you would have to materialize it first from the nebulous state it is in.

Trying to make it into something solid results in oddities like the ultra precise spot clean up of prints that leaves nothing detectable by luminol.

 

[Katody]

Well one of the arguments I have always heard is that AK isn't on the camera. I've always said the camera doesn't see everyone who comes and goes from the cottage and the fact that some have RG coming and going multiple times means that's true. Tbh I don't even believe the 7:51 image is RG. So what time do you think RG broke in?

Some minutes before 9pm. He had time to defecate and not much more.

 

[aa9511]

Why would it include the guys? They don't understand woman nature and "disappointment" feelings. Not to mention the language barrier.

And speaking about human nature, when two girls fight, it's not in the nature of a man to join in.

I don't know who would have said what and done what at exactly what time. IMO, an escalation is very possible. You are coming from the viewpoint that 2 of these people are completely normal. yes, I agree, it doesn't make sense when you consider it with normal people. Normal people would not go and stab someone, either.

But if we look at the evidence as a whole, and we come to the conclusion that the participants of the assault and murder were Rudy, Amanda, and RS, then that means that all 3 are not normal people. Thus, you have 3 erratic people together, something happened. Something happened.

I think SMK and I and others have laid out possible scenarios of how the escalation could have occured. We do not know exactly what happened. Just like you don't know exactly what happened with Rudy - was he in the bathroom, was Meredith home already, where did they first see each other in the house, was he on the toilet or somewhere else?

So for example you said, why did the guys join in? Well, we don't know who started the general teasing, if that's what happened. Maybe Amanda, maybe RS, maybe Rudy, maybe all 3 together. Maybe there was no argument at all in the beginning. Maybe like, I suggested, it could have been that they saw Meredith b/c she came into the kitchen, they asked her to join them, "come on, come on," she didn't want to....she goes back to her room. Amanda comes up with a "prank" to inject "life" into the party - "hey guys, let's go in there and (insert prank)." They do some prank, or do something to annoy Meredith, she gets annoyed, maybe she 'overreacts' then, hurts Amanda's feelings. Maybe she doesn't overreact then, maybe she doesn't react much, so Amanda, RS, and Rudy continue to pester her and annoy her.

I don't know exactly what happened, none of us do. I don't think the idea of an esclation is far-fetched at all.

 

[Katody]

Well one of the arguments I have always heard is that AK isn't on the camera. I've always said the camera doesn't see everyone who comes and goes from the cottage and the fact that some have RG coming and going multiple times means that's true.

Speaking about cameras. I would assume the first thing a modern police force does when a murder happens is sequestering each end every municipal and private cctv recordings from the general area.

There were quite a few on the street where Raffaele lived and on the way to via della Pergola 7. It's very baffling that the police didn't have the material to immediately contradict Amanda's and Raffaele's story. I don't recall now if they said they forgot to secure the recordings or was there some other explanation. Odd and suspicious, anyway.

 

[Katody]

I don't know who would have said what and done what at exactly what time. IMO, an escalation is very possible. You are coming from the viewpoint that 2 of these people are completely normal. yes, I agree, it doesn't make sense when you consider it with normal people. Normal people would not go and stab someone, either.

But if we look at the evidence as a whole, and we come to the conclusion that the participants of the assault and murder were Rudy, Amanda, and RS, then that means that all 3 are not normal people. Thus, you have 3 erratic people together, something happened. Something happened.

Well if you start with the assumption of guilt you can for sure arrive back at guilt

What is interesting that if you assume all 3 people did this, suddenly very improbable things absolutely need to be also inferred. One person happens to have undiagnosed mental problems, I can understand. Three such people meet by chance and murder someone, well I'm starting to look around for something more plausible.
No traces of 2 people of that 3 at all? No problem, we just postulate a super ultra clean up. Etc. etc.

 

[Katody]

I think SMK and I and others have laid out possible scenarios of how the escalation could have occured.

I don't think they did.

We do not know exactly what happened.

That's a problem.

Just like you don't know exactly what happened with Rudy - was he in the bathroom, was Meredith home already, where did they first see each other in the house, was he on the toilet or somewhere else?

But I know this things. I know Meredith wasn't home, I know he was on the toilet, I know he went to the bathroom after the stabbing. It is visible in the evidence. The evidence tells the story.

So for example you said, why did the guys join in? Well, we don't know who started the general teasing, if that's what happened. Maybe Amanda, maybe RS, maybe Rudy, maybe all 3 together. Maybe there was no argument at all in the beginning. Maybe like, I suggested, it could have been that they saw Meredith b/c she came into the kitchen, they asked her to join them, "come on, come on," she didn't want to....she goes back to her room. Amanda comes up with a "prank" to inject "life" into the party - "hey guys, let's go in there and (insert prank)." They do some prank, or do something to annoy Meredith, she gets annoyed, maybe she 'overreacts' then, hurts Amanda's feelings. Maybe she doesn't overreact then, maybe she doesn't react much, so Amanda, RS, and Rudy continue to pester her and annoy her.

Why not just choose one version of the above that common sense tells you is the best and tell it properly and believably?

Why is there need for maybes when you are in full control of the story (in the sense that it doesn't overlap with any data points from the physical evidence).

And that's another problem. I'd love to see the picture you and others draw to actually include the evidence, the points of data, those contested and those agreed on, the times, the traces, everything or at least something.

 

[Tugela]

I believe RGs blood was found in his bathroom, it could be true that his blood can't be dated there (like said of AK) but IMO it's proof he was actively bleeding that night. I could be wrong it's been awhile since I've looked at the evidence collected from his apartment bathroom.

ETA yes I just looked back over his blood was found on a towel, in the drain basin in his bathroom, and on the floor. Seems he was bleeding quite a bit IMO.

But not necessarily as a result of the MK murder. If he made a habit of burglary and petty crime, it could have happened just about any time. There is no evidence that he cut himself at the cottage. He may have, but in the absence of definitive evidence it is just speculation.