Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL* #2

[aa9511]

What experience do you have that makes your instincts credible here? (I'm not trying to be unkind. I know *I* have no such experience.)

How do you know how "innocent people" do or do not phrase things? How do you know how Amanda Knox phrases things?

To me, the most logical explanation for her being "happy", as she puts it, is that she knows she has an alibi and she expects to be released shortly--and NOT held in jail for a year.

I know my reply is a bit late, I have been away from here for a few days.

Nova, my "experience" is a member of society, and a human being myself just like Amanda. Like in the jury instructions, where they instruct the jury that they can use their own "common sense" and their own "life experiences." I'm sorry, but I don't need a PhD in Criminology: How Innocent People Talk to speak about this topic. :floorlaugh:

 

[aa9511]

Yes I know.... remember way back when I was a big supporter of AK...

but it bugs me how a person could feel safe with someone they only recent met, cannot fluently converse with and who's fantasies as so akin to the bloody gory horror that just took place in a bedroom just so many feet from yours.

OldSteve, may I ask what made you change your opinion of Amanda's involvement?

 

[aa9511]

BBM: Exactly !

And that is why Knox and Raf had that "deer in the headlights" look :scared: on their faces when the Postal Police arrived because they had NOT called the Emergency # ...

Surprise Surprise ... they did NOT expect Meredith's 2 cell phones to be found so quickly, or to be found at all ...

:doh: I bet they regret NOT turning off the ringer on those 2 cell phones ...

:twocents:

bbm

And their actions fully support this fact. They were not expecting the police. They were gonna go on their little trip, get a call from Filomena after she inevitably discovered the body, THAT was when they were going to make calls to Mom (AK) and Sister (RS). There would have been no need for them to ever call the police. Can you imagine their emotions when they saw the police walking up to the door, knowing what was inside, and they were standing right outside the door?

 

[Footwarrior]

"in the meantime" can mean "before the carabinieri arrived" as well as "before I made the call".

This cherry-picking of partial phrases out of context gets really tiresome. From now on, I'm going to resist the impulse to correct each and every distortion of the record.

The defense used a combination of security video from the car park and cell phone records to prove Raffaele's 112 call was made before the Postal Police arrived.

 

[aa9511]

This statement from Sollecito is also interesting:

"She opened the door with her keys and I went in. I noticed that Filomena's door was wide open and there was broken glass on the floor and the room was in a mess. Amanda's door was open but it was tidy. Then I went towards Meredith's door and saw that it was locked. "
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1568640/Suspect-statements-in-Kercher-murder-case.html

He says that Filomina's bedroom door was wide open, meaning that Knox would have seen the broken window when she went to Filomina/Laura's bathroom, and then she went for lunch. He also claims that he "saw" that Meredith's door was locked. That would be impossible to see.

Yes, Otto, good point! I have also wondered this very obvious point of how come RS immediately saw the broken glass, but Amanda didn't see it? Maybe she thought that was just a "normal" thing too....and of course we are supposed to accept her version of a "normal" world and not question it one iota because then, gasp, we wouldn't be acknowledging people's differences. Because, you know, some people may think there are flying pigs, and it would be very offensive if we sit here from our little computers and try to say that they're not "normal" or that that is factually incorrect. We have to accept that there are 6 billion different views of the world. And Amanda's is just one of those 6 billion, so who are we to judge?? OH! THe injustice of it all!!!

 

[aa9511]

My understanding from watching and reading all the interviews was that they were her friends long before, during and after the events in Italy. Some of her friends even went there to testify on her behalf at the trial...

*resp. snipped

What her friends say from back in the U.S. doesn't really carry that much weight for me, because in a sense, she had the freedom to completely re-invent herself in Italy. No one knew her past, no one knew anything about her. She could explore whatever side of her she wanted. Oh, also big point - NO FAMILY THERE. Absolutely no one she had to be accountable to or be responsible for.

It's just natural, really, I imagine I would do some of the same. If I went to some place where no one knew me, no one knew my family, no one knew anyone from my "previous" life, I would probably "change" some things about me from the very beginning. One example is, I almost never like to wear sort of "revealing" clothing....over there I would probably wear some low-cut shirts and get some sexy-vixen look on. :floorlaugh::floorlaugh: haha, seriously thought, I would! So that is just a small small example, but you see how for someone with some shady/seedy/dark thoughts, it could all go horribly wrong.

 

[aa9511]

What does CMIIW mean?

Regarding friends in Italy, I think that people closed Knox off, or avoided her, rather than she closed them off. Other than the language school instructor, I don't think that anyone that knew Knox in Perugia was prepared to speak on her behalf.

1. Knox made friends with Patrick and got a job in his bar. We know what she did with that friendship.
2. She befriended the men that lived downstairs in the cottage and had a one night fling with one of them. We haven't heard anything else about him, so I think that was a short term friendship.
3. We know that Knox befriended Guede, that they had met in the plazas a couple of times and that they smoked hash or pot together in the downstairs flat. During trial, knowing that Guede participated in Meredith's murder, she stated that she was not afraid of him
4. Knox had a boyfriend in Seattle when she went to Perugia, but we know that she didn't value this relationship because she was intimate with several men shortly after arriving in Europe. In conversations with her roommates, she expressed feeling "guilt" regarding her relationships with her Seattle boyfriend and Sollecito
5. Her uncle in Germany had secured a job for her in Germany. An apartment was available for the person that filled the position. Knox showed up for the job for one or two days, then said she didn't feel well, and didn't go back. She stayed in the apartment for the time that she should have been working. I doubt she made any friends at that time.
6. Knox was introduced to Meredith's friends, but after a couple of weeks, they didn't want to spend time with her. Laura, Filomina and Meredith all attended parties on Halloween and, although Knox wanted to join Meredith and her friends, she was not invited. (p72 Massei)
7. Knox met Sollecito and immediately began staying with him at his apartment.

Generally speaking, Knox appears to have gravitated towards people that used illegal drugs, and to have intimate relationships with men that she didn't know. Healthier relationships, such as those with Laura, Filomina, Meredith and her friends, were short term and did not appear to be going anywhere.

"After inviting Knox, a Jesuit-educated student, to live with her and two other English students in their cottage, Meredith Kercher soon began having reservations about Knox, particularly about her bringing "strange men" to the house."

http://www.theweek.co.uk/film/amanda-knox/55260/amanda-knox-film-beckinsale-joins-cast#ixzz2hzmqxFIl

Otto, in one of her statements she also said that one of the things that she and RS supposedly talked about that night when they were supposedly at his place the whole night......was about high school and how he was unpopular in school and so was she. I think it's one of those Jodi Arias-type things, where females can just sense in other females that there is something wrong with this girl.

 

[aa9511]

Thinking more and BBM - it's the changing of their stories that bothers me now. The truth is just that.

Okay, one can add more facts to an account as they might be recalled, but when a person presents different versions of what took place - I see that as indicative of guilt.

Add to when those involved in a crime seek to coordinate their account of events in a way that goes beyond just filling in details of an original account - once again I see that as indication of guilt.

In some cases that's all I would need to say "guilty".

Good forensics are important, .. but when there are only minute DNA traces and/or lots of other details that can be explained in different ways and labored over for hours upon hours in a trial (ha, here on WS too) it becomes a way of confusing and using science to draw attention away from human behavior.

Good Post!!!!!!!!

 

[aa9511]

It's interesting that you say this because this has been a major factor in my thinking about the case - the extent to which we can rely on purely 'scientific' evidence as opposed to looking at how the various human beings in this case behaved and how their behaviour fits with our own experience and intuition. As a scientist I have a healthy skepticism about the reliability of any and all scientific data.

To me the one piece of evidence that points to guilt is the DNA match for Meredith on the knife in Sollecito's apartment. There are however significant scientific issues even with that data.

On the other hand for all of the attempts to microanalyze the behavior of Knox and Sollecito over the years for me there is absolutely nothing that stands up as evidence of their involvement in the death of Meredith. Either people are way overanalyzing their behavior and seeing conciousness of guilt that isn't there OR the evidence is based on things said or done by Knox and Sollecito under conditions of extreme stress. We know based on both scientific studies and anecdotal evidence that well-meaning innocent people can give false confessions and misleading information to police.

At the same time, my intuition and my experience tell me that it would be extremely unusual for them to have been involved in the murder. Scientists like to say "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." To me the claim that Knox and Sollecito committed or participated in this murder is an extraordinary claim. I've yet to hear a convincing "story" to explain to me how and more importantly why they got involved in the death of Meredith. THis is especially true given that there is a simple explanation, consistent with typical human experience, for who killed Meredith. It is absolutely not necessary to invoke the extraordinary.

For me the "behavioral" data pointing towards innocence greatly outweighs the weak "scientific" data pointing towards guilt.

bbm


But actually the "behavioral data" points towards their guilt. This point is not debatable because it obviously does, from the "false" confessions to the changing of stories to the accusing an innocent man and on to the less significant things like cartwheels, etc..

So I don't see how you can say the behavioral data points towards their innocence? Now whether one chooses to believe that data or not is the question I suppose.....I suppose we could say the whole case is fiction and that Meredith never really died?

 

[Snoods]

"Anyone can claim to teach playwriting"? Yeah, because it's such a lucrative and prestigious profession in our culture.

If I were going to lie about my area of expertise, wouldn't I claim to to be a forensic specialist or at least an expert in Italian law? Come on.

***

The point remains that AK stayed behind and continued to answer questions. The false implication of Lumumba didn't come for 5 days. The British roommates couldn't be bothered and instead hightailed it back to England. I guess they don't have souls either.

I don't have a dog in this hunt, but I had to smile just a bit about Otto's accusation and your comeback was pretty witty, Nova. No offense Otto, but Nova may have you on this one.

I occasionally lurk on this thread and am now slowly slinking back to lurkdom....

 

[Snoods]

I know my reply is a bit late, I have been away from here for a few days.

Nova, my "experience" is a member of society, and a human being myself just like Amanda. Like in the jury instructions, where they instruct the jury that they can use their own "common sense" and their own "life experiences." I'm sorry, but I don't need a PhD in Criminology: How Innocent People Talk to speak about this topic. :floorlaugh:

Okay, butting my nose in again. IMO what Nova was trying to say was that only people that have had the unique experience of being accused of a heinous crime while being innocent understand how you would react in that situation. Innocent people behave differently, there isn't an "How Innocent People Talk" chapter in the PhD in Criminology for a reason. It's all educated guess work. Otherwise it would be really easy to throw all the guilty people in jail because they were talking guilty speak.

I've gone back and forth on Amanda, from guilty to innocent and now I just don't know. I was trying to read up on everyone's opinion to help me make up my mind. But I don't want to get ganged up on and laughed at for stating an opinion! Seems to be getting really personal in here. Should I stay lurking? Eh, probably not.

 

[Snoods]

I'd like to hear from both sides on this. This has been a sticking point towards innocence for me. If guilty, why did RS never roll on AK? He was offered a plea deal. He could have testified against Amanda and received a much lighter sentence, but he never budged.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I'd like to hear from both sides on this. This has been a sticking point towards innocence for me. If guilty, why did RS never roll on AK? He was offered a plea deal. He could have testified against Amanda and received a much lighter sentence, but he never budged.

He rolled the dice and won. IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Snoods]

He rolled the dice and won. IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

Hi Linda:seeya: He didn't know they'd get a new trial though. He thought he was in jail for life, right? So he rolled the dice and lost. Even after they were granted a new trial he didn't turn on her.

 

[Whisperer]

What length of time passed between AK dropping her blood on the murder weapon and it being used for the murder?

 

[Snoods]

What length of time passed between AK dropping her blood on the murder weapon and it being used for the murder?

If this is directed at me I confess to be an newbie on this thread:blushing:

It's consuming to read all the posts, but thanks all you posting!I only recently started following the retrial and kept up with some of the past trial. I admit I didn't know a murder weapon with Amanda's blood on it was found. I know there is a knife in evidence, but I don't think it has ever been proven as the murder weapon. I could be wrong, but please read report: recent data from this article Dated October 16, 2013

quote from recent article"
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_...-win-for-american-accused-of-murder-in-italy/

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_...or-american-accused-of-murder-in-italy/Quote:

One of the big items trashed was the prosecution's claim they had found the knife that killed Meredith Kercher. The supposed murder weapon was discovered in a moment of clairvoyance by a Perugia police officer who apparently knew exactly which knife, among many in a kitchen drawer in Sollecito's apartment, was "the" knife. It was worthy of an episode on MythBusters. And, indeed, the myth was "busted" by the 2011 appellate court when it dismissed the kitchen knife as the weapon that killed Meredith Kercher.eapon was tested
This past weekend the results of the initial test on trace number 36-i were leaked to Italian media. The DNA isn't Meredith Kercher's. Nor is it Rudy Guede's. So there is still zero proof the kitchen knife is the murder weapon. The myth looks to be "busted" a second time.

The leaked test results say trace 36-i is Amanda Knox's DNA. Since the knife came from Sollecito's Perugia apartment in 2007, and Amanda Knox prepared food in that apartment, there is little mystery as to how Knox's DNA got on the kitchen knife.

So the murder weapon was handled by Amanda Know, in RS kitchen, without any Meredithc Kercher or Rudy Guede DNA, so it was just a random drawer with a knife that the prosecution chose as the murder weapon. The articles I'm finding today all seem to point in one direction.no DNA on the knife.

Sorry y'all, it's been a long night feeding 3 week old kittens every hour on the hour so break me in with kindness! Then you can drag me through the coals the morning!

Where did you find the article about the time AK blood dropped on the knife and when she did the killing? Can you quote that and has it been recent? I just want to know everything about this case. I'm sure it's out there just couldn't find it Yes, I'm leaning but I really want to hear bother sides!

 

[Sonata]

Otto, in one of her statements she also said that one of the things that she and RS supposedly talked about that night when they were supposedly at his place the whole night......was about high school and how he was unpopular in school and so was she. I think it's one of those Jodi Arias-type things, where females can just sense in other females that there is something wrong with this girl.

Wow. As a fellow unpopular in secondary school kind of girl, that is a scary idea to me.

I don't think you can go by that at all. There are many reasons why someone is outcast in school. I think murderous nature is probably one of the less frequent.

 

[Sonata]

Yes, Otto, good point! I have also wondered this very obvious point of how come RS immediately saw the broken glass, but Amanda didn't see it? Maybe she thought that was just a "normal" thing too....and of course we are supposed to accept her version of a "normal" world and not question it one iota because then, gasp, we wouldn't be acknowledging people's differences. Because, you know, some people may think there are flying pigs, and it would be very offensive if we sit here from our little computers and try to say that they're not "normal" or that that is factually incorrect. We have to accept that there are 6 billion different views of the world. And Amanda's is just one of those 6 billion, so who are we to judge?? OH! THe injustice of it all!!!

I think it's more likely that she didn't actually see it. I don't think it's puzzling that RS would and she wouldn't. Sounds just like my partner and I. I notice very little about my physical environment and am more focused on my internal world. He notices everything.

Unfortunately, yes, you do kind of need to accept that there are 6 billion different view of the world because that is pretty much irrefutable. There is a big difference between believing in flying pigs and not noticing shards of glass.

 

[Nova]

I know my reply is a bit late, I have been away from here for a few days.

Nova, my "experience" is a member of society, and a human being myself just like Amanda. Like in the jury instructions, where they instruct the jury that they can use their own "common sense" and their own "life experiences." I'm sorry, but I don't need a PhD in Criminology: How Innocent People Talk to speak about this topic. :floorlaugh:

No, but we (this applies to me as well and I don't want to make it personal) would have to know at least several people falsely accused and several more rightly accused of murder in order to make a comparison. And even THAT wouldn't provide a sample large enough to escape the margin of error.

I, for one, don't know anyone who's ever been in AK's situation. So on what evidence would I base an opinion of her speech?

Common sense and "personal experience" must be used with caution.

Personally, I come from a family where members aren't comfortable expressing sentiment and a comment such as AK's reported "she effing bled to death" (IIRC) wouldn't surprise me in the least. And yet nobody in my family has ever been suspected of murder.

 

[Nova]

*resp. snipped

What her friends say from back in the U.S. doesn't really carry that much weight for me, because in a sense, she had the freedom to completely re-invent herself in Italy. No one knew her past, no one knew anything about her. She could explore whatever side of her she wanted. Oh, also big point - NO FAMILY THERE. Absolutely no one she had to be accountable to or be responsible for.

It's just natural, really, I imagine I would do some of the same. If I went to some place where no one knew me, no one knew my family, no one knew anyone from my "previous" life, I would probably "change" some things about me from the very beginning. One example is, I almost never like to wear sort of "revealing" clothing....over there I would probably wear some low-cut shirts and get some sexy-vixen look on. :floorlaugh::floorlaugh: haha, seriously thought, I would! So that is just a small small example, but you see how for someone with some shady/seedy/dark thoughts, it could all go horribly wrong.

Fair enough, but you were just touting the value of personal experience. AK's friends have personal experience of how she talks and how she reacted that you and I will never know.