Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#6

[Yellow]

I hear you. I do not know whether they are guilty or not, but the DNA is doing nothing for pro-guilt at this point; same with bathmat print, etc. So much of this keeps pointing back to Guede alone. You wind up really left only with their suspicious behavior. And some intuition that they know more than they have said.

At this point in the debate (with the bathmat print in serious question now) I think if they had gone on their trip that weekend, they might never have been suspects. People would have assumed a burglary had taken place. (Or IS the simulation theory truly backed by hard data? Been spun around so much, I can't keep the facts straight) I understand police felt their luminol prints, bra clasp indicated them, but so much mud was slung at these points I can't see clearly anymore. In any case I feel Nov 2 - AK , RS = nothing, no case. But they WERE there. Did that have meaning, or not?

They would not be suspects if they were away. They also would be more suspicious if RG was not involved. If unsolved, people would be more suspicious of the, even without DNA

The prosecution case comes down to whether you believe a clean up is the only scenario AND RG would have no incentive to clean up. I don't think the second supposition is necessarily true. RG needed time to escape. He too would have an incentive to clean up, at least not to make the front rooms look like a murder scenes in case anyone came back that night. They would think MK was sleeping and no one would at least discover the murder scene till morning, giving RG time to dispose of bloody cloths, murder weapon as well as plan escape. He did not want that scene being discovered that night, time helped him.

I also think there is a good faith dispute on whether that rock was thrown from inside or not. Why use same method RG always used? Very coincidental. Also, if they had to go outside to get the rock (I assume Fiormella is not a rock collector of big rocks), why not throw it from outside? If they knew bleach killed DNA, they similarly should have known not to throw rock from the inside. I don't see what the rock shows anyway bc there is at least some dispute and even if the rock is thrown from the outside, it still could be a simulation. All that evidence is just meaningless, really. They need more

And that is where footsteps are key. But I think that is a hard argument to understand and without a smoking gun like the DNA to go along with it, I think this case would be a first being based on circumstantial evidence of footsteps, footsteps not even based in MK DNA and at least a dispute as to whether blood. Without a clear motive, that is just not enough even if you believe the prosecutions story about the footsteps.

Basically once you throw out the DNA (no reason C&V is unreliable, I don't think the court will not contradict itself on that), all you have is the footsteps and some inconstancies possibly like calling her mother, etc. I don't see how they can base a murder conviction on that especially w their ridiculous motive story w no evidence that these girls had some long simmering fued. All you have is MK telling some of her friends MK was not that clean. You don't even have MK being real angry about it nor do you have MK telling anyone there was going to be a confrontation about it.

Just a roommate gossiping to her friends that AK does not know how to flush the toilet and that she hooked up w a few guys (very common in college, I doubt MK was a prude, she herself was sexually active w a guy she had only been dating a short time. Kids in cottage "hook up" alot, and 2 guys over the course of 2 months is nothing at all. I doubt MK would be so horrified by such actions. She lived in a dorm before, she knew how it works. People who are older on this board may not know how college life is nowadays; bringing guys back to your room is very common, it would only get to be annoying or unacceptable if it was every night or multiple times a week; here there were at most 2-3 instances in 2 months, which is nothing in today's college environment. Indeed, most roommates expect that there roommates bring back guys to hook up as normal college behavior. It is not the 1950s. Kids in college do not date often, they hook up. It is not always sex, though. Kids nowadays want no committment so bringing guys back to your room - even random ones - is quite common in college.

 

[SMK]

They would not be suspects if they were away. They also would be more suspicious if RG was not involved. If unsolved, people would be more suspicious of the, even without DNA

The prosecution case comes down to whether you believe a clean up is the only scenario AND RG would have no incentive to clean up. I don't think the second supposition is necessarily true. RG needed time to escape. He too would have an incentive to clean up, at least not to make the front rooms look like a murder scenes in case anyone came back that night. They would think MK was sleeping and no one would at least discover the murder scene till morning, giving RG time to dispose of bloody cloths, murder weapon as well as plan escape. He did not want that scene being discovered that night, time helped him.

I also think there is a good faith dispute on whether that rock was thrown from inside or not. Why use same method RG always used? Very coincidental. Also, if they had to go outside to get the rock (I assume Fiormella is not a rock collector of big rocks), why not throw it from outside? If they knew bleach killed DNA, they similarly should have known not to throw rock from the inside. I don't see what the rock shows anyway bc there is at least some dispute and even if the rock is thrown from the outside, it still could be a simulation. All that evidence is just meaningless, really. They need more

And that is where footsteps are key. But I think that is a hard argument to understand and without a smoking gun like the DNA to go along with it, I think this case would be a first being based on circumstantial evidence of footsteps, footsteps not even based in MK DNA and at least a dispute as to whether blood. Without a clear motive, that is just not enough even if you believe the prosecutions story about the footsteps.

Basically once you throw out the DNA (no reason C&V is unreliable, I don't think the court will not contradict itself on that), all you have is the footsteps and some inconstancies possibly like calling her mother, etc. I don't see how they can base a murder conviction on that especially w their ridiculous motive story w no evidence that these girls had some long simmering fued. All you have is MK telling some of her friends MK was not that clean. You don't even have MK being real angry about it nor do you have MK telling anyone there was going to be a confrontation about it.

Just a roommate gossiping to her friends that AK does not know how to flush the toilet and that she hooked up w a few guys (very common in college, I doubt MK was a prude, she herself was sexually active w a guy she had only been dating a short time. Kids in cottage "hook up" alot, and 2 guys over the course of 2 months is nothing at all. I doubt MK would be so horrified by such actions. She lived in a dorm before, she knew how it works. People who are older on this board may not know how college life is nowadays; bringing guys back to your room is very common, it would only get to be annoying or unacceptable if it was every night or multiple times a week; here there were at most 2-3 instances in 2 months, which is nothing in today's college environment. Indeed, most roommates expect that there roommates bring back guys to hook up as normal college behavior. It is not the 1950s. Kids in college do not date often, they hook up. It is not always sex, though. Kids nowadays want no committment so bringing guys back to your room - even random ones - is quite common in college.

Yes, I would agree with all of this. The only thing I can think of, is that the lay judges will somehow be compelled by the prosecution narrative. (just as pro-guilt posters have). What drives that in most, I cannot say. With me, it was intuition. But I can see that much of what I really and truly believed was solid evidence is very much in dispute. We will have to see how things transpire after mi-Dec and Jan.

 

[Amber29]

This photo illustrates where Meredith bled out (darker blood) and where her hair made a sweeping pattern on the floor when she was moved.

On the discussion of the size of the room, I don't see the desk or the wardrobe in the picture, so apparently there was some room, as this photo was taken near the wardrobe where she was murdered.

Found the blood on the bathroom door photo. What could have caused that type of blood dripping?

These two photos are available at PerugiaMurderFile.org.

I don't know how to attach your thumbnail pics you added to post #767

In the first one though, what was on the floor above the evidence marker during the attack? I can't remember and I've seen this photo multiple times and it has me wondering.

 

[Yellow]

Yes, I would agree with all of this. The only thing I can think of, is that the lay judges will somehow be compelled by the prosecution narrative. (just as pro-guilt posters have). What drives that in most, I cannot say. With me, it was intuition. But I can see that much of what I really and truly believed was solid evidence is very much in dispute. We will have to see how things transpire after mi-Dec and Jan.

I think the prosecution had a better narrative w the sex angle, as that would better explain RS and RG involvement. But w the cleaning story, why would they get themselves involved in that? In fact, most cases where an argument heats up to an out of the blue stabbing, third parties HELP the victim, not join in on the stabbing.you also have to believe RG would not only get himself involved but would also decide to sexually assault her as well.

On logic, the prosecutions case falls apart bc they have no evidence of any preexisting relationship between RG and the couple. They need something, eve texts as friends, evidence they hung out together, something. There is no evidence RG even met RS and RG knew AK just as much as MK. What loyalty did RG have to AK that he would join in on a murder?

The only believable tie between them is drugs, and all that is speculation as there is no evidence the couple did hard drugs together let alone w RG. If they proved that the 3 were somehow involved in drugs, that would be a different story but they are not

You have to believe AK would get so angry about the cleaning that she would kill. To get to that level of anger, IMO, you would have had to have repeated blows in the past about the cleaning, but you have barely any evidence the girls discussed it let alone argue over it

Then you would have to believe RS and RG too are angry about the cleaning and they join in too. This story would be more believable if it involved sex for them bc men do not kill over disputes about cleaning.

You also would have to rule out the scenario that RG is just a local criminal who burglared the cottage when he saw an opportunity, MK interrupts him, locks the door and he is locked inside so he has to confront her. He decides to rape her, she fights back and is stabbed. How do you disprove that scenario? I don't think you can. The evidence fully supports it.

 

[otto]

I don't know how to attach your thumbnail pics you added to post #767

In the first one though, what was on the floor above the evidence marker during the attack? I can't remember and I've seen this photo multiple times and it has me wondering.

I've attached it again. Which marker are you thinking ... not that I can do anymore than guess what they represent.
Ref: www.perugiamurderfile.org ; gallery: crime scene photos.

 

[SMK]

I don't know how to attach your thumbnail pics you added to post #767

In the first one though, what was on the floor above the evidence marker during the attack? I can't remember and I've seen this photo multiple times and it has me wondering.

You have to use the url and go to the manage attachment section, click on the top one after it is uploaded, to attach the thumbnail. :seeya:

 

[SMK]

I think the prosecution had a better narrative w the sex angle, as that would better explain RS and RG involvement. But w the cleaning story, why would they get themselves involved in that? In fact, most cases where an argument heats up to an out of the blue stabbing, third parties HELP the victim, not join in on the stabbing.you also have to believe RG would not only get himself involved but would also decide to sexually assault her as well.

On logic, the prosecutions case falls apart bc they have no evidence of any preexisting relationship between RG and the couple. They need something, eve texts as friends, evidence they hung out together, something. There is no evidence RG even met RS and RG knew AK just as much as MK. What loyalty did RG have to AK that he would join in on a murder?

The only believable tie between them is drugs, and all that is speculation as there is no evidence the couple did hard drugs together let alone w RG. If they proved that the 3 were somehow involved in drugs, that would be a different story but they are not

You have to believe AK would get so angry about the cleaning that she would kill. To get to that level of anger, IMO, you would have had to have repeated blows in the past about the cleaning, but you have barely any evidence the girls discussed it let alone argue over it

Then you would have to believe RS and RG too are angry about the cleaning and they join in too. This story would be more believable if it involved sex for them bc men do not kill over disputes about cleaning.

You also would have to rule out the scenario that RG is just a local criminal who burglared the cottage when he saw an opportunity, MK interrupts him, locks the door and he is locked inside so he has to confront her. He decides to rape her, she fights back and is stabbed. How do you disprove that scenario? I don't think you can. The evidence fully supports it.

There's no disputing it: At this point in time, it has become extremely difficult to get around Guede alone, and yes, it is easier to make all fit around him. It does leave questions, though; for some of us, even though it makes logical sense, it doesn't resonate with spirit and intuition. But of course legally, it does go along way toward supporting reasonable doubt. I just am stumped to see so much of the evidence weakened---although maybe I am just no good at holding onto an argument. In any case, one wishes the verdict would come earlier than Jan 15---oy , vey.

 

[Amber29]

I've attached it again. Which marker are you thinking ... not that I can do anymore than guess what they represent.
Ref: www.perugiamurderfile.org ; gallery: crime scene photos.

To the upper right of the L marker. Where the floor has no blood. Was something on the floor there during the attack, do you think?

 

[whoanellie]

There's no disputing it: At this point in time, it has become extremely difficult to get around Guede alone, and yes, it is easier to make all fit around him. It does leave questions, though; for some of us, even though it makes logical sense, it doesn't resonate with spirit and intuition. But of course legally, it does go along way toward supporting reasonable doubt. I just am stumped to see so much of the evidence weakened---although maybe I am just no good at holding onto an argument. In any case, one wishes the verdict would come earlier than Jan 15---oy , vey.

Every time I've looked in detail at any of the pro-guilt evidence or arguments I've discovered that they don't stand up to scrutiny. Are there any pro-guilt arguments that still leave you with doubt about Amanda's involvement?

 

[redheadedgal]

I agree, at least do the testing as the defense wanted. Maybe her boyfriend told the police he made the stain, yet I don't know why they would not have tested it.

ETA: Just a reminder this is a key piece of evidence they either destroyed or through utter incompetence allowed to rust.

--several hard drives fried
--bra clasp allowed to rust
--failure to test a semen stain in a supposed sexual assault case
--proven (videotaped) poor evidence collection techniques (dirty gloves, passing evidence person to person and placing object back onto dirty floor, using evidence pads to sample multiple areas of sink, light switch etc.)

i've never heard of another case where so much "error" re: evidence occurred...

 

[SMK]

Every time I've looked in detail at any of the pro-guilt evidence or arguments I've discovered that they don't stand up to scrutiny. Are there any pro-guilt arguments that still leave you with doubt about Amanda's involvement?

Well, I still wonder about the oddities:

• with Knox and her behavior (NOT the things like cartwheels or kissing- those never bothered me and never struck me as suspect --I mean the first call to her mother, the changing her mind about the door. )
• How can the police/CSI be wholly wrong about the dna evidence? Maybe they are still right about some of it?
• How can all of the prosecution witnesses be wrong (Cuarotollo or whatever his name is, Quantavalle etc.?)
• What about the switched off phones?
• The appearance of simulation?

I guess this is a very odd case. I just don't know what to think. I guess I will simply have to be uneasy about a lot of things.....

 

[Sigh Sister]

To the upper right of the L marker. Where the floor has no blood. Was something on the floor there during the attack, do you think?

I'll chime in. It does look like something was there. Is that a piece of glass above the K?

 

[SMK]

I'll chime in. It does look like something was there. Is that a piece of glass above the K?

Do you mean it looks like something was there due to the smudge on the lower wall, where it meets the floor? You mean behind the K, the triangular shard of glass?

 

[Yellow]

There's no disputing it: At this point in time, it has become extremely difficult to get around Guede alone, and yes, it is easier to make all fit around him. It does leave questions, though; for some of us, even though it makes logical sense, it doesn't resonate with spirit and intuition. But of course legally, it does go along way toward supporting reasonable doubt. I just am stumped to see so much of the evidence weakened---although maybe I am just no good at holding onto an argument. In any case, one wishes the verdict would come earlier than Jan 15---oy , vey.

I think they may be a bit delayed bc I think MK lawyer and PL lawyer will also speak. So I am not sure if Jan 15 takes into account that delay

I think when you read the case on murder wiki, it is written in such a convincing way that one can be easily swayed. But the evidence left out -namely a knife with no blood, footsteps w no victim DNA of the blood they are suppose to have - also do not make sense

AK could have done some odd and weird things,and I think that troubles people. But I think to often people attribute to her the mind of a 40 year old calculating murderer. To the contrary, if this was spur of the moment as the prosecution alleges, we would have a frazzled, nervous person

The thing is, we could similarly have such a person acting the same exact way as a 20 year old kid whose friend was murdered and perhaps feeling guilt that she and RS had not slept in the apartment that night bc if they did, maybe this would not have happened. RG would not have murdered all 3.

I don't see anything in AK behavior other than the behavior of a 20 year old ditzy girl freaked out by her friends murder. I also think she was extremely naive re the police. A guilty person would not have acted like she did w the police, a 20 year old kid would have acted like RG and try to flee, not be so arrogant so as to think you can outsmart them. Not one single person has come forth and said AK or RS were smug, cocky, or arrogant people.

 

[redheadedgal]

I don't know how to attach your thumbnail pics you added to post #767

In the first one though, what was on the floor above the evidence marker during the attack? I can't remember and I've seen this photo multiple times and it has me wondering.

the only item nearby that matches the void is the dictionary... and it appears to be on top of aspirated blood in this (theorized) second position...

 

[SMK]

I think they may be a bit delayed bc I think MK lawyer and PL lawyer will also speak. So I am not sure if Jan 15 takes into account that delay

I think when you read the case on murder wiki, it is written in such a convincing way that one can be easily swayed. But the evidence left out -namely a knife with no blood, footsteps w no victim DNA of the blood they are suppose to have - also do not make sense

AK could have done some odd and weird things,and I think that troubles people. But I think to often people attribute to her the mind of a 40 year old calculating murderer. To the contrary, if this was spur of the moment as the prosecution alleges, we would have a frazzled, nervous person

The thing is, we could similarly have such a person acting the same exact way as a 20 year old kid whose friend was murdered and perhaps feeling guilt that she and RS had not slept in the apartment that night bc if they did, maybe this would not have happened. RG would not have murdered all 3.

I don't see anything in AK behavior other than the behavior of a 20 year old ditzy girl freaked out by her friends murder. I also think she was extremely naive re the police. A guilty person would not have acted like she did w the police, a 20 year old kid would have acted like RG and try to flee, not be so arrogant so as to think you can outsmart them. Not one single person has come forth and said AK or RS were smug, cocky, or arrogant people.

Points well taken. -----I think they did take into account the fact that Maresca did not get to speak on the 26th---they moved the verdict up from Jan 10 to the 15th. I think Dec `16 Maresca will speak--then the 17 Defense Knox or Sollecito, continued Jan 10. Followed by Rebuttals. And then the deliberations Jan 15. Or so it seemed to me.

 

[Sigh Sister]

Do you mean it looks like something was there due to the smudge on the lower wall, where it meets the floor? You mean behind the K, the triangular shard of glass?

To the right of the L marker, the blood is in an arc. The area to the right of the arc is clean. It looks like something could have been in this area. Probably not explaining it well. I mentioned the K marker because I never noticed what appears to be a shard of glass. Is that actually glass? I never saw anyone talking about it if it is glass (although I'm sure it's probably been talked about).

( I didn't put that emoticon there! This keeps happening and I can't get rid of them! )

 

[redheadedgal]

--"make up your bloody mind" about motive
--neighbor hears supposed blood-curdling scream (through a closed double-panel window) but makes tea instead of calling police
--neighbor claims she was told of murder @ 11am but body not discovered until 1pm
--curatolo, the wandering vagrant who just happens to show up when needed

more @ http://www.allthingscrimeblog.com/2...inues-to-be-bogged-down-by-floating-evidence/

 

[Amber29]

To the right of the L marker, the blood is in an arc. The area to the right of the arc is clean. It looks like something could have been in this area. Probably not explaining it well. I mentioned the K marker because I never noticed what appears to be a shard of glass. Is that actually glass? I never saw anyone talking about it if it is glass (although I'm sure it's probably been talked about).

( I didn't put that emoticon there! This keeps happening and I can't get rid of them! )

I don't know about the glass ill have to open the pic on my computer because I'm on my iPad and every time I zoom it closes the pic. Ill have a better look.

I do wonder about what was on the floor there though. Strange

 

[SMK]

To the right of the L marker, the blood is in an arc. The area to the right of the arc is clean. It looks like something could have been in this area. Probably not explaining it well. I mentioned the K marker because I never noticed what appears to be a shard of glass. Is that actually glass? I never saw anyone talking about it if it is glass (although I'm sure it's probably been talked about).

( I didn't put that emoticon there! This keeps happening and I can't get rid of them! )

Ha, I wondered why my post made you respond with LOL
The reason that what appears to be a shard of glass near the K marker interests me, is that back in 2007 the police believed the murder weapon may have been a big shard of glass.