Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#7

[Amber29]

Hahahaha, ok, ok. I get it. I'll try to stop.

At least I point out very specific similarities, such as cuts on finger from stabbing, or else some general points about how prosecutors work.

I don't lump "all stabbing murders" together just because they all include using a knife to stab someone.

But ok, point taken!

Are you a lawyer? You seem to have a knack for using people's words against them

Personally I have followed many trials, this one since the beginning but I was COMPLETELY taken in by the Jodi Arias trial. Like my husband thought I had lost my mind with my headphones on all day watching the trial and making plans so I could for sure be home at key moments. Lol

So I can see why you use it as an example a lot. I find myself making comparisons as well. It doesn't mean you lump all stabbings together.

 

[Sigh Sister]

Personally I have followed many trials, this one since the beginning but I was COMPLETELY taken in by the Jodi Arias trial. Like my husband thought I had lost my mind with my headphones on all day watching the trial and making plans so I could for sure be home at key moments. Lol

So I can see why you use it as an example a lot. I find myself making comparisons as well. It doesn't mean you lump all stabbings together.

OT

I did that with the Casey Anthony trial. Gained ten pounds and my family hated me. I swore I would never follow a trial again. Then, I did it again with the Arias trial. Gained ten pounds and my family hated me. I swear I will never do it again! During both trials, people would ask me how the trial was going. I would go into great detail until I realized eyes were glazing over. People just wanted the bottom line, not all the minutiae we go into here. Haha

 

[aa9511]

Personally I have followed many trials, this one since the beginning but I was COMPLETELY taken in by the Jodi Arias trial. Like my husband thought I had lost my mind with my headphones on all day watching the trial and making plans so I could for sure be home at key moments. Lol

So I can see why you use it as an example a lot. I find myself making comparisons as well. It doesn't mean you lump all stabbings together.

Oh, Amber, I was the same way. It was a very stressful 5 1/2 months, or whatever it was, and I wasn't even one of the players!!! LOL!!!!!!!!!!!

I would have to catch up in the evenings (watching on youtube)....meant sleeping late almost every night.

I think that's why I use so many examples/comparisons....because it was such a big part of my life for so long! LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It was a very long and strange trial, and with slow pace and short court days, it took way longer than it would have anywhere else, IMO.

 

[aa9511]

OT

I did that with the Casey Anthony trial. Gained ten pounds and my family hated me. I swore I would never follow a trial again. Then, I did it again with the Arias trial. Gained ten pounds and my family hated me. I swear I will never do it again! During both trials, people would ask me how the trial was going. I would go into great detail until I realized eyes were glazing over. People just wanted the bottom line, not all the minutiae we go into here. Haha

hahahahah.....yes, I know what you mean. LOL! :floorlaugh:

I had a big notebook, I was taking notes like I was an actual juror! I started the notebook after I realized all the lies coming out of her mouth - then I realized I needed it to be able to catch her in her lies!! LOL!!!!!!

"Outsiders" (to following cases, I mean) will never understand.

 

[SMK]

I can't remember if I asked this or not, (or actually, the post seems to have vanished) but I think it's unlikely that a group altercation would begin in the bedroom.

Was there any evidence in the kitchen or livingroom area that Knox, Guede, and Sollecito had been playing music, partying, drinking or smoking?

 

[aa9511]

I can't remember if I asked this or not, (or actually, the post seems to have vanished) but I think it's unlikely that a group altercation would begin in the bedroom.

Was there any evidence in the kitchen or livingroom area that Knox, Guede, and Sollecito had been playing music, partying, drinking or smoking?

SMK, I was thinking about that too (I was thinking about the smoking), but then I thought, I mean they cleaned up. So obviously they would have cleaned all of that up.

 

[SMK]

SMK, I was thinking about that too (I was thinking about the smoking), but then I thought, I mean they cleaned up. So obviously they would have cleaned all of that up.

Yes, I had thought of that after I posted. :facepalm: thanks

 

[aa9511]

Ok, I was thinking of this Amanda DNA thing.

Now, the argument is well, Amanda's DNA just happened to be in those exact spots that they collected, because well, her DNA was all over place because she lived there.

Then why weren't Laura or Filomena's DNA found in some samples? They lived there, too. In at least a few of them, shouldn't have their DNA be there, too, especially in Filomena's own room? I know their DNA supposedly wasn't taken, but even so, those samples should have then been "unidentified." Someone's DNA is there, but that person is not identifiable. Instead, it was Amanda's DNA. How does Amanda's DNA show up in an "unidentifiable person's" DNA? For all the numerous complicated DNA analysis I have seen on here, I don't think I've heard this simple question be acknowledged since I've been on here.

No one has ever seemed to take this simple fact into consideration, as far as I've seen from the arguments.

It's always, Amanda's DNA has a reason to be there (other than she was there during the murder).

All 4 roomates lived there. If the theory that DNA is everywhere is correct, the other roomates (or 3 of them) should have been equally represented in the house, DNA-wise. I'm leaving Meredith out because her DNA was already in almost everything due to the blood, so we couldn't have determined whether some of her DNA was in the house from the "everywhere' theory or not.

Same goes with the luminol footprints. f the Luminol supposedly reacted to something other than blood, the other 3 roomates' footprints did not show up under Luminol, even though they lived there, too. Only Amanda's.

I was thinking of this when I was just thinking about this whole issue, thinking I wish there was a control house somewhere where they could do experiments on how the occupants' DNA is found.

THen I thought.....wait, there are already controls built into this house.....Laura and Filomena.

 

[SMK]

Ok, I was thinking of this Amanda DNA thing.

Now, the argument is well, Amanda's DNA just happened to be in those exact spots that they collected, because well, her DNA was all over place because she lived there.

Then why weren't Laura or Filomena's DNA found in some samples? They lived there, too. In at least a few of them, shouldn't have their DNA be there, too, especially in Filomena's own room? I know their DNA supposedly wasn't taken, but even so, those samples should have then been "unidentified." Someone's DNA is there, but that person is not identifiable. Instead, it was Amanda's DNA. How does Amanda's DNA show up in an "unidentifiable person's" DNA? For all the numerous complicated DNA analysis I have seen on here, I don't think I've heard this simple question be acknowledged since I've been on here.

No one has ever seemed to take this simple fact into consideration, as far as I've seen from the arguments.

It's always, Amanda's DNA has a reason to be there (other than she was there during the murder).

All 4 roomates lived there. If the theory that DNA is everywhere is correct, the other roomates (or 3 of them) should have been equally represented in the house, DNA-wise. I'm leaving Meredith out because her DNA was already in almost everything due to the blood, so we couldn't have determined whether some of her DNA was in the house from the "everywhere' theory or not.

Same goes with the luminol footprints. f the Luminol supposedly reacted to something other than blood, the other 3 roomates' footprints did not show up under Luminol, even though they lived there, too. Only Amanda's.

I was thinking of this when I was just thinking about this whole issue, thinking I wish there was a control house somewhere where they could do experiments on how the occupants' DNA is found.

THen I thought.....wait, there are already controls built into this house.....Laura and Filomena.

Yes, and if I am not mistaken, it was said that none of Filomena's dna was found in her own bedroom, which is very odd. Anyone know about this, and the above posted?

 

[SMK]

Just some thoughts on "culpability from a peripheral role":
(of course this will annoy all those convinced of the lone wolf theory so apologies, but am trying to envision the involvement of the 2 defendants):

I recall someone once mused that perhaps Knox had wanted Guede to rob/scare MK (if she felt their friendship was over as MK ignored her on Halloween) and asked him to do it anonymously (perhaps wearing a Halloween mask) , giving him the key and entrance to the cottage - but something went wrong and his face showed and he was identified. And from thence, the trouble spiraled with them all. Would cover "lone wolf" and would cover holes in Knox and Sollectio stories, simulation, feelings of guilt, etc.

 

[Footwarrior]

Ananda didn't remember a phone call at noon, before anything had happened. She did remember a phone call after concern had been raised to the point where Filomena was returning to the cottage with her friends. A phone call after several more indications that something was wrong had been found. A phone call that records show happened closer to 1pm than to noon. The phone call shortly before Amanda had Raffaele call the police as her mother suggested.

Human memory isn't perfect. Especially when a question is asked in a deceptive way.

My take is that pro guilt people are using this discussion as a distraction. Rather than focus on more critical aspects of the case, they keep dragging out tired old talking points from the lists on TJMK or PMF.

 

[aa9511]

Just some thoughts on "culpability from a peripheral role":
(of course this will annoy all those convinced of the lone wolf theory so apologies, but am trying to envision the involvement of the 2 defendants):

I recall someone once mused that perhaps Knox had wanted Guede to rob/scare MK (if she felt their friendship was over as MK ignored her on Halloween) and asked him to do it anonymously (perhaps wearing a Halloween mask) , giving him the key and entrance to the cottage - but something went wrong and his face showed and he was identified. And from thence, the trouble spiraled with them all. Would cover "lone wolf" and would cover holes in Knox and Sollectio stories, simulation, feelings of guilt, etc.

I assume you're attributing the forensic evidence to just covering up, in this scenario? Unless they specifically asked him to go murder her, I don't see this as the case. For the reason of, I believe if their involvement had been less than Rudy's, as in your scenario described, they would have eventually confessed. To avoid being on trial for murder, being convicted of murder, being imprisoned for murder. It doesnt' make sense. Why would they go through all of that, make themselves look like possible murderers instead of just confessing that it was all a big mistake, and they never meant for Rudy to kill her, they just wanted to do it as a prank. Going on trial on murder charges is no small thing.

No, I believe either they are innocent, or they are as deeply involved as Rudy is, that's why no confession.

 

[SMK]

I assume you're attributing the forensic evidence to just covering up, in this scenario? Unless they specifically asked him to go murder her, I don't see this as the case. For the reason of, I believe if their involvement had been less than Rudy's, as in your scenario described, they would have eventually confessed. To avoid being on trial for murder, being convicted of murder, being imprisoned for murder. It doesnt' make sense. Why would they go through all of that, make themselves look like possible murderers instead of just confessing that it was all a big mistake, and they never meant for Rudy to kill her, they just wanted to do it as a prank. Going on trial on murder charges is no small thing.

No, I believe either they are innocent, or they are as deeply involved as Rudy is, that's why no confession.

Yes, you do have a very good point there.

But giving someone a key, asking them to rob someone: If such a scenario led to murder, I believe in the US you would be held very accountable, and receive a long sentence as an accessory to murder. (at this point, it would NOT be viewed as a prank, but as a deadly act of reckless homicide)-- Wouldn't you agree?

and perhaps with all the appeals they have in Italy, admitting to nothing is your best chance of acquittal? Especially with a PR campaign of innocence which is working, etc.?

 

[SMK]

Ananda didn't remember a phone call at noon, before anything had happened. She did remember a phone call after concern had been raised to the point where Filomena was returning to the cottage with her friends. A phone call after several more indications that something was wrong had been found. A phone call that records show happened closer to 1pm than to noon. The phone call shortly before Amanda had Raffaele call the police as her mother suggested.

Human memory isn't perfect. Especially when a question is asked in a deceptive way.

My take is that pro guilt people are using this discussion as a distraction. Rather than focus on more critical aspects of the case, they keep dragging out tired old talking points from the lists on TJMK or PMF.

Perhaps that is what pro-guilt people are doing. But for those of us who are neither pro-guilt nor pro-innocence, but simply trying to see both sides and figure out if there is some veracity to the prosecution's case, it's simply exploring all angles and leaving no stone unturned.

 

[Amber29]

Ananda didn't remember a phone call at noon, before anything had happened. She did remember a phone call after concern had been raised to the point where Filomena was returning to the cottage with her friends. A phone call after several more indications that something was wrong had been found. A phone call that records show happened closer to 1pm than to noon. The phone call shortly before Amanda had Raffaele call the police as her mother suggested.

Human memory isn't perfect. Especially when a question is asked in a deceptive way.

My take is that pro guilt people are using this discussion as a distraction. Rather than focus on more critical aspects of the case, they keep dragging out tired old talking points from the lists on TJMK or PMF.

Or perhaps we are responding to a post about the phone call and giving our thoughts from the "otherside". Isn't that what a discussion is?

To insinuate that a "pro guilt person" is using it as a distraction is wrong. For one I replied a lot yesterday about the phone call but it started as a reply simply.

I do not like the lumping pro guilt people into a group in this way.
I do not have a dog in this fight so to speak.
I do not harbor ill will towards amanda Knox

I simply view the evidence differently then some is all and I enjoy the polite discussion from both views.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

SNIP
Same goes with the luminol footprints. f the Luminol supposedly reacted to something other than blood, the other 3 roomates' footprints did not show up under Luminol, even though they lived there, too. Only Amanda's.

I was thinking of this when I was just thinking about this whole issue, thinking I wish there was a control house somewhere where they could do experiments on how the occupants' DNA is found.

THen I thought.....wait, there are already controls built into this house.....Laura and Filomena.

No reference DNA from Laura or Filomena were taken. No reference footprints from Laura or Filomena were taken. Meredith shared a bathroom with Amanda, not with Laura or Filomena. The FP were obviously focused on blood. If Rudy had cleaned up in the large bathroom, one might find mixed DNA from Laura and/or Filomena (if their reference profiles were taken). One of the samples from Filomena's room has some extra alleles (Rep. 176 or 177); it is possible that Filomena is the donor.

The footprints in the hall do not have distinguishing marks and the luminol was overapplied, leading to dilation; therefore, I do not see how one can claim that the footprints must come from any one woman, Amanda or someone else. At least one of the footprints in Amanda's room (Rep. 180) has no mark where Amanda's second toe is, but it has a mark below it. If this is not Amanda's footprint, then the whole premise that it is blood that is reacting with luminol is called into question.

 

[SMK]

No reference DNA from Laura or Filomena were taken. No reference footprints from Laura or Filomena were taken. Meredith shared a bathroom with Amanda, not with Laura or Filomena. The FP were obviously focused on blood. If Rudy had cleaned up in the large bathroom, one might find mixed DNA from Laura and/or Filomena (if their reference profiles were taken). One of the samples from Filomena's room has some extra alleles (Rep. 176 or 177); it is possible that Filomena is the donor.

The footprints in the hall do not have distinguishing marks and the luminol was overapplied, leading to dilation; therefore, I do not see how one can claim that the footprints must come from any one woman, Amanda or someone else. At least one of the footprints in Amanda's room (Rep. 180) has no mark where Amanda's second toe is, but it has a mark below it. If this is not Amanda's footprint, then the whole premise that it is blood that is reacting with luminol is called into question.

So, in other words, Amanda's showed up with the luminol as Amanda's were referenced. The luminol may have been reacting to something else, in which case if the other girls profiles were referenced, then they too would have shown up as "being at the crime scene". thanx

 

[Sigh Sister]

hahahahah.....yes, I know what you mean. LOL! :floorlaugh:

I had a big notebook, I was taking notes like I was an actual juror! I started the notebook after I realized all the lies coming out of her mouth - then I realized I needed it to be able to catch her in her lies!! LOL!!!!!!

"Outsiders" (to following cases, I mean) will never understand.

OT

Shhh....don't tell anyone. I had a notebook too. :floorlaugh:

 

[Amber29]

OT

Shhh....don't tell anyone. I had a notebook too. :floorlaugh:

So glad I'm not the only one! :floorlaugh:

 

[Katody]

SMK, I was thinking about that too (I was thinking about the smoking), but then I thought, I mean they cleaned up. So obviously they would have cleaned all of that up.

It's not that obvious. After all they didn't clean up blood and footprints.