Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#8

[Katody]

I believe there was a rather long discussion on the last thread, which suggested that someone was going around and changing Edda's statement?? Remember, "someone made up that sentence," "that sentence did not exist in original testimony," "that sentence is completely fake"?

So let's talk about "conspiracies".....................................

I do remember it. I think you missed that it has been proven in the previous thread that the made up sentence does not exist in the original transcript.

Now, it would be very exciting to see a proof that the British TV station perpetrated a very unethical falsification with a help of a respectable local Perugian who even apparently agreed to be identified by name.

it would be even more exciting to see a proof that Amanda falsified the court document she posted.

 

[Katody]

Think about it, Amanda didn't report the "broken window" as one of her original discoveries. She didn't, obviously, report seeing Meredith's dead body. So what else was there to "report" that she had seen which "worried" her about the house?? They had already cleaned everything obvious up, everything was behind locked door in Meredith's room. If she didn't see the "broken window," there must have been OTHER things she saw which worried her.

I've give the reason, IMO, why they alerted Filomena instead of jsut going off on there trip, in the couple posts above this one.

As for the first part, if we follow this scenario, why wouldn't an unlocked front door and Guede's feces suffice?

As for the bolded part,
Could you direct me, please? There were lots and lots of posts.

 

[sherlockh]

I do remember it. I think you missed that it has been proven in the previous thread that the made up sentence does not exist in the original transcript.

*Snipped*. It was proven that there were 2 different versions. Nothing of the conspiracy stuff that followed was ever proven.

 

[Katody]

*Snipped*. It was proven that there were 2 different versions. Nothing of the conspiracy stuff that followed was ever proven.

The correct version was sourced with two distinct court documents giving the exact same text.

Did I miss something? Has the original case file document been provided for the manipulated version? Could you please link to it again?

I remember only people linking to one of pro-guilt blogs known for manipulating evidence. No actual source was ever provided.

 

[Sigh Sister]

Think about it, Amanda didn't report the "broken window" as one of her original discoveries. She didn't, obviously, report seeing Meredith's dead body. So what else was there to "report" that she had seen which "worried" her about the house?? They had already cleaned everything obvious up, everything was behind locked door in Meredith's room. If she didn't see the "broken window," there must have been OTHER things she saw which worried her.

I've give the reason, IMO, why they alerted Filomena instead of jsut going off on there trip, in the couple posts above this one.

If you read Amamda's account from her book, ( which I know you have no interest in) I think you would understand. She comes home to find the door wide open. Concerning, but no reason to panic as the door had a faulty latch. She then calls out to see if anyone is home, and no one answers. She then notices a few drops of blood in the bathroom, and after she gets out of the shower notices the blood stain on the bath mat. Strange, but not reason to panic. She then goes to the big bathroom to dry her hair and sees the toilet unflushed. THAT is when she feels "a lurch of panic and that prickly feeling you get when you think someone might be watching you ". She wonders if maybe someone came into the house while she was in the shower. She quickly leaves and then starts questioning whether she is overreacting. She decides to call her mother because she wants reassurance that she is right to be concerned and ask her advice on what to do. Her mother always told her "if in doubt, call". Her mother tells her to call her roommates, tell Raffaele, and call her back. She calls Filomena who is instantly on high alert, tells her that neither she nor Laura where there last night and to call Meredith. She is unable to reach Meredith. She gets to Raffaele's and asks him what he thinks. He thinks they should go check it out. They have a quick breakfast and Filomena calls back wanting to know what she found at the cottage. Amanda tells her they are just leaving to go back. Filomena's tone cause Amanda to feel a sense of panic again. They get back to the cottage, and she is feeling very anxious. They start to look around. Kitchen/living room and Laura's room are in order. She then opens Filomena's door and finds it trashed and window broken. She then realizes that someone broke in.

I know you will dismiss it, but it makes sense to me.

 

[Amber29]

I can't see me using the word shocked. Why do you assert I asserted it?
I just wrote about it as an interesting aside.



Thank you! Watching the video of December inspection it looks like they have hard time locating where the shoeprints were originally. They spin around with the photo of them in hand helplessly for some time. That's just my impression because there's no audio track unfortunately.

What is evident from the video itself is the complete lack of preservation of the crime scene after the November inspections.

The place looks like a hurricane went through. It's utterly compromised. The examinators seem to know it because their bunny suits are just for show. They disregard any guidelines preventing room-to-room cross contamination. They're not changing gloves or shoecovers. They walk around stepping on blood traces.

Of course the final part after all the farce was luminol testing the floor and... swabbing it for DNA.

You said
"An interesting fact:

When Scientifica returned to the villa in December, they found someone actually removed the bloody shoeprints in the hallway.
A lot of blood traces in the bedroom were gone, too."
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#7


What exactly did you mean by this "fact" if it wasn't they were shocked?

What was the point of this "fact", considering the scientific knew exactly who removed the prints because they themselves did it right after documenting them.

Seems in the December video they are using photos of the prints to give reference for where they were.

I just think asserting something like this as fact, when it's clearly an opinion and gives an impression that they somehow messed up with the prints is misinforming.

 

[Katody]

*Snipped*. It was proven that there were 2 different versions. Nothing of the conspiracy stuff that followed was ever proven.

If by two versions you mean

- one that exists in the case file and is quoted in Massei report and Galati appeal and

- the other one that exists only on a blog without any real source

I think we can agree.

 

[aa9511]

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/PhotoGallery4.html

Photo 3 shows blood on the inside handle.

Uh huh, exactly. What about the outside? Where is the blood on the outside if there was blood on the inside?

Of course there couldn't be any blood on the outside, then her whole claim of "not sure where Meredith is," "not sure if something's wrong or not," "let's go check the door Raffaelo, uh oh it's locked (but no mention of blood b/c no blood visible from outside),"....that would all be null and void.

 

[aa9511]

Incorrect. Of course I quoted the full sentence upthread and even summarized it's contents.

Your claim is Amanda falsified the court document on her webpage. I must say it's baffling because it does look authentic. How sure you are of this and what evidence suggest it to you?



BTW: Could you provide the quote from Crini's transcript confirming what you claim the article says? Or do you concede there is none?

Yesterday, I read over the thread the things that I had missed....I believe Otto was trying to say that Amanda posted it on her web in the original Italian, thus someone has to do Google translate on it, and that doesn't give accurate results. So therefore, it's hard to tell whether the quoted part is actually accurate or not, b/c the translation might be inaccurate......................kind of like the whole Edda "made up sentence" thing, which could have just been rhe result of a bad translation instead of some conspiracy theory.

Otto never claimed that Amanda falsified anything, that is incorrect. I just read the posts yesterday so they are fresh in my mind. That is putting words in Otto's mouth which were not stated.

 

[aa9511]

I do remember it. I think you missed that it has been proven in the previous thread that the made up sentence does not exist in the original transcript.

Now, it would be very exciting to see a proof that the British TV station perpetrated a very unethical falsification with a help of a respectable local Perugian who even apparently agreed to be identified by name.

it would be even more exciting to see a proof that Amanda falsified the court document she posted.

It was not "proven," though, that someone made it up. That is not was what "proven." Those were the inferences and suggestions that you put upon it. Was it ever found out who "made it up"? Was it ever reported anywhere that this person "made up" that sentence? Did we ever found out the reason and the background for "making it up." No. All we have is your word that it is the result of some conspiracy.

As I said in my last post, it could have just been the result of a bad translation.

It was not "proven" anywhere, other than claiming to be proven by posters on here.

 

[Katody]

You said
"An interesting fact:

When Scientifica returned to the villa in December, they found someone actually removed the bloody shoeprints in the hallway.
A lot of blood traces in the bedroom were gone, too."
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#7


What exactly did you mean by this "fact" if it wasn't they were shocked?

What was the point of this "fact", considering the scientific knew exactly who removed the prints because they themselves did it right after documenting them.

Seems in the December video they are using photos of the prints to give reference for where they were.

I just think asserting something like this as fact, when it's clearly an opinion and gives an impression that they somehow messed up with the prints is misinforming.

I think it adds to the obvious lack of preservation of the crime scene integrity.

1. The prints were removed but nobody bothered to mark their exact position, which would be crucial if further testing of the floor was expected.

2. After the Scientifica left in November the crime scene was absolutely trashed (probably by the local police).

Clearly nobody expected there would be another inspection in December.

In my opinion the December inspection was a Hail Mary throw by the authorities. By that time it wasn't obvious that the court would authorize further detention of the pair of students and the prosecution was in desperate need of some evidence to prop up their case.

 

[aa9511]

As for the first part, if we follow this scenario, why wouldn't an unlocked front door and Guede's feces suffice?

As for the bolded part,
Could you direct me, please? There were lots and lots of posts.

No, I don't see an unlocked front door and seeing some poo in the toilet as sufficing to cause so much "worry."

My posts were directly above the post you just replied to.

 

[sherlockh]

If you read Amamda's account from her book, ( which I know you have no interest in) I think you would understand. She comes home to find the door wide open. Concerning, but no reason to panic as the door had a faulty latch. She then calls out to see if anyone is home, and no one answers. She then notices a few drops of blood in the bathroom, and after she gets out of the shower notices the blood stain on the bath mat. Strange, but not reason to panic. She then goes to the big bathroom to dry her hair and sees the toilet unflushed. THAT is when she feels "a lurch of panic and that prickly feeling you get when you think someone might be watching you ". She wonders if maybe someone came into the house while she was in the shower. She quickly leaves and then starts questioning whether she is overreacting. She decides to call her mother because she wants reassurance that she is right to be concerned and ask her advice on what to do. Her mother always told her "if in doubt, call". Her mother tells her to call her roommates, tell Raffaele, and call her back. She calls Filomena who is instantly on high alert, tells her that neither she nor Laura where there last night and to call Meredith. She is unable to reach Meredith. She gets to Raffaele's and asks him what he thinks. He thinks they should go check it out. They have a quick breakfast and Filomena calls back wanting to know what she found at the cottage. Amanda tells her they are just leaving to go back. Filomena's tone cause Amanda to feel a sense of panic again. They get back to the cottage, and she is feeling very anxious. They start to look around. Kitchen/living room and Laura's room are in order. She then opens Filomena's door and finds it trashed and window broken. She then realizes that someone broke in.

I know you will dismiss it, but it makes sense to me.

Just a few 'mistakes'
- She never called her mother at that time.
- She mentioned in her 4 November email that she saw blood before taking the shower.
- She told the English girls at the police station she saw the mess in Filomena's room before going back to Sollecito.
- Filomena was not called from the cottage at that time.

 

[Amber29]

I think it adds to the obvious lack of preservation of the crime scene integrity.

1. The prints were removed but nobody bothered to mark their exact position, which would be crucial if further testing of the floor was expected.

2. After the Scientifica left in November the crime scene was absolutely trashed (probably by the local police).

Clearly nobody expected there would be another inspection in December.

In my opinion the December inspection was a Hail Mary throw by the authorities. By that time it wasn't obvious that the court would authorize further detention of the pair of students and the prosecution was in desperate need of some evidence to prop up their case.

Again this is your opinion correct?

How long or how many visits to the cottage are the police supposed to leave the scene untouched?
What is a normal time frame?
Do you not agree that they have photographed every print, marked them with markers and taken numerous photos of the overall scene before disturbing it?

 

[sherlockh]

If by two versions you mean

- one that exists in the case file and is quoted in Massei report and Galati appeal and

- the other one that exists only on a blog without any real source

I think we can agree.

I already gave the source but I am not allowed to link to it. Furthermore the audio file of that trial hearing is no longer online I believe. I have no idea if the lawyer misspoke, was misheard, misunderstood or if there was a mistranslation. I have not read any proof whatsoever of any manipulation nor lies nor propaganda nor any of the other accusations thrown at others here in this thread. The aggressive personal attacks are totally uncalled for and do not belong on this forum IMO.

 

[MichaelSmith]

Uh huh, exactly. What about the outside? Where is the blood on the outside if there was blood on the inside?

Of course there couldn't be any blood on the outside, then her whole claim of "not sure where Meredith is," "not sure if something's wrong or not," "let's go check the door Raffaelo, uh oh it's locked (but no mention of blood b/c no blood visible from outside),"....that would all be null and void.

That makes no sense to me. His name is Raffaele btw not Raffaelo.

 

[Amber29]

Just a few 'mistakes'
- She never called her mother at that time.
- She mentioned in her 4 November email that she saw blood before taking the shower.
- She told the English girls at the police station she saw the mess in Filomena's room before going back to Sollecito.
- Filomena was not called from the cottage at that time.

Then there's this sentence.

"Her mother tells her to call her roommates, tell Raffaele, and call her back. She calls Filomena who is instantly on high alert, tells her that neither she nor Laura where there last night and to call Meredith. She is unable to reach Meredith. She gets to Raffaele's and asks him what he thinks."

You are correct in that there's no call to her mother before Filomena. I don't know why she chose to tell these lies in her book. Not only this but she had already called Merediths phone for 16secs before her first call to Filomena. All these called were not placed at the cottage either.

Boggles the mind why she would tell it this way in her book when the evidence says something different.

 

[aa9511]

If you read Amamda's account from her book, ( which I know you have no interest in) I think you would understand. She comes home to find the door wide open. Concerning, but no reason to panic as the door had a faulty latch. She then calls out to see if anyone is home, and no one answers. She then notices a few drops of blood in the bathroom, and after she gets out of the shower notices the blood stain on the bath mat. Strange, but not reason to panic. She then goes to the big bathroom to dry her hair and sees the toilet unflushed. THAT is when she feels "a lurch of panic and that prickly feeling you get when you think someone might be watching you ". She wonders if maybe someone came into the house while she was in the shower. She quickly leaves and then starts questioning whether she is overreacting. She decides to call her mother because she wants reassurance that she is right to be concerned and ask her advice on what to do. Her mother always told her "if in doubt, call". Her mother tells her to call her roommates, tell Raffaele, and call her back. She calls Filomena who is instantly on high alert, tells her that neither she nor Laura where there last night and to call Meredith. She is unable to reach Meredith. She gets to Raffaele's and asks him what he thinks. He thinks they should go check it out. They have a quick breakfast and Filomena calls back wanting to know what she found at the cottage. Amanda tells her they are just leaving to go back. Filomena's tone cause Amanda to feel a sense of panic again. They get back to the cottage, and she is feeling very anxious. They start to look around. Kitchen/living room and Laura's room are in order. She then opens Filomena's door and finds it trashed and window broken. She then realizes that someone broke in.

I know you will dismiss it, but it makes sense to me.

Oh so now Filomena's door has to be closed too. I see, for that version to work. So the killer, Rudy, closes/locks Meredith's door, closes Filomena's door even though there is no reason to, and then doesn't lock the front door even though he knows he has the keys in his hands.

Wouldn't it kind of make sense that, upon seeing the poo-poo and suddenly "panicking," (but not so much that it interferes with her brunch), that she doesn't just quickly check the rooms whose doors are closed? That would make sense to me. Since she apparently wanted to "make sense" of this poo-poo. Did it not cross her mind that maybe, since Filomena's door was closed, maybe Filomena had come back sometime the night before, and maybe he had a guy friend with her that left the poo-poo in the toilet?

That is what would make sense to me.

Does it make sense to you that she's a little "perplexed," but she doesn't think to check Filomena's roomm to check if it was her that might have come back?

I also think that anyone can come up with a story that makes sense with a few years to think about it.

I know you will dismiss everything I have said, too, but this is what makes sense to me.

Also, it's not "dismissing" to point out some things which someone sees from a different perspective. In that case, I can say all the supporters of her innoence routinely "dismiss" everything the other side says. I didn't think that's what we were doing, but if we are, it goes both ways.

 

[Amber29]

Oh so now Filomena's door has to be closed too. I see, for that version to work. So the killer, Rudy, closes/locks Meredith's door, closes Filomena's door even though there is no reason to, and then doesn't lock the front door even though he knows he has the keys in his hands.

Wouldn't it kind of make sense that, upon seeing the poo-poo and suddenly "panicking," (but not so much that it interferes with her brunch), that she doesn't just quickly check the rooms whose doors are closed? That would make sense to me. Since she apparently wanted to "make sense" of this poo-poo. Did it not cross her mind that maybe, since Filomena's door was closed, maybe Filomena had come back sometime the night before, and maybe he had a guy friend with her that left the poo-poo in the toilet?

That is what would make sense to me.

Does it make sense to you that she's a little "perplexed," but she doesn't think to check Filomena's roomm to check if it was her that might have come back?

I also think that anyone can come up with a story that makes sense with a few years to think about it.

I know you will dismiss everything I have said, too, but this is what makes sense to me.

Also, it's not "dismissing" to point out some things which someone sees from a different perspective. In that case, I can say all the supporters of her innoence routinely "dismiss" everything the other side says. I didn't think that's what we were doing, but if we are, it goes both ways.

It's actually easy to dismiss that entire passage, considering the amount of things said that the evidence says didn't happen that way.

 

[Katody]

I already gave the source but I am not allowed to link to it. Furthermore the audio file of that trial hearing is no longer online I believe. I have no idea if the lawyer misspoke, was misheard, misunderstood or if there was a mistranslation.

I have the audio. Maresca reads in court from the page 35/36 of the November 10 transcript. It's exactly the same text that I quoted from Massei and Galati appeal before.

The version on the blog is incorrect and not so subtly changed to the detriment of Amanda and her mother.

BTW: Linking to court documents and primary sources like audio, video and photos is allowed, isn't it?

I have not read any proof whatsoever of any manipulation nor lies nor propaganda nor any of the other accusations thrown at others here in this thread. The aggressive personal attacks are totally uncalled for and do not belong on this forum IMO.

I agree fully.