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

[MichaelSmith]

We try and explain the case and certain people seek to poke holes in the explanation so as to carve out an undefined role for Amanda and Raffaele being involved in a conspiracy with Guede.

It goes a little something like this......ohh, there's a missing print from Guede where we think it should be so therefor Amanda & Raffaele killed Meredith even though there's no prints of them in the murder room and all of them are Guede's

Amanda & Raffaele must have stolen the money & phones even though it's the unemployed criminal Guede's DNA on the purse and he stole a phone from the lawyers office and money from the nursery and was caught with a knife.

Amanda & Raffaele sexually assaulted Meredith even though it's Guede's DNA inside of her.

Amanda stabbed her friend Meredith after watching Ameile even though Guede admits having cuts on his hand seen weeks later and said she wasn't involved and told a lame story about being there on a date with Meredith.

So the whole case for guilt revolves around:

1. It was raining even though it wasn't

2. She didn't flush the poo in a bathroom that wasn't hers

3. No one does a bath mat boggie.

:sheesh:

 

[aa9511]

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

Ok, thanks. What doesn't make sense to you? You posted the pic of blood on the inside handle. I said, why isn't blood on the oustide handle then? We would expect some blood on that side too, since Rudy had to close the door with the handle and lock it, also. Same thing with the front door if he closed it and locked it. Right now I'm taking everything Amanda says regarding the way she found the door, etc. as "uncertain" if it's credible or not. So, therefore, we don't knwo for certain whether the front door was really open/close, locked or unlocked. If it was closed and locked by Rudy (Since he had to have the keys), doesn't it make sense there would be some signs of him doing this?

Or are we to believe that he took the time to shut and lock Meredith's door, shut Filomena's door, but then left the front door wide open? Not only open, but unlocked, even though he had already locked Meredith's door, and he knew he had the keys, because he had already used them on Merediths' door?

 

[Katody]

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

Add Meredith's locked door and her not answering phone calls and I think it would do.

Of course the best solution would be to go on a trip and leave discovery to others.

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

Sorry, can't find anything about Filomena there.

 

[aa9511]

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.

bbm


Because the way the evidence tells it, doesn't make sense. That's why, IMO.

 

[MichaelSmith]

Ok, thanks. What doesn't make sense to you? You posted the pic of blood on the inside handle. I said, why isn't blood on the oustide handle then? We would expect some blood on that side too, since Rudy had to close the door with the handle and lock it, also. Same thing with the front door if he closed it and locked it. Right now I'm taking everything Amanda says regarding the way she found the door, etc. as "uncertain" if it's credible or not. So, therefore, we don't knwo for certain whether the front door was really open/close, locked or unlocked. If it was closed and locked by Rudy (Since he had to have the keys), doesn't it make sense there would be some signs of him doing this?

Or are we to believe that he took the time to shut and lock Meredith's door, shut Filomena's door, but then left the front door wide open? Not only open, but unlocked, even though he had already locked Meredith's door, and he knew he had the keys, because he had already used them on Merediths' door?

The front door lock was defective. This has been explained many times.

 

[Katody]

Because the way the evidence tells it, doesn't make sense. That's why, IMO.

By the cellphone logs evidence she called her mother after discovering the break-in. Why doesn't it make sense?

 

[aa9511]

We try and explain the case and certain people seek to poke holes in the explanation so as to carve out an undefined role for Amanda and Raffaele being involved in a conspiracy with Guede.

It goes a little something like this......ohh, there's a missing print from Guede where we think it should be so therefor Amanda & Raffaele killed Meredith even though there's no prints of them in the murder room and all of them are Guede's

Amanda & Raffaele must have stolen the money & phones even though it's the unemployed criminal Guede's DNA on the purse and he stole a phone from the lawyers office and money from the nursery and was caught with a knife.

Amanda & Raffaele sexually assaulted Meredith even though it's Guede's DNA inside of her.

Amanda stabbed her friend Meredith after watching Ameile even though Guede admits having cuts on his hand seen weeks later and said she wasn't involved and told a lame story about being there on a date with Meredith.

So the whole case for guilt revolves around:

1. It was raining even though it wasn't

2. She didn't flush the poo in a bathroom that wasn't hers

3. No one does a bath mat boggie.

:sheesh:

bbm

I know you're trying to be sarcastic/facetious (or maybe not), but that is not what the guilt case is about, or else there wouldn't be pages and pages and thread after thread of this case. If it was really that simple, well there wouldn't be anything for us to argue about, now would there?

 

[aa9511]

Add Meredith's locked door and her not answering phone calls and I think it would do.

Of course the best solution would be to go on a trip and leave discovery to others.


Sorry, can't find anything about Filomena there.

And that's coming from your perspective. Let's look at it coming from a guilty-Amanda perspective: there is a brutally murdered Meredith's dead body, bled to death, blood everywhere, pools of blood went out of her.....it's in the room behind the locked door.

So relative to that, which was known to Amanda in the guilty-Amanda perspective, relative to that, does unlocked door and poo-poo sound so bad/worrisome?

Just try to visualize that scene and see if it would make any sense to you, and if the proportions of what was found on the outside would match even .0001% of what was on the inside.

Amanda needed whatever she could use to make her "worry" claim believable, IMO.

 

[Amber29]

By the cellphone logs evidence she called her mother after discovering the break-in. Why doesn't it make sense?

Because now as per AKs book she does remember a "first" call to her mother. Only it's a call described in some detail by her that does NOT exist.

So now the cellphone records really are interesting, considering we now another version of phone calls from AK.

 

[Katody]

Just a few 'mistakes'
- She never called her mother at that time.

Prosecutor Comodi insisted she did, Judge Massei insisted Comodi was right.

- She mentioned in her 4 November email that she saw blood before taking the shower.

Not a mistake, Sister just wrote the same.

- She told the English girls at the police station she saw the mess in Filomena's room before going back to Sollecito.

Do you believe she really did? That would make very little sense.

- Filomena was not called from the cottage at that time.

Again it's not what Sister wrote.

You wrote 'mistakes', probably suggesting 'lies'. Two of the mistakes listed are yours. The other two are meaningless.

 

[aa9511]

The front door lock was defective. This has been explained many times.

I thought it was the front door was defective, so that's why they had to lock it, to keep it closed? Otherwise, sometimes it flew open with the wind.

Why would Rudy lock Meredith's door, but leave the front door unlocked, when he already had the keys in his hands? And he had already taken the time to find the key to lock Meredith's door?

And also, because the door was defective, Meredith's would have locked it when she came in. So Rudy would have had to unlock it when he was leaving. There are no signs of blood or any signs of him unlocking the front door. Also, he would have first turned the handle, door woulnd't open, maybe tried one more time before realizing it was locked. Then would have to look for key to unlock the door. So wouldn't there be DNA/fingerprints of him on the door when he's trying to open it from the inside?

I realize it seems easy to "dismiss" these small details becauase, in some people's minds, the sole killer has been found so who cares, but these small details are also necessary to find out what generally happened, even if was lone-wolf Rudy.

 

[aa9511]

Because now as per AKs book she does remember a "first" call to her mother. Only it's a call described in some detail by her that does NOT exist.

So now the cellphone records really are interesting, considering we now another version of phone calls from AK.

Oh boy, not the "first call" again. I can see what we'll be discussing for the rest of the day

 

[Coldpizza]

Please be respectful of your fellow posters and remember without differing opinions there would be no point to the thread.

The same facts can produce more than one opinion, and everyone is entitled to use their own logical processes to reach that opinion. Please do NOT assume that an opinion differing from yours, but based on the same facts is illogical. That's not how it works. Everyone is entitled to use their own method to reach their own conclusion - and you don't get to tell them they are wrong. So please don't.

If your stating a fact then link it, if it's your opinion say so, but again do it in a respectful manner.

:tyou:

 

[aa9511]

Prosecutor Comodi insisted she did, Judge Massei insisted Comodi was right.


Not a mistake, Sister just wrote the same.



Do you believe she really did? That would make very little sense.

Again it's not what Sister wrote.

You wrote 'mistakes', probably suggesting 'lies'. Two of the mistakes listed are yours. The other two are meaningless.

bbm


Ain't got nothin' to remember when it's the truth.

 

[Katody]

Because now as per AKs book she does remember a "first" call to her mother. Only it's a call described in some detail by her that does NOT exist.

So now the cellphone records really are interesting, considering we now another version of phone calls from AK.

This doesn't really answer my question. aa9511 wrote:

Because the way the evidence tells it, doesn't make sense.

To which I asked for clarification:
By the cellphone logs evidence she called her mother after discovering the break-in. Why doesn't it make sense?



Anyway, I think Amanda reconstructed it that way in the book because she believed Comodi was telling the truth in the courtroom. Judge Massei reassured her that what Comodi said is true. Do you think there are other reasons?

 

[Amber29]

This doesn't really answer my question. aa9511 wrote:



To which I asked for clarification:
By the cellphone logs evidence she called her mother after discovering the break-in. Why doesn't it make sense?



Anyway, I think Amanda reconstructed it that way in the book because she believed Comodi was telling the truth in the courtroom. Judge Massei reassured her that what Comodi said is true. Do you think there are other reasons?

So are we to overlook that now in her book she tells yet another version but its the prosecutors fault?

So she isn't capable of looking at the phone logs and telling a believable version backed up by the evidence? She's had many years to do so.

IMO it would've been better to stick to "I don't remember that call" than to create a new one, that clearly is a lie.

 

[Katody]

So are we to overlook that now in her book she tells yet another version but its the prosecutors fault?

So she isn't capable of looking at the phone logs and telling a believable version backed up by the evidence? She's had many years to do so.

IMO it would've been better to stick to "I don't remember that call" than to create a new one, that clearly is a lie.

I'm not asking you to overlook it.
I think she used the courtroom transcripts and it didn't occur to her to double check Comodi's words with the actual phone logs. She was too trusting, for sure.
If you see something nefarious here please state your reasoning. I'll gladly discuss it.

 

[Amber29]

I'm not asking you to overlook it.
I think she used the courtroom transcripts and it didn't occur to her to double check Comodi's words with the actual phone logs. She was too trusting, for sure.
If you see something nefarious here please state your reasoning. I'll gladly discuss it.

Ok I choose to not over look it. Here's my opinion.

AK gave clear testimony about her first call to her mother in the courtroom.
I have said that I felt if she remembered the "actual first call" she could've easily corrected MC in the courtroom or her lawyer could've guided her to correct it.

Anyways here we are years later and a book written by AK

It's now her chance to set the record straight about the "first call to her mother"

She chooses to LIE and make up a call to her mother that does not exist.
So she chooses to go along with the prosecutors version instead of telling the truth? Why would someone do that, it reminds me of RS telling the "pricking Meredith with the knife story"

I can not write this off as another thing blamed on the prosecutor, amanda made this decision all on her own.

 

[Sigh Sister]

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.

I didn't write that she called from the cottage. I do see that her email says something different regarding when she exactly saw the blood. Do you think that is a major inconsistency ? When she called Filomena the first time, did she tell her that her room was trashed? I think that all of them (Meredith's roommates and friends) suffered a major shock, and it's understandable that an exact accounting of the order of events and what was said (by all of them) may have been inconsistent.

 

[Sigh Sister]

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.

He went into the bathroom and cleaned up before he locked her door?