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

[Myvice]

What do you think happened below the waist?

I grant them they didn't fake it with tricks out of the frame. Why do you think it's wrong to assume good faith?

With all the lack of good faith in this trial why should anyone assume good faith in one side and not the other?

 

[Amber29]

So you do believe he lied when ha said it was easy to do even for an amateur.
You also do believe the TV station produced a very unethical manipulation o facts with trick montage of video.

This is a bold claim that I think requires some justification.

I cannot think about any reason why a Perugian doctor, member of a climbing club identified by name would take part in such an unethical manipulation.

Can you?

Yes I believe it is easy for someone to say "it would be easy for anyone", they are talking from their experience.

I guarantee that I couldn't make that climb, so yes he can't speak for "everyone"

I have said I don't think it's unethical for them to produce a video like this. In fact I think they leave it to their viewers to decide, IMO they don't take an official stand and say RG made that climb.

I feel like I have justified my opinion, which I'm entitled to.

 

[Katody]

Didn't you see this same kind of thing in the Arias trial on a daily basis? I sure did.

<modsnip>


So you do believe he lied when ha said it was easy to do even for an amateur.
You also do believe the British TV station produced a very unethical manipulation of facts with trick montage of video.

This is a bold claim that I think requires some justification.

I cannot think about any reason why a Perugian doctor, member of a climbing club identified by name would take part in such an unethical manipulation.

Can you?

 

[Katody]

Yes I believe it is easy for someone to say "it would be easy for anyone", they are talking from their experience.

I guarantee that I couldn't make that climb, so yes he can't speak for "everyone"

I have said I don't think it's unethical for them to produce a video like this. In fact I think they leave it to their viewers to decide, IMO they don't take an official stand and say RG made that climb.

I feel like I have justified my opinion, which I'm entitled to.

Of course they were not speaking about "everyone" but a fit, athletic person like Guede certainly was. More interestingly:

You suggested there was something sinister going on from the waist down in this video. Could you clarify?

 

[Katody]

With all the lack of good faith in this trial why should anyone assume good faith in one side and not the other?

You think the Perugian climbing doctor and the British TV crew are a "side"?

 

[Myvice]

<modsnip>


So you do believe he lied when ha said it was easy to do even for an amateur.
You also do believe the British TV station produced a very unethical manipulation of facts with trick montage of video.

This is a bold claim that I think requires some justification.

I cannot think about any reason why a Perugian doctor, member of a climbing club identified by name would take part in such an unethical manipulation.

Can you?

As I stated in an earlier post I don't think I need to justify my opinion. We all have opinions and they are based on the perception we have formed regarding the totality of the circumstances.

Why this Dr. chose to do the video could only be answered by him. Why did so many lawyers on HLN do the things they did during the Arias trial? Only they would know. And I haven't heard any of them justify their opinions of their reenactments so I guess it was just to get their opinion out in the open. What more can you say?

Obviously, many professional people are willing to stick their neck out to be heard in a case so widely broadcast. Name recognition is a big deal whether people agree with your opinion or not.

 

[Myvice]

You think the Perugian climbing doctor and the British TV crew are a "side"?

Well I think it's rather obvious.

 

[Amber29]

Of course they were not speaking about "everyone" but a fit, athletic person like Guede certainly was. More interestingly:

You suggested there was something sinister going on from the waist down in this video. Could you clarify?

I'm an athletic fit person, I assure you.
The MLB players make hitting a ball thrown 100mph look easy, although I guarantee any "athlete" can't do it.

I didn't suggest that. What I suggested is that it's questionable why they chose to film it showing only waist up. I have no idea what was going on with his feet and that's not my fault.

 

[Katody]

Can you exclude that the shutters were never opened at the time the glass was broken? With a rock that size someone could have broken it from the inside just by hitting the glass with the rock after placing the clothes all around the room then just dropped the rock.

I've seen the mark on the inside shutter but haven't heard about imbedded glass in them. I'd be interested in that. The mark could have been made at any time. The imbedded glass may change my mind, I'd have to read it.

Cropped detail showing stuck fragments of glass:

Full photo:

The rock went through the window from the outside, striking the inner shade with significant force and speed, enough to make glass pieces stuck in the wood. Outline of the rock is visible as it hit the inner shade leaving dents, fresh damage and embedded glass.

 

[Amber29]

Cropped detail showing stuck fragments of glass:

Full photo:

The rock went through the window from the outside, striking the inner shade with significant force and speed, enough to make glass pieces stuck in the wood. Outline of the rock is visible as it hit the inner shade leaving dents, fresh damage and embedded glass.

So when the rock hit the inner shade did it open it?

 

[Katody]

I'm an athletic fit person, I assure you.
The MLB players make hitting a ball thrown 100mph look easy, although I guarantee any "athlete" can't do it.

I didn't suggest that. What I suggested is that it's questionable why they chose to film it showing only waist up. I have no idea what was going on with his feet and that's not my fault.

But you do have some suspicions? Why not share it? Isn't it what most of us do in this forum all the time? What do you suspect is going on below the waist?

I think he's supporting himself on a foothold provided by the lower window. You obviously disagree. What are your thoughts then?

 

[Katody]

So when the rock hit the inner shade did it open it?

It wasn't latched, that's why the rock deflected to its final position to the left of the point of impact.

 

[Amber29]

But you do have some suspicions? Why not share it? Isn't it what most of us do in this forum all the time? What do you suspect is going on below the waist?

I think he's supporting himself on a foothold provided by the lower window. You obviously disagree. What are your thoughts then?

I don't know what to think as I've stated. I only question the reasoning behind the choice to film in this way, that leaves questions in the mind of the viewer.

If they were being completely upfront with their viewers, they would show the climb in its entirety.

 

[Amber29]

It wasn't latched, that's why the rock deflected to its final position to the left of the point of impact.

So the whole window opened on impact? In your opinion?

 

[Katody]

I don't know what to think as I've stated. I only question the reasoning behind the choice to film in this way, that leaves questions in the mind of the viewer.

If they were being completely upfront with their viewers, they would show the climb in its entirety.

You mean they would show the legs the second time the guy climbed? They did show them in the first take. So you are undecided, there are other possibilities that you allow for, apart from "not being upfront"?

I think for example, that since they've shown a wide shot for the first time, they wanted to do a close-up of what he was doing with his hands when climbing without bars, there was no dishonesty and the Perugian did it without tricks, off-camera wires, ladders or platforms.

 

[Sigh Sister]

@ Katody

Was the embedded glass ever addressed by Massei or anyone else? I would love to hear the explanation for it.

 

[Tugela]

Apparently, the glass being all close to the window says nothing to you, but to some of us it suggests that the shutters were closed. Just a different perspective I guess.

Kinetic energy would have carried the glass inwards if a stone was thrown from the outside, not outwards. The inner shade was probably not fully closed, so the glass would have gone inwards and been funneled to one side, exactly as the pictures of the scene show.

 

[Katody]

So the whole window opened on impact? In your opinion?

the latch obviously allows for closing the window without latching the inner shade. That's how you can have light with window closed.

I can't exclude the window did open on impact. The mechanism was old, loose and rickety. IIRC Filomena complained about it to the landlord.

However I think the large shards of glass arranged on the sill, that seem to come from the edges of the window indicate that Guede cleared them from the frame and than unlatched the window by hand or with some tool ( e.g. a knife).

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Didn't you see this same kind of thing in the Arias trial on a daily basis? I sure did.

With respect, this trial does not remind me of the Arias trial at all. It reminds me of the Lindy Chamberlain trial, where the prosecution's witnesses trampled over good forensic science to convict an innocent person. MOO.

 

[Tugela]

I don't think it's a problem with the way you've explained it at all. I understand you perfectly.

He also would have had to climb up twice...the first time to open the shutters. Were there shutters on the other window he allegedly broke? It takes someone pretty brain dead to look for the most difficult window in the city to break into.

Incidently, I don't necessarily think it's impossible to do. It just seems ridiculous to me. Nobody has to agree with my opinion.

He was not looking for a window easier or harder to break in, the house was not chosen at random. He went specifically there for a reason, and it wasn't to steal, so he addressed the challenges presented by those specific windows. He is a young athletic guy, an avid basketball player and a known burgler. Why is hard to believe that could do this?

Other windows in the town being harder or easier is irrelevant.