Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#9

[aa9511]

This is the quote from Maresca

"She has a personal website where she invites people to collect donations in the memory of the victim, Meredith Kercher, which is an unbearable contradiction for the family,' Maresca said.

Then the article goes on 2 paragraphs down without quotes saying:

Knox is soliciting donations on her website for her defense as well as a separate, as yet-unspecified project in Miss Kercher's memory.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...or-demands-Amanda-Knoxs-convicted-murder.html

Now can someone who calls the lawyer a liar please link his quote where he says what the other paragraph asserts.

Ugh, the Daily Mail again, causing all these problems.

 

[Katody]

You are right.

It's sad that Amanda would go against the Kerchers wishes.

Even if she wasn't clear before that they dislike it, she should be now.

Her keeping it there speaks volumes of her character.

They have very clearly spoken out about their feelings for her.

I hope she would keep it.

The Kerchers have spoken a lot, that's true. I don't think they are entitled to demand anything from her.
I also think it will not have the effect on the jury Maresca expects. I think the constant demands and bashing of the suspects unrelated to the actual evidence will backfire.

 

[redheadedgal]

Iif this is the website you are referring to then both Merideth and Raffeales links have been removed since last night when I viewed it.

http://www.amandaknox.com/

it is now 4pm PST... and both links are still there, unchanged from last night.

http://www.amandaknox.com/the-meredith-kercher-murder/

 

[Chris_Halkides]

And yes there is something wrong with his so called attempts to "create a barrier between Meredith and Amanda." As I've already pointed out it is both irrelevant to the subject of guilt and innocence and also very disingenuous.

It is paradoxical that Mr. Maresca complains that Meredith is being forgotten, but then berates Amanda Knox for directing people toward a fund, one of whose purposes is to keep Meredith Kercher's memory alive.

 

[aa9511]

And yet several used that point of his to claim that Amanda was some horrible person for doing what she was accused of doing. So why is it ok to jump on the Amanda is a horrible person bandwagon without any proof? I suppose that since she has been accused of a crime that she claims she is innocent of that she is fair game? That simply being accused is enough for some?

For what it's worth, her website rubs me the wrong way even just as it is, without some fund-raising for an "unspecifed" project or whatever that was.

" I suppose that since she has been accused of a crime that she claims she is innocent of that she is fair game?"

Her entire website if precisely about the crime and being accused of the crime, and everything surrounding the case, all the documents, etc.. So isn't she kind of putting herself out there as "fair game"?? I don't understand. So you want her to have a whole website devoted to Meredith's murder and the Amanda's case, but then us not be allowed to discuss that, because it's not "fair game"?

 

[aa9511]

When I just checked they were back up. I swear they were gone earlier.

Maybe Amanda is following along on this thread. One person says something, she's like, oh I better take that off. Then someone else supports her, she changes her mind. Back and forth.

 

[aa9511]

Yes, that's pretty much what I meant. I would never want to be a murderer, and I assume most people wouldn't want to, and those who do usually have had some kind of personality disorder or dysfunction to become one. But that doesn't mean I do not feel Amanda should be held accountable if guilty.

I understand now

 

[otto]

No it's not. He is talking about the link to the Meredith Kercher fund.

Clearly the Kerchers do not like AK linking to it.

That makes sense. When people click on a link and end up at a new website, it's sometimes possible to see exactly where they were before they arrived at the site.

 

[Katody]

<modsnip>

I have a simple definition of lie. Someone intentionally telling something that he or she knows is not true is lying.

E.g. IMO Stefanoni lied about the quantification data. Mignini lied about the interrogation recordings. Some or all of the policemen lied about the interrogation as their stories contradict each other. Comodi lied about having the 12:00 phone call on record. Maresca lied about the website. Etc.

It's hard to argue mistakes or forgetfulness in the above.

There's a sea of difference when the best you can come up with is Amanda didn't remember the exact time she had dinner.

 

[TorisMom003]

For what it's worth, her website rubs me the wrong way even just as it is, without some fund-raising for an "unspecifed" project or whatever that was.

" I suppose that since she has been accused of a crime that she claims she is innocent of that she is fair game?"

Her entire website if precisely about the crime and being accused of the crime, and everything surrounding the case, all the documents, etc.. So isn't she kind of putting herself out there as "fair game"?? I don't understand. So you want her to have a whole website devoted to Meredith's murder and the Amanda's case, but then us not be allowed to discuss that, because it's not "fair game"?

As I have said in a previous post, Amanda and Meredith will forever be linked. That will never change no matter the outcome of numerous trials. Amanda should not be expected to not talk about what happened to her. It is well within her right to do so. What she has not done is open herself up to folks believing the lies and making nasty remarks about her based on those lies by those opposed to her. I believe that Amanda is innocent as well as RS. And that by being innocent they too are victims, as are their families. Discussing the case is one thing, making snide remarks based on lies told in court is another.

MOO

 

[Monzoo]

For what it's worth, her website rubs me the wrong way even just as it is, without some fund-raising for an "unspecifed" project or whatever that was.

" I suppose that since she has been accused of a crime that she claims she is innocent of that she is fair game?"

Her entire website if precisely about the crime and being accused of the crime, and everything surrounding the case, all the documents, etc.. So isn't she kind of putting herself out there as "fair game"?? I don't understand. So you want her to have a whole website devoted to Meredith's murder and the Amanda's case, but then us not be allowed to discuss that, because it's not "fair game"?

I am curious. Do you feel the same about Ryan Ferguson's website? Do you find his fundraising to be in bad taste? (If you do not know about Ryan Ferguson, please see the murder of Kent Heitholt thread)

How would you feel if he wrote a book about his experiences?

 

[otto]

I realize that I am being a bit picky, but Maresca is not Meredith Kercher's lawyer. I know that newspapers have a habit of saying that, but it is truly innacurate. He is the lawyer for her parents and siblings, with the exception of her sister Stephanie, whose lawyer is Perna. (I think? that is the lawyer's name.)

I assume you will ask me for proof, so I will direct you to one of the many court documents. Here is Amanda Knox's translation-in-progress of the Supreme Court's report. You will see that Maresca has filed on behalf of the listed family members.

I believe the second lawyer, Fabiani, filed on behalf of Stephanie in place of Perna. perhaps a partner?

Knox (who has no reason to suddenly become truthful) has translated the document as: "in the appeal proposed by". That doesn't mean that the he is not the lawyer for Meredith Kercher. Meredith Kercher is in no position to propose anything anymore.

 

[aa9511]

a one night stand is now an "extreme sexual experience"??

please post a link affirming agreement w/ the above.

bbm

I thought someone said we shouldn't get all caught up on links and it slows the thread, when it doesn't need a link, etc..?

 

[aa9511]

I think she's probably too busy torturing kittens and eating babies to follow a fast moving thread like this one.

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

Oh you love providing fodder! (sorry if I misused the word, I think I'm using it right, but not sure! LOL!).

 

[otto]

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#4

That would be why I followed it with another link that confirmed the same information. Here it is again ... in case you missed it.
"A lawyer urged an Italian appeals court on Monday to convict Amanda Knox of murdering British student Meredith Kercher and denounced as "unbearable" that the American was soliciting donations in Kercher's memory."

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/victims-lawyer-seeks-knox-conviction-murder-21230989

(it's funny to see my comments isolated and critiqued out of context)

 

[Monzoo]

Knox (who has no reason to suddenly become truthful) has translated the document as: "in the appeal proposed by". That doesn't mean that the he is not the lawyer for Meredith Kercher. Meredith Kercher is in no position to propose anything anymore.

She is also in no position to hire a lawyer. It is a gruesome thing, but the dead do not have interests to protect that would require a lawyer.

You can look at any of the official documents that have the beginning intact. You will see the same thing. Find a PDF from the original Italian, and you will see it is the same.

 

[SMK]

I am curious. Do you feel the same about Ryan Ferguson's website? Do you find his fundraising to be in bad taste? (If you do not know about Ryan Ferguson, please see the murder of Kent Heitholt thread)

How would you feel if he wrote a book about his experiences?

While you await the answer, I will say, that it all depends on if you believe Ferguson to be guilty or not (recall, he was NOT found innocent; his conviction was overturned by the Supreme Court due to procedural problems).

I and most believe Ferguson is INNOCENT and a victim of a gross miscarriage of justice (there are , believe it or not, a few who still think he is guilty).

Of course if someone thinks he really did kill Heitholt, then his website and innocence campaign become a farce.

 

[aa9511]

I have a simple definition of lie. Someone intentionally telling something that he or she knows is not true is lying.

E.g. IMO Stefanoni lied about the quantification data. Mignini lied about the interrogation recordings. Some or all of the policemen lied about the interrogation as their stories contradict each other. Comodi lied about having the 12:00 phone call on record. Maresca lied about the website. Etc.

It's hard to argue mistakes or forgetfulness in the above.

There's a sea of difference when the best you can come up with is Amanda didn't remember the exact time she had dinner.

There are too many lies coming from Amanda to count.

So are these other people, did they implant a chip in Amanda, which allows them to control her like a robot, and then they program what words they want her to speak?

So is Amanda not really Amanda, then?

 

[aa9511]

I am curious. Do you feel the same about Ryan Ferguson's website? Do you find his fundraising to be in bad taste? (If you do not know about Ryan Ferguson, please see the murder of Kent Heitholt thread)

How would you feel if he wrote a book about his experiences?

Has he written a book yet? I haven't heard of one.

Did he link on there to a Kent Heitholt family's website, asking for people to donate to that site going from his site?

 

[TorisMom003]

I think I get it now. If Amanda says something that is perceived to be a lie it is a bad, bad thing. If anyone against Amanda says something that is perceived to be a lie it is ok and acceptable. Never mind finding out the truth about the murder of Meredith Kercher. It isn't needed. The "truth" according to some that Amanda is guilty is all that is needed.