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

[Katody]

Often when the Kerchers do voice their wishes and opinions directly, we can glimpse that Maresca doesn't really work according to what they say.

The Kerchers declare they want the truth, they requested to consider and test everything that can be. Maresca protests the testing in court.

John Kercher appealed in the media to Guede to tell the truth. Maresca worked in court to prevent any questioning of Guede about the murder.

I think there is conflict of interest, stemming from the fact that Maresca works for the Perugian authorities. At first de facto, now also officially, representing the Perugian cops in court.

There is conflict of interest because the Kerchers want the truth and the cops doesn't. If Amanda is innocent the direct implication is that there was misconduct, incompetence and even criminal acts on the part of the investigators.
Maresca is not interested in finding the truth, he is only interested in finding guilt. The Kerchers have nothing to offer him unlike the authorities.

JMO.

 

[aa9511]

Regarding the latest <modsnip> about Amanda's blog.

Amanda has the absolute right to declare her innocence. Meredith was her friend, this is integral part of the truth.

Nobody can demand Amanda to stop declaring the truth of her innocence. Not Maresca, not even the Kerchers.

The fact that Maresca wants to silence her voice of innocence, at the same time keeping the right of declaring her guilt and smearing her is perverse.

THey're not smothering her "voice of innocence." They did not tell her to take down their blog. They only were talking about the link which goes directly from Amanda's website to the Kerchers' website.

Like I said before, I don't know what difference it would make to Amanda whether she has that link on her website or not.

The way she is being so stubborn about it, makes me think she has an ulterior motive for having the link on her website.

I believe that motive is to keep up the act of "dear, sincere friend" to Meredith, even though she had only known her for a short while and they were not life-long friends or partners. I don't know about you, but I do not get so deeply connected to a friend in such a short time that I would go even against their parent's wishes in the event of that person's death. They were not lovers, they were not husband and wife, they were not "soulmates," they were merely roomates who, by way of being roomates, hung out with each other.

By being stubborn about this, she is trying to show that "hey, look, look at my deep deep loyalty to Meredith....I am taking a stand for her even in the face of lawyers...see see.....see now why would I ever harm this dear friend who see see, I'm so loyal to."

The other thing is that by not linking up to the Kerchers' website, she would then only have her and Raffaele's sites listed as for donations. And that would make it seem like she's teaming up with only Raffaele. If she puts Meredith in there, it acts as a buffer between Amanda and Raffaele. That way, it's not just Amanda plus Raffaele. It's Amanda, Raffaele, and Meredith, all together, now doesn't that sound sweet?

 

[Amber29]

THey're not smothering her "voice of innocence." They did not tell her to take down their blog. They only were talking about the link which goes directly from Amanda's website to the Kerchers' website.

Like I said before, I don't know what difference it would make to Amanda whether she has that link on her website or not.

The way she is being so stubborn about it, makes me think she has an ulterior motive for having the link on her website.

I believe that motive is to keep up the act of "dear, sincere friend" to Meredith, even though she had only known her for a short while and they were not life-long friends or partners. I don't know about you, but I do not get so deeply connected to a friend in such a short time that I would go even against their parent's wishes in the event of that person's death. They were not lovers, they were not husband and wife, they were not "soulmates," they were merely roomates who, by way of being roomates, hung out with each other.

By being stubborn about this, she is trying to show that "hey, look, look at my deep deep loyalty to Meredith....I am taking a stand for her even in the face of lawyers...see see.....see now why would I ever harm this dear friend who see see, I'm so loyal to."

The other thing is that by not linking up to the Kerchers' website, she would then only have her and Raffaele's sites listed as for donations. And that would make it seem like she's teaming up with only Raffaele. If she puts Meredith in there, it acts as a buffer between Amanda and Raffaele. That way, it's not just Amanda plus Raffaele. It's Amanda, Raffaele, and Meredith, all together, now doesn't that sound sweet?

Yes and it was amanda who shortly after the murder said something along the lines of I didn't know her that long and just wanting to get on with her life. IIRC

Now it's all about remembering Meredith, her dear friend.

 

[aa9511]

Yes and it was amanda who shortly after the murder said something along the lines of I didn't know her that long and just wanting to get on with her life. IIRC

Now it's all about remembering Meredith, her dear friend.

She should have just kept that up (honesty). It is only natural, yes, in the innocence scenario, she would of course have sadness for Meredith and her family and sadness over the horrible thing that happened to her, but in the end the fact is that they were casual friends who only knew each other a short while. That's just natural.

It's all the matter of like I said before, it always shows when you're being inauthentic, and better to just go with your true feelings. In a tactful way.

I presume part of this was her PR team, and advising her to deal with it this way (her general act, I mean), or it could all be her choice and what she thinks will make the best impression for her.

 

[MichaelSmith]

I'm a little confused here over something. Amanda who actually knew Meredith and was friends with her posts a pic on her website and that's considered an "act" and "trying to hard" yet random strangers including grown men on other forums and on twitter use the photo of a dead girl they didn't know as an avatar and that's ok? To me that's just bizarre, creepy and disturbing.

Why is ok for Meredith's so called British friends who knew her a month just like Amanda did to post photos of her on their Facebook pages but not Amanda on her website? They didn't kill her and neither did Amanda so what's the problem?

Beat-up #435353

 

[Amber29]

I'm a little confused here over something. Amanda knew Meredith and was friends with her and has a pic of her on her website and that's considered an "act" and "trying to hard" yet random strangers on the internet who never knew the girl including grown men on other forums and on twitter use the photo of a dead girl they didn't know as an avatar and that's ok? To me that's just bizarre, creepy and disturbing.

Why is ok for Meredith's so called British friends who knew her a month like Amanda to post photos of their Facebook pages but not Amanda on her website? They didn't kill her and neither did Amanda so what's the problem?

I know it's hard to understand for someone who views her as innocent but she is still being tried for Meredith's murder. That is what sets amanda apart.

 

[Katody]

I'm not getting the point about the "too long" part. On the original picture, we can clearly see that there is no tracing of a handle, that is, of a handle of any knife. There is nothing there to indicate where the handle was. So how can you say for sure that the knife is too long?

Couldn't it have been that they simply didn't thrust the knife in all the way to the end of the blade? I would assume that there would be bones to block it from going that deep anyway (sorry for the gruesomeness).

There was a blood spray. A of blood while the attacker plunged the knife multiple times causing the mortal wound.

 

[Katody]

I know it's hard to understand for someone who views her as innocent but she is still being tried for Meredith's murder. That is what sets amanda apart.

I'd appreciate if you took care to write her name correctly. I know how you feel about her, but she's still a human being whether you want it or not.

There are people here of different opinion than yours, people who know Amanda personally and they deserve to have their feelings respected at least a little bit.

 

[Myvice]

The depth of the major wound is about half of the length of the knife. One of the reasons why I think the murder wasn't really intended. High resolution pics of the knife show which part of the blade was scrubbed which also fits the idea that the knife wasn't fully pushed.
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/images/d/d3/Knife_VI.JPG

Thank you for this link. I hadn't seen it before.

I wonder how many people scrub their knives to this degree.

 

[aa9511]

I'm a little confused here over something. Amanda who actually knew Meredith and was friends with her posts a pic on her website and that's considered an "act" and "trying to hard" yet random strangers including grown men on other forums and on twitter use the photo of a dead girl they didn't know as an avatar and that's ok? To me that's just bizarre, creepy and disturbing.

Why is ok for Meredith's so called British friends who knew her a month just like Amanda did to post photos of their Facebook pages but not Amanda on her website? They didn't kill her and neither did Amanda so what's the problem?

Beat-up #435353

It's not about posting a picture, and I believe you know this. It's easy to dismiss something as meaningless when once completely distorts the topic in order to fit in with their own viewpoint.

What we were discussing is having the link for the Kerchers' website directly on Amanda's site. Allowing for people visiting Amanda's site, to then click on the Kerchers' link and go directly to their site.

Do you think the Kerchers' want people who were first visiting Amanda's site, most of whom would be going there because they support her, to then come and visit their site?

Please don't distort the information. We were not discussing the picture at all.

 

[Myvice]

The depth of the major wound is about half of the length of the knife. One of the reasons why I think the murder wasn't really intended. High resolution pics of the knife show which part of the blade was scrubbed which also fits the idea that the knife wasn't fully pushed.
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/images/d/d3/Knife_VI.JPG

Thank you for this link. I hadn't seen it before.

I wonder how many people scrub their knives to this degree.

 

[Amber29]

I'd appreciate if you took care to write her name correctly. I know how you feel about her, but she's still a human being whether you want it or not.

There are people here of different opinion than yours, people who know Amanda personally and they deserve to have their feelings respected at least a little bit.

I agree but I'm allowed to voice my opinion as well.

I'm sorry if my iPad failing to capitalize Amanda's name offends you.
It is a mistake, which I make many in my typing. It by no means is meant as an offense and is petty to be taken that way.

I don't know how many times I have to repeat that I have no hate for Amanda Knox.

 

[SMK]

I agree but I'm allowed to voice my opinion as well.

I'm sorry if my iPad failing to capitalize Amanda's name offends you.
It is a mistake, which I make many in my typing. It by no means is meant as an offense and is petty to be taken that way.

I don't know how many times I have to repeat that I have no hate for Amanda Knox.

BBM - I agree, and I think passionate feelings really have no place in this case:

It should rest on whether on not the evidence supports guilt.

I believe people who go to excess with their hatred of Knox (not really on this site; I am actually thinking of other forums ) are actually detracting from, and weakening the case for culpability, making it appear suspect.

 

[Myvice]

It's not a case of being unfamiliar with the phone records, it's a mistake and the transcript clearly shows Comodi referring to a call made at 12.00pm. Raffaele spelt Walter Biscotti as Valter Biscotti in his book. Does that mean he really thinks Guede's lawyer is called Valter? It's a mistake. No big deal.

Just bringing this down to show that people make mistakes.

 

[Myvice]

BBM - I agree, and I think passionate feelings really have no place in this case:

It should rest on whether on not the evidence supports guilt.

I believe people who go to excess with their hatred of Knox (not really on this site; I am actually thinking of other forums ) are actually detracting from, and weakening the case for culpability, making it appear suspect.

With all due respect, and I love your posts, I feel like that goes both ways.

When every bit of evidence is discounted because the entire Italian justice system is out to get Amanda it becomes suspect as well, IMO.

 

[SMK]

With all due respect, and I love your posts, I feel like that goes both ways.

When every bit of evidence is discounted because the entire Italian justice system is out to get Amanda it becomes suspect as well, IMO.

I understand this, yes, and it was one of the reasons I decided to be more open to examining both sides: Too much denigration of the Italian justice system seemed to me suspect as well.

In any case, excessive passion on both sides confirms that cases for guilt or innocence are best made when sticking to the evidence or lack thereof at hand. Such as in the Ferguson case. At least in my perspective, there was less of both hate and love voiced for Ryan, and more a determination to show that there was no evidence and that the police had been self-interested rather than serving truth and justice.

 

[Amber29]

BBM - I agree, and I think passionate feelings really have no place in this case:

It should rest on whether on not the evidence supports guilt.

I believe people who go to excess with their hatred of Knox (not really on this site; I am actually thinking of other forums ) are actually detracting from, and weakening the case for culpability, making it appear suspect.

I just wish people could separate believing them to be guilty and hate.

I harbor no ill will for Amanda Knox. While I disagree with many of her decisions, they are hers to make. This case is NOT personal for me.

I would just appreciate (I know it wasn't you) the "I know how you feel about her but" to be left out of a reply to me. That is personalizing this, and it is wrong to assume anything of the such.

I agree though with the post about this being true of both sides.

 

[SMK]

I just wish people could separate believing them to be guilty and hate.

I harbor no ill will for Amanda Knox. While I disagree with many of her decisions, they are hers to make. This case is NOT personal for me.

I would just appreciate (I know it wasn't you) the "I know how you feel about her but" to be left out of a reply to me. That is personalizing this, and it is wrong to assume anything of the such.

I agree though with the post about this being true of both sides.

I agree: suspicion of, or belief in, guilt is not tantamount to hatred for the defendants.

I know that you harbor no ill will toward Amanda, and that is the proper attitude: If the evidence shows guilt, then she should be held accountable; if not, then she should be acquitted. Yes, personalization should be left out, of both sides. (sometimes easier said than done, I know)

 

[Cappuccino]

Amanda has now removed the link to the Kercher website from her blog.

This is obviously further evidence of her evil, manipulative ways.

 

[SMK]

Amanda has now removed the link to the Kercher website from her blog.

This is obviously further evidence of her evil, manipulative ways.

OK, she is being reasonable - in any case it was between her, and the Kerchers. I don't think she is evil, no.