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

[Cappuccino]

Did Amanda not give them Patrick's name? Yet again, there are diversions being done to take the complete blame for this off of Amanda.

The reality is that in her letter to the court she lies and misleads and says that the police just looked at her statement and picked out Patrick's name from it. As if she just mentioned Patrick in some sort of nonchalant way, something like, my boss Patrick told me not to come to work. When in fact she was the one who accused Patrick of murdering Meredith!! So she says Patrick murdered her, and yet she passes it off in her letter like she had nothing to do with it, and the police just got his name out of nowhere.

No she didn't "give them" Patrick's name. He got dragged into it because of a text exchange between himself and Amanda where he said he didn't need her to work that night and she responded with a casual cya later type message. Apparently the mistranslation of that text sounded like a definite plan to meet up later, putting all kinds of suspicions into the heads of the police.

None of which explains why they didn't just ask him for his alibi. I ask again - is there a requirement under Italian law to arrest someone before you check their alibi? If the answer is no, then it is the police's fault, and not Amanda's, that Patrick was arrested in the first place.

 

[aa9511]

You cannot be serious? Just in case you are, no there is no law governing whether or not someone links to your website on theirs. You post on the internet at your own peril, unless you have a specific court order against someone preventing any contact on their part, or unless you are one of the very few people covered by a contra mundum order preventing anyone from posting about you.

The Kercher's fall into neither category, so anyone can link to their website and be competely within the law, even if its a sick gore site encouraging trolls to gloat over Meredith's death.

Thank you for that, but yes I am serious. I simply do not know what laws there are or aren't out there regarding this. For example, how does it work in court cases in Italy between defendants and victims? Because the Kerchers' would be speaking for the victim as the victim is dead. So in a court case in Italy, does the defendant have the right to post a link to something related to the victim in their case? I simply do not know. This is not concerning two regular Joe's. This is a criminal case in which one party is the defendant and one is the victim. So no, I do not know all the laws regarding this, I don't think anyone would unless they are expertise in this type of law, and Italian law at that.

 

[Cappuccino]

Mislead to make someone come to a conclusion that is not the truth. That is a lie in my book.

Would someone tell their child, no don't lie, but well you can mislead people to think something is the truth when it's actually not true?

Oh.........a post to which I could say so much but probably shouldn't. I'll just say one word - irony.

:banghead:

 

[Myvice]

No she didn't "give them" Patrick's name. He got dragged into it because of a text exchange between himself and Amanda where he said he didn't need her to work that night and she responded with a casual cya later type message. Apparently the mistranslation of that text sounded like a definite plan to meet up later, putting all kinds of suspicions into the heads of the police.

None of which explains why they didn't just ask him for his alibi. I ask again - is there a requirement under Italian law to arrest someone before you check their alibi? If the answer is no, then it is the police's fault, and not Amanda's, that Patrick was arrested in the first place.

Was Amanda jailed because Patrick went to jail or because she accused him?

 

[aa9511]

I think the way this knife has been scrubbed, that grooves sort of we're created. It's clear in the pictures.

Uh-oh Amber, typo. Quick, quick.

 

[Cappuccino]

Thank you for that, but yes I am serious. I simply do not know what laws there are or aren't out there regarding this. For example, how does it work in court cases in Italy between defendants and victims? Because the Kerchers' would be speaking for the victim as the victim is dead. So in a court case in Italy, does the defendant have the right to post a link to something related to the victim? I simply do not know. This is not concerning two regular Joe's. This is a criminal case in which one party is the defendant and one is the victim. So no, I do not know all the laws regarding this, I don't think anyone would unless they are expertise in this type of law, and Italian law at that.

Internet law is a speciality all of its own, and no Italian law would not govern what a defendant in an Italian case posts on her web site unless she, or her server, are located in Italy. I presume Amanda and her site server are located in the States, which would mean that only a court order from a US court could force her to remove or include anything. Italy could, if they wanted to use domestic law against her, block viewing of her blog to Italian internet users, and that's about it.

 

[redheadedgal]

Former FBI profiler Robert Ressler: "a psychopathic personality."

"They're manipulators. They tend to con people very well and they wear false faces," he said. "They tend to be able to fool everyone from their families to their friends to society, schools, their community."

http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/the-question-lingers-in-peterson-case-why/nKfyq/

this quote (and article) is about scott peterson. do you have a cite for an FBI profiler calling amanda knox psychopathic (or using similar words to describe her)? if not, this is irrelevant.

 

[otto]

No you didn't. You didn't state otherwise either, but like I said, the misleading way your post was constructed was surely an innocent mistake on your part.

I'm glad you have now clarified that the link you posted, and FBI profiler you quoted, have absolutely nothing to do with Amanda Knox or anything else to do with this case.

I apologize if you misunderstood. An FBI profiler described a personality type. I quoted that profiler. There is nothing strange about quoting an authority and then discussing that statement in another context.

That is, the comment made by the profiler was not about a specific person, it was about a specific personality type.

 

[aa9511]

The post was worded in a very misleading way. It starts with a quote from a former FBI profiler, followed by a link, followed by Otto's own editorialising about how he thinks Amanda Knox fits into that category. For anybody who didn't click on the link, it would look as if a former FBI profiler had described Knox as a psychopathic personality, which would lend completely undeserved weight to Otto's armchair psychologising.

The fact that you personally weren't misled doesn't change the fact the post was badly worded, although I'm sure it was an innocent mistake on Otto's part. And I'm not concerned with sensitivity, but I am concerned with accuracy.

Ah, I see.

Kind of like when Amanda mislead the court about Patrick? Even though that was to a much much greater degree and concerning something way way more significant than what Otto was posting about?

<snark>

 

[Cappuccino]

Was Amanda jailed because Patrick went to jail or because she accused him?

We're not discussing why Amanda went to jail, we're discussing why Patrick was arrested. And I still haven't had an answer to my question. Maybe people thought I was being snarky or whatever, but it was an honest question - is there a requirement under Italian law for police to arrest a suspect before they check their alibi?

If the answer is no, then its the police's fault Patrick was arrested. If the answer is yes, then admittedly Amanda does bear partial responsibility for encouraging the police's tunnel vision based on the misunderstanding of a text message.

 

[aa9511]

No you didn't. You didn't state otherwise either, but like I said, the misleading way your post was constructed was surely an innocent mistake on your part.

I'm glad you have now clarified that the link you posted, and FBI profiler you quoted, have absolutely nothing to do with Amanda Knox or anything else to do with this case.

bbm

Otto has clarified. Amanda never did. She left it that way, the conclusion we get is she wanted to mislead the court regarding her accusation of Patrick.

I'm glad Otto has way more character than Amanda does.

 

[otto]

Did Amanda not give them Patrick's name? Yet again, there are diversions being done to take the complete blame for this off of Amanda.

The reality is that in her letter to the court she lies and misleads and says that the police just looked at her statement and picked out Patrick's name from it. As if she just mentioned Patrick in some sort of nonchalant way, something like, my boss Patrick told me not to come to work. When in fact she was the one who accused Patrick of murdering Meredith!! So she says Patrick murdered her, and yet she passes it off in her letter like she had nothing to do with it, and the police just got his name out of nowhere.

Knox voluntarily wrote letters on Nov 6 and 7 confirming her accusations against Patrick. Based on those two letters she was convicted and sentenced to prison.

Knox admitted during the trial that she introduced Patrick's name when she was questioned as a witness. Police did not suggest his name to her.

 

[redheadedgal]

"See they don't match" how? Because it's too long? As I said yesterday, there are no blood marks to show where the handle would have been for the "shorter" knife, either, so how can we say the knife was "too long"? There are no indications that it was too long or too short, because we don't know where the handle began.

width of blade

 

[Cappuccino]

I apologize if you misunderstood. An FBI profiler described a personality type. I quoted that profiler. There is nothing strange about quoting an authority and then discussing that statement in another context.

That is, the comment made by the profiler was not about a specific person, it was about a specific personality type.

Actually the profiler was talking about a specific person - Scott Peterson. The article you linked to, in the middle of a post about Amanda Knox and your personal opinion of her, had absolutely no relevance to Amanda or anything else to do with this case.

Just so everybody's clear.

 

[aa9511]

That doesn't explain why there would be no blood on the blade and the handle, given that the knife was plunged repeatedly, creating a spray and an outpour of blood visible in the crime scene photos.

The spray, I don't know. But the outpour of blood, because someone would have been holding the knife so it wouldn't have been left on the floor somewhere to where blood would cover it from the outpour.

Regarding the spray, but the round circle of blood you are talking about from the "handle" does not resemble spray? And if the entire blade went in, then wouldn't there be more blood left on the imprint from the entire blade....how come there is spotty outline and then suddenly a lot of blood at the "handle" in the short knife scenario?

 

[aa9511]

From what I could gather, Maresca contacted Amanda, asking her to remove all references/photos/links RE Meredith. Amanda responded by telling him she believed the Kerchers themselves should request this of her if they wished it. Maresca brought it up in court; she responded on her blog; finally, today, she removed the link and pics, and wrote an explanation of her actions to her readers.

As, I see. Ok, so if she waited all this time before she took it down, then surely it is just from public pressure after Maresca brought it up and people became aware of it. Because if she got the request a while ago, and she did nothing up to today......

I am wondering how long ago Amanda actually received the request from Maresca.

 

[aa9511]

I'm sure that the Kerchers made a request via their lawyer for Knox to remove all references to their daughter from her blog shortly after they became aware of it. It was only when that refusal to respect the request of the victim's family was mentioned in court that we became aware of it. Prior to that, it was Knox's dirty little secret that she was demanding that the Kerchers speak directly with her before she would respect their wishes.

Omg, that makes it so much worse.

 

[Katody]

The spray, I don't know. But the outpour of blood, because someone would have been holding the knife so it wouldn't have been left on the floor somewhere to where blood would cover it from the outpour.

Regarding the spray, but the round circle of blood you are talking about from the "handle" does not resemble spray? And if the entire blade went in, then wouldn't there be more blood left on the imprint from the entire blade....how come there is spotty outline and then suddenly a lot of blood at the "handle" in the short knife scenario?

I think you misunderstood.

If you want to match the kitchen knife to the imprint you need to explain why half of the blade left no blood imprint at all.

I know it's hard to explain because it's physically impossible.

There are more things about the kitchen knife absurd hypothesis that require suspension of disbelief: the depth of wound, the carrying of the knife for self-defense, returning it to the drawer, the complete lack of biological material or blood. All of it is hard to absorb for a reasonable person but the imprint idea simply defies belief.

 

[whoanellie]

From what I could gather, Maresca contacted Amanda, asking her to remove all references/photos/links RE Meredith. Amanda responded by telling him she believed the Kerchers themselves should request this of her if they wished it. Maresca brought it up in court; she responded on her blog; finally, today, she removed the link and pics, and wrote an explanation of her actions to her readers.

Who or what gave you the impression that Maresca had previously requested that Amanda remove anything from her website?

 

[aa9511]

There was a bloody handprint at the scene (Meredith's blood, Rudy's print). That would lead me to expect the knife handle as well as the hand to have at least some blood.

That is a good point. That would kind of lead to someone putting down the knife, and then handling Meredith, thus getting the blood on the palm.

Or, it could have been that the bloody palmprint was from the other hand, which was holding on to some part of Meredith's body, and which got bloody from the blood coming out of her.