Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #10

[OldSteve]

This is a good point which a commentator brought up some time ago, Why were ILE so quick to believe L and F, and not AK and RS? Why did L and F so quickly put Amanda down? It was suggested that they may have wanted to make her look bad, to make themselves looks less suspect (even assuming they were not involved in any way, who wants to be part of a group to discover a murder scene in your own home?)---why did the police trust L and F as character witnesses about Amanda? How reliable were their reports?

Exactly! :great: Glad someone sees my point!

Bias because of AK quirkiness?

 

[SMK]

Exactly! :great: Glad someone sees my point!

Bias because of AK quirkiness?

Yes, I certainly do, and when I read the above-mentioned account about this, I kept it well in mind....Yeah, because of her quirkiness, and maybe AK is just one of those people whom females do not warm up to ( I always felt kind of like that, and had more male friends than female)---and YES, it is disturbing in the EXTREME that ILE were so very quick to take their word as gospel. BTW, here is where I first found my own feelings about L and F being too harsh on AK and too readily believed, confirmed :


While we’re on the subject of being around, and not wanting to look sort of suspicious on a suspicious sort of day.

Crime scene photos do not support the prosecution staged break-in hypothesis that the glass was on top of Filomena’s newly strewn clothes.

Like Filomena said.

What if the cops turned on Filomena in that nasty way they have....how would Filomena have responded to that ? The discovery of a really horrific murder isn’t anyone’s idea of one of their better times. People within that environment were being barked at and threatened with thirty years loss of life....within days.
The police definitely arrested and seriously roughed up... a minimum...of one innocent person at first.

The very first thing someone like Filomena or Amanda or whoever is going to want to do that day is get any semblance of blame shifted away from ...themselves.

It’s always good to be the one going up if someone else is going down.

Filomena didn’t need to worry about that though...there’s always Amanda.....

Not the most popular of those present and wading through every obstacle imaginable.
The Michelli trial report is like an anchor of guilt for the defence to drag along through the trial but it’s not the greatest analysis of what might have taken place. At best it’s highly speculative and done amidst a fiery self-righteous, self-fulfilling heat from the cops, which under closer examination later suggested that a lot of the police accusations were crap.
The truth is the first trial mainly eroded a lot of the prosecution's case into vindictive garbage, which doesn't necessarily mean that they are overall wrong in their suspicions.
But the Motivations report submitted to the public after the first real trial, eroded a lot of the contentions of the defence, that an enormous amount of the evidence against them was...well, insane really. While the prosecutor assures us he is sane, the difference between the Machelli report and the Massei report is a bit like taking a kook out of the process. By reducing the circumstances around the crime (or ignoring the prosecution's case) the Judges and jury of the first trial have left far less outrageous stuff for the defence to attack in the appeal.
Now Raff and Amanda are pretty much blamed mainly for the break-in, which still means a long time in jail. (uh, is that too long though ?) I can imagine two nutty kids breaking the window, after the phonecall to Filomena. That would be why they didn't answer her calls and were caught outside by the postals. But I can still see two young people doing that just because they're scared of being the ones from the flat to discover what they've found.

I don't really rate the morning after evidence. It is The Evidence I believe you can most ignore. But you can guarantee they've told a fib or two that day. It doesn't seem likely that Amanda took a shower. She obviously called her mother after the postals arrived and then Raff called the cops. Big deal. Ask yourself, would you want to be the discoverers of that mess ?

....the cops went berserk, and turned on those two because of what Filomena said at the cop shop...but how much does she know, and how right is what she says ? Also how much of it (like the washing machine ********...washing machines don't even get warm anyway) is just extracting that glare away from herself ?

And the very last thing you would want to happen to you in a situation like this is to be the ones being bugged....and not knowing it.... because the whole thing doesn’t really seem to have much to do with you.
http://www.crimeshots.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9580

 

[jjenny]

This is a good point which a commentator brought up some time ago, Why were ILE so quick to believe L and F, and not AK and RS? Why did L and F so quickly put Amanda down? It was suggested that they may have wanted to make her look bad, to make themselves looks less suspect (even assuming they were not involved in any way, who wants to be part of a group to discover a murder scene in your own home?)---why did the police trust L and F as character witnesses about Amanda? How reliable were their reports?

I don't think they needed to suggest anything about AK. As far as I understand it, L and F had a reaction that one might have after discovering murdered roommate (properly upset), while AK was cuddling and kissing with RS. That must have raised some eyebrows.

 

[OldSteve]

I don't think they needed to suggest anything about AK. As far as I understand it, L and F had a reaction that one might have after discovering murdered roommate (properly upset), while AK was cuddling and kissing with RS. That must have raised some eyebrows.

Yes it did, and that's the problem if LE saw it like this - whereas might not AK simply be looking for love and comfort from her boyfriend? Isn't it natural to seek this?
There was no video made to show what took place.

 

[sherlockh]

After RG when thru FR's room, he went into the bathroom...was there when MK arrived ... MK's room is next to the bathroom...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kercher_Knox_house_Perugia_Italy.gif

RG went to the other bathroom. The one in the back, next to Laura's room.

 

[SMK]

I don't think they needed to suggest anything about AK. As far as I understand it, L and F had a reaction that one might have after discovering murdered roommate (properly upset), while AK was cuddling and kissing with RS. That must have raised some eyebrows.

Right, as Old Steve says, cuddling might be just what one felt like doing under these conditions. L and F seemed a bit too quick to jump on this, they must have had a falling out beforehand. Let us just say, even if AK somehow was not attached to MK and not as upset as others might be, that does not mean she was involved. And if she WAS involved, would not this be the PERFECT time to "play the actress"? i.e., "Boo hoo, Meredith is dead" wringing her hands, etc., to deflect any guilt? IMO, the fact that she acted so blase meant consciousness of innocence: I have nothing to fear, as I am not involved, so I needn't play the grieving friend if I don't really feel it. OR she may have been in shock, and really cared....

 

[SMK]

RG went to the other bathroom. The one in the back, next to Laura's room.

IMO, RG went to Meredith's room to confront her, after hearing her enter early when he was on the toilet. Feeling trapped, (maybe MK had locked the front door and taken the key) he had to confront her with a knife to "finish up the robbery" (which he had THOUGHT he could do leisurely and undisturbed, not guessing she would return so early).

 

[SMK]

One thing I think is very, very important when looking to AK and RS: In Jurisprudence, one of the FIRST principles of "Consciousness of Innocence" is "Absence of Flight"--the second is "Voluntary Surrender to Search" and also cooperating with police. Did not AK and RS exhibit consciousness of innocence , while Mr. Guede took flight????:waitasec::waitasec::banghead:

 

[wasnt_me]

Regarding the keys - do we know for sure that no one else had a key to MK room? I thought MK and Filomena were close, and it is possible that Filomena had a key to M's room. I also thought that there was tension between Filomena and AK - remember in the movie how quick Filomena was to cast suspicion toward AK by saying MK never locked her room...
I say this not because I think Filomena killed MK, but I do think AK was an easy target for all to point to.

Wow Oldsteve, I hadn't gone as far as suspecting FR of killing Mk.

 

[wasnt_me]

Another thing I wish to clear up is that someone posted that it was RG's jailmate not cellmate that stated and which was recorded that RG stated RS and AK were not with him that night and which forms part of the appeals. This is incorrect. It was his cellmate and his statement is on videotape

In the dramatic new statement Guede's cellmate claims that Rudy Guede told him there was another person with him but it was not Amanda or Raffaele.

The cellmate's testimony was videotaped and submitted to the prosecutor's office in Perugia

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-6271397-504083.html

Thanks because I was the one who wrote it, and someone corrected me telling me that it was the jailmate, not cellmate when I'd originally said cellmate.

 

[miley]

Please explain where I am confused or wrong...
according to Italian Code of Criminal Procedure:
*(Fast-track trial) The defendant is rewarded with a reduction on the sentence. The law states that this reduction is one third. If the crime was punishable by life imprisonment, the defendant will be sentenced to thirty years.

Rudy's sentence was reduced from a life sentence to 30 years in his first appeal (not at the end of all of his appeals).
Unless someone can show me in the Motivation Report where it says Rudy's sentence was reduced a third due to the fast track, then I still stand by what we discussed here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125994&page=32


*SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Criminal_Procedure#Fast-track_trial

 

[SMK]

Wow Oldsteve, I hadn't gone as far as suspecting FR of killing Mk.

I agree with Old Steve that Amanda was the odd girl out, and easy for everyone to point the finger at.

 

[wasnt_me]

CBS corrected themselves a week later.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20000287-504083.html

Did I miss the correction? Cold you extract the line that contains the correction, because I somehow missed it.

 

[SMK]

Did I miss the correction? Cold you extract the line that contains the correction, because I somehow missed it.

Right, I see that Guede is denying it, but no retraction of the story by CBS, and it stands as reported here: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-6271397-504083.html

 

[Nova]

Let's be clear. I have said that according to Candace Dempsey, Amanda and Raffaele were only fluent in their native languages.

I haven't made any assumptions about Rudy's language abilities. I have no idea what languages he does speak ... do you?

For some reason I thought RG didn't speak English, perhaps because I've never read any reference to him speaking it.

If you are now saying AK was merely less than fluent in Italian and RS was merely less than fluent in English, that's fine. In the past you have written as if each spoke barely a word of the other's language.

We still have RS and RG, who had never met, forming a conspiracy with AK, with whom they did not share a primary language--and forming that conspiracy in a matter of minutes. Sorry, otto, but it really makes no sense.

 

[SMK]

Please explain where I am confused or wrong...
according to Italian Code of Criminal Procedure:
*(Fast-track trial) The defendant is rewarded with a reduction on the sentence. The law states that this reduction is one third. If the crime was punishable by life imprisonment, the defendant will be sentenced to thirty years.

Rudy's sentence was reduced from a life sentence to 30 years in his first appeal (not at the end of all of his appeals).
Unless someone can show me in the Motivation Report where it says Rudy's sentence was reduced a third due to the fast track, then I still stand by what we discussed here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125994&page=32


*SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Criminal_Procedure#Fast-track_trial

Well, are you saying that Guede's apology factored in to the reduction?

 

[wasnt_me]

I dont know about others but I find this locked door to be a bit of a red herring. I know how often I return home from a day at the office with my briefcase and various work documents thus my hands are full yet I am still able to unlock my deadbolt.

The other part of this is that there is nothing in MK's room to suggest that AK or RS were in that room so I would think the person whom has been identified to be in that room probably had the most to gain from locking it

To my knowledge FR's room was not locked but the door was closed when both AK and RS returned. It was then opened by them.

Considering that we now know that it was a very windy night I know how often my doors slam shut when I leave my windows open

I think you might be explaining something different than what I'm talking about. I guess I didn't explain myself properly.

I expect that RF's door would be unlocked and either open or closed on the day of the murder.

However, the night OF the murder, I think her door was locked before the break-in.

I think she locked it because she was going away for the holiday. This is why I think she locked it:

1. RF, or the court in her testimony, claims that she went through the effort to attempt to secure her window because she was going away. if she was making an attempt to secure her room, and had a key to lock the door, it would serve to reason that she'd also lock the door before going away.

2. The reason she thought she had to secure the window. Apparently, she thought she had to lock it because what? Because she must have thought someone was capable of getting in that way. So why wouldn't she think all these "strange people" AK allegedly brought home wouldn't go in her room unless she locked her door?

3. Additionally, she knew that the front door had a potential to come open if not secured properly. So why not be more worried about locking your room door than a window that NO ONE IN THE WORLD thinks RG could have scaled?

I contend that on the night of the murder, RF's door was locked. RG broke in the window, came in her room, and to get to the rest of the house, he simply unlocked RF's door.

IF RF had indeed locked her door before going away and AK had no key to it, AK could not go in there to stage a break-in.

I theorize that Laura's door might have also been locked, which is why RG didn't go in there. He'd have to make effort to break it down. That might have been something he WOULD have done later, had he not been interrupted. AK's door could or could not have been locked, I don't know, since she hadn't gone away and had just been there earlier in the day.

I agree with everything else you've said.

 

[wasnt_me]

Filomena did not go on a trip. Instead her and her boyfriend went to a birthday party

Wherever she went, the transcript states:

Filomena Romanelli stated (cf. declarations at the hearing of February 7, 2009) that when she left the house in via della Pergola 7 on the afternoon of November 1, 2007 she had closed the shutters of her window (p. 68); she had pulled them in (p. 95); "the wood was slightly swelled, so they rubbed against the windowsill" (p. 26), adding that "it was an old window...the wood rubbed". And on the day she went away, she recalled "having closed them because I knew that I would be away for a couple of days" (p. 96). She later added, when noting what she had declared on December 3, 2007, that "I had pulled the shutters together, but I don't think I closed them tight" (p. 115).


Page 48.
http://www.westseattleherald.com/si...ttachments/MasseiReportEnglishTranslation.pdf

Same document, page 50

It cannot be assumed - as the Defence Consultant did - that the shutters were left completely open, since this contradicts the declarations of Romanelli, which appear to be detailed and entirely likely, considering that she was actually leaving for the holiday and had some things of value in her room; already she did not feel quite safe because window-frames were in wood [38] without any grille. Also, the circumstance of the shutters being wide open does not correspond to their position when they were found and described by witnesses on November 2, and photographed (cf. photo 11 already mentioned).

Just like to ask, too, why wouldn't she feel safe in regard to the window? Answer: cause she thinks it can be accessed and penetrated.

 

[Nova]

I think it's highly suspicious that Amanda's room was not ransacked ... not one computer key touched, but the lamp from her bedroom was locked inside Meredith's bedroom. What sort of strange burglar borrows a lamp and respectfully leaves everything untouched. What kind of funny burglar needs to borrow a lamp in the first place?

Please don't start with the story about them all being college kids who borrowed everything from clothes to furniture without permission. There has been absolutely no testimony to support this story. That cannot be said about the women that rented rooms in the cottage.

Maybe the lamp had nothing to do with the crime.

 

[Nova]

So ... did he speak English?

I can't find anything that suggests he did, but that doesn't prove he didn't.