Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #11

[wasnt_me]

If two suspects in a murder case do NOT present discrepancies in their memories of events, then in all probability they are giving you a story they carefully rehearsed.

The idea that innocent people remember every detail correctly and always tell the truth openly and consistently is a total myth.

If ILE chose to do so, I promise you they could go through transcripts of Filomena and her boyfriend and find just as many discrepancies and lapses in memory. We just don't hear about those because ILE chose to accuse AK and RS (perhaps sincerely believing they were guilty).

As for "constantly making excuses" for these two, let's keep in mind the prosecutor couldn't even decide on a theory of the case; the theories he tried were preposterous (whether it be sex games or killing your flatmate over chores); two of the three conspirators had never met; and the so-called "ringleader" didn't speak the same language as either of her accomplices.

A discrepancy over whether a door was open is petty stuff considering the prosecution's case comes down to a few pieces of glass and a conspiracy that must have been made using mime.

This bears repeating, especially the Mime part.

 

[wasnt_me]

I realize it's odd to find feces unflushed in a toilet. Even AK says she found it odd. But in a house full of young people upstairs and down, I'm sure there were frequent visitors. (We've even heard a rumor that MK thought AK had too many visitors.) So the idea that one of them was careless in the bathroom--or that a toilet was malfunctioning, which is what I would assume--isn't so unbelievable.

Likewise, the open door. It's apparent from AK's testimony that the flatmates sometimes left the door unlocked if they went out briefly. What was strange was that nobody returned while she showered.

But neither of these things seems really ominous if you don't know there's a dead body in the next room.

very true, and I haven't heard so far that RF found AK's reasoning about the open door to be "untrue." and you're right. if a toilet malfunctions, you might have something float back up or not go down.

 

[wasnt_me]

Yes, you are right. You know, another thing about what you point out above, is that it totally discounts this idea that AK and RS knew MK would be the only one home, and planned the attack with Guede ( I was just reading this aspect about the Massei motivation). It is a major aspect of this theory of the 3 on 1 attack, that it was pre-planned, and contingent upon no one but MK being there that weekend. I also find it bizarre that it was supposedly to teach MK a lesson about the stolen money, drive her from Perugia, as if she would not simply report them to the authorities for such a "hazing". I guess no one knows the answer to my question last night about AK's blood in the bathroom supposedly pointing to a nose-bleed (which she is supposed to have gotten from being punched my Meredith!) This is being supposed still in April 2011 on a recent post at TJFMK.

I never heard about the busted nose, but if MK had hit AK during an attack, then I'd like to hope MK had knocked the crap out of AK, and DOING SO would have left a swelled nose. There's no reports that Ak's nose was out of joint. I just say, if MK was fighting for her life and manage to smack or hit AK like that, I'm imagining we'd see the result.

Yeah, about who'd be home that weekend. I just commented on someone else's theory that AK had probably planned to go home after work, but since she didn't work, her stay over at RS's house was impromptu and that's why she had to go home in the morning for clothes and a shower.

Anyways, my point is, that's probably also the reason she said "It could have been me." I don't know what time she would have gotten off work, but if she had gone to work and then returned home, she might have walked in on it or be in worse trouble for sleeping the whole night in her house with a murdered body in the next room. However, I'd like to think that her seeing her door wide open at night would be A LOT scarier than seeing it that way in the daytime. Anytime would scare the heck out of me, but i'm just saying...

 

[wasnt_me]

OK, well, they went out, MAYBE. Maybe. Would they have wanted to admit it, though? Would there be an alibi? I was reading an April 2011 post on TJFMK last night, someone giving additional motive commentary to the Massei report. I ALMOST began to doubt RS and AK. Almost. But it raises many questions. Many. too many holes. And what is the bit about AK and the bloody nose?
(if interested see
Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Fine-Tuning Of A Previous Post On Motive In The Meredith Kercher Case And Its Addressing By Massei)http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php

The first thing I saw about true justice is I don't like to read it because the first time I read it, they gave what I consider an absurd reasoning about the cell phones winding up where they did.

After reading that, I figured I couldn't trust the site. I might be wrong. but they put this quote in, and if it's true, would explain why AK might think period blood was on the floor:

“Meredith was too polite to confront Amanda, but she did confide in her pal, Robyn Butterworth. Robyn winced in disbelief when Meredith said that the pair had quarreled because Knox often failed to flush the toilet, even when menstruating. Filomena began noticing that Amanda could be odd, even mildly anti-social.”

Additionally, it says that FR testified that MK was into her studies, not boys. So why did she have a boyfriend and why was she sexualy active? Not disparaging MK at all, just pointing out the inconsistency in the perception and the fact.

 

[flourish]

Me green

I'm a little confused on this as well. I'm thinking the answer is no, since there are still discussions as to whether the stains could be vasoline.

Thank you.

Well, Allusonz is right that more and more, the more serious bloggers are being recognized as journalists in their own right. Certainly, if Frank's charges are true, then he was mistreated for journalist-type activities.

I agree that more serious bloggers are being recognized. (LOL a post on my bro's blog went viral a while back and that was just funny crazy). I'm not totally convinced of the rest and I don't read wherever Frank writes, so..? *shrug*

You know, as soon as I started listing posters on whose research I depend, I knew it was a bad idea and I would regret some omissions.

Of course, I appreciate all you bring to these threads and not just the scatological expertise. I deeply regret the error. :loser:

Dude, I was just giving you some carp (WS for ____) all in good fun


(Hey, for the record, I only use the "loser" emoticon to refer to myself. Is that clear? Am I using it correctly? I don't want anyone to think I'm referring to him or her.)

Was clear to me

 

[wasnt_me]

OK, what does it show?

ETA: I ask because recently this confused me a lot. http://church-discipline.blogspot.com/2011/01/windowserverlog-raffaele-sollecitos.html

When confused, I suggest using Nova's reasoning. Nova always asks how does "so in so fact" benefit the duo?

Don't get bogged into tiny details. Especially ones that can be subjective and biased for or again, like witness testimony. But use witness testimony to develope common themes that seem evident based on the evidence.

Always question "why" and what's the point of that when reading things. And don't read everything as if it's true! Pick the sites you trust. I trust perjugiamurderfile for one. I think they are proguilt, but I still think their evidence index is impressive and even though they are proguilt, I can research through their site and see the evidence I need for reasonable doubt. Some pro-guilt or pro-innocent sites ONLY show you stuff that's of their mindset. Some show you unbiased evidence and just theorize based on their beliefs. Stick with the latter.

 

[wasnt_me]

:curtsey::takeabow:Thanks folks My mother would be so proud!

And I realized this morning that I didn't even address positioning of the booty upon the toilet and how that may affect the poo

Or the affects of coffee and tacos on the intestines! Not to mention being lactose intolerent. And to think, all RG worried about was a kabob.

 

[wasnt_me]

this may help, video footage of the bathroom -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n71ZJPBq8uk
eta: btw, Flourish and wasn't me, video of the bidet - slide to 4:20

Looking at that rug, but NOT paying that much attention to it, I would not assume it is a bloody footprint. I don't know if I'd go as far as period blood. If I were AK, I might have thought MK spilled her costume blood. AK thought up this story all night and the best she could do was period blood, not fake blood from the vampire costume. AK thought up this story all night but she was stupid enough to say she hadn't seen the blood on the sink before the murder. If she was guilty, why not say, "Oh, that. I must have been from when my did xyz." She could easily say it had already healed, since it took them until Nov 6 to take pictures of her.

Maybe not, though, because her hicky was still there in all that time. AK is even gross enough to admit using the bathmat--with the blood on it--whether she thought it was period blood or what, to shield herself going to her room from the bathroom. I personally would have just streaked. But she said she'd put the rug right back, so why even mention it in a masterly made up story?

anyway, I'm just rambling. Thought I had a point, but I forgot it.

 

[flourish]

Or the affects of coffee and tacos on the intestines! Not to mention being lactose intolerent. And to think, all RG worried about was a kabob.

(http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lgwdp9mt0C1qek863o1_400.gif)


Well I think I know what my next project will be!

 

[wasnt_me]

Three or four. Ah, yes, the 60s. Daycare centers were not well regulated in Florida back then. (I don't know about now.)

There was also a swimming pool and the place was eventually closed down when one of the children somehow got into the pool and drowned. That was after my siblings and I no longer went there.

yeah, sounds like somebody needed their license revoked on that one. Glad you all survived it!

 

[flourish]

AK is even gross enough to admit using the bathmat--with the blood on it--whether she thought it was period blood or what, to shield herself going to her room from the bathroom. I personally would have just streaked.

Most respectfully snipped, for space and emphasis.
I, too, would totally streak. I mean, supposedly she "doesn't get embarrassed" or whatever...I don't know...

Anyway, Yep, gross. Was her mother so lenient on her to just clean up after her? I mean...I will admit to having a downright nasty shared apartment freshman year, with a young lady who was as sloppy as I was at the time, but blood???? I never saw that...orange glue residue in the shower from boyfriend's fake mohawk? Yes. Cigarette butts in champagne flutes? You got it! But even we never left any biological material uncleaned for any length of time. I mean...I'm not saying AK and me are just the same and she should have been exactly like me! I'm just marveling at her grossness for a moment here. Murderer or not, blech.
:sick: :sick: uke:

 

[wasnt_me]

Maybe you should do a little research on it then. Then you will know ludicrous.

Recognizing him and him being an actual 'journalist' working for a major or minor network are two different things.

I gotta chime in because when people like Glenn beck are considered legit and if Foxnews is considered legit, I'll take the blogger.

The bloggers paid more attention and reported more on this case than the major netowrks without the hardwork of bloggers, those we agree with and those we do not, we certainly wouldnt have a volume of material to pull from. My hats off to all the bloggers, esp those who translated the motivation report.

 

[wasnt_me]

Most respectfully snipped, for space and emphasis.
I, too, would totally streak. I mean, supposedly she "doesn't get embarrassed" or whatever...I don't know...

Anyway, Yep, gross. Was her mother so lenient on her to just clean up after her? I mean...I will admit to having a downright nasty shared apartment freshman year, with a young lady who was as sloppy as I was at the time, but blood???? I never saw that...orange glue residue in the shower from boyfriend's fake mohawk? Yes. Cigarette butts in champagne flutes? You got it! But even we never left any biological material uncleaned for any length of time. I mean...I'm not saying AK and me are just the same and she should have been exactly like me! I'm just marveling at her grossness for a moment here. Murderer or not, blech.
:sick: :sick: uke:

you just reminded me. My roommates were so nasty! I'd come home and pantyhose were doing splits on the living room floor, just like supposedly AK at the police station. Once my BF at the time screamed when he went in the bathroom. He thought a dead animal was in the sink. It was a wig.

Then In the middle of the night, some man was throwing rocks at my damn windows and ringing the doorbell. Dumb me, I opened the door (that's what beig young will get you) and let the man go upstairs.

He went in her room and THANK GOD she and I were alive the next day, because I don't know who the hell that guy was, but I asked her what was up with that and she claimed not to even know the dude had been there. Apparently he got up and left in the middle of the night.

Then one time she had these other friends stay over. I went in the bathroom the next morning, and on the floor of the tub was some brown jelly crap. Could have been hair gel, or "What's your poo telling you?" I don't know, but I didn't even take a shower, I'm not gonna lie and I stank that day, because that was gross.

I see you got yourself a toilet icon thing! LOL

:great:

 

[wasnt_me]

Then I am sure what I have stated will again find its' way to PMF

I don't understand. You're saying people in the PMF site have nothing better to do than mock the theories we come up with? Then I hope they had some whopping fun with mine.

 

[wasnt_me]

that had occurred to me as well, that AK might be the monster

I thought he meant monster "Working" on the computer, as in whoever destroyed the computer was a monster.

 

[wasnt_me]

I got a question.

If you set out to fake an elaborate break-in, why not highlight the break-in?

Instead, it seems not to occur to AK that a break-in has taken place. Not even when FR is like "Go see if something was stolen." AK is hesitatant to go back to the house and check. She tells FR that she already saw the TV was there and her own computer was there. BUt FR insists, so they go back.

Why? Why instead doesn't AK call FR and say "There's a break-in. the windows are busted out, MK's door is locked and I ain't going back over there."

It just seems to me, that if you went through all the trouble to stage a break-in, why say nothing to FR about a break-in in the initial call?

 

[wasnt_me]

You know, as soon as I started listing posters on whose research I depend, I knew it was a bad idea and I would regret some omissions.

Of course, I appreciate all you bring to these threads and not just the scatological expertise. I deeply regret the error. :loser:

(Hey, for the record, I only use the "loser" emoticon to refer to myself. Is that clear? Am I using it correctly? I don't want anyone to think I'm referring to him or her.)

Yeah, I got snubbed at the research oscars. Though I am a freshmen, I thought I was good at bringing in quotes and sites and ideas. It's cool, though. Maybe next year.

Now I gotta get back to this testimony.

 

[flourish]

I gotta chime in because when people like Glenn beck are considered legit and if Foxnews is considered legit, I'll take the blogger.

The bloggers paid more attention and reported more on this case than the major netowrks without the hardwork of bloggers, those we agree with and those we do not, we certainly wouldnt have a volume of material to pull from. My hats off to all the bloggers, esp those who translated the motivation report.

Glen Beck gets another uke: from me Also a :cow:

Me green:

I got a question.

If you set out to fake an elaborate break-in, why not highlight the break-in?
Well, that would depend on your definition of the words "elaborate" and "highlight," I suppose.
Perhaps an effort to make it look less staged? Perhaps the best two people who were stoned-- high on weed and hash and maybe alcohol (and I'm still not ruling out benzos) and allegedly all hopped up on post-kill adrenaline and/or post-semi-accident adrenaline/shock/whatever could come up with?


Instead, it seems not to occur to AK that a break-in has taken place. Not even when FR is like "Go see if something was stolen." AK is hesitatant to go back to the house and check. She tells FR that she already saw the TV was there and her own computer was there. BUt FR insists, so they go back.

Why? Why instead doesn't AK call FR and say "There's a break-in. the windows are busted out, MK's door is locked and I ain't going back over there."

Perhaps she knew there was nothing to be afraid of over there now? And even not, since nothing of hers was stolen, why should she risk her booty or take away from booty time to go check? *shrug*


It just seems to me, that if you went through all the trouble to stage a break-in, why say nothing to FR about a break-in in the initial call? Perhaps you're kinda hoping that FR will go to look to see if anything is stolen, and then be the one to discover the body? idk

:cow: :twocents:

 

[wasnt_me]

AK on her computer:

GCM: Excuse me, difensore. When was the last time that you used your computer?

AK: I was listening to music. When I was at home, my computer was always on, and
when I left I turned it off. The last time I used it must have been on Nov 1,
when I came home. I changed clothes, I listened to music, I checked
this and that, and when I left, I turned it off.

LG: How do you explain that when your computer was subjected to examination, it was
burned up by an electric shock? Do you have any explanation?

AK: I think someone burned up my computer.

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=165

 

[wasnt_me]

But, as I understand it, doesn't AK just do what she's told rather than try to persuade RF to go over there herself?

I just can't reconcile staging a break-in on purpose, elaborate or not, stoned or not, no matter what they were, and not making sure the break-in is known. Again, she tells FR of strange happenings. She doesn't say a thing to lead to the fact of a break-in. I guess it's knowledge that the front door was wide open that leads FR to wanting to know if something was stolen.

IF they'd staged the break-in and they want everyone to think it's a break-in, why not tell FR I rolled up to the house, your window is broken. I mean, she could have said that just the same as the front door was open.

That's just one of the subtleties that make me disbelieve the break-in is fake. I'm biased into thinking the criminals who stage things think they are clever and on some level, that causes them to tip their hand too much because they secretely want people to know how clever they are.

It seems too much work to try to get FR to come over and discover something herself, and with FR being farther away than AK, it's not a good cover. LE will want to know why, if you were closer, did YOU not go check it out again, after calling FR?

So I don't buy the wanting FR to discover it. If she wanted FR to discover it, then she should have just called FR, said she was going with RS on the trip. Then she should have asked when FR would be home, and she and RS should have stayed gone an extra day, so NOT to be in town when it was discovered.

Better yet, she could have called FR once in the city. THey should have kept their cell phones off, drove to that city and then turned them on. AK could have then called FR to say she was on her trip and would be back in two days.

That way, No ONE EVER has to know they were at the cottage and they have the same alibis as LM and FR.

That's just why I didn't believe it to start and can't really find too much to make me believe it. A thing or two bothers me about RS and AK, but I feel there's too much reasonable doubt.