Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #11

[dgfred]

And it wouldn't require that police coerce witnesses to "lie", it might well be a matter of deciding the truth in advance and refusing to accept or explore any testimony to the contrary. It's obvious that happened here, regardless of whether AK and RS are guilty or not.

Obvious? To who?

Like what for instance(s)?

 

[dgfred]

Well, I would love to say it were that simple, but the computer analysis shows it is actually very murky, if you take the time to read it.

So you are insinuating I didn't take the time? :slap:

You can go ahead and say it... because it is that simple = easy to show you are on a computer if you actually are.

'murky' is what the defense is trying for you (and the court) to see. Doesn't seem to be working tho as far as the court is concerned.

 

[Nova]

....not just the door and the poop,there's also a BLOODY footprint....sure,you're not going to assume the worst but the least I think ANYONE (unless there's a syndrome or some huge influence of drugs) would do is check with their roommates.

If no one has ever been murdered in a house where you lived (and surely that remains a rare event even in these times), would you leap to that conclusion over a blood stain? (I honestly don't know whether AK recognized the stain as a footprint; I'm not even sure which print she saw--the one on the mat?) That's still a far cry from the great quantity of blood one would expect from a homicide.

Add to that the fact that AK thought MK might have gone back to England for the holiday weekend (locked door) and was expecting another of the roommates to return from a short errand (open front door). AK may well have intended to ask about the blood stain, but no one turned up.

Should she have called her flatmates before she locked the door and left? Yes. But she was 20, she didn't communicate easily with two of the roommates (the ones she believed to be in town), and she went to her boyfriend (who spoke the language) and asked him what to do.

Again, anything but an urgent call to the carabinieri seems odd once one knows there is a dead body in the locked room. But assuming AK didn't yet know that, I don't see her actions as so terribly suspicious.

 

[SMK]

Obvious? To who?

Like what for instance(s)?

Maybe because they were ruling out a burglary from day one, as was mentioned in The Star?

 

[SMK]

So you are insinuating I didn't take the time? :slap:

You can go ahead and say it... because it is that simple = easy to show you are on a computer if you actually are.

'murky' is what the defense is trying for you (and the court) to see. Doesn't seem to be working tho as far as the court is concerned.

:razz:That analysis was murky to me.

 

[Nova]

So he tapped AK's phone illegally? What is the connection? They left him in office so apparently he is in his right to continue his work as a prosecutor. On the internet he has been pretty much accused of being a Devils worshipper. It took me 5 minutes to read about the Monsters of Florence to see that the whole satanic cult thing wasn't even his idea. In this case, I am pretty sure any other prosecutor would have thought that for example RS's bloody footprint on the bathmat was pretty suspicious as well. That is just my opinion.

It never ceases to amaze me how the same people who say or imply "once a liar, always a liar" with regard to AK will also insist that Mignini's lack of ethics in another case is irrelevant. He prejudged and went after innocent people (quite a few of them) in the Monster of Florence case; why is it so hard to believe he may have done so here?

BTW, I could be wrong, but I believe Mignini is still practicing because Italian law presumes him innocent until his appeals are concluded, not because the Court decided his crimes were minor.

(ETA and let's remember that the most anyone could say was that the footprint "was consistent with" RS; the print lacked the ridges for a true, fingerprint-like i.d. Frankly, I think ILE was desperate to find some evidence that RS helped commit the murder and that greatly influenced how the print was viewed.)

 

[miley]

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

 

[SMK]

Thank you, Miley. Yes, I can see there was nothing to tip AK off that a brutal murder had taken place. and the Postal police saw no indication, either.

 

[Nova]

Ha!..in that case, here is some homework for you A wiretap between RS, his father and stepmother. Where some posters claim AK never changed her story (and was only coerced once), RS's father is very clear about the number of changed versions she has given.

http://perugianotizie.blogspot.com/2008/07/raffaele-contro-amanda.html
http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=340&start=2000 (translation is on this page)

I'm sure RS' father blamed AK for his son's trouble, since RS would have been in the clear had he not met her. The father hardly an unbiased source; nor is he an original source since he is merely repeating what he was told by others.

 

[Nova]

respectfully snipped

Why would RS say "since the FIRST version that I have given" if there were not others?

So we can see he was NOT on the computer, and he changed his story at least more than once.

I think you're putting too much faith in google translate. "The first version" may just mean the first time he talked to police.

 

[dgfred]

I'm sure RS' father blamed AK for his son's trouble, since RS would have been in the clear had he not met her. The father hardly an unbiased source; nor is he an original source since he is merely repeating what he was told by others.

Yeah, but RS told him IMO. Probably one of the best sources of actual truth we can see/find, since that is most likely the case.

 

[dgfred]

I think you're putting too much faith in google translate. "The first version" may just mean the first time he talked to police.

Come on Nova, I don't think you even believe that. His changing alibi is what got AK in trouble in the first place.

 

[Nova]

WAIT JUST A BISCUIT EATING SECOND HERE...

There were OCELOTS at a DAYCARE?!! :crazy:

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.

 

[Allusonz]

@SMK,

'the defense argues'... in 'their' appeal. Grasping at straws IMO as it would have been quite easy to show you were 'using' a computer if you were in fact really using it.

Could you provide a cite regarding which info came off what computers both for the prosecution and the defense

 

[Allusonz]

Come on Nova, I don't think you even believe that. His changing alibi is what got AK in trouble in the first place.

I will point out that the only time their stories change was the night of the 5th

I as well know of not one single person that can state with 100% certainty that someone was sleeping while they were sleeping

 

[Allusonz]

Yeah, but RS told him IMO. Probably one of the best sources of actual truth we can see/find, since that is most likely the case.

This is truly reaching when the supporting facts do not even support what was said in this conversation

 

[Allusonz]

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

Very correct. The articles there do raise more questions that in fact are answered.

 

[Nova]

True---Nova, I am wondering if you think this is going to lean toward Mignini's "giving up the ghost", or on the contrary, becoming more aggressive re AK and RS? https://cpj.org/2011/04/journalists-threatened-for-reporting-on-murder-cas.php

I honestly don't know. Thus far, criticism of Perugia LE has only hardened their attitudes, it seems to me.

And frankly, the rules re libel and criticizing public officials seem so different in Italy.

But look at Arkansas and the West Memphis Three: despite all the bad publicity re Arkansas LE and celebrity attention to problems with the convictions and public support (even from many of the families of the victims) for the defendants, officials in AK still refuse to admit any possibility of error. And that case has been going on for 18 years!

 

[Allusonz]

: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

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

OMG slip sliding away...now the song is stuck in my head this may require a bottle of red wine :giggle:

 

[Nova]

Obvious? To who?

Like what for instance(s)?

If you don't have enough work experience to know that supervisors have various ways of making their wishes known, what can I say?

It can be as simple as smiling when the boss hears something he likes and frowning when he doesn't.