Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #14

[SkewedView]

In Iran, three American hikers are imprisoned for around a year without charges - Clinton frequently and aggressively condemns the violation of their human rights.

In Italy, Amanda Knox was imprisoned for nearly a year without charges - the silence of the Secretary of State is deafening.

Funny how human rights only seem to count if they help to move forward a political agenda, isn't it? :sick:

 

[SkewedView]

No problem at all. Happy Birthday to your daughter. Mine will be 21 in November. Have a wonderful weekend.

Thank you dgfred and SMK - she's turning eight, though she tries to act like she's sixteen sometimes, I swear!

 

[wasnt_me]

I'm sorry to sound cynical, but U.S. relations with Italy are complex (and generally positive). I don't think Amanda Knox is a big factor there.

Yeah, but the president I know usually reacts when he gets pressured to do so. I doubt, though, that those in AK's camp have enough to apply enough pressure. It is possible, though. Maybe go after Hillary.

Nothing changes without pressure. I don't care about rocking a boat. I'm from the country that "threw tea in the harbor."

 

[wasnt_me]

Some time ago I had posted and linked the letter to President Obama, and no one remarked.

There is this one, but there is also one signed by Mark Waterbury, Bruce Fisher, and others, I will try and find the second one:

]

Cool. I didn't see them. Now they need to just multiply their efforts by 1000.

 

[wasnt_me]

Snipped by SMK for emphasis

FROM THE DAILY BEAST ( A PRO-CONVICTION ONLINE PUBLICATION)

BY BARBIE NADEAU : http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-06-27/at-knox-trial-the-killer-speaks/
Late on the night of October 13, 2007, a couple of blocks from the house where Kercher was murdered, Guede broke into a law office and stole a Nokia cellphone and Sony Vaio computer. He smashed a window about 10 feet above the ground with a large rock, then scaled the wall, unlatched the window and crawled in. Two weeks later, the computer was in his possession when he was found in a nursery school in Milan. There, Maria Antonietta Salvadori del Prado, the school administrator, discovered him asleep in her office. "He was very serene and explained that he had been told that for €50 he could sleep here for the night," she told the court. She also testified that along with the computer, he had a kitchen knife, a woman’s watch, and a small hammer in his backpack. "I was shocked to find him there. I was more shocked when I discovered he was wanted for Meredith Kercher's murder."

The small hammer, it was a glass breaking hammer found on buses, I might add.

there's no use trying to convince anyone who does not believe it is a real break-in. In Dfred's statement, he used just as much subjective thinking as he claims the other side uses. He will not accept this article as proof, because he believes in the suppositions of his statement, such as "law enforcement usually checks for clues of stages break-ins. He believes that it's okay that FR altered the burglar scene, that her recollections, even though it doesn't matter if they are clear, are correct.

I quote:

[Thus, hazy memory or not from Filomena is irrevelant IMO. Her testimony of her actions regarding the glass fragments is quite clear... as is ILE testimony that the glass was ON TOP of the clothing and laptop. Experienced investigators usually 'red flag' any evidence of staging during 'theft' investigations... much more so a murder investigation I would think.

Her hazy memory doesn't matter, yet her testimony about something SHE REMEMBERED is quite clear in his mind.

Investigators can't "red flag" an altered crime scene. If the postal police had gone to one day of training, they would have not let FR even go in her room. There was blood in the bathroom, so they should have made everyone get out of the house immediately. They should NOT have allowed civilians to even break down the door. Everyone should have left the house because a burglary or a murder was not their jurisdiction, and obviously SOMETHING criminal had occured there. So they are the reason we won't know the truth about the glass etc.

As for the rest of it...the two sides of the argument each accuse the other of making facts fit a theory. I think that is what happened here with dfred's assertions. It's incredibly uncanny that circumstantial evidence against AK is valid but circumstantial evidence in her favor, like RG's burglary record is not enough. We have strong circumstantial evidence that RG broke this window to gain entry. We have basically no evidence, circumstantial or otherwise, that AK was in MK's room. Yet people do not believe he broke in through the window and DO believe that AK was in that room. You can't reason with logic like that.

 

[wasnt_me]

Sorry, that doesn't do for me. If he was known to have done the breaking in and KNOWN to have scaled the wall... he would have been arrested. He was ONLY charged with having stolen goods in his possession IIRC.

See? it doesn't work for him.

It doesn't even work even though eye witnesses from two of the break-ins state that RG was there. They came face-to-face with him on their property. One detained him for the police, and in fact, he DID break in there because there was no way he was allowed to sleep in a nursey. He DID steal money and a knife from said nursery. What's the possible reason for RG to be in a nursey on a saturday morning when he has no children and they weren't open?

The other guy also came face-to-face with RG and his knife.

But they are not believed. Instead, the man at the corner store who saw AK NOT buy some UNNEEDED bleach, the heroine addict who doesn't know his holidays but can be considered an expert people-watcher, the woman who can hear through thick walls and across the street things that the people in the broken down car couldn't hear, a roommate who doesn't know for sure how she left her window, let alone what state she left her room in, and bra clasp evidence that RS would have had to float into the room to touch.

No one can argue with that logic.

 

[wasnt_me]

They would have at least had his fingerprints on file if that was so.

Uhm yeah, that's how they caught him. His fingerprints came up in the database when they took prints from MK's room. I don't know about that other excuse but law enforcement said themselves that it was his prints from being printed in Milan.

It seems to be your insinuation that RG isn't even a criminal. So you believe him when he writes a long diary story about having a budding relationship with MK? Why RG's so sweet, he wouldn't hurt a fly....

 

[wasnt_me]

Hey SkewedView. I don't how wise it is to debate with you anyway, your views are well...... skewed. :great:

Pot, meet Kettle.:floorlaugh:

 

[wasnt_me]

In Iran, three American hikers are imprisoned for around a year without charges - Clinton frequently and aggressively condemns the violation of their human rights.

In Italy, Amanda Knox was imprisoned for nearly a year without charges - the silence of the Secretary of State is deafening.

Funny how human rights only seem to count if they help to move forward a political agenda, isn't it? :sick:

I hate to say this, but aren't muslims in Iran? and isn't Iran Isreal's biggest enemy over there?

Those would be the reasons that clinton was whooping and hollering about what Iran was doing.

 

[Nova]

Yeah, but the president I know usually reacts when he gets pressured to do so. I doubt, though, that those in AK's camp have enough to apply enough pressure. It is possible, though. Maybe go after Hillary.

Nothing changes without pressure. I don't care about rocking a boat. I'm from the country that "threw tea in the harbor."

So am I. I'm also gay and therefore a member of a group that voted heavily for Obama in 2008. Nonetheless, it took enormous pressure and several years to get him to fulfill his campaign promises re Don't Ask/Don't Tell.

Amanda Knox has nowhere near the same numbers of supporters. (I'm not talking about people who say they think she's innocent, but people actively working to pressure Washington on her behalf.)

 

[Nova]

I hate to say this, but aren't muslims in Iran? and isn't Iran Isreal's biggest enemy over there?

Those would be the reasons that clinton was whooping and hollering about what Iran was doing.

Yes, I think that was SV's point: that Clinton has political motives to intervene in Iran that do not apply in Italy.

 

[SMK]

So am I. I'm also gay and therefore a member of a group that voted heavily for Obama in 2008. Nonetheless, it took enormous pressure and several years to get him to fulfill his campaign promises re Don't Ask/Don't Tell.

Amanda Knox has nowhere near the same numbers of supporters. (I'm not talking about people who say they think she's innocent, but people actively working to pressure Washington on her behalf.)

You are right, Nova. It took Obama a long, long time to even begin to fulfill his campaign promises to gays, and many gays were rightfully disappointed and angry.

The reason why I posted that brief about the State Dept. getting involved, is that it was very evasive, as was Clinton when confronted by Senator Cantwell. I therefore am placing my hopes in the appeal process itself, because I do not trust that the letter will be followed up on. And I fear alienating the Italians, as well.

 

[SMK]

I disagree, except for the examined part with:

Refuted/Shot down= ???
*how could it be the wrong weapon with AK's and Meredith's dna on it?
Why would RS say he 'pricked' Meredith if the results of the knife testing didn't bother him? So not really refuted OR shot down. Since IMO the testing will be verified, both the knife evidence and the bra clasp dna of RS would seal the deal as far as the appeals failing. That puts both in Meredith's room at some point with his dna on the clasp and her dna on a weapon found with the victim's dna. How can anthing overcome that IF the testing is verified?Sollecito's remark is VERY suspicious, YES. BUT it has been stated many times that the weapon does not match the wounds. Guede was known to carry a knife---where is it? Contamination likely on the tiny bit on the bra clasp.

*dna retesting can not be redone, they are reviewing the original testing results and procedures now. LCN is not an issue in Italy. Top forensic experts have already verified the original testing methods used. IMO they will not be reversed. So not yet refuted OR shot down.Dr. Hampikian ruined DNA for me. He is too experienced to be "appalled" without good cause.

*'iffy' luminol prints- In who's opinion??? Not the judges/jurors. Not the experts that were presented to them in court. The BARE footprints of both RS and AK in the hallway has in NO WAY been refuted or shot down. Quite the opposite really. Was RS and AK BAREFOOTED at another time in the hallway and in the bathroom? Was this fact presented in court at all? Did anyone verify that both AK and RS were barefooted in the hallway in front of Meredith's room in the week they had known each other? I didn't hear of any.
Isn't it a little cold for them to be roaming around barefooted in late October.Not really, no, I am always barefoot.
Were they cleaning the floor or drinking/spilling juice barefooted? That doesn't seem reasonable to me, nor is there any evidence presented of it.Being kind of sloppy, they might have dripped juice and stepped in it, yes.

That is not even considering the bathroom BARE footprint of RS, which infers several things about the crime:
-There was a clean up of some type. How is this proven?Why? Not RG! Who would have motive?
There is little doubt reasonably that RG EVER had his shoes off that night.Maybe I am the only one who is always barefoot at home. I assumed the place would be loaded with Knox's bare foot prints, and maybe Raff's from being there.
-The print is RS's as found by the court. Where is the rest of it? Why is the rest of it and any leading to it cleaned up? Does it relate to the others in the hallway and the blood spots of AK's dna/Meredith's blood in both the bathroom and Filomena's room... I think so.Mixed DNA in Filomina's room is VERY suspicious, YES.

Did AK's reasoning/statements regarding the blood spots satisfy you? Would she have placed her finger in another's period blood if that is what she 'thought' it may be? If she 'thought' it was from her ears, wouldn't she have checked to make sure? Would she have 'bathmat boogied' naked back and forth to her room, without any lighting (no lamp not noticed) except the morning light after finding the front door open and in what was it... 15C weather??? That doesn't seem reasonable to me tho others sometimes claim it is perfectly normal.It does strike me as normal, yes, for a casual type such as Amanda was. I also find her 'reasoning' regarding finding all that mentioned, getting a shower and walking back to RS's, eating lunch and cleaning up the 'spill' (another question I have) and then only making calls and returning to the cottage very confusing and suspicious. Why not make the calls from the cottage originally? I also find her email and other statements very self-serving and incriminating.She did check. It was not from her ears. Period blood does not repulse girls, we are used to it. Another's is not so big a deal. It was dried, and she did say she thought, "Ew, but no big deal". and she did not KNOW a murder had been committed yet; she did not know what was really afoot or that the situation was actually urgent.

For example in the Brad Cooper trial it was found that he cleaned spotless certain parts of the home (for the first time cleaning at all supposidly) the very morning his wife 'disappears' = not normal behavior. He made two trips to the store to buy milk and juice (on the very morning his wife disappears)at like 4am and around 6am = not normal behavior. This behavior was very supicious to the jury, even tho nothing was really proven about where, when, or how his wife was actually killed. There was ZERO dna evidence against him, not just dna evidence disputed. ALL the evidence was circumstancial and he did not even lie to investigators. Unless there is some sort of HUGE conspiracy to 'get' AK... IMO she was justly found guilty of being part of a murder.I am suspicious of Cooper, yes. as with Scott Peterson and others - there is no Guede in the picture to explain who else had opportunity and motive to do it.

So I don't understand your 'flimsy' statement, maybe you can elaborate more.

WILL GET TO ANSWERING MORE OF YOUR QUESTIONS ANON. BELOW ARE SOME OTHER THINGS WHICH SWAYED ME. Feel free to address them as I did yours (I am aware that I did not do a very great job with my remarks)....

I guess all I can say is, I originally believed there was a very strong case against Knox and Sollecito, and believed they were guilty as charged. I was not expecting any refutation or public outcry.

When it came, I was curious, so I began to read. I had been impressed by the fact that Knox and Sollecito had failed to call 112 until after the arrival of the postal police, and that was shot down (the times were off; they HAD called before the postal police arrived).

I had also thought it was very fishy that the washing machine was warm, and had a load of clothes in it. THAT was refuted: the clothes had been put in by Meredith the night before.

Then the staged break in was refuted.

Then it was pointed out that Guede's dna was all over the room, but not the other 2.

I then heard that the man at the grocery store who saw Amanda early in the morning , buying cleaning supplies, took a full year to come forward, and originally had NOT said she was there. And there was no receipt.

Amanda's shirt was missing: I expected it to be found blood soaked, or bleached and hid away: It was found tossed on her bed with not a drop of blood on it.

Then I read that the TOD had to be closer to 9:30, and the Sollecito's computer showed activity as late as 9 :20, giving them 10 minutes for going over and committing the crime.

Then I read the computer hard drives were fried by police.

Then I was shocked to hear Guede had a history of unlawful entry and robbery.

Then I heard the mixed blood contained no blood of Knox, only DNA from the bathroom she regularly used in her own home.

The I read she had immediately recanted about being present, and about PL.

Then I read that Mignini had a history of consulting psychics and a had acted like a fool in the Monster of Florence case. Then I read about his conviction and sentencing to prison for lies and dereliction of duty.

It went on and on, until the whole case seemed flimsy to me. None of the evidence moves me anymore, as I became too disillusioned. I never had much interest in Knox as a person and still do not. But when a case is this stupid, I would like to see the convictions overturned.

 

[SMK]

When I Googled "Proof of Clean Up, Knox and Sollectio" I found this. Why did the man take a YEAR to come forward??? Why not immediately???

THE CLEAN-UP

Grocer Marco Quintavalle said Knox bought cleaning products at 7:45am the day after the murder.

She claimed she was in bed at the time with Sollecito and did not get up until 10am.http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2403500/posts

AND:

There Was No Clean Up
It was claimed by the prosecution that Amanda and Raffaele made an effort to clean up the evidence that would point to them.

The prosecution claimed that the footprints detected with luminol proved there was a clean up effort. Luminol does not prove that there was any clean up effort. There was absolutely no proof presented in court showing any clean up. Luminol glows from many different substances other than blood. Luminol reacts with various household cleaners, different types of soil, rust in tap water, and many other substances. Luminol helps to find areas that may be blood. When the luminol glows, the area can then be tested to see if the stain is actually blood. None of the footprints detected with luminol were tested for blood. If they were tested, then the information was withheld by the prosecution because it did not show the result they wanted. Either way, the footprints detected with luminol were never proven to be blood. These footprints had nothing to do with the murder. They certainly do not prove that there was a clean up effort of any kind.njusticeinperugia.blogspot.com/p/there-was-no-clean-up.html

and:

ACCUSATION: “Amanda bought bleach for a cleanup early in the morning after the murder when she claimed she was still in bed.”
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY: An early report claimed that Amanda Knox bought bleach that morning but this was shown to be untrue. A shopkeeper claimed he saw someone he thought was Amanda go into the section of a store where there were cleaning supplies. Police confiscated and examined all of that morning's receipts from the store and THERE WERE NO BLEACH RECEIPTS. The receipt found in Raffaele’s apartment was old – from a previous month. There was already bleach in Raffaele’s apartment. If Amanda had needed some bleach and it was already there, why would she have needed to go out and buy it??http://mysite.verizon.net/vze1063v4/Myths/AmandaKnoxMyths.htm

AND:

p 42: “[Nov 1 12:35] The postal police arrived to find Amanda and Raffaele standing outside [with a] mop and bucket…”

This implies that there was a clean up of the crime scene. Luminol testing would later reveal that there was no clean up at the scene, and no bleach was found on the knife that the prosecution claimed was the murder weapon. No blood was found on it either.http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2011/05/05/rebuttal-to-angel-face-the-book-about-amanda-knox/

but this seems to refute:

Police said that further evidence against Mr Sollecito had come to light in the form of receipts from a shop near his flat for bleach, bought on the morning after the murder and allegedly used to clean an 8in kitchen knife and Mr Sollecito’s Nike trainers. The first receipt was timed at 8.30am on November 2, and the second 45 minutes later, suggesting that the first container of bleach had not been sufficient. The bleach was also used to clean up the flat itself.http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2894139.ece

were there bleach receipts or not???

 

[SMK]

so he did NOT wait a year to come forward??? I guess none of this matters in the appeal, but it matters to me..........:waitasec: In other words, it makes a difference to me if Amanda was out buying cleaning supplies that morning. I was told the man took a year to come forward, and was likely pressed to do so falsely by the prosecution....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/5028729/Meredith-Kercher-murder-A-new-hole-appears-in-Amanda-Knoxs-alibi.html

 

[SMK]

I know this is Off Topic RE the Appeal, but for my own mind , what ever came of this? I guess nothing....just talking to myself here, and making notes.....


Knox, dubbed Foxy Knoxy, has repeatedly changed her story – but yesterday her latest alibi was shattered by CCTV footage.
She claimed she was not at home at any point on the night of the murder. But the film shows her walking TOWARDS the flat at 8.43pm. Police say Meredith, from Coulsdon, Surrey, died there between 11pm and midnight. Knox was in a light-coloured dress, and one was later found at lover Sollecito’s pad.
Detectives claim the clip proves she could have gone there AFTER the killing.
At one point Knox said she WAS in the flat, but only in the kitchen covering her ears to block Meredith’s screams. A police source said: “It will be interesting to see what her story is when we show her the footage.”skville.amazon.com/revealed-Meredith-Kercher-crime-scene/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=53669312

 

[SkewedView]

I know this is Off Topic RE the Appeal, but for my own mind , what ever came of this? I guess nothing....just talking to myself here, and making notes.....


Knox, dubbed Foxy Knoxy, has repeatedly changed her story – but yesterday her latest alibi was shattered by CCTV footage.
She claimed she was not at home at any point on the night of the murder. But the film shows her walking TOWARDS the flat at 8.43pm. Police say Meredith, from Coulsdon, Surrey, died there between 11pm and midnight. Knox was in a light-coloured dress, and one was later found at lover Sollecito’s pad.
Detectives claim the clip proves she could have gone there AFTER the killing.
At one point Knox said she WAS in the flat, but only in the kitchen covering her ears to block Meredith’s screams. A police source said: “It will be interesting to see what her story is when we show her the footage.”skville.amazon.com/revealed-Meredith-Kercher-crime-scene/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=53669312

ILE embarrassed themselves with this one - they later figured out that the CCTV caught MK coming home (it also caught Guede, but nobody else). Oopsy!

(someone else is going to have to source this, however - I'm just too dead tired right now. Sorry.)

 

[wasnt_me]

WILL GET TO ANSWERING MORE OF YOUR QUESTIONS ANON. BELOW ARE SOME OTHER THINGS WHICH SWAYED ME. Feel free to address them as I did yours (I am aware that I did not do a very great job with my remarks)....

You are just fine in your remarks. It's just that you can say the sky was blue when MK was murdered and a diehard disagreer of that fact will still not listen to you. You can't help that. You just have to know for yurself that the sky is and was blue.

 

[wasnt_me]

p 42: “[Nov 1 12:35] The postal police arrived to find Amanda and Raffaele standing outside [with a] mop and bucket…”

Amanda and Rafe cannot be standing outside with the mop if the mop was actually found in the hallway closet.

If they were found outside with the mop, is there testimony from anyone that while they were explaining the crap in the toilet and the blood in the bathroom, looking around FR's room and breaking down MK's door that AK also put the mop in the closet? Because if no one saw her do that, then right after the body was found, everyone was made to leave the house. She would have had NO time between when the PP arrived and when they were vacated from the house to put the mop away. And if the PP remembered her with the mop so clearly, surely they would have watched her put it away and they would have testified to such. Did they? I doubt it, but still...

 

[SMK]

Amanda and Rafe cannot be standing outside with the mop if the mop was actually found in the hallway closet.

If they were found outside with the mop, is there testimony from anyone that while they were explaining the crap in the toilet and the blood in the bathroom, looking around FR's room and breaking down MK's door that AK also put the mop in the closet? Because if no one saw her do that, then right after the body was found, everyone was made to leave the house. She would have had NO time between when the PP arrived and when they were vacated from the house to put the mop away. And if the PP remembered her with the mop so clearly, surely they would have watched her put it away and they would have testified to such. Did they? I doubt it, but still...

Good question, and I doubt it as well.....:waitasec: