Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #17

[Sonata]

The whole laundry thing always confused me as well. I had originally believed reports that AK and RS were "cleaning up" with the laundry, which is why I thought they were guilty in the beginning. Then, it was reported that MK put a load in before retiring. The only way she might have been doing laundry in her jacket is if the house was cold. It was about 45 degrees out. Yes, it may have been a prior time, with others away.....Good point about the heat, and the discovery of Guede.....

I thought in AK's accounts of the last time she saw MK she mentions that she was taking laundry out of the machine. This suggests that MK probably put another load in before leaving for the evening.

 

[SMK]

I though in AK's accounts of the last time she saw MK she mentions that she was taking laundry out of the machine. This suggests that MK probably put another load in before leaving for the evening.

You are right, good point....

 

[dgfred]

The very fact that ANYONE agrees to "imagine" something they have said never occurred should be a red flag to any fair-minded person. Obviously, the suspect agreeing to "imagine" is already being manipulated, and not necessarily in the direction of the truth.

What?

Why wouldn't she 'imagine' she was NOT involved? :dance:

The mental gymnastics being shown regarding AK's confession/accusation/Nov 6 statements are impressive IMO from the supporters. Obviously.

 

[Sonata]

What?

Why wouldn't she 'imagine' she was NOT involved? :dance:

The mental gymnastics being shown regarding AK's confession/accusation/Nov 6 statements are impressive IMO from the supporters. Obviously.

Haha, I like the emoticon there.

I think the point is that she was 'offered' the exercise to imagine being there. Responding to that with imagining she was not there would take a thinking outside of the box attitude. Since AK seems to be a highly suggestible person, this would fit with her response to this.

Sounds like you, however, are not too suggestible, and would be able to stand your own in such a situation without following instructions so close to the line that you 'forget' that you are allowed to subvert the suggestion.

Just a fun psychological theory!

 

[SMK]

Haha, I like the emoticon there.

I think the point is that she was 'offered' the exercise to imagine being there. Responding to that with imagining she was not there would take a thinking outside of the box attitude. Since AK seems to be a highly suggestible person, this would fit with her response to this.

Sounds like you, however, are not too suggestible, and would be able to stand your own in such a situation without following instructions so close to the line that you 'forget' that you are allowed to subvert the suggestion.

Just a fun psychological theory!

I think you hit the nail on the head regarding the difference between Knox and Fred.:dance:

 

[dgfred]

Can someone please just explain to me what the actual evidence proving that the break-in was staged is?

I know the courts ruled that it was indeed staged but I still do not understand HOW they came to that conclusion.

The only thing I have heard is about positioning of the window and the glass spray. But the glass spray seems debatable as the shutter system is so complicated and I don't see how the window positioning can without a doubt prove that it was not a break-in.

I have seen those two things debated on here, but what did the court documents actually state as the evidence?

There are many reasons, many are evidence of what was not present:

*Lack of anything stolen.
*Per testimony the shutters were closed except for swollen wood preventing them being totally shut.
*The inprobability of anyone choosing that window to break into the cottage.
*No dna on the window sill or in the room of an intruder.
*No glass outside the window on the ground and no disturbances on the ground showing someone was below the window.
*Glass only on the sill suggesting the window shutters were closed when the window was broken.
*Testimony that glass was on top of clothes thrown to the floor suggesting the room was tossed before the window was broken.
*AK's dna mixed with Meredith's blood in a spot in Filomena's room, but no dna of RG in the room.
*The recognition by experienced investigators of a staging, and the suspicion of persons that would need to cover up having a way into the cottage= keys.

 

[dgfred]

Haha, I like the emoticon there.

I think the point is that she was 'offered' the exercise to imagine being there. Responding to that with imagining she was not there would take a thinking outside of the box attitude. Since AK seems to be a highly suggestible person, this would fit with her response to this.

Sounds like you, however, are not too suggestible, and would be able to stand your own in such a situation without following instructions so close to the line that you 'forget' that you are allowed to subvert the suggestion.

Just a fun psychological theory!

Haha, that is the dancing emoticon... since alot is going on it seems.

 

[Sonata]

There are many reasons, many are evidence of what was not present:

*Lack of anything stolen.
*Per testimony the shutters were closed except for swollen wood preventing them being totally shut.
*The inprobability of anyone choosing that window to break into the cottage.
*No dna on the window sill or in the room of an intruder.
*No glass outside the window on the ground and no disturbances on the ground showing someone was below the window.
*Glass only on the sill suggesting the window shutters were closed when the window was broken.
*Testimony that glass was on top of clothes thrown to the floor suggesting the room was tossed before the window was broken.
*AK's dna mixed with Meredith's blood in a spot in Filomena's room, but no dna of RG in the room.
*The recognition by experienced investigators of a staging, and the suspicion of persons that would need to cover up having a way into the cottage= keys.

Thanks Fred. Very helpful.

But I thought MK's money and phones were stolen?

 

[dgfred]

I thought in AK's accounts of the last time she saw MK she mentions that she was taking laundry out of the machine. This suggests that MK probably put another load in before leaving for the evening.

I've always thought (my opinion only) that maybe AK (she claimed to be carrying a bag of dirty laundry back to the cottage from RS's that morning) washed a load of clothes/evidence either much earlier that morning or that morning when she returned... then put in another load of towels and Meredith's clothes to 'cover up' what she had washed previously before returning to RS's.

 

[dgfred]

Thanks Fred. Very helpful.

But I thought MK's money and phones were stolen?

You are welcome.

They were, I was speaking of Filomena's stuff in the room... laptop, etc.

 

[dgfred]

I always questioned this , too, as usually when cops suspect staging, it is more detailed and an analysis in done in a formal forensic manner. Glass on top of clothes could happen with the rock being thrown from the outside, if clothes were on the floor. FR compromised the crime scene in any case. I am not at all certain the break-in was staged.

I don't agree. I think there were many 'signs' that it was a staging. I don't think the crime scene was compromised at all by just picking up her laptop.
It wasn't the only thing with glass on top of it.

For instance in alot of stagings the stager will bust out a window or screen, but do it from the inside. Which is a giant red flag to investigators that someone already inside had committed the crime and staging.

Very similar here; as there was no disturbance on the ground below, no glass on the outside of where the shutters would have been if closed, glass on top of clothes already thrown to the ground, and nothing stolen from the room.
Also no dna of an intruder struggling up and thru the window is of note.

 

[dgfred]

Just exactly who was doing the dancing, fred?

I'd say it was PLE, who listened to AK insist for two hours that she was with RS at the time of the crime, then asked her to "imagine" instead being at the crime scene with PL, and announced "case solved" as soon as she did.

That was quite a rumba!

*I feel like you have a good idea :innocent: .

*She insisted she was with RS until HE SAID she was not.

*The PLE believed Patrick was involved, because SHE TOLD them he was.

*Well, since SHE SAID she met him, let him in, and did nothing while Meredith was murdered by Patrick... it does 'look' like the case had been solved. They also had another suspect (who had been giving her an alibi) STATING AK was not around his apt at the time of the murder as previously claimed. It basically was solved as far as RS, AK and someone else being involved IMO.

 

[Allusonz]

Can someone please just explain to me what the actual evidence proving that the break-in was staged is?

I know the courts ruled that it was indeed staged but I still do not understand HOW they came to that conclusion.

The only thing I have heard is about positioning of the window and the glass spray. But the glass spray seems debatable as the shutter system is so complicated and I don't see how the window positioning can without a doubt prove that it was not a break-in.

I have seen those two things debated on here, but what did the court documents actually state as the evidence?

The prosecution did not present any formal expert testimony with respect to it being a staged breakin. Conversely, the defense brought in a ballistics experts to show that it was indeed a real breakin. The judge determined in his Motivational Report that since the ballistics expert was not a rock throwing expert he dismissed his testimony :giggle:

 

[sherlockh]

There are many reasons, many are evidence of what was not present:

*Lack of anything stolen.
*Per testimony the shutters were closed except for swollen wood preventing them being totally shut.
*The inprobability of anyone choosing that window to break into the cottage.
*No dna on the window sill or in the room of an intruder.
*No glass outside the window on the ground and no disturbances on the ground showing someone was below the window.
*Glass only on the sill suggesting the window shutters were closed when the window was broken.
*Testimony that glass was on top of clothes thrown to the floor suggesting the room was tossed before the window was broken.
*AK's dna mixed with Meredith's blood in a spot in Filomena's room, but no dna of RG in the room.
*The recognition by experienced investigators of a staging, and the suspicion of persons that would need to cover up having a way into the cottage= keys.

I found the scenario of climbing up and down to gain access through that window very telling. Climb up to open the shutters, climb back down, get back up to the parking space to pick up rock and throw through the window, get back down to the wall, climb back up and get through the window without touching any glass or hurting yourself. That is all too complicated.

I did wonder if it is possible to throw a rock from the outside without any glass falling outside. Unfortunately, I have no windows available to test that. Maybe that would make more sense with the way the glass was distributed inside the room, but nobody climbed that wall though. That nail was untouched!

 

[Allusonz]

There are many reasons, many are evidence of what was not present:

*Lack of anything stolen.
*Per testimony the shutters were closed except for swollen wood preventing them being totally shut.
*The inprobability of anyone choosing that window to break into the cottage.
*No dna on the window sill or in the room of an intruder.
*No glass outside the window on the ground and no disturbances on the ground showing someone was below the window.
*Glass only on the sill suggesting the window shutters were closed when the window was broken.
*Testimony that glass was on top of clothes thrown to the floor suggesting the room was tossed before the window was broken.
*AK's dna mixed with Meredith's blood in a spot in Filomena's room, but no dna of RG in the room.
*The recognition by experienced investigators of a staging, and the suspicion of persons that would need to cover up having a way into the cottage= keys.

<modsnip>

Items were stolen including money, credit cards, keys, and her bank card

FR stated three different scenerios with respect to the state of the window. As well remember that it was a very windy night.

What expert stated for the prosecution that this was staged in testimony? They did not forensically analyze the window below, the wall, or the planter.

This is the basics. It has been gone over many times here. I am sure others will add more as my time is limited

 

[Allusonz]

I found the scenario of climbing up and down to gain access through that window very telling. Climb up to open the shutters, climb back down, get back up to the parking space to pick up rock and throw through the window, get back down to the wall, climb back up and get through the window without touching any glass or hurting yourself. That is all too complicated.

I did wonder if it is possible to throw a rock from the outside without any glass falling outside. Unfortunately, I have no windows available to test that. Maybe that would make more sense with the way the glass was distributed inside the room, but nobody climbed that wall though. That nail was untouched!

I posted the video of the defense expert re-creating the throwing of the rock and surprise it landed in just about the exact same place it was actually shown on an Italian news report.

Glass does go in both directions as many have presented videos here to prove. Alas I can only go by what my zada zada golf balls do when they have broken a window. Most of the glass went forward, downward and some went out to the deck the gentleman was sitting on as he ended up with a glass shard in his shoulder

 

[Allusonz]

OH man Malkmus I am sorry but I believe my day will be filled with zada zada's and I made the mistake of showing the video to my children. The house is now filled with zada zada's. Now their friends are starting lol. Too funny :giggle:

 

[dgfred]

<modsnip>
Items were stolen including money, credit cards, keys, and her bank card

FR stated three different scenerios with respect to the state of the window. As well remember that it was a very windy night.

What expert stated for the prosecution that this was staged in testimony? They did not forensically analyze the window below, the wall, or the planter.

This is the basics. It has been gone over many times here. I am sure others will add more as my time is limited

<modnsip>.

*I posted nothing was stolen from Filomena's room. <modsnip>.

*Filomena testified the window was closed almost totally except for where the swollen wood prevented total closing. No wind blew it open IMO.

*As listed it doesn't really take an 'expert' on staging, to see all the signs.

Do you have a cite that below the window wasn't forensically tested?

*I'm sure too that others will add, <modsnip>.

 

[dgfred]

I posted the video of the defense expert re-creating the throwing of the rock and surprise it landed in just about the exact same place it was actually shown on an Italian news report.

Glass does go in both directions as many have presented videos here to prove. Alas I can only go by what my zada zada golf balls do when they have broken a window. Most of the glass went forward, downward and some went out to the deck the gentleman was sitting on as he ended up with a glass shard in his shoulder

What about hitting a golf ball thru the window from the inside with closed shutters, would any glass go outside then?

 

[Allusonz]

I've always thought (my opinion only) that maybe AK (she claimed to be carrying a bag of dirty laundry back to the cottage from RS's that morning) washed a load of clothes/evidence either much earlier that morning or that morning when she returned... then put in another load of towels and Meredith's clothes to 'cover up' what she had washed previously before returning to RS's.

Except AK testified that she did not do her laundry there as there was not a dryer and instead took her laundry to a laundrymat