Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #17

[dgfred]

Well telling contradicting stories and making contradicting statements is one way to turn the jury against you. Here she is vs Patrick's lawyer.

ViaDellaPergola的频道 - YouTube

If you read some of her other testimony... she rarely answers the question that was asked instead going off on tangents and talking about other things she wants to bring to their attention. Several times the judge has to tell her to answer the question asked.

 

[SMK]

Well telling contradicting stories and making contradicting statements is one way to turn the jury against you. Here she is vs Patrick's lawyer.

ViaDellaPergola的频道 - YouTube

If you read some of her other testimony... she rarely answers the question that was asked instead going off on tangents and talking about other things she wants to bring to their attention. Several times the judge has to tell her to answer the question asked.

Pretty common.....But I think her answers are those of a college girl who is a bit annoyed that she was dragged into this whole thing, which I can understand. I do not hear anything which is not straightforward. Her ability to understand that rapid Italian is awesome.

I think they made a mistake. I know you do not think so, but.....OK, she says she did not want to sign their declaration, that it was all a big mistake. She did not know whether Patrick did it or not, she did not see him and was not there....Sorry, Fred, I would love to be on your team, but there just is nothing there for me to hang onto... In my heart of hearts, I think this is all Giacomo's fault....:razz: for getting involved with Meredith for less than noble reasons, and for getting Guede in the mix at the cottage....I think Meredith should have been in a women's dorm....

 

[dgfred]

No problem my posting friend... your heart of hearts is ok by me.

 

[SMK]

If I could come to the belief that this scenario (image from Lifetime movie) had actually occurred, it would make me want Knox and Sollecito locked away for the heinous crime.

I wish something really decisive would "turn" me, so that I did not have to be bothered by the injustice. And so I could be on the same team as Fred.

Even looking at this image: Why would Guede leave more evidence than the other two? And now Mignini says she may have been in the kitchen....Oy vey....

It’s all about the entertainment. Because when you don’t know the killers or the victim, and the TV news crews keep filming the action and speculating on the legal process – Knox is appealing right now – the death of an innocent young women becomes a soap opera.

http://www.anorak.co.uk/272434/tv/a...of-meredith-kerchers-murder.html/#more-272434

 

[SMK]

No problem my posting friend... your heart of hearts is ok by me.

:blowkiss:

 

[emyr]

The bars were placed on there much time after the murder and the two other break ins that used the balcony route. Not at the time of the murder.

Yes, AK's testimony really opened the eyes of the judges/jurors in getting accurate and good-faith information out of her IMO. Attitude was terrible.

I'm just guessing. The bars were put on after the murder, yes, but the guy doing the climbing also climbed after the murder. Question is, were the bars up or not? I vote yes!

Re: her attitude (more in response to those who have answered below.) I don't have a problem with her answering the questions in full. I've seen the transcript, and I thought the typed version of the answers were appropriate. It's really her mannerisms that bug me. I interpret this behavior as immature petulance.

It doesn't make me think she's guilty, but it's not behavior I like. I think it would be fine to be angry, but at all times it is important to remember that you are on trial for murder, and every moment should be taken seriously. She can be angry with the line of questions, but dismissive and annoyed is not a good attitude to convey. That's just my opinion, and I don't even know if this is the attitude she intended to convey.

 

[emyr]

Hey, in reference to Meredith's memorial service, did any of the female roommates or English friends go? Didn't everyone leave Italy except for Filomena and Amanda? Or am I wrong on that?

 

[dgfred]

I'm just guessing. The bars were put on after the murder, yes, but the guy doing the climbing also climbed after the murder. Question is, were the bars up or not? I vote yes!

Re: her attitude (more in response to those who have answered below.) I don't have a problem with her answering the questions in full. I've seen the transcript, and I thought the typed version of the answers were appropriate. It's really her mannerisms that bug me. I interpret this behavior as immature petulance.

It doesn't make me think she's guilty, but it's not behavior I like. I think it would be fine to be angry, but at all times it is important to remember that you are on trial for murder, and every moment should be taken seriously. She can be angry with the line of questions, but dismissive and annoyed is not a good attitude to convey. That's just my opinion, and I don't even know if this is the attitude she intended to convey.

Well your vote must be for the wrong party... because there were no bars in the pics of the lawyer trying to climb up into the window.

Immature petulance is a good way to discribe her attitude. Sarcastic and giggling are bad attitudes/actions to convey to a jury too IMO.

 

[dgfred]

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/gallery/image_page.php?album_id=14&image_id=1390

Here is a pic of the memorial, I don't really know exactly who her English friends were exactly. There are more pics of the memorial in that gallery, and some pics of her friends.

 

[OldSteve]

But each point has an opposing view:

No blood smears if they didn't touch blood. Two guys holding Meredith, leaves a girl with no hair pulled out. If they didn't step in blood, no footprints to clean. How can Meredith kick if she is being held by two and there are at least two knives threatening her? The sex-game motive is only one of several possibilites... such as rage, prank, none, etc.

Yes, she can't kick while she's being held down, but can't see the three coordinating their attack and acting in concert such that she would not have kicked, scratched, biten, pulled their hair before they could subdue her..
If by some chance they did manage to subdue her without her doing what I mentioned, then they have to avoid leaving blood splatter/smearing evidence showing they were all there... as well as not leaving some real DNA (beyond low copy number DNA).

Just too many things had to go to perfectly for three people I cannot see working in harmony, and if they had been drinking, using pot, all the less the could work together....

Combine that with RG not implicating AK/RS when he was first captured, that alone has me believing that AK/RS were not involved.

 

[dgfred]

Here are some links to AK's testimony... ouch!

Part 1
Amanda Knox Trial Testimony, Part 1 English - YouTube

Part 2
Amanda Knox Trial Testimony, Part 2 English - YouTube

 

[Nova]

Perhaps they could tell be prints on the bottoms of their shoes if there were any shoe prints of theirs.
Perhaps they were barefooted :innocent: .
Perhaps there were not many footprints or they knew exactly what they had touched in the room as far as fingerprints. Like the lamp :innocent: . Wonder why her prints were not on her own lamp?

Was AK a print expert, not sure... but if I said she was/wasn't someone likely would argue from the other view <modsnip>.

Well, you've left me speechless, fred. That doesn't happen very often.

:truce:

 

[Salem]

I know nothing of the timing, just it was reported in Italian media who his lawyer was (not his name). It stated that he was part of a three-man operation of cocaine dealers that serviced students and locals in Perugia that were charged. It stated that his phone number came to the attention of investigators during the Meredith murder investigation because his number had been called by AK both before and after the murder. One of the three was supposidly taking the fast track trial, and the other two (including this fellow) were taking a full trial route.

This was highly interesting to me, opening up all sorts of possibilities and scenarios to think about. Maybe he was just a friend... but IMO it must be a good one for her to call him during the time period just after the murder :waitasec: . One might think she had alot more worries than calling a random guy just after the murder... so I think it may be important. He sure didn't testify on her behalf as a 'friend' in Italy.

I have asked<modsnip> in the past to try to find out the guys name and his relationship with AK... but immediately get the brick-wall treatment :banghead: . This is not relevant and doesn't want to be discussed by AK <modsnip>. This makes me even more interested.

dgfred - what supporters are you talking about? Please let me know.

Thanks,

Salem

 

[wasnt_me]

I know they put bars on the window to protect the occupants after the murder. And I think the prosecution took quite some time to present the fact that part of their case was going to be built around the idea that the break-in was staged. I think that the reason the guy didn't climb through the window was because there were bars on it.

bar have finally been put on FR's window? She was saying in her statements that she wanted bars, just like LM had, and she was saying how insecure she felt about that window. So they put bars on it after the murder?

 

[wasnt_me]

Thanks for agreeing with me. :clap: I think at least Giocomo was a student, but the boys were heavily into drugs, growing pot, and allowing Guede to stay over. Agreed: A crime waiting to happen. I do not think Mr. and Mrs. Kercher knew what situation their carefully raised daughter was living in. And would not have appreciated what the landlady had set up... :tos:

I was surpised when Nina described the city as drug ridden with needles seemingly laying around everywhere. And she made it sound crime ridden, too. So I was surprised that AK's or MK's parents agreed to that city after reading that.

 

[wasnt_me]

Behind the closed shutters? I don't know. I found the reference to bars being put up here:

http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2009/07/05/amanda-knox-she-didnt-fake-a-burglary/

Incidentally, after watching Amanda's testimony here, I don't like her. I realize she is talking to Mignini who she actively dislikes at this point, but the attitude is all wrong. I still don't think she's guilty though.

I didn't watch the whole video, but it has to be annoying to have a translator interrupt your thought and sentences about every two words.

 

[dgfred]

dgfred - what supporters are you talking about? Please let me know.

Thanks,

Salem

I've asked different pro-innocent posters on different forums to try to ask BF (IIP) or Charlie W (JREF) since they claimed to have almost everything regarding the case. I believe I asked Malkmus either here or on IS. Is that what you are asking?

 

[wasnt_me]

I'm just guessing. The bars were put on after the murder, yes, but the guy doing the climbing also climbed after the murder. Question is, were the bars up or not? I vote yes!

To know if bars were on the windows at the time of the demonstration, we'd have to know when the demonstration was done. It's possible that the bars were there if the demonstration was done say a year after the murder. I know that doesn't help pinpoint a time, but I am assuming the demonstration was NOT done before the two break-ins.

 

[Malkmus]

I've asked different <modsnip> on different forums to try to ask BF (IIP) or Charlie W (JREF) since they claimed to have almost everything regarding the case. I believe I asked Malkmus either here or on IS. Is that what you are asking?

You did raise the question back in January, and no one knew the answers you were looking for. I saw no brick wall. But here is a bit of what was said back then on the subject:

Originally Posted by dgfred
Of course nobody will reveal the guy's name , but why not if he was just a friend? IMO he was not recorded just for the sake of it... he/she must have revealed something related to dealing for LE to continue the investigation of him. After all, isn't the theory that LE already 'had their man/woman anyway??? Why would she be calling him just after the murder? Is his advice/comfort that valuable to her? How would talking to a cocaine dealer not be relevant in the case, if true? Naming the guy and a firm denial would go a long way in a remedy for this. I'm also sure nobody from the innocent side cares who he was... oystering.

Posted by Malkmus
I know you'd really like to know who this guy was, but the problem is that it's a tabloid story that never made it out of Italy and unless it gains any sort of real traction nobody is going to answer your question. My take on it is that no one outside of Amanda knows who this guy is because it's highly likely that they were just acquaintances or it's even possible that the whole story is bunk and they never knew each other. It wouldn't be the first time a completely false story has come out about Amanda in the Italian press. Maybe you've followed it more than me... Has there been any sort of development in the story since the initial one?

To answer my own question at the end, it's been 7 months and still no follow-up.

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6067986&highlight=cocaine#post6067986

 

[dgfred]

These are what RS's knives looked like. Top = displayed on wall / next = carrying

http://www.perugiamurderfile.net/viewtopic.php?p=45927#p45927