WARNING:GRAPHIC PHOTOS Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #9

[SMK]

From the review Amazon deems top rated, of Nadeau's "Angel Face: The True Story of Student Killer Amanda Knox":
One point that confused me was Nadeau purposely mentions a phone call from Solecito's father to his apartment at 8:40pm on the night of the murder which as she puts it, "was not answered." This implies that Knox and Solecito were not at his apartment when they said they were. A big problem is that Nadeau has neglected to report that an eyewitness testified that she spoke directly to Knox at Solecito's apartment at 8:45 pm the same night. You would never know this if you only listen to Nadeau. This gets confusing later on though because Nadeau (as did the Prosecution) acknowledges that Knox and Solecito probably were at his apartment and didn't leave until well after 9 pm. This begs the question, why mislead and cast doubt on the defendants whereabouts at 8:40 pm if it's immaterial to the case entirely?http://www.amazon.com/Angel-Face-Student-Killer-Amanda/product-reviews/0984295135/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

 

[sherlockh]

But isn't Barbie the author of a book in which Knox is viewed as guilty? :waitasec: Angel Face: The True Story of Student Killer Amanda Knox

So? I commented on the article. Not on the book.

 

[SMK]

So? I commented on the article. Not on the book.

I also posted from a review of the same book - I think I am only trying to point out that many can say Nadeau, as a journalist , is far from objective about Knox. I take all she writes with a grain of salt, as I do those who are tipped too far in favor of Knox and Sollecito's innocence.

 

[otto]

That is not what I am saying. I am saying that Raffaele and Amanda came under intense scrutiny, and it was conjectured without solid evidence that they had to have been there with Rudy. I find no conclusive evidence for this, wish I did.

Amanda, Raffaele, the woman that walked Meredith home, the British friends, the boys downstairs, Shaky, Filomina and anyone that had been to the cottage came under intense scrutiny. It was after Amanda and Raffaele were arrested that Rudy was connected to the murder. Amanda tried to put it on Patrick, but that failed after he was cleared by one of his customers.

For some reason, police found evidence that all three were involved in the murder.

 

[otto]

But isn't Barbie the author of a book in which Knox is viewed as guilty? :waitasec: Angel Face: The True Story of Student Killer Amanda Knox

You should read Barbie Nadeau's book. It is a fair and balanced account of the investigation and trial, delivering the facts of the case. She attended every court session and is fluent in Italian. The book does not appear to be written with an agenda, so I don't think it can be said that the author viewed KNox as guilty. Nadeau makes some points that go against the prosecution, but she is reporting on the case, and the case is about the prosecution of Knox and Sollecito for the murder.

 

[otto]

From the review Amazon deems top rated, of Nadeau's "Angel Face: The True Story of Student Killer Amanda Knox":
One point that confused me was Nadeau purposely mentions a phone call from Solecito's father to his apartment at 8:40pm on the night of the murder which as she puts it, "was not answered." This implies that Knox and Solecito were not at his apartment when they said they were. A big problem is that Nadeau has neglected to report that an eyewitness testified that she spoke directly to Knox at Solecito's apartment at 8:45 pm the same night. You would never know this if you only listen to Nadeau. This gets confusing later on though because Nadeau (as did the Prosecution) acknowledges that Knox and Solecito probably were at his apartment and didn't leave until well after 9 pm. This begs the question, why mislead and cast doubt on the defendants whereabouts at 8:40 pm if it's immaterial to the case entirely?http://www.amazon.com/Angel-Face-Student-Killer-Amanda/product-reviews/0984295135/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

Raffaele's father phoned at about 8:42 (Judge's summary) and the suitcase woman stopped by at about 8:40. The last activity on the computer was at 9:10 PM, but that was the Amelie movie ending ... no human interaction until the following morning. I don't think anyone is being misled. Raffaele and Amanda were at the apartment, and Raffaele spoke to his father at 8:42.

Where does Nadeau say that the 8:42 call wasn't answered? That was the call where Raffaele mentioned the leaking sink.

(by the way, I've read that the Barbie Nadeau book review section has been swarmed by Friends of Amanda people because that group (and others) are trying to have the wiki site modified such that Nadeau's book is discredited and Dempsey's book is credited ... take book reviews from the past couple of weeks with a grain of salt)

 

[otto]

I also posted from a review of the same book - I think I am only trying to point out that many can say Nadeau, as a journalist , is far from objective about Knox. I take all she writes with a grain of salt, as I do those who are tipped too far in favor of Knox and Sollecito's innocence.

Have a look at the Meredith Kercher wikipedia article "talk page" if you want so see what is going on regarding the Nadeau book. She is being trashed by people that want her book removed from the list of books ... it's that strange reasoning where people trash everything around them and then they don't look so trashy themselves ... as opposed to doing something remarkable and shining above all else.

 

[otto]

You're right. Nadeau's book, page 37: "At 8:40 PM, his father called on the apartment's land line, but no one answered." According to the Judge's summary, page 319, Dr Sollecito called Raffaele on his cell phone at 8:42 PM and the call lasted 221 seconds. They discussed the water leak. I don't know if Nadeau discusses the suitcase woman, but I think she does (just haven't found the page yet). If Nadeau omitted mention of the suitcase woman, does that mean she wrote the book with an agenda?

 

[SMK]

:anguish:Otto - I can see all of your points, and there is some merit in them. But there is no question that many people are highly suspicious of what occurred with Raffaele and Amanda; they are suspicious of Nadeau, they have some very legitimate suspicions about the prosecution, about the evidence. I for one would at this point really love to feel secure that AK & RS really were involved in the murder, as it has actually caused extra stress in my life to think they are innocent - stress that I do not need and cannot afford. In other words, I am someone who desperately wants and needs to be in the pro-conviction or pro-guilt camp, and simply am not finding the confidence I should be able to in the prosecution's case.

 

[SMK]

You're right. Nadeau's book, page 37: "At 8:40 PM, his father called on the apartment's land line, but no one answered." According to the Judge's summary, page 319, Dr Sollecito called Raffaele on his cell phone at 8:42 PM and the call lasted 221 seconds. They discussed the water leak. I don't know if Nadeau discusses the suitcase woman, but I think she does (just haven't found the page yet). If Nadeau omitted mention of the suitcase woman, does that mean she wrote the book with an agenda?

Well, yeah....it sure might. It sure might be her attempt to cast suspicion on the 2 defendants....

 

[SMK]

Have a look at the Meredith Kercher wikipedia article "talk page" if you want so see what is going on regarding the Nadeau book. She is being trashed by people that want her book removed from the list of books ... it's that strange reasoning where people trash everything around them and then they don't look so trashy themselves ... as opposed to doing something remarkable and shining above all else.

I was following the Wikipedia cabal talk page----yes, they have "trashed" Nadaeu, but I have never seen such vicious slander of authors as has occurred on Perugia Murder File with regard to Bruce Fisher, Steve Moore, and Waterbury....true ad hominem and vicious attacks...

 

[SMK]

Amanda, Raffaele, the woman that walked Meredith home, the British friends, the boys downstairs, Shaky, Filomina and anyone that had been to the cottage came under intense scrutiny. It was after Amanda and Raffaele were arrested that Rudy was connected to the murder. Amanda tried to put it on Patrick, but that failed after he was cleared by one of his customers.

For some reason, police found evidence that all three were involved in the murder.

well, police swallowed all that Filomina said, even though much of it was doubtful. Washing machines get warm, etc..... She and the others were quick to put Amanda down, and why were they in a position to be character witnesses against her? did they dislike her? I doubt the others were as quickly set upon by Mignini as AK and RS were.....RS was a case of guilt by association.

 

[SMK]

You should read Barbie Nadeau's book. It is a fair and balanced account of the investigation and trial, delivering the facts of the case. She attended every court session and is fluent in Italian. The book does not appear to be written with an agenda, so I don't think it can be said that the author viewed KNox as guilty. Nadeau makes some points that go against the prosecution, but she is reporting on the case, and the case is about the prosecution of Knox and Sollecito for the murder.

The words "fair and balanced" remind me of the mantra of Fox News, which is in fact biased and unworthy to be called journalism. Whenever anyone says something is "fair and balanced" these days, I become suspicious, as Fox News may have revealed that those who say they are, ain't.....:waitasec:

 

[SMK]

:waitasec:mayhap I will read it, though....

 

[SMK]

In my opinion, this is one of the best pieces I have read concerning the whole original focus on Raffaele and Amanda: It truly seems honest, and unbiased, and seems to "catch" many of the nuances and subtleties which others have missed:What Really Happened That Night? http://crimeshots.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9580

 

[otto]

:anguish:Otto - I can see all of your points, and there is some merit in them. But there is no question that many people are highly suspicious of what occurred with Raffaele and Amanda; they are suspicious of Nadeau, they have some very legitimate suspicions about the prosecution, about the evidence. I for one would at this point really love to feel secure that AK & RS really were involved in the murder, as it has actually caused extra stress in my life to think they are innocent - stress that I do not need and cannot afford. In other words, I am someone who desperately wants and needs to be in the pro-conviction or pro-guilt camp, and simply am not finding the confidence I should be able to in the prosecution's case.

How can you be suspicious of an author if you haven't read the book? I'm baffled by people that discuss the case with a fixed, or firm opinion when they haven't read much of anything about the case except what is published in US media and propaganda blogs. It's bewildering. I would compare it to a classroom where everyone is given an assignment to come to class prepared to discuss a particular topic, and where everyone decides that they can take a stance and "wing it". Obviously the discussion would be pretty low quality, or filled with confused opinions.

I would like to point out that words such as "pro-conviction" and "pro-guilt" are all about Amanda, not about the case. That is exactly what the Knox public relations team wants ... to make this all about Amanda. This isn't about two Italian prosecutors, and it isn't about a judicial system that differs from that in the United States. This is about a British woman that was murdered in Italy. If one looks at this murder from that starting point, forgetting that Amanda is American, even pretending that the victim is American for the purpose of obtaining objectivity, conclusions may be very different.

 

[otto]

Well, yeah....it sure might. It sure might be her attempt to cast suspicion on the 2 defendants....

The suitcase girl stopped by at 8:40, the landline phone was unanswered at 8:40, the cell phone was answered at 8:42. Barbie was of the opinion that Raffaele and Amanda left the apartment at about 8:30, the courts determined that it was closer to 8:45. Dempsey places the murder closer to 11 PM. Does that 15 minutes make any difference?

 

[SMK]

How can you be suspicious of an author if you haven't read the book? I'm baffled by people that discuss the case with a fixed, or firm opinion when they haven't read much of anything about the case except what is published in US media and propaganda blogs. It's bewildering. I would compare it to a classroom where everyone is given an assignment to come to class prepared to discuss a particular topic, and where everyone decides that they can take a stance and "wing it". Obviously the discussion would be pretty low quality, or filled with confused opinions.

I would like to point out that words such as "pro-conviction" and "pro-guilt" are all about Amanda, not about the case. That is exactly what the Knox public relations team wants ... to make this all about Amanda. This isn't about two Italian prosecutors, and it isn't about a judicial system that differs from that in the United States. This is about a British woman that was murdered in Italy. If one looks at this murder from that starting point, forgetting that Amanda is American, even pretending that the victim is American for the purpose of obtaining objectivity, conclusions may be very different.

First off, I have seen Daily Beast interviews of Nadaeu, and read some of her articles, and also seen have her discussed extensively with commentary on Perugia Murder File. I do not KNOW she is biased, but I suspect it strongly, based on the foregoing. Second, this IS about Amanda. We already know that Kercher was tragically murdered, that is established fact. The question is, have Amanda and Raffaele been wrongfully arrested and convicted by the prosecution. How can this NOT be about Amanda?:banghead::waitasec:

 

[SMK]

I never said the judicial system in Italy was worse than America, I think it is far better. Just not in this case. I do not care if Amanda is American or not. Of course it sparked the initial interest, but how on earth could her being American make her innocent?

 

[SMK]

The suitcase girl stopped by at 8:40, the landline phone was unanswered at 8:40, the cell phone was answered at 8:42. Barbie was of the opinion that Raffaele and Amanda left the apartment at about 8:30, the courts determined that it was closer to 8:45. Dempsey places the murder closer to 11 PM. Does that 15 minutes make any difference?

They are positive that the two left Sollecito's apartment? Do they show up on video camera? People absolutely saw them?