Page 20 of 83 FirstFirst ... 10 18 19 20 21 22 30 70 ... LastLast
Results 286 to 300 of 1236
  1. #286
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,855
    Quote Originally Posted by ziggy View Post
    Sadly I don't have hope. I've followed a lot of cases and when the fixation occurs and the police start using their evidence to "fit" their theory instead of truly following the evidence, they actually are so committed to their theory, no matter how crazy and impossible it seems and no matter how little hard evidence there is. that their zeal seems to make them credible - and then there is the "police can't be wrong" feeling that most people have and "the person would not have been arrested if they weren't guilty" etc. Throw in some Barry Bond's size egos and the need to be right, along with a system that abhors the "re-trial" of any facts and give deference to the prosecutors, and you have a recipe for injustice. The Titanic turns ever so slowly and the damage is already done.

    I must add that for the knife to have ended up as the murder weapon, one of them would have had to taken it (Amanda the villian of course) across town with the INTENT at that time to use it to kill someone. There were knives in AK and Meredith's house already. The intent had to be formed prior to leaving RS's- this does not fit.

    An infatuated girl is so not going to leave her sexy man to engage in something like that - Amanda seemed to just be content to have RS all to herself and immerse herself in her euphoric euro-adventure. I don't find it at all disgusting that they were constantly practically entwined - it's a very rich and exhilerating feeling to have that little snapshot of an experience with someone made even more romantic and surreal knowing that you will eventually have to say goodbye and go home to your home country.
    Oh, I agree, I thought they looked sweet holding eachother. But I am afraid I must agree with you about the idea that people have gone the route of "the police can't be wrong" and "you don't get arrested unless...." (i.e., "where there's smoke, there's fire")---this is really upsetting, the thought that if the convictions are upheld, many people will be gloating, even though still horribly, horribly in the wrong. I keep thinking there must be something that can be done....


  2. #287
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    18,988
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    Actually, when I read the references I posted, I think all but the a couple mention the leak without mentioning dinner. The courts clearly conclude that dinner was before the leak.

    I gave the page references so you are most welcome to read the context ... a context that clearly places the leak after doing the dinner dishes. Here's the document: http://www.westseattleherald.com/sit...ranslation.pdf

    I know that you don't want to believe this, and have said that you don't put much faith in the Judge's summary ... but that is not a reason to conclude that I am making things up. I am stating documented facts and referencing them. That you do not want to accept or believe those documented, referenced facts is not a reflection of my accuracy, but an indication of your skepticism.
    Apparently I wasn't clear, otto. I apologize. I was AGREEING that you had proved your point.


  3. #288
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    18,988
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    Dempsey carefully documents the conversations that Amanda initiated with Meredith, and also with Laura and Filomina, about whether she was cheating on DJ. She raised the issue after she was seeing Raffaele (and another guy while she was seeing Raffaele), saying that she felt guilty because of DJ. DJ, on the other hand, said they'd split up. Amanda agreed and knew this ... so why did she repeatedly raise the issue about monogamy in relationships. Meredith did not judge, but was in favor of monogamy ... something that Amanda tried to justify breaking (with reference to DJ). That strikes me as weird. Amanda knew perfectly well that she and DJ were not an item, so why did she talk about feeling guilty with DJ and cheating on her non-boyfriend?

    Thinking out loud ...

    Meredith disagreed with Amanda's loose and carefree attitude towards men. Amanda was quite comfortable lying to police and accusing an innocent man of murder. She's a bold woman. After scoring hard drugs in the square with Rudy, and the three of them getting loaded while Meredith is settling in for the night ... how do we know that Amanda didn't think it would be a good drugged up idea for Rudy to think that Meredith had the hots for him? How do we know that Rudy didn't wander down the hall to Meredith's bedroom, thinking he would get lucky, while Amanda and Raffaele listened or even snickered in the kitchen. Perhaps, when things went wrong, Amanda and Raffaele went to the bedroom and realized that things were already out of hand with Meredith ... that is, she was not going to let this go.

    I don't like Amanda because she is not a very nice person. She's a liar. I don't like people like that ... I find them to be a waste of time and mental energy. She put an innocent man in jail and then remained silent for two weeks, at which time he was freed without a word from her. That makes her a liar of the worst kind. I also don't like her because she takes advantage of people, as we saw with her uncle in Berlin. I see her as an opportunist who thinks she's smarter than everyone else, someone that will exploit people if it suits her.

    According to Dempsey, other than ordering pizza, Amanda couldn't speak Italian. Raffaele couldn't speak English.
    "How do we know she didn't..." are problematic words when used with reference to someone convicted of murder.

    If AK felt guilt about "cheating on an ex-boyfriend," doesn't that indicate a heightened moral sensibility? (Actually, it's probably just a matter of habit and sentimentality, but I'm curious as to your point.)

    Despite AK's faults (and Lord knows they've been gone over with a fine-tooth comb since the murder), I just don't see her thinking that MK would be receptive to advances from RG. "Come to my house and we'll do drugs," maybe. "Sure, you can use my bathroom," perhaps. But "Come put the moves on my roommate?" I just don't see it. And I don't see scrubbing the apartment to cover for a relative stranger, not unless one is very, very, VERY involved in the murder.

    But assuming that's what happened, I don't understand why neither AK nor RS have ever said so, not even when they were bowing to pressure and saying whatever they thought would get them out of the interrogation room. Even assuming ILE doesn't plea bargain as American cops and DAs do, it's still very odd neither kid ever gave up RG in an attempt to curry favor with ILE or the Court.

    As for Dempsey, which language test did she administer to AK? I'm guessing none. I know from personal experience with Spanish that I can communicate and understand far more speaking one-on-one slowly than I can with a group or under pressure. Maybe AK and RS didn't discuss Kierkegaard, but that doesn't mean they didn't communicate at all.

    But what's oddest is that those who insist AK spoke NO Italian will also insist that she was somehow able to enter into a conspiracy with two men who spoke NO English!
    Last edited by Nova; 04-04-2011 at 05:27 PM.


  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nova For This Useful Post:


  5. #289
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    18,988
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    You are right. The report deduces that dinner occurred prior to the leak.

    8:42, Raffaele told his father that the pipe was leaking.
    Amanda told police that they ate dinner and the leak occurred while doing dinner dishes.
    Deductively, those two pieces of information mean that they had dinner before 8:42.
    Yes, they do. It was AK's testimony I didn't know about, so the Court's logic seemed a leap. I appreciate the clarification.
    Last edited by Nova; 04-04-2011 at 05:28 PM.


  6. #290
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    18,988
    Quote Originally Posted by ziggy View Post
    Sadly I don't have hope....
    I don't have much either, but I think what hope there is lies in the fact that the first appeal in Italy seems to be something very different than an appeal here in the States.

    Some posters here and elsewhere claim reversals are more common in Italy, but I haven't seen any hard figures.


  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nova For This Useful Post:


  8. #291
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,855
    Quote Originally Posted by Nova View Post
    I don't have much either, but I think what hope there is lies in the fact that the first appeal in Italy seems to be something very different than an appeal here in the States.

    Some posters here and elsewhere claim reversals are more common in Italy, but I haven't seen any hard figures.
    Very true. Problem is, this case has garnered so much attention in Europe and US,(even if some argue it is "just internet and media"--well, that DOES constitute public attention these days!) it makes me feel there is too much at stake to completely overturn conviction. Would this not amount to saying that they had been wrong all along about Knox and Sollecito? Plus as the Kercher family has trusted the ruling, they would experience it as Meredith's killers walking free---If they overturn, Knox's and Sollecito's might bring lawsuits against Mignini, etc - - at least, this is the fear. I truly believed they were guilty until I began to read, and am almost sorry I did if it will just end badly.


  9. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to SMK For This Useful Post:


  10. #292
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,855
    I guess its going on right now, as they are on Pacific time (I am on New York Eastern ST): I wonder what is the goal of this:
    Seattle U Forum to Make Case For Amanda Knox's Innocence
    While Amanda Knox's appeals case plods onward in Italy, a Seattle University student group has organized a panel discussion and Q&A on the West Seattle woman's conviction for the murder of her British flatmate Meredith Kercher in Perugia Italy in 2007.
    The title of the event, Amanda Knox: The Case for Innocence, should give you an idea of the stance these panelists take on Knox's incarceration. The forum will be held on Monday, April 4 at Pigott Auditorium on the Seattle U campus. It's free and open to the public.

    The panel includes some names that should be familiar to anyone following Knox's case, including Dr. Mark Waturbury, author of The Monster of Perugia, and local author Candace Dempsey who has also written a book on Knox's arrest, trial and conviction. Also participating are Paul Ciolino who has discussed Knox on the CBS show "48 Hours" and Steve Moore, the retired FBI agent who has spoken out about Knox's case.

    The moderator will be Thomas Wright of the group Friends of Amanda Knox.

    The event is sponsored by the university's BA Film Studies program.

    April 4, 4-5:30 p.m. // Pigott Auditorium // FREE
    http://seattlest.com/2011/03/29/seat...ase_for_am.php


  11. #293
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,632
    Quote Originally Posted by ziggy View Post
    Sadly I don't have hope. I've followed a lot of cases and when the fixation occurs and the police start using their evidence to "fit" their theory instead of truly following the evidence, they actually are so committed to their theory, no matter how crazy and impossible it seems and no matter how little hard evidence there is. that their zeal seems to make them credible - and then there is the "police can't be wrong" feeling that most people have and "the person would not have been arrested if they weren't guilty" etc. Throw in some Barry Bond's size egos and the need to be right, along with a system that abhors the "re-trial" of any facts and give deference to the prosecutors, and you have a recipe for injustice. The Titanic turns ever so slowly and the damage is already done.

    I must add that for the knife to have ended up as the murder weapon, one of them would have had to taken it (Amanda the villian of course) across town with the INTENT at that time to use it to kill someone. There were knives in AK and Meredith's house already. The intent had to be formed prior to leaving RS's- this does not fit.

    An infatuated girl is so not going to leave her sexy man to engage in something like that - Amanda seemed to just be content to have RS all to herself and immerse herself in her euphoric euro-adventure. I don't find it at all disgusting that they were constantly practically entwined - it's a very rich and exhilerating feeling to have that little snapshot of an experience with someone made even more romantic and surreal knowing that you will eventually have to say goodbye and go home to your home country.

    I just read an update in the Seattle paper online - I hope I am pleasantly surprised.
    BBM. Not exactly cross town. Her boyfriend was only a few minutes (walking distance) away.


  12. The Following User Says Thank You to sherlockh For This Useful Post:


  13. #294
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    N.C., USA
    Posts
    3,220
    Quote Originally Posted by Malkmus View Post
    I'd have no problem saying I'm pro-guilt when it comes to Joran Van Dersloot, Ted Bundy, or Charles Manson if someone wanted to argue their innocence. I don't find it derogatory. You say no one wants to "advocate guilt" as if that's advocating child abuse or something. Not getting the logic.
    Perfect time to say... WHY NOT have a problem?

    Tactics can be turned around, that is why I find it so interesting seeing other post by some here and their points of view in other cases. Amazing some of the time.

    *OT, but related in a way.

    In Joran's 'case' for instance the exact same arguments that are used here could apply. No witnesses, 'false' confession, forced confession, changing stories and behavior used against him regarding guilt, rumors/stories of past behavior used against him regarding guilt, somebody else did it... it's just ALL THESE COINCIDENCES . He is just a young boy in a foreign land, he didn't have an interpretor and admitted something he didn't really do. It's was a mistake because he couldn't understand the questions. They were yelling at him to confess so he did. He wouldn't hurt a fly, and his odd and annoying behaviors are just Joran being Joran. Anything he admitted on video is because he was deprived of food, drink and bathroom. When he said he didn't do it they did not tape it, or destroyed/hid those videos.
    The police are lying to protect their image... and the prosecutors are all crooked and controled by the 'system' of guilt. The collection of the evidence at the crime scene was not appropriate for the US, and probably contaminated or planted. Any evidence of him in the room is because he lived there and not related to the murder. He was not there when the murder took place... but he can't remember what he was doing. Heck, he went to get her some coffee... why would he kill her? Someone else did it, any evidence that he might have is just another coincidence. His parent says he is a good boy and wouldn't murder anybody, much less two people.

    CM didn't have anything to do with the Tate murders... he wasn't there.
    The witnesses are mistaken or lying regarding testimony. The 'girls' false confessed about the murders due to police intimidation... we know this because there is no videos of the interrogations. Their strange behaviors and ways of life were used against them regarding guilt. No evidence of CM at the crime scene. He couldn't make others do these unbelievable and terrible things, he is just a small homeless man. Previous bad behavior and criminal background were used against him... every bit of evidence is circumstancial. He was living and having a happy life in the desert community, why would he want to murder anybody? They decided to murder those people on their own. Anything showing or someone saying that he might have is mistaken, misled or outright lying. Evidence showing he 'might' have given them weapons, the car or directions is just another one of those pesky circumstancial coincidences.
    He was railroaded. The crooked system had to find someone responsible for this gruesome high profile murders... so everyone in the justice system either contaminated, lied, ignored, were mistaken, were misled, worked around, or were just plain wrong regarding his guilt. Even though he is in jail for committing this murder... he says he is innocent.

    How about Scott Peterson... these tactics should have got him off too? No direct evidence, all circumstancial. Lying, bad behavior, cheat, and alot of circumstancial evidence put him away. A hair in a boat, Lacy could have been in the boat at some point. He was a sorry husband and person... so what, didn't mean he murdered anybody. No witnesses, no dna regarding murder, cleaning products were around kitchen because Scott liked to clean or Lacy was doing it while pregnant. A serial cheater but still loved his wife and was excited about the upcoming baby... and change of lifestyle. Only his wife and baby washed up at the precise area he was fishing at... surely just another COINCIDENCE right? Everyone wanted someone to pay for this terrible tragedy so he was the most likely suspect. The prosecutor and the Judges had it out for him, and they convinced the jury to convict. The defence did everything they could to debate the evidence, but the jury was blind, misled and given false information. The Judges at trial and appeals all just 'went with the flow' because they did not want to disrupt the system. His family says he is a super good guy and wouldn't murder his wife and child. He hasn't ever shown violence in the past, why would he start? Poor unlucky, misunderstood fellow... right?

    How about OJ, that seems more the direction of the AK group argument? Did he get off on a technicality? Should he have? Was there contamination or mishandling of evidence... sure everyone can make a mistake but does that mean he didn't do it? Can all of his evidence of blood and mixed dna be explained/excused away? Yes. Was alot of the evidence circumstancial and past behavior looked at? Yes

    Any of that kind of excuses and twisting seen here??? They didn't even have a PR firm behind their 'cause'. Would they have gotten off if they had? Are there people that believe/hope they are innocent, sure but it doesn't mean they are right.

    Based on the evidence both circumstancial and direct AK and RS have been found guilty of being co-responsible and contributing to the murder of Meredith. They have been held since day 1 of their changing story and accusation of that night... IMO the many Judges that have looked over the evidence SINCE that point saw a reason(s) to do so and take them to trial. Since RG's case has already reached it's end by the confirmation of the Supreme Court, it doesn't bode well for the AK/RS defense at appeals IMO.
    The Seeker / Sports Freak /


  14. The Following User Says Thank You to dgfred For This Useful Post:


  15. #295
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,855
    Quote Originally Posted by dgfred View Post
    Perfect time to say... WHY NOT have a problem?

    Tactics can be turned around, that is why I find it so interesting seeing other post by some here and their points of view in other cases. Amazing some of the time.

    *OT, but related in a way.

    In Joran's 'case' for instance the exact same arguments that are used here could apply. No witnesses, 'false' confession, forced confession, changing stories and behavior used against him regarding guilt, rumors/stories of past behavior used against him regarding guilt, somebody else did it... it's just ALL THESE COINCIDENCES . He is just a young boy in a foreign land, he didn't have an interpretor and admitted something he didn't really do. It's was a mistake because he couldn't understand the questions. They were yelling at him to confess so he did. He wouldn't hurt a fly, and his odd and annoying behaviors are just Joran being Joran. Anything he admitted on video is because he was deprived of food, drink and bathroom. When he said he didn't do it they did not tape it, or destroyed/hid those videos.
    The police are lying to protect their image... and the prosecutors are all crooked and controled by the 'system' of guilt. The collection of the evidence at the crime scene was not appropriate for the US, and probably contaminated or planted. Any evidence of him in the room is because he lived there and not related to the murder. He was not there when the murder took place... but he can't remember what he was doing. Heck, he went to get her some coffee... why would he kill her? Someone else did it, any evidence that he might have is just another coincidence. His parent says he is a good boy and wouldn't murder anybody, much less two people.

    CM didn't have anything to do with the Tate murders... he wasn't there.
    The witnesses are mistaken or lying regarding testimony. The 'girls' false confessed about the murders due to police intimidation... we know this because there is no videos of the interrogations. Their strange behaviors and ways of life were used against them regarding guilt. No evidence of CM at the crime scene. He couldn't make others do these unbelievable and terrible things, he is just a small homeless man. Previous bad behavior and criminal background were used against him... every bit of evidence is circumstancial. He was living and having a happy life in the desert community, why would he want to murder anybody? They decided to murder those people on their own. Anything showing or someone saying that he might have is mistaken, misled or outright lying. Evidence showing he 'might' have given them weapons, the car or directions is just another one of those pesky circumstancial coincidences.
    He was railroaded. The crooked system had to find someone responsible for this gruesome high profile murders... so everyone in the justice system either contaminated, lied, ignored, were mistaken, were misled, worked around, or were just plain wrong regarding his guilt. Even though he is in jail for committing this murder... he says he is innocent.

    How about Scott Peterson... these tactics should have got him off too? No direct evidence, all circumstancial. Lying, bad behavior, cheat, and alot of circumstancial evidence put him away. A hair in a boat, Lacy could have been in the boat at some point. He was a sorry husband and person... so what, didn't mean he murdered anybody. No witnesses, no dna regarding murder, cleaning products were around kitchen because Scott liked to clean or Lacy was doing it while pregnant. A serial cheater but still loved his wife and was excited about the upcoming baby... and change of lifestyle. Only his wife and baby washed up at the precise area he was fishing at... surely just another COINCIDENCE right? Everyone wanted someone to pay for this terrible tragedy so he was the most likely suspect. The prosecutor and the Judges had it out for him, and they convinced the jury to convict. The defence did everything they could to debate the evidence, but the jury was blind, misled and given false information. The Judges at trial and appeals all just 'went with the flow' because they did not want to disrupt the system. His family says he is a super good guy and wouldn't murder his wife and child. He hasn't ever shown violence in the past, why would he start? Poor unlucky, misunderstood fellow... right?

    How about OJ, that seems more the direction of the AK group argument? Did he get off on a technicality? Should he have? Was there contamination or mishandling of evidence... sure everyone can make a mistake but does that mean he didn't do it? Can all of his evidence of blood and mixed dna be explained/excused away? Yes. Was alot of the evidence circumstancial and past behavior looked at? Yes

    Any of that kind of excuses and twisting seen here??? They didn't even have a PR firm behind their 'cause'. Would they have gotten off if they had? Are there people that believe/hope they are innocent, sure but it doesn't mean they are right.

    Based on the evidence both circumstancial and direct AK and RS have been found guilty of being co-responsible and contributing to the murder of Meredith. They have been held since day 1 of their changing story and accusation of that night... IMO the many Judges that have looked over the evidence SINCE that point saw a reason(s) to do so and take them to trial. Since RG's case has already reached it's end by the confirmation of the Supreme Court, it doesn't bode well for the AK/RS defense at appeals IMO.
    So it's basically a done deal, not really up for debate, nothing to sleuth, appeals process a formality merely, and all the various and sundry people of high intelligence who are crying 'foul' are deluded.


  16. #296
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,855
    Manson: True, he was not there. I will grant him that much.
    Peterson and OJ: If not them, then, who???? With AK and RS, the answer is Guede.


  17. #297
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,632
    Quote Originally Posted by SMK View Post
    Manson: True, he was not there. I will grant him that much.
    Peterson and OJ: If not them, then, who???? With AK and RS, the answer is Guede.
    Are you sure that that is "the answer"?

    According to RS's defense witness Alessi it was RG's unknown friend.
    According to AK's defense witness Aviello it was his brother.


  18. The Following User Says Thank You to sherlockh For This Useful Post:


  19. #298
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    ...on the veranda
    Posts
    3,250
    Quote Originally Posted by sherlockh View Post
    Are you sure that that is "the answer"?

    According to RS's defense witness Alessi it was RG's unknown friend.
    According to AK's defense witness Aviello it was his brother.

    I am not certain who did this crime, however, I am having a hard time believing it was AK. It just doesn't make sense to me.

    JMO/MOO & all that stuff!!
    I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.


  20. The Following User Says Thank You to Suthrnqt For This Useful Post:


  21. #299
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,855
    Quote Originally Posted by sherlockh View Post
    Are you sure that that is "the answer"?

    According to RS's defense witness Alessi it was RG's unknown friend.
    According to AK's defense witness Aviello it was his brother.
    From all I have read - and at this point I really regret reading so much on this case - I am satisfied with Guede's guilt but not with AK and RS's. And not for any personal or prejudiced reasons, either, but because of the evidence and his history as a brazen police-informer and burglar.


  22. The Following User Says Thank You to SMK For This Useful Post:


  23. #300
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    18,988
    Quote Originally Posted by SMK View Post
    Manson: True, he was not there. I will grant him that much.
    Peterson and OJ: If not them, then, who???? With AK and RS, the answer is Guede.
    Thank you, SMK. dgfred put in a lot of work comparing not just apples to oranges, but to pears, peaches and mangos.

    But as you note, with the exception of Manson, none of the cases fred cites have an actual perp such as RG, whose presence and participation are undeniable.

    As for the Tate/LoBianco murders and despite Mignini's wild theories, Amanda Knox is no Charles Manson. Prosecutor Bugliosi spent months in court demonstrating the hold Manson had over his followers; there is no equivalent evidence for Knox, except that she allegedly moved her hips suggestively.


  24. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Nova For This Useful Post:


Page 20 of 83 FirstFirst ... 10 18 19 20 21 22 30 70 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1206
    Last Post: 04-01-2011, 12:43 AM
  2. Replies: 749
    Last Post: 02-24-2011, 10:59 PM
  3. Replies: 317
    Last Post: 02-11-2011, 06:45 PM
  4. Replies: 826
    Last Post: 02-07-2011, 01:46 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •