Is Amanda Knox guilty or innocent of murdering Meredith Kercher?

In my opinion, these were two very naive young people caught in the crosshairs of the Italian legal system, still in a happy-go-lucky mode, and unable to take it at first the gravity of the charges laid against them.

Just as many naively assume the legal system seldom gets it wrong, Amanda probably naively assumed that the truth would sooner or later come out and she would be exonerated, yet she was repelled at the same time, and so she distanced herself from all these proceedings, trying to restore an atmosphere of normalcy. As she said herself, drastic things like this didn't ever happen in her life, so it was all a shock to her and she felt vulnerable and exposed, hence the natural need to turn to someone (who was in this case RS) for comfort and reassurance.

Effectively she was undergoing a culture shock, but didn't know it at the time. This happens to many young Americans abroad whose lives in America are typically quite different from their experiences outside America.

Her behavior was the product of all of this.

James50 said:

In my very firm opinion, those who consider that AK is guilty are either not aware or have missed the point that she was convicted on the basis of the product of some very weird prosecutor's wild imaginations and that this scenario has since been discarded. To really get it clear that the case against her is absurd, I urge people to read this:

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-amanda-knox-is-innocent-2014-1

Get it clear, guys! The convicted murderer, Guede, had a history of breaking and entering homes at least once with a knife. That was his MO. The orgy scenario was the prosecutor's line in a previous trial, which case fell apart.

Guede broke in to homes, that was his MO.
The orgy scenario was the prosecutor's usual line of argument.

Read that again and again until it sinks in that the notion that AK was involved is clearly absurd.

Click to expand...

:deadhorse::deadhorse::deadhorse:I strongly disagree with you, and I have followed this case closely from the beginning. Guede is Guilty but he did NOT act alone. Amanda and Rafe are Guilty too, and twice convicted. You can't blame the verdict this time around on the prosecutor. Look closely at the evidence. They were there too!
Also, this break-in was staged to frame him.:banghead::banghead::banghead:
One more thing, doing cartwheels at a police station is not normal, "happy-go-lucky" behavior.:moo:

LinasK said:

:deadhorse::deadhorse::deadhorse:I strongly disagree with you, and I have followed this case closely from the beginning. Guede is Guilty but he did NOT act alone. Amanda and Rafe are Guilty too, and twice convicted. You can't blame the verdict this time around on the prosecutor. Look closely at the evidence. They were there too!
Also, this break-in was staged to frame him.:banghead::banghead::banghead:
One more thing, doing cartwheels at a police station is not normal, "happy-go-lucky" behavior.:moo:

Click to expand...

The presumption that he did not act alone is a supposition only. That had to be concluded so that it would fit the orgy scenario. The fact that they were convicted twice doesn't alter any of what I said. They were also acquitted at one point, and the second trial was very heavily influenced by the first.

Again the notion that the break-in was staged is an opinion only, and one that can easily enough be disputed.

Doing cartwheels is normal if someone is trying to establish a sense of normalcy in the midst of tragedy. Like someone cracking a joke when faced with mortal danger to stave off fear. It can even be a nervous reaction.

James50 said:

Secondly since RS downloaded a movie, that places him (and hence her) in his home, not at the cottage, and clearly then this is where they were.

Click to expand...

They were accused of buying bleach early next morning. But both Knox and Sollecito claimed that they didn't wake up until 10:30am. So how come computer records showed someone was on the computer at around 6am?

The presumption that he did not act alone is a supposition only. That had to be concluded so that it would fit the orgy scenario.

Click to expand...

No, that was from the autopsy. Based on the bruising on her arms and lack of cuts, it was concluded that she was likely held down by a second person.

Effective said:

They were accused of buying bleach early next morning. But both Knox and Sollecito claimed that they didn't wake up until 10:30am. So how come computer records showed someone was on the computer at around 6am?

Click to expand...

Good point about the time. However, that can be explained in at least two ways: 1. fear that they might be fingered for a crime they didn't commit could also have made them economic with the truth about the time they got up. 2. One of them did wake up but went back to sleep again and the person seen buying bleach was in fact someone else.

Effective said:

No, that was from the autopsy. Based on the bruising on her arms and lack of cuts, it was concluded that she was likely held down by a second person.

Click to expand...

Well in my dictionary the word 'likely' still makes that supposition. The only prints in Meridith's room were Guedo's.

IMO, Amanda Knox is guilty of murder. Granted, she may not have pre-meditated murder, she may have gotten in a fight with Meredith, attempted to pull a prank, got accused by Meredith of stealing her money, and umpteen other possible scenarios. Cell phone evidence, lies, changing alibis, and forensic evidence clearly point to her as the ring leader of the act gone bad, and as the chief in charge of coverup. MOOOOO

Ok I'm finally weighing in on the case after several years of nothing. So here goes.

At first I thought she was innocent. But after watching a lot of Mystery 48 hours types of shows (which I know are reality tv to most people) there are a couple of things that make me think she did it.

First up James, saying she'd never do such a violent crime out of jealousy is just total nonsense. When groups of people get together and are led along by a criminal and alcohol and drugs are involved it's shocking what people can do. Like the team of girls that brutally killed their high school friend and then burned her alive. You know, that kind of "first timer" type of crime.

I don't believe her confession at all. And I think that's what has made me confused for so long. I'm a fan of Ryan Ferguson and the Innocence Project so I'm well aware of false confessions that can be thrown out. It's not her confession that bothers me.

It's her lies and her stories.

In all of those crime shows, the reason they caught the criminal was because they made a stupid silly lie at some point and their story didn't add up.

Usually it involves timelines and phone calls and that's exactly what happened in this case.

She called her mother early in the morning (I think 4 am ish our time) and woke her up saying she thought something was wrong in the apartment BEFORE she called the police. Her mother told her to hang up and call the police.

Amanda later denied making the call. Her mother remembered it though.

The prosecutor pointed out a detail that is interesting, in that she was attempting to give her self an "alibi" of sorts of stumbling onto the crime scene.

The second thing that gives me pause is her incriminating the bar owner. She went into great detail on that which was bizarre.

But those two things are just timeline issues that make you look closer and lies that make you look closer. She also lied about the quality and length of her interrogation. So more lies. When cops see lies they go back to the story.

Next we have a staged break in. There's no reason for the guy who broke in to stage a break in.

Next we have a bloody foot print.

All those things together really point to guilt more than DNA evidence or lack thereof.

I also think she may not have been in the room when Meredith was murdered but she and boyfriend were there in the other room maybe even having sex when it happened as a sadistic turn on.

They sober up the next day and freak out. Maybe that's what happened. Do I think she held her down and killed her, not really. But I think she's not telling the truth about being there that night.

First up James, saying she'd never do such a violent crime out of jealousy is just total nonsense. When groups of people get together and are led along by a criminal and alcohol and drugs are involved it's shocking what people can do. Like the team of girls that brutally killed their high school friend and then burned her alive. You know, that kind of "first timer" type of crime.

Click to expand...

I didn't say, nor did I mean "she'd never do such a violent crime out of jealousy." What I believe is that the charges are utterly absurd based on all that I know of the case. But now that you mention it, jealousy so far as to kill someone you've only known for a few weeks for that motive when you're heavily involved with a guy you've just met and you call this girl "my friend" and have had no prior record of aggression towards other females is utterly crackers, and no intelligent person will accept it as a reasonable motive. ]

I don't deny that in a group we may do things we wouldn't do alone, but the shoe doesn't fit here. There are too many other issues that jar with that scenario, for example the fact that Guedo's MO is breaking and entering ALONE, and that the orgy scenario had been used by the same prosecutor in a previous case. That sounds huge alarm bells in my ears and suggests to me that Amanda was framed and any minor, insignificant or inconsequential thing that seemed to fit the scenario was entered as evidence to "buttress" the case against her. But the point is that using that tack, you could make a case that my grandmother was involved.

She called her mother early in the morning (I think 4 am ish our time) and woke her up saying she thought something was wrong in the apartment BEFORE she called the police. Her mother told her to hang up and call the police.

Click to expand...

Yes, but that was 4 a.m. Seattle time, actually 3.47 a.m. In fact it was 12.47 pm on 2nd Novemeber in Peruglia at the time, when she was at the cottage and she did already have real cause for concern.

Next we have a staged break in. There's no reason for the guy who broke in to stage a break in.

Click to expand...

I hear a lot of stories about staged break-ins, but mostly they're in the realms of fiction. I live in a part of the world where there are a lot of break-ins. Trust me, most break-ins are just that. If two people just killed a girl in a drug fueled frenzy, they aren't going to be thinking about staging anything. If they intend to try to evade justice, they're going to get the hell out of there as soon as they can. And there's no way they will be able to get rid of prints and DNA evidence, since they wouldn't know for sure where they might have left it. Especially if they were supposedly stoned.

James50 said:

I didn't say, nor did I mean "she'd never do such a violent crime out of jealousy." What I believe is that the charges are utterly absurd based on all that I know of the case. But now that you mention it, jealousy so far as to kill someone you've only known for a few weeks for that motive when you're heavily involved with a guy you've just met and you call this girl "my friend" and have had no prior record of aggression towards other females is utterly crackers, and no intelligent person will accept it as a reasonable motive. ]

.

Click to expand...

You basically just lost all credibility with this statement right here. It seems you only think of murder as premeditated or something.:facepalm:

As far as the break in, it's clear no one ever climbed in the window that was broken in. There is another balcony that has been used twice since the murders to break in. But to use the broken window to break into the apartment would have been nearly impossible because of the height and the view from the street.

So if no one broke in that way, why was there a staged break in? I suggest you read more about the case.

Bit Analyzer said:

IMO, Amanda Knox is guilty of murder. Granted, she may not have pre-meditated murder, she may have gotten in a fight with Meredith, attempted to pull a prank, got accused by Meredith of stealing her money, and umpteen other possible scenarios. Cell phone evidence, lies, changing alibis, and forensic evidence clearly point to her as the ring leader of the act gone bad, and as the chief in charge of coverup. MOOOOO

Click to expand...

None of which fit with Guedo's MO.

Chewy said:

You basically just lost all credibility with this statement right here. It seems you only think of murder as premeditated or something.:facepalm:

Click to expand...

Then you need to read over what I said. I do not believe murder has to be premeditated, no such idea, but the poster I was replying to spoke of jealousy as a motive, and you don't just lash out at someone you hardly know out of jealousy so far as to murder them unless you have long standing issues with them, typically going back years.

As far as the break in, it's clear no one ever climbed in the window that was broken in.

Click to expand...

And to me the very reverse is clear. Have you ever seen what a real break-in looks like? I have, and this one looks real enough to me.

There is another balcony that has been used twice since the murders to break in. But to use the broken window to break into the apartment would have been nearly impossible because of the height and the view from the street.

Click to expand...

You've led a charmed life and keep it that way , but you clearly know very little about break-ins. A professional burglar could find his way into virtually any part of that cottage. It makes sense to choose an access point in the room furthest away from Meredith's so as not to wake her up.

James50 said:

Then you need to read over what I said. I do not believe murder has to be premeditated, no such idea, but the poster I was replying to spoke of jealousy as a motive, and you don't just lash out at someone you hardly know out of jealousy so far as to murder them unless you have long standing issues with them, typically going back years.


And to me the very reverse is clear. Have you ever seen what a real break-in looks like? I have, and this one looks real enough to me.



You've led a charmed life and keep it that way , but you clearly know very little about break-ins. A professional burglar could find his way into virtually any part of that cottage. It makes sense to choose an access point in the room furthest away from Meredith's so as not to wake her up.

Click to expand...

Your first statement again demonstrates you don't know too much about how jealousy may play a role in murder. But that's not to say that was the motive here. But sudden violence against someone is not shocking at all.

As to your second point you have not addressed what I stated. It is virtually IMPOSSIBLE to climb in that window during a break in. And so why would the burglar choose a window that high, fully visible from the street instead of another window that as I have stated has been used twice since then to break into the same apartment.

Anyway this is boring. You are using "I don't believe it" as if it's some sort of logical argument.:facepalm:

This is what rings true.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJRffHH1FMk"]Amanda Knox 2 part Exclusive Interview ITV Daybreak - YouTube[/ame]

All the rest is conjecture and supposition. What is so hard about taking this person at her word?

Chewy said:

Your first statement again demonstrates you don't know too much about how jealousy may play a role in murder. But that's not to say that was the motive here. But sudden violence against someone is not shocking at all.

Click to expand...

My friend. You're not getting me. I am well aware that and how jealousy can play a role in murder. But the suggestion that Amanda Knox killed her "friend" who she had not known long enough to have developed some deep seated jealousy for so as to murder her on a whim is out of some very cheap novel. Sorry! It just doesn't wash. People just don't go around killing each other like that unless there's something you can detect in their past that would have led up to it. Like she attacked a girl once for no evident reason or something. I see nothing like that in Amanda.

As to your second point you have not addressed what I stated. It is virtually IMPOSSIBLE to climb in that window during a break in. And so why would the burglar choose a window that high, fully visible from the street instead of another window that as I have stated has been used twice since then to break into the same apartment.

Again you don't know burglars. Typically they're like cats and can get in virtually anywhere. They can climb in through the roof, you name it. Besides that, are all people the same? Do all people think alike? I've been broken into several times over the years and each time the burglar used a different access point. Probably those two incidents you mention were carried out by the same guy, who had the added benefit of knowing the layout extremely well because it was all over the media. Filomena's room is no obstacle to a seasoned burglar, and like pickpockets who steal your wristwatch without you realizing it, they can break into all parts of a building that YOU thought no one ever could.

Anyway this is boring. You are using "I don't believe it" as if it's some sort of logical argument.:facepalm:

Click to expand...

No, I'm using "give me proof beyond reasonable doubt." So far all I see is an innocent lady who has been totally railroaded by overzealous prosecutors.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

James50 said:

Yes, but that was 4 a.m. Seattle time, actually 3.47 a.m.

Click to expand...

But why would she have no recollection of even making this phone call? If you called someone knowing it was in the middle of the night for them, would you remember it?

According to Meredith's father, Meredith did not get along with Amanda...Meredith supposedly complained to him that she didn't flush after using the washroom sometimes, and that she would bring strange men back into the home. How do you reconcile that with Amanda claiming to be "friends" with her?

I don't claim to know what happened, but there are some things that raise questions.

James50 said:

This is what rings true.

Amanda Knox 2 part Exclusive Interview ITV Daybreak - YouTube

All the rest is conjecture and supposition. What is so hard about taking this person at her word?

Click to expand...

What is so hard is that she is a self-serving, known liar. This is just like Scott Peterson doing interviews while claiming his dead wife- that he murdered was "missing"!

James50 said:

As to your second point you have not addressed what I stated. It is virtually IMPOSSIBLE to climb in that window during a break in. And so why would the burglar choose a window that high, fully visible from the street instead of another window that as I have stated has been used twice since then to break into the same apartment.
Again you don't know burglars. Typically they're like cats and can get in virtually anywhere. They can climb in through the roof, you name it. Besides that, are all people the same? Do all people think alike? I've been broken into several times over the years and each time the burglar used a different access point. Probably those two incidents you mention were carried out by the same guy, who had the added benefit of knowing the layout extremely well because it was all over the media. Filomena's room is no obstacle to a seasoned burglar, and like pickpockets who steal your wristwatch without you realizing it, they can break into all parts of a building that YOU thought no one ever could.

Click to expand...

The burglary was staged. The glass was broken facing outward, not inward- this is evidence of staging, NOT an opinion! Amanda and Rafe were framing Guede so that he got caught and they got off. He did get out of there before they did. Noone here said Guede isn't guilty, but they were accomplices, and I do think Amanda was roommates long enough with Meredith to be jealous of her.:twocents: