British student murdered in Perugia, 3 suspects

Isabella said:

I read lingerie store.

Click to expand...

That's my point. I "read" lingerie store also. But I also "read" discount store. So...which is it?!?

I found the store owner's name, but haven't found the name of the actual store. Well...if I did, I didn't know I did since I can't read Italian.

And, as an aside: For those people who think some of us are bashing Italy, I LOVE Italy. I have been there several times and would go again in a heartbeat. The country is beautiful and the art and architecture are amazing. The people I met there were charming and friendly. I am, however, one of the people who questions whether or not Amanda got a fair trial. And, when I refer to Italian this or Italian that, it is simply because the crime and trial were in Italy. If these things had happened in any other country, including my own, I would have the same concerns. I don't know if Amanda is innocent or guilty. What I do know is that based on what I currently know, I could not have convicted her. I have not been convinced beyond a reasonable doubt and consequently I would have acquitted her. I couldn't ever convict anyone based on if they *might* have done it or even if they *probably* did it. There have been too many people convicted wrongly and I would want to be darn sure before I found someone guilty. Having said that, it doesn't mean that I don't want justice for Meredith. She was horribly and brutally murdered. But justice for Meredith also means making 100% sure that the right person(s) are convicted of her murder. And, as I said, I'm not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Amanda (or Raffaele) was involved. Should I become convinced, I will gladly voice that opinion.

Brwnigirl said:

In between their naps, lol

Click to expand...

Isabella said:

Excuse me?

Click to expand...

Not to speak for Brwni, but it's been alleged that jurors were seen sleeping during testimony. Whether testimony is important or not, should jurors be sleeping during proceedings? Doubt it.

SleuthyGal said:

Because some people are making comments like, "well I know she's guilty because she LOOKS guilty to me!" or "she was kissing her boyfriend and buying panties when she should have been upset and crying! Guilty!"

I keep asking about the physical evidence because this is a crime scene that has a lot of physical evidence...blood, hair, fibers, footprints, fingerprints, a body, etc. If there was a cleanup then how did AK and/or RS manage to find just their own fingerprints and footprints to erase? How did they erase their own DNA from the room? Footprints from the murder room? How is this even believable? Surely there would be some trace of themselves in MK's room that they couldn't erase (besides the bra clasp that was passed around by investigators 6 wks after the murder and still left at the scene, found to have RS DNA on it). No one is that good at a cleanup. There must be something in that murder room that shows someone else besides Guede to be there, IF they were there.

Click to expand...

Mixture of AKs DNA and MKs blood in Filomena's room... where the break-in was staged.

Mixture of AKs DNA and MKs blood in bathroom still after clean-up.

Cleaned bloody bare footprint (size of AKs foot) one in hall pointing toward MKs room and one going away.

Bloody footprint (size of RSs foot) on bathmat in bathroom.

***Even if some traces of DNA for RS and AK found in murder room, it could be explained by both of them having been in the cottage before... not really of value in court.

I believe it was fairly easy to tell who's footprint was whos in that room... and they probably did clean up some of RGs prints, but left others to be found.

A few questions for you:

Why would both RS and AK lie over and over again if innocent?
Why would AK accuse an innocent man of being there?
What person(s) would benefit from the staged break-in?
Why would RG clean up other's evidence of being there?
Why would anything be cleaned up at all?
Why would MKs and AKs DNA be on the knife at all? Why was it cleaned so well except for those two specs?

What clothes and shoes was AK wearing the day before? Where are they now?

Where is the evidence that they WERE doing something else the night of the murder?

Why did AK call Meredith, but only let the phone ring a couple of times?

How did she find blood drops in sink, on floor and a turd in the toilet... but take a shower (among blood stains), supposidly blow dry her hair (by turd),
not notice the break-in and THEN return to RSs home/return/try to break down door but STILL DO NOT call the police?????? Then lie about calling the police before they arrived?

Interested to know how you feel about this stuff.

Actually Guede claims that he had consensual sex with Meredith, felt sick ? and went to bathroom (hence the feces in toilet) and when he came out he saw an "Italian man" over her with a knife and he ran out

Since it was on the 2nd floor....breaking the windows was ridiculous...and why would Guede do that?? He would want it to look as if he was let in or invited in

the window in Meredith's bedroom was broken...and pieces of the glass missing
they may have been used in some of the superficial cuts on her or under her chin where it seems someone held a weapon to make her "comply"

the glass is outward...and the idea that someone climbed up there is crazy unless they had rappelling equipment, a ladder (no signs of that) or were spiderman

then..."overkill"....the glass in one of the Italian girls bedrooms is broken and nothing is stolen....her computer etc are in plain sight...but her clothes are thrown around the room ....but....a pile of clothes thrown near the window has GLASS ON TOP OF IT...
meaning it seems someone "tossed' the room and made a mess and then thought to break the window

AK and RS could not "see" the broken window in Meredith's room as it was locked but although they didn't bother to call police, Amanda messed around from 10:30 to 12:30...and they only reported the "break in" when the postal police came up to them with the 2 phones (taken from Meredith).....then they spoke of the broken window

specifically Rafaelle spoke of the broken window....a lot...which bothered the Italian roommates and their boyfriends who came there too....

the one even said it was odd that Rafaelle was now so concerned about the broken window but earlier they did not call police even when the Italian roommate told them to (they phoned the roommate and told her about the broken window and she told them to phone police...she got the other girl and the boyfriends and they all came to the apt)

SleuthyGal said:

Okay he 'knew' who she was. Why did he say she wasn't in the house? He was interrogated several times. He kept saying she wasn't there! Why?




So which one is correct?



1. Guede fingerprints/handprint in MK's blood in her room.
2. Guede DNA inside of MK
3. Guede feces left in toilet (and was DNA tested)
4. Guede footprints in MK's blood in hallway and (possibly) bathroom.
5. Guede fingerprints inside MK's purse
6. Guede says he was in the house at the time of the murder.

And that's just the evidence I do know about. I admittedly do not know all the evidence they found. NO ONE disputes that Guede was there and that he was in the murder room and left evidence of himself on/in/near MK's body. Not even Guede disputes that.

Click to expand...

I believe he did not admit AK or RS was there until his appeal because he was worried they would both frame him as the sole killer.

Nobody know which story (if any) by AK is correct, just that she and RS have lied several times.

Both claimed to have called police before they actually did.
RS claimed AKs and MKs DNA could have been on his knife from him cooking and pricking MKs hand... which is a LIE (MK never was around him eating or cooking).

Both claimed to have stayed at RSs home that night watching movie on computer... which is a LIE (computer shows nobody on it late evening of the murder).

Both turned their phones off early evening on the night of the murder??? why?

Both claimed they were together that night, but RS changed that to 'I'm not sure if AK was with me the entire night' when the evidence that they were not on the computer was learned.

When AKs DNA was found on the knife she accused RS of: 'he could have placed the knife in my hand while I was sleeping'.

She knew RG, they had been around each other at the boy's downstairs before. There is also the possibility that they knew each other well from
previous drug purchases.

Upon appeal RG says man in home wearing 'cap' that he didn't see his face and he saw AKs outline leaving the house. Seems he may be placing both of them at the crime scene now!

@Logical- I believe the broken window was Filomena's room.

SleuthyGal said:

BTW, all evidence is 'circumstantial' in a case except for

1. eyewitness to the crime as it's being committed
2. valid confession
3. video or recording of the crime


Those are considered 'direct evidence.'

Blood/DNA is circumstantial evidence.

As such, 95+% of all evidence in crimes is "circumstantial" since most crimes do not have eye witnesses, are not video taped, and do not have (valid) confessions.

Click to expand...

thank you. all true. I feel like quoting you in pretty much every thread I ever read from now on cause I get so tired of hearing "but that's only circumstantial" as though "circumstantial" is another word for "bull{censored}"

I posted this earlier, but these are interesting links about the broken window so I'm posting again. Give these links a look, especially the second one that demonstrates how easily an athletic person actually could gain entry through that window...All are very informative, IMO.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/216903/page/1 Very informative article and from page 2..
from link...
The prosecution alleges that a break-in was staged by Knox and Sollecito in Romanelli's room: the window was broken with a large rock and the room was ransacked, but nothing was taken—even though expensive sunglasses and jewelry were in plain sight. Clothes were pulled from Romanelli's dresser drawers but the glass shards from the broken window were found on top of them, leading police to believe that the window was broken after the ransacking took place, not before.

and.....
http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/archives/172993.asp
from link....
Prosecutors Giuliano Mignini and Manuela Comodi have made much of Filomena Romanelli's testimony, in which she describes finding glass on top of her clothes, meaning the window would have broken after the murder--not before. A detective made the same contention. But crime scene photos do not support this contention. And, in any case, Filomena disturbed the crime scene (through no fault over her own) at least three times.

and...
http://clintvanzandt.newsvine.com/_n...ty-or-innocent
from link...
The prosecution, for its part, argued that the glass from the broken window was on top of items in the room that was already in disarray, i.e., the window was broken after the assault and murder, probably to give the appearance that someone had entered the residence via the broken window.

Also, I have been unable to find anything that verifies the glass was broken OUTward, any links to that info, LM? TIA

dgfred said:

@Logical- I believe the broken window was Filomena's room.

Click to expand...

Hi...yes...but the window in Meredith's room was also broken ...and they cant find all the glass...

they can find the glass from Filomena's

to me, two broken windows, that are impossible to enter from outside without some equiptment, are sort of overdoing it

I feel they did break the window in Meredith's room and use the shard to subdue her....and then afterwards threw Filomena's clothes around and then thought to break her window

there are pictures on msnbc that show the glass on the window sill outside the room
the italian police gathered up all the glass in Meredith's room and from the sill and from the yard..
but it does not match up

the door was left open after all of this

why would an intruder break two windows?? surely if he broke one and could not get in, Meredith would have heard it and been able to run out or call for help?

what does "staging" a break in mean....why would someone do that? The obvious answer is to make it look as if someone from OUTSIDE the home came in....to deflect suspicion from those living there

have you seen the pictures of the house:? I don't think an "athletic person" could easily get up there...the roof is very sloped and has large eaves over the side..so you would have to be a gymnaist

both windows are on the 2nd floor

Tizzle said:

Not to speak for Brwni, but it's been alleged that jurors were seen sleeping during testimony. Whether testimony is important or not, should jurors be sleeping during proceedings? Doubt it.

Click to expand...

I believe it was AK's sister that claimed this on a new's interview.

Nova said:

But there is behavior and then there is behavior.

I hope SP was found guilty because of things he did that related to the crime, not because he appeared to some people to be insufficiently grief-stricken.

Click to expand...

His post-murder behaviors were additional factors in his conviction, it's called "consciousness of guilt", i.e. returning to the crime scene. OJ did the same thing with his slow-speed chase- it was really a run for the Mexican border, which Scott was also planning. Amanda has also shown similar behaviors, such as purchasing bleach (even if you discount her post-murder lingerie shopping, cartwheels, cuddling with her boyfriend, and wearing bright colors to her trial)

Tizzle said:

Yes, some people just prefer thongs . I wouldn't buy Granny panties, either and I also wouldn't be too keen on goin' commando. I don't find anything curious or suspicious about Amanda buying herself basic necessities, even if they were "sexy". People need undies and she obviously was unable to get hers from her house. I bet she bought other things like toothpaste and deodorant and soap and such, but that's not worth reporting because it doesn't incriminate her and RS. JMO

Also, when a man was killed in the house I used to live in, my then boyfriend cuddled me and comforted me and even peppered me with kisses out in our driveway, with police tape and police and swat and observers everywhere, because he knew I was frightened and wanted to comfort me. Does that mean I'm guilty even though I wasn't in that particular apartment? I was taken to police headquarters, questioned and gave my statement for over two hours and was never arrested, so I guess not. I wonder what makes us different from AK and RS? :waitasec:

Click to expand...

I'm guessing you had one true story and stuck to it. I think it made sense to the cops and so they didn't pursue you. That's probably the difference IMO.

ETA: I believe AK's embrace didn't look like it was a comforting one. Yours sounds different.

Britlaws said:

Here is a link to the best site I have found currently that includes all the evidence. It takes some time to wade through. It obviously is not going to support AK's stance but it is quite balanced in terms of presenting the evidence.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php

I don't think a reasoned evaluation of the finding in this case can be made before the judges report is published, which may take up to 3 months. Although you can look at judges report on the finding in Guede's trial - the Micheli report.

I think this case has a lot of similarities to Darlie Routier - vastly different circumstances of course but a lot of the same issues in terms of character, changing stories etc. and she sits on death row in Texas.

Click to expand...

Here's another link to that site. http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C356/

It is long but I agree it's very interesting. I'm still going through it.

Steely Dan said:

The U.S. State Department said Monday it has no indication that Knox is not being treated fairly under Italian law.

Click to expand...

:woohoo:Hope this means Sen. Cantwell and HRC will butt out!:clap::clap::clap:

SleuthyGal said:

No I wasn't in the room but I wish I had been there to hear it all for myself. Were any of the websleuthers there? No? Well then everyone is speculating based on whatever report they read. AK testified in court what the police said to her, to "imagine" what might have happened that night. I saw the video of her testimony. Did the police dispute it? I didn't see or hear anything where they said they didn't say that. So on that I'm going with her testimony in the courtroom. She also wrote about her interrogation, but let's just go with what she said in court.

As for her 'confession' there are like 2 or 3 different versions floating around. One version allegedly has her in the kitchen covering her ears to block out the screaming.

BTW, why did Guede insist during his first 3 or 4 interrogations that A.K. wasn't even in the house? He later changed his story as further interrogations got more aggressive. Why would he protect someone he didn't know?

DNA evidence proves Guede was in the house, and in the murder room. He left lots of evidence of him being there, being in the room, having sex with M.K. Was there evidence of A.K. in M.K.'s room? Any hair? Blood? Skin? Fibers? Footprints? Anything at all? I haven't heard of anything found in the murder room.

I don't know if AK was involved in the crime or not. I'm trying to piece together what evidence links her to the murder. It was a bloody, messy crime scene. 40+ wounds were found on MK's body. She fought hard for her life. I'm looking for the evidence.

Click to expand...

Might I suggest a trip to Italy rather than relying on sources like 48 Hours for example???
The reason for several different confessions is because Amanda kept changing her story. One version she has Raf putting the knife in her hand while she slept!:doh: Amanda's DNA was found on the handle of the knife, with Meredith's on the tip, why do you keep missing that fact? I've posted it more than once on this thread.

Some of you apparently want this case all wrapped up with a pretty little bow like they do in the movies.

Hate to break it to you but this was real life. Real life is messy. Meredith was butchered, she was cut so she bled out like a pig.

So you want answers to all of your questions. Well, Amanda lived with Meredith. Amanda was charged with her murder. Amanda's life hung in the balance. Amanda has given no answers.

I see a lot of anger here. Anger that Amanda didn't beat the rap. I don't understand that.

One thing to remember is that three people were involved. Which means the odds are very high the truth about what happened that night will be told.

LinasK said:

Amanda's DNA was found on the handle of the knife, with Meredith's on the tip, why do you keep missing that fact? I've posted it more than once on this thread.

Click to expand...

In my first post or 2 on this thread I brought up the knife and asked how it was determined it was cleaned by bleach? (i.e. tested and verified?). And how did AK's and MK's DNA survive on the knife if it was cleaned by bleach and 'scrubbed'? AK's DNA on the knife is not that big of a deal since she was at RS's and used the knife. MK's DNA = big deal. One forensic expert in the U.S. said the MK evidence on that knife didn't cause a positive hit for blood and the blood test is more sensitive and requires less evidence than that for a DNA test. I have no idea if this is true but it's what I heard one of the DNA experts say on TV. Was the DNA test on the knife repeated? How confident are experts on the results? Which DNA test was run (I never heard).

Again, I'm NOT saying that AK is innocent! I'm just trying to examine the evidence. (I feel I need to repeat this in every single post I make since people keep thinking I'm defending AK and saying she didn't do the crime).

Did you look over my post in the previous page?

SleuthyGal said:

In my first post or 2 on this thread I brought up the knife and asked how it was determined it was cleaned by bleach? (i.e. tested and verified?). And how did AK's and MK's DNA survive on the knife if it was cleaned by bleach and 'scrubbed'? AK's DNA on the knife is not that big of a deal since she was at RS's and used the knife. MK's DNA = big deal. One forensic expert in the U.S. said the MK evidence on that knife didn't cause a positive hit for blood and the blood test is more sensitive and requires less evidence than that for a DNA test. I have no idea if this is true but it's what I heard one of the DNA experts say on TV. Was the DNA test on the knife repeated? How confident are experts on the results? Which DNA test was run (I never heard).

Again, I'm NOT saying that AK is innocent! I'm just trying to examine the evidence. (I feel I need to repeat this in every single post I make since people keep thinking I'm defending AK and saying she didn't do the crime).

Click to expand...

Maybe when the show "Forensic Files" or even "Snapped" does an episode on this case, we'll get those answers. I certainly don't have access to that kind of information, we may never, but I have full confidence that the Italian jury did and that this is the correct verdict based on everything I have ever read about this case!

Folks on this board, even the Yanks, are starting to Get It. It is a very complex situation without any real smoking gun; just a lot of "things" that add up to the incontravertable conclusion that they were "involved".

The "Spin" in most of the US media; most notably the 48 hours of 12/5, is clearly "pro Amanda". Evidently, the Knox/Mellas family got their money's worth when they shelled out big bucks for a media consultant and a full court press PR campaign. The trouble was/is that the trial was in Italy and it had no impact (except perhaps a negative one) on the jurors. I suppose the parents sleep a little better believing that their friends and neighbors don't think their daughter is a killer. There is talk about appealing to Hillary Clinton to get involved, but they must realize that this is going to be researched a little better by the State Depot that the 48 Hour staff.

Actually, the strongest argument that Amanda (and Raffaele and Rudy) have is the very improbability of the Crime. Does it make any sense that these three young people would commit such a crime? No it doesn't and I can't come up with any senerio that does. The prosecution offered up its own WAG (wild *advertiser censored* guess) and I read a few others but I am stumped. It was probably some sort of "game" gone bad. We do know that seemingly "normal" people commit inexplicable crimes (think: Jeffery McDonald, Scott Petterson, Dollie Routier etc.)

In the end, I find myself most disturbed by the pointless death of a seeming perfectly decent young woman. I grieve for her and her family. I also feel very bad for Amanda and Raffaeles' family. Whether they see themselves as victims of legal abuse or of the trajedy of having their children commit serious crime, they have, and will continue to suffer.

LinasK said:

Maybe when the show "Forensic Files" or even "Snapped" does an episode on this case, we'll get those answers. I certainly don't have access to that kind of information, we may never, but I have full confidence that the Italian jury did and that this is the correct verdict based on everything I have ever read about this case!

Click to expand...

I'd love to see a FF on this. :thumb: