Amanda Knox New Motivation Report RE: Meredith Kercher Murder #1 *new trial ordered*

[Frankie Hellis]

Raffaele didn't speak English.

He spoke as much English as Amanda did Italian. You can see why things were mistranslated.

Do you really think they hung out together for over a week not being able to communicate?

 

[otto]

You know this is unfair. The biological evidence present in places one would not expect was far more plentiful for Guede than for Knox or Sollecito, and Meredith's DNA on the knife in Sollecito's flat was LCN. You make it seem as if it was all equal. Guede's DNA was found inside Meredith and on her purse, his palmprint in blood in her room, his bloody footprints walking away from her room. He even admitted to being there. There was no DNA of Amanda at all in Meredith's room, where the murder happened. How could she have killed Meredith and left not a speck of DNA?

BBM

Exactly. Guede's bloody shoe prints from Meredith's bedroom head straight out the front door. His DNA is not in the bathroom with the bloody sink/tap - the bathroom where Knox saw blood prior to showering. His DNA is in the toilet in the bathroom at the other end of the house. Guede's DNA is in the bedroom, but not in the bathroom with the blood. The DNA in the bathroom with blood matches Knox.

We also have a bloody bare foot print in that bathroom, but no bloody barefoot prints leading to and from that footprint. In the court, that bare foot print on the bathmat has been matched to Sollecito. Are we to believe that Guede removed his shoes in Meredith's bedroom, walked bare foot in the blood, went to the bathroom, left bloody bare foot prints on the bathmat and no other DNA in that bathroom, cleaned up the prints leading to and from the bathroom, returned to Meredith's bedroom, put on his shoes, and then left bloody shoe prints leading from Meredith's bedroom to the front door? That seems like a really complicated explanation for trying to attribute that bathmat print to Guede.

Sollecito's DNA has been matched to Meredith's bra clasp.

Knox's DNA is mixed with Meredith's blood in five separate places in the house, including in Filomina's bedroom. Meredith's DNA was on the knife blade and Knox's DNA is on the handle of the knife.

Why is there no DNA matching Knox on her own lamp?

 

[otto]

He spoke as much English as Amanda did Italian. You can see why things were mistranslated.

Do you really think they hung out together for over a week not being able to communicate?

Neither of them spoke enough of the other language to properly communicate. They met at an early evening music concert and that night, Knox had a sleepover with Sollecito. It doesn't sound like they were attracted to each other because of an intellectual connection ... but that's just my opinion. They apparently had a mutual interest in drugs, alcohol, pasta, fish, pizza, music and parties.

 

[Frankie Hellis]

Are we to believe that Guede removed his shoes in Meredith's bedroom,

yes

walked bare foot in the blood, went to the bathroom,

Socks or bare feet, did not walk through the blood first.

left bloody bare foot prints on the bathmat and no other DNA in that bathroom,

One bloody, watered-down barefoot print on the bathmat, as a result of washing off his pants. Look at the post upthread, whose foot does that print look like?

cleaned up the prints leading to and from the bathroom,

There were none – see above.

returned to Meredith's bedroom, put on his shoes, and then left bloody shoe prints leading from Meredith's bedroom to the front door?

Exactly.

Now, you tell us how you think the crime happened, and please include a timeline of events. Thanks.

 

[otto]

yes


Socks or bare feet, did not walk through the blood first.


One bloody, watered-down barefoot print on the bathmat, as a result of washing off his pants. Look at the post upthread, whose foot does that print look like?


There were none – see above.


Exactly.

Now, you tell us how you think the crime happened, and please include a timeline of events. Thanks.

I have analyzed the footprint myself and I know whose foot is the length, width and shape to match the bloody footprint on the bathmat. What I don't understand is why the above-posted image is so very dark. The original is not.

I didn't realize that we had to add new facts to the scenario in order to attribute the bloody bare foot print to Guede. So he wore his bloody shoes (we know they were bloody from the shoe prints leading from Meredith's bedroom to the front door) to the bathroom, washed his jeans, that blood got onto the bottom of his bare foot, which was bare only for a moment while he washed his jeans, then he put his bloody shoes back on, then he wiped up all the blood leading from Meredith's bedroom to the bathroom and back and then left bloody shoe prints all the way down the hall to the front door? I don't recall any witnesses, nor Guede, claiming that he washed his pants or ran down the street wearing wet pants.

I have to wonder why the image that is used to explain that the footprint belongs to Guede has been darkened to the extent that it is no longer possible to identify the print as blood, and why the actual footprints of Guede and Sollecito have been cropped.

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/580/sidebysidei.jpg/

In fact, I'm just looking at the original image of the bathmat and two footprints, and comparing it to the one that is used to justify that the print belongs to Guede, and they are not the same. It appears that Sollecito's footprint (left) has been enlarged and Guede's footprint (right) has been distorted. Hmmmmm ... that's odd.

 

[otto]

Here we go ... the original is not nearly as dark as the one that is used to argue that the bloody footprint belongs to Guede. It is Sollecito that is asked to explain the footprint.

 

[Ebbiguise]

otto I think the defense's point on the footprint is obvious if you just look at them.

Rafaelle's big toe does not leave an impression on the shaft portion (lack of better word) that forms a solid impression on a print when he steps down in ink, blood, what have you since it does not touch the ground and leaves a gap.
Look at the print. There is a blank space (no ink on the paper) between the shaft of his big toe and the mushroom head actual toe in the print.

Rudys on the other hand does since he lacks this arch in the character of his big toe's shaft so when he walks this portion actually does touch the ground and leaves an imprint in ink where as rafaelles does not

that make sense?

that is one of the fundamentals or at least my understanding

 

[otto]

If I have some time later, I'll superimpose the two using the original photo and actual measurements and see what comes out of it. Guede's foot is obviously longer than Sollecito's foot, so that is a factor in matching the print to the foot.

 

[otto]

They don't look the same to me, especially when millimeters count.
Original on top, modified version used to justify that the print belongs to Guede below.

 

[miimaa]

You know this is unfair. The biological evidence present in places one would not expect was far more plentiful for Guede than for Knox or Sollecito, and Meredith's DNA on the knife in Sollecito's flat was LCN. You make it seem as if it was all equal. Guede's DNA was found inside Meredith and on her purse, his palmprint in blood in her room, his bloody footprints walking away from her room. He even admitted to being there. There was no DNA of Amanda at all in Meredith's room, where the murder happened. How could she have killed Meredith and left not a speck of DNA?

I think Amanda was present in the apartment when the murder happened. I do not think she herself actually murdered Meridith but IMO she did nothing to help or intervene. Perhaps she was too drugged out and thought it was rough sex. IMO Amanda Knox knows more than she has let on.

Was the knife used to kill Meridith from Sollecito's apt (as I have read elsewhere)?

 

[Frankie Hellis]

<snip>

I didn't realize that we had to add new facts to the scenario in order to attribute the bloody bare foot print to Guede. So he wore his bloody shoes (we know they were bloody from the shoe prints leading from Meredith's bedroom to the front door) to the bathroom, washed his jeans, that blood got onto the bottom of his bare foot, which was bare only for a moment while he washed his jeans, then he put his bloody shoes back on, then he wiped up all the blood leading from Meredith's bedroom to the bathroom and back and then left bloody shoe prints all the way down the hall to the front door? I don't recall any witnesses, nor Guede, claiming that he washed his pants or ran down the street wearing wet pants.

<snip>

In the scenario I described he did not walk down the hallway to the bathroom wearing bloody shoes. You got it completely wrong.

There were no witnesses period. Of course there were no witnesses to claim Guede washed his pants (except for his words about them being wet or something -- I would have to look it up for the exact context and quote.)

And just because Guede didn't claim something does not make it false.

 

[iluvmua]

I think Amanda was present in the apartment when the murder happened. I do not think she herself actually murdered Meridith but IMO she did nothing to help or intervene. Perhaps she was too drugged out and thought it was rough sex. IMO Amanda Knox knows more than she has let on.

Was the knife used to kill Meridith from Sollecito's apt (as I have read elsewhere)?

I agree, I believe she was in the apartment, did not participate with killing Meredith but helped clean up the crime scene. only other option as to why she cleaned up the crime scene is because she was afraid of being pointed at as a possible suspect.

Her DNA is everywhere because she lives at the house, She comes home, finds blood everywhere and freaks out because she's afraid of being accused by the police. (This is the only other reason I can come up with as to why she would come to the house to mop up "pasta sauce".


I do believe that she knows more than she's telling.

JMO

 

[iluvmua]

The book I have about this case is this one:

Murder in Italy: The Shocking Slaying of a British Student, the Accused American Girl, and an International Scandal: Candace Dempsey: 9780425230831: Amazon.com: Books

I really enjoyed reading this book because it's not pro anything. It just presents the facts about the case. The author said in the Amazon interview that she interviewed all of Amanda's friends/family in Seattle etc.

 

[Nova]

I must have misunderstood all the comments attributed to Knox about wanting to viist Italy again. Same thing with how she wanted to get out of jail so that she could be a mom ... and then she moved into a transient part of town and wore really big boots. She says one thing, then does the other.

There can be a request for extradiction after the next trial, but that depends on the outcome of the trial.

So Amanda must be guilty because of her choice of footwear? This is so typical of the evidence against her.

 

[Boytwnmom]

Are you thinking that the US would never extradite a US citizen to a country where the judicial process allows for both the defense and the prosecution to appeal a verdict?

Not necessarily. But I don't see extradition happening in a criminal case where a foreign tribunal has found a person not guilty whether at trial, on appeal or any other way. In the US the prosecutor gets one bite of the apple. If a person is found not guilty at any stage of any proceeding that's it-game over. I don't see our country sending a citizen to a foreign country where the proceedings would violate the citizens constitutional rights. Just like other countries won't extradite here because of the death penalty.

Sure, there may be theoretical arguments made by parsing the treaty and arguing she wasn't acquitted but who would be arguing that? A foreign country. Knox would have US attorneys arguing for her rights and a judge would have to decide. Our country is pretty adamant about constitutional rights and I just don't find it realistic to believe Knox would ever be extradited in this case. Not to mention many people in the US think she's innocent and was the target of a strangely obsessed prosecutor and a media frenzy which seemed focused on her being a "*advertiser censored*".

So, whether extradition would ever happen in any case where the state can appeal I can't say but I feel pretty darn sure it won't ever happen here.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Nova]

Okay, I can take just about any criticism or accusation, but having myself lumped in with La Nancy and friends is just going too far :crazy:

I think Arias' overkill was due to rage and being pushed to the edge by a society and finally a specific man whose ideals she attempted meet but but was ultimately rejected anyway when it was decided she wasn't up to snuff. It is a case of *advertiser censored*-shaming to the worst degree (which is why I don't even post on the thread), combined with religious and societal hypocrisy about women. I can understand how it came about, though of course not approve it.

In Amanda's case, we have someone involved in what, to me, looks like a night of thievery and mayhem, ending in a murder. Guede, prior to the murder, was nothing more than perhaps a petty thief. if everyone asks how can Amanda, with no real prior violence in her history, suddenly snap, we shoukd also ask why Guede, with no prior real violence, suddenly commit a brutal murder on his own?

And Amanda, being the typical American with racial hangups, blames the nearest black guy, poor Lumumba, who had to sit in jail waiting to be cleared. And the American public, with racial hangups, of course, has no problem believing that Guede, a black man, was responsible for it all, while the innocent, white Amanda, the poor naive American girl alone abroad, is being persecuted for being American. And oh, those awful Italians...mafia, corruption, Berlusconi, all the stereotypical things come to mind for many, I'm sure. Not to mention the crowd that believes the world revolves around the US, and we are the bestest, and Europe is full of corrupt socialists who no doubt love to railroad Americans every chance they get. :crazy:

To be clear, I know you enough from your postings to know that you don't fall into either of those crowds, Nova. but I do believe that these are reasons why Amanda has gotten such a pass from a large part of the American public, who just eat this type of thing up.

FWIW, I do think the guilty verdicts will be reinstated (upheld? Found guilty again? Not sure the terminology to use here, in re Italian law), but that Italy will wisely not insist on extradition.

Gardenlady, I was not comparing you to Nancy Grace. What I meant was that thanks to the 24/7 news cycle, we all have Jody Arias on the brain. But there's really no comparison between the murders except that a knife was involved in both.

As for Guede-the-thief v. Knox-the-roommate, the primary difference is that Knox had every right to be in the apartment and therefore had no need to eliminate a witness.

It was the Italian police who suggested Lumumba as an accomplice based on their misreading of a text message sent to him by Knox. She was NOT the "typical American" instantly pointing the finger at the nearest black guy. And her interrogators hammered away at her until she capitulated and put Lumumba at the murder scene, thereby incriminating herself in the process.

If anybody was jumping to blame "the black guy", it was Perugia LE.

***

Trust me, I started out thinking Knox was guilty and the U.S. backlash was mere xenophobia. But as the trial and appeal progressed, and I saw the evidence as opposed to media reports, it became clear that the so-called evidence against Knox consists largely of things like the "cartwheel" and the allegedly suggestive way she moved her hips.

American xenophobia isn't the only kind of prejudice that influences the way crimes and trials are reported. Good old-fashioned sexism still makes for a good story, so it seems. (I'm talking about the media storm and the prosecution, not accusing you of the latter.)

 

[Malkmus]

I think that there has always been a problem with knowing the facts of the case because of the language barriers. Italy has published the facts of the case since November 2007, but few people in the US could understand what was published. One or two Seattle reporters speak Italian, but their information has sometimes been somewhat skewed, depending on whether they believe in the guilt of innocence of the accused.fluence on what information was released to the English speaking public.

And why do you single out the US as the only country for which there was a language barrier? Are you Italian or speak it? I don't think so based on our long history here. So I find it ironic, considering that you are someone I've repeatedly in the past had to explain to that you were reading inaccurate translations of Amanda's diary (from English to Italian and back), Raf's diary, and their Myspace entries. But, apparently, it's just the US that didn't get it right.

Knox's family hired a PR firm to manage case information in the US and this had an influence on what information was released to the English speaking public.

And yet we have had all the case information for a long time now via the multiple judges reports and sites on either side of the debate, and someone like me still comes to the firm conclusion that they are innocent based on all that information. I also put more weight in the appeal jury who acquitted them, as the prosecution wasn't allowed to withhold certain evidence, and witnesses for the prosecution were finally discredited for their contradictory stories. So what's that jury's excuse?

It's easy to understand that many people in the US have been unable to follow the facts of the case because of the very obvious language barrier.

Again, I ask you why the US and not every country outside Italy?

 

[Nova]

She didn't speak or understand the Italian language.

That's not true. She wasn't fluent, but she had some knowledge of Italian.

I'm not fluent in Spanish, but I would recognize the Spanish for "a lot of blood" ("mucho sangre").

 

[Nova]

According to the Harvard Law professor, this is true:

"And the extradition treaty's reference to double jeopardy may not be binding in some cases, he said. "In the United States, generally, when you appeal a conviction, you waive your double jeopardy rights, and we permit retrials of people who have had their convictions reversed, at least on procedural grounds," he said."

Is there any reason to doubt this?

I said Dershowitz is a bona fide expert on constitutional law. What I questioned was the accuracy of his knowledge of the Knox case, with which he has had no apparent involvement.

 

[Malkmus]

Raffaele didn't speak English.

From John Follain's book:

Raffaele’s English was better than Amanda’s broken Italian, so
they often resorted to English.

Follain, John (2012-08-21). A Death in Italy: The Definitive Account of the Amanda Knox Case (Kindle Locations 626-627). Macmillan. Kindle Edition.