Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#11

[SMK]

I guess I am trying to understand the perspective of someone who believes them guilty. As I see it, there are a few tenets of this belief that I am interested in exploring. Things like the "staged" break in.

What convinces you it was staged? Is there specific evidence that sways you, or is the fact that the prosecution asserts it good enough? If the current court rules that the break in was not staged, will you change your mind?

For my part, I am open to guilt . When the case was new, I had assumed that all that was said in the papers was true. I was then surprised to find that much of it was discounted; thus I became open to their innocence.

When Hellmann ruled that "the court acquits the defendants as not having committed these acts", I took this to be the end of the matter, and was satisfied. I had assumed the Supreme Court of Cassation would uphold this, and that the matter would be finished. Amanda would have her book, and time would eventually heal all.

When instead they annulled Hellmann, "razed him to the ground", as it were, I decided to go back and see if perhaps there was actually some culpability on the part of the defendants. I read the muder Wiki, rashly believing it was an objective piece sponsored by Wikipedia and the Associated Press. I was very impressed, until I found out that the site was only an opinion blog.

At present I am trying to determine if Knox and Sollecito did act suspiciously on the morning of November 2, 2007. I feel that they did, but I hope it was not simply owing to their being stoned, or fearful that police might find pot in the villa. I do think at this point that something decisive ought to be firmed up, and that the court should be as objective as possible. The case is losing steam and credibility as it drags on and on. If there is forensic evidence pointing to guilt, it should be very clear in a case this serious. I am losing patience because for each indicator of guilt, there are loud refutations coming from other quarters. It really is exhausting to try and figure out where spin from both sides ends, and truth begins.

 

[SMK]

Just to clear up facts: Kercher was stabbed twice.

 

[SMK]

I do not agree that the room was in such a state of disarray before, and that is why glass fell on top of things. That is not what Filomena said, it was her room. And one can also just look at the pictures and see that it is chaotic. It is easy for us to sit here and say how messy Filomena was, but she is the one who knows and she is the one who said the room was in disarray.

I had brought this up as well, and would agree: That Filomena said her room was not as she left it, and was in a total state of disarray.

 

[SMK]

What is truly confusing to me : Things such as this:

It was originally said that a female shoeprint, compatible to Knox's size, was found on the pillow in Kercher's bedroom (as per police analysis).

Later, it was discounted, and I was told that it was Guede's own print, but the pillowcase had "folded", making it look smaller. OK, that finishes that.

Now Crini states he accepts the original police analysis, and believes the shoe print belongs to Knox. Why is there no definitive way of showing whether or not it is Guede's size or Knox's?

 

[Amber29]

What is truly confusing to me : Things such as this:

It was originally said that a female shoeprint, compatible to Knox's size, was found on the pillow in Kercher's bedroom (as per police analysis).

Later, it was discounted, and I was told that it was Guede's own print, but the pillowcase had "folded", making it look smaller. OK, that finishes that.

Now Crini states he accepts the original police analysis, and believes the shoe print belongs to Knox. Why is there no definitive way of showing whether or not it is Guede's size or Knox's?

IMO both sides put up experts, the jurors decide who they believe.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

What is truly confusing to me : Things such as this:

It was originally said that a female shoeprint, compatible to Knox's size, was found on the pillow in Kercher's bedroom (as per police analysis).

Later, it was discounted, and I was told that it was Guede's own print, but the pillowcase had "folded", making it look smaller. OK, that finishes that.

Now Crini states he accepts the original police analysis, and believes the shoe print belongs to Knox. Why is there no definitive way of showing whether or not it is Guede's size or Knox's?

The Vinci report does a convincing job on this subject IMO, but one has to do with a machine translation. I seem to recall posting a portion of it many threads ago.

 

[quesarita]

What is truly confusing to me : Things such as this:

It was originally said that a female shoeprint, compatible to Knox's size, was found on the pillow in Kercher's bedroom (as per police analysis).

Later, it was discounted, and I was told that it was Guede's own print, but the pillowcase had "folded", making it look smaller. OK, that finishes that.

Now Crini states he accepts the original police analysis, and believes the shoe print belongs to Knox. Why is there no definitive way of showing whether or not it is Guede's size or Knox's?

I know that not everyone is willing to believe information found on the Injustice in Perugia site, but they do have very clear and detailed explanations and photos. What I read is that the prosecution claims there was a footprint on the pillowcase that matched the SIZE of Knox's shoe, but it was a partial print half on/half the pillowcase, and surrounded by 3-4 other shoe prints attributed to Rudy. From the IIP site close-up photos, the TREAD of the partial print appears to exactly match the distinctive tread of the prints attributed to Rudy.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

quesarita,

It was just two parallel lines IIRC. What Vinci showed was that shoe prints do not have two parallel edges (inner edge versus outer edge). The edges are always curving.

 

[aa9511]

THIS should be respected???

--batestelli lying about entering the room/lifting the duvet
--ficarra's hitting amanda
--stepfanoni perjuring herself on the stand re: TMB testing/results and not changing gloves
--Polizia Scientifica hiding their data for peer review for years
--rinaldi's outrageous lies re: print measurements
--Polizia Scientifica not changing booties or gloves at the house
--bra clasp collection chaos (passed around w/ dirty gloves, put back on floor, collected 47 days later)
--Polizia Scienfica trying to lie about performing control tests
--PLE choosing a murder weapon out of thin air from a drawer full of knives @ RS, but never testing any from the cottage
--PLE spreading false evidence leaks to incite a witch hunt (picture w/ pink chemical in the bathroom, the harry potter book, bleach receipts, missing sweater, washing machine running, manipulated diary entries, cherry picked MySpace sentences, phony positive HIV test…)
--PLE destroying MK's, AK's and RS's computer hard drives
--PLE perjuring themselves about the garage clock running fast
--PLE refusing to testify for amanda’s defense about guede’s criminal acts in milan
--mignini not providing the recordings of amanda, raffaele, and patrick’s life-changing “interviews” after recording 39,000+ phone conversations, other interviews, and police holding room conversations and then giving conflicting excuses for why it wasn't done (budget, no time to press "record")
--mignini refusing amanda and raffaele legal counsel for days while he prepared for the hearing
--mignini refusing to test the pillow (semen) stain
--mignini changing the motive and modus operandi willy-nilly throughout the trial: pot fueled sex game gone wrong, satanic sex cult murder ritual, jealousy, robbery, no motive, amanda directed it from outside the room…
--mignini placing mentally ill/drug addicted “witnesses” on the stand to chase the time of death based on their testimony
--mignini ignoring exonerating evidence like the people with the broken down car next to the cottage who saw and heard nothing at the prosecution’s fantasy TOD, the store clerk who stated emphatically that amanda was not in the store that morning, the negative blood tests on luminol detected prints, the skype tap on guede when he said amanda and raffaele were not there, amanda’s nov. 7, 2007 note to police stating she was not involved and did not know who was
--nencini refusing to allow re-tests of evidence that both defense teams and the kercher's requested
--maresca lying in court about amanda's link to the MK fund

I must say I respect this for the fact that it is quite a comprehensive list and you have a good memory!

 

[aa9511]

what "initial competence"? batestelli did something he realized later he had to lie about. and it just went downhill from there...

(about that lamp: i wonder if meredith brought it into her room at some point... maybe she had a friend over to study and they needed the extra light after the sun went down. she was studying for tests that week. this possibility also backs up amanda's statement to mignini that she didn't know how the lamp got into MK's room).

Well because you said that the investigators would not have gotten Meredith's own lamp to use beccaues of "crime scene 101: preservation of the crime scene." Because it would disturb/contaminate the crime scene. So I was just noting that it is very, shall I say, convenient, that they happen to be very conscientious and abiding by rules at one time, and then later seem to have forgotten all their "crime scene classes" and simply become incompetent slobs. I was responding about the lamp. I believe that is what we were discussing, and then you were discussing with Amber about the duvet.

So this friend, are you saying that this maybe-friend had some sort of agenda like all the rest, and that is why she would not come forward and say, "I was with Meredith on this day, I was studying with her, we brought in Amanda's lamp to use?" I would also think that the investigators would have interviewed everyone who had contact with Meredith in the last days. So are you then saying that the investigators "shelved" this piece of information to pursue their agenda and Quest against Amanda and RS?

 

[aa9511]

Too bad there are no video demonstrations showing that other climbing routes were as easy and fast as Filomena's window.


Getting back to the clean up reconstruction for a moment. This is no longer clear to me, if you could please confirm:

Do you think the bathmat print was made by tracking blood from the murder room, and that trail was later cleaned up?

Speaking for myself, I don't need a video demonstration to tell me what to think. MOO.

Re: the trail of blood and where it originated, I know you are discussing this with Amber and I understand the point you are trying to make. So I would like to point out that Meredith's blood would have still been flowing heavily in the moments after the stabbing murder. Perhaps some footprints which were directly around her body, were then filled in by the liquid, moving blood. That would eliminate footprints in that specific area around her body. This would also lead to the conclusion that there was no need for Amanda and RS to "clean-up" footprints around her body.

 

[TorisMom003]

"This has been an investigation of a truly psychological nature. We were able to establish guilt by carefully observing the suspect's psychological behavioural reactions during the interrogations. We didn't need to rely on other kinds of investigation as this method enabled us to get to the guilty parties in very quick time." ~ Edgardo Giobbi (Serious Crime Squad)

When one looks at the time that this quote was said it makes one wonder if perhaps a rush to judgement against two people that maintained their innocence was ill advised. When the evidence results began to come back and those results did not point to any of the people that had been arrested, it should have been a sign that perhaps their investigative tools they used were faulty and that they needed to rethink who committed the crime. It also explains why there was a need to go back 46 days after the murder to collect more evidence. Unfortunately for the "case closed" crowd the courts need actual evidence placing a killer or killers at the scene of a crime in order to convict. In the court of public opinion though, many still believe in the guilt of the accused based on their actions and/or reactions instead of factual evidence that proves their guilt or innocence.

MOO

 

[aa9511]

Never too late to read the forensic report.

You need to be more specific. What did Filomena say and which things in her room are disturbed and which are not? I've read her testimony and viewed the photos and I don't see what you're saying.

There was no struggle outside. Guede walked quietly into her room and attacked by surprise.

How do you know the keys were in the purse? I think he took them from the table, not stepping in blood.

It matched Guede, as determined in court.

It was not a palmprint, and not his. Why would he?:facepalm:

He closed the door but it opened by itself. Locking it made little sense, after all he left break-in evidence behind him.

Yes it is

What can I say. You're not an expert.

He stepped in blood when he returned from the bathroom. Simple.


He broke in, and Meredith walked on him in while he was on the toilet. Maybe he was on drugs, maybe he was just high on adrenalin, he took the opportunity to rape her (burglary gone rape, very common) and killed her in the process ( also typical).



There was no struggle outside. He sneaked on her in her room.


You need to read up on the evidence. There were no "tens of stab wounds".

On the point of the disarray in Filomena's room, we will just have to agree to disagree. I see chaos and disarray and you don't. Filomena has indicated that her room was not in that condition when she left it. It's ok if we disagree.

"Guede walked quietly into her room and attacked her by surprise"....how would it have been quiet with the SMASH of a broken window and somebody thudding in from the window?

The keys....that could be, I suppose. But then wouldn't his footprints going towards the door have been disturbed when he walked back across them going back towards Meredith's bedroom to get the keys?

I thought the footprint didn't match Rudy.

"locking it made little sense", then why did he lock Meredith's bedroom door? "After all, he left break-in evidence behind him," - then why did he need to lock Meredith's door, if he left this other break-in evidence in the open anyway?

"What can I say. You're not an expert" - First of all, I have never claimed to be an expert on anything. Secondly, you are not an expert, either.

"he stepped in blood when he returned from the bathroom" - So if he stepped in blood when he came back from the bathroom and not when he was going to the bathroom, then how did the bloody footprint get onto the bathmat? I still do not understand your answer to this point.

"He broke in, and Meredith walked on him in while he was on the toilet." But this goes against what you said earlier to explain how the struggle didn't begin anywhere else other than her bedroom. You said earlier: "Guede walked quietly into her room and attacked by surprise." So do you think it happened according to your first scnenario, or your second scenario, or some other scenario?

"There was no struggle outside. He sneaked on her in her room." So did he sneak into her room, or was he on the toilet? Was Meredith already at the house, or did she come in after he was already there?

"he took the opportunity to rape her (burglary gone rape, very common) and killed her in the process ( also typical)." So from this, I see that you think it was burglary-gone-rape. In which case, why does it not seem like a burglary, as he did not even check Laura or Amanda's rooms and he only took cash (taking of phones and keys I consider to be murder-related). How did he know where the cash was located? If it was burglary-related, and Meredith was in her room at the time, he would have had to have known immediately that she was in her room and gone there immediately to kill her. Because she would have certainly heard the broken window. However, in that scenario, we are to believe she just stayed in her room without calling anyone or trying to see what was going on, just sat there. So did Rudy go through Filomena's room first, looking for things, or did he go straight to Meredith's room? Why would Meredith just be sitting in her room after she has heard this?

From the wounds that are there, does it not seem like the person wanted Meredith to suffer?

 

[Amber29]

"This has been an investigation of a truly psychological nature. We were able to establish guilt by carefully observing the suspect's psychological behavioural reactions during the interrogations. We didn't need to rely on other kinds of investigation as this method enabled us to get to the guilty parties in very quick time." ~ Edgardo Giobbi (Serious Crime Squad)

When one looks at the time that this quote was said it makes one wonder if perhaps a rush to judgement against two people that maintained their innocence was ill advised. When the evidence results began to come back and those results did not point to any of the people that had been arrested, it should have been a sign that perhaps their investigative tools they used were faulty and that they needed to rethink who committed the crime. It also explains why there was a need to go back 46 days after the murder to collect more evidence. Unfortunately for the "case closed" crowd the courts need actual evidence placing a killer or killers at the scene of a crime in order to convict. In the court of public opinion though, many still believe in the guilt of the accused based on their actions and/or reactions instead of factual evidence that proves their guilt or innocence.

MOO

Do you have the link to that quote? I'd like to read whole article/interview.

 

[SMK]

"This has been an investigation of a truly psychological nature. We were able to establish guilt by carefully observing the suspect's psychological behavioural reactions during the interrogations. We didn't need to rely on other kinds of investigation as this method enabled us to get to the guilty parties in very quick time." ~ Edgardo Giobbi (Serious Crime Squad)

When one looks at the time that this quote was said it makes one wonder if perhaps a rush to judgement against two people that maintained their innocence was ill advised. When the evidence results began to come back and those results did not point to any of the people that had been arrested, it should have been a sign that perhaps their investigative tools they used were faulty and that they needed to rethink who committed the crime. It also explains why there was a need to go back 46 days after the murder to collect more evidence. Unfortunately for the "case closed" crowd the courts need actual evidence placing a killer or killers at the scene of a crime in order to convict. In the court of public opinion though, many still believe in the guilt of the accused based on their actions and/or reactions instead of factual evidence that proves their guilt or innocence.

MOO

BBM: I think Giobbi's quote is compelling both in its ability to penetrate surfaces and be correct, and its liability of rushing to judgment prior to collecting evidence. I do think there can be the pitfall of building your case in the air, and then putting the foundation of evidence beneath that. I know that many people trusted the police and prosecutor's instinct and intuition: Which is why they still believe the scenario they laid out. I can believe it as well (it resonates psychologically in some ways) but I do become frustrated when all the evidence seems to be waved away. On the other hand, I am afraid that there may be some falsehood on the other side as well (maybe irrational to think this?) and I just wish something really conclusive would tip things (but of course both sides believe it already has) - color me confused.

 

[aa9511]

Have you ever been a victim of burglary, or known someone who has? I have seen a couple, and from what I have seen there is very little outward evidence of something amiss, other than the method of entrance. (In my area, there was a burglary ring getting in by pushing in window air conditioners.)

My opinion is that Rudy's original motive was burglary, which was abandoned after the murder.

I agree with you on the more investigating. For whatever reason, they did not do a lot of forensic investigation in this case, except where they saw blood.

bbm

But in this case, there was a lot amiss in one room, burglary-related. So that would go against your observation in general burglaries of "very little outward evidence of something amiss, other than the method of entrance." The method of entrance would have been the broken window. Why are there so many other things amiss in Filomena's room, looking like a burglar went through stuff? So, IMO, that also goes towards supporting a staged burglary.

Yes, it could be that his original motive of burglary was abandoned after the murder. Because he would have been scared of getting caught and/or leaving more evidence of himself in places, and he would just want to get the he$$ out of there. So why would he then stay and go to the bathroom to clean himself up, in the process maybe cleaning things up in the bathroom since it relatively clean except for a few drops of blood and one footprint?

On your last point, yes, imagine what all we could have learned had more things and more areas been tested. We might all know pretty much what happened that night. Sigh.

 

[Amber29]

bbm

But in this case, there was a lot amiss in one room, burglary-related. So that would go against your observation in general burglaries of "very little outward evidence of something amiss, other than the method of entrance." The method of entrance would have been the broken window. Why are there so many other things amiss in Filomena's room, looking like a burglar went through stuff? So, IMO, that also goes towards supporting a staged burglary.

Yes, it could be that his original motive of burglary was abandoned after the murder. Because he would have been scared of getting caught and/or leaving more evidence of himself in places, and he would just want to get the he$$ out of there. So why would he then stay and go to the bathroom to clean himself up, in the process maybe cleaning things up in the bathroom since it relatively clean except for a few drops of blood and one footprint?

On your last point, yes, imagine what all we could have learned had more things and more areas been tested. We might all know pretty much what happened that night. Sigh.

Yes and in lone wolf scenario he is in the house almost an hour and half. Time is of the essence for a burglar. Even if he attacked Meredith shortly after she arrived, he would've stayed in the house for like 45mins after. Makes no sense he had no idea when someone else would've returned home and what was he doing, not collecting things from other rooms? 45mins is a long time!

 

[TorisMom003]

Do you have the link to that quote? I'd like to read whole article/interview.

Sorry but I don't. I saw the man say this on Sex, Lies and the murder of Meredith Kercher. I will look and see if I can find just the interview of this man and his statement though.

 

[SMK]

I think much of the material and evidence can lend itself easily to the lone wolf scenario.

It's believable that Guede may have broken into an empty cottage, and assuming it would stay empty as it was the holiday weekend, and the boys downstairs and most/all of the girls were presumed to be away, he may have been on the toilet at his leisure when he heard Kercher come in. She either saw him on the toilet and fled to her room, or he ambushed her in her room when he discovered she had locked the front door with her keys and he was trapped inside.

She was stabbed twice and the other wounds may have been made by his restraining her.

That said, it does not automatically or necessarily mean that the lone wolf scenario is what actually occurred. Crini does make mention of a cleanup in the small bath, as there are no prints leading to the isolated bath print, or away from it. Simulation and cleanup taken together with dubious behavior on the part of Knox and Sollecito are the strongest evidence pointing toward guilt. But they must be made to stand against all refutations.

 

[SMK]

Yes and in lone wolf scenario he is in the house almost an hour and half. Time is of the essence for a burglar. Even if he attacked Meredith shortly after she arrived, he would've stayed in the house for like 45mins after. Makes no sense he had no idea when someone else would've returned home and what was he doing, not collecting things from other rooms? 45mins is a long time!

Absolutely, yes.