Discussion in 'Amanda Knox' started by Harmony 2, Jan 21, 2014.
Continue discussion here:
thread #1 thread #2 thread #3 thread #4 thread #5 thread #6 thread #7 thread #8 thread #9 thread #10 thread #11 thread #12
Italian Supreme Court:
Galati -Costagliola Prosecution Appeal Supreme Court of cassation:
Conti- Vecchiotti report
Court of Appeals of Florence- Amanda Knox email
Stephanoni power point
lists of books about the case:
galleries of crime scene photos:
* if you have a problem with a post use the ALERT BUTTON (do not respond)
* use thumbnails for graphic crime scene photos
* copying and pasting verbatim from opinion sites or from blogs is not allowed
* linking to forums is not allowed
* treat opposing views respectfully
-Refrain from personalizing, name calling, mocking, or posting broad negative characterizations of opposing views
* add a link to all photos (including attached thumbnails), tweets, documents and facts or posts will be removed.
What lovely pictures, Harmony....makes my mouth water, I tell ya!
Great images!! Are you a musician?
Now we've gotten to the bottom of Otto and Sherlocks cite re luminol is a con, there's a post I would have really liked to reply to but didn't have time.
aa9951, correct me if I'm wrong but on the previous thread, didn't you say Amanda & Raffaele probably planted Guede's DNA in Meredith's vagina. :facepalm:
Can you expand on that. Thanks
Hi Michael, I don't know, I am mostly brainstorming my ideas at this point, trying to work things out in my head. I stated in another post that I am not claiming that any or all of what I propose in my theory is what actually happened. Just like, you know, even with the more "standard" theories which have been kind of solidified over the years, we do not know whether that is what actually happened or not.
In my accidental death scenario (due to prank), the initial wound would have been very bad, Rudy was holding Meredith as part of the prank - he drops her. The 3 panic and after the inital panic, have to decide what to do. Someone, I don't know who, comes up with the idea that they have to make it look like someone came in and intentionally murderered her. They did not want it to look like an accident. So they decide that they have to stab her some more, because one stab might look more like it was some kind of accident.
But Amanda and RS cannot bring themselves to do the stabbing. So Rudy does it, because he is panicking and he wants to get out of there, and he knows that if they don't do it, someone has to do it.
He does the stabbing overkill. He is scared and flees the scene and runs away. They are also panicked and don't want to stay around, naturally.
Amanda and RS also flee at the same time. They go back to Raffaele's.
At Raffaele's, they clean up and get themselves semi-together. They need to come up with a plan. This is where they come up with their plan re: staged burglary, staging body, and also possibly their plan for the next day and what they are going to do.
In the accidental scenario that I laid out above, it does not make sense that they do the overkill, and then rape her? It was accidental. They were scared, they did what they "had to do" and they got the he$$ out of there. Go back home and have time to think about what to do in a place of relative safety, rather than stay any longer at the cottage with a dead body and not having any plan.
Rudy does not have incentive to "stage" rape her, either. Why would he, he would be leaving his DNA in her? Why would he want to incriminate himself like that?
Staging the rape went along with staging the body, went along with staging the burglary, went along with staging the whole scene. That makes sense, does it not? Stage, stage, stage, stage, stage.
They probably thought it over at the house, that if they are going to break the window and stage the burglary, why would a burglar murder Meredith? They needed something more. They needed to make it look like it was a rape and a murder combined. That makes more sense intuitively, just like it makes sense intuitively to the supporters of her innocence, to this day. Rather than a burglar coming in, and just brutally killing Meredith for no real reason. There had to be some aspect of "craze,sociopath" involved with it.
So I'm left with, Amanda and RS staged the rape. Now how would they do that? That is something we will probably never know. But I was just saying, that it would not be too hard to do if you already know Rudy's blood is somewhere like on the doorknobs. If they were standing by the doorway while Rudy did the overkill, they would not have touched any doorknobs themselves. And after the first accidental wound, they would have probably thereafter made sure not to touch much so they didn't leave evidence of themselves. If they didn't touch the doorknobs, that means Rudy touched the doorknobs, if they had seen him cut his finger (from the overkill), they would know his blood was on the doorknobs.
I don't know how they did it. But it makes sense to me that they would stage the rape, just like they staged the rest. And it makes no sense for anyone to be doing any raping in an accidental scenario.
I disagree that Otto and Sherlock's link is a con-site.
I would think that it would be standard that the federal government requires that any group they give funding to, has to state that the federal government has given them a grant, but does not monitor their site and activities day to day.
In this age of sue this sue that, does it not make sense that the government wants to protect itself in case one of these groups they have vetted and they think is totally "okay," suddenly goes rogue??
They cannot go around monitoring everyone they give grants to 24-7. That is just common sense.
I completely understand that they would require some kind of standard "disclaimer" for every group or every individual.
For example, they give a grant to a professor in a university, on the basis of valid work. But that professor is actually secretely also working on some bomb they are going to give to terrorists. And, you see how that could go very bad very fast for the government.
Could you please repost the link you cited showing Otto and Sherlock's cite were a con? I must have missed it when the new thread was created. I'm sure everyone will want to see it.
Thank you kindly.
Thank you. So they planted Guede's DNA in her vagina and on her bra and staged a fake rape/sexual assault? Incredible/diabolical. I don't know what to say except it'd probably get me banned from this forum if I did
Why is this theory better than Crini's fight over Guede's poo?:shakehead:
Interesting that the luminol prints are compatible with what Amanda wrote and later testified about taking a shower in the morning.
Yes, it's good that you stopped yourself there.
I don't expect anyone to believe it, and I fully expect no supporters of her innocence to believe it.
However, I think that so far what has been happening by beating two theories into the ground to a pulp and beyond, is that both of those theories just might be wrong. And so maybe it's a good thing to think outside of the box.
I know you don't want to accept it, but your theory (lone-wolf Guede) has holes. It has serious holes in it. You can deny it, but that doesn't mean they are not there. And obviously other people like the Courts agree.
At the same time, yes, the argument-gone-wrong, sex-game, or poo-poo fight also has some holes in it.
Also, I do not think it is a giant leap from what was already in dispute. There was already dispute as to whether or not the body had been moved, what were the circumstances under which the bra was cut, what were the circumstances under which the pillow was placed under her, and what were the circumstances of how her clothes ended up how they were.
If one takes the viewpoint that all of those fall under the "stage" category, then what is the giant leap to think that they staged the rape part, also? Let me ask you - if the rape was real, then why would they need to stage any part of it? If it's real, there would be no staging necessary, because it actually happened.
And some parts of the sexual assault were already in dispute as to whether they were staged or not, so to me, it's not a giant leap.
There is no evidence any part of the rape was staged. It all looks like actual rape.
IMO you hit the nail right on the head there. It would be nice to live in a world like yours, where women were NOT raped at a frequency of one every two minutes (237,868 reported rapes in the US in 2006)
mostly by a single man acting alone.
Nothing was shown to be a con site. Any site that is linked that disproves an argument for innocence is deemed unworthy. Though IIP is constantly linked and were to believe everything posted there as fact, even though it is in fact an opinion site and forums.
What is fact is that a negative tmb test does NOT prove it isn't blood and luminol is the more sensitive test of the two.
Did I miss the post where you clarified what the sensitivity ratios are for luminol? It doesn't make much sense to, for example, say that 2+2 is not equal to 4, and then offer nothing about what it is equal to.
Yet according to Steffi: (cite previously posted)
JUDGE: However where the result is negative I’m given to understand that it’s almost certain that it is not [blood]?
ANSWER: Yes, it’s not blood, it is not, yes.
Falsified transcript with made up sentences quoted, falsified phone calls timeline.
Why would the anti Knox PR campaign resort to lies if they had a strong case to present?
I'm not going to get into an argument about the two sites. I don't understand the total bashing from one side that is constantly done here. I never see the same said even though I guarantee some of us feel that way. Can we not have a discussion with out derogatory names being used in reference to sites we disagree with? (I understand that it wasn't done in this particular post but it's been done constantly)
Anyways I don't see any falsified transcript, the discussion was over trial testimony that was put into an easy to read format. There weren't made up sentences the discussion was over a conversation that has been translated repeatedly from English to Italian to English and so on. Who even knows what was actually said.
While we're on the discussion of lies, did you ever come up with a logical reason for RS to exaggerate the arrival time at the police station by some 5 hours?
Separate names with a comma.