Amanda Knox....Innocent American on trial in Italy or cold-blooded murderer? - Page 1080 - Other Topics Forum - Discuss Pop Culture, Arts and Entertainment

Two Plus Two Forums 2+2 Communities Other Other Topics

Amanda Knox....Innocent American on trial in Italy or cold-blooded murderer?

View Poll Results: Is Amanda Knox innocent or guilty of murdering Meredith Kercher in Perugia Italy?

There is reasonable doubt here and should be found not guilty.

381 26.87%

She is guilty as can be and should be found guilty.

551 38.86%

She is completely innocent and should be acquitted.

168 11.85%

Undecided

318 22.43%

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 1080 of 1123

First

80 580 880 980 1030 1060 1070 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1090 1100

Last

Page 1080 of 1123

First

80 580 880 980 1030 1060 1070 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1090 1100

Last

10-05-2016 , 07:47 PM

#26976

Lawnmower Man

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 4,647

Is legal professional == a guy that gets the coffee at a law office?

Quote

10-05-2016 , 07:48 PM

#26977

SenorKeeed

mew mew mew

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 37,478

But anyway I definitely want to hear more about this hazing incident that escalated to gruesome murder. How does that work exactly?

Quote

10-05-2016 , 08:20 PM

#26978

+rep_lol

banned

Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 14,900

hazing?

Quote

10-05-2016 , 08:24 PM

#26979

nunnehi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 9,525

I eagerly anticipate SK's continued work in this thread. He's perfect to be a pro AK guy, a guy who never reads anything legitimate, forms conclusions based on opinions from completely biased sources, knows absolutely nothing about the topic he's talking about, no interest in learning anything about it, and has a huge distaste for reality. There hasn't been this much potential "entertainment" in this thread since Ken Dine left.

It's impossible for SK to do himself a disservice, because nearly his entire posting history since I first noticed him is a disservice to himself and pretty much everyone else (I'm seriously wondering if he has ever contributed anything of value to this forum with his relentless trolling). This is just the logical conclusion for who he really is as a person. His "bombing" of this thread managing to land him as a top 5 worst poster in it, in a handful of posts is truly incredible. It's made even more incredible because there have been hundreds of the worst droolers imaginable posting in this thread. Highjack, a half dozen time banned poster in this thread is the last guy seriously trying to continue this on, and anyone with the smallest hint of a logical brain knows you don't want to have him leading your cause. SK just gets the point and laugh treatment, because nothing else is justified.

To re-iterate, this thread is a trainwreck of bad posting, and I honestly can't think of a pro AK poster in this thread that appeared to be actually smart and didn't just think they were. That's mainly because it requires a special brand of logic to ignore all of the evidence in the case, to actively argue the other side of that evidence while creating new "evidence" that isn't actually evidence. I'm sure there are lots of smart people who don't think AK did it, but they haven't been arguing ridiculous theories that are easily disproven. Of course, it's hard to lump the new "she's innocent" doc guys into that category because they know absolutely nothing but what that told them about the case. But SK fits right in with all the other bad posters. Wasn't it HighJack who refused to read any court documents, and just cherry picked anything he actually found? I was happy to see the thread die, because it's such a waste of space, but SK may bring new "life" into it if he can make posts longer than two sentences. No one will respond to him if he keeps it up the way he is.

Oski has wasted far more time in this thread than he ever should have, but his main commentary has always been in interpreting the court documents and putting people out to pasture about it when they're wrong. It's obvious he thinks she did it, but he has never argued for it. That's what Henry did. AK and RS hit a one outer on the river, and even relentless white knight shills like Ken Dine expected her conviction to be held at the SC. I seem to remember 239 also thinking she was done at SC. So, the gloating over this by the pro AK people (mainly the drooler one sentence trolls) is especially bizarre. Everyone just moved on from the case. It was the most unnecessary doc ever, but again, it's doing its job for the people it's trying to influence. And the pro AK team is counting on new people to show up in threads like this proclaiming her innocence, but the people who once actually cared about her guilt or innocence moving on, since the court case is over. Boom, new narrative..."everyone knew AK was innocent all along".

Quote

10-05-2016 , 08:34 PM

#26980

nunnehi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 9,525

Quote:

Originally Posted by SenorKeeed

But anyway I definitely want to hear more about this hazing incident that escalated to gruesome murder. How does that work exactly?

So, did Rudy take the dump and not flush it before or after the sexual assault and murder? Is it common for burglars to drop a deuce when they don't know whether people might return home? Is it common for "skilled" burglars as HighJack has presented Rudy to be to pick the hardest entry point and do it in the least stealthy way possible, while leaving a ton of his own DNA behind? How did AK know an attacker was Black? Was it just a guess based on what she knew about crime in the U.S.? That's not even talking about the two door locks (the bedroom and front door). What is not in question in this case is whether Rudy was a part of the murder. He absolutely was. Since most experts actually agree that there was more than one attacker, who would those attackers be? Hmmm.

Quote

10-05-2016 , 08:36 PM

#26981

SenorKeeed

mew mew mew

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 37,478

lol no

Quote

10-05-2016 , 08:57 PM

#26982

SenorKeeed

mew mew mew

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 37,478

Quote:

Originally Posted by +rep_lol

hazing?

Yeah that 57 dude was all ACTUALLY the prosecution's Henry of the crime was that it was a hazing incident that escalated to murder. Which is apparently pretty common in USA#1? I wanted to know more about this.

Quote

10-05-2016 , 08:59 PM

#26983

nunnehi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 9,525

Cool, now that you agree no break in occurred, who do you think let Rudy in the place and allowed him to drop an unflushed deuce in the toilet?

Quote

10-05-2016 , 09:02 PM

#26984

SenorKeeed

mew mew mew

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 37,478

Uh what? I do think there was a break in.

Quote

10-05-2016 , 09:06 PM

#26985

nunnehi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 9,525

See what happens when you answer a series of simple yes and no questions with "lol no"? I'll sit back and wait for the crickets as you attempt to answer them with that ol' SK logic. Or is this where you cue another "lol no"? Your one sentence troll schtick won't play in this thread. You'll just be ignored. But please, please, please, keep posting in it to your heart's content.

Quote

10-05-2016 , 09:56 PM

#26986

Steel Wheel

centurion

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 129

All the important questions regarding Knox and Sollocitos involvement in this case have been answered nunnehi if you don't want to accept it that's your weird deal. Delusional bunch aint they SenorKeeed? It's like they got crushed in the Super Bowl 50-0 and are claiming victory.

Quote

10-05-2016 , 10:47 PM

#26987

nunnehi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 9,525

That's A+ projection, bruh. I have no investment in this case other than reading the thread (more for watching some of the mental cartwheels that have been attempted in it as a form of hilarity).

You're acting like you won 50-0, when your side won on a not even possible 200 yard Hail Mary on a 100 yard football field (239 and Ken Dine thought she was going to lose at the SC, and they were her single biggest and most "technical" apologists, meaning people who actually followed the case very closely). The way the play unfolded in Oski's avatar is rote compared to what the SC pulled off for AK and RS. It's pretty obvious you never even read one single court document, or even a reliable interpretation of one. You're certainly in that top 5 or so bad poster range in this thread, though. You just don't have any volume, unlike SK.

Quote

10-05-2016 , 11:08 PM

#26988

ymmv

adept

Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 726

Quote:

Originally Posted by STJEAN81

Rich, start reading from post 6642.

The doc includes 30-40% of all facts.

Yeah, more like 10%. I understand the whole time constraint of a movie thing, but that was like the posterchild for fluff pieces.

Quote

10-06-2016 , 01:12 AM

#26989

Lawnmower Man

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 4,647

This thread is the internet's Heaven's Gate starring Henry17 as Marshall Applewhite.

Quote

10-06-2016 , 02:15 AM

#26990

eddymitchel

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 6,761

Reading mam thread for months and knowing oski's stance reading AK thread is hilarious.
I guess it had the same effect for posters who had an opinion on oski from AK thread and started reading Mam thread. It gives a perspective for people who believe he has a bias for one side(not that I had any doubt myself about his objectivity)

Quote

10-06-2016 , 03:48 AM

#26991

WoodsGOAT

journeyman

Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 307

Having just watched the doc and naturally getting a big "ahh so it turns out she is innocent" vibe from it (not knowing much about the case beforehand) could the "she's guilty" camp provide some key points as to why she is guilty, like their top 5 bullet points that indicate guilt?

Quote

10-06-2016 , 04:24 AM

#26992

Heady

enthusiast

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 98

Quote:

Originally Posted by WoodsGOAT

Post 6642

Quote

10-06-2016 , 05:06 AM

#26993

WoodsGOAT

journeyman

Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 307

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henry17

The mega post is going to be 11 posts. Since that is a lot to read I’ve decided to preface it with a summary of what each post contains.

Post 2: The Alibi

Amanda and Raffaele’s account of what they were doing the night of the murder is contradicted by physical evidence and eye witnesses.

1) Amanda claims to have been at Raffaele’s all night on the computer but the computer shows no human interaction for the entire night. A witness saw Amanda leave Raffaele’s apartment and another witness saw them together near the cottage.

2) They claim to have slept until 10-10:30am but someone was using the computer at 5:30am for half an hour and someone turned on Raffaele’s mobile phone at 6am. Amanda was also seen outside the supermarket waiting for it to open at 7:45am

3) They changed their alibi multiple times. Raffaele was originally at a party without Amanda, then he changed that to at home with Amanda. That was revised to Amanda went out at 9pm and I stayed home and when she returned home at 1am she may have been wearing different clothing. Raffaele then changed his story to he was not certain if Amanda was with him or not. Amanda’s story changed from being at Raffaele’s to being at the cottage with Patrick and hearing Meredith screaming while Patrick raped and killed her. She changed this back to I was at Raffaele's and we did not leave the house.

The inability to give a straight answer to the very basic question of what were you doing the night of the murder as well as the fact that even after changing your answer multiple times the final answer is a lie that is contradicted both by physical evidence and by witnesses is pretty damning.

Post 3 November 2

There are several things wrong with the events of November 2 before the body was found.

1) Amanda comes home to find the door wide open, blood in the bathroom, a bloody footprint, and feces in the toilet. She also completely fails to notice the nine bloody footprints in the hall, the broken window, or her missing lamp. She goes about her day as if none of things happened.

2) There is a major inconstancy between Raffaele and Amanda’s account of what happened when Amanda returned to Raffaele’s. In Amanda’s version she calmly returns and cleans the water spill and they have breakfast. It is only when they are having coffee on the veranda that she mentions the weird things at the cottage. In Raffaele’s version she returned running in a panic and there was no breakfast.

3) Filomena asks Amanda to call Meredith. Amanda tries each phone once for 3s and 4s which is less than required for the voicemail to pick up. Amanda would later claim the phone just kept ringing and ringing. Amanda never tries to call Meredith again despite claims of panic over Meredith’s safety. Amanda made these calls just to register a call but she knew no one would answer.

4) Amanda and Raffaele called 911 20-25 minutes after the postal police have already arrived.

5) The phone call to 911 is suspicious. The 911 operator automatically realizes there is something abnormal and is suspicious of Raffaele.

6) In her email home Amanda claimed that they tried to break down the door and climb up the window to get to Meredith’s room prior to the Postal Police arriving, but when the Postal Police arrive they don’t express any concern and actually lie and say it is perfectly normal for Meredith to lock her door so there is nothing to worry about.

7) Amanda makes a phone call home to her mom at 3am Seattle time. At this point only the broken window had been discovered and according to Amanda there is nothing to be concerned about. When asked about this call Amanda denies making it. When confronted with her phone records she claims she doesn’t remember what motivated her to call home at 3am.

8) According to the police Amanda had body order and smeared makeup which is not consistent with her claim that she had taken a shower two hours prior to their arrival.

Post 4 The Confession

Despite reports of abuse there was none. The interrogation of Raffaele started at 10:40pm. Confronted with his phone records and the fact that he called 911 after the police were already at the cottage Raffaele changes his story to I was lying because Amanda asked me to. I was home alone. She went out at 9pm and returned at 1am possibly wearing different clothing.

Amanda was not supposed to be interrogated but since she was in the police station they asked her to clear up some questions. This started after 11:30pm and by 1:45am she had confessed to being in the cottage twice and her statement had been typed. We don’t know how long it took Amanda to confess but her first confession happened before Minini was present. Minini was sent for and he arrived at about 1am. That means Amanda cracked in about an hour and likely less.

Questioning stopped at 1:45am but Amanda chooses to make a spontaneous statement at 5:45am that confirmed her previous statement. The original confession would be excluded as evidence since she was a suspect before 1:45am but was treated like a witness until 1:45am when her status was changed. The spontaneous statement was allowed because that was after she had been offered a lawyer.

The confession was not the product of abuse and more importantly Amanda places herself where a witness saw her at the time the witness claims to have seen her. The confession also has minor other details that ended up being confirmed by witnesses and physical evidence. False confessions don’t end up matching the other evidence so her confession is almost certainly true with the exception that she has diminished her role and substituted Patrick for Rudy.

Post 5 Things Amanda Should Not Have Known

Amanda knew that Meredith’s throat had been slit and that she was killed by the closet even though she was in the kitchen when the door was kicked open and Meredith’s body was covered. Paola who was there when the door was opened said it was dark and you couldn’t see anything but a foot. The body and most of the floor was covered. On the stand when Amanda was asked how she knew these details she claims she heard them from people. When asked who she would not identify anyone – it was just random people that she was talking to. Only someone involved with the crime would know these details and Amanda’s refusal to identify someone who she spoke with that told her these details makes it fairly obvious she is lying about how she came to know them.

Part 6 Break-in Staged

The break-in was staged. This was immediately apparent to the postal police and Filomena, whose clothes had been tossed around the room but none of her drawers had even been opened to search for valuables. The choice of entry point was illogical and maybe impossible: There were no signs that anyone was in the backyard, there were no traces or markings of anyone scaling the wall, the glass distribution only makes sense if the window was broken from the inside with the shutters closed, and the glass was on top of the stuff that was ransacked. Further, Meredith’s blood mixed with Amanda’s DNA was found in the room which means someone was in the room after Meredith was killed but Rudy’s footprints go straight from the body to the front door.

The only advantage to staging a burglary is to throw suspicion off people who would normally have access to the building. That would be Laura, Filomena, Amanda, and the four boys from downstairs. Since everyone was out of town except Amanda she is the only person who would benefit from staging the break-in.

Part 7 Multiple Attackers

An independent medical expert from Rome as well as the local coroner testified that there were multiple attackers. Raffaele’s expert testified it was one attacker from behind. Amanda’s expert testified it was one attacker from the front.

The multiple attackers question hinges on if you believe a physically fit girl who is attacked while standing up would allow someone to inflict 47 wounds without fighting back. These wounds were from distributed evenly on the left and right side and included being hit, being stabbed, being cut both seriously and just to inflict pain, and bruising from having both her arms and her head restrained. There were no defensive wounds or anything under her nails.

Witnesses also place multiple people running from the cottage after hearing a scream. The accounts of these witnesses fit perfectly with statements from other witnesses as well as with the location of the dumped mobile phones.

Post 8 The Many Wolves Theory

Someone both cleaned the house and staged the body long after Rudy was gone. This fact in and of itself makes Rudy as a lone wolf impossible. So at a minimum it had to be Rudy plus someone else. When we consider who could have helped Rudy the only answer is Amanda and Raffaele. A normal burglar would have no reason to clean or stage the body nor would they feel comfortable spending that much time in the cottage. This, much like the staged burglary, only makes sense for a resident of the cottage or someone who would have access to it. Further, there is also no logical explanation of why an accomplice would clean everything except evidence that incriminated Rudy.

Post 9 Footprints

The footprint in blood on the bathmat is probably Raffaele’s. The head of Italy’s print identity division as well as an independent expert asked to consult by the court testified that they can exclude Rudy with certainty and that the footprint is a match for Raffaele. The defence expert testified that the other two experts did the measurements wrong.

There were nine Luminol hits and at least eight are footprints. Seven of these form a path from Meredith’s room to Amanda’s. Two had both Amanda and Meredith’s DNA. Two were a match to Amanda based on partial markers. One was a match to Raffaele based on partial markers. There is no reasonable explanation for these prints except that two people with feet similar to Amanda and Raffaele were walking around with Meredith’s blood on their feet that they later cleaned.

The pillow has a footprint in blood that is a size 7 female Ascis shoe. The head of Italy’s print identity division as well as an independent expert testified that it was a size 7 female shoe. The defence expert argued that it was actually a size 11 men’s shoe and that the smaller print is due to the pillow being a soft surface. It is just a coincidence that the print matches Amanda’s shoe size.
When it comes to the bloody footprints it is a simple question of do you believe the head of the print identity division and an independent expert or do you believe a defence expert that is paid to say anything?

Post 10 DNA

Meredith’s blood was found in five locations mixed with Amanda’s DNA. This included a sample in Filomena’s room where the burglary was staged. This could not be explained by Meredith’s blood coming in contact with random Amanda DNA from skin cells.

The bra clasp had Raffaele’s DNA. There were issues with the collection process of this piece of evidence but despite those issues there is still no plausible explanation of how contamination could have happened. Theoretical risks of contamination are not sufficient to exclude evidence. Raffaele’s original expert was let go because he was not willing to testify that contamination was a legitimate concern.

The knife had Meredith’s DNA. There was no risk of contamination but the defence argued that the result was unreliable because the DNA was LCN. LCN DNA is not used in the United States yet but it is used in Europe. The defence’s argument amounted to an argument against the advancement of science.

When confronted about the knife Raffaele manufactured a fake explanation for how the DNA got on the knife. In an effort to explain away evidence Raffaele actually incriminates himself since only if he knew it was possible that Meredith’s DNA was found on the knife would he have a motivation to fabricate a lie to explain the DNA.

Post 11 Small Things

The day after the murder Amanda had a scratch on her neck and a piercing hole in her ear ripped. They were not there the day before according to her roommates. Amanda claimed it was a hickey and that the ear was from a piercing attempt gone bad. The mark does not look like a hickey and the excuse for a piercing attempt gone bad makes no sense given it was her first piercing.

Amanda’s lamp—her only light source-- was in the victim’s room placed on the floor by the bed. The only explanation is that someone was using the lamp as a light source while they were looking for something on the floor -- maybe a missing earring.

Amanda has a series of freak out attacks. Amanda was perfectly fine at the police station until she was called to be fingerprinted. At the point she started freaking out and hitting her head with both her hands – she was not a suspect and all the individuals with regular access to the cottage were asked for fingerprints. This behaviour would present itself again two days later when the police asked them to come look at the knives. Amanda again freaked out and had to lie down. This happened a third time when she was confronted by the news that Raffaele was no longer corroborating her alibi.

An inmate (Aviello) testified for the defence claiming that his brother and a friend killed Meredith because they got the address wrong on a job. Aviello is followed by three inmates who claim that he bragged to them that he was being paid by the Sollecito family to make up the story as a way to confuse the jury. A month later Aviello himself admits that he was paid and that Raffaele actually told him that Amanda killed Meredith and that Raffaele was there.

thanks

Quote

10-06-2016 , 06:52 AM

#26994

RichGangi

Laughable false & highly douchey

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 9,567

Lots of interesting info, thx.

Calm down, everyone. Wow.

Quote

10-06-2016 , 07:14 AM

#26995

WoodsGOAT

journeyman

Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 307

What about the stuff I ve heard about Knox being on drugs before the murder, possibly stealing Meredith's rent money (400 euro), and having a huge argument with Meredith in the days prior to the murder?

Is all this stuff true? and did it come up in the trial?

Quote

10-06-2016 , 09:08 AM

#26996

TrollyWantACracker

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 4,191

Quote:

Originally Posted by 57 On Red

You might envy Chris Robinson, Trolly, but I don't think I do.

http://pagesix.com/2016/09/09/take-a...pey-boyfriend/

He isn't a video-game journalist, he's a sort of novelist. He's the co-author of a co-written novel called The War of the Encyclopedists. Part of it was about stupid campus sex and part of it was about one of the characters going on to serve with the army in Iraq. Unfortunately the chapters the critics liked (apart from a reviewer called Amanda Knox, of the West Seattle Herald, who was deeply impressed by all of it) were the chapters about the army in Iraq, written by Chris's co-author, who had in fact served out there with his National Guard unit. The juvenile college chapters, written by Chris, were regarded as a bit more meh.

Chris is the son of the owner of the West Seattle Herald, which, by a remarkable coincidence, is the paper that publishes Knox's slightly embarrassing weekly column, and also published her rave review of his (and his friend's) novel.

Wow, sorry I missed this the other day. Here is a little piece of advice for you (and all of your confederate Crusaders for Justice); if you are trying to portray yourself as an unbiased seeker of Truth and not just some frustrated MRA working out his sexual frustration by impugning some young woman because you are furious that she has had sex with men who happen to not be you, then maybe don't gossip about the dating habits and otherwise stalk this person who you don't even know. Not particularly convincing, fyi.

Quote

10-06-2016 , 09:10 AM

#26997

TrollyWantACracker

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 4,191

Quote:

Originally Posted by nunnehi

no.

Quote

10-06-2016 , 09:41 AM

#26998

Oski

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 13,261

Quote:

Originally Posted by WoodsGOAT

The escalation of a dispute over the stolen rent money was the accepted motivation at the second trial (which was a trial on remanded issue from the Supreme Court).

Quote

10-06-2016 , 09:51 AM

#26999

SenorKeeed

mew mew mew

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 37,478

orchestrating the rape and murder of a roommate over a few hundred dollars? Honestly the satanic sex game gone wrong makes more sense. I mean it makes absolutely no sense, but more sense.