Amanda Knox....Innocent American on trial in Italy or cold-blooded murderer? - Page 15 - Other Topics Forum - Discuss Pop Culture, Arts and Entertainment

I really would have a tough time convicting based solely on inconsistencies in her story and an eye witness bleach purchase. So much of her reported behavior seems crazy whether she was innocent or guilty so I wouldn't feel comfortable trying to rationalize her decisions.

Well there's also the knife and bra clasp. I mean if the bf was involved there's no way she wasn't. He's obviously not that bright.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 02:59 PM

#352

yimyammer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 7,260

Quote:

Originally Posted by suzzer99

If you watch that video of Preston, he's pretty much a full blown advocate for the Knox family now and obviously has a bone to pick with the prosecutor. Which could be for very good reason, I'm just saying he isn't close to an impartial observer anymore. And I wouldn't be surprised if he was getting under the prosecutor's skin in a major way on the Monster of Florence thing. Which caused the prosecutor to play hardball and overstep his authority. Does that make it right? No. But Something tells me this isn't to be an all-that-uncommon occurrence in Italy. Nor does it necessarily extend to planting evidence or putting an innocent behind bars to save face. I think if all the evidence pointed to Guede, Guede would be the only one behind bars right now.

Oh, I've noticed and don't take his opinion as the gospel truth but I do take note of the prosecutors indictment as well as the tactics he used with the reporters and think it wouldn't be a stretch to think his office/police strong armed the suspects in this case.

I haven't gotten on board with the planting of evidence idea. My questions relate more to the amount and type of evidence obtained and specifically the questions surrounding the DNA test method used Apparently, the method used in this case is for when minuscule amounts are obtained but destroys the sample in the process making it impossible for it to be retested by opposing counsel (see http://www.sciencespheres.com/2009/1...ne-part-i.html --this person appears to be pro-Amanda, so I dont know how accurate it is)

I get that people false confess. But as the site says often they are children or mentally challenged. I still would like to see a case where an intelligent, strong young woman who has the wherewithal to want to study abroad and was by no accounts a shrinking violet - cracks under the pressure and "confesses" that an acquaintance committed the killings. Then backs it up with a written statement. And she's ultimately innocent. Still waiting on that poker91. Or we can talk about the receipts some more.

Hey, i'm with you I'll never understand how anyone confesses to something they didn't do (unless they were tortured)---but I do take note that people do and wonder if circumstances in this case provided an environment ripe for a false confession.

I also take note that she didn't confess to the crime, she made up a story about someone that clearly wasn't involved and said she was in the kitchen when he did it (do I have this right?).

Why is it ok to throw out the part about the bartender but then keep the rest of her story? I understand he had an Alibi, but the point is that this strikes me as how a false confession might occur: suspect makes confession under duress, story is proven to be untrue because the suspect is innocent and had to make a story up.

Not saying she did or didn't, but I do wonder if she might have.

The court transcript is available I think (still looking). If Solecito really lied about the knife (and I am trying to confirm that) to me that eliminates the whole planted or contaminated evidence theory - and combined with everything else is plenty good enough evidence imo.

See comments in bold above

How did he lie about the knife?

The contamidated evidence thing doesn't resonate well with me, I have a hard time thinking the people that work in these labs would deliberately manipulate the evidence . Given the nature of their work, I suspect there are pretty rigorous procedures that must be followed to protect the legitimacy of the evidence. I also don't see how the bra clasp sitting uncolllected for 40+ days makes it invalid (assuming the crime scene has been locked up).

As a side bar, I've always thought the people testing DNA, blood, etc should have no idea of what its for. It should merely have a unique ID and the type of test that must be performed but nothing that would reveal what case it relates. To me this would reduce the chance of manipulation by a motivated party--collusion could still occur however.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 03:02 PM

#353

Omar Comin

fantasy failure

Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 27,348

If poker91 agrees to let me beat the **** out of him for 5 minutes I'll personally go rescue this chick even if she admits to this murder and 500 other murders.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 03:15 PM

#354

suzzer99

Save the Cheerleader, Save the World

Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 100,195

Quote:

Originally Posted by yimyammer

See comments in bold above

How did he lie about the knife?

It was linked earlier in the thread: http://www.zimbio.com/Meredith+Kerch...aele+Sollecito

Quote:

Lie ten. When Sollecito heard that the scientific police had found Meredith’s DNA on the double DNA knife in his apartment. He told a **** and bull story about accidentally pricking Meredith’s hand whilst cooking at his apartment.

“The fact that Meredith’s DNA is on my kitchen knife is because once, when we were all cooking together, I accidentally pricked her hand.’’

Meredith had never been to Sollecito’s apartment. Sollecito could not have accidentally pricked her hand whilst cooking.

It’s highly telling that Sollecito wasn’t surprised that the forensic police had found Meredith’s DNA on the double DNA knife in his apartment. He knew Meredith’s DNA was on the blade, which is why he made up the silly **** and bull story. He was attempting to explain the presence of Meredith’s DNA on the blade, but in doing so, he further incriminated himself and Amanda Knox.

Also here:
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C339/

Quote:

1. The Large Double DNA Kitchen Knife

The double DNA knife is the knife that was sequestered from Sollecito’s apartment. Although there was an imprint of another knife at the scene, and one defense expert argued that there may have been yet another, it remains plausible that this is the weapon that was used to murder Meredith.

Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni was the leader of the forensic team from Rome that carried out all the forensic collections at Meredith’s house. She testified unequivocally about the knife. A small sample of Meredith’s DNA was found to be in a groove on the blade, and Amanda Knox’s DNA was found to be on the handle.

Dr. Stefanoni noted that there were peculiar diagonal scrapes on the knife blade, which suggested that the knife had been vigorously cleaned.

Both Dr. Renato Biondo, the head of the DNA Unit of the scientific police, and the Kerchers’ own DNA expert, Professor Francesca Torricelli, provided independent confirmation that this forensic finding is accurate and reliable.

The defence teams’ forensic experts are not disputing that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade of the knife. Instead they are arguing that the knife was somehow contaminated for the DNA to actually be there.

Dr Stefanoni has firmly excluded this possibility of contamination in transit or in the laboratory. She testified that there hasn’t been a single instance of contamination in her laboratory for at least the last seven years, and every precaution was taken here to ensure that different traces were not mixed.

A police officer who led a search of Sollecito’s apartment added weight to the prosecution’s assertion that the double DNA knife had been cleaned with bleach. He testified that he had been struck by “the powerful smell of bleach”.

When Raffaele Sollecito heard that the scientific police had found Meredith’s DNA on the double DNA knife in his apartment, he did not deny the possibility of the DNA being there.

Instead he made a claim about accidentally pricking Meredith’s hand whilst cooking at his apartment. “The fact that Meredith’s DNA is on my kitchen knife is because once, when we were all cooking together, I accidentally pricked her hand.’’

However Meredith had never been to Sollecito’s apartment and so it seems Sollecito could not have accidentally pricked her hand there whilst he was cooking. In attempting to explain the presence of Meredith’s DNA on the blade, he did so in a way easily disproved and seemed to further implicate Amanda Knox and himself.

Although now I realize both of these posts were made by someone called "The Machine". The last two paragraphs being verbatim. It would be nice if we could corroborate.

OK this seems to confirm, if reliable. It has an NBC logo for whatever that's worth.

http://clintvanzandt.newsvine.com/_n...ty-or-innocent

Quote:

The murder weapon. As most know, Meredith’s throat was cut. While both sides agree that the exact murder weapon has not been found, the prosecution contends that a knife with a 6 ½ inch blade found in Sollecito’s apartment (noting he was a knife collector) was similar to one of the edged weapons used to cut and kill the victim. This same knife, though it had evidence of vigorous cleaning (with investigators noting the powerful smell of bleach in the apartment), was found with the DNA of Knox and trace evidence of DNA that was deemed similar to that of the victim, but due to the miniscule amount of DNA, it could not be positively identified as that of Kercher’s. And were it to have been the victim’s DNA, Sollecito sought to explain it away stating that the victim had accidently been cut with the knife while cooking in his apartment. The prosecution contends there is no evidence Kercher was ever in Sollecito’s apartment and that; in fact, due to her low opinion of Knox, she would not have gone to his apartment. “Close enough” for prosecutors, but is “close” really “enough” when you face life in prison? Point, counterpoint.

Ok, well we're getting somewhere:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510009,00.html

Quote:

Prosecutors say police detected the odor of bleach on Nov. 6, 2007 — the day both defendants were arrested. Investigators allege the defendants might have used it to eliminate possible trace on any item that might have been at the death scene.

The Ecuadorean cleaner, Rosa Natalia Guaman Fernandez De Calle, said nothing seemed different in Sollecito's house when she last went there on Nov. 5, 2007, and was asked to clean "as usual." She said she never used bleach and did not smell it that day, but could not be sure if it was among the cleaning products in the house.

Prosecutors said it is significant bleach was not used by the cleaner, but was smelled by police.

I still have not confirmed that Sollecito wrote about Kercher's hand being pricked while cooking in his prison diary. If anyone can find a legitimate link confirming or denying that it would be awesome. I don't see it denied on the friend of amanda site(s). (http://www.friendsofamanda.org/files...se_summary.pdf)

Last edited by suzzer99; 12-07-2009 at 03:40 PM.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 03:35 PM

#355

yimyammer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 7,260

Quote:

Originally Posted by suzzer99

Although now I realize both of these posts were made by someone called "The Machine".

Couldn't help but laugh...no disrespect to "The Machine"

The murder weapon. As most know, Meredith’s throat was cut. While both sides agree that the exact murder weapon has not been found, the prosecution contends that a knife with a 6 ½ inch blade found in Sollecito’s apartment (noting he was a knife collector) was similar to one of the edged weapons used to cut and kill the victim. This same knife, though it had evidence of vigorous cleaning (with investigators noting the powerful smell of bleach in the apartment), was found with the DNA of Knox and trace evidence of DNA that was deemed similar to that of the victim, but due to the miniscule amount of DNA, it could not be positively identified as that of Kercher’s. And were it to have been the victim’s DNA, Sollecito sought to explain it away stating that the victim had accidently been cut with the knife while cooking in his apartment. The prosecution contends there is no evidence Kercher was ever in Sollecito’s apartment and that; in fact, due to her low opinion of Knox, she would not have gone to his apartment. “Close enough” for prosecutors, but is “close” really “enough” when you face life in prison? Point, counterpoint.

This pretty well sums up my thoughts on this case, is "close" enough to send them to prison, still not sure I could vote that way

Oh yeah, forgot about that, thanks for the links.

Was this testimony at trial? When and under what circumstances did Sollecito say Merideth was at his apartment?

Quote

12-07-2009 , 03:43 PM

#356

suzzer99

Save the Cheerleader, Save the World

Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 100,195

Quote:

Originally Posted by yimyammer

Oh yeah, forgot about that, thanks for the links.

Was this testimony at trial? When and under what circumstances did Sollecito say Merideth was at his apartment?

See my edits above. According to a bunch of sources he seems to have written it in his prison diary upon hearing that they found Meredith's DNA on the knife - or that there was an investigation into the knife. Still looking for a good credible source on this either way. But the fact that it's not denied in the friends of amanda pdf above makes me lean toward it being real. Or mabye they just want to focus 100% on Amanda and possibly leave the door open for him to take the fall.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 03:54 PM

#357

[Phill]

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 52,717

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poker91

Fine you said the receipts were presented at the trial, now you admit you don't know. Glad we could clear that up. And I wasn't trying to trip you up I don't if they were presented at the trial, but if they were not I'd like to know why the hell not.

You clearly knew they werent presented at trial. I never said they were presented at trial, what i said was:

Quote:

Originally Posted by [Phill]

Private investigators charge by the hour.

What, you think these receipts were not entered into evidence and werent shown at trial?

Or more importantly, do you not think you would find a record of this mysterious receipt not being shown at the trial? I mean its pretty key evidence.

The store probably has records, but it certainly has an eye witness who recognised Knox and went to the police with this info.

You are reaching at straws, give it up, how can you possibly think she is innocent? On the plus side your boneheaded unwillingness to back down has let several peeps drag up details and references and you indirectly brought this thread along a great deal.

My logical conclusion is sound.

"If receipt exists then it was entered at trial"

The fact that you wasted my time because you knew it didnt exist just pisses me off somewhat.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 04:23 PM

#358

Zeestein

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 6,918

applying Occram's Razor in this instance results in clear guilty verdicts, don't see how its remotely close

Quote

12-07-2009 , 04:30 PM

#359

dotbum

in ur facebook

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 1,351

Quote:

Originally Posted by LFS

Not enough discussion of the big deal that was made over the discovery of Knox's vibrator.

Is this for real?

Quote:

Originally Posted by yimyammer

I can't believe you don't think so.

Do you make a habit of going into other peoples homes and taking a dump and not flushing?

I sure as heck don't and if I was robbing someone or committing some other crime, I sure as hell don't want to leave a big stinky pile of evidence.

To me it implies he had a level of comfort at the crime scene that I would consider atypical. Why woud he feel so comfortable that he felt he could take the time to leave a dump and then not flush?

If anything, it makes his story that he was in the bathroom during the murder sound more reaonable. I could imagine being at a womans apartment and then hearing her getting attacked and forget to flush because I was distracted by this and rushed to help or because I didn't want the intruder to be alerted by the sound of a toilet flushing and let him know I was there.

I can imagine the kind of state my digestive system would be in after murdering someone, especially seeing as he seems to be some small time crook, not a cold-blooded serial killer. He might just have had to deal with it.

It's also common for thieves to defacate on the floor during burglaries, not sure what other crimes that extends to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by [Phill]

Except she was seen by the owner of the supermarket where she bought the cleaning supplies that she was waiting outside his shop at 0745 for him to open up.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...oxs-alibi.html

I mean, who actually stands outside of a supermarket since before 0745 after a night of taking drugs so powerful that she cannot remember clear details in order to buy cleaning supplies?

I don't really think it's that odd for druggy students, they're just in their own little timezone.

I think you could argue away each bit of individual evidence, but they would have to be incredibly unlucky for all this circumstancial evidence to point right at them as it does. To the point where under reasonable conditions they either did it, or the Italian police have framed them.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 04:33 PM

#360

Poker91

banned

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 309

Quote:

Originally Posted by [Phill]

You clearly knew they werent presented at trial. I never said they were presented at trial, what i said was:

My logical conclusion is sound.

"If receipt exists then it was entered at trial"

The fact that you wasted my time because you knew it didnt exist just pisses me off somewhat.

Well I still don't know if the receipts were presented at trial or not Phill, that's why I asked you if you knew, since it would be important evidence, it's not my fault you decided to bull**** about it, like you are continuing to do now.

Last edited by Poker91; 12-07-2009 at 05:00 PM.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 04:33 PM

#361

suzzer99

Save the Cheerleader, Save the World

Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 100,195

It has been widely reported that she had a vibrator and the female police were very condescending to her about it.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 04:36 PM

#362

suzzer99

Save the Cheerleader, Save the World

Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 100,195

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poker91

Well I still don't don't know if the receipts were presented at trial or not Phill, that's why I asked you if you knew, since it would be important evidence, it's not my fault you decided to bull**** about it, like you are continuing to do now.

Keep working those receipts, you've found a winner, don't let it go. We'll all be over here, talking about other stuff, whenever you get done with that soup bone.

If you ever do get bored with the receipts though, can you confirm/deny Sollecito's if story about cooking with Kercher and pricking her finger ever happened? That, like the receipts, seems to be the internet scuttlebutt. I haven't seen it shown in a credible source yet, although neither have I seen it denied by Friends of Amanda - like the receipts were.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 04:37 PM

#363

yimyammer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 7,260

Quote:

Originally Posted by suzzer99

See my edits above. According to a bunch of sources he seems to have written it in his prison diary upon hearing that they found Meredith's DNA on the knife - or that there was an investigation into the knife. Still looking for a good credible source on this either way. But the fact that it's not denied in the friends of amanda pdf above makes me lean toward it being real. Or mabye they just want to focus 100% on Amanda and possibly leave the door open for him to take the fall.

good point, do they mention it in the friends of Amanda PDF?

Quote

12-07-2009 , 04:38 PM

#364

suzzer99

Save the Cheerleader, Save the World

Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 100,195

No it's not mentioned either way that I saw. Here, it's not long: http://www.friendsofamanda.org/files...se_summary.pdf

Quote

12-07-2009 , 04:39 PM

#365

suzzer99

Save the Cheerleader, Save the World

Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 100,195

Question, she's liable for 7.5 million euros or something. Does that transfer to her parents? I'm guessing no since she's not a minor.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 04:42 PM

#366

yimyammer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 7,260

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeestein

applying Occram's Razor in this instance results in clear guilty verdicts, don't see how its remotely close

Occam's razor (or Ockham's razor[1]), entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, is the principle that "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity" and the conclusion, thereof, that the simplest explanation or strategy tends to be the best one.

It appears to me, the simplest explanation is that Guede raped and killed Merideth.

I'm not saying that's correct, I'm merely suggesting that this seems to be the simplest explanation as to what occurred

Quote

12-07-2009 , 04:45 PM

#367

suzzer99

Save the Cheerleader, Save the World

Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 100,195

Quote:

A few hours later, after Amanda got some rest and had time to think, she wrote a note to the police in which she attempted to reconcile what she had said with what she thought was the truth. She wrote:

In regards to this "confession" that I made last night, I want to make clear that I'm very doubtful of the verity of my statements because they were made under the pressures of stress, shock and extreme exhaustion. Not only was I told I would be arrested and put in jail for 30 years, but I was also hit in the head when I didn't remember a fact correctly. I understand that the police are under a lot of stress, so I understand the treatment I received.

However, it was under this pressure and after many hours of confusion that my mind came up with these answers. In my mind I saw Patrik in flashes of blurred images. I saw him near the basketball court. I saw him at my front door. I saw myself cowering in the kitchen with my hands over my ears because in my head I could hear Meredith screaming. But I've said this many times so as to make myself clear: these things seem unreal to me, like a dream, and I am unsure if they are real things that happened or are just dreams my head has made to try to answer the questions in my head and the questions I am being asked.

When Amanda says she was hit, she means she was slapped in the back of the head. That is inexcusable conduct, but it is the least of the problems with the way Amanda was treated. She was pressured into making a statement that she believed was untrue, and said was untrue — but by that time she had been badgered and manipulated to the point where she really thought that her memory might be playing tricks on her. She explains this in her note:

The police have told me that they have hard evidence that places me at the house, my house, at the time of Meredith's murder. I don't know what proof they are talking about, but if this is true, it means I am very confused and my dreams must be real.

Come on. Have you ever gotten confused that your dreams must be real? Dreams as concrete as taking someone to your house who murders your roommate? This is not a dingy in-and-out-of-reality type girl. Or does that sound a lot more like some FUD you make up after the fact to wriggle out of a gigantic mistake? A mistake in that she thought she saw an opportunity to implicate someone else for this crime, and she took it. I'm still looking for an example case or two where a completely innocent upstanding citizen of sound mind does this. I mean I think the only way I could see this happening is if you're in some kind of a totalitarian state and you fear they're going to put someone away no matter what. But Italy does not qualify, no matter how intimidating the cops are during interrogation.

My guess is she talked to a lawyer and/or realized how dumb it was to try to implicate Patrik and so tried to get out of it the next day. Doesn't make her innocent though. By the way the completely dropped saying she was hit. That would have been a pretty serious misconduct charge she could have pursued but also a serious allegation that could get her in more hot water if proven false. Well I guess they changed it to slapped in the back of the head. Hmmmm.

Last edited by suzzer99; 12-07-2009 at 05:04 PM.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 04:55 PM

#368

yimyammer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 7,260

Quote:

Originally Posted by dotbum

Is this for real?

I can imagine the kind of state my digestive system would be in after murdering someone, especially seeing as he seems to be some small time crook, not a cold-blooded serial killer. He might just have had to deal with it.

Good point, although I think I might throw up before I needed to take a dump.

I realize my point probably sounds silly, but I thought it helped construct the atmosphere in which the crime had occurred and since the motive in this case seems dubious, I'm searching for something that might logicaly explain how the events of that evening transpired.

It's also common for thieves to defacate on the floor during burglaries, not sure what other crimes that extends to.

LOL, really? That's funny, I've never heard that before (not doubting you, just never heard this claim before)

I don't really think it's that odd for druggy students, they're just in their own little timezone.

I think you could argue away each bit of individual evidence, but they would have to be incredibly unlucky for all this circumstancial evidence to point right at them as it does. To the point where under reasonable conditions they either did it, or the Italian police have framed them.

It is pretty daming on the whole. While it certainly keeps me from thinking they are definately innocent, I'm still not at a place where I could vote to convict. Just like some innocent people are convicted, I think some people walk because the evidence is not sufficient to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 05:03 PM

#369

Zeestein

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 6,918

Quote:

Originally Posted by yimyammer

this would be true if all that other thing didn't happen, like Knox trying to effectively frame this dude with flawless alibi for murder and how there was witnesses saying they bought bleach and so forth and the bf with his dumbass story etc etc

I mean, they'd need to do all this stuff AND someone else would have had to have murdered Kercher

Quote

12-07-2009 , 05:04 PM

#370

yimyammer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 7,260

Quote:

Originally Posted by suzzer99

I don't think so when you factor in all the lying and weird behavior, then add in the physical evidence and it strongly points to some major involvement and attempts to cover-up by Knox/Sollecito as the simplest explanation imo.

From the Friends of Amanda site:

http://www.friendsofamanda.org/statements.html

Come on. Have you ever gotten confused that your dreams must be real? Dreams as concrete as taking someone to your house who murders your roommate? This is not a dingy in-and-out-of-reality type girl. Or does that sound a lot more like some FUD you make up after the fact to wriggle out of a gigantic mistake? A mistake in that she thought she saw an opportunity to implicate someone else for this crime, and she took it.

My guess is she talked to a lawyer and/or realized how dumb it was to try to implicate Patrik and so tried to get out of it the next day. Doesn't make her innocent though. By the way the completely dropped saying she was hit. That would have been a pretty serious misconduct charge she could have pursued but also a serious allegation that could get her in more hot water if proven false. Well I guess they changed it to slapped in the back of the head. Hmmmm.

Fair points, I'm probably tainted by several crime shows I've watched where innocent people confessed and to my recollection, this is the kind of statement they made when they confessed.

And no, I've never confused my dreams with reality (except while in the dream itself---I have had several dreams where I won or found a lot of money only to wake up and feel really disappointed).

I would love to know why they dropped the statements about Amanda being slapped in the head (although I thought this statement was in the letter she wrote that they admitted as evidence). This is a good reason why video and audio of the interogation would help clear up a lot of issues.

I think the why and how this crime occurred is still a big stumbling block for me. I have no dog in this hunt, I'm not anti-Italy, pro-America or pro Amanda, I'm merely curious what the truth is and something about this case still doesn't sit well with me, no matter which scenario I consider.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 05:08 PM

#371

suzzer99

Save the Cheerleader, Save the World

Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 100,195

I do agree it seems kind of weird that if they were in on it with Rudy, or even knew he was there, that she didn't rollover on him at some point. I would assume it was out of fear that he had plenty of evidence to implicate them. If so you'd think he would have cracked and let that out for a lighter sentence at some point. But his story absolutely can't be true. Otherwise why wouldn't Knox have just implicated him instead of Patrick? Also while not 100%, one has to assume what 95% chance the Albanian who saw them together is telling the truth? Which definitely puts them all in on it together.

Definitely some unanswered questions there.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 05:10 PM

#372

[Phill]

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 52,717

Quote:

Originally Posted by yimyammer

Its only the simplest explanation when you ignore the other evidence. When all the evidence is gathered together - the witness statements, the trace DNA evidence, the inability to keep a story together right up to and including the trial itself and finally implicating an innocent man to draw attention from who the real killers were - then you have to think the simplest explanation is the three of them were all involved in some way.

Im not convinced it happened like the prosecution said and if this trial were to have happened in the UK or USA the narrative the prosecution gave for what might have happened would have been different to be simpler - ie the three of them planned it together then Guede killed Meredith with an unknown knife and then Knox and the boyfriend cleaned up the second knife and implicated themselves in an over elaborate way to appear innocent and form an alibi.

-----

Quote:

I don't really think it's that odd for druggy students, they're just in their own little timezone.

Ive never taken anything stronger than weed, so ive zero clue, but my assumption is any drug that ****s you up so bad to make you forget what happened the night before and to totally mess you up will not have you logging onto the computer and turning on your phone just after 0500 and then a couple hours later you go shopping to clean up. Especially given Knox is well reported to have not been a particularly clean person around the house.

Too lazy to go back and find the articles, but the phone turning on at just after 0500 and the computer wasnt used, according to experts, between 9pm and something like 0521 indicating it was used at that time.

As far as im aware its just one of several lies the two of them were caught out on and still have no explanation for.

-----

Finally, id like to end this post with a question:

If the Italian police tried to frame them, as indicated when referencing that the bra clasp was found and tested 45 days later, why did they do such a terrible job of it?

If i were to frame someone, id sure as hell have a better smoking gun than the double DNA knife.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 05:12 PM

#373

yimyammer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 7,260

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeestein

fair enough, I still can't help but feel the simplest explanation is that Guede raped and murdered her.

That doesn't mean that's what actually occurred or that I think this is the gospel truth, it's merely what I feel is the simplest explanation. He confessed, admitted to being there, admitted to having sex with her, left fingerprints and DNA at the crime scene, fled the country and robbed people with a knife in the past. For whatever reason the evidence regarding Guede isn't under the same level of scrutiny as the evidence against Amanda and Solicetto.

Don't mistake my statement that I think Guede is the simplest explanation to mean that all the circumstantial evidence regarding Amanda/Sollicetto is meaningless, to be sure, if what we have heard is accurate, it's pretty damning when looked at as a whole.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 05:14 PM

#374

suzzer99

Save the Cheerleader, Save the World

Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 100,195

Yeah I'd like to hear a little more about the exact claims that the Kercher's DNA was too small to be reliable. I mean either it is or it isn't. They said picograms is bad because it can get so easily contaminated. So I guess the theory is micro amounts of Kercher's DNA were still on the lab tools that examined it or something. Guess that's pretty tough to disprove.

Quote

12-07-2009 , 05:16 PM

#375

yimyammer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 7,260

Quote:

Originally Posted by suzzer99

I do agree it seems kind of weird that if they were in on it with Rudy, or even knew he was there, that she didn't rollover on him at some point. I would assume it was out of fear that he had plenty of evidence to implicate them. If so you'd think he would have cracked and let that out for a lighter sentence at some point. But his story absolutely can't be true. Otherwise why wouldn't Knox have just implicated him instead of Patrick? Also while not 100%, one has to assume what 95% chance the Albanian who saw them together is telling the truth? Which definitely puts them all in on it together.

Definitely some unanswered questions there.

Just playing devils advocate, but she might not have implicated Rudy because she wasn't there, didn't know what happened and gave the police a story under the stress of the situation.

I realize everyone thinks this is highly unlikely (and I'm not sure I don't agree), but like I said, i'm just postulating one of the possiblities for her statements

Quote

Page 15 of 1123

First

5 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 25 35 65 115 215 515 1015

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 15 of 1123

First

5 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 25 35 65 115 215 515 1015

Last