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%
It's still sensitive and should produce a positive especially if DNA results are positive.
No it's not and it isn't and when I read things like this it seems even less likely you know what you're talking about
At the end of the day it's simply not true that luminol proves blood no matter what you say.
I'm not sure what you're referring to about the defense argument.
No, you stopped responding to it because you couldn't argue against it and now you're lying.
How convenient to argue that the proof was destroyed by incompetence in the same breath as saying the results produced by incompetence were the proof.
Luminol unlike TMB is applied to the surface. TMB you use a dry swab to get material by rubbing and then test the swab. Applying Luminol too liberally does not impact if Luminol will react or not. What excessive Luminol will do is cause dilution because you are spraying a liquid on to the surface.
You are lying again. Stop lying Henry. You're getting really desperate, eh? You didn't even know they did luminol in Raf's apartment. You're lost and I sourced it in the Massei report.
Here are the actual results reported by IIP.
Here are the actual results reported by IIP.
Do you have a legitimate source?
Further what you quoted doesn't support your claim that these hits were not blood -- it states that no DNA was found on many of them but where does it say anything about them not being blood?
Lastly, when were these tests done relative to the arrest? The reason we can rule out bleach is that they waited six weeks to use Luminol in the cottage. That did not happen with Raffaele's apartment which as far as I know was searched only once. We also know the apartment had a strong smell of bleach and that 2 1/2 bottles of bleach that should not have been ar Raffaele's were discovered. If you post more details on this I think we might have some decent evidence of a clean up at Raffaele's apartment.
It was sourced the first time you and your happy gang asked Henry. It's in the Massei report, go back and find the post, I'm done sourcing things multiple times sorry.
The fact that I can't find any other witness that ever discussed it. Combine that with the defence requesting and being denied the ability to add a witness for that purpose at the end of the trial and it is pretty definitive.
Yeah -- and that makes any sense to you?
lol ok what does it mean to check the internet for daylight savings time?
l'ora legale is the correct time not daylight savings time. Even if you don't know Italian you should be able to figure that out. l'ora is time and legale is legal.
There is a print out of all the phone records. We will discuss that when we discuss Mauro Paggi's testimony.
I'm not sure what you are trying to imply. She asks Barbadori about the phone records several times and he answers -- never saw them not my department.
Barbadori never says it is Meredith. It is a girl who can't be identified. They don't really discuss it all that much.
No they didn't.
See what I did here to establish that it was fast? If you want to claim it was actually slow you need to offer more than just you repeatedly insisting on it. You can't because it never happened but try anyway as that will be fun to watch.
Google translate has this.
I don't think you're establishing what you think you're establishing. If this was cut and dry Massei would have been all over it.
l'ora legale is the correct time not daylight savings time. Even if you don't know Italian you should be able to figure that out. l'ora is time and legale is legal.
Well yeah, they missed it and the defense sorted it out. It's interesting how Bongiorno talks about the 1:29 as a print out. I wonder if that's a transcript or if she's just referring to the phone call from the phone records.
I'm not sure what you are trying to imply. She asks Barbadori about the phone records several times and he answers -- never saw them not my department.
It's fine if you believe that. What isn't fine is to say that a figure is on the CCTV when Meredith should be arriving home because that would be a really dumb think to say if you think the clock is 10 minutes fast. That's the point.
Yes the police originally thought the CCTV was 10 minutes fast but the defense was able to demonstrate it was 10 minutes or so slow.
See what I did here to establish that it was fast? If you want to claim it was actually slow you need to offer more than just you repeatedly insisting on it. You can't because it never happened but try anyway as that will be fun to watch.
So I'm not really saying anyone screwed up, more that they never did it at all.
Henry seems to be trying to say that they did some sort of test that determined the CCTV camera was 10 minutes fast. That's hard to believe considering what the judge ultimately concluded. If this proof had been done, I would think we'd have a detailed explanation of it.
So I'm not really saying anyone screwed up, more that they never did it at all.
So I'm not really saying anyone screwed up, more that they never did it at all.
RISPOSTA – Non registra. Comunque sia io ho visualizzato le immagini, ho acquisito e visualizzato le immagini del parcheggio e ci sono due dati importanti, un dato è quello delle 12.30... innanzitutto l’orario è spostato di dieci minuti in avanti, poi...
Also from page 6
RISPOSTA – Esatto. Il primo dato è quello delle 12.36 che corrispondono alle 12.26, alle 12.36 è il momento in cui si vede la macchina della Polizia Postale
page 22
DOMANDA – Sulla base di quali elementi lei sostiene che l’orario indicato dalle telecamere del parcheggio non è esatto ed indica dieci minuti avanti?
RISPOSTA – Lo verificai, andai su internet e guardai l’ora legale.
RISPOSTA – Lo verificai, andai su internet e guardai l’ora legale.
By comparison to the accurate time from the internet.
DIFESA – AVV. BONGIORNO – Lei ha detto: “sono andato su
internet e ho visto l’ora legale”.
RISPOSTA – Sì.
internet e ho visto l’ora legale”.
RISPOSTA – Sì.
then on page 24 Bongiorno asks Barbadori if he did the calibration himself
DIFESA – AVV. BONGIORNO – Allora chi ha fatto questo accertamento dei dieci minuti?
RISPOSTA – Probabilmente è stato fatto dal tecnico della SIPA, cioè il tecnico dal quale ho acquisito le immagini del parcheggio che è colui che mi comunicò questo dato
RISPOSTA – Probabilmente è stato fatto dal tecnico della SIPA, cioè il tecnico dal quale ho acquisito le immagini del parcheggio che è colui che mi comunicò questo dato
Are you really going to claim that there was no calibration that found the clock to be ten minutes fast?
No. I have explained why this isn't the case referencing the defence expert witness.
If the list is not small you are free to prove that by sourcing what specifically causes Luminol to react.
Sorry. That is not how science or law work. Both will accept it as blood until there is a good reason not to. So far there is no good reason not to.
Closing arguments of Hellmann. If you need me to source this I probably can.
No I stop responding because you're an idiot and we are not even close to being on the same level when it comes to the science stuff. After I explained why you were wrong four times I lost interest.
How many times can you demonstrate that you're an idiot in one post?
Luminol unlike TMB is applied to the surface. TMB you use a dry swab to get material by rubbing and then test the swab. Applying Luminol too liberally does not impact if Luminol will react or not. What excessive Luminol will do is cause dilution because you are spraying a liquid on to the surface.
You are using IIP as a source?
Do you have a legitimate source?
Do you have a legitimate source?
Further what you quoted doesn't support your claim that these hits were not blood -- it states that no DNA was found on many of them but where does it say anything about them not being blood?
Lastly, when were these tests done relative to the arrest? The reason we can rule out bleach is that they waited six weeks to use Luminol in the cottage. That did not happen with Raffaele's apartment which as far as I know was searched only once. We also know the apartment had a strong smell of bleach and that 2 1/2 bottles of bleach that should not have been ar Raffaele's were discovered. If you post more details on this I think we might have some decent evidence of a clean up at Raffaele's apartment.
You just asked me to source multiple things in a foreign language and your too lazy to give me a page number in Massei.
Yeah -- and that makes any sense to you?
lol ok what does it mean to check the internet for daylight savings time?
l'ora legale is the correct time not daylight savings time. Even if you don't know Italian you should be able to figure that out. l'ora is time and legale is legal.
l'ora legale is the correct time not daylight savings time. Even if you don't know Italian you should be able to figure that out. l'ora is time and legale is legal.
There is a print out of all the phone records. We will discuss that when we discuss Mauro Paggi's testimony.
I'm not sure what you are trying to imply. She asks Barbadori about the phone records several times and he answers -- never saw them not my department.
Barbadori never says it is Meredith. It is a girl who can't be identified. They don't really discuss it all that much.
No they didn't.
See what I did here to establish that it was fast? If you want to claim it was actually slow you need to offer more than just you repeatedly insisting on it. You can't because it never happened but try anyway as that will be fun to watch.
That being said, the defense did have the goods which has been clearly laid out in the defense presentation. You've been totally dispatched as you claimed this was never even mentioned at the trial and these transcripts prove you to be totally uninformed. The only thread you're left hanging by which is a repeated theme in this thread (i.e. the broken down car people didn't exist, oh wait no they just never testified, oh wait no they did but just one, oh wait maybe they all did), is that we don't know if the police were already there when the dispatch called directions because the police couldn't find the place.
That's it. Hang on to that thread even though we're creeping closer. We now have the lead defense attorney plainly stating in the transcript that was the case and there is no objection, nor any correction of that which leads me to believe the postal police testified to that on February 6th. Bask in your ignorance I guess.
No I explained why this is the case citing a study where they determined exactly that.
It's been sourced before. I'm not under any requirement to prove what it reacted to, you are. Get it?
No, you need to prove blood is blood.
No, insults aside, it's clear you stopped responding after I posted a very persuasive study that looked at cleaned blood stains and the results were very clear. When you get a strong luminol reaction you get positive TMB and when you get DNA you should also get positive DNA. The report plainly says that and your argument was that it didn't.
You've told us it only takes 8 hours for bleach to not be an issue though. The reality is that Raf's cleaning lady had cleaned at some point like she always did and she didn't use bleach iirc.
I already sourced it. You're accusing me of never sourcing it. Maybe ask Poker Reference?
From page 6
Barbadori is about to give his first time and then he stops -- the bolded part reads before we start the camera is ten minutes fast.
Also from page 6
Barbadori states that 12:36 on the camera corresponds to 12:26
page 22
How did you determine it was ten minutes fast?
By comparison to the accurate time from the internet.
Bongiorno asks a follow up question so you went on the internet and checked the accurate time -- response yes.
then on page 24 Bongiorno asks Barbadori if he did the calibration himself
and Barbadori says no it was done by a technician. Bongiorno asks for the name and Barbadori does not know it off the top of his head but resolves to get the name of the technician for Bongiorno.
Are you really going to claim that there was no calibration that found the clock to be ten minutes fast?
Barbadori is about to give his first time and then he stops -- the bolded part reads before we start the camera is ten minutes fast.
Also from page 6
Barbadori states that 12:36 on the camera corresponds to 12:26
page 22
How did you determine it was ten minutes fast?
By comparison to the accurate time from the internet.
Bongiorno asks a follow up question so you went on the internet and checked the accurate time -- response yes.
then on page 24 Bongiorno asks Barbadori if he did the calibration himself
and Barbadori says no it was done by a technician. Bongiorno asks for the name and Barbadori does not know it off the top of his head but resolves to get the name of the technician for Bongiorno.
Are you really going to claim that there was no calibration that found the clock to be ten minutes fast?
Are you really arguing that they did a definitive calibration and the judge ignored it?
Please source what in the transcript implies they have discussed this before?
This should be fun given you are relying on Google to translate for you.
No, but if they actually did some type of calibration they wouldn't say they looked up the time on the internet.
Again, there is no indication this happened or that it was definitive. That's all I'm saying.
Specifically how does someone even screw this up?
The print out of the phone records is in the postale.pdf presentation, we have them.
I'm wondering if she is referring to a print out of the phone records or a print out of the transcript of the call between the Carabinieri dispatch and Amanda's phone as it would have likely been recorded.
Why don't you try replying to what I actually said which was that you are wrong to say it was at a time we should see her given that you think it's 8:41 on the clock and the testimony would reveal it's impossible she's there at 8:41.
No. That is not what the study determined.
It has been sourced by me. Since you refuse to do it I will source it again when I get home.
No. That is now how it works. Once there is very strong evidence of something (a positive Luminol reaction) the onus shifts to the person claiming the evidence is wrong because it is the result of a rare exception.
No. I explained why you were misinterpreting the study multiple times and you kept at it so I stopped responding much like I will stop responding now if you just keep claiming it. You are wrong and honestly not even close to being smart enough to read anything scientific. I think you had someone helping you but they while better than you were still pretty dumb.
No. I said it takes a couple of days.
I don't believe you have. Even if you have and I forgot just ****en do it again. I just sourced a **** load of stuff again in my last post even though I didn't have to because unlike you I don't lie and people trust me.
Where would you get the accurate time?
What is not definitive about it?
Specifically how does someone even screw this up?
What is not definitive about it?
Specifically how does someone even screw this up?
No. The postale.pdf contains the phone records but the phone records exist independently of the postale.pdf. We will deal with them in Paggi's testimony.
No. It is a print out much like a phone bill but with more detail.
Because the witness never said it was Meredith. In fact he said he doesn't know who it is. Again you are trying to make an argument by assuming that it is Meredith when the evidence says it is unknown person
I have to crash, when I get some time I'll try to figure out what calibration the police thought they did. I'm starting to remember that I read something about that at one point, but I'll have to find the discussion. Hopefully Henry will be able to tell us why this definitive proof was ignored.
Not wrong. I'll post a quote from a manual tomorrow when I'm at my other computer.
You can argue 1500 ways that you don't have to prove blood is blood, but I still disagree sorry.
There's not much that is scientific about that study. Even if you ignore the DNA part it clearly says that in the cases where they had a strong reaction they got positive TMB, sorry.
Your study says 8 hours, sorry.
Anyway you said from reading the transcripts it is pretty clear that this is not the only person who testified about the CCTV. I asked you for specifics in the transcripts that imply that -- as usual you were lying.
Well exactly. Had this been done in a convincing way it would be front and center as proof and it isn't. So as usual you're hiding behind some vague bs while ignoring what actually happened at the trial on this issue.
What is not convincing about calibrating the equipment this way?
How would you have calibrated the equipment?
Yes, we've seen it. It's in the postale.pdf. We can't be sure that's what she meant but it probably is.
You claimed that he said it was a figure that was there at a time consistent when Meredith was.
Henry seems to be trying to say that they did some sort of test that determined the CCTV camera was 10 minutes fast. That's hard to believe considering what the judge ultimately concluded. If this proof had been done, I would think we'd have a detailed explanation of it.
So I'm not really saying anyone screwed up, more that they never did it at all.
So I'm not really saying anyone screwed up, more that they never did it at all.
So you're saying Henry has wrongly translated that testimony, and that Barbadori didn't actually say that? Or are you saying that the expert is lying?
Might he lie then?
Originally Posted by 239
Henry seems to be trying to say that they did some sort of test that determined the CCTV camera was 10 minutes fast. That's hard to believe considering what the judge ultimately concluded. If this proof had been done, I would think we'd have a detailed explanation of it.
1. He went to the camera
2. He noted the current time on the camera
3. He checked the exact time using the internet on his phone
4. He noted the difference between those two numbers.
There you have it. The complete, scientific procedure for checking the accuracy of a CCTV clock. The guy testified he did it. I'm not sure what you're having trouble wrapping your head around?
What's more, this version fits with the testimony of every witness on the scene and multiple entries in the log book of the postal police. What precisely is so difficult for you?
That's hard to believe considering what the judge ultimately concluded.
In this case Massei concluded that, in his judgment and despite the testimony, it was unlikely that postal police would not have noticed the calls - and they testified they didn't see the calls. He even stated that the case was established solely by this observation. Given that you think he made a million logical leaps elsewhere (I think he made a few), why can't he have made a logical leap here? Why can't he just have given them the benefit of the doubt? Furthermore, even if you impute bias, perhaps he just went with this one because they didn't want to appear to confirm everything?
Your reasoning that Massei's judgment is definitive is on par with PFUNK reasoning. It's whack, and it's showing your bias. I expect much better from you.
I have to crash, when I get some time I'll try to figure out what calibration the police thought they did. I'm starting to remember that I read something about that at one point, but I'll have to find the discussion. Hopefully Henry will be able to tell us why this definitive proof was ignored.
Fabio D'Astolto
He is called in on his day off by the police because he was born in Australia and moved to Italy at 14 so speaks both English and Italian. He has worked as an interpreter for the police for 22 years.
His testimony is important for five reasons.
1) It establishes that Knox had someone there to work as an interpreter right from the start. There were actually two individuals Fabio and Anne who worked as a team. Fabio did the bulk of the translating of documents as well. The defence strategy on cross makes no sense to me -- Fabio admits that he only translated what he felt was relevant and they take issue with this because it is subjective. He explains that Knox going on about what she ate is not relevant to the police and used the pizza story as an example of things that did not need translation. This ends on him saying that with 22 years experience he knows what is relevant and what is not. It was odd questioning but the defence had to ask something to distract from the three items below.
2) Fabio D'Astolto also describes Knox's behaviour. She was cuddling, kissing, and sometimes laughing with Raffaele while everyone else was crying and being somber. Amanda and Raffaele were also talking in hushed tones on several occasions.
3) Fabio describes that he was tasked with escorting Knox to the scientific police. The scientific police had requested that the three roommates as well as anyone that normally had access to the cottage be fingerprinted so that they could exclude fingerprints that should be in the cottage from normal life. As Knox was walking toward the area of the scientific police her mood changed from what was described in #2 to upset. She started to hit herself with both fists to her temples very hard. Fabio tried to call him down but she just kept hitting herself over and over again -- simultaneous fists to temples.
4) The three roommates were requested to be at the cottage the following day to examine their knives. The police wanted to know if any knife was missing from the kitchen. Fabio was there to act as Knox's interpreter. Again Knox went from being perfectly fine to having a mental breakdown when confronted with the knives. The medical examiner was there and helped Knox in her capacity as a doctor. Then they covered Knox with a coat and helped her to the police car so she could leave the scene.
5) He also reported Knox's neck injury. It was something that he saw and under the circumstances noted that Knox had what appeared to be a scratch on her neck.
I was tired when I read this and rushing but I don't believe I missed anything. As a supplementary note the freaking out and hitting her temples will appear again during her interrogation when she is told that Raffaele has stopped supporting her alibi. It seems to be her response to being put in a situation where she feels ****ed. I really hope she has to go on a show with a tough reporter to promote her book as watching her freak out like that would be hilarious.
Personally I think #3 is very damaging. Giving your fingerprints for exclusion purposes is not stressful unless you're actually the murder. That she went from hugging, kissing, and laughing to complete mental breakdown when asked to do a routine thing is a strong indicator of guilt.
He is called in on his day off by the police because he was born in Australia and moved to Italy at 14 so speaks both English and Italian. He has worked as an interpreter for the police for 22 years.
His testimony is important for five reasons.
1) It establishes that Knox had someone there to work as an interpreter right from the start. There were actually two individuals Fabio and Anne who worked as a team. Fabio did the bulk of the translating of documents as well. The defence strategy on cross makes no sense to me -- Fabio admits that he only translated what he felt was relevant and they take issue with this because it is subjective. He explains that Knox going on about what she ate is not relevant to the police and used the pizza story as an example of things that did not need translation. This ends on him saying that with 22 years experience he knows what is relevant and what is not. It was odd questioning but the defence had to ask something to distract from the three items below.
2) Fabio D'Astolto also describes Knox's behaviour. She was cuddling, kissing, and sometimes laughing with Raffaele while everyone else was crying and being somber. Amanda and Raffaele were also talking in hushed tones on several occasions.
3) Fabio describes that he was tasked with escorting Knox to the scientific police. The scientific police had requested that the three roommates as well as anyone that normally had access to the cottage be fingerprinted so that they could exclude fingerprints that should be in the cottage from normal life. As Knox was walking toward the area of the scientific police her mood changed from what was described in #2 to upset. She started to hit herself with both fists to her temples very hard. Fabio tried to call him down but she just kept hitting herself over and over again -- simultaneous fists to temples.
4) The three roommates were requested to be at the cottage the following day to examine their knives. The police wanted to know if any knife was missing from the kitchen. Fabio was there to act as Knox's interpreter. Again Knox went from being perfectly fine to having a mental breakdown when confronted with the knives. The medical examiner was there and helped Knox in her capacity as a doctor. Then they covered Knox with a coat and helped her to the police car so she could leave the scene.
5) He also reported Knox's neck injury. It was something that he saw and under the circumstances noted that Knox had what appeared to be a scratch on her neck.
I was tired when I read this and rushing but I don't believe I missed anything. As a supplementary note the freaking out and hitting her temples will appear again during her interrogation when she is told that Raffaele has stopped supporting her alibi. It seems to be her response to being put in a situation where she feels ****ed. I really hope she has to go on a show with a tough reporter to promote her book as watching her freak out like that would be hilarious.
Personally I think #3 is very damaging. Giving your fingerprints for exclusion purposes is not stressful unless you're actually the murder. That she went from hugging, kissing, and laughing to complete mental breakdown when asked to do a routine thing is a strong indicator of guilt.
Fabio D'Astolto
He is called in on his day off by the police because he was born in Australia and moved to Italy at 14 so speaks both English and Italian. He has worked as an interpreter for the police for 22 years.
His testimony is important for five reasons.
1) It establishes that Knox had someone there to work as an interpreter right from the start. There were actually two individuals Fabio and Anne who worked as a team. Fabio did the bulk of the translating of documents as well. The defence strategy on cross makes no sense to me -- Fabio admits that he only translated what he felt was relevant and they take issue with this because it is subjective. He explains that Knox going on about what she ate is not relevant to the police and used the pizza story as an example of things that did not need translation. This ends on him saying that with 22 years experience he knows what is relevant and what is not. It was odd questioning but the defence had to ask something to distract from the three items below.
2) Fabio D'Astolto also describes Knox's behaviour. She was cuddling, kissing, and sometimes laughing with Raffaele while everyone else was crying and being somber. Amanda and Raffaele were also talking in hushed tones on several occasions.
3) Fabio describes that he was tasked with escorting Knox to the scientific police. The scientific police had requested that the three roommates as well as anyone that normally had access to the cottage be fingerprinted so that they could exclude fingerprints that should be in the cottage from normal life. As Knox was walking toward the area of the scientific police her mood changed from what was described in #2 to upset. She started to hit herself with both fists to her temples very hard. Fabio tried to call him down but she just kept hitting herself over and over again -- simultaneous fists to temples.
4) The three roommates were requested to be at the cottage the following day to examine their knives. The police wanted to know if any knife was missing from the kitchen. Fabio was there to act as Knox's interpreter. Again Knox went from being perfectly fine to having a mental breakdown when confronted with the knives. The medical examiner was there and helped Knox in her capacity as a doctor. Then they covered Knox with a coat and helped her to the police car so she could leave the scene.
5) He also reported Knox's neck injury. It was something that he saw and under the circumstances noted that Knox had what appeared to be a scratch on her neck.
I was tired when I read this and rushing but I don't believe I missed anything. As a supplementary note the freaking out and hitting her temples will appear again during her interrogation when she is told that Raffaele has stopped supporting her alibi. It seems to be her response to being put in a situation where she feels ****ed. I really hope she has to go on a show with a tough reporter to promote her book as watching her freak out like that would be hilarious.
Personally I think #3 is very damaging. Giving your fingerprints for exclusion purposes is not stressful unless you're actually the murder. That she went from hugging, kissing, and laughing to complete mental breakdown when asked to do a routine thing is a strong indicator of guilt.
He is called in on his day off by the police because he was born in Australia and moved to Italy at 14 so speaks both English and Italian. He has worked as an interpreter for the police for 22 years.
His testimony is important for five reasons.
1) It establishes that Knox had someone there to work as an interpreter right from the start. There were actually two individuals Fabio and Anne who worked as a team. Fabio did the bulk of the translating of documents as well. The defence strategy on cross makes no sense to me -- Fabio admits that he only translated what he felt was relevant and they take issue with this because it is subjective. He explains that Knox going on about what she ate is not relevant to the police and used the pizza story as an example of things that did not need translation. This ends on him saying that with 22 years experience he knows what is relevant and what is not. It was odd questioning but the defence had to ask something to distract from the three items below.
2) Fabio D'Astolto also describes Knox's behaviour. She was cuddling, kissing, and sometimes laughing with Raffaele while everyone else was crying and being somber. Amanda and Raffaele were also talking in hushed tones on several occasions.
3) Fabio describes that he was tasked with escorting Knox to the scientific police. The scientific police had requested that the three roommates as well as anyone that normally had access to the cottage be fingerprinted so that they could exclude fingerprints that should be in the cottage from normal life. As Knox was walking toward the area of the scientific police her mood changed from what was described in #2 to upset. She started to hit herself with both fists to her temples very hard. Fabio tried to call him down but she just kept hitting herself over and over again -- simultaneous fists to temples.
4) The three roommates were requested to be at the cottage the following day to examine their knives. The police wanted to know if any knife was missing from the kitchen. Fabio was there to act as Knox's interpreter. Again Knox went from being perfectly fine to having a mental breakdown when confronted with the knives. The medical examiner was there and helped Knox in her capacity as a doctor. Then they covered Knox with a coat and helped her to the police car so she could leave the scene.
5) He also reported Knox's neck injury. It was something that he saw and under the circumstances noted that Knox had what appeared to be a scratch on her neck.
I was tired when I read this and rushing but I don't believe I missed anything. As a supplementary note the freaking out and hitting her temples will appear again during her interrogation when she is told that Raffaele has stopped supporting her alibi. It seems to be her response to being put in a situation where she feels ****ed. I really hope she has to go on a show with a tough reporter to promote her book as watching her freak out like that would be hilarious.
Personally I think #3 is very damaging. Giving your fingerprints for exclusion purposes is not stressful unless you're actually the murder. That she went from hugging, kissing, and laughing to complete mental breakdown when asked to do a routine thing is a strong indicator of guilt.
There was no scratch. It was a hicky.
We just covered this. She wrote two pages and handed it to a guard, who handed it to the prison governor who then gave it to Mignini.
Personally I think #3 is very damaging. Giving your fingerprints for exclusion purposes is not stressful unless you're actually the murder. That she went from hugging, kissing, and laughing to complete mental breakdown when asked to do a routine thing is a strong indicator of guilt.
It all fits: multiple lines of behavior, needless lies, her narcissism and hedonism, the comments of her boss, her inappropriateness. It makes up a remarkably consistent profile. If there was some abuse or violence that caused this to develop (there often is) it would also be another avenue to explain her participation in a violent sexualized murder.
Who is Pokerface?
As for it being a hickey -- no.
Those pictures were taken five days after the murder.
Also this is how Knox's roommate describes it the night the body was found as being really intense.
As for it being a hickey -- no.
Those pictures were taken five days after the murder.
Also this is how Knox's roommate describes it the night the body was found as being really intense.
Amanda had a wound to her neck, and I noticed it because it was known that Meredith had been killed by a wound to her neck," said Mezzetti. "She had a scratch to her neck. I was afraid that Amanda, too, might have been wounded. I was worried and I looked at it really intensely
Did you ever post Knox's psychological assessment? She clearly has some kind of personality disorder whether she's guilty or innocent. I don't know if I'd call her a psychopath or sociopathy given her spontaneous feelings of remorse (that description would probably fit Sollecito better), but she's clearly unable to connect fully with reality.
It all fits: multiple lines of behavior, needless lies, her narcissism and hedonism, her inappropriateness. If there was some abuse or violence that caused this to develop (there often is) it would also be another avenue to explain her participation in a violent sexualized murder.
It all fits: multiple lines of behavior, needless lies, her narcissism and hedonism, her inappropriateness. If there was some abuse or violence that caused this to develop (there often is) it would also be another avenue to explain her participation in a violent sexualized murder.
I do have the preliminary hearing report now and the psychological assessment figured prominently in that so maybe it will have details.
close up photo magnified 250% with lighting.
Feedback is used for internal purposes. LEARN MORE