Judge Massei Sentencing Report     The Meredith Kercher Fund     The Murder Of Meredith Kercher Wiki     True Justice For Meredith Kercher     Judge Nencini Sentencing Report 


Last visit was: Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:25 pm
It is currently Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:25 pm
All times are UTC

Forum rules

XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 - Jan 24, 10

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


 Page 1 of 12 [ 2769 posts ]
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 12  Next
Author Message

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 12:13 am   Post subject: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 - Jan 24, 10   

XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 - Jan 24, 10






This is the main discussion thread regarding the achievment of truth and justice for Meredith Kercher and her family. Meredith, barely 21 years old, was brutally murdered in her own home on the 1st November 2007 whilst studying in Perugia, Italy.

To read the previous main discussion thread, please view XIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, Dec 9 - Dec 31, 09

Michael (Co-Administrator/Moderator of Perugia Murder File)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 12:26 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Knox guilty verdict was reason for citizen complaints, halting "Perugia" as Seattle park name
December 31, 3:00 PM

EXAMINER





Is mainstream press fair to Kercher trial Prosecutor Mignini?
December 31, 9:53 AM


EXAMINER

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 12:42 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Happy New Year to all at PMF. mul-)


I found the following excepts on a completely different website about a completely different subject, but it reminded me of this place and the level of debate we are lucky enough to have here, so I thought I would post it. Maybe some FOA will drop by and learn a thing or two!

(Hope it's not too big Michael!)


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 1:22 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

OUT WITH THE OLD!


oil study after Spagnoletto (1591-1652)

December 31, 2009 7:15 PM mul-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline fine


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:00 am

Posts: 555

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:13 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Italy too lenient?............

"Luis Alfredo Garavito Cubillos, aka "La Bestia" ("The Beast") or "Tribilin" (Spanish translation of Disney's "Goofy") (born 25 January 1957 in Génova, Quindío, Colombia) is a Colombian rapist and serial killer. In 1999, he admitted to murder and rape of 140 young boys. The number of his victims, based on the locations of skeletons listed on maps that Garavito drew in prison, could eventually exceed 300. He has been described by local media as "the world's worst serial killer" because of the high number of victims.

Once captured, Garavito was subject to the maximum penalty available in Colombia, which was 30 years. However, as he confessed the crimes and helped authorities locate bodies, Colombian law allowed him to apply for special benefits, including a reduction of his sentence to 22 years and possibly an even earlier release for further cooperation and good behavior." www.en.wikipedia.org

////
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Bea


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:18 pm

Posts: 267

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:42 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

I hope 2010 will be a year of great things. Dare I hope... new decade, better world?



Whether you've already rung it in or are still chilling your champagne, a Very Happy New Year to All!
Top Profile 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:04 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

piktor wrote:
OUT WITH THE OLD!



oil study after Spagnoletto (1591-1652)

December 31, 2009 7:15 PM mul-)


Piktor, I have been on the creative side all my life and worked with many (music) artists before I transferred into a "real" job by converting to law in my mid 20's. I say this carefully and with consideration - I think you are the most talented visual artist it has ever been my pleasure to converse with. Stunning, stunning, stunning!!

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zinnia


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:57 am

Posts: 56

Location: Northern California

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:25 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Happy New Year! May Meredith find peace.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Sex Appeal


Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:18 am

Posts: 3

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 9:07 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Hello everyone... Long live the spirit of Meredith Kercher.

This is my first post, so be gentle. I too have been nurtured by the warmth of True Justice for Meredith Kercher, the enlightening Miss Represented and the rich diversity of thought, opinion and style I have found at PMF, all united in the quest for justice for Meredith.

To the extent that I have followed the case, read up on the available material and considered a vast cross section of facts, views, commentaries, and interpretations, my position is as follows:

I am convinced of the guilt of the trio, AK, RS and RG.
Premeditated murder seems unlikely (although I am still open to persuasion).
Likely scenario: heavy drugs - quarrel/let's have some fun - escalates out of control - point of no return - panic - kill to silence (there's your motive).

I believe that the evidence taken in totality stacks up overwhelmingly against the guilty trio, AK, RS and RG. Regarding AK and RS, the component parts of the evidence are of varying strength. DNA evidence is strong, although the knife could be a possible weak link - not that it matters much given the total picture. Witness testimony on the whole is sufficiently reliable in placing more than one of them in the immediate vicinity of the crime.
But the CLINCHER must surely be the behavioural aspect of the evidence. At the heart
of this is the false accusation of an innocent man, changing alibis and other lies and deception - this is damning.

Given the importance of the behavioural aspect, I propose to make a few random observations. This may be the ranting of a wannabe criminal psychologist, and highly subjective, so take it for what it's worth, and I apologise in advance for points covered previously.

Some of my fellow posters have cautioned against reading too much from details gleaned from photos. I accept this as a general proposition, but in this case I believe the context is critical. The photos taken around the time of the murder (2 Nov) are particularly relevant to me. Bear in mind, just a few hours before, a violent murder of a young student has been revealed. I would expect the body language, especially of those who knew the victim (or claim to be close to her), to reflect devastation, sadness, defeat. What do I see from the picture of AK and RS in the car, and standing on the street - worry, anxiety, tension. If I had to verbalise these feelings it would go like this: What the hell do we do now?
Note: Perhaps I am unduly influenced by the other people in the car who described their conduct as suspicious.

I turn now to the lovey-dovey (kissing and canoodling) of AK and RS so soon, and inappropriately, after the murder. Bizarre, we say, but I maintain that it made perfect sense to them. They had no choice but to give their full attention and “love” to each other. Why? Simply because they knew at that stage that their deadliest enemy was each other. Each had the knowledge, and therefore the power, to destroy each other. So what do they do? Stay together, prove to each other that the other could be trusted. (Classic self preservation). RS could have got any amount of sex he desired, and AK anything she wanted. There is also a far more sinister reason for sticking close, it is the only way to keep an eye on each other. I would bet my bottom dollar that in the days immediately after the murder these two would have been inseparable.
In one of her pieces, Miss Represented also suggests that on one occasion AK accompanied RS to the police station, even though she was not called, to keep an eye on him. Her story, that she was afraid to be alone, is utter b/s.

Finally, a look at RG’s statement, ”...black man here...black man guilty” or words to that effect.
I don’t believe this statement was uttered, but I do sense an element of truth about the words.
This suggests to me that RG had a feeling that he couldn’t trust someone (or more) who had knowledge of his whereabouts and actions - that someone would turn against him. So, when he was arrested he cleverly verbalised his feeling in a way that provided him with insurance for the future. The effect would be to place at least one additional person at the scene which could possibly help lessen his own culpability. We, of course, are not interested in how much this helps RG, but in the confirmation that there was more than one person in the house that night.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Sex Appeal


Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:18 am

Posts: 3

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 10:09 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Happy New Year to all - peace, prosperity and justice for all.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zinnia


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:57 am

Posts: 56

Location: Northern California

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 10:21 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Could this link be relevant? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiBMkxZr ... re=related
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 10:53 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Happy New Year and welcome Sex Appeal. A lot of us struggle with the premeditation. A lot like the authorities struggle to interpret what happenend. For all the denial and accusing coming from FOAK, I think the sex-game-gone-wrong was the kindest interpretation of evidence and the one of taking a big kitchen knife to scare someone is somehow weirder and worse.
(deliberately scaring someone badly). It is a puzzle, but I can't buy the sex game either.

Zinnia....oh if only I understood Italian! :)
Top Profile 

Offline lamaha


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:08 am

Posts: 36

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 11:03 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

A VERY HAPPY NEW YEAR to all on PMF; most especially I hope that the Kercher family may find some peace this year.
I've been mostly lurking this last month, just popping a question or two now and again, but I'd like to say a big thank you to all you people here who have spent so much time and energy in the effort fo find justice for Meredith, and to make some sense of this totally senseless crime. Unlike some of the newcomers from thelast few days, I don't have any observations that would be of any use to the discussion; I'm as baffled and upset by it all as all of you, and the amateur detective in me longs for some straight answers that will never come. I update this forum several times a day; it's become almost an obsession and if there is any justice in heaven and earth I hope that at some unseen layer of reality karma will have its way.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4883

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 11:09 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Hello, Everybody!

As non-native English speakers in this discussion forum, we don't have the same eloquence as you, native-born, so I'll be brief.

surp-)

A Happy New Year ... to all you animal lovers on this board with this short ppt:

Attachment:
Holiday_greetings.pps


(Yes, it's a little late... But better than never...)

And a little rose for Meredith -

Attachment:
A-Rose-for-Meredith.jpg


(hope it hasn't been already posted, as I haven't been around for the past couple weeks).

411, get well and come back soon! What will we do without ya? (And I do mean that I'd miss ya. Love your sense of humor :).) I hope our kind Bard will send you one of those cute "Get Well Soon" cards to help you get back on your feet da-)).


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile 

Offline Rebel


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 3:25 am

Posts: 129

Location: Bellingham WA

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 12:53 pm   Post subject: Album Dedication   

Happy New Year to all you intrepid and talented posters!!!
band-)
To start off the new year I would like to dedicate some songs
to the cast of characters in the murder at Via della Pergola 7.
I believe I have found the perfect album for this occasion.

TALKING HEADS – STOP MAKING SENSE (SPECIAL NEW EDITION)
©1984, 1999 Sire Records Company & Talking Heads Films
David Byrne, a true genius, wrote most of the songs on this album.

Here are my nominees for each song along with snippets of the lyrics:

1. PSYCHO KILLER – The Butchers Of Perugia :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

I can't seem to face up to the facts
I'm tense and nervous and I can't relax
I can't sleep 'cause my bed's on fire
Don't touch me I'm a real live wire
Run run run run run run run away
We are vain and we are blind
I hate people when they're not polite
Psycho Killer

2. HEAVEN – Meredith Kercher, R.I.P. rip-)

[These are the complete lyrics - a touching song to listen to]

Everyone is trying to get to the bar.
The name of the bar, the bar is called Heaven.
The band in Heaven plays my favorite song.
They play it once again, they play it all night long.
Heaven is a place where nothing ever happens.
Heaven is a place where nothing ever happens.

There is a party, everyone is there.
Everyone will leave at exactly the same time.
Its hard to imagine that nothing at all
could be so exciting, and so much fun.
Heaven is a place where nothing ever happens.
Heaven is a place where nothing ever happens.

When this kiss is over it will start again.
It will not be any different, it will be exactly the same.
It's hard to imagine that nothing at all
could be so exciting, could be so much fun.
Heaven is a place where nothing every happens.
Heaven is a place where nothing every happens.

3. THANK YOU FOR SENDING ME AN ANGEL – Edda Mellas angel-)

Oh, oh, baby you can walk, you can talk just like me …
You can walk, you can talk just like me.
You can look, tell me what you see.
You can look, you won't see nothing like me
if you look around the world.

4. FOUND A JOB – Curt Knox / Edda Mellas ar-))

We've heard this little scene, we've heard it many times.
People fighting over little things and wasting precious time.
They might be better off ... I think ... the way it seems to me.
Making up their own shows, which might be better than T.V.

They've enlisted all their family.
They've enlisted all their friends.
It helped saved their relationship,
And made it work again ...

Inventing situations, putting them on T.V.

5. SLIPPERY PEOPLE – Friends Of Amanda surp-)

Help us loose [sic] our minds
These slippery people
help us understand
They were living creatures
Watch 'em come to life
Right before your eyes
Backsliding!
How do you do?
These slippery people
Gonna see you through

6. BURNING DOWN THE HOUSE – to all the banned posters here, esp. pyromaniac m-))

Here's your ticket pack your bag: time for jumpin' overboard
The transportation is here
Close enough but not too far,
Maybe you know where you are
Fightin' fire with fire

7. LIFE DURING WARTIME – Douglas Preston gang-)

Heard of some gravesites, out by the highway,
a place where nobody knows
The sound of gunfire, off in the distance,
I'm getting used to it now

8. MAKING FLIPPY FLOPPY – Donald Trump d-))

Don't believe what you read
We have great big bodies
We got great big heads

9. SWAMP – Frank Sfarzo sun-)

Now lemme tell you a story
The devil he has a plan
How many people do you think I am
Pretend I am somebody else
You can pretend I'm an old millionaire
A millionaire washing his hands

Rattle the bones, dreams that stick out
A medical chart on the wall
Soft violence and hands touch your throat
Ev'ryone wants to explode

And when your hands get dirty
Nobody knows you at all
Don't have a window to slip out of
Lights on, nobody home
Click click - see ya later
Beta beta - no time to rest
Pika pika - risky business
All that blood, will never cover that mess

10. WHAT A DAY THAT WAS – Giuliano Mignini :shock:

And on the first day, we had everything we could stand …
Ooh who could’ve asked for more?

Well I'm going right through
And the light came down
Well they're roundin' 'em up
from all over town
They're movin' forward and backwards
They're movin' backwards and front
Moving in every direction

And if you feel like you're in a whirlpool
You feel like going home
You feel like talking to someone
Who know the difference between right and wrong

11. THIS MUST BE THE PLACE – Amanda Knox bu-)

Home is where I want to be
Pick me up and turn me round
I feel numb - born with a weak heart
I guess I must be having fun
The less we say about it the better
Make it up as we go along
Feet on the ground
Head in the sky
It's ok I know nothing's wrong . . nothing

Cover up the blank spots
Hit me on the head Ah ooh pf-))

12. ONCE IN A LIFETIME – Francesco Sollecito dis-))

And you may find yourself in a beautiful house, with a beautiful wife
And you may ask yourself - Well...How did I get here?
Into the blue again / after the money's gone
Once in a lifetime / water flowing underground

13. GENIUS OF LOVE – Amanda Knox c-))

What you gonna do when you get out of jail?
Im gonna have some fun
Time isn’t present in that dimension
When were walkin, rolling and rocking
The way he’d hold me in his warm arms
We went insane when we took cocaine

14. GIRLFRIEND IS BETTER – Raffaele Sollecito nin-)

We're being taken for a ride again
I got a girlfriend that's better than that
She has the smoke in her eyes

Now everyone's getting involved
She's moving up going right through my heart
We might not ever get caught
Going right through (try to stay cool) going through, staying cool
I got a girlfriend that's better than that
And nothing is better than you

I got a girlfriend thats better that this
And you don't remember at all
As we get older and stop making sense
You won't find her waiting long
Stop making sense, stop making sense...stop making sense, making sense
I got a girlfriend that's better than that
And nothing is better that this
( is it? )

15. TAKE ME TO THE RIVER – Chris Mellas hb-))

I don't know why I love you like I do
All the troubles you put me through
Sixteen candles there on my wall
And here am I the biggest fool of them all
Take me to the river and drop me in the water

16. CROSSEYED AND PAINLESS – Rudy Guede co-))

Sharp as a knife / Facts cut a hole in us
Facts don't do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape
I'm still waiting...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I had way too much fun crafting this little bit of "monkey" business. co-)
Hope you enjoy! Robert (aka Rebel)
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 1:26 pm   Post subject: SNOOKERED, and smoothing readers' ruffled feathers   

It is interesting how often motivations seem to dove-tail with song lyrics.
Popular culture seems to present an image that people find it compulsory to emulate.
Go to Italy and live "la dolce vita". (Girls Gone Wild! Exciting!)
Go into law in England p-((( and be a cowboy in a cowboy hat when anything American comes along. (Yee-ha! Exciting! sun-) )
All adolsecent, really.



SNOOKERED


The Bard,

After the shock from reading Bernard Shepherd’s Christmas Eve “article” in that Birmingham newspaper wore off, I got to thinking, and I’ve come to the conclusion that Bernard may have snookered himself.

Therein lies your remedy.


The editor of the newspaper has a question to answer: why does he/she allow “advertorials” to mask as articles? Should they not be marked as such for the reader’s benefit?

His response may be that Bernard supplies a “comment”, and therefore an “opinion”, which can be about anything (of course). In which case, the next question becomes: if the “comment” is a rehash and paraphrase of a two-year-old “Free Amanda” pamphlet, why pay the president of the local law society for such a piece, when a cub reporter could do it better and cheaper?

The paper’s owner might become interested as well, when they discover that there has been “recycling” going on (and not just of the paper stock). Why would they need an “editor” position for that task?


Bernard, on his own bat, seems to have forgotten that he used to be a lawyer in the old days.

If a criminal case was still pending, he would be quite familiar with the sub judice rule, that is, not publicly commenting on an ongoing case for fear of being seen by the jury as an authority figure whose opinion counted (President, and all that) and so, potentially, influencing their decision.

In fact, the reporting standards for ongoing cases usually include, in any and every article reporting on a case, a summary of the charges, the allegations by the prosecution, the response of the defence, what happened in court, and whether the trial is still continuing. There is never a one-sided diatribe against anybody, at any time.

The Italian newspaper reports do all these standard things and go one step further, mentioning in an addendum at the end of each article, that Rudy has already been arrested, charged and convicted of the same murder, that he claims he is innocent like the other two and is appealing the verdict.

Bernard did none of things. Ergo, he doesn’t know about how to report on legal cases. For the president of a law society, that is somewhat surprising. Perhaps he is trying to show the law students how not to do it.

The Knox and Sollecito trial, and the Guede trail, are ongoing cases, until the final appeal. Why Bernard would want to treat Italian cases different to UK ones is beyond my understanding, but he may have a reason, somewhere.

When all is said and done, though, Meredith was a UK citizen. For Bernard to overlook that fact, shows where his true loyalty lies. Historically, the Birmingham-Leeds rivalry runs quite deep. She was a student at Leeds; he is a denizen of Birmingham. Maybe Leeds is not good enough for him. True or not, that is the impression that comes across.

And if he wants to rely on the quality of his research (assistant) as an excuse for his poor “comment”, pity the clients of his dispute-resolution consultancy who have access to a Google button on their blackberries/phones, and then decide to take their custom elsewhere after doing their own "research".


To make amends (for his future income stream, if not his readership), he could:
  • apologise
  • apologise and resign the presidency of the law society for reasons of lack of discretion becoming of such a high office
  • for fairness, give equal space to a victim (and victim’s family) viewpoint
  • do a UK viewpoint
  • do a real comment, and expose the PR campaign string-pulling amorality (which is, ultimately, anti-justice, and against him)
  • all of the above


I wouldn’t hold my breath, though. He gives the impression that gravy-train is more important than principles.

But I remain open to persuasion that I am wrong on this.
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 1:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

A Happy New Year to everyone at PMF.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline martin


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:28 pm

Posts: 362

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 1:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Good Morning and a happy new year!

Zinnia, thanks for the link.

Bucketoftea, I think we will never find out if the murder was premeditated or not unless one of them starts spilling the beans. Some posters here on pmf think they will never confess,
because they don't want the "maschera d'assassino(a) printed on their faces".
My opinion is that RS will sooner or later confess and explain what really happened in that night, he is the only one who has nothing to loose (family, social reputation, book deals).
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

I think you're right, Martin. He has an especial devotion to Padre Pio, doesn't he?
Top Profile 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Catnip said:
Go into law in England p-((( and be a cowboy in a cowboy hat when anything American comes along. (Yee-ha! Exciting! sun-) )
All adolsecent, really.

Thanks for the laugh!
That strikes me so funny, you'll never know. It sounds like you've met my ex. LOL
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:36 pm   Post subject: A dish on the side   

DANCING WITH AN HONORARY CHEF’S ASSISTANT

In Australia, if you’re invited to a party, you may sometimes be asked “to being a plate”. For newcomers to the country, this is sometimes interpreted literally, and they turn up on the doorstep with a plate, as opposed to “a plate of food”, which is the original intention of the request (to help the hostess of the party out).

Likewise, sometimes people come to a discussion forum table carrying an empty plate, or no plate at all.



SomeAlibi wrote:
I spent a quiet hour or so at a dead workplace today having a look back at the 370-odd posts of Lancelotti.
… There's a little lip service to being 'more neutral' (than other posters) early on…
… There's no evaluation, a total absence of scepticism about anything, just rote challenging time and time again. …
… it's reading the posts in order that really gives you a sense of the scale of work being put [into] it. …

– Thu 31 Dec, [ link ]



SomeAlibi,

Early on, there was also a generationally-inappropriate use of wink icons going on, giving the impression of (an attempt at) cosying-on up and even linguistically “dude-ifying” the posts in order to “fit in” (fit into what? That’s a puzzle because the board is not monolithic in any sense, but is being treated as if it were, and also being treated with metaphorical latex gloves, as if it were contaminated). Thankfully, that’s more or less stopped (the winks, that is; the gloves continue).

The response pattern of posts is also diagnostic (who is deigned with a response, who is ignored), and so is the trigger event initiating a post.

I get ignored so completely, I’m beginning to agree with the barrister (Burnside) who said that English needs a noun version of the verb “to ignore” to fit into this phrase: “she treated him with contempt and ignore”. That would be really handy. ;)



Overall, there is a lack of engagement, almost an emotional disconnect, with the case as a whole. Only some sort of (unexpressed implied) viewpoint and (unheard) discussion enlivens the posts – and I am left out in the cold on both counts.

There used to be an old lady who came into the library once a week, asking where the statutes for 1954 could be found, so that she could look up the divorce clauses in the Marriage Act. The librarian always obliged.

The best way to treat incipient Alzheimer’s patients is with kindness.

Likewise for posters whose “memory” ;) is reset between posts.




Aside from the Perugia connection, the nickname reveals this:
lances are sharp and have a point; they are used in jousting; and lots of lances means lots of points. Like a crop of exclamation marks. Going into battle. How refreshing! And exciting!

All that may have been my fault I’m afraid, when I did a mop! (and book!) post way back when.
A ! attracts !! like a magnet. ;)


Anyway, based on feedback from the meanings of posts, the name now derives from:

Lance – have you got a point?
Lancelotti – have you got any point?

I am probably more open to the three defence views than the big L seems to assume to give me credit for. (Plus the three views on the other side, as well. :) ) However, no discussion, nothing gained. ;)

Besides all of this raising a “to-do” task for me in the future to un-besmirch (there’s a new verb!) the name of the real professor Lancelotti of Perugia, it will allow me the occasion to recount the lawyer’s joke about the Corpus Juridicum.

But all that can wait for another day.






Frank’s nickname also reveals.

There is an Umbria connection, invoking memories of Sinatra via the Umbria-Jazz festival. Although, out of three members of “The Clan” I’ve always personally preferred Dean. Sammy Davis Jr was along for the ride, I always thought, and always seemed a bit out of place, like Rudy in a way.

And that’s another unconscious echo:

Ol’ Blue Eyes the crooner with connections and who couldn’t quite sing, the sophisticated and polished one who could, and the guy left holding the bag. And a hint of someone in the background, pulling the strings. sun-)

“The Clan”:

Cecil Beaton’s photo of Frank Sinatra, Sammy Davis Jr & Dean Martin 1964,
[ Flickr ], uploaded on December 24, 2007 by BooBooGBs



See also: [ Rat Pack ] (Wikipedia)
Top Profile 

Offline modest_ex


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 3:29 pm

Posts: 160

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

bucketoftea wrote:
A lot of us struggle with the premeditation. A lot like the authorities struggle to interpret what happenend. For all the denial and accusing coming from FOAK, I think the sex-game-gone-wrong was the kindest interpretation of evidence and the one of taking a big kitchen knife to scare someone is somehow weirder and worse.
(deliberately scaring someone badly). It is a puzzle, but I can't buy the sex game either.


I struggle with the premeditation, I struggle with the sex game gone wrong theory, I think harder drugs than pot were probably involved, and I deeply struggle with the role Guede played in the whole thing. If it wasn't for the DNA evidence of sexual assault directly linking Guede to Meredith, I'd almost be inclined to believe parts of his story (wrong place wrong time).

I think it's possible that if (hopefully WHEN) AK and RS lose their last appeal, that RS will tell what really happened that night.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:41 pm   Post subject: Re: SNOOKERED, and smoothing readers' ruffled feathers   

Catnip wrote:
SNOOKERED


The Bard,

After the shock from reading Bernard Shepherd’s Christmas Eve “article” in that Birmingham newspaper wore off, I got to thinking, and I’ve come to the conclusion that Bernard may have snookered himself.

Therein lies your remedy.[/quote]

Catnip

I re-read that article by Mr Shepherd and was even crosser than on my first reading. The man is a disgrace to the profession. I wonder if anyone else wrote to the paper? Since I sent my letter to the 'letters page' they can simply not publish it, and ignore it. Maybe I should have directed it personally to the editor. Or to Mr Shepherd himself. What an utter disgrace. Thank you for your truffling on possible sources for the article. I may well incorporate into the next letter should I receive no response. (I doubt I will)

____________

Re: "I hope our kind Bard will send you one of those cute "Get Well Soon" cards to help you get back on your feet da-))"


411, I did read your sad flu post and am delighted to send you a get well soon cat (although I am aware that the board is becoming a bit of a menagerie of late!) Hope you are feeling better really soon. Don't rush it. Lie back and make the most of the seasonal films on the tv. And chicken soup is not to be underestimated for it's restorative properties. It's a cliche for a reason! (I know, I have just had some - still getting over *hem* (blush) 'alcoholic poisoning' from TWO DAYS AGO!)

Get Better Soon 411!!!


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

New You Tube post on the Double DNA knife! Who is this masked crusader ViaDellaPergola!!! Woot!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJbYe3-5ms0

_________________


Last edited by The Bard on Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

The Bard wrote:
New You Tube post on the Double DNA post! Who is this masked crusader ViaDellaPergola!!! Woot!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJbYe3-5ms0



Hi Bard, thanks for the video link. It's an excellent video. I just need to make a correction, even though I hate to criticise something someone has clearly put such hard work into and the intention was to tell the truth. The knife wasn't found in a box in Raffaele's apartment, but in his kitchen draw. The reason the 'knife in the box' story came about, is that after it was bagged, the detective at the police station put it in an envelope and then put that in a shirt box he had and had it sent off to the lab in that. Unfortunately, at the time, we went through a period of not having a translator about and the Italian articles when translated by google read as though the knife had been found in a box, rather then 'dispatched' in a box. I think there also may have been a couple of media misreports at the time as well. In any case, the story got around and got etched in the 'history' of the case. Of course, this was dealt with once and for all when the detective who found the knife testified in the trial and he was quite clear, he found the knife in a drawer in the kitchen.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

The Bard wrote:
New You Tube post on the Double DNA post! Who is this masked crusader ViaDellaPergola!!! Woot!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJbYe3-5ms0



There is also another video by ViaDellaPergola:


Perugia trial - false accusation by Knox


_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

One further quibble with what is an excellent and much needed video: I do not think RS every specifically stated he was cooking with MK in his apartment: I do not think he specified where this cooking was supposed to have been done when he claimed he pricked her. It is a very minor point, though

While we are on the subject: i undersand that the knife was not found in a box: but does anyone know why it was the only knife taken from his apartment for testing given that was not the case?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Fiona wrote:
One further quibble with what is an excellent and much needed video: I do not think RS every specifically stated he was cooking with MK in his apartment: I do not think he specified where this cooking was supposed to have been done when he claimed he pricked her. It is a very minor point, though

While we are on the subject: i undersand that the knife was not found in a box: but does anyone know why it was the only knife taken from his apartment for testing given that was not the case?


Hi Fiona,

One of the Italian speakers on PMF pointed out that Sollecito must have been referring to his apartment when he wrote about pricking Meredith's hand with the knife.

The double DNA knife wasn't the only knife that was taken from Sollecito's apartment.

Andrea Vogt's article gives detailed information:

"Much of the rest of the day's testimony focused on the handling of the alleged murder weapon -- a kitchen knife found in Sollecito's apartment that prosecutors say has traces of Knox's DNA near the handle and Kercher's DNA on the blade. Two police officers handled the knife before it was sent for forensic analysis. Both wore gloves, they testified.

Armando Finzi, an assistant in the Perugia police department's organized crimes unit, first discovered the knife in Sollecito's kitchen drawer. He said the first thing he noticed upon entering the place was a "strong smell of bleach." He opened the drawer and saw "very shiny and clean" knife lying on top of the silverware tray.

"It was the first knife I saw," he said. When pressed on cross-examination, said his "investigative intuition" led him to believe it was the murder weapon because it was compatible with the wound as it had been described to him. With gloved hands, he placed the knife in a new police envelope, taped it shut with Scotch tape, then placed it inside a folder, he said. There were smaller and bigger knives in the drawer, but no others were taken into evidence from the kitchen, he said. A small knife was taken into evidence from Sollecito's bedroom, along with other items.

Homicide unit captain Stefano Gubbiotti then testified later at police headquarters he took the knife out of the envelope (also while wearing gloves) and placed it in a cardboard box he had in his office before it would be sent to Rome for forensic analysis.

"It was a box that had come with my agenda calendar," Gubbiotti said when asked to describe the box further, noting that it was from the Italian designer Renato Balestra. That box was then placed in another box for transport to Rome." (Andrea Vogt, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 28 February 2009).


Last edited by The Machine on Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Fiona wrote:
One further quibble with what is an excellent and much needed video: I do not think RS every specifically stated he was cooking with MK in his apartment: I do not think he specified where this cooking was supposed to have been done when he claimed he pricked her. It is a very minor point, though

While we are on the subject: i undersand that the knife was not found in a box: but does anyone know why it was the only knife taken from his apartment for testing given that was not the case?


Hi Fiona. No, Raffaele raffaele was clearly referring to the cooking taking place in his apartment. Our Italian translators have stated his grammar in the original Italian translates as being specifically at his apartment.

Well, there was another knife taken from the apartment and Knox's DNA was also found on the handle of that one (but no DNA from Meredith was on it) and since it couldn't be linked to the crime it wasn't used as evidence. That came from Judge Micheli in a post pre-trial interview. There may have been other knives tested. But as a rule, evidence that has been tested and excluded or can't be connected to the crime is generally not mentioned in the case file. Only the viable evidence is heard, not the dead ends. Of course, the FOA like to try and say the opposite and claim no other knives were tested, but the only basis for that claim is their absence from the 10,000 page report, but since they're not evidence they wouldn't be in there anyway. Also, of course, Raffaele's knife that he carried on him was confiscated and tested.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

I see. Thank you both :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

The Machine wrote:
Fiona wrote:
One further quibble with what is an excellent and much needed video: I do not think RS every specifically stated he was cooking with MK in his apartment: I do not think he specified where this cooking was supposed to have been done when he claimed he pricked her. It is a very minor point, though

While we are on the subject: i undersand that the knife was not found in a box: but does anyone know why it was the only knife taken from his apartment for testing given that was not the case?


Hi Fiona,

One of the Italian speakers on PMF pointed out that Sollecito must have been referring to his apartment when he wrote about pricking Meredith's hand with the knife.

The double DNA knife wasn't the only knife that was taken from Sollecito's apartment.

Andrea Vogt's article gives detailed information:

"Much of the rest of the day's testimony focused on the handling of the alleged murder weapon -- a kitchen knife found in Sollecito's apartment that prosecutors say has traces of Knox's DNA near the handle and Kercher's DNA on the blade. Two police officers handled the knife before it was sent for forensic analysis. Both wore gloves, they testified.

Armando Finzi, an assistant in the Perugia police department's organized crimes unit, first discovered the knife in Sollecito's kitchen drawer. He said the first thing he noticed upon entering the place was a "strong smell of bleach." He opened the drawer and saw "very shiny and clean" knife lying on top of the silverware tray.

"It was the first knife I saw," he said. When pressed on cross-examination, said his "investigative intuition" led him to believe it was the murder weapon because it was compatible with the wound as it had been described to him. With gloved hands, he placed the knife in a new police envelope, taped it shut with Scotch tape, then placed it inside a folder, he said. There were smaller and bigger knives in the drawer, but no others were taken into evidence from the kitchen, he said. A small knife was taken into evidence from Sollecito's bedroom, along with other items.

Homicide unit captain Stefano Gubbiotti then testified later at police headquarters he took the knife out of the envelope (also while wearing gloves) and placed it in a cardboard box he had in his office before it would be sent to Rome for forensic analysis.

"It was a box that had come with my agenda calendar," Gubbiotti said when asked to describe the box further, noting that it was from the Italian designer Renato Balestra. That box was then placed in another box for transport to Rome." (Andrea Vogt, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 28 February 2009).



Interesting that there was a strong smell of bleach. That is waaaay too much bleach for normal cleaning purposes. From a professional restaurant and caterer's site re cleaning knives; "Your bleach water should be a 1:100 part solution. If your can smell the bleach, it's at a toxic level. A rule of one capful of bleach per one gallon of water is an easy way to prevent poising yourself or your customer. If you use a sanitation solution, you should also have test strips available to make sure the solution is used properly and effectively."

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline martin


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:28 pm

Posts: 362

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

bucketoftea wrote:
I think you're right, Martin. He has an especial devotion to Padre Pio, doesn't he?


Sorry, bucketoftea, I meant RG - he has nothing to loose - nobody offered him bokk deals, he has no caring family in Italy, he has no friends in high places
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

LOL I also see this in RG. I think it may depend upon his prison "experience".
Top Profile 

Offline Leodmaeg


User avatar


Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 4:18 pm

Posts: 30

Location: England

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Oh dear. An article in the Daily Mail about the Perugia/Seattle twinning thing, while most of the comments appear to understand the case, has nevertheless attracted a few FOA nutjobs.

Look at this stupid comment made James, London at 15.40

Quote:
Do you really believe she tried to blame an innocent person? I just can't believe that the girl is conniving and clever enough to carry out a brutal murder without leaving any convincing DNA, but then stupid enough to try to blame an innocent man who she knows for an absolute fact had an alibi that night- she knew Lumumba was working at his bar on the night of the murder because he'd told her not to come in to work. He was perhaps the one person in the entire world whose whereabouts that night she could be sure of and yet she still tries to fit him of all people up? I think it's more likely that the police found the text from Lumumba on her phone and her response 'See you later', and they put it to her that he was involved. Then after hours of questioning with no legal representation, no translator, no food, no drink, no loo breaks, and on a bit of a cannabis comedown, she pretty much says, 'Yeah, why not'. Just a different perspective.


Follow this link to read: http://bit.ly/6QgyiW
Top Profile 

Offline martin


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:28 pm

Posts: 362

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Just a few thoughts about a knife attack: Last year, a former WAA Worldchampion in the
superwelterweight class has been stabbed to death by a chechen asylum seeker. The champ sometimes came to our gym and I once had the honor to spar with him a few rounds ( i think you can imagine how my face looked after the sparring). It was later released to the press that the chechen came to the champ's bar (located in a bad neighborhood), had some drinks and started an argument about boxing. When the champ told him that professional boxing requires not only aggressiveness but also a heart, he unexpectedly pulled a knife and stabbed him several times. If a former worldchampion is not able to defend himself against an unexpected knife attack, how should poor merdith have fought off the attack of 3 people?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline ttrroonniicc


Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:12 pm

Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

martin wrote:
Just a few thoughts about a knife attack: Last year, a former WAA Worldchampion in the
superwelterweight class has been stabbed to death by a chechen asylum seeker. The champ sometimes came to our gym and I once had the honor to spar with him a few rounds ( i think you can imagine how my face looked after the sparring). It was later released to the press that the chechen came to the champ's bar (located in a bad neighborhood), had some drinks and started an argument about boxing. When the champ told him that professional boxing requires not only aggressiveness but also a heart, he unexpectedly pulled a knife and stabbed him several times. If a former worldchampion is not able to defend himself against an unexpected knife attack, how should poor merdith have fought off the attack of 3 people?


that's if you believe guede was involved in the attack
Top Profile 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Having watched ViaDellaPergola's excellent videos again I notice he has included the infamous 'wacky' old Amanda 'goofing' around with a machine gun at the holocaust museum image.

I have thought this for some time - would it be fair to suggest Knox did have a gap in her teeth (which was laughed off by all her supporters when a witness testified in court as such) and had some dental work done inbetween the discovery of Merediths body and her arrest?

No biggie, just a thought that's all.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Michael wrote:
The Bard wrote:
New You Tube post on the Double DNA post! Who is this masked crusader ViaDellaPergola!!! Woot!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJbYe3-5ms0



Hi Bard, thanks for the video link. It's an excellent video. I just need to make a correction, even though I hate to criticise something someone has clearly put such hard work into and the intention was to tell the truth. The knife wasn't found in a box in Raffaele's apartment, but in his kitchen draw. The reason the 'knife in the box' story came about, is that after it was bagged, the detective at the police station put it in an envelope and then put that in a shirt box he had and had it sent off to the lab in that. Unfortunately, at the time, we went through a period of not having a translator about and the Italian articles when translated by google read as though the knife had been found in a box, rather then 'dispatched' in a box. I think there also may have been a couple of media misreports at the time as well. In any case, the story got around and got etched in the 'history' of the case. Of course, this was dealt with once and for all when the detective who found the knife testified in the trial and he was quite clear, he found the knife in a drawer in the kitchen.


Hi Michael - I noticed that too, but it has been corrected by another poster in the comments section. It's just so refreshing to have some proper info out in a public arena I didn't want to criticise either. Let's hope it gets a few more views by people at large...it feels like a small victory against the Marriot Machine.

_________________


Last edited by The Bard on Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

DeathFish 2000 wrote:
Having watched ViaDellaPergola's excellent videos again I notice he has included the infamous 'wacky' old Amanda 'goofing' around with a machine gun at the holocaust museum image.

I have thought this for some time - would it be fair to suggest Knox did have a gap in her teeth (which was laughed off by all her supporters when a witness testified in court as such) and had some dental work done inbetween the discovery of Merediths body and her arrest?

No biggie, just a thought that's all.


I doubt it. Braces are the only thing that fixes gaps in teeth. Maybe she had a chunk of food stuck between her front teeth making it look like a gap.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

DeathFish 2000 wrote:
Having watched ViaDellaPergola's excellent videos again I notice he has included the infamous 'wacky' old Amanda 'goofing' around with a machine gun at the holocaust museum image.



The picture takes on new meaning knowing that Amanda thought it was hilarious that "my people killed your people" when speaking to someone that was Jewish and referencing her German heritage.

What a sick woman! She doesn't deny the holocaust, but rather thinks it's a big joke. Bigotry is usually learned at home, which again provides insight into Amanda's upbringing.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Leodmaeg wrote:
Then after hours of questioning with no legal representation, no translator, no food, no drink, no loo breaks, and on a bit of a cannabis comedown, she pretty much says, 'Yeah, why not'. Just a different perspective.


Hi Leodmaeg,

Many of the claims made by people who think Amanda Knox is innocent are completely false.

Amanda Knox made her false and malicious accusation against Diya Lumumba shortly after being informed that Sollecito admitted they had both lied and that he had stopped providing her with an alibi.

The police were not required to provide a lawyer because Knox was being questioned as a witness not a suspect. She could have requested a lawyer, but she chose not to.

Amanda Knox was provided with a translator - Anna Donnino.

Knox was given food and drinks. She admitted this at the trial.

I've never heard that Amanda Knox was denied loo breaks.

Is there even a "cannabis comedown"? I've never heard of such a thing.


Last edited by The Machine on Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

DF2K wrote:
I have thought this for some time - would it be fair to suggest Knox did have a gap in her teeth (which was laughed off by all her supporters when a witness testified in court as such) and had some dental work done inbetween the discovery of Merediths body and her arrest?


Actually, it was a mistranslation. Kokomani didn't say she had gaps in her teeth, he said she had 'broad' teeth. I personally interpreted what he meant by that was that she had straight teeth without gaps.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Jester wrote:
The picture takes on new meaning knowing that Amanda thought it was hilarious that "my people killed your people" when speaking to someone that was Jewish and referencing her German heritage.

What a sick woman! She doesn't deny the holocaust, but rather thinks it's a big joke. Bigotry is usually learned at home, which again provides insight into Amanda's upbringing.


I agree.
What sort of person 'goofs' around in such a solemn place?
Disgraceful behaviour and a true insight into the guilty person.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

DeathFish 2000 wrote:
I agree.
What sort of person 'goofs' around in such a solemn place?
Disgraceful behaviour and a true insight into the guilty person.


I visited the camp in Auschwitz many years ago, when I was 19 years old. Everyone that was there was silent. There was no joking, no one posing for pictures, no one spoke in anything more than a whisper, everyone was in shock at the horror of the place. I'm sure that anyone that saw Amanda posing for that picture was a bit sickened by her attitude and blatant identification with the perpetrators of murder.
Top Profile 

Offline ttrroonniicc


Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:12 pm

Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

DeathFish 2000 wrote:
Having watched ViaDellaPergola's excellent videos again I notice he has included the infamous 'wacky' old Amanda 'goofing' around with a machine gun at the holocaust museum image.

I have thought this for some time - would it be fair to suggest Knox did have a gap in her teeth (which was laughed off by all her supporters when a witness testified in court as such) and had some dental work done inbetween the discovery of Merediths body and her arrest?

No biggie, just a thought that's all.


in the background there - is that her 'green bag'?



Last edited by ttrroonniicc on Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Jester wrote:
DeathFish 2000 wrote:
I agree.
What sort of person 'goofs' around in such a solemn place?
Disgraceful behaviour and a true insight into the guilty person.


I visited the camp in Auschwitz many years ago, when I was 19 years old. Everyone that was there was silent. There was no joking, no one posing for pictures, no one spoke in anything more than a whisper, everyone was in shock at the horror of the place. I'm sure that anyone that saw Amanda posing for that picture was a bit sickened by her attitude and blatant identification with the perpetrators of murder.


I too have been there, I went to Poland to watch England play Poland in a world cup qualifier some years ago.
It had a profound effect on me and I felt sick most of the time afterwards, the match became secondary - but me and my pals decided we had to visit since we were there.
Again, an insight into the character of Amanda Knox to behave like she did in such a way.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.


Last edited by DeathFish 2000 on Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

ttrroonniicc wrote:
in the background there - is that her 'green bag'?


Sure is, ttrroonniicc...

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

DeathFish 2000 wrote:

I too have been there, I went to Poland to watch England play Poland in a world cup qualifier some years ago.
It had a profound effect on me and I felt sick most of the time afterwards, the match became secondary - but me and my pals decided we had to visit since we were there.
Again, an insight into the character of Amanda Knox to behave like she did in such a way.

Profound is almost an understatement, but there is no other word to describe it. I still have vivid mental images of the scenes behind the glass, the photos, the desolation, the pits. I haven't been to any of the museums, but I expect they have the same impact on those that have the capacity to understand what happened.

Amanda, unlike most Germans, appears to be proud of what the Germans did during WW2. She is a very stupid woman.
Top Profile 

Offline fine


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:00 am

Posts: 555

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

_________________


Re. the Machine Gun photo of Amanda.......note bag in the photograph.
Kokomani (paraphrased): "She then took out a big knife from her LARGE GREEN BAG, held it in front of her with both hands raising it threateningly, shouting in Italian, 'Come here, come here, I'll show you!' "

/////


Last edited by fine on Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

The Machine wrote:
Leodmaeg wrote:
Then after hours of questioning with no legal representation, no translator, no food, no drink, no loo breaks, and on a bit of a cannabis comedown, she pretty much says, 'Yeah, why not'. Just a different perspective.


Hi Leodmaeg,

Many of the claims made by people who think Amanda Knox is innocent are completely false.

Amanda Knox made her false and malicious accusation against Diya Lumumba shortly after being informed that Sollecito admitted they had both lied and that he had stopped providing her with an alibi.

The police were not required to provide a lawyer because Knox was being questioned as a witness not a suspect. She could have requested a lawyer, but she chose not to.

Amanda Knox was provided with a translator - Anna Donnino.

Knox was given food and drinks. She admitted this at the trial.

I've never heard that Amanda Knox was denied loo breaks.

Is there even a "cannabis comedown"? I've never heard of such a thing.


Please do some basic research, Leodmaeg. If Amanda Knox suffered from food, drink, or loo deprivation it could only have been self imposed, and she did have an interpreter.

In her email home on November 4, 2007 Amanda Knox does not complain about being subjected to intense and ongoing interrogations following the murder. She does complain about having to answer questions about it over and over again for acquaintances and investigators, even though Edda and Curt say she wanted to hang around because she was so eager to help out with the investigation of the murder of her good friend and roommate, Meredith Kercher.

She makes it clear in that email that she was completely fed up with helping out the investigation and wrote her email as a once-and-for-all explanation of what happened. No more questions, please - I'm tired of talking about it. Let's move on, people!

The next day, on the evening November 5th, Raffaele was called into the police station for some additional questioning. Amanda Knox did not have to go with him but went along just for the heck of it, perhaps to simply practice her yoga and cart-wheeling skills in the heated and spacious waiting room. She was not dragged out of her home into a brutal midnight questioning session by abusive police, as Paul Ciolino likes to claim.

During Raffaele's questioning a few discrepancies arose and, since Amanda Knox was already at the police station going through her workout routine, the police asked her to please come in to help clarify things. When she was presented with the discrepancies Raffaele had revealed she was obviously caught off guard and panicked; she broke down and falsely accused Patrick Lumumba within a mere 2 hours of the time that questioning session began!
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Here's a short article on Seattle's King5 regarding the postponement of the naming of Seattle's "Perugia" park. What's interesting is down in the comments. It looks as though the FOA, including one or two of our own trolls, are being called out for what they are - a small and deceitful special interest group. Amanda's friends are rapidly losing traction on the slippery slopes of public opinion.
Top Profile 

Offline bilko


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 7:25 pm

Posts: 198

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Sorry if I've missed something here, but Fly by Night seems to be chiding Leodmaeg for not doing some basic research and attributing a quote to him that he never made.

I thought that Leodmaeg was quoting a post in the Daily Mail which he had called "silly".

Chide me, if I've got it wrong ( I'm used to it ) but if not Leodmaeg deserves an apology.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline fine


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:00 am

Posts: 555

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

FlybyNight wrote:

"In her email home on November 4, 2007 Amanda Knox does not complain about being subjected to intense and ongoing interrogations following the murder. She does complain about having to answer questions about it over and over again for acquaintances and investigators, even though Edda and Curt say she wanted to hang around because she was so eager to help out with the investigation of the murder of her good friend and roommate, Meredith Kercher."

____________

And in that lengthy detailed email Amanda never mentioned her profound AMNESIA either. On the contrary, she seemed to remember everything!!!

////


Last edited by fine on Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

SomeAlibi wrote:
piktor wrote:
OUT WITH THE OLD!

oil study after Spagnoletto (1591-1652)

December 31, 2009 7:15 PM mul-)


...stunning, stunning, stunning!


IN WITH THE NEW !

mul-)

Thank you, SomeAlibi,
You stunn me!


Last edited by piktor on Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

I'm really shocked. The picture is bad enough in itself, but I didn't realise where it was. That's just terrible.
Top Profile 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Oops! Piktor, I didn't mean your gorgeous picture, but the photo of AK. So sorry if anyone interpreted it that way!
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

bilko wrote:
Sorry if I've missed something here, but Fly by Night seems to be chiding Leodmaeg for not doing some basic research and attributing a quote to him that he never made.

I thought that Leodmaeg was quoting a post in the Daily Mail which he had called "silly".

Chide me, if I've got it wrong ( I'm used to it ) but if not Leodmaeg deserves an apology.


Hi Bilko,

It's my fault. I deleted the link to the comments Leodmaeg was referring to.
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

bilko wrote:
Sorry if I've missed something here, but Fly by Night seems to be chiding Leodmaeg for not doing some basic research and attributing a quote to him that he never made.

I thought that Leodmaeg was quoting a post in the Daily Mail which he had called "silly".

Chide me, if I've got it wrong ( I'm used to it ) but if not Leodmaeg deserves an apology.


Sorry, I was quoting a quote. My apologies, but I did want to make the strong point that Paul Ciolino, Anne Bremner, and the rest of the FOA can't have it both ways. They can't say that Amanda Knox wanted to eagerly stay in Perugia to help out with the investigation by answering questions, and then use those same 4 days worth of hours spent innocently "helping out" the investigation in their calculations for claims of lengthy and brutal interrogations. That's where the FOA gets those "40 hours of interrogation" numbers, by the way; it's a fine example of their deceitful methods for twisting the facts.

All apologies to Leodmaeg, and good catch Sarg!
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

modest_ex wrote:
bucketoftea wrote:
A lot of us struggle with the premeditation. A lot like the authorities struggle to interpret what happenend. For all the denial and accusing coming from FOAK, I think the sex-game-gone-wrong was the kindest interpretation of evidence and the one of taking a big kitchen knife to scare someone is somehow weirder and worse.
(deliberately scaring someone badly). It is a puzzle, but I can't buy the sex game either.


I struggle with the premeditation, I struggle with the sex game gone wrong theory, I think harder drugs than pot were probably involved, and I deeply struggle with the role Guede played in the whole thing. If it wasn't for the DNA evidence of sexual assault directly linking Guede to Meredith, I'd almost be inclined to believe parts of his story (wrong place wrong time).

I think it's possible that if (hopefully WHEN) AK and RS lose their last appeal, that RS will tell what really happened that night.




I mostly struggle with the term "game" in relation to such a horrific murder. If everything started out as a game, it would have been only for AK, RS, maybe RG- but certainly not for poor Meredith.


And, finally: Happy New Year to everyone!!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
Here's a short article on Seattle's King5 regarding the postponement of the naming of Seattle's "Perugia" park. What's interesting is down in the comments. It looks as though the FOA, including one or two of our own trolls, are being called out for what they are - a small and deceitful special interest group. Amanda's friends are rapidly losing traction on the slippery slopes of public opinion.


And now - more of the same in the comments for a Seattle Times article on the topic. Are you listening Mike James and Maria Cantwell?
Top Profile 

Offline bilko


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 7:25 pm

Posts: 198

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Fly by Night: "All apologies to Leodmaeg, and good catch Sarg!"

Easily done, with so much material and thanks for the links. It gets my blood up, the way these people try to manipulate through the media.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Leodmaeg


User avatar


Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 4:18 pm

Posts: 30

Location: England

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Thanks Bilko th-) . I was about to blow up at people accusing me of something I hadn't done until I saw your comment. I shall put a word in with Colonel Hall to get you some extra weekend leave, lol.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:56 pm   Post subject: Re: Album Dedication   

Rebel wrote:
Happy New Year to all you intrepid and talented posters!!!
band-)
To start off the new year I would like to dedicate some songs
to the cast of characters in the murder at Via della Pergola 7.
I believe I have found the perfect album for this occasion.

TALKING HEADS – STOP MAKING SENSE (SPECIAL NEW EDITION)
©1984, 1999 Sire Records Company & Talking Heads Films
David Byrne, a true genius, wrote most of the songs on this album.

Here are my nominees for each song along with snippets of the lyrics:

1. PSYCHO KILLER – The Butchers Of Perugia :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

I can't seem to face up to the facts
I'm tense and nervous and I can't relax
I can't sleep 'cause my bed's on fire
Don't touch me I'm a real live wire
Run run run run run run run away
We are vain and we are blind
I hate people when they're not polite
Psycho Killer

2. HEAVEN – Meredith Kercher, R.I.P. rip-)

[These are the complete lyrics - a touching song to listen to]

Everyone is trying to get to the bar.
The name of the bar, the bar is called Heaven.
The band in Heaven plays my favorite song.
They play it once again, they play it all night long.
Heaven is a place where nothing ever happens.
Heaven is a place where nothing ever happens.

There is a party, everyone is there.
Everyone will leave at exactly the same time.
Its hard to imagine that nothing at all
could be so exciting, and so much fun.
Heaven is a place where nothing ever happens.
Heaven is a place where nothing ever happens.

When this kiss is over it will start again.
It will not be any different, it will be exactly the same.
It's hard to imagine that nothing at all
could be so exciting, could be so much fun.
Heaven is a place where nothing every happens.
Heaven is a place where nothing every happens.

3. THANK YOU FOR SENDING ME AN ANGEL – Edda Mellas angel-)

Oh, oh, baby you can walk, you can talk just like me …
You can walk, you can talk just like me.
You can look, tell me what you see.
You can look, you won't see nothing like me
if you look around the world.

4. FOUND A JOB – Curt Knox / Edda Mellas ar-))

We've heard this little scene, we've heard it many times.
People fighting over little things and wasting precious time.
They might be better off ... I think ... the way it seems to me.
Making up their own shows, which might be better than T.V.

They've enlisted all their family.
They've enlisted all their friends.
It helped saved their relationship,
And made it work again ...

Inventing situations, putting them on T.V.

5. SLIPPERY PEOPLE – Friends Of Amanda surp-)

Help us loose [sic] our minds
These slippery people
help us understand
They were living creatures
Watch 'em come to life
Right before your eyes
Backsliding!
How do you do?
These slippery people
Gonna see you through

6. BURNING DOWN THE HOUSE – to all the banned posters here, esp. pyromaniac m-))

Here's your ticket pack your bag: time for jumpin' overboard
The transportation is here
Close enough but not too far,
Maybe you know where you are
Fightin' fire with fire

7. LIFE DURING WARTIME – Douglas Preston gang-)

Heard of some gravesites, out by the highway,
a place where nobody knows
The sound of gunfire, off in the distance,
I'm getting used to it now

8. MAKING FLIPPY FLOPPY – Donald Trump d-))

Don't believe what you read
We have great big bodies
We got great big heads

9. SWAMP – Frank Sfarzo sun-)

Now lemme tell you a story
The devil he has a plan
How many people do you think I am
Pretend I am somebody else
You can pretend I'm an old millionaire
A millionaire washing his hands

Rattle the bones, dreams that stick out
A medical chart on the wall
Soft violence and hands touch your throat
Ev'ryone wants to explode

And when your hands get dirty
Nobody knows you at all
Don't have a window to slip out of
Lights on, nobody home
Click click - see ya later
Beta beta - no time to rest
Pika pika - risky business
All that blood, will never cover that mess

10. WHAT A DAY THAT WAS – Giuliano Mignini :shock:

And on the first day, we had everything we could stand …
Ooh who could’ve asked for more?

Well I'm going right through
And the light came down
Well they're roundin' 'em up
from all over town
They're movin' forward and backwards
They're movin' backwards and front
Moving in every direction

And if you feel like you're in a whirlpool
You feel like going home
You feel like talking to someone
Who know the difference between right and wrong

11. THIS MUST BE THE PLACE – Amanda Knox bu-)

Home is where I want to be
Pick me up and turn me round
I feel numb - born with a weak heart
I guess I must be having fun
The less we say about it the better
Make it up as we go along
Feet on the ground
Head in the sky
It's ok I know nothing's wrong . . nothing

Cover up the blank spots
Hit me on the head Ah ooh pf-))

12. ONCE IN A LIFETIME – Francesco Sollecito dis-))

And you may find yourself in a beautiful house, with a beautiful wife
And you may ask yourself - Well...How did I get here?
Into the blue again / after the money's gone
Once in a lifetime / water flowing underground

13. GENIUS OF LOVE – Amanda Knox c-))

What you gonna do when you get out of jail?
Im gonna have some fun
Time isn’t present in that dimension
When were walkin, rolling and rocking
The way he’d hold me in his warm arms
We went insane when we took cocaine

14. GIRLFRIEND IS BETTER – Raffaele Sollecito nin-)

We're being taken for a ride again
I got a girlfriend that's better than that
She has the smoke in her eyes

Now everyone's getting involved
She's moving up going right through my heart
We might not ever get caught
Going right through (try to stay cool) going through, staying cool
I got a girlfriend that's better than that
And nothing is better than you

I got a girlfriend thats better that this
And you don't remember at all
As we get older and stop making sense
You won't find her waiting long
Stop making sense, stop making sense...stop making sense, making sense
I got a girlfriend that's better than that
And nothing is better that this
( is it? )

15. TAKE ME TO THE RIVER – Chris Mellas hb-))

I don't know why I love you like I do
All the troubles you put me through
Sixteen candles there on my wall
And here am I the biggest fool of them all
Take me to the river and drop me in the water

16. CROSSEYED AND PAINLESS – Rudy Guede co-))

Sharp as a knife / Facts cut a hole in us
Facts don't do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape
I'm still waiting...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I had way too much fun crafting this little bit of "monkey" business. co-)
Hope you enjoy! Robert (aka Rebel)



Rebel, you can't have known what a huge Talking Heads fan your humble co-mod SB is! Here in Seattle, my wonderful husband and I have made a couple of "Perugia Shock" CDs, and the TH figure prominently, for reasons you have set forth so brilliantly.

Happy New Year, everyone.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 9:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

This Ryan Adams song made our Perugia Shock CD:

"To Be Young (Is To Be Sad, Is To Be High)"

Young boy you done me bad I went and did ya wrong
Young boy you done me bad I went and did ya wrong
Then I got high Lord I got high and I got a bone to pick with you

And I'm sure you know its true

Oh one day when you're looking back
You were young and man you were sad
When you're young you get sad
When your young you get sad then you get high

Oh man
Young gal you done me bad and I went and did ya wrong
Young gal you done me bad so I went and did ya wrong
Then I got high
Lord I got high

Now you got a bone to pick with me but I wish you'd let me be
Oh one day when you're looking back
You were young and man you were sad
When you're young you get sad
When your young you get sad then you get high

You get high
Oh the days the rain would fall your way
Oh the days the rain would fall your way
Then you be high cause you got sad
Cause you got sad

Oh man

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 9:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Ava wrote:
I mostly struggle with the term "game" in relation to such a horrific murder. If everything started out as a game, it would have been only for AK, RS, maybe RG- but certainly not for poor Meredith.


Hi Ava,

There was no game of any description. There was a sexual assault and an exceptionally brutal murder. I wish people would stop re-editing what happened to make it more palatable. Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guede are not normal people. They are fiends.
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 9:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

The Machine wrote:
Ava wrote:
I mostly struggle with the term "game" in relation to such a horrific murder. If everything started out as a game, it would have been only for AK, RS, maybe RG- but certainly not for poor Meredith.


Hi Ava,

There was no game of any description. There was a sexual assault and an exceptionally brutal murder. I wish people would stop re-editing what happened to make it more palatable. Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guede are not normal people. They are fiends.



Hi Machine,
thank you for clarifying. Language can be so misleading and powerful, and I think it's especially important to be careful about it in this case.
Wasn't it the prosecution though (that's what I had in mind, always was a little disappointed by it) that first used that expression, or was it already a secondary interpretation/ invention by some journalist?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 9:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Ava wrote:
Wasn't it the prosecution though (that's what I had in mind, always was a little disappointed by it) that first used that expression, or was it already a secondary interpretation/ invention by some journalist?


Hi Ava,

From what I understand, Mignini believed that Sollecito got the idea for an extreme sexual experience after reading one of his Manga comics. They asked Meredith to take part, but she refused and that's when the violence started. The police and prosecutors have always made it crystal clear that Meredith had not consented to anything.

It was Amanda Knox who told Mignini that she, Sollecito and Diya Lumumba were drunk and at the cottage, and asked Meredith to join them:

“I can’t remember if my friend Meredith was there or if she came later. We were all separate,” she said.

“He (Lumumba) wanted her (Meredith).

Yes we were in the house. We were drunk. We asked her to join us.

“Diya wanted her. Raffaele and I went into another room and then I heard screams.

“Patrick and Meredith were in Meredith’s bedroom while I think I stayed in the kitchen.

“I can’t remember how long they were together in the bedroom but the only thing I can say is that at a certain point I remember hearing Meredith’s screams and I covered my ears."

It's worth noting that Knox, Sollecito and Guede were all charged with murder and not manslaughter.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 9:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!
band-) band-) band-)


Quote:
Also, TO JOOLS: is that a Labradoodle you've got as your avatar?


Hi 411,

No, is not a Labradoodle. My (avatar) dog is a cross of Maltese and Poodle a Malti-Poodle.:)

Hope you feel better soon!
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 10:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Letters in prison for Amanda and Raffaele.

The American student will resume the course of Italian.

Sollecito still upset, "Why did they sentenced me?"

PERUGIA (January 1) - Amanda Knox is "very worn out" - said defense lawyer Luciano Ghirga - and Raffaele Sollecito, "still does not understand why he was sentenced," said his father Francesco. It is a sad new year in jail in Perugia for the American student and a sad one for her former boyfriend in Terni jail, both sentenced at first-degree trial respectively to 26 and 25 years imprisonment for the murder of British student Meredith Kercher.

Amanda recently received visits from her lawyers who will come back to see her tomorrow, while Raffaele talked by telephone last Wednesday with his father and will go to visit him in prison on Monday. For the two students many letters continue to arrive in prison, even from abroad, from people who try to cheer them up. The one who visits the American student almost daily is Don Saulo Scarabattoli, chaplain of the women's section in Capanne prison. He also met with her yesterday, “as well as all other prisoners,” highlights the priest. “I speak to her of great things, of the Lord," says the cleric who describes her as a person "with a strong inner energy.” Tomorrow, like every Saturday, Don Saulo will celebrate Mass in prison and Amanda as usual will be present. As well as in the film club on Tuesday, led by a religious group. "Now --said the chaplain-- we are studying the role of women in different countries and in their cultures."

Lawyer Ghirga went to visit Amanda last Wednesday and yesterday was the turn of another defender, lawyer Maria Del Grosso. At the moment --says Ghirga-- her relatives are in America, "and we try to be near her. Wednesday I found her a bit low, very exhausted. After the ruling - said the lawyer - she lost some confidence." Amanda, however - says her lawyer – is trying to respond and keeps up with all prison activities. Now she's trying to resume her course of Italian at the University of Washington. It’s a course via computer with a teacher who comes once a year. He already attended the first year but now - explains Ghirga-- there is a need to reactivate the designated computer that enables her to follow the lessons. She shares a cell with another American, who is 50 years old. Last night –says prison director Dina Di Mario-- the prisoners were given special foods, that were also able to cook themselves and be together till 22 hours.

Raffaele also wants as soon as possible to resume his studies for the degree in Virtual Reality. His father --as mentioned-- heard from him last Wednesday, "he keeps asking himself and doesn’t understand the reason for which he was sentenced. All of us - adds Francesco Sollecito – await anxiously the motivation report for which an innocent was convicted."
http://www.ilmessaggero.it/articolo.php ... E_INITALIA
Top Profile 

Offline modest_ex


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 3:29 pm

Posts: 160

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 11:07 pm   Post subject: question about the double DNA knife   

Just to reiterate, I am in no doubt that RG RS & AS were justly convicted, this is a question from my confusion, NOT trying to muddy the water or pick holes in the evidence for any reason other than clarification.

The double DNA knife was used to kill Meredith, no doubts. AK's DNA was found on the handle of the knife that had been obviously vigorously cleaned recently. This (unless I am mistaken, totally possible) is used as the foundation of the scenario that AK was responsible for the fatal blow while RG and RS held her?

Isn't it far more logical, given how thoroughly the knife was cleaned, that AK's DNA on the handle is more evidence that she was the one that cleaned the knife, than that she was holding it when it was used to kill Meredith? The cleaning would have been successful had it not been for the tiny nick in the blade that trapped Meredith's DNA - Couldn't it have been any of the three of them holding it?

Not that this makes a bit of difference to the outcome, they are all responsible, but in everything I am reading the double DNA on the knife is clearly being used as the foundation for the accepted scenario.
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 11:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

I do not think that we know what happened modest_ex. It seems to me that we never will unless one of them tells us.

The prosecution have constructed a version of the events based on what they do know for certain. It is necessarily partial because they were not there. The evidence that all three participated is strong and to me it is sufficient for conviction. I am not personally comfortable with going beyond that. However I do recognise the very, very strong desire for a coherent narrative. Many people do not seem to be able to accept the implications of the evidence alone and the uncertainties which go with that. Indeed on my other board it has been a recurrent theme that without a strong story of how and why it happened some people are just plain unable to believe it. These are not idiots. I think that we are built to make stories to explain the world to ourselves and this is reinforced all day every day by the media and literature and all of that. In court cases as portrayed we are taught to look for motive, means and opportunity. Means and opportunity make sense and are normally essential: but we put motive in there as if it had the same importance: and that does not seem to me to be true. Murder is not always (often?) explicable. We accept some motivations because we are used to them but, if you stop to think, they never really make sense. How can be be more comfortable if someone tells us X killed his wife cos she was having an affair? A moment's thought tells you that is not a reason at all: happens all the time without murder being the outcome. The only thing that makes us accept it as a motive is familiarity, I think.

We cannot make windows into people's souls and we especially cannot in extremis. We need narrative and there is very strong pressure on the prosecution in any case to give it to us: but it not truth (or it need not be). We might be a little more realistic if we could just accept that we very often have no idea about the "why" of it: and little of the "how" of it as well. But we are not made that way
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Professor Snape


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:53 pm

Posts: 247

Location: Seattle. WA

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 11:38 pm   Post subject: JUrY sEquEStrATioN - ReDdIkULuS!!   

I want to comment on the jury sequestration topic from the end of the last string because it has become such a hot topic to those silly FOAKERS. I realize not one of their theories hold water but it would not even be difficult for someone hit by the Confundus Charm to realize this sequestration talk is just a bunch of mumbo jumbo. Thanks to your link Michael -

According to G. Thomas Munsterman of the Center for Jury Studies at the National Center for State Courts:

“Sequestration has fallen so far out of favor that judges rarely bother anymore. The current thinking is that isolating a jury causes more problems than it solves. For one, it can increase juror dropouts.”

Makes sense…

“When a judge does decide to sequester a jury, it's often because there's a critical piece of inadmissible material being discussed in the press—for example, a suppressed confession. Or there may be the threat of harassment from reporters, protesters, or the defendant's criminal associates. Less frequent nowadays is a sequestration based solely on the high-profile nature of a case; such reasoning became less popular after the 1995 O.J. Simpson trial, which featured a long sequestration that some legal observers regarded as counterproductive.”

Hmmm, now this is interesting, let’s look at it –

1. Critical piece of inadmissible material? Notta one.
2. High profile? Notta in my mind. I think the only reason it has been given any real attention in the US is because of the FOAKERS PR campaign, otherwise it rates about a 4.5 on the OJ 8 killer scale.
(9 & 10 reserved for killing police officers or your favorite President)
3. Threat of harassment from defendant’s associates? Does “family” count?

Seriously – IMHO if this murder had been committed by an ugly FOAK troll it would not be receiving the press coverage it has. It is sensational but lacks even the social dynamics of the OJ trial…

“There are a few states that have mandatory sequestration laws for the most serious criminal cases. Missouri, for example, requires that juries in death-penalty cases be sequestered. But in general, the decision is left solely to the trial judge. Either the prosecution or the defense can request a sequestration, but such motions are usually denied. There are no nationwide figures on the percentage of juries that are sequestered, but it's certainly tiny.”

….let’s look at that one more time… “in general, the decision is left solely to the trial judge.”
Well, there we have it! And how many judges reviewed the mounds and layers of evidence in Italy? Close to 2 Dozen!!

Let’s face it. Life is hard when your son or daughter gets busted for murder. If it were just a matter of money Raffaele would be home free. Amanda on the other hand would be up shit creek without her paddle. Thank goodness the Italian justice system has solid ethics and the checks and balances in place that it does.

Those silly old FOAKERS just like to keep flapping their babbling jinx cursed lips in the wind tou-)
allowing the rest of us to have another good laugh and chance to prove them wrong!

_________________
"Wizard of Healing Potions and Alibis"
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 11:59 pm   Post subject: Stories and things   

Stories and narratives need to "work". They are "built", not natural parts of the world.

Why is the Italian trial supposed to be a sham? The FOAKers need to work up a story for (and so) people can understand their position (or lack of it).

Why did the perpetrators do it? Ultimately, for trivial reasons, in the wording of the Penal Code.
But that is a grown-up view of the world (not that there is anything wrong with that).





WHY

I think ttrroonniicc has come the closest to describing an understandable version of the internal dynamics of the perpetrators.

And SomeAlibi has gone some way towards describing a set of possible steps, seen from the outside, so to speak, providing a sort of “rationale” to help understand what happened.

Adding to this, and sort of halfway between the two, I think that if we are looking for what motivated people who display the immature personalities of seven-year-olds, we could benefit from looking in the basket labelled “seven-year-olds’ reasons for doing things”. Twenty-year-old minds and bodies would only make it more dangerous, not more logical.




Given that people were running around the Perugia city centre with blades, they were playing “Blade Runners versus Replicants” and someone, unfortunately, had to be the replicant that night that needed “retiring”.

In the New Year’s Eve fireworks here in Sydney, one of the movements in the firework symphony had “the haunting tenor sax solo Love Theme”* from Blade Runner as the backing soundtrack. I’m sure many people may have recognised it.


It led me to thinking about the parallels between the Perugia murder and the film.



For example:

There was, in both film and case, the thrill of mortal danger and illicit transactions.

As one study guide puts it (Blade Runner is now on the NSW HSC English syllabus):


Spurr and Cameron wrote:
The inclusion of “blade” in the title gives the sense of danger, possibly mortal, to the work, and “runner” conveys the idea of illicit transactions and of fast-paced action, which is certainly true of the film.


– Barry Spurr and Lloyd Cameron, HSC Advanced English (Pascal Press, 2009),
Module A “Comparative Study of Texts and Context”:
Elective 2 “Texts in Time”:
Frankenstein (Mary Shelley, 1817) and Blade Runner (Ridley Scott, 1982),
page 136.




Ironically, both film and case involve confused perceptions:


Spurr and Cameron wrote:
…the confusions which can occur…over who is or is not a replicant…




And there’s a double irony:


no emotion
Spurr and Cameron wrote:
Replicants, as their name indicates, replicate human beings, but are without emotion.




Lastly, when you look at the film as a constructed piece of art, there are masks involved:



Spurr and Cameron wrote:
Special Blade Runner squads have been established to kill any trespassing replicants. This is regarded not as execution, but as “retirement”. Again, the use of such euphemism is very reminiscent of such as Huxley’s Brave New World, where the discourse characteristically masks reality and truth behind some bland or pseudo-consoling phrase.




Pseudo-consoling is definitely going on in the case as well, in various ways at various levels.



Quick quiz: if it really was a charade, guess who would want to cast herself as the athletic Pris, a “basic pleasure model”? Would this have any bearing on the painted “Cat” and her companion, “Abstract Figure”, going “out” on Halloween night in Perugia (according to one version)?



On reflection, it is probably not that surprising that there are Blade Runner-like motifs and echoes. Ridley Scott’s film has had quite a strong thematic influence on manga (e.g., amongst others, Bubblegum Crisis, which is not a bad story, actually).


The Italian enthusiasm for manga, which Raffaele shared (and it was not contested in court), may have seen some manga-world metaphors and story-building techniques (and rock physics?) seep back into the real world, among the alibi-construction phases, for example. CSI would have taken care of the rest.






* [ Wikipedia ] Blade Runner: “Philip K. Dick refused an offer of $400,000 to write a novelization of the Blade Runner screenplay, saying: "[I was] told the cheapo novelization would have to appeal to the twelve-year-old audience".
Top Profile 

Offline Itchy Brother


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 11:35 pm

Posts: 423

Location: California/U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:31 am   Post subject: Re: question about the double DNA knife   

modest_ex wrote:
Isn't it far more logical, given how thoroughly the knife was cleaned, that AK's DNA on the handle is more evidence that she was the one that cleaned the knife, than that she was holding it when it was used to kill Meredith?

If I was going to do a thorough scrubbing of an object with a high concentration of bleach, I'd wear protective gloves. After all, bleach is a harsh and caustic chemical.

So I'd have to say it is more likely that AK's DNA was deposited before cleaning rather than during.
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:43 am   Post subject: Cartoons   

The recently-arrived Settimana Enigmistica ("Weekly Puzzler"), no 4046, 10 October 2009, has some apposite cartoons:





Re all the horse-trading going on in/by/for the media:

Press-conference lawyer: "My client is ready to fight for his rights: TV, film, books..."




Re: How long not-very-many thousand $ would last a girl on an overseas trip,
and who happens to meet a rich doctor's son:

Woman 1 to woman 2: "He's got everything that I've always looked for in a man: lots of money and little brains."


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:43 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

OT OT

picktor, do you have a website? Would love to look at some more of your beautiful artwork.

As for Amanda holding the knife to scrub it/DNA positioning etc - I think this is a very good point indeed. I imagine that the handle of the knife was scrubbed with bleach as well as the blade. No question. However I agree with Fiona that we will never know for sure and just have to do what we can to make the pieces fit when we can. Anyone who has looked at the DNA profile match on the new You Tube post has to agree that the match is uncanny. Meredith's DNA was there without a shadow of a doubt in my mind. The rest is academic in the sense that there is enough other DNA evidence to place the perps at the scene, so who held the knife is of less importance to me. They were all involved, they are all lying and they all either killed Meredith or allowed her to die. To me this is a life sentence. Unless they speak they are all equally culpable. I think they must have all been fully involved or they would not be keeping their silence now. JMO

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:45 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Quote:
The double DNA knife was used to kill Meredith, no doubts. AK's DNA was found on the handle of the knife that had been obviously vigorously cleaned recently. This (unless I am mistaken, totally possible) is used as the foundation of the scenario that AK was responsible for the fatal blow while RG and RS held her?


My impression is that the knife was a weak evidence in court, scarcely related to the dynamic of the murder, above all I am very doubtful that this weapon was actually used to stab Meredith. I think the importance of this piece of evidence is the oddity of the presence of Amanda and Meredith's DNA alone on a clean and very peculiar object in Sollecito's apartment, and the fact that is just consistent with a lot of other unrelated evidence. Meredith's DNA on the blade on a knife bearing only Amanda's traces suggests a contact between Amanda and Meredith, but does not qualify the role of the knife.

This was to say how I think the knife was not the founding element of the evidence set nor of the scenario. The scenario in which Amanda is responsible for the fatal wound comes from other and maybe rather graphic considerations. Rudy does not have a sufficient number of hands to hold the victim's hands and attempt a strangulation while holding a knife at the same time, even less to grab the victim's hair as forensics showed. But also the fact that Raffaele seems to have a lesser physical envolvement in the action, maily because of the absence of his DNA (except on those items that are belived to have been touched only after the victim's death). Amanda's DNA traces, if in small amount near the victim's DNA would be undetectable, because there is no Y aplotype to highlight them. Judge Micheli suspects the presence of other DNA pofiles on the purse, and other experts detected a second female DNA profile on some mixed traces.

Anyway the assault dynamic is merely intended to be a likely reconstruction to indicat what is possible, not the truth. The scenario is still quite a weak part in the evidence set and not the basis for the incrimination.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:54 am   Post subject: Re: question about the double DNA knife   

Hi modest_ex,

I believe that Amanda Knox inflicted the fatal blow with the double DNA knife for a number of reasons. Please warned be that some of the information below is graphic.

If Amanda Knox is the one who cleaned the double DNA knife so vigorously, this surely indicates she is the one who would be implicated by the physical traces that were on the knife.

Knox and Sollecito made no attempt to remove the physical traces of Guede from the cottage. Judge Paolo Micheli believed they were trying to point the finger at Guede. Why would they clean the knife if Guede's DNA was on the handle? It makes no sense when you consider that they didn't clean up his bloody footprint in Meredith's room or flush his faeces in the toilet.

The double DNA knife was taken from Sollecito's apartment. There is no evidence that Guede had ever been to Sollecito's apartment. The knife must have been taken to the cottage by Knox or Sollecito. I believe that Knox took the knife because Sollecito always carried a knife on him.

Hekuran Kokomani's testimony is worth noting. He claimed that Knox and Sollecito both had knives. He made this claim before there was any real mention that two knives were used in the attack on Meredith, which is significant.

There is no evidence that Guede used one of the two knives. Sollecito must have used one of the knives because his DNA was found on the bra clasp close to where the bra strap had been cut with the knife.

The Violent Crimes Unit analysed the crime scene and studied the autopsy reports. They concluded that Guede sexually assaulted Meredith whilst Sollecito restrained her and Knox wielded the double DNA knife. This has to be the most likely scenario.

Meredith was almost certainly being restrained when the fatal blow was inflicted. There was was bruising on Meredith's right forearm and elbow and almost no blood on Meredith's right hand. I don't think Amanda Knox was strong enough to be able to restrain Meredith or strangle her with such force that the hyoid bone in her neck broke. The Violent Crimes Unit believe that Guede and Sollecito were the ones who were holding Meredith.

The person who inflicted the fatal blow must have had a deep, twisted hatred of Meredith. I don't think Sollecito or Guede had such a vicious hatred of Meredith. The most likely person is Knox. She is the one who lived with Meredith. There was friction between the two of them.

Diya Lumumba's text message to Knox at 8.19pm, informing her that she wasn't required at Le Chic seems to have been the catalyst for the terrible events that night. Knox replied to him and turned off her mobile phone shortly afterwards. I suspect the double DNA knife was taken from Sollecito's shortly after Diya Lumumba's text message.

Amanda Knox is the connective tissue between Sollecito and Guede. Judge Paolo Micheli believes that Knox let Sollecito and Guede into the cottage. Knox is the main protagonist; the driving force. I think the three of them had different motives. Guede had a sexual interest in Meredith, Sollecito wanted to have an extreme experience with knives and Knox wanted to inflict as much pain and suffering on Meredith as was humanly possible.

The prosecution believe Guede's story about staying behind after Meredith had been stabbed in attempt to save her with the towels. I don't think he would have done this if he had stabbed Meredith.

I believe Amanda Knox's reactions after the murder indicate that she was the one who inflicted the fatal wound. Hitting herself violently on the head suggests she was filled with self-loathing or anger at herself. The shaking fits indicate the she was overwhelmed by the horror of what she had done.

Amanda Knox is the only one of the three who has admitted that she was involved in Meredith's murder. Sollecito wrote that Amanda Knox was the main reason why he was in prison.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:08 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Fiona wrote:
I think that we are built to make stories to explain the world to ourselves and this is reinforced all day every day by the media and literature and all of that. In court cases as portrayed we are taught to look for motive, means and opportunity. Means and opportunity make sense and are normally essential: but we put motive in there as if it had the same importance: and that does not seem to me to be true. Murder is not always (often?) explicable.


Hi Fiona,

Pete and I have discussed the case in depth with several lawyers. One of things I was told is Agatha Christie came up with the idea of means, motive and opportunity. The most important thing is the evidence. The prosecution don't have to prove motive. Sometimes the police and prosecution never discover what the motive was behind a murder. Some people kill for the most banal or trivial reasons: they were in a bad mood, they felt like it, they felt disrespected or somebody looked at them in a funny way
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:23 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Yes, The Machine: that is what I was trying to say. But the demand for a narrative is strong and the prosecution do try to provide one because of that demand: and because they, too, are human :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:30 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

In his prison cell, does Raffaele dream of electric sheep?

Couldn't resist that one...

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:49 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

DeathFish 2000 wrote:
In his prison cell, does Raffaele dream of electric sheep?

Couldn't resist that one...



SA places an origami unicorn on this thread...

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Patzu


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:10 pm

Posts: 158

Highscores: 1

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:03 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

There are a lot of questions about what the motivation for the murder could be. AK is a film fan and thinks of herself as Amelie, but could other films shed an insight into what might have happened. For instance could AK and RS have offered MK to RG in exchange for drugs like in the film Requiem for a Dream. Here is my take on it through film.

The Plot
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKJpWfSHEs4

The Murder
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCZ9TguVOIA

Payback and Immortality
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5d4f1nyLgg

That RS wouldn’t hurt a fly clip from Psycho got me thinking.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Earthling


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:25 pm

Posts: 512

Location: USA

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:08 am   Post subject: Re: question about the double DNA knife   

modest_ex wrote:
Just to reiterate, I am in no doubt that RG RS & AS were justly convicted, this is a question from my confusion, NOT trying to muddy the water or pick holes in the evidence for any reason other than clarification.

The double DNA knife was used to kill Meredith, no doubts. AK's DNA was found on the handle of the knife that had been obviously vigorously cleaned recently. This (unless I am mistaken, totally possible) is used as the foundation of the scenario that AK was responsible for the fatal blow while RG and RS held her?

Isn't it far more logical, given how thoroughly the knife was cleaned, that AK's DNA on the handle is more evidence that she was the one that cleaned the knife, than that she was holding it when it was used to kill Meredith? The cleaning would have been successful had it not been for the tiny nick in the blade that trapped Meredith's DNA - Couldn't it have been any of the three of them holding it?

Not that this makes a bit of difference to the outcome, they are all responsible, but in everything I am reading the double DNA on the knife is clearly being used as the foundation for the accepted scenario.

Hi modest_ex... By the way, I really enjoyed your first post to the group... Good surmising on motive....

Initially, I too questioned whether it might be possible that Amanda just cleaned the kitchen (double-DNA) knife. However, certain other evidence has led me to believe that although Amanda probably DID clean the knife, she probably also was the one who wielded it as well.

First, Kokomani, the Albanian outside the cottage that night, testified that he SAW Amanda wielding a knife matching the double-DNA knife's description. He said she took it out of her green bag and brandished it at him.

Also, didn't Patrizia Stefanoni testify that Amanda's DNA was found on the handle in a spot corresponding to a certain "overhand" way of holding a knife that would possibly be used to stab someone, rather than the "regular way" one holds a knife for chopping, etc.? I thought I had read that. I'd appreciate it if someone could point me to the link to support that, as I'm not sure I saw any of the primary evidence on that. I just saw someone say that she had said that. sh-))

If that is true, that would indicate it's more than likely that Amanda was holding the knife at some point, as a weapon-like manner, as opposed to a manner for cooking, chopping, or just cleaning the knife.

This would be corroborated by Kokomani's testimony that Amanda was holding the knife with both hands in an "overhand" fashion, pointing downward.

Also (and this is just speculation on my part because I'm not a DNA expert): it would seem to me that if one is holding a knife very tightly and using it to stab someone, it is possible that DNA might get "embedded" in certain minuscule cracks or crevices in the plastic handle (I assume it was plastic, not wood). Then the DNA in those crevices might be a LOT harder to clean out; just as Meredith's DNA only showed up inside a little scratch or crevice on the blade. Just total speculation on my part, but I think it MIGHT make sense.

I'd really love to see Stefanoni's testimony on the DNA on that knife. Can anyone direct me to the discussion on this board, or on some other site (TJMK?), of the SPECIFIC DNA testimony on the double-DNA knife? Are there any English translations anywhere (even partial) of Stefanoni's testimony on that?

By the way, I believe this testimony was around May 22nd. Also, can anyone direct me to that recent posting of the dates of the various testimonies? Mucho gracias.

------

Lastly but not leastly, I'd like to say HAPPY NEW YEAR to all here at PMF, TJMK, MissRep blog, and all other sites working on this case for so long.

Your work for justice for Meredith Kercher has totally inspired me. I'm sort of a newbie here. When I go back and read posts from last May or even last January, and I imagine all the heck you've been through in the past year or two with this case, and yet you keep working for justice for Meredith and her family, I am even more inspired!!!

An especial THANK YOU to the wonderful Italian to English translators here. None of this would be possible without YOU!!!! You're ANGELS!!!!

Peace, Health and Happiness to ALL in the New Year!!! th-) Yay-) tt-) dm-) b-(( pp-( wor-))

And RIP, Meredith Kercher..... r-((
Top Profile 

Offline Greggy


User avatar


Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 11:10 pm

Posts: 208

Location: Southern USA

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:18 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

SomeAlibi wrote:
DeathFish 2000 wrote:
In his prison cell, does Raffaele dream of electric sheep?

Couldn't resist that one...



SA places an origami unicorn on this thread...



"It's too bad he won't live! But then again who does."

They better keep an eye on the boy, now that he is starting to realize the years in prison will be long and hard.
I can see someone with a knife fetish liking the oozing sight of blood, even their own.
Amanda won't believe his apology.
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:02 am   Post subject: The Unstoppable Machine Dreams   

He doesn't believe her either.


The unicorn and dreams belong to the other person:

In his letter addressed to his father, written from prison, he copies her brain-thinking style into his brain:

Raffaele wrote:
“This experience has at least one bright outcome. I’m spending time in prison trying to talk to doctors, psychologists, educators and guards, trying to understand what could have happened that night and with the absolute certainty of not having done anything bad. I’m trying to understand what Amanda’s role in this case was. The Amanda that I knew is an Amanda that lives life con leggerezza (“lightly; not seriously”). Her only thought is for looking for the pleasure in each moment. But from this, to being able to imagine that she is a killer , is an impossible ask. I’ve read her memoriale. Some things that she recounts are not true. But I don’t know why she says them. For example, it wasn’t that night that we had the shower together. I’m aware that if we’ve ended up in prison, it’s my fault, because of my leggerezza regarding the facts of that night. And also due to the fact that we smoked a ton of joints (parecchi spinelli) and I’m very sorry. I listen and think, intensely think about everything that has happened to me and surrounds me, my brain now seems an unstoppable machine that is trying to rejoin the pieces and to imagine. I’ll stop [now] so as to not go mad and think [instead] about my friends who are on the outside.

[ Corriere della sera ] Alessandro Capponi and Fiorenza Sarzanini, 24 November 2007, quoted in WildGreta’s blog



And he doesn’t do her any favours, either, about the truth of her statements.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:33 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Thanks for that Catnip. I have found myself wondering about young Raffaele recently, more and more. He has escaped so much by flying under the radar it seems. Not testifying - how can he justify that? Keeping silent about the events of that night has allowed him a degree of anonymity that will be useful to him in the court of public opinion I think. Now the slight volte face toward Amanda. Interesting to watch this one develop. Papa Sollecito understands the wisdom of silence it seems. No fool. He knew his youngest was not the brightest...

Just musing. It irks me that Raff has been such a coward throughout. At least Amanda has the guts to testify, even if it was a load of lies. It still took some gumption. No, Raff's a strange fish. No emotion looking at photos of injuries. No emotional melt downs/shaking/hitting himself...he's a cool customer I think. And maybe, just maybe, cleverer than he's been given credit for...

Is he planning his next move I wonder...

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline Greggy


User avatar


Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 11:10 pm

Posts: 208

Location: Southern USA

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 4:20 am   Post subject: Re: The Unstoppable Machine Dreams   

Catnip wrote:
He doesn't believe her either.


The unicorn and dreams belong to the other person:

In his letter addressed to his father, written from prison, he copies her brain-thinking style into his brain:

Raffaele wrote:
“This experience has at least one bright outcome. I’m spending time in prison trying to talk to doctors, psychologists, educators and guards, trying to understand what could have happened that night and with the absolute certainty of not having done anything bad. I’m trying to understand what Amanda’s role in this case was. The Amanda that I knew is an Amanda that lives life con leggerezza (“lightly; not seriously”). Her only thought is for looking for the pleasure in each moment. But from this, to being able to imagine that she is a killer , is an impossible ask. I’ve read her memoriale. Some things that she recounts are not true. But I don’t know why she says them. For example, it wasn’t that night that we had the shower together. I’m aware that if we’ve ended up in prison, it’s my fault, because of my leggerezza regarding the facts of that night. And also due to the fact that we smoked a ton of joints (parecchi spinelli) and I’m very sorry. I listen and think, intensely think about everything that has happened to me and surrounds me, my brain now seems an unstoppable machine that is trying to rejoin the pieces and to imagine. I’ll stop [now] so as to not go mad and think [instead] about my friends who are on the outside.

[ Corriere della sera ] Alessandro Capponi and Fiorenza Sarzanini, 24 November 2007, quoted in WildGreta’s blog



And he doesn’t do her any favours, either, about the truth of her statements.



I think you may be right, Catnip

Neither one of them believes each other.
Neither one of them knows what's true anymore.
It's like their memories of that night have been programed the way a replicant's memories are programed.
What this hypothesis unfortunately implies is that neither the Kerchers nor any of us criminalists will ever know what really happened that night.
We will only be able to watch the unicorn swaying in their dream.
Top Profile 

Offline Brogan


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:41 am

Posts: 306

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:02 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

DeathFish 2000 wrote:
In his prison cell, does Raffaele dream of electric sheep?

Couldn't resist that one...


Given Raff's choice of internet grot I don't think the sheep would be electric.

and just to go with the Phillip K Dick theme

Do you think he will eventually Remember it for us wholesale.
Top Profile 

Offline bilko


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 7:25 pm

Posts: 198

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:44 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Reading one of the comments sections in a Seattle paper, I see that a line of defence for Ms. Knox is that she didn't phone the police because she was covering for her other flat mates.

Quote: "If you were sharing a house with two ''legal secretaries'' who profess to be your ''friends,'' but who you know consort with drug dealers like Giacomo and do illegal things like smoke marijuanna which might be in their rooms right at this moment, yes you would hold up on calling the police for fear that you drop your ''friends'' in it, not to mention lose them their jobs.

It wasn't till later that Amanda found out that ''friends'' in Italy don't give a monkeys about your loyalty to them, tell little tales about scratches on you to the police, and fail to warn you that you, like they have, should get a lawyer when the fan is....."

I have not heard this ingenious defence before. Why was it not used in court? Surely such loyalty would have elevated her to sainthood by now and the Italian economy would have been brought to a standstill as the fury of Amanda overs everywhere was unleashed.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:08 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Earthing wrote:
I'd really love to see Stefanoni's testimony on the DNA on that knife. Can anyone direct me to the discussion on this board, or on some other site (TJMK?), of the SPECIFIC DNA testimony on the double-DNA knife? Are there any English translations anywhere (even partial) of Stefanoni's testimony on that?


Hi Earthling. Stefanoni's testimony begins on the 22nd May and she also testifies on the 23rd. The first articles regarding her testimony and subsequent board discussion on it begins from about this post here: viewtopic.php?p=11080#p11080

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:14 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

There seems to be a good bit if debate in Seattle about this park not being renamed in Perugia's honour:


No 'Perugia Park' in Seattle, for now
The name for a new Seattle park has been postponed because it's the name of the Italian city where West Seattle's Amanda Knox was convicted last month of murdering her British roommate.

By Susan Gilmore

Seattle Times staff reporter

THE SEATTLE TIMES



Poll asks: What should Seattle name its new park, formerly Perugia Park?
January 1, 12:14 PM Spokane Elections 2010 Examiner Bill Edelblute

EXAMINER

(Poll)



More on Trump, a rather Amandaphile piece:

Amanda Knox update: Billionaire support, convicts hair falling out (video)
January 1, 4:36 PM Memphis Headlines Examiner Nicole Merkle

EXAMINER

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline flowers


Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 1:40 pm

Posts: 57

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

rebel's talking heads post made me give a little chuckle of self-recognition yesterday - thought i was the only one to apply this whole sorry story to the music i listen to! for me, the song that always makes me think of this case is 'the noose' by a perfect circle. it all seems creepily appropriate...


"Recall the deeds as if they're all
someone else's atrocious stories
Now you stand reborn before us all
So glad to see you well

And not to pull your halo down
Around your neck and tug you to the ground
But I'm more than just a little curious
How you're planning to go about
Making your amends to the dead

With your halo slipping down
to choke you now"

sorry if the music thing seems a little banal - i'm not trying to start an insensitive party game here or anything! but it was reassuring to realise i'm not the only one who has absorbed this story into other aspects of everyday life.

happy new year to everyone xx
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Thanks for the links, Michael. It's cheering to read so many sensible comments.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Regarding the new park in Seattle, the Perugia Mayor has also words on the matter.

From Il Secolo XIX:
Amanda divides the U.S. and Italy
Seattle, goodbye to the "Perugia Park"

There will not be a Perugia Park in Seattle: After unanimously deciding to name a new city garden by the name of Perugia, the City of Seattle has rapidly reversed on the grounds that Perugia is the city where Amanda Knox was convicted. "The decision to name a park with the name of Perugia provoked protests in the city's community in the wake of the conviction of Amanda. So the project is been temporarily closed," said the parks superintendent Tim Gallagher.

Perugia and Seattle are twin cities. The proposal to call the park arrived in Perugia City a month ago and was approved unanimously by a committee over a dozen other competitive offerings, "The hope is that it would serve to begin a process of reconciliation. A new beginning of the relations with the Italian city. But obviously for many people the wound for the conviction of Amanda was too big," said Seattle Parks Department spokeswoman Joelle Hammerstad.

Hammerstead then explained that the name of the park and the Knox case factors are completely disconnected, "But apparently there are people very angry with the city of Perugia, and we do not want to feed the flames. So we suspended the decision for the moment and we will review the case maybe later."

Amanda Knox, as noted, was sentenced to 26 years in prison in 2007 for the murder of British student Meredith Kercher.

Six other parks in Seattle have now the name of a sister city. Seattle is twinned with other 21 cities. The twinning with Perugia, which had also dedicated a park to Seattle, dates back to 1991. The park in Perugia is called Orca and has a sculpture created by Seattle artist Marvin Oliver.

Upon hearing the news, the mayor of Perugia, Wladimiro Boccali, said that he will be writing to his colleague in Seattle in connection with the incident of non-naming a park in the American city after the Umbrian city hoping that relations since 1992 between the two sister cities “should not be compromised by an event which is and should remain only judiciary.”

At present --states the mayor-- his city administration has not yet received any official notice on the suspension of the decision to name a city park in Seattle Perugia following the protests of citizens for the conviction of Amanda Knox.

"Our two communities --continues Boccali-- have noting to do with it. Certainly I have not seen any aspects of anti-Americanism in the city, nor do I believe that the judges in the process trial were motivated by other reasons than what were exclusively in the procedural pleadings."

"Among the many episodes of friendship between our two cities, the last one - remembers the mayor – is Sister Orca, a work piece by a Seattle artist, of Indian origin, donated to Perugia as a sign of friendship because the Orca is a sacred animal for these people.” The large bronze sculpture was recently placed in front of the station Minimetrò, the infrastructure is most significant of modern Perugia.

“I will write to the mayor of Seattle --concludes Boccali-- to say that the feelings of the Perugia people are unchanged, and I hope is the same with regard to the citizens of Seattle."
Secolo XIX
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

bucketoftea wrote:
Thanks for the links, Michael. It's cheering to read so many sensible comments.



Hi Bucket. I think several things are now becoming quite clear. The first, is that there is a constant drive by the FOA to keep Amanda Knox in the news on a daily basis (that is a battle the FOA appear to be winning). The second, is that a policy decision (although I think that was taken some long time ago) has been taken by the FOA to work on politicising Amanda Knox (which has had mixed success).

However, while the FOA are winning the battle on the former, they are destined to lose the war. The simple reason for that is 'over saturation'. Both the World and the local Seattle public, are getting a little tired of having to read about Amanda Knox. The local Seattle media are happy to continue pushing stories about her for the moment, but when the backlash comes that will change. Eventually, Seattleites will become exasperated and say 'enough' (some have been doing so already). That is the consequence of 'nagging' and nagging is what it has become.

The politicising effort has been mixed. It started well with Cantwell when she publicly jumped on the bandwagon, but ended badly when she had to back peddle and shut the hell up. The park naming incident is the next attempt to politicise it. I'm not a Seattle resident, so it's not for me to opine on specifics, but I will make a general comment. The politicisation of a shared municipal facility, in order to further a minority campaign should not be placed in the hands of the few with a vested interest. It infers that the city belongs to the few and is merely a tool to be used for whatever political end they see fit.

And I will add here a very skeptical direct comment. The Sister City group of Seattle is far from neutral in this affair as they claim. The parks naming committee 'suddenly' decided a month ago to consider a name for a park that doesn't actually exist (it still has be built) and had supposedly decided on naming it 'Perugia Park'. Just by coincidence, this happened to coincide with the days just before the Knox verdict came out (fantastic timing, since Seattle has been twinned with Perugia for HOW long?). Then, one month later, it's announced that Seattle is going to create a new park and is expected to name it 'Perugia Park' (I posted the link). THEN, the very NEXT day, we get the press reports that they have decided NOT to name it so, because... That shift of policy 'suddenly' took place in 24 hours?

This whole thing doesn't sound rather contrived and staged to anyone? Is it just me?

The parks committee claim they 'unanimously' decided (the lady doth protest too much) to name the park 'Perugia Park' a month ago...they are a public body, therefore that meeting should be a public record. Is it therefore possible to request the minutes of that meeting?

PS: In a later post I might tell you exactly how this went down.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Amnesty Int'l is involved? How ridiculous. I've donated to that organization! I want my donations back.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Emerald wrote:
Amnesty Int'l is involved? How ridiculous. I've donated to that organization! I want my donations back.


Hi Emerald,

I don't think Amnesty International are involved in this case. Do you have a link to any newspaper articles that claim this?
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

The Machine wrote:
Emerald wrote:
Amnesty Int'l is involved? How ridiculous. I've donated to that organization! I want my donations back.


Hi Emerald,

I don't think Amnesty International are involved in this case. Do you have a link to any newspaper articles that claim this?


The FOA have been trying to get Amnesty International involved in this case for almost two years. Amnesty have never been involved. Therefore, the FOA have gone to plan B and thrown the Amnesty International 'name' into the discussion every now and then, just so readers might get the impression they're involved. They are not.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline ttrroonniicc


Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:12 pm

Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 4:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Help Amnesty Intnl. Free Amanda Knox

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/help-a ... manda-knox

Target:
Anyone who cares about the innocent/wrongfully convicted
Sponsored by:
Jeff Dearman on behalf of Amnesty International

Help free Amanda Knox, wrongfully convicted University of Washington student, convicted by biased courts, and circumstantial evidence. There was no DNA evidence linking Knox to the crime at the case, and the media most likely influenced the jurors and the judge, not to mention the fact she was an American accused overseas. Knox was wrongfully convicted to 26 years in prison for this crime she did not commit. Lets send a petition to President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Amnesty International in support of Amanda Knox and to request they get involved in this matter to try to get her back home to Seattle. At the very least she should be allowed to serve her sentence and/or time up to appeal in U.S. jail closer to her home in Washington State. But ultimately, Ms. Knox should be freed from this crime she did not commit. Please share your comments and thoughts in support of Amanda Knox. I will hope we can deliver this petition of support to Amanda personally as well. This is a human rights issue that needs to be addressed. Help Free Amanda Knox today and get her back home to her family.

244 signatures
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 4:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Troon wrote:
Lets send a petition to President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Amnesty International in support of Amanda Knox and to request they get involved in this matter


So, clearly Amnesty International are not involved, otherwise why the need to send them a petition to get them involved? So, how can 'Jeff Dearman' be claiming to be requesting a petition on 'behalf' of Amnesty International, when they are one of the stated recipients of the petition in order to get them involved? What's going on here? I strongly suspect, Jeff Dearman is not being totally forthright here on who he is truly representing and in what capacity. He may be a member of AI, But it's clear AI itself isn't on board.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 4:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Amnesty International are not involved in the case.

Jeff Dearman wrote:

Lets send a petition to President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Amnesty International in support of Amanda Knox and to request they get involved in this matter to try to get her back home to Seattle.[/quote]

Jeff Dearman is trying to get Amnesty International involved.


Amnesty International and the American Embassy have not got involved in the case. I've been reliably informed that they have no intention of doing so.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 4:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Michael wrote:
There seems to be a good bit if debate in Seattle about this park not being renamed in Perugia's honour:


No 'Perugia Park' in Seattle, for now
The name for a new Seattle park has been postponed because it's the name of the Italian city where West Seattle's Amanda Knox was convicted last month of murdering her British roommate.

By Susan Gilmore

Seattle Times staff reporter

THE SEATTLE TIMES


Poll asks: What should Seattle name its new park, formerly Perugia Park?
January 1, 12:14 PM Spokane Elections 2010 Examiner Bill Edelblute

EXAMINER

(Poll)



More on Trump, a rather Amandaphile piece:

Amanda Knox update: Billionaire support, convicts hair falling out (video)
January 1, 4:36 PM Memphis Headlines Examiner Nicole Merkle

EXAMINER


This is another sick example of the family using the tactic of saying something enough times until people believe it is true.

"Amanda Knox was known for her long and flowing locks."

Really? I thought Amanda Knox was known for her participation in the murder of Meredith Kercher. I thought she was known for her lying, false accusations, cartwheels in the police station, fake pot-induced memory loss, expectation that as an American she should be able to do whatever she wants, and her reputation as a convicted murderer.

I didn't know Knox had long, flowing locks, but there's a song in there somewhere about foxy knoxy with the flowing locksy. If Trump is that concerned about Amanda's hair loss, he can share his comb-over secrets with her.
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 4:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

The Machine wrote:
Ava wrote:
Wasn't it the prosecution though (that's what I had in mind, always was a little disappointed by it) that first used that expression, or was it already a secondary interpretation/ invention by some journalist?


Hi Ava,

From what I understand, Mignini believed that Sollecito got the idea for an extreme sexual experience after reading one of his Manga comics. They asked Meredith to take part, but she refused and that's when the violence started. The police and prosecutors have always made it crystal clear that Meredith had not consented to anything.

It was Amanda Knox who told Mignini that she, Sollecito and Diya Lumumba were drunk and at the cottage, and asked Meredith to join them:

“I can’t remember if my friend Meredith was there or if she came later. We were all separate,” she said.

“He (Lumumba) wanted her (Meredith).

Yes we were in the house. We were drunk. We asked her to join us.

“Diya wanted her. Raffaele and I went into another room and then I heard screams.

“Patrick and Meredith were in Meredith’s bedroom while I think I stayed in the kitchen.

“I can’t remember how long they were together in the bedroom but the only thing I can say is that at a certain point I remember hearing Meredith’s screams and I covered my ears."

It's worth noting that Knox, Sollecito and Guede were all charged with murder and not manslaughter.



Thanks for the details, Machine.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:02 pm   Post subject: Re: A dish on the side   

Catnip wrote:
DANCING WITH AN HONORARY CHEF’S ASSISTANT

In Australia, if you’re invited to a party, you may sometimes be asked “to being a plate”. For newcomers to the country, this is sometimes interpreted literally, and they turn up on the doorstep with a plate, as opposed to “a plate of food”, which is the original intention of the request (to help the hostess of the party out).

Likewise, sometimes people come to a discussion forum table carrying an empty plate, or no plate at all.



SomeAlibi wrote:
I spent a quiet hour or so at a dead workplace today having a look back at the 370-odd posts of Lancelotti.
… There's a little lip service to being 'more neutral' (than other posters) early on…
… There's no evaluation, a total absence of scepticism about anything, just rote challenging time and time again. …
… it's reading the posts in order that really gives you a sense of the scale of work being put [into] it. …

– Thu 31 Dec, [ link ]


quote Catnip:
The response pattern of posts is also diagnostic (who is deigned with a response, who is ignored), and so is the trigger event initiating a post.
I get ignored so completely, I’m beginning to agree with the barrister (Burnside) who said that English needs a noun version of the verb “to ignore” to fit into this phrase: “she treated him with contempt and ignore”. That would be really handy. ;)



Hi Catnip,
do you mean that really? As for me, I love your posts. They are just so rich that it takes me a while to digest and I have nothing to answer immediately, or if I do I have to log out already...(and now I can't even get a smiley posted, so: *smile*).


Last edited by Ava on Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:11 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

"not to mention the fact she was an American accused overseas"

I'm sorry?
Could you explain exactly what you mean here, err... Jeff?


At the end of the day it's as Michael has pointed out.
They have to keep Knox in the public eye, they have to keep the momentum going.
The court of public opinion is very fickle.
People move on.
They dont want to lose the media interest - even if it means a story appearing that Amanda Knox has been to the hairdressers in the prison.
I mean really, big deal...
It is a battle that they will ultimately lose, judging by the facts of the case and their losing strategy so far.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.


Last edited by DeathFish 2000 on Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:15 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Kip


Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:30 pm

Posts: 7

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:07 pm   Post subject: Re: The Unstoppable Machine Dreams   

Catnip wrote:
He doesn't believe her either.


The unicorn and dreams belong to the other person:

In his letter addressed to his father, written from prison, he copies her brain-thinking style into his brain:

Raffaele wrote:
“This experience has at least one bright outcome. I’m spending time in prison trying to talk to doctors, psychologists, educators and guards, trying to understand what could have happened that night and with the absolute certainty of not having done anything bad. I’m trying to understand what Amanda’s role in this case was. The Amanda that I knew is an Amanda that lives life con leggerezza (“lightly; not seriously”). Her only thought is for looking for the pleasure in each moment. But from this, to being able to imagine that she is a killer , is an impossible ask. I’ve read her memoriale. Some things that she recounts are not true. But I don’t know why she says them. For example, it wasn’t that night that we had the shower together. I’m aware that if we’ve ended up in prison, it’s my fault, because of my leggerezza regarding the facts of that night. And also due to the fact that we smoked a ton of joints (parecchi spinelli) and I’m very sorry. I listen and think, intensely think about everything that has happened to me and surrounds me, my brain now seems an unstoppable machine that is trying to rejoin the pieces and to imagine. I’ll stop [now] so as to not go mad and think [instead] about my friends who are on the outside.

[ Corriere della sera ] Alessandro Capponi and Fiorenza Sarzanini, 24 November 2007, quoted in WildGreta’s blog



And he doesn’t do her any favours, either, about the truth of her statements.


What's peculiar (and unbelievable, IMO) is how both Amanda and Raffaele could be so certain of the time a particular event occurred (in his case, a shared shower), and yet apparently not able to give an accurate account of their time leading up to, and immediately following, Meredith's murder.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:21 pm   Post subject: Re: The Unstoppable Machine Dreams   

Kip wrote:
Catnip wrote:
He doesn't believe her either.


The unicorn and dreams belong to the other person:

In his letter addressed to his father, written from prison, he copies her brain-thinking style into his brain:

Raffaele wrote:
“This experience has at least one bright outcome. I’m spending time in prison trying to talk to doctors, psychologists, educators and guards, trying to understand what could have happened that night and with the absolute certainty of not having done anything bad. I’m trying to understand what Amanda’s role in this case was. The Amanda that I knew is an Amanda that lives life con leggerezza (“lightly; not seriously”). Her only thought is for looking for the pleasure in each moment. But from this, to being able to imagine that she is a killer , is an impossible ask. I’ve read her memoriale. Some things that she recounts are not true. But I don’t know why she says them. For example, it wasn’t that night that we had the shower together. I’m aware that if we’ve ended up in prison, it’s my fault, because of my leggerezza regarding the facts of that night. And also due to the fact that we smoked a ton of joints (parecchi spinelli) and I’m very sorry. I listen and think, intensely think about everything that has happened to me and surrounds me, my brain now seems an unstoppable machine that is trying to rejoin the pieces and to imagine. I’ll stop [now] so as to not go mad and think [instead] about my friends who are on the outside.

[ Corriere della sera ] Alessandro Capponi and Fiorenza Sarzanini, 24 November 2007, quoted in WildGreta’s blog



And he doesn’t do her any favours, either, about the truth of her statements.


What's peculiar (and unbelievable, IMO) is how both Amanda and Raffaele could be so certain of the time a particular event occurred (in his case, a shared shower), and yet apparently not able to give an accurate account of their time leading up to, and immediately following, Meredith's murder.


Hi Kip. Actually 'they' are not certain. Only Amanda spoke of the shower (a long one togther where Raffaele 'cleaned her ears'). Raffaele recalls no such shower. And this is part of the problem. Amanda relays a whole list of events, one that would be impossible for any 'normal' person to foget, yet Raffaele remembers 'none' of these events. Another example is Amanda stating that on the night of the murder, they sat on Raffaele's bed and had a long and deep conversation, the central core of that conversation being Raffaele's suicided mother. Now, if your mother had committed suicide, that's not a conversation you're going to forget. Raffaele not only forgets it, claiming no such conversation took place, he has also stated to media his mother never committed suicide.

It's no good as an alibi to say you were at home together and simply pass that off as being enough, at least 'some' of the details of activities you claim you did, especially memorable ones, have to match that of the other. In this case, none of them do. The devil is in the detail, especially in this case.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

It's because they are both lying Kip! Plain and simple.

So Sollecito is innocent and wasn't at the house that night?
So why remain silent at your trial if you are innocent?
It's a no brainer.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Michael wrote:
The Sister City group of Seattle is far from neutral in this affair as they claim. The parks naming committee 'suddenly' decided a month ago to consider a name for a park that doesn't actually exist (it still has be built) and had supposedly decided on naming it 'Perugia Park'. Just by coincidence, this happened to coincide with the days just before the Knox verdict came out (fantastic timing, since Seattle has been twinned with Perugia for HOW long?). Then, one month later, it's announced that Seattle is going to create a new park and is expected to name it 'Perugia Park' (I posted the link). THEN, the very NEXT day, we get the press reports that they have decided NOT to name it so, because... That shift of policy 'suddenly' took place in 24 hours?

This whole thing doesn't sound rather contrived and staged to anyone? Is it just me?


Here is a quaint half-hour 2008 video produced by Mike James on Perugia, Seattle's Sister City. The Seattle-Perugia Sister City Association is not Neutral? Well, Mike James was a long-time nightly news anchor for Seattle television station King 5 and Seattle television stations have a great reputation for being highly neutral, don't they? Mike James, now president of the Seattle-Perugia Sister City Association, claimed he thought the park's name wasn't going to be announced until spring and was surprised it was named this week.

From the Seattle Times article:

"We can argue these are two separate issues and the trial shouldn't define Perugia," James said. "That argument might be rational, but there is a lot of reaction against the verdict, and it's hard to separate it from the politics naming the park. I understand that."

He said a jury decision shouldn't define a city, but that's not what happened "I understand the emotion behind it," said James. "I understand my own feelings that the evidence wasn't there for the guilty verdict."


So Mike James is not only spokesperson for the Seattle-Perugia Sister City Association but he also seems to have assigned himself as Spokesperson for Seattle Opinion on the topic of the Amanda Knox conviction. Given Mike's statements above, I would not be surprised to learn that he himself participated in the drive insisting that the Seattle Parks Department postpone the naming.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
So Mike James is not only spokesperson for the Seattle-Perugia Sister City Association but he also seems to have assigned himself as Spokesperson for Seattle Opinion on the topic of the Amanda Knox conviction. Given Mike's statements above, I would not be surprised to learn that he himself participated in the drive insisting that the Seattle Parks Department postpone the naming.


Hi FBN,

Didn't Mike James join PMF, take exception to anyone who thought Amanda Knox might be guilty and then storm off in a hissy fit?

I think this is him:

search.php?author_id=267&sr=posts


Last edited by The Machine on Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Jools wrote:
From Il Secolo XIX:
Amanda divides the U.S. and Italy
Seattle, goodbye to the "Perugia Park"

...Upon hearing the news, the mayor of Perugia, Wladimiro Boccali, said that he will be writing to his colleague in Seattle in connection with the incident of non-naming a park in the American city after the Umbrian city...his city administration has not yet received any official notice on the suspension of the decision to name a city park in Seattle Perugia following the protests of citizens for the conviction of Amanda Knox. "Our two communities --continues Boccali-- have noting to do with it. Certainly I have not seen any aspects of anti-Americanism in the city, nor do I believe that the judges in the process trial were motivated by other reasons than what were exclusively in the procedural pleadings."...“I will write to the mayor of Seattle --concludes Boccali-- to say that the feelings of the Perugia people are unchanged, and I hope is the same with regard to the citizens of Seattle."


Apparently Mike James does not share Mayor Boccali's sentiments.
Top Profile 

Offline Professor Snape


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:53 pm

Posts: 247

Location: Seattle. WA

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

ttrroonniicc wrote:
Help Amnesty Intnl. Free Amanda Knox

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/help-a ... manda-knox

Target:
Anyone who cares about the innocent/wrongfully convicted
Sponsored by:
Jeff Dearman on behalf of Amnesty International

Help free Amanda Knox, wrongfully convicted University of Washington student, convicted by biased courts, and circumstantial evidence. There was no DNA evidence linking Knox to the crime at the case, and the media most likely influenced the jurors and the judge, not to mention the fact she was an American accused overseas. Knox was wrongfully convicted to 26 years in prison for this crime she did not commit. Lets send a petition to President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Amnesty International in support of Amanda Knox and to request they get involved in this matter to try to get her back home to Seattle. At the very least she should be allowed to serve her sentence and/or time up to appeal in U.S. jail closer to her home in Washington State. But ultimately, Ms. Knox should be freed from this crime she did not commit. Please share your comments and thoughts in support of Amanda Knox. I will hope we can deliver this petition of support to Amanda personally as well. This is a human rights issue that needs to be addressed. Help Free Amanda Knox today and get her back home to her family.

244 signatures
That's serving up 244 slander suits. I hope the whole bloody lot of them get fined. gang-)

_________________
"Wizard of Healing Potions and Alibis"
Top Profile 

Offline Bea


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:18 pm

Posts: 267

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

bilko wrote:
Reading one of the comments sections in a Seattle paper, I see that a line of defence for Ms. Knox is that she didn't phone the police because she was covering for her other flat mates.

Quote: "If you were sharing a house with two ''legal secretaries'' who profess to be your ''friends,'' but who you know consort with drug dealers like Giacomo and do illegal things like smoke marijuanna which might be in their rooms right at this moment, yes you would hold up on calling the police for fear that you drop your ''friends'' in it, not to mention lose them their jobs.

It wasn't till later that Amanda found out that ''friends'' in Italy don't give a monkeys about your loyalty to them, tell little tales about scratches on you to the police, and fail to warn you that you, like they have, should get a lawyer when the fan is....."

I have not heard this ingenious defence before. Why was it not used in court? Surely such loyalty would have elevated her to sainthood by now and the Italian economy would have been brought to a standstill as the fury of Amanda overs everywhere was unleashed.



Funny how that FOAKer seems to forget that Amanda's "friend" the ''legal secretary'' specifically TOLD her to call the police and that Amanda LIED to her and said she HAD called the police when they spoke for the second time. hb-))
Top Profile 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Is Jeff Dearman acting for Amnesty International? "Sponsored by:
Jeff Dearman on behalf of Amnesty International" That's what those words mean to me.

I like how he begs she be "released from the crime.." Fat chance.
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

The Machine wrote:
Fly by Night wrote:
So Mike James is not only spokesperson for the Seattle-Perugia Sister City Association but he also seems to have assigned himself as Spokesperson for Seattle Opinion on the topic of the Amanda Knox conviction. Given Mike's statements above, I would not be surprised to learn that he himself participated in the drive insisting that the Seattle Parks Department postpone the naming.


Hi FBN,

Didn't Mike James join PMF, take exception to anyone who thought Amanda Knox might be guilty and then storm off in a hissy fit?

I think this is him:

http://perugiamurderfile.org/search.php ... 7&sr=posts


That could very well be Seattle's very own Mike James. who made those postings. The writing does comes across as jounalistic.

Here's a little more background on Seattle's favorite son from the Seattle Times over 10 years ago. I like the part about doggedly following a single strand of spaghetti all the way to it's end - but what if you're following the wrong strand of spaghetti, Mike?

MIKE JAMES QUITS AS ANCHOR, CITING TV'S DISCONNECT WITH COMMUNITY.

July 13, 1999

When Mike James began work at a small Idaho radio station in the mid-1960s, he saw broadcasting as a way to better connect people with the issues that affect their communities.

But these days, James says he sees his profession straying more and more from that ideal, as local TV news coverage increasingly emphasizes breaking news over issue-oriented journalism.

So the 33-year veteran reporter and TV news anchor announced yesterday that he's leaving his position as weekend anchor for KIRO-TV. In an interview, James said he feels modern TV news is "not as engaged in the discourse of the community."

"In a game where the competition is not two or three channels, but a hundred or more, breaking events will always trump issue and political talk," he wrote in a memo to KIRO staffers.

On top of his broadcasting career, James, 58, also had a brief foray into politics, running unsuccessfully for the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate in 1994.

His last broadcast was Sunday, and his last day in the office was yesterday. He had been weekend anchor at KIRO since 1995, but has spent most of his 33-year career as a reporter and anchor at KING-TV, where his longtime co-anchor was Jean Enersen.

"Mike is a terrific journalist," Enersen said yesterday. "He's got a really great brain and a warm heart."

KIRO news director Bill Lord said James is an "extreme talent…I can't think of any other broadcast journalist who has had a greater impact on a community than Mike has."

Lord said James will continue to work for KIRO on special free-lance projects.

James, who was born in England but grew up in Spokane, leaves for a 10-day vacation in London later this week. He said he'll explore career options upon his return.

While James said he doesn't have specific ideas about his professional future, he plans to stay in Seattle.

"What would be important to me is to feel engaged in some way with community life," he said. "It's a good time for me. I still have 10 good working years in me, and I know this area well."

Ancil Payne, retired president of King Broadcasting, said James always has been a dogged and conscientious reporter who knew how to "follow a single strand of spaghetti through the stack."

"He always took a genuine concern about local events," Payne said. "He was one of the best city reporters we ever had."

Lord said James' weekend anchor slot will be filled by noon anchor Brian Wood.
Top Profile 

Offline Bea


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:18 pm

Posts: 267

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:28 pm   Post subject: Re: The Unstoppable Machine Dreams   

Catnip wrote:
Another example is Amanda stating that on the night of the murder, they sat on Raffaele's bed and had a long and deep conversation, the central core of that conversation being Raffaele's suicided mother. Now, if your mother had committed suicide, that's not a conversation you're going to forget. Raffaele not only forgets it, claiming no such conversation took place, he has also stated to media his mother never committed suicide.



Funny how Amanda's Italian was good enough to have a "long, deep" conversation about suicide and good vs. evil yet she claims she stuggled to make herself understood to the postal police about a found cellphone and a locked door.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Bea wrote:
bilko wrote:
Reading one of the comments sections in a Seattle paper, I see that a line of defence for Ms. Knox is that she didn't phone the police because she was covering for her other flat mates.

Quote: "If you were sharing a house with two ''legal secretaries'' who profess to be your ''friends,'' but who you know consort with drug dealers like Giacomo and do illegal things like smoke marijuanna which might be in their rooms right at this moment, yes you would hold up on calling the police for fear that you drop your ''friends'' in it, not to mention lose them their jobs.

It wasn't till later that Amanda found out that ''friends'' in Italy don't give a monkeys about your loyalty to them, tell little tales about scratches on you to the police, and fail to warn you that you, like they have, should get a lawyer when the fan is....."

I have not heard this ingenious defence before. Why was it not used in court? Surely such loyalty would have elevated her to sainthood by now and the Italian economy would have been brought to a standstill as the fury of Amanda overs everywhere was unleashed.



Funny how that FOAKer seems to forget that Amanda's "friend" the ''legal secretary'' specifically TOLD her to call the police and that Amanda LIED to her and said she HAD called the police when they spoke for the second time. hb-))



This takes The Entourage's habit of blaming others to the extreme. It is almost laughable. Then you realize what is being implied: Amanda preferred to do nothing in the face of a clearly serious situation in order to save her newfound Italian "friends" from the remote possibility that the police would find some pot in the cottage and lock them up. And notice the sly allegation, presented as fact, that Giacomo was a drug dealer. Finally, Saint Amanda was already thinking ahead, trying desperately to save the jobs of her "friends".

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Bea


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:18 pm

Posts: 267

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Professor Snape wrote:
ttrroonniicc wrote:
Help Amnesty Intnl. Free Amanda Knox

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/help-a ... manda-knox

Target:
Anyone who cares about the innocent/wrongfully convicted
Sponsored by:
Jeff Dearman on behalf of Amnesty International

Help free Amanda Knox, wrongfully convicted University of Washington student, convicted by biased courts, and circumstantial evidence. There was no DNA evidence linking Knox to the crime at the case, and the media most likely influenced the jurors and the judge, not to mention the fact she was an American accused overseas. Knox was wrongfully convicted to 26 years in prison for this crime she did not commit. Lets send a petition to President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Amnesty International in support of Amanda Knox and to request they get involved in this matter to try to get her back home to Seattle. At the very least she should be allowed to serve her sentence and/or time up to appeal in U.S. jail closer to her home in Washington State. But ultimately, Ms. Knox should be freed from this crime she did not commit. Please share your comments and thoughts in support of Amanda Knox. I will hope we can deliver this petition of support to Amanda personally as well. This is a human rights issue that needs to be addressed. Help Free Amanda Knox today and get her back home to her family.

244 signatures
That's serving up 244 slander suits. I hope the whole bloody lot of them get fined. gang-)


How hilarious that they want la_) to "serve her sentence and/or time up to appeal in U.S. jail." I think that's a FINE idea, provided the FOAKers are willing to foot the bill. But I don't think Amanda would find the hairdressing arrangements as agreeable in "U.S. jail", not to mention the lack of private cooking and bathing facilities and the prohibition against Beatles-quote T-shirts and cashmere sweaters.
Top Profile 

Offline mortytoad


User avatar


Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 335

Location: Seattle, Washington

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

I like how the author of the petition (and so many others) assumes that the jury was "most likely" biased by the media's portrayal of Amanda. I call that "mind-reading" and I'd be pretty ticked if I were a member of that jury and have someone assume that for me.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
The Machine wrote:
Fly by Night wrote:
So Mike James is not only spokesperson for the Seattle-Perugia Sister City Association but he also seems to have assigned himself as Spokesperson for Seattle Opinion on the topic of the Amanda Knox conviction. Given Mike's statements above, I would not be surprised to learn that he himself participated in the drive insisting that the Seattle Parks Department postpone the naming.


Hi FBN,

Didn't Mike James join PMF, take exception to anyone who thought Amanda Knox might be guilty and then storm off in a hissy fit?

I think this is him:

http://perugiamurderfile.org/search.php ... 7&sr=posts


That could very well be Seattle's very own Mike James. who made those postings. The writing does comes across as jounalistic.

Here's a little more background on Seattle's favorite son from the Seattle Times over 10 years ago. I like the part about doggedly following a single strand of spaghetti all the way to it's end - but what if you're following the wrong strand of spaghetti, Mike?

MIKE JAMES QUITS AS ANCHOR, CITING TV'S DISCONNECT WITH COMMUNITY.

July 13, 1999

When Mike James began work at a small Idaho radio station in the mid-1960s, he saw broadcasting as a way to better connect people with the issues that affect their communities.

But these days, James says he sees his profession straying more and more from that ideal, as local TV news coverage increasingly emphasizes breaking news over issue-oriented journalism.

So the 33-year veteran reporter and TV news anchor announced yesterday that he's leaving his position as weekend anchor for KIRO-TV. In an interview, James said he feels modern TV news is "not as engaged in the discourse of the community."

"In a game where the competition is not two or three channels, but a hundred or more, breaking events will always trump issue and political talk," he wrote in a memo to KIRO staffers.

On top of his broadcasting career, James, 58, also had a brief foray into politics, running unsuccessfully for the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate in 1994.

His last broadcast was Sunday, and his last day in the office was yesterday. He had been weekend anchor at KIRO since 1995, but has spent most of his 33-year career as a reporter and anchor at KING-TV, where his longtime co-anchor was Jean Enersen.

"Mike is a terrific journalist," Enersen said yesterday. "He's got a really great brain and a warm heart."

KIRO news director Bill Lord said James is an "extreme talent…I can't think of any other broadcast journalist who has had a greater impact on a community than Mike has."

Lord said James will continue to work for KIRO on special free-lance projects.

James, who was born in England but grew up in Spokane, leaves for a 10-day vacation in London later this week. He said he'll explore career options upon his return.

While James said he doesn't have specific ideas about his professional future, he plans to stay in Seattle.

"What would be important to me is to feel engaged in some way with community life," he said. "It's a good time for me. I still have 10 good working years in me, and I know this area well."

Ancil Payne, retired president of King Broadcasting, said James always has been a dogged and conscientious reporter who knew how to "follow a single strand of spaghetti through the stack."

"He always took a genuine concern about local events," Payne said. "He was one of the best city reporters we ever had."

Lord said James' weekend anchor slot will be filled by noon anchor Brian Wood.



Presumably, Mike James has maintained his contacts within the Seattle media community since his departure from the tube. This comes in handy for promoting his organizational interests, and perhaps really helped to steer local coverage when the shit hit the fan. Mike, you are a true disappointment to this native of Seattle! Here's Mike's bio:


Quote:
Seattle's Sister Cities Hosts
Mike James is known and recognized throughout the Puget Sound area as a long time local television news anchor, as a journalist respected by his peers and the public, as a former state-wide political candidate, and as a leader in service to his community.

Mike began his local journalism career in 1966 at KING Radio, where he wrote and anchored early morning newscasts and covered local events and politics for several years. In 1968, when KING Television expanded its nightly news coverage, Mike moved to television journalism and spent more than 25 years on KING's top-rated news programs. After a run for US Senate in 1994, Mike returned to television, covering local events and appearing as a weekend anchor on KIRO from January 1995 to July 1999. In 1999-2000, Mike served as a national correspondent for News Hour with Jim Lehrer. In the past decade, Mike has produced and hosted several programs for the SEATTLE CHANNEL.

Community service is important to Mike. He is a past-president of the Hearing, Speech, and Deafness Center Board of Directors, and contributes time to that organization. Mike also has a passion for Italy and the Italian language, and is currently president of the Seattle-Perugia Sister City Association.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Bea wrote:
bilko wrote:
Reading one of the comments sections in a Seattle paper, I see that a line of defence for Ms. Knox is that she didn't phone the police because she was covering for her other flat mates.

Quote: "If you were sharing a house with two ''legal secretaries'' who profess to be your ''friends,'' but who you know consort with drug dealers like Giacomo and do illegal things like smoke marijuanna which might be in their rooms right at this moment, yes you would hold up on calling the police for fear that you drop your ''friends'' in it, not to mention lose them their jobs.

It wasn't till later that Amanda found out that ''friends'' in Italy don't give a monkeys about your loyalty to them, tell little tales about scratches on you to the police, and fail to warn you that you, like they have, should get a lawyer when the fan is....."

I have not heard this ingenious defence before. Why was it not used in court? Surely such loyalty would have elevated her to sainthood by now and the Italian economy would have been brought to a standstill as the fury of Amanda overs everywhere was unleashed.



Funny how that FOAKer seems to forget that Amanda's "friend" the ''legal secretary'' specifically TOLD her to call the police and that Amanda LIED to her and said she HAD called the police when they spoke for the second time. hb-))



This takes The Entourage's habit of blaming others to the extreme. It is almost laughable. Then you realize what is being implied: Amanda preferred to do nothing in the face of a clearly serious situation in order to save her newfound Italian "friends" from the remote possibility that the police would find some pot in the cottage and lock them up. And notice the sly allegation, presented as fact, that Giacomo was a drug dealer. Finally, Saint Amanda was already thinking ahead, trying desperately to save the jobs of her "friends".


The problem with this argument is that pot for personal use is not a serious problem in most of Europe, including Italy. Furthermore, we know that Amanda used pot, but where does it say that Filomina and Laura were pot users?
Top Profile 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Mike is also available for a price.
Competative rates on application.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 7:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

From the Petition:

Quote:
(...) There was no DNA evidence linking Knox to the crime at the case, and the media most likely influenced the jurors and the judge, not to mention the fact she was an American accused overseas.


Oh yes... not to mention!

I read ore than once to understand if the page was real. It really looks like the authors mean this point to make an additional reason in itself for a petition.
So what else do you need to define its moral content?
Top Profile 

Offline Zopi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 8:52 pm

Posts: 317

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 7:05 pm   Post subject: Re: A dish on the side   

Ava wrote:
Catnip wrote:
DANCING WITH AN HONORARY CHEF’S ASSISTANT

In Australia, if you’re invited to a party, you may sometimes be asked “to being a plate”. For newcomers to the country, this is sometimes interpreted literally, and they turn up on the doorstep with a plate, as opposed to “a plate of food”, which is the original intention of the request (to help the hostess of the party out).

Likewise, sometimes people come to a discussion forum table carrying an empty plate, or no plate at all.

SomeAlibi wrote:
I spent a quiet hour or so at a dead workplace today having a look back at the 370-odd posts of Lancelotti.
… There's a little lip service to being 'more neutral' (than other posters) early on…
… There's no evaluation, a total absence of scepticism about anything, just rote challenging time and time again. …
… it's reading the posts in order that really gives you a sense of the scale of work being put [into] it. …

– Thu 31 Dec, [ link ]


The response pattern of posts is also diagnostic (who is deigned with a response, who is ignored), and so is the trigger event initiating a post.

I get ignored so completely, I’m beginning to agree with the barrister (Burnside) who said that English needs a noun version of the verb “to ignore” to fit into this phrase: “she treated him with contempt and ignore”. That would be really handy. ;)


Hi Catnip,
do you mean that really? As for me, I love your posts. They are just so rich that it takes me a while to digest and I have nothing to answer immediately, or if I do I have to log out already...(and now I can't even get a smiley posted, so: *smile*).


Hi Ava, no, you are not being ignored... we [lurkers] read and appreciate your contribution.

Catnip, what is important in a discussion forum table is that people come, with/without plates.

Note: Research indicates that "lurkers make up over 90% of online groups"
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 7:19 pm   Post subject: Re: A dish on the side   

Zopi wrote:
Ava wrote:
Catnip wrote:
DANCING WITH AN HONORARY CHEF’S ASSISTANT

In Australia, if you’re invited to a party, you may sometimes be asked “to being a plate”. For newcomers to the country, this is sometimes interpreted literally, and they turn up on the doorstep with a plate, as opposed to “a plate of food”, which is the original intention of the request (to help the hostess of the party out).

Likewise, sometimes people come to a discussion forum table carrying an empty plate, or no plate at all.

SomeAlibi wrote:
I spent a quiet hour or so at a dead workplace today having a look back at the 370-odd posts of Lancelotti.
… There's a little lip service to being 'more neutral' (than other posters) early on…
… There's no evaluation, a total absence of scepticism about anything, just rote challenging time and time again. …
… it's reading the posts in order that really gives you a sense of the scale of work being put [into] it. …

– Thu 31 Dec, [ link ]


The response pattern of posts is also diagnostic (who is deigned with a response, who is ignored), and so is the trigger event initiating a post.

I get ignored so completely, I’m beginning to agree with the barrister (Burnside) who said that English needs a noun version of the verb “to ignore” to fit into this phrase: “she treated him with contempt and ignore”. That would be really handy. ;)


Hi Catnip,
do you mean that really? As for me, I love your posts. They are just so rich that it takes me a while to digest and I have nothing to answer immediately, or if I do I have to log out already...(and now I can't even get a smiley posted, so: *smile*).


Hi Ava, no, you are not being ignored... we [lurkers] read and appreciate your contribution.

Catnip, what is important in a discussion forum table is that people come, with/without plates.

Note: Research indicates that "lurkers make up over 90% of online groups"


Thanks, Zopi. I just read Ava's comment and Catnip's and wanted to reply, but you have expressed it well. If it's any consolation, many of my comments are ignored too. It's only when I have to put on that silly mod hat and spank someone that I get the attention I crave! :)
And a shout-out to lurkers everywhere!

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 7:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Jester wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Bea wrote:
bilko wrote:
Reading one of the comments sections in a Seattle paper, I see that a line of defence for Ms. Knox is that she didn't phone the police because she was covering for her other flat mates.

Quote: "If you were sharing a house with two ''legal secretaries'' who profess to be your ''friends,'' but who you know consort with drug dealers like Giacomo and do illegal things like smoke marijuanna which might be in their rooms right at this moment, yes you would hold up on calling the police for fear that you drop your ''friends'' in it, not to mention lose them their jobs.

It wasn't till later that Amanda found out that ''friends'' in Italy don't give a monkeys about your loyalty to them, tell little tales about scratches on you to the police, and fail to warn you that you, like they have, should get a lawyer when the fan is....."

I have not heard this ingenious defence before. Why was it not used in court? Surely such loyalty would have elevated her to sainthood by now and the Italian economy would have been brought to a standstill as the fury of Amanda overs everywhere was unleashed.



Funny how that FOAKer seems to forget that Amanda's "friend" the ''legal secretary'' specifically TOLD her to call the police and that Amanda LIED to her and said she HAD called the police when they spoke for the second time. hb-))



This takes The Entourage's habit of blaming others to the extreme. It is almost laughable. Then you realize what is being implied: Amanda preferred to do nothing in the face of a clearly serious situation in order to save her newfound Italian "friends" from the remote possibility that the police would find some pot in the cottage and lock them up. And notice the sly allegation, presented as fact, that Giacomo was a drug dealer. Finally, Saint Amanda was already thinking ahead, trying desperately to save the jobs of her "friends".


The problem with this argument is that pot for personal use is not a serious problem in most of Europe, including Italy. Furthermore, we know that Amanda used pot, but where does it say that Filomina and Laura were pot users?


I believe it was Amanda who said they were. The more unseemly elements of the online Entourage (Aunt Janet, DJ, Goofy, CM, etc.) have been spreading this news for a long time now, suggesting that somehow the other members of the household were treated differently. Probably because they're Italian. It's just another version of the anti-American bias built into Italy's system of justice.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bilko


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 7:25 pm

Posts: 198

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 7:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Just in case the "covering for friends" excuse doesn't work. Here is a new one - "What if Amanda was given a "roofie", Yes! She is a victim of the date rape drug. Shall we hoist this one up the flag pole and see if it flies?

Also: "I have still heard from unconfirmed sources, that if the Amanda knox story is made into a feature film, Twilight's Kristen Stewart remains the top choice. No word on whether she has been approached."

All this from www.examiner.com

On the one hand it's funny, but once I stop laughing, I get very angry.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Zopi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 8:52 pm

Posts: 317

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 7:34 pm   Post subject: Re: A dish on the side   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Zopi wrote:
Ava wrote:
Catnip wrote:
DANCING WITH AN HONORARY CHEF’S ASSISTANT

In Australia, if you’re invited to a party, you may sometimes be asked “to being a plate”. For newcomers to the country, this is sometimes interpreted literally, and they turn up on the doorstep with a plate, as opposed to “a plate of food”, which is the original intention of the request (to help the hostess of the party out).

Likewise, sometimes people come to a discussion forum table carrying an empty plate, or no plate at all.

SomeAlibi wrote:
I spent a quiet hour or so at a dead workplace today having a look back at the 370-odd posts of Lancelotti.
… There's a little lip service to being 'more neutral' (than other posters) early on…
… There's no evaluation, a total absence of scepticism about anything, just rote challenging time and time again. …
… it's reading the posts in order that really gives you a sense of the scale of work being put [into] it. …

– Thu 31 Dec, [ link ]


The response pattern of posts is also diagnostic (who is deigned with a response, who is ignored), and so is the trigger event initiating a post.

I get ignored so completely, I’m beginning to agree with the barrister (Burnside) who said that English needs a noun version of the verb “to ignore” to fit into this phrase: “she treated him with contempt and ignore”. That would be really handy. ;)


Hi Catnip,
do you mean that really? As for me, I love your posts. They are just so rich that it takes me a while to digest and I have nothing to answer immediately, or if I do I have to log out already...(and now I can't even get a smiley posted, so: *smile*).


Hi Ava, no, you are not being ignored... we [lurkers] read and appreciate your contribution.

Catnip, what is important in a discussion forum table is that people come, with/without plates.

Note: Research indicates that "lurkers make up over 90% of online groups"


Thanks, Zopi. I just read Ava's comment and Catnip's and wanted to reply, but you have expressed it well. If it's any consolation, many of my comments are ignored too. It's only when I have to put on that silly mod hat and spank someone that I get the attention I crave! :)
And a shout-out to lurkers everywhere!


lol Skep, that was funny :-)

sometimes when there are no replies it is simply because the original post is agreeable, nothing to add. sometimes controversial posts are the ones causing a 'flame-war', so actually being ignored is not so bad... isn't it?
Top Profile 

Offline Zopi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 8:52 pm

Posts: 317

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 7:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Patzu wrote:
There are a lot of questions about what the motivation for the murder could be. AK is a film fan and thinks of herself as Amelie, but could other films shed an insight into what might have happened. For instance could AK and RS have offered MK to RG in exchange for drugs like in the film Requiem for a Dream. Here is my take on it through film.

The Plot
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKJpWfSHEs4

....


wow! I am impressed, for a while, watching the trailer "Requiem for a dream" I thought I was seeing AK, RS and RG!! he even seem to be calling 'Amanda!'
Top Profile 

Offline Zopi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 8:52 pm

Posts: 317

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 8:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

piktor wrote:
SomeAlibi wrote:
piktor wrote:
OUT WITH THE OLD!

oil study after Spagnoletto (1591-1652)

December 31, 2009 7:15 PM mul-)


...stunning, stunning, stunning!


IN WITH THE NEW !

mul-)

Thank you, SomeAlibi,
You stunn me!


Thank you for sharing your work with us, congratulations!
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 8:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Questionable Mignini tactics could taint Knox result
January 2, 10:03 AM Spokane Elections 2010 Examiner Bill Edelblute

EXAMINER

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:09 pm   Post subject: Re: A dish on the side   

quote Catnip:
The response pattern of posts is also diagnostic (who is deigned with a response, who is ignored), and so is the trigger event initiating a post.
I get ignored so completely, I’m beginning to agree with the barrister (Burnside) who said that English needs a noun version of the verb “to ignore” to fit into this phrase: “she treated him with contempt and ignore”. That would be really handy. ;)

quote me:
Hi Catnip,
do you mean that really? As for me, I love your posts. They are just so rich that it takes me a while to digest and I have nothing to answer immediately, or if I do I have to log out already...(and now I can't even get a smiley posted, so: *smile*).[/quote]

quote Zopi and Skep:
Hi Ava, no, you are not being ignored... we [lurkers] read and appreciate your contribution.
Catnip, what is important in a discussion forum table is that people come, with/without plates.
Note: Research indicates that "lurkers make up over 90% of online groups"[/quote]

Thanks, Zopi. I just read Ava's comment and Catnip's and wanted to reply, but you have expressed it well. If it's any consolation, many of my comments are ignored too. It's only when I have to put on that silly mod hat and spank someone that I get the attention I crave! :)
And a shout-out to lurkers everywhere![/quote]



Hi Zopi and Skep!
thank you, but misunderstanding, I quoted and posted in a sloppy way. It was Catnip who wrote about being ignored, and below my humble try to communicate that I really like her posts.
I personally don't feel ignored, or if so, it's as Skep writes, everybody else must feel ignored, too. (Sorry for making such a big thing out of it, Catnip, that wasn't intented.)


Last edited by Ava on Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:58 pm, edited 6 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

The Machine wrote:
Fly by Night wrote:
So Mike James is not only spokesperson for the Seattle-Perugia Sister City Association but he also seems to have assigned himself as Spokesperson for Seattle Opinion on the topic of the Amanda Knox conviction. Given Mike's statements above, I would not be surprised to learn that he himself participated in the drive insisting that the Seattle Parks Department postpone the naming.


Hi FBN,

Didn't Mike James join PMF, take exception to anyone who thought Amanda Knox might be guilty and then storm off in a hissy fit?

I think this is him:

search.php?author_id=267&sr=posts



Indeed he did TM :)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

FBN" wrote:
So Mike James is not only spokesperson for the Seattle-Perugia Sister City Association but he also seems to have assigned himself as Spokesperson for Seattle Opinion on the topic of the Amanda Knox conviction. Given Mike's statements above, I would not be surprised to learn that he himself participated in the drive insisting that the Seattle Parks Department postpone the naming.


I'll go even further. I'd be willing to suggest it was he that put forward the name for the park in the first place, with the intent of pulling strings to have it withdrawn later down the road if the verdict didn't go Amanda's way. And that's exactly what happened, but not until the 11th minute of the 11th hour for maximum effect. The media were told the day before that an announcement was going to be made to name the park Perugia Park the next day...then the very next day the announcement is made 'Well we WERE going to name it Perugia Park, but we're not now'. Apparently they didn't realise that the day before, they only realised the next day. If that doesn't scream STUNT I don't know what does.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Questionable Mignini tactics could taint Knox result
January 2, 10:03 AM Spokane Elections 2010 Examiner Bill Edelblute

EXAMINER


How ridiculous. Of course they will not find a logged law suit from Mignini in Seattle against any journalist!

What Mignini did was to inform the Procura, perhaps Yummi pls you can explain exactly what action Mignini took regarding the personal insults directed at him? as it has absolutely nothing to do with any law suits in Seattle, that is just more BS spreaded by the Cook and the rest of FOA Entourage.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Here is a nice video of Seattles's sister city Perugia made in summer 2008 and hosted by Mike James:
http://www.seattlechannel.org/videos/vi ... ID=4050701
Top Profile 

Offline Bea


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:18 pm

Posts: 267

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Jools wrote:
Michael wrote:
Questionable Mignini tactics could taint Knox result
January 2, 10:03 AM Spokane Elections 2010 Examiner Bill Edelblute

EXAMINER


How ridiculous. Of course they will not find a logged law suit from Mignini in Seattle against any journalist!

What Mignini did was to inform the Procura, perhaps Yummi pls you can explain exactly what action Mignini took regarding the personal insults directed at him? as it has absolutely nothing to do with any law suits in Seattle, that is just more BS spreaded by the Cook and the rest of FOA Entourage.


Did you catch the photo caption? "Perugian police are now picking on Amanda's parents"

"picking on" them?????????? What is this, third grade?

The article also tries to claim that they were served with papers based on an interview a year and a half ago when ANYONE who has seen a single interview with them KNOWS that they have CONTINUALLY and VIGOROUSLY slandered the Perguia police throughout the trial and continue to do so.
Top Profile 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Edda Mellas thought so much of her lying daughter she spent Christmas in Seattle, leaving poor bambi alone.

If Knox was my daughter and I professed such strong emotions as Edda Mellas has, I would be there in Perugia for her with what must be a difficult time for the child I brought into the world.

Of course, this hasn't happened.
Maybe nobody will pay for it.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline Leodmaeg


User avatar


Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 4:18 pm

Posts: 30

Location: England

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

bilko wrote:
Just in case the "covering for friends" excuse doesn't work. Here is a new one - "What if Amanda was given a "roofie", Yes! She is a victim of the date rape drug. Shall we hoist this one up the flag pole and see if it flies?

Also: "I have still heard from unconfirmed sources, that if the Amanda knox story is made into a feature film, Twilight's Kristen Stewart remains the top choice. No word on whether she has been approached."

All this from http://www.examiner.com

On the one hand it's funny, but once I stop laughing, I get very angry.


Or, knowing how Hollywood likes to rewrite history, how about Rambo 23: The Italian Job :lol:
Sylvester Stallone gets parachuted into Italy and has to fight his way to Perugia with only his zimmer frame to keep him company. Somehow he finds where Amanda is jailed, fights his way in and rescues her. I can see it now, all the guards dropping like nine-pins as he rumbles in carrying under his arms the trusty self-propelled artillery gun he found lying about, breaks into the cell to find Amanda in a Madonna like pose with a golden halo round her head...
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Zopi wrote:
Patzu wrote:
There are a lot of questions about what the motivation for the murder could be. AK is a film fan and thinks of herself as Amelie, but could other films shed an insight into what might have happened. For instance could AK and RS have offered MK to RG in exchange for drugs like in the film Requiem for a Dream. Here is my take on it through film.

The Plot
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKJpWfSHEs4

....


wow! I am impressed, for a while, watching the trailer "Requiem for a dream" I thought I was seeing AK, RS and RG!! he even seem to be calling 'Amanda!'



Yes, but doesn't it hurt somehow to connect such great films with Amanda & Co?
Patzu, I think it was Miss Buongiorno who first called Amanda "Amélie of Seattle", but AK probabely loved it (or maybe would she rather have chosen something darker and more lascivious for herself?).
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

LOL!!!

Who killed bambi?
My old mate Steve Jones and Eddy Tenpole!
Eddy used to smoke big Churchillian cigars in those days (while eating).
A bit of humour and mad Britishness for you - sorry in advance if you don't understand it - it's from the great rock and roll swindle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erjpLxrV9PE

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

1. From the 48 Hours hatchet job, there is nevertheless an interesting snippet; Nathan Abraham - Bar worker at Merlins seemed very calm, credible; "People knew who Ruede was. We found out he tried to rob one of our bartenders. He went to his house and they had a little scuffle with a knife. He was one of those people you kinda knew him but stayed a little bit far away from him". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIoYlGQDZ4M (middle section).


2(a). I watched the original video of AK and RS outside the house again from which the still pictures of them kissing etc are taken; you can quite clearly see Amanda quickly looking at the film-taker more than once. Both when they are kissing and earlier.

Attachment:
I see you.JPG



As distinct from my previous impressions from looking at still pictures, having watched the videos several times, I now think they did this as a staged thing to try and show how terribly worried Amanda looks. Now clearly the kissing (3 lip to lip comfort kiss type) backfired very badly on them but I think she is actually making sure she looks worried. Watch carefully and you can see her clock the video taker at least twice, checking she's still being filmed while they are standing together. She looks away extremely quickly to hide the fact that she’s looking but she knew they were being filmed;

Attachment:
hi there.JPG



2(b) Video-outside of the house; One other thing from the kissing vid, someone commented the other day that there's a picture of RS with his left hand out in what looked like some sort of emphasising / remonstration body language. In fact from the vid, he circles his hand in a 'keep doing this' type of universal body language for repetition. To me it looks like he's saying "keep looking concerned, keep going, they are still filming aren't they?" sort of thing. After he does that you can see a tiny half smirk / smile from Amanda after that which she then abandons very quickly before again sneaking a look at the camera man. It’s around 0:43 here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJyAU1Zo ... re=related

Attachment:
half smile quickly abandoned.JPG


Just loop round from 0:43 to 0:50 a few times in a row. Chilling huh?


3. US domestic interview of the editor Mudede of The Stranger. He says he's been down to where RS and RG lived very close together. The US interviewer who is sympathetic to Amanda says "but RS and RG didn't know each other" and the journalist responds instantly "Impossible" and goes on to say that he knew everyone in the area in a matter of days of being there. They lived on top of each other.

4. The in-court video of Amanda's testimony. When the prosecutor asks her how many times Rudy had been in the bar she blinks four times rapidly (lying stress sign) and answers in a higher register "once".

5. The in-court video of Amanda's testimony. Really, with the best will in the world allowing for nerves etc, just not convincing. I hope her Shakespeare is better than that. At least she's got a long time to practice.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Well thank you so much for posting this SomeAlibi, the 'half smile quickly abandoned' shot is excellent and kudos to you for your sharp observance.
I was beginning to think I was the only one..

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline lector


Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 1:25 am

Posts: 97

Location: swamps of Jersey

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

The Bard wrote:
New You Tube post on the Double DNA knife! Who is this masked crusader ViaDellaPergola!!! Woot!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJbYe3-5ms0


That video has now "been removed by the user."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Leodmaeg


User avatar


Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 4:18 pm

Posts: 30

Location: England

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

lector wrote:
The Bard wrote:
New You Tube post on the Double DNA knife! Who is this masked crusader ViaDellaPergola!!! Woot!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJbYe3-5ms0


That video has now "been removed by the user."


Probably just for editing.
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:06 pm   Post subject: Re: A dish on the side   

Zopi wrote:
sometimes when there are no replies it is simply because the original post is agreeable, nothing to add. ....



Hi Zopi! (and Ava! (and lurkers!) ) :),

True!

I was thinking of my question to Lancelotti (almost a year ago, now),
asking about the basis behind her reasoning, so that I could try to
understand her short cyrptic posts better, and maybe not make a wrong interpretation
by reading the wrong subtext into it.

-- "Silence, was the stern reply", as the poem says.

She has been treating Yummi recently the same way, when he asked a similar question.
That reminded me of my question all those months ago.
But it is hard to learn from anyone this way (i.e., "The Road of Silence, Grasshopper, is very loud in its emptiness." :) )

My purpose is that I would like to try to understand, beyond the newspaper reports, all 9 starting viewpoints (1 prosecution, 3 civil, 3 defence, 2 first-instance courts), how they see the evidence to build a "scenario", how they "translate" the evidence.

E.g., what was the purpose of the tactic to treat Amanda and Raffaele together at the same trial, and not separately? That is (it seems to me) almost an admission they were both involved. For an inquest, that is the practical way and that might be the reason (otherwise it would be two inquests running in parallel, with the same evidence and experts at each, but on different days/courtrooms, and what would be the point of that?).

E.g., why did the prosecution decide not to use Amanda and Raffaele as testifying witnesses? (It was their unreliability as witnesses because of their lying, the papers said, but which lies? All of them, probably.)

Also, I think the (ironic) way that Amanda and Raffaele talk about their brains as if their brains were separate from themselves might be a clue (or a false clue), e.g. is the chiasmus malformed? or is it just a figure of speech for the youngsters nowadays: "my brain made me do it; so it wasn't me"?.


I am not very good at solving L's crossword puzzles, that is all.

Sooner or later I will probably give up waiting for an answer,
and go and do something else, like play with a leaf on the mat. :)
(Or, actually, finish the rest of the digests, so people like Brian can get a fuller picture, as much as is possible, anyway - their insight is quite instructive.)

P.S. I know I myself am not being really ignored, as your posts and from others show.
Thanks for your feedback and thoughts.
Plus, the time difference does not help for a to-and-fro discussion, in any case.
Only Tiziano and a few others here in Australia are awake when I am awake.
And the rest of the world is sleeping.
We are like possums in the roof at night time! beer-)
Top Profile 

Offline adentre


Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:27 am

Posts: 3

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

First of all I would like to state that I have not come to a complete decision on the guilt of AK and RS. I do believe that RG is guilty without a doubt. I would like to voice my concerns over guilt of AK and RS. I am a Canadian and do not feel like I would take sides because of nationality. I must say I am leaning more towards they are innocent, but I do have some serious concerns over their alibis etc.

These are reasons I believe AK and RS are not guilty:

1) I do not believe AK and RS have a motive for the murder of MK. It surely wasn’t money, and I don’t believe it was because of arguments over cleaning of the house. I don’t believe it was a form of some Satanic ritual as there is no past behavior or involvement. I think the likelihood of AK and RS doing it for sexual pleasure and because they were high on drugs are pretty farfetched.


2) Where are the transcripts of the interrogation?? Are police and prosecutors hiding them or destroyed them because it shows something that might not go along with their theories? Where is the video, where is the transcripts?????????

3) What about the 3 hard drives missing - One of AK’s, one of RS and one of MK?? Why did the police lose them? Does it not fit their puzzle? Does it show that AK and MK were friends? How can that happen in such an important investigation. It sure looks poorly on the police.

4) Why is there only a minute amount of RS’s DNA when such a struggle took place. I again would think there would be hair etc. left in the room. The evidence about the bra clasp is EXTREMELY disturbing. The CSI people tainted it by passing it back and forth, then placing it in a plastic rather than a paper evidence folder. What is totally unforgivable is the fact that they obtained the clasp 46 or so days after the initial collection of evidence. I could imagine them opening MK’s door with their gloves on and thereby picking up RS’s who tried to open the door, and then touch the clasp and hand it back and forth. Why has there been a video of the bra clasp leaked out? It would seem that they were looking for evidence against RS and this would prove his quilt. It sure seems extremely suspicious to me!


5) Why would the knife that was taken from RS apartment first placed into a paper evidence folder, removed and placed in a box, then another box and then shipped to the lab? Why the extra handling? Why take it out of the paper folder? This really seems suspicious to me. The knife does not fit most of the wounds and does not fit the pattern on the sheet. Prosecutors would then have to come up with a two knife theory. Of course this is possible, but not probable.

6) I have heard so much conflicting stories on how long the interrogation was and whether it was with a lawyer and an interpreter. I am in the belief an interpreter was present and I believe she was treated to breaks and food. I do question if it is possible that she was cuffed lightly on the back of the head. (where is the video) I do believe that under hours of questioning (even if it were only a few hours) by professional and skilled interrogators, that almost anyone can say anything. I know personally of cases where this has happened and the accused has spent years in prison because of false testimony. I do believe the police et al, would ask questions such as: ‘What could you have imagined the crime to have looked like?’


7) Why is there NO DNA evidence in Meredith’s room of Amanda if there was such a struggle? Surely there would be hairs of Amanda that would fall off with a struggle. I understand the only physical evidence at the scene is a shoe print that came from the same size shoe as AK. This still is not physical evidence that is conclusive in any way shape or form. She couldn’t have cleaned up just her physical evidence and not RG’s.

8) Why if there was going to be a premeditated murder with AK and or RS bringing a knife to MK’s place, was there no record on the computers or text messages or phone calls between AK, RS and Rudy Guede? This is a bit disturbing. When would they have time to set up such a attack. RG would have to bring his own knife which still hasn’t been found.

9) RG has all sorts of physical DNA evidence all over MK’s room and body. He fled the country after the murder. Apparently he has been known to break and enter and steal. Apparently his DNA was on the inside of MK’s purse so it does look like he robbed her and there was money missing. He also had a cut on his hand. (no cuts on AK or RS) It is so obvious that he is involved mostly if not SOLEY. His testimony about being there but someone else did it is pretty much the same as many, many other rapists and murderers.

Here are reasons I believe that AK and RS may be involved or in fact participated in the murders:

1) The testimony apparently changed many times about whether AK spent the night at RS’s and what they were actually doing that night. I believe their stories conflict about times of watching movies or downloading things on the internet and what time supper was etc. This is very suspicious and does not bode well for either of them.
2) Amanda does not recall the first call when she called her mother. This is very puzzling unless she was still high on something.
3) Apparently the timelines of RS calling his sister and the police arriving are in question. I don’t know if this has been proven one way or another.
4) Amanda not seeing that Fiona’s room was broken in when she went for a shower is also quite suspicious, especially with the front door left open.
5) Her having a shower without locking the door is also not normal. (if this happened)
6) If bleach was actually bought the morning after the murder, then this would be the very most incriminating evidence against RS and AK. I don’t know if this is rumor or has actually been substantiated. If it has indeed been substantiated, then I would have to say I believe that AK or RS or both were definitely involved and possibly guilty of the act of murder!!!!!!!!! (it is my belief that this is just rumor)
7) Needing a mop on the morning after the murder is very suspicious. I do believe that they never found any DNA on the mop and it was just very coincidental. I’m sure if that mop was used, DNA would be all over it. (unless they bought a mop and switched it, which I don’t believe has been proven or seen)



I believe that these are topics that although they may sound telling, are in fact innocuous in my opinion:

1) The behavior of AK and RS when the police first came. They were holding and consoling each other and possibly grieving in their own way. People do act differently in these situations.
2) The cartwheels and exercises in the police station sound quite inappropriate, however, maybe it was a way of releasing tension and nothing more than that. It would be immature in my opinion.
3) AK buying underwear is not unusual because she didn’t have any clothes to wear. The type of underwear should not be at all important either. If it was g-strings, that is quite normal around here.
4) Foxy Knoxy of course has been explained and has absolutely nothing to do with her being a man eater.
5) The fact that she went to the police station with RS can show she was supporting him and didn’t want to be alone.
6) All of the mixed blood in the bathroom would not be able to be linked to the murder because they shared the same bathroom with bidet etc.
7) AK pointing the finger at Lumumbo I think is just from constant harsh questioning and having AK ‘picture’ what might have occurred. The police had trouble understanding why AK texted Lumumbo ‘see you later’. They thought it meant something much more sinister and planted that thought in Amanda’s mind. At that point in time she could have said almost anything.


I really hope that the truth is found somehow and someway, however, if AK and RS are eventually released on appeal due to lack of evidence, we may never know what really when on. I wish Rudy would at some point either admit to it as a one person act or tell all with AK and RS’s involvement that could be proved beyond a doubt. Until then you can count me on the AK and RS probably have nothing to do with the murder. If any evidence is found that is irresputable that AK and RS are guilty, - may they spend the rest of their lives in prison!! :evil:
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Leodmaeg wrote:
lector wrote:
The Bard wrote:
New You Tube post on the Double DNA knife! Who is this masked crusader ViaDellaPergola!!! Woot!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJbYe3-5ms0


That video has now "been removed by the user."


Probably just for editing.


This is the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgBA9TGC6Mg
Top Profile 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

The shot posted by SomeAlibi : 'half smile quickly abandoned' gives the lie to the 'Raffy was comforting Amanda' rubbish
that Edda mellas has constantly propagated.

I find it distasteful that Edda Mellas refers to this obviously disturbed person as 'Raffy'.
Her previous husband referred to Sollecito as a 'nice kid' (although he had not ever met him) and described his knife collection as 'art pieces'.
'Raffy'... How nice, such a nice term of endearment.
How do they know him?
How facile from the parents of the saint.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

DeathFish 2000 wrote:
The shot posted by SomeAlibi : 'half smile quickly abandoned' gives the lie to the 'Raffy was comforting Amanda' rubbish
that Edda mellas has constantly propagated.

I find it distasteful that Edda Mellas refers to this obviously disturbed person as 'Raffy'.
Her previous husband referred to Sollecito as a 'nice kid' (although he had not ever met him) and described his knife collection as 'art pieces'.
'Raffy'... How nice, such a nice term of endearment.
How do they know him?
How facile from the parents of the saint.


Hi DF2K,

They even want him to be an American! So it fits better with their spin of Sollecito was found guilty because of some hatred towards Americans! LOL
Top Profile 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Questionable Mignini tactics could taint Knox result
January 2, 10:03 AM Spokane Elections 2010 Examiner Bill Edelblute

EXAMINER




From Examiner as above:

"Knox's parents have been served with papers by Italian police placing them under criminal investigation for defamation for their comments, to The London Daily Times, which merely repeat their daughter's allegations of a physically abusive police interrogation. Her parents did not kill anyone, and this adds insult to their own injury." huh-)
Top Profile 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

DeathFish 2000 wrote:
Well thank you so much for posting this SomeAlibi, the 'half smile quickly abandoned' shot is excellent and kudos to you for your sharp observance.
I was beginning to think I was the only one..



Cheers.... the video really is the thing because you can see all the nuances. But I don't know how to rip a small 7 second section from a youtube vid. I urge everyone to watch it. What I see is

a) She checks out the camera (see pic in above post)
b) RS is saying something to her circling his hand. She is slightly caught off guard from her stage management and checking out the camera.
c) You get a little half smile / smirk and in the video you can clearly see her flick her eyebrows up at it. There's some complicity going on.
d) She quickly stops that expression
e) You can then clearly see her steal another very very quick look at the camera AND cover the fact that she's looking
f) She then resumes looking sad for the record.

Attachment:
1 Repeat.JPG

Attachment:
2 What you saying.JPG

Attachment:
3 Beginning to smile smirk.JPG


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Attachment:
4 Eyebrows flick up too.JPG

Attachment:
5 Little smirk.JPG

Attachment:
6 Oops - cameras still there isn't it..JPG


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Attachment:
7 Crap. I better look contrite and saaaaad again.JPG



Oooh - and just look at 0:57/0:58 - watch Raffaele when they've just finished kissing from the other camera. He takes two seconds and then shakes his head very quickly as if to say "I shouldn't have done that" (she starts the first kiss but he makes kisses 2 and 3 happen and I think it takes him a couple of seconds to realise that was a dumb move). The head shake is there - watch the vid! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJyAU1Zo ... re=related

Attachment:
8. That kiss was stupid too.JPG



Win 7 sniptool for the win ;)

BTW DF2K - anything with Steve Jones and Sir Edward is alright by me. A finer catburglar rock guitarist was never produced by the UK than Mr Jones.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.


Last edited by SomeAlibi on Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:57 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Zopi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 8:52 pm

Posts: 317

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:42 pm   Post subject: Re: A dish on the side   

Catnip wrote:
Zopi wrote:
sometimes when there are no replies it is simply because the original post is agreeable, nothing to add. ....



Hi Zopi! (and Ava! (and lurkers!) ) :),

True!

I was thinking of my question to Lancelotti (almost a year ago, now),
asking about the basis behind her reasoning, so that I could try to
understand her short cyrptic posts better, and maybe not make a wrong interpretation
by reading the wrong subtext into it.

-- "Silence, was the stern reply", as the poem says.

She has been treating Yummi recently the same way, when he asked a similar question.
That reminded me of my question all those months ago.
But it is hard to learn from anyone this way (i.e., "The Road of Silence, Grasshopper, is very loud in its emptiness." :) )

My purpose is that I would like to try to understand, beyond the newspaper reports, all 9 starting viewpoints (1 prosecution, 3 civil, 3 defence, 2 first-instance courts), how they see the evidence to build a "scenario", how they "translate" the evidence.

E.g., what was the purpose of the tactic to treat Amanda and Raffaele together at the same trial, and not separately? That is (it seems to me) almost an admission they were both involved. For an inquest, that is the practical way and that might be the reason (otherwise it would be two inquests running in parallel, with the same evidence and experts at each, but on different days/courtrooms, and what would be the point of that?).

E.g., why did the prosecution decide not to use Amanda and Raffaele as testifying witnesses? (It was their unreliability as witnesses because of their lying, the papers said, but which lies? All of them, probably.)

Also, I think the (ironic) way that Amanda and Raffaele talk about their brains as if their brains were separate from themselves might be a clue (or a false clue), e.g. is the chiasmus malformed? or is it just a figure of speech for the youngsters nowadays: "my brain made me do it; so it wasn't me"?.


I am not very good at solving L's crossword puzzles, that is all.

Sooner or later I will probably give up waiting for an answer,
and go and do something else, like play with a leaf on the mat. :)
(Or, actually, finish the rest of the digests, so people like Brian can get a fuller picture, as much as is possible, anyway - their insight is quite instructive.)

P.S. I know I myself am not being really ignored, as your posts and from others show.
Thanks for your feedback and thoughts.
Plus, the time difference does not help for a to-and-fro discussion, in any case.
Only Tiziano and a few others here in Australia are awake when I am awake.
And the rest of the world is sleeping.
We are like possums in the roof at night time! beer-)


And here again... I have nothing to add, but I don't want you to feel ignored... :-) [it is a joke!]

I like Lancelotti's posts since it does trigger very interesting answers, as it makes oneself to question every detail once again, and I do treat his/her point of view respectfully because I understand disagreement, but I don't expect Lance to answer questions.

Regarding your questions:
-understanding the 9 point of views: do you remember when one of AK's lawyers implied that he was for another defense strategy? I am quite sure it was a difficult task to decide what was better for the defendants from the legal point of view.
-why together: was there an option? I thought it was mandatory.
-witnesses: nope, it wouldn't be nice for the prosecution to be seeing as interrogators.
-brains: no idea, I am not Anglophone.

Looking forward to read your next Digest!

A Zopilote Z:-)
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:49 pm   Post subject: Re: A dish on the side   

Catnip wrote:
Zopi wrote:
sometimes when there are no replies it is simply because the original post is agreeable, nothing to add. ....



Hi Zopi! (and Ava! (and lurkers!) ) :),

True!

I was thinking of my question to Lancelotti (almost a year ago, now),
asking about the basis behind her reasoning, so that I could try to
understand her short cyrptic posts better, and maybe not make a wrong interpretation
by reading the wrong subtext into it.

-- "Silence, was the stern reply", as the poem says.

She has been treating Yummi recently the same way, when he asked a similar question.
That reminded me of my question all those months ago.
But it is hard to learn from anyone this way (i.e., "The Road of Silence, Grasshopper, is very loud in its emptiness." :) )

My purpose is that I would like to try to understand, beyond the newspaper reports, all 9 starting viewpoints (1 prosecution, 3 civil, 3 defence, 2 first-instance courts), how they see the evidence to build a "scenario", how they "translate" the evidence.

E.g., what was the purpose of the tactic to treat Amanda and Raffaele together at the same trial, and not separately? That is (it seems to me) almost an admission they were both involved. For an inquest, that is the practical way and that might be the reason (otherwise it would be two inquests running in parallel, with the same evidence and experts at each, but on different days/courtrooms, and what would be the point of that?).

E.g., why did the prosecution decide not to use Amanda and Raffaele as testifying witnesses? (It was their unreliability as witnesses because of their lying, the papers said, but which lies? All of them, probably.)

Also, I think the (ironic) way that Amanda and Raffaele talk about their brains as if their brains were separate from themselves might be a clue (or a false clue), e.g. is the chiasmus malformed? or is it just a figure of speech for the youngsters nowadays: "my brain made me do it; so it wasn't me"?.


I am not very good at solving L's crossword puzzles, that is all.

Sooner or later I will probably give up waiting for an answer,
and go and do something else, like play with a leaf on the mat
. :)
(Or, actually, finish the rest of the digests, so people like Brian can get a fuller picture, as much as is possible, anyway - their insight is quite instructive.)

P.S. I know I myself am not being really ignored, as your posts and from others show.
Thanks for your feedback and thoughts.
Plus, the time difference does not help for a to-and-fro discussion, in any case.
Only Tiziano and a few others here in Australia are awake when I am awake.
And the rest of the world is sleeping.
We are like possums in the roof at night time! beer-)



Hi Catnip,
I have had the same experience as you describe with the same poster. Occasionally, I point out that I have not had any answer and then get a cryptic doublespeak reply that shifts the terms of the question or skirts it in some way. As a result, I have given up hope that good faith dialogue is possible with said poster and moved on, more in sadness than in anger.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Leodmaeg


User avatar


Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 4:18 pm

Posts: 30

Location: England

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Jools wrote:
Leodmaeg wrote:
lector wrote:
The Bard wrote:
New You Tube post on the Double DNA knife! Who is this masked crusader ViaDellaPergola!!! Woot!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJbYe3-5ms0


That video has now "been removed by the user."


Probably just for editing.


This is the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgBA9TGC6Mg


th-)
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

SomeAlibi wrote:

Quote:
From the 48 Hours hatchet job, there is nevertheless an interesting snippet; Nathan Abraham - Bar worker at Merlins seemed very calm, credible; "People knew who Ruede was. We found out he tried to rob one of our bartenders. He went to his house and they had a little scuffle with a knife. He was one of those people you kinda knew him but stayed a little bit far away from him".


Just to clarify: the "bartender" in question is Christian T (can't remember his last name), the guy whose testimony was deemed unreliable by Judge Micheli because, among other things, he never came forward and did not file charges with police when the incident allegedly occurred.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Zopi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 8:52 pm

Posts: 317

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

adentre wrote:
First of all I would like to state that I have not come to a complete decision on the guilt of AK and RS. I do believe that RG is guilty without a doubt. I would like to voice my concerns over guilt of AK and RS. I am a Canadian and do not feel like I would take sides because of nationality. I must say I am leaning more towards they are innocent, but I do have some serious concerns over their alibis etc.
...
I really hope that the truth is found somehow and someway, however, if AK and RS are eventually released on appeal due to lack of evidence, we may never know what really when on. I wish Rudy would at some point either admit to it as a one person act or tell all with AK and RS’s involvement that could be proved beyond a doubt. Until then you can count me on the AK and RS probably have nothing to do with the murder. If any evidence is found that is irresputable that AK and RS are guilty, - may they spend the rest of their lives in prison!! :evil:


Dear adentre, I just said that I understand disagreement, but your post is too tiring to read. I suppose you took your time as a 'lurker' before posting anything, this is rule number one [Read Wikipedia 1% rule Internet culture].

Before asking questions that were discussed hundred of times, could you take your time explaining a few points?

-Give a logic explanation how RG could/was able to commit the murder alone.
-Give a logic explanation why RG would have staged a 'rape' scenario.
-Give a logic explanation why RS/AK gave contradictory alibis many times in different situations - starting with RS interview.

Thanks and regards,

Zopi
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

SomeAlibi wrote:

Quote:
US domestic interview of the editor Mudede of The Stranger. He says he's been down to where RS and RG lived very close together. The US interviewer who is sympathetic to Amanda says "but RS and RG didn't know each other" and the journalist responds instantly "Impossible" and goes on to say that he knew everyone in the area in a matter of days of being there. They lived on top of each other.


123 steps apart, to be exact.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Rebel


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 3:25 am

Posts: 129

Location: Bellingham WA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:00 am   Post subject: Video Tribute To Meredith   

ViaDellaPergola has recently posted a video tribute to Meredith. It is very moving.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtPoeKWJXYE
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:16 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
SomeAlibi wrote:

Quote:
From the 48 Hours hatchet job, there is nevertheless an interesting snippet; Nathan Abraham - Bar worker at Merlins seemed very calm, credible; "People knew who Ruede was. We found out he tried to rob one of our bartenders. He went to his house and they had a little scuffle with a knife. He was one of those people you kinda knew him but stayed a little bit far away from him".


Just to clarify: the "bartender" in question is Christian T (can't remember his last name), the guy whose testimony was deemed unreliable by Judge Micheli because, among other things, he never came forward and did not file charges with police when the incident allegedly occurred.



Christian Tramontano

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Bea


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:18 pm

Posts: 267

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:17 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Hello Michael,

Thanks for backing me up over in the Examiner 'Questionable Mignini' article comments! (I am correct in assuming the Michael in the comments is you, no?)
http://www.examiner.com/x-32288-Spokane ... nox-result?

Funny how dotdotdot not only clings to her denial of a PR campaign but admits she'd commit murder to defend her (hypothetical) daughter accused of murder. Yeah, that'll win her side some much-needed sanity points, eh?
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:20 am   Post subject: Re: Video Tribute To Meredith   

Rebel wrote:
ViaDellaPergola has recently posted a video tribute to Meredith. It is very moving.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtPoeKWJXYE



I'll just embed that :)


for Meredith


_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:26 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
SomeAlibi wrote:

Quote:
From the 48 Hours hatchet job, there is nevertheless an interesting snippet; Nathan Abraham - Bar worker at Merlins seemed very calm, credible; "People knew who Ruede was. We found out he tried to rob one of our bartenders. He went to his house and they had a little scuffle with a knife. He was one of those people you kinda knew him but stayed a little bit far away from him".


Just to clarify: the "bartender" in question is Christian T (can't remember his last name), the guy whose testimony was deemed unreliable by Judge Micheli because, among other things, he never came forward and did not file charges with police when the incident allegedly occurred.



Christian Tramontano



Ah yes, thanks Skep / Michael. So Nathan Abraham's comments just become; "People knew who Ruede was. <snip> He was one of those people you kinda knew him but stayed a little bit far away from him"

Still does it for me :)

Right going to bed. That camera-checking, little smirk, the tragically sad looking heroine face and that headshake of Raffaele after the dumb kiss has really left me buzzed. I think my exact words were "you little *****". Oh to get my hands on the original video camera footage.

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:29 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Bea wrote:
Hello Michael,

Thanks for backing me up over in the Examiner 'Questionable Mignini' article comments! (I am correct in assuming the Michael in the comments is you, no?)
http://www.examiner.com/x-32288-Spokane ... nox-result?

Funny how dotdotdot not only clings to her denial of a PR campaign but admits she'd commit murder to defend her (hypothetical) daughter accused of murder. Yeah, that'll win her side some much-needed sanity points, eh?


:)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:51 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

It's come to the point if Amanda said the Earth was round the sky blue I would think she had an ulterior motive.

Those images of Amanda and Raffaele after the crime don't mean a lot. She's playing the damsel in distress for the sake of gaining a man's attention. Her Father is a control freak for which nothing is ever good enough. There is no way to please that type of person. If you think you've achieved what they've demanded, the demands are raised to a new level. Otherwise, they lose control if you are deemed equal.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:54 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

adentre wrote:
These are reasons I believe AK and RS are not guilty:

1)I do not believe AK and RS have a motive for the murder of MK. It surely wasn’t money, and I don’t believe it was because of arguments over cleaning of the house. I don’t believe it was a form of some Satanic ritual as there is no past behavior or involvement. I think the likelihood of AK and RS doing it for sexual pleasure and because they were high on drugs are pretty farfetched.


People kill for the most trivial and banal reasons: they felt like it, they felt disrespected, somebody looked them in a funny way, petty jealousy etc. There have also been seemingly motiveless murders.

There was no logical reason to murder Meredith. In case you hadn't realised, murderers are not logical and reasonable people.

Nobody has claimed that Meredith was killed in a satanic ritual, so why are you bringing it up?

The idea that priests, lawyers, teachers, nursery workers and police officers could be paedophiles might seem to far-fetched to many, but the reality is people from the these respectable professions have been convicted of sexually abusing children. Just because it might seem far-fetched to many people, doesn't mean it isn't true. You need to start living in the real world rather than some fantasy world in which everyone acts completely logically and reasonably.


adentre wrote:
2) Where are the transcripts of the interrogation?? Are police and prosecutors hiding them or destroyed them because it shows something that might not go along with their theories? Where is the video, where is the transcripts?????????


You sound like some hysterical conspiracy theorist. The police and prosecutors aren't hiding anything. Amanda Knox was questioned as a witness and not as a suspect on 5 November 2007. This is one the reasons why the interrogation wasn't recorded. Knox had made her false and malicious allegation against Diya Lumumba and the police and Mignini had to act quickly.

All the witnesses, including Knox's interpreter, who were present when she was questioned, have testified under oath that Knox wasn't hit or mistreated in any way. The judges and jury had to decide whether to believe the corroborative testimony of numerous upstanding witnesses or the word of a compulsive liar who has lied repeatedly. It will have been a very easy decision to make.

adentre wrote:
3) What about the 3 hard drives missing - One of AK’s, one of RS and one of MK?? Why did the police lose them? Does it not fit their puzzle? Does it show that AK and MK were friends? How can that happen in such an important investigation. It sure looks poorly on the police.


Again you sound like an hysterical conspiracy theorist. Mistakes can and do happen in police investigations.


adentre wrote:
4) Why is there only a minute amount of RS’s DNA when such a struggle took place. I again would think there would be hair etc. left in the room. The evidence about the bra clasp is EXTREMELY disturbing. The CSI people tainted it by passing it back and forth, then placing it in a plastic rather than a paper evidence folder. What is totally unforgivable is the fact that they obtained the clasp 46 or so days after the initial collection of evidence. I could imagine them opening MK’s door with their gloves on and thereby picking up RS’s who tried to open the door, and then touch the clasp and hand it back and forth. Why has there been a video of the bra clasp leaked out? It would seem that they were looking for evidence against RS and this would prove his quilt. It sure seems extremely suspicious to me!


The amount of Sollecito's DNA was described as "abundant" by Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni. Raffale Sollecito's DNA wasn't on the door handle. The only other instance of Sollecito's DNA was found on a cigarette butt in the kitchen.

Did Rudy Guede leave any hair in Meredith's room?

The scientific police didn't taint the bra clasp by handling it. They were wearing gloves. You are coming across as very ignorant and ill-informed.

The scientific police provided the defence teams with the videos of the investigation. It shows you how transparent they are. The forensic investigation was independently reviewed by Dr. Renato Biondo, the head of the DNA unit of the scientific police, in 208. He confirmed that all the forensic findings were accurate and reliable. He praised the work of Dr. Stefanoni and her team.

adentre wrote:
5) Why would the knife that was taken from RS apartment first placed into a paper evidence folder, removed and placed in a box, then another box and then shipped to the lab? Why the extra handling? Why take it out of the paper folder? This really seems suspicious to me. The knife does not fit most of the wounds and does not fit the pattern on the sheet. Prosecutors would then have to come up with a two knife theory. Of course this is possible, but not probable.


The double DNA knife was properly handled and bagged. End of story.

The double DNA knife is compatible with the deep puncture wound on Meredith's neck. Various independent forensic experts - Dr. Patrizia Stenoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli - categorically stated that Meredith's DNA was on the blade of the double DNA knife.

Furthermore, Raffaele Sollecito confirmed that Meredith's DNA was on the balde of the knife when he claimed on two separate occasions that he had accidentally pricked Meredith's hand whilst cooking.

adentre wrote:
6) I have heard so much conflicting stories on how long the interrogation was and whether it was with a lawyer and an interpreter. I am in the belief an interpreter was present and I believe she was treated to breaks and food. I do question if it is possible that she was cuffed lightly on the back of the head. (where is the video) I do believe that under hours of questioning (even if it were only a few hours) by professional and skilled interrogators, that almost anyone can say anything. I know personally of cases where this has happened and the accused has spent years in prison because of false testimony. I do believe the police et al, would ask questions such as: ‘What could you have imagined the crime to have looked like?’


The claim that Amanda Knox was hit twice came from Amanda Knox. The huge problem with this claim is that:

1. It has been made by a compulsive liar.

2. It has been flatly contradicted by numerous witnesses.

Amanda Knox voluntarily accused Diya Lumumba of murdering Meredith. She admitted on four separate occasions that she was at the cottage when Meredith. She also voluntarily admitted that she was involved in Meredith's murder on 6 November.


adentre wrote:
7) Why is there NO DNA evidence in Meredith’s room of Amanda if there was such a struggle? Surely there would be hairs of Amanda that would fall off with a struggle. I understand the only physical evidence at the scene is a shoe print that came from the same size shoe as AK. This still is not physical evidence that is conclusive in any way shape or form. She couldn’t have cleaned up just her physical evidence and not RG’s.


Evidence that Amanda Knox was in Meredith's room on the night of the murder:

1. The double DNA Knife not only places Amanda Knox in Meredith's room, but also indicates that she inflicted the fatal wound

2. The woman's bloody shoeprint on the pillow under Meredith's body matched Amanda Knox's foot size, but was incompatible with Meredith's foot size. This debunks the myth that Rudy Guede acted alone and clearly places Amanda Knox inside Meredith's room when Meredith was killed.

3. Raffaele Sollecito's forensic expert, Professor Vinci, claimed that he had found Knox's DNA on Meredith's bra. This seems to prove she also handled Meredith's bra.

Apparently, Vincenzo Pascali, Sollecito's chief forensic consultant, also found Knox's DNA on Meredith's bra

4.Amanda Knox's reading lamp was found in Meredith's room. This is further evidence that Amanda Knox was in Meredith's room on the night of the murder.

5. Amanda Knox's footprints were set in Meredith's blood in different parts of the cottage, which clearly indicates that she had stepped in Meredith's blood in the Meredith's room and then tracked the blood around the house.

6. Amanda Knox's DNA was mixed with Meredith's blood in the bathroom, which clearly indicates that her hands had come into with Meredith's blood in Meredith's room and then touched different fittings and the box of Q Tips cotton swabs in the bathroom.

adentre wrote:
8) Why if there was going to be a premeditated murder with AK and or RS bringing a knife to MK’s place, was there no record on the computers or text messages or phone calls between AK, RS and Rudy Guede? This is a bit disturbing. When would they have time to set up such a attack. RG would have to bring his own knife which still hasn’t been found.


Who's claiming that Meredith's murder was premeditated? No-one knows whether it was or not.

It's possible to communicate without mobile phones. Judge Paolo Micheli pointed out that Knox, Sollecito and Guede could have met in the bars and clubs of Perugia.

Who is claiming that Rudy Guede had to bring a knife with him. I haven't read any comments on PMF claiming this.

adentre wrote:
9) RG has all sorts of physical DNA evidence all over MK’s room and body. He fled the country after the murder. Apparently he has been known to break and enter and steal. Apparently his DNA was on the inside of MK’s purse so it does look like he robbed her and there was money missing. He also had a cut on his hand. (no cuts on AK or RS) It is so obvious that he is involved mostly if not SOLEY. His testimony about being there but someone else did it is pretty much the same as many, many other rapists and murderers.


It's not true that Rudy Guede's DNA was all over Meredith's room. Surprisingly, there was just one instance of his DNA on Meredith's body, and there was a total of four instance in Meredith's room. His DNA wasn't found inside Meredith's purse.

Guede’s DNA was found:

1. On a vaginal swab.

2. On toilet paper.

3. On the right side of Meredith’s bra.

4. Mixed with Meredith’s DNA on the her purse zip.

5. On the left cuff of Meredith’s light blue tracksuit top.

Rudy Guede, unlike Amanda Knox, didn't have a criminal record before Meredith's murder. Raffaele Sollecito also had a run-in with the police a few years earlier.


Last edited by The Machine on Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:11 am, edited 4 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Zopi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 8:52 pm

Posts: 317

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:02 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Chapeau The Machine!
Top Profile 

Offline Bea


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:18 pm

Posts: 267

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:48 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Meredith Kercher leads poll for new Seattle park name
Since Seattle backed out of naming a new park after Perugia, it will need some name. Here is how the voting has gone so far in the poll of Examiner …

http://www.examiner.com/x-32288-Spokane ... attle-Park


edited to add link to actual poll (voting still open): http://www.examiner.com/x-32288-Spokane ... rugia-Park


Last edited by Bea on Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Hammerite


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 3:46 pm

Posts: 517

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:54 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

[quote="adentre"]First of all I would like to state that I have not come to a complete decision on the guilt of AK and RS. I do believe that RG is guilty without a doubt. I would like to voice my concerns over guilt of AK and RS. I am a Canadian and do not feel like I would take sides because of nationality. I must say I am leaning more towards they are innocent, but I do have some serious concerns over their alibis etc.

These are reasons I believe AK and RS are not guilty:
etc........[quote="adentre"]

Hello adentre,

Welcome to this forum. Like you I too am a recent poster here. I am surprised however by your lack of detailed knowledge on the specifics of this complex case. If as you state you are concerned with learning the truth about this horrific murder than your next step is to go to the trouble to inform yourself of the facts.

You are free to explore the vast amount of verifiable data that has been assembled here and on the True Justice for Meredith Kercher site. If you are prepared to do your homework you can fill in all of the huge gaps in information that are missing on your post. In addition there has been extensive and exhaustive discussion on these sites covering all of the points you allude to; and you might find it interesting to look over these to also contribute to your knowledge of this case.

Proffering inaccurate and wrong facts is most disrespectful. At the very least you should debate with the facts and the truth; you need to start from this position. Don’t treat people here as your personal tutors, show respect to others and be assured it will be shown to you.
Be of no doubt that learning the facts will be time consuming. This however will not pose an obstacle to a true seeker of the truth and will show that you are not merely a time waster here.

It is not fair to expect posters here that have been over this ground many many times before to do your research for you; it is like a student arriving late for a lecture and expecting the entire class to back up and start all over again from the beginning just for them.

Best wishes.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 2:42 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Hammerite wrote:
adentre wrote:
First of all I would like to state that I have not come to a complete decision on the guilt of AK and RS. I do believe that RG is guilty without a doubt. I would like to voice my concerns over guilt of AK and RS. I am a Canadian and do not feel like I would take sides because of nationality. I must say I am leaning more towards they are innocent, but I do have some serious concerns over their alibis etc.

These are reasons I believe AK and RS are not guilty:
etc........
adentre wrote:

Hello adentre,

Welcome to this forum. Like you I too am a recent poster here. I am surprised however by your lack of detailed knowledge on the specifics of this complex case. If as you state you are concerned with learning the truth about this horrific murder than your next step is to go to the trouble to inform yourself of the facts.

You are free to explore the vast amount of verifiable data that has been assembled here and on the True Justice for Meredith Kercher site. If you are prepared to do your homework you can fill in all of the huge gaps in information that are missing on your post. In addition there has been extensive and exhaustive discussion on these sites covering all of the points you allude to; and you might find it interesting to look over these to also contribute to your knowledge of this case.

Proffering inaccurate and wrong facts is most disrespectful. At the very least you should debate with the facts and the truth; you need to start from this position. Don’t treat people here as your personal tutors, show respect to others and be assured it will be shown to you.
Be of no doubt that learning the facts will be time consuming. This however will not pose an obstacle to a true seeker of the truth and will show that you are not merely a time waster here.

It is not fair to expect posters here that have been over this ground many many times before to do your research for you; it is like a student arriving late for a lecture and expecting the entire class to back up and start all over again from the beginning just for them.

Best wishes.


Amen.
In addition, I don't care what nationality posters are. It has nothing to do with anything relevant. I also don't care in what direction anyone claims to be leaning. A verdict was handed down after a laborious, thorough and fair trial. As Hammerite notes, we have been over a lot of ground and it is all part of the public record. As a truthseeker, Adentre will find tons of stuff to read here.

I admire The Machine for taking the time to address each one of Adentre's points. I hope you all will excuse me for not doing so. I suggest that Adentre read Andrea Vogt's most recent article for seattlepi.com. Among other things, it reviews the evidence that led to the conviction of AK and RS.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline adentre


Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:27 am

Posts: 3

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 3:49 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

TO Machine:

The Machine wrote:
adentre wrote:
These are reasons I believe AK and RS are not guilty:

1)I do not believe AK and RS have a motive for the murder of MK. It surely wasn’t money, and I don’t believe it was because of arguments over cleaning of the house. I don’t believe it was a form of some Satanic ritual as there is no past behavior or involvement. I think the likelihood of AK and RS doing it for sexual pleasure and because they were high on drugs are pretty farfetched.


People kill for the most trivial and banal reasons: they felt like it, they felt disrespected, somebody looked them in a funny way, petty jealousy etc. There have also been seemingly motiveless murders.

There was no logical reason to murder Meredith. In case you hadn't realized, murderers are not logical and reasonable people.

Machine: I really wonder how many murders are committed by people with no motive whatsoever? Most of ‘these types’ of murders are by people who are schizophrenic or delusional in some way. AK and RS simply do not fit the profile! So what is your theory on why the killed MK?

Nobody has claimed that Meredith was killed in a satanic ritual, so why are you bringing it up?

The idea that priests, lawyers, teachers, nursery workers and police officers could be paedophiles might seem to far-fetched to many, but the reality is people from the these respectable professions have been convicted of sexually abusing children. Just because it might seem far-fetched to many people, doesn't mean it isn't true. You need to start living in the real world rather than some fantasy world in which everyone acts completely logically and reasonably.

Yes Machine, you are right, I have to get out of the fantasy world and see that even people like you could be a gay-bashing murderous pedophile and an all around bad person - but you probably aren’t.


adentre wrote:
2) Where are the transcripts of the interrogation?? Are police and prosecutors hiding them or destroyed them because it shows something that might not go along with their theories? Where is the video, where is the transcripts?????????


You sound like some hysterical conspiracy theorist. The police and prosecutors aren't hiding anything. Amanda Knox was questioned as a witness and not as a suspect on 5 November 2007. This is one the reasons why the interrogation wasn't recorded. Knox had made her false and malicious allegation against Diya Lumumba and the police and Mignini had to act quickly.

All the witnesses, including Knox's interpreter, who were present when she was questioned, have testified under oath that Knox wasn't hit or mistreated in any way. The judges and jury had to decide whether to believe the corroborative testimony of numerous upstanding witnesses or the word of a compulsive liar who has lied repeatedly. It will have been a very easy decision to make.

Why do I sound hysterical, seriously??? Simply the loss of the transcripts or video make it highly suspicious PLAIN AND SIMPLE! It does not bode well on the police or the investigators at all. They cannot botch something as serious as this surely.

adentre wrote:
3) What about the 3 hard drives missing - One of AK’s, one of RS and one of MK?? Why did the police lose them? Does it not fit their puzzle? Does it show that AK and MK were friends? How can that happen in such an important investigation. It sure looks poorly on the police.


Again you sound like an hysterical conspiracy theorist. Mistakes can and do happen in police investigations.
Again you are the one who sounds hysterical. A
mistake like this is simply unforgivable.


adentre wrote:
4) Why is there only a minute amount of RS’s DNA when such a struggle took place. I again would think there would be hair etc. left in the room. The evidence about the bra clasp is EXTREMELY disturbing. The CSI people tainted it by passing it back and forth, then placing it in a plastic rather than a paper evidence folder. What is totally unforgivable is the fact that they obtained the clasp 46 or so days after the initial collection of evidence. I could imagine them opening MK’s door with their gloves on and thereby picking up RS’s who tried to open the door, and then touch the clasp and hand it back and forth. Why has there been a video of the bra clasp leaked out? It would seem that they were looking for evidence against RS and this would prove his quilt. It sure seems extremely suspicious to me!


The amount of Sollecito's DNA was described as "abundant" by Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni. Raffale Sollecito's DNA wasn't on the door handle. The only other instance of Sollecito's DNA was found on a cigarette butt in the kitchen.

I’m not sure where you read it wasn’t on the door handle, but if he tried to break down the door, it would be on the door. Abundant is not a very quantifiable term for the lay person at least when it comes to DNA. I believe it was around 200 rf.

Did Rudy Guede leave any hair in Meredith's room?
Yes Rudy left his hair in MK’s hand!

The scientific police didn't taint the bra clasp by handling it. They were wearing gloves. You are coming across as very ignorant and ill-informed.

I’m sorry but you are the one who is ignorant. I know they were wearing gloves, however, if they pass it back and forth and if it is on the ground and moved, the evidence is tainted without question.

The scientific police provided the defence teams with the videos of the investigation. It shows you how transparent they are. The forensic investigation was independently reviewed by Dr. Renato Biondo, the head of the DNA unit of the scientific police, in 208. He confirmed that all the forensic findings were accurate and reliable. He praised the work of Dr. Stefanoni and her team.

I guess it does depend on which DNA specialists you listen to. I wonder if you have read any other labs specialist reports on the said evidence?

adentre wrote:
5) Why would the knife that was taken from RS apartment first placed into a paper evidence folder, removed and placed in a box, then another box and then shipped to the lab? Why the extra handling? Why take it out of the paper folder? This really seems suspicious to me. The knife does not fit most of the wounds and does not fit the pattern on the sheet. Prosecutors would then have to come up with a two knife theory. Of course this is possible, but not probable.


The double DNA knife was properly handled and bagged. End of story.

If the knife was removed from the paper folder and placed in a box, it was not handled properly. There would be no reason to remove it before placing it in the box.

The double DNA knife is compatible with the deep puncture wound on Meredith's neck. Various independent forensic experts - Dr. Patrizia Stenoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli - categorically stated that Meredith's DNA was on the blade of the double DNA knife.

Although the blade of the knife from RS’s apartment could have made ONE, and only ONE of the wounds, whereas the other knife could have made ALL the wounds and especially all three in the neck, it is farfetched that RS’s knife made only one wound and one wound only.

Furthermore, Raffaele Sollecito confirmed that Meredith's DNA was on the balde of the knife when he claimed on two separate occasions that he had accidentally pricked Meredith's hand whilst cooking.

If he admits to that, it sure DOES sound suspicious.

adentre wrote:
6) I have heard so much conflicting stories on how long the interrogation was and whether it was with a lawyer and an interpreter. I am in the belief an interpreter was present and I believe she was treated to breaks and food. I do question if it is possible that she was cuffed lightly on the back of the head. (where is the video) I do believe that under hours of questioning (even if it were only a few hours) by professional and skilled interrogators, that almost anyone can say anything. I know personally of cases where this has happened and the accused has spent years in prison because of false testimony. I do believe the police et al, would ask questions such as: ‘What could you have imagined the crime to have looked like?’


The claim that Amanda Knox was hit twice came from Amanda Knox. The huge problem with this claim is that:

1. It has been made by a compulsive liar.

I wonder if you realize how many suspects or witnesses change there story when interrogated by police. It does not make them a compulsive liar. It makes them vulnerable to the constant harsh and intimidating interrogation from police. Do you have any idea how many people have confessed to a murder they didn’t do and then found the real killer by irresputable DNA evidence? In numbers in the thousands and thousands.
2. It has been flatly contradicted by numerous witnesses.

Amanda Knox voluntarily accused Diya Lumumba of murdering Meredith. She admitted on four separate occasions that she was at the cottage when Meredith. She also voluntarily admitted that she was involved in Meredith's murder on 6 November.

I believe she retracted the statements made after she had some rest and clear mind.

adentre wrote:
7) Why is there NO DNA evidence in Meredith’s room of Amanda if there was such a struggle? Surely there would be hairs of Amanda that would fall off with a struggle. I understand the only physical evidence at the scene is a shoe print that came from the same size shoe as AK. This still is not physical evidence that is conclusive in any way shape or form. She couldn’t have cleaned up just her physical evidence and not RG’s.


Evidence that Amanda Knox was in Meredith's room on the night of the murder:

1. The double DNA Knife not only places Amanda Knox in Meredith's room, but also indicates that she inflicted the fatal wound

If the DNA evidence were accurate, then it would only put the DNA on the blade of MK and that of AK on the handle. It COULD not be 'absolute' that it was placed in the room or even that it made the fatal wound. It is possible, but it doesn’t put the blade in MK’s room.

2. The woman's bloody shoeprint on the pillow under Meredith's body matched Amanda Knox's foot size, but was incompatible with Meredith's foot size. This debunks the myth that Rudy Guede acted alone and clearly places Amanda Knox inside Meredith's room when Meredith was killed.

There is not concrete match on AK’s footprint, it just matches her shoe size and that’s all. Hardly reliable.
3. Raffaele Sollecito's forensic expert, Professor Vinci, claimed that he had found Knox's DNA on Meredith's bra. This seems to prove she also handled Meredith's bra.

Apparently, Vincenzo Pascali, Sollecito's chief forensic consultant, also found Knox's DNA on Meredith's bra
I have never read about this brought up in court and have heard much to the contrary. Where did you get this? Web link?

4.Amanda Knox's reading lamp was found in Meredith's room. This is further evidence that Amanda Knox was in Meredith's room on the night of the murder.

Come on, really, how does that put her there in the room on that very night? MK could have borrowed the lamp on her own.

5. Amanda Knox's footprints were set in Meredith's blood in different parts of the cottage, which clearly indicates that she had stepped in Meredith's blood in the Meredith's room and then tracked the blood around the house.

No, if there is blood tracked around the house it could simply have come from the murderers footprints over-stepped by AK’s and RS’s footprints in the hallway and bathroom.

6. Amanda Knox's DNA was mixed with Meredith's blood in the bathroom, which clearly indicates that her hands had come into with Meredith's blood in Meredith's room and then touched different fittings and the box of Q Tips cotton swabs in the bathroom.

adentre wrote:
8) Why if there was going to be a premeditated murder with AK and or RS bringing a knife to MK’s place, was there no record on the computers or text messages or phone calls between AK, RS and Rudy Guede? This is a bit disturbing. When would they have time to set up such a attack. RG would have to bring his own knife which still hasn’t been found.


Who's claiming that Meredith's murder was premeditated? No-one knows whether it was or not.
I said ‘if there’ was a premeditated murder, then AK or RS would have had to bring their knife with them as well as the other knife which wasn’t found.

It's possible to communicate without mobile phones. Judge Paolo Micheli pointed out that Knox, Sollecito and Guede could have met in the bars and clubs of Perugia.

Yes it is possible to communicate that way, but no one ever saw them together so it is highly unlikely to premeditate this murder in a very short time.

Who is claiming that Rudy Guede had to bring a knife with him. I haven't read any comments on PMF claiming this.
Well either RG had to bring a knife or AK and RS would have hid the knife that did all of the wounds but one. Why wouldn’t they hid both knifes? Therefore it would have to have been brought by RG.

adentre wrote:
9) RG has all sorts of physical DNA evidence all over MK’s room and body. He fled the country after the murder. Apparently he has been known to break and enter and steal. Apparently his DNA was on the inside of MK’s purse so it does look like he robbed her and there was money missing. He also had a cut on his hand. (no cuts on AK or RS) It is so obvious that he is involved mostly if not SOLEY. His testimony about being there but someone else did it is pretty much the same as many, many other rapists and murderers.


It's not true that Rudy Guede's DNA was all over Meredith's room. Surprisingly, there was just one instance of his DNA on Meredith's body, and there was a total of four instance in Meredith's room. His DNA wasn't found inside Meredith's purse.

I have read that it was on the purse and will try to find it (link) for you! His hair was also apparently in her hand.

Guede’s DNA was found:

1. On a vaginal swab.

2. On toilet paper.

3. On the right side of Meredith’s bra.

4. Mixed with Meredith’s DNA on the her purse zip.

5. On the left cuff of Meredith’s light blue tracksuit top.

Rudy Guede, unlike Amanda Knox, didn't have a criminal record before Meredith's murder. Raffaele Sollecito also had a run-in with the police a few years earlier.


Oh the old AK’s CRIMINAL RECORD – come on dude!!!! She had a party and received a fine for disturbing the neighbors. A fine - God they should put her to death. (wink)

Andy (Canada)

I believe RG had been caught with stolen property and was known as a petty drug dealer.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:00 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

SomeAlibi wrote:
DeathFish 2000 wrote:
Well thank you so much for posting this SomeAlibi, the 'half smile quickly abandoned' shot is excellent and kudos to you for your sharp observance.
I was beginning to think I was the only one..



Cheers.... the video really is the thing because you can see all the nuances. But I don't know how to rip a small 7 second section from a youtube vid. I urge everyone to watch it. What I see is



Oh I missed one. Let me update that list I made because there's another camera look I missed. Three in all! (And my descriptions should have been better). I do realise these videos have been much examined for the kiss etc, but it's the self-awaredness and therefore staging that I hadn't appreciated and which is so appalling. This really made my skin crawl when I saw all the little components together. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJyAU1Zo ... re=related

The key is to watch the youtube vid in High Quality (red HQ button on the bottom right of the youtube player) AND then click the Fullscreen button to the right of that. At this size everything is plainly visible even on a 10 inch notebook. If it's not HQ and you're on a laptop / notebook it's going to be really hard to see.



a) The scene opens and Amanda almost immediately (0:44) looks directly at the camera pointing at her from diagonally behind Raffaele's left side. It's irrefutable she is checking that camera. She's probably (incorrectly) a bit reassured by how far off it is. Lenses are powerful though Amanda! This is look one.

b) Amanda is slightly offguard by trying to do three things at once; to check the camera, think about how she is appearing and now RS is saying something to her circling his hand. It could be "keep going, we're on candid camera". It could be a kind of hurry up motion accompanying a statement such as "all this will blow over".

c) Amanda gives a brief little half smile / smirk and in the video you can clearly see her flick her eyebrows up at it. The left hand cheek muscle also twitches up in time with the eyebrows - a half smile. She also placed his hand on his back and rubs down - all the same action. There's some complicity going on.

d) She quickly stops that expression because she remembers she's on camera.

e) You can then clearly see her immediately steal another very very quick look at the camera over Raffaele's left shoulder / side. This is look two at 00:47.


f) But then, she continues to move her eyes right to the second camera that is side-on to them and which the editor is just about to cut to to show the kiss. Her eyes are facing directly right at the side-on camera at 00:49 - look three... This is absolutely classic wrongdoing behaviour - she almost involuntarily checks out TWO different cameras to see if she was observed.

f) She then resumes looking sad for the record. Probably thinking "be careful!" or "****!"

g) They kiss. She initiates one kiss, Raffaele does two more. They are probably feeling pretty vulnerable and worried and that human touch is reassuring. But people in shock and grief IMHO don't want kisses on the lips - they want hand holding or hugs. Of course, they aren't in that state - more worried and looking for "their" normal reassurance. So it goes on too long, becoming notable.


h) Two seconds later Raffaele in a small but quick motion clearly shakes his head quickly as if to say "that was wrong". It't not a slow shaking of the head about how sad things are, it is a quick 'admonishment' type of headshake when people are telling themselves off. It's small but definitely there at 00:57/58.

i) Amanda puts on her most pathetic downward "I'm sad" face looking deliberately away but conveniently towards camera. Rather unnaturally, Raffaele is also looking past Amanda and doing that rather odd downward arm rubbing motion. He looks really artificial to me.


And that is how, in the space of half a minute, Amanda and Raffaele started the exquisite process of blowing themselves up. If there wasn't conversations in Perugia policestations along the lines of what I just posted, I'll eat my hat. In every murder, police always encourage family and friends in the UK to do appeal videos. They serve two purposes - to do an appeal but mostly they are done so they can be shot in close detail and observed by trained forensic psychologists to look for displayed behaviour by the family and friends (on the basis that the majority of murders are committed by someone known to the deceased). This is how Ian Huntley blew himself up for instance in the murder case of two little girls. Amanda and Raffaele gave that to them on a plate and once they had done, that extremely useful tool "the copper's nose" (copper = slang for policeman) was firmly on the scent. From that time on, they were toast. The police khew who they had, it was just painstakingly putting the evidentary basis of the case together.

But above all, watching that, I see two guilty as sin people given away by the smallest of indiscretions and it makes my skin crawl. :(

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.


Last edited by SomeAlibi on Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:02 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline adentre


Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:27 am

Posts: 3

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:00 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Hammerite wrote:
adentre wrote:
First of all I would like to state that I have not come to a complete decision on the guilt of AK and RS. I do believe that RG is guilty without a doubt. I would like to voice my concerns over guilt of AK and RS. I am a Canadian and do not feel like I would take sides because of nationality. I must say I am leaning more towards they are innocent, but I do have some serious concerns over their alibis etc.

These are reasons I believe AK and RS are not guilty:
etc........
adentre wrote:

Hello adentre,

Welcome to this forum. Like you I too am a recent poster here. I am surprised however by your lack of detailed knowledge on the specifics of this complex case. If as you state you are concerned with learning the truth about this horrific murder than your next step is to go to the trouble to inform yourself of the facts.

I have read exhaustively on this case and I don't believe that I more than anyone else on here is trying to put out false information such as 'receipts of bleach' etc. I am stating my opinion on many articles and web sites including this one. I see other members on this forum list inaccuracies and they get debated back and forth.

You are free to explore the vast amount of verifiable data that has been assembled here and on the True Justice for Meredith Kercher site. If you are prepared to do your homework you can fill in all of the huge gaps in information that are missing on your post. In addition there has been extensive and exhaustive discussion on these sites covering all of the points you allude to; and you might find it interesting to look over these to also contribute to your knowledge of this case.
It is very hard to find irresputable facts on the web anywhere including this site. I don't think just listing your site and TJMK is fair whatsoever. There are many other sites and articles to be read to be well informed and I have done just that.

Proffering inaccurate and wrong facts is most disrespectful. At the very least you should debate with the facts and the truth; you need to start from this position. Don’t treat people here as your personal tutors, show respect to others and be assured it will be shown to you.
Be of no doubt that learning the facts will be time consuming. This however will not pose an obstacle to a true seeker of the truth and will show that you are not merely a time waster here.

It is not fair to expect posters here that have been over this ground many many times before to do your research for you; it is like a student arriving late for a lecture and expecting the entire class to back up and start all over again from the beginning just for them.

As I say, I have done exhaustive reading and do not in fact agree with you with 'I am not well informed! I had to write a long article to get people on this list up to speed with my convictions. I'm sorry if this is not acceptable to this forum. If not feel free to ban me.

Best wishes.


Amen.
In addition, I don't care what nationality posters are. It has nothing to do with anything relevant. I also don't care in what direction anyone claims to be leaning. A verdict was handed down after a laborious, thorough and fair trial. As Hammerite notes, we have been over a lot of ground and it is all part of the public record. As a truthseeker, Adentre will find tons of stuff to read here.

I admire The Machine for taking the time to address each one of Adentre's points. I hope you all will excuse me for not doing so. I suggest that Adentre read Andrea Vogt's most recent article for seattlepi.com. Among other things, it reviews the evidence that led to the conviction of AK and RS.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:02 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

adentre wrote:
TO Machine:

The Machine wrote:
adentre wrote:
These are reasons I believe AK and RS are not guilty:

1)I do not believe AK and RS have a motive for the murder of MK. It surely wasn’t money, and I don’t believe it was because of arguments over cleaning of the house. I don’t believe it was a form of some Satanic ritual as there is no past behavior or involvement. I think the likelihood of AK and RS doing it for sexual pleasure and because they were high on drugs are pretty farfetched.


People kill for the most trivial and banal reasons: they felt like it, they felt disrespected, somebody looked them in a funny way, petty jealousy etc. There have also been seemingly motiveless murders.

There was no logical reason to murder Meredith. In case you hadn't realized, murderers are not logical and reasonable people.

Machine: I really wonder how many murders are committed by people with no motive whatsoever? Most of ‘these types’ of murders are by people who are schizophrenic or delusional in some way. AK and RS simply do not fit the profile! So what is your theory on why the killed MK?

Nobody has claimed that Meredith was killed in a satanic ritual, so why are you bringing it up?

The idea that priests, lawyers, teachers, nursery workers and police officers could be paedophiles might seem to far-fetched to many, but the reality is people from the these respectable professions have been convicted of sexually abusing children. Just because it might seem far-fetched to many people, doesn't mean it isn't true. You need to start living in the real world rather than some fantasy world in which everyone acts completely logically and reasonably.

Yes Machine, you are right, I have to get out of the fantasy world and see that even people like you could be a gay-bashing murderous pedophile and an all around bad person - but you probably aren’t.


adentre wrote:
2) Where are the transcripts of the interrogation?? Are police and prosecutors hiding them or destroyed them because it shows something that might not go along with their theories? Where is the video, where is the transcripts?????????


You sound like some hysterical conspiracy theorist. The police and prosecutors aren't hiding anything. Amanda Knox was questioned as a witness and not as a suspect on 5 November 2007. This is one the reasons why the interrogation wasn't recorded. Knox had made her false and malicious allegation against Diya Lumumba and the police and Mignini had to act quickly.

All the witnesses, including Knox's interpreter, who were present when she was questioned, have testified under oath that Knox wasn't hit or mistreated in any way. The judges and jury had to decide whether to believe the corroborative testimony of numerous upstanding witnesses or the word of a compulsive liar who has lied repeatedly. It will have been a very easy decision to make.

Why do I sound hysterical, seriously??? Simply the loss of the transcripts or video make it highly suspicious PLAIN AND SIMPLE! It does not bode well on the police or the investigators at all. They cannot botch something as serious as this surely.

adentre wrote:
3) What about the 3 hard drives missing - One of AK’s, one of RS and one of MK?? Why did the police lose them? Does it not fit their puzzle? Does it show that AK and MK were friends? How can that happen in such an important investigation. It sure looks poorly on the police.


Again you sound like an hysterical conspiracy theorist. Mistakes can and do happen in police investigations.
Again you are the one who sounds hysterical. A
mistake like this is simply unforgivable.


adentre wrote:
4) Why is there only a minute amount of RS’s DNA when such a struggle took place. I again would think there would be hair etc. left in the room. The evidence about the bra clasp is EXTREMELY disturbing. The CSI people tainted it by passing it back and forth, then placing it in a plastic rather than a paper evidence folder. What is totally unforgivable is the fact that they obtained the clasp 46 or so days after the initial collection of evidence. I could imagine them opening MK’s door with their gloves on and thereby picking up RS’s who tried to open the door, and then touch the clasp and hand it back and forth. Why has there been a video of the bra clasp leaked out? It would seem that they were looking for evidence against RS and this would prove his quilt. It sure seems extremely suspicious to me!


The amount of Sollecito's DNA was described as "abundant" by Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni. Raffale Sollecito's DNA wasn't on the door handle. The only other instance of Sollecito's DNA was found on a cigarette butt in the kitchen.

I’m not sure where you read it wasn’t on the door handle, but if he tried to break down the door, it would be on the door. Abundant is not a very quantifiable term for the lay person at least when it comes to DNA. I believe it was around 200 rf.

Did Rudy Guede leave any hair in Meredith's room?
Yes Rudy left his hair in MK’s hand!

The scientific police didn't taint the bra clasp by handling it. They were wearing gloves. You are coming across as very ignorant and ill-informed.

I’m sorry but you are the one who is ignorant. I know they were wearing gloves, however, if they pass it back and forth and if it is on the ground and moved, the evidence is tainted without question.

The scientific police provided the defence teams with the videos of the investigation. It shows you how transparent they are. The forensic investigation was independently reviewed by Dr. Renato Biondo, the head of the DNA unit of the scientific police, in 208. He confirmed that all the forensic findings were accurate and reliable. He praised the work of Dr. Stefanoni and her team.

I guess it does depend on which DNA specialists you listen to. I wonder if you have read any other labs specialist reports on the said evidence?

adentre wrote:
5) Why would the knife that was taken from RS apartment first placed into a paper evidence folder, removed and placed in a box, then another box and then shipped to the lab? Why the extra handling? Why take it out of the paper folder? This really seems suspicious to me. The knife does not fit most of the wounds and does not fit the pattern on the sheet. Prosecutors would then have to come up with a two knife theory. Of course this is possible, but not probable.


The double DNA knife was properly handled and bagged. End of story.

If the knife was removed from the paper folder and placed in a box, it was not handled properly. There would be no reason to remove it before placing it in the box.

The double DNA knife is compatible with the deep puncture wound on Meredith's neck. Various independent forensic experts - Dr. Patrizia Stenoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli - categorically stated that Meredith's DNA was on the blade of the double DNA knife.

Although the blade of the knife from RS’s apartment could have made ONE, and only ONE of the wounds, whereas the other knife could have made ALL the wounds and especially all three in the neck, it is farfetched that RS’s knife made only one wound and one wound only.

Furthermore, Raffaele Sollecito confirmed that Meredith's DNA was on the balde of the knife when he claimed on two separate occasions that he had accidentally pricked Meredith's hand whilst cooking.

If he admits to that, it sure DOES sound suspicious.

adentre wrote:
6) I have heard so much conflicting stories on how long the interrogation was and whether it was with a lawyer and an interpreter. I am in the belief an interpreter was present and I believe she was treated to breaks and food. I do question if it is possible that she was cuffed lightly on the back of the head. (where is the video) I do believe that under hours of questioning (even if it were only a few hours) by professional and skilled interrogators, that almost anyone can say anything. I know personally of cases where this has happened and the accused has spent years in prison because of false testimony. I do believe the police et al, would ask questions such as: ‘What could you have imagined the crime to have looked like?’


The claim that Amanda Knox was hit twice came from Amanda Knox. The huge problem with this claim is that:

1. It has been made by a compulsive liar.

I wonder if you realize how many suspects or witnesses change there story when interrogated by police. It does not make them a compulsive liar. It makes them vulnerable to the constant harsh and intimidating interrogation from police. Do you have any idea how many people have confessed to a murder they didn’t do and then found the real killer by irresputable DNA evidence? In numbers in the thousands and thousands.
2. It has been flatly contradicted by numerous witnesses.

Amanda Knox voluntarily accused Diya Lumumba of murdering Meredith. She admitted on four separate occasions that she was at the cottage when Meredith. She also voluntarily admitted that she was involved in Meredith's murder on 6 November.

I believe she retracted the statements made after she had some rest and clear mind.

adentre wrote:
7) Why is there NO DNA evidence in Meredith’s room of Amanda if there was such a struggle? Surely there would be hairs of Amanda that would fall off with a struggle. I understand the only physical evidence at the scene is a shoe print that came from the same size shoe as AK. This still is not physical evidence that is conclusive in any way shape or form. She couldn’t have cleaned up just her physical evidence and not RG’s.


Evidence that Amanda Knox was in Meredith's room on the night of the murder:

1. The double DNA Knife not only places Amanda Knox in Meredith's room, but also indicates that she inflicted the fatal wound

If the DNA evidence were accurate, then it would only put the DNA on the blade of MK and that of AK on the handle. It COULD not be 'absolute' that it was placed in the room or even that it made the fatal wound. It is possible, but it doesn’t put the blade in MK’s room.

2. The woman's bloody shoeprint on the pillow under Meredith's body matched Amanda Knox's foot size, but was incompatible with Meredith's foot size. This debunks the myth that Rudy Guede acted alone and clearly places Amanda Knox inside Meredith's room when Meredith was killed.

There is not concrete match on AK’s footprint, it just matches her shoe size and that’s all. Hardly reliable.
3. Raffaele Sollecito's forensic expert, Professor Vinci, claimed that he had found Knox's DNA on Meredith's bra. This seems to prove she also handled Meredith's bra.

Apparently, Vincenzo Pascali, Sollecito's chief forensic consultant, also found Knox's DNA on Meredith's bra
I have never read about this brought up in court and have heard much to the contrary. Where did you get this? Web link?

4.Amanda Knox's reading lamp was found in Meredith's room. This is further evidence that Amanda Knox was in Meredith's room on the night of the murder.

Come on, really, how does that put her there in the room on that very night? MK could have borrowed the lamp on her own.

5. Amanda Knox's footprints were set in Meredith's blood in different parts of the cottage, which clearly indicates that she had stepped in Meredith's blood in the Meredith's room and then tracked the blood around the house.

No, if there is blood tracked around the house it could simply have come from the murderers footprints over-stepped by AK’s and RS’s footprints in the hallway and bathroom.

6. Amanda Knox's DNA was mixed with Meredith's blood in the bathroom, which clearly indicates that her hands had come into with Meredith's blood in Meredith's room and then touched different fittings and the box of Q Tips cotton swabs in the bathroom.

adentre wrote:
8) Why if there was going to be a premeditated murder with AK and or RS bringing a knife to MK’s place, was there no record on the computers or text messages or phone calls between AK, RS and Rudy Guede? This is a bit disturbing. When would they have time to set up such a attack. RG would have to bring his own knife which still hasn’t been found.


Who's claiming that Meredith's murder was premeditated? No-one knows whether it was or not.
I said ‘if there’ was a premeditated murder, then AK or RS would have had to bring their knife with them as well as the other knife which wasn’t found.

It's possible to communicate without mobile phones. Judge Paolo Micheli pointed out that Knox, Sollecito and Guede could have met in the bars and clubs of Perugia.

Yes it is possible to communicate that way, but no one ever saw them together so it is highly unlikely to premeditate this murder in a very short time.

Who is claiming that Rudy Guede had to bring a knife with him. I haven't read any comments on PMF claiming this.
Well either RG had to bring a knife or AK and RS would have hid the knife that did all of the wounds but one. Why wouldn’t they hid both knifes? Therefore it would have to have been brought by RG.

adentre wrote:
9) RG has all sorts of physical DNA evidence all over MK’s room and body. He fled the country after the murder. Apparently he has been known to break and enter and steal. Apparently his DNA was on the inside of MK’s purse so it does look like he robbed her and there was money missing. He also had a cut on his hand. (no cuts on AK or RS) It is so obvious that he is involved mostly if not SOLEY. His testimony about being there but someone else did it is pretty much the same as many, many other rapists and murderers.


It's not true that Rudy Guede's DNA was all over Meredith's room. Surprisingly, there was just one instance of his DNA on Meredith's body, and there was a total of four instance in Meredith's room. His DNA wasn't found inside Meredith's purse.

I have read that it was on the purse and will try to find it (link) for you! His hair was also apparently in her hand.

Guede’s DNA was found:

1. On a vaginal swab.

2. On toilet paper.

3. On the right side of Meredith’s bra.

4. Mixed with Meredith’s DNA on the her purse zip.

5. On the left cuff of Meredith’s light blue tracksuit top.

Rudy Guede, unlike Amanda Knox, didn't have a criminal record before Meredith's murder. Raffaele Sollecito also had a run-in with the police a few years earlier.


Oh the old AK’s CRIMINAL RECORD – come on dude!!!! She had a party and received a fine for disturbing the neighbors. A fine - God they should put her to death. (wink)

Andy (Canada)

I believe RG had been caught with stolen property and was known as a petty drug dealer.


Adentre, I am beginning to think your tone and aim do not fit well with this board. The word dude is, like, a dead giveaway. Please stop posting here. Your tone and personal attack mode are offensive, and I am not available for babysitting duties tonight.
A verdict was handed down against AK and RS and we, like many, believe it was after a fair trial. You won't convince anyone here, dude, and we aren't interested in spats with people whose concept of crime comes from reading Agatha Christy. By the way, you know that Craigslist killer, the straight A med student? It's so strange, but the prosecutor has no motive whatsoever. Nonetheless, he isn't worried about that at all. Wow, dude. How 'bout that?

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:27 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

adentre wrote:
First of all I would like to state that I have not come to a complete decision on the guilt of AK and RS. I do believe that RG is guilty without a doubt. I would like to voice my concerns over guilt of AK and RS. I am a Canadian and do not feel like I would take sides because of nationality. I must say I am leaning more towards they are innocent, but I do have some serious concerns over their alibis etc.


I don't think anyone is "taking sides" regarding the murder of Meredith Kercher. Even in Canada there is no "taking sides" in a trial. Evidence is presented, a verdict is given. Italy is similar to Canada in how it addresses murders, investigations, prosecutions, and convictions. In fact, Canadian Law, unlike US Law, is based on Roman Law. The implication that Canadians interpret murder trials as "taking sides" is a little scary.

An innocent woman was murdered in Perugia after a quiet dinner with friends. Her roommate, along with her short term boyfriend and another friend, have been convicted of murdering her. If this crime had occurred in anywhere from Prince Edward Island to BC, these same people would have been convicted on the same evidence.

I doubt anyone would be calling the CBC and expecting them to present only the opinions of the murderer's parents. I doubt the CBC would be so irresponsible as to blindly present one viewpoint. In fact, the CBC covered the story three times in two years: time of arrest, start of trial, and conviction. The story then vanished from the Canadian news, as it should; like all murder trials in Canada. There was a thorough and fair trial, according to Amanda, that resulted in a fair sentence; one identical to what she would have received had she committed the murder in Canada.

Even in Canada, no one would be asking why DNA that was irrelevant to the investigation was not introduced at trial. Why would anyone introduce DNA from Amanda in Meredith's bedroom? What would it imply? The obvious courtroom response to that type of DNA would be "but of course Amanda's DNA would be in the bedroom, she lived in the cottage." To assume that because this irrelevant evidence was not presented in court, the trial is flawed, seems absurd. This was a murder trial where only evidence that implicated guilt needed to be presented - just like in Canada. Amanda's DNA in her roommate's room does not mean she committed the murder, and the absence of the evidence in court tells us that it is the most easily refuted evidence.

There is ample circumstantial evidence outside the bedroom, and a voluntary statement from Amanda placing herself at the murder. That would be sufficient evidence in a Canadian courtroom, even if she was cuffed in the head for lying. Even in Canada, as a witness for a murder investigation, she would have been told to "knock it off" if she were doing cartwheels in the police station.

Don't be seduced by the absurd remarks you hear from the parents. Amanda's parents have stated that Amanda Knox came to be known for her long locks, their very own locksy, foxy Knoxy. Canadians know her as a murderer. The parents have much to say about the trial, but they were not there, and, even if they were, by their own admission, they don't know enough Italian (after 2 years during which they should have learned this language) to understand even the verdict.
Top Profile 

Offline Earthling


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:25 pm

Posts: 512

Location: USA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:33 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Earthing wrote:
I'd really love to see Stefanoni's testimony on the DNA on that knife. Can anyone direct me to the discussion on this board, or on some other site (TJMK?), of the SPECIFIC DNA testimony on the double-DNA knife? Are there any English translations anywhere (even partial) of Stefanoni's testimony on that?


Hi Earthling. Stefanoni's testimony begins on the 22nd May and she also testifies on the 23rd. The first articles regarding her testimony and subsequent board discussion on it begins from about this post here: viewtopic.php?p=11080#p11080

Thanks, Michael. I have been perusing that link... very interesting.

A link to an article on that day's testimony confirmed my recollection about Amanda's DNA on the knife being in a crevice on the handle, as well as in what would be an unusual position for cutting and/or chopping:

Quote:
The Italian news agency ANSA quoted Ms Stefanoni as testifying that traces of Knox’s genetic code were found in a small scratch on the knife’s handle, and that the point in which the genetic material was found indicates that the knife “was used to pierce and not to cut”.


Last edited by Earthling on Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:33 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Adentre

Every single one of your points is just trotting out the same old defence lines but I'll compliment you on augmenting it with a fine little line in offering up 'perhaps they did it because of this weird stuff' to show your 'impartiality' when it's clear they are all the areas where AK and RS have already stuffed up so comprehensively it's not worth fighting.

Stop for a second and just hear me out. No-one, but no-one, who is a friend or family of a first-time murderer without a history of violence (there are plenty) can get their heads round the very concept that that person might have actually done it. This makes it almost impossible for them to receive any negative information without them reaching for a way of dismissing it. It is always possible to find a line for the defence - always! It doesn't mean those arguments are right. It brings you fine results like the OJ case - them gloves just don't fit.

For all the friends and family of first time murderers where guilt is proven conclusively with a slam dunk piece of evidence, the friends and family come to earth with the most crashing impact. They are stunned and shocked. But it happens. There's no such slam-dunk single piece of evidence here but there IS a cushing weight of cumulative evidence. The problem is, you can't accept the *possibility* of a guilty conclusion so ex-ante you are arguing them all away.

Go to my post above and watch the youtube video of Amanda and Raffaele outside the house. Watch it in HQ and Fullscreen. Look at the timings I posted and the expressions and the conscious checking of the cameras I talked about. It's not evidence, no. But your human instinct will see something you can't get rid of through the conflict of argument and counter-argument. You'll see a display of people who know they are being observed and whose demeanour and actions mark them out as behaving very oddly.

Everything else you can argue away in your own mind but use your own eyes and watch very carefully and closely. Watch it several times in a row. You can see the looking for the cameras, the smirk, the headshaking, the kissing. I think that if you really do, you might dismiss it once again through conscious effort. But your brain will have seen what's in front of your eyes. And maybe, just maybe, you might wake up in the middle of the night sometime and realise that that's not the "Amanda" that you thought you knew or have read about. Then you can start trying to read the evidence and the claims and counter-claims of the prosecution and defence cases objectively.

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Hammerite


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 3:46 pm

Posts: 517

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:57 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Hello adentre,

I responded to your post in good faith as a fellow newbie and made no judgment or comment on your views. My sole intention was to give you assistance in site procedure and direction with your apparent lack of detailed information in this case. Your post really does come across as someone not well informed of the specifics in this case. Unsubstantiated assertion does not equate to the facts.

Comments like

“9) RG has all sorts of Physical DNA evidence all over MK’s room and body”

is an outrageous sweeping generalisation and not consistent with someone informed of the facts. There are numerous other gaffs in your post but you really need to do your own research. Of course the information available is not limited to PMF and TJMK but as stated you must do your own research, I was merely giving you some pointers to help out.

Best wishes
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:01 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

adentre wrote:
Machine: I really wonder how many murders are committed by people with no motive whatsoever? Most of ‘these types’ of murders are by people who are schizophrenic or delusional in some way. AK and RS simply do not fit the profile! So what is your theory on why the killed MK?


Motives are not presented in Canadian courts, as they are not evidence. The concept of motive falls into the realm of speculation, supposition, and innuendo.

Why do you expect motive in trials in other countries? It's a curiosity, naturally, but it is better left for the coffee shop than a courtroom.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:04 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:

Adentre, I am beginning to think your tone and aim do not fit well with this board. The word dude is, like, a dead giveaway. Please stop posting here. Your tone and personal attack mode are offensive, and I am not available for babysitting duties tonight.
A verdict was handed down against AK and RS and we, like many, believe it was after a fair trial. You won't convince anyone here, dude, and we aren't interested in spats with people whose concept of crime comes from reading Agatha Christy. By the way, you know that Craigslist killer, the straight A med student? It's so strange, but the prosecutor has no motive whatsoever. Nonetheless, he isn't worried about that at all. Wow, dude. How 'bout that?


Perhaps a ruse ... the bit about being Canadian. Canadians aren't usually that perverse in their understanding of the law.

Adentre, Since there's a possibility that you're not Canadian, let me clarify what I mean when I say the story was covered in Canadian news three times: arrest, trial, and conviction. That means a 10-20 second blip during the evening news each time.
Top Profile 

Offline DLW


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:41 pm

Posts: 623

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:57 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Emerald wrote:

‘Those images of Amanda and Raffaele after the crime don't mean a lot. She's playing the damsel in distress for the sake of gaining a man's attention.’

You mean the photo’s posted by SomeAlibi of the two lovebirds in a semi embrace. Amanda seems to be conscious of the camera for sure. But for several moments oblivious to others, they seem to be gazing endlessly into each others eye’s , looking for something. Some new very unique bond had formed almost overnight that wasn’t there before. Like its just you and me babe. You were their when I needed you the most. More than needed for comforting one another in a time for sorrow. Something that binds them forever. Something between them that nobody else including family and friends would ever understand. They are taking their marriage vows right on camera, and would lead them to buying the finest lingerie money could buy.
OK I’m getting carried away, but that’s sort of how I viewed it.
Top Profile 

Offline Geologist


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 4:31 pm

Posts: 83

Location: Leeds and Toronto

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 6:28 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Jester wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:

Adentre, I am beginning to think your tone and aim do not fit well with this board. The word dude is, like, a dead giveaway. Please stop posting here. Your tone and personal attack mode are offensive, and I am not available for babysitting duties tonight.
A verdict was handed down against AK and RS and we, like many, believe it was after a fair trial. You won't convince anyone here, dude, and we aren't interested in spats with people whose concept of crime comes from reading Agatha Christy. By the way, you know that Craigslist killer, the straight A med student? It's so strange, but the prosecutor has no motive whatsoever. Nonetheless, he isn't worried about that at all. Wow, dude. How 'bout that?


Perhaps a ruse ... the bit about being Canadian. Canadians aren't usually that perverse in their understanding of the law.

Adentre, Since there's a possibility that you're not Canadian, let me clarify what I mean when I say the story was covered in Canadian news three times: arrest, trial, and conviction. That means a 10-20 second blip during the evening news each time.


The Canadians I know all think she's guilty.

Nobody suspected Karla Homolka of being a murderer till she confessed after leaving Paul Bernardo.

Sometimes the most (seemingly) normal people do the most horrendous things.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 6:51 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Jester wrote:
Some of the knife injuries did not appear to be consistent with cause serious serious injury ... more along the lines of nicking.

Once the windpipe has been crushed, there would have been no scream. To suggest that the scream happened at the time of the fatal knife wound means that the windpipe was either crushed by the knife injury (not likely), or it happened after the fatal wound (also not likely). Therefore, the crushed windpipe happened earlier ... I've been wondering if a single assailant that attacked from behind could restrain a person, crunch their throat by kneeling on it, and ... so on. That only thing that makes sense with the crushed trachea is that the windpipe was also injured at the same time ... which is inconsistent with the prosecutor's theory..

Happy New Year :) Sorry, need to catch up a bit and I wanted to reply to this post of Jester. I never stated this. My suggestion was that the scream happened during the first stabs with the smaller knife. The scream then caused a shock to the attacker and make him throw his knife aside to have his hands free to stop the scream. I believe the knife print was made at that time. The other time the knife print could have been made is after the murder but I believe they ran away immediately which is also in line with the witness hearing the scream and footsteps. The final and fatal stab wound was made by a different knife I believe. Amanda's knife.

I believe Amanda&Rafaelle had a huge fight discussing what to do (in Italian so Meredith couldn't really understand? not sure how her Italian was at that point.) and Amanda left Rafaelle for a moment. So why would he want his hands free if there were 4 other hands available to stop the screaming? Why would Rudy get 2 towels when he just killed Meredith? Those are the reasons why I think there was only 1 or maximum 2 attackers in the final fase (I am not sure if Amanda rushes back into the bedroom to help Rafaelle or if Rafaelle grabbed Amanda's knife himself). Of course, in the first attack all 3 were involved. I know Rudy tells a lot of lies but I think he might have told the truth about this part.

Following the above scenario their statements started to make a bit more sense to me. Rudy in the bathroom, Amanda in the kitchen with her fingers in her ears (no need to rush into the bedroom since she already knew what was going on there), Amanda saying 'if it was up to me Meredith would still be alive', 'Rafaelle with blood on his hands (from the fish)', Rafaelle stating that 'HE pricked Meredith', and Rudy's statements.

This is just my opinion of course. I know several different scenarios are possible as well so I don't say this is exactly what happened but it makes sense to me.
Top Profile 

Offline GameOver


Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 12:25 am

Posts: 42

Location: Southern California

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:03 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Hello, everyone and Happy New Year to all! I introduced myself a few posts back and wanted to go into one or two of the different factors surrounding the case that I had previously mentioned. I was actually reading about something unrelated to the case while perusing Wikipedia and stumbled on the psychological dynamic of 'individuation'. From there, I became increasingly interested in how it might relate to the group dynamic surrounding Meredith's death.

To begin, I'm parapharasing a bit here, but the article refers to individuation as

'the circumstance that comes into play when groups are formed and the ways in which the culmination of a group can lead to a 'diffusion of responsibility' ,such that each individual in a particular group can experience a 'diminishing of self-awareness'
...to the point to where an individual no longer feels responsible fo their own actions due to the fact that there are othr grop members upon whom they can share or place blame and responsibility'.

The article goes on to state that, "this leads to a loss of normal inhibition of behavior which may cause a person, acting with the group, to engage in anti-normative behaviors."

How does individuation affect a group dynamic?--- (link cited after the quote)

1. Deindividuation weakens people against performing harmful or socially disapproved actions. Essentially, when a person is in the group and deindividuation occurs, the person is no longer acting as the individual. Therefore, what would normally inhibit the actions of a single person acting in a social setting and conforming to social norms is removed. The result is uninhibited behavior which may be harmful or socially disapproved actions (e.g.: looting, vandalism, gang assaults, etc.)

2. Deindividuation heightens peoples’ responsiveness to external cues, which may be either positive or negative. This responsiveness refers to the situation. In the case of looting, you may see others stealing desirable items and not receiving any punishment or negative outcomes. This may make you more compelled to join the group and engage in the behavior because you see others getting away with it and you believe you won’t be singled out just like they haven’t. This type of responsiveness may also be positive. For instance, you may walk into a party and see that others are sitting around, watching television, and having a drink. You will probably feel compelled to follow the group by taking a seat in front of the TV and grabbing a drink yourself. This makes you feel more at ease because you stand out less from the group.

3. Deindividuation increases people’s adherence to norms that emerge with the group. When deindividuation occurs, new norms are set as the standard for the group. This standard pushes people to conform to the social influence of the group instead of thinking individually about how to comply with social norms. This can be exemplified in gang activities such as vandalism. Even though it is against a societal norm (and the law, for that matter) to spray paint walls with offensive terms and symbols, the norm set for the group is that it is a typical and endorsed behavior which switches from “damaging property” to “creating artwork and marking the gang’s territory.” This emergence of new group norms often leads to group think, a phenomenon characterized by faulty decision-making in a group.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deindividuation

I find that the second point, especially, is extremely relevant in piecing together the fateful events of that night.

Despite clear details of exacty what happened: If you consider the evidence, which suggests an increasingly aggravated, highly volatile situation, well, it seems like their 'heightened level of responsiveness to external cues' was to, as has been stated here before, make a clear, abrupt, and definitive choice to silence the victim permanently (due to the intensity of Meredith's scream) in a desperate attempt at self-preservation (and 'self' in the sense of the group serving as a collective self).

There is a lot more in the article on wiki and is a very good read of this common occurence in group dynamics, whether related to violence, anonymous crowds, nightclubs, or any other collective gathering of people.

For now, in the absence of a 'clear motive' preceding the crime, my current thesis is that a group can bring forth latent or residual forces from each individual, which can also lead to a sort of 'monkey see, monkey do' in otherwise relatively docile people (i.e: the 'new norms' reference in the 3rd point).

To make a non-violent comparison of a group: Think of how rowdy a group of new friends will be in one of their own homes having a night of drinking. Group dynamics are in place but because of the societal standards of respecting a host's home (and in which most guests would assume to be a 'fixed' residence), most people will curtail and monitor their behavior. Things could certainly go awry but they are a bit less likely in such a scenario.

Now think of how a group of new friends will be when they meet up 'away' from home: lets say, Miami/Cancun/college town USA, where they will all (with the exception of one or two locals) be there for a short-term and predetermined period of time, and all they know is that they are in that town for 'fun' or under the guise of study. Haven't we seen countless examples of Spring Break gone wrong? The pillars of society going wild in Vegas? Been privy to moments of abandon in a new country? Or, heck, even on the 'other' side of town?

Well, in this particular tragedy, we have an American on a glorified year-long 'holday' (or independent study) abroad, an Erasmus exchange student who would have been leaving Perugia at the end of the school year, and a resident of foreign origins who knows the ropes of the town and can give them the inside scoop to what's 'on' in Perugia.

That being the case, I don't see why some people instantly dismiss the idea that 1) they couldn't all have been involved and 2) that the possiblity of drug use was remote.

To get the group of them together is not that difficult to imagine. In a foreign country, fast friendships and intense bonds can be made very quickly. This is even more likely to happen when you throw alcohol/illicit drug use into the mix.

-Young people in a new enviroment can be a lot more trusting of, or quicker to bestow trust upon, one another in their search for a support system (e.g.: Rudy,the go-to guy for local intel) to navigate their way throughout a new city.

-They may also be more prone to associate with people that they may not have associated with if they were back home. (Which is why I find it cruel and yet amusing that the Knox family immediately threw RG ( and arguably, Lumumba) to the proverbial gutter but have been much softer on the upper-class Sollecito even though both RS/RG are admitted drug users and RS' seems to present a slightly more alarming pre-disposition for depravity, what with his decidedly perverse sexual inclinations).
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Sex Appeal


Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:18 am

Posts: 3

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:25 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

The Machine wrote:
Fiona wrote:
I think that we are built to make stories to explain the world to ourselves and this is reinforced all day every day by the media and literature and all of that. In court cases as portrayed we are taught to look for motive, means and opportunity. Means and opportunity make sense and are normally essential: but we put motive in there as if it had the same importance: and that does not seem to me to be true. Murder is not always (often?) explicable.


Hi Fiona,

Pete and I have discussed the case in depth with several lawyers. One of things I was told is Agatha Christie came up with the idea of means, motive and opportunity. The most important thing is the evidence. The prosecution don't have to prove motive. Sometimes the police and prosecution never discover what the motive was behind a murder. Some people kill for the most banal or trivial reasons: they were in a bad mood, they felt like it, they felt disrespected or somebody looked at them in a funny way


Hi Everyone

Motive, or the lack of it, is one of the red herrings used by the FOAKERS. Jeanine Pirro, well known
US former prosecutor, in an exchange with Anne Bremner on the Geraldo show (Fox TV – clip available on True Justice site), confirms that motive need not be shown/proven, even in the US.
This is quite common knowledge, even outside legal circles.

Just to make the point that no single piece of evidence is sacrosanct, doubters and denialists will be astounded to learn that a murder conviction can be successful even if the victim’s body has not been found, as long as the available evidence is compelling. A case in point is the 1998 murder of a UK woman, Surjit Athwal, who was lured to India from the UK by her mother-in-law and murdered there, in what has been described as a ‘honour killing’. The mother-in-law and her son, the victim’s husband, were convicted of the murder in 2007 in the UK, even though the body was never found. It is also interesting to note that the absence of the body did not stop the court from imposing the ultimate punishment on the ‘honourable pair’, life imprisonment (mother-in-law min. 20 years and son min. 27 years)

Finally, needless to say, a murder conviction can proceed easily even if the murder weapon is not found or proven, provided that the remaining evidence stacks up.

Cheers
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:27 am   Post subject: A thread from the first week, via Repubblica newspaper   

Michael,
I checked out the Internet Wayback Machine ([ www.archive.org ] ) in case they imaged the timeline, but no luck. Nothing there.


SomeAlibi (and others),
About your timeline thingy, in your (legal) experience, what is best way for understanding and showing how someone’s understanding of events has changed through time?

I thought dot points, or maybe a tree structure, but it seems to be more like a tapestry than anything else, with the intertwining between events on any one day, and across days, building up the bigger picture.

For example, taking just one thread of events only – the one with Amanda at one end, and “a roommate” at the other – and taking just one newspaper (the Repubblica), and for only one week of reports (from 2 Nov to 8 Nov), it becomes obvious that the newspaper reports are (necessarily) incomplete, and that the threads of knowledge cross over and under each other. Sometimes suffused with conjecture, sometimes with certainty, sometimes with information that is later corrected and revised.

Definitely a tapestry.


It also becomes obvious that the forensics really is ancillary and secondary to the “people” factor.
After the murder in a private place was discovered, everyone was a potential suspect, and no hypothesis was ruled out. The investigators brought out paper and pencil and asked the question: “OK, on that night, where was everyone, and what were they doing?”
Straight away, some people tripped up and fell into a pothole on the Road of Truth, and others didn’t.


By the bye,
Interesting to note that Amanda kept her mouth shut at the GIP hearing.

And that Raffaele’s initial lawyer (Tedeschi) said he (Raffaele) was the one who called the carabinieri. That’s true, but not necessarily very helpful. :)

There is also a potential thread awaiting documentation of “Amanda’s green(ish) bag(s)” – they keep popping up in almost every photo now. Before, they were invisible (to me).



THE AK THREAD TIMELINE




FRIDAY – 02 NOVEMBER 2007
From the thread about background information on the victim:

“Two Italian university students and one US one were living with the young woman [=Meredith]. From what the police have been able to ascertain, it emerges that none of them spent last night in the house.” (1)


From the thread about what the postal police did:

“At the little cottage, the postal police found two of the foreigner’s roommates, just returned, who seem not to have been aware of anything [untoward]. The officers noticed various blood stains in the bathroom and then located the body of the young woman. (1)





SATURDAY – 03 NOVEMBER 2007
From the thread about what the Flying Squad were doing:

“The Flying Squad interviewed the three roommates of the girl (ragazza) late into the night. Also interviewed were the students who are living in another apartment in the same cottage, underneath the one in which the murder took place. It seems, though, that so far nobody has been able to furnish conclusive details for the investigation.” (2)





SUNDAY – 04 NOVEMBER 2007
From the thread about the crime scene:

“According to the investigators, therefore, the girl knew the killer. Enough to go into the house together. …Interviews are continuing with the friends and acquaintances of the victim. In the afternoon, another search of the house [will be conducted].” (3)


From the autopsy results thread:

“Seven hours [for the autopsy], at the end of which the forensic pathologist (“ medico legale”) Luca Lalli said that ‘interesting elements’ had emerged, about which it was useful to have a “meeting” with the [investigating] magistrate [=GM] and the investigators. So, straight afterwards, Lalli, the prosecutor Giuliano Mignini (who is coordinating the investigations), and the investigators returned to the murder cottage. The visit might have to do with a breakthrough, especially as there was a young woman, apparently one of the friends of the victim, with them.”(3)





MONDAY – 05 NOVEMBER 2007
From what would become the “cat’s blood in the downstairs apartment” thread:

“Two traces of blood, like those discovered in Meredith’s apartment, were found in the neighbour’s apartment, on the ground floor of the via Sant’Antonio farm house, rented by four Marchese students, one of whom was having a flirt (=”love-affair”) with the English girl. He has an alibi, he was at home [i.e., in his home town] during the long weekend, and apparently so were the other three. But they are the ones the police are holding under the spotlight. If they weren’t there, and, given that the [front] door had not been forced, to whom did any of the boys loan the keys to?” (4)


From the autopsy thread:

“And, straight after the autopsy, the investigators ordered a fresh crime scene inspection with the three roommates of the murdered girl. They were made to enter with gloves on, and made to exit with a covering on their heads, to shield them from the photographers.” (4)


From the “various hypotheses of the investigators” thread:

“And the second line of investigation is focussing on the small circle of friendships.” (4)

“The investigations have proceeded without a pause for three days and are concentrating on a restricted group of people.” (5)

“The American student who was sharing the lodgings with Meredith returned to the murder house last night with investigators after the forensic pathologist handed in a preliminary report to the magistrate [=GM]. Checks are also being undertaken involving the owner of the house and on who had access to the keys of the apartments.” (5)






TUESDAY – 06 NOVEMBER 2007

[HitsUSA]


“This morning, at dawn, three people were led into the Questura and placed under arrest: an American roommate of the victim, 20-year-old student Amanda Knox, her boyfriend, the Barese Raffaele Sollecito, 24, and a Congolese citizen, Patrick Diya Lumumba, 37. It was Knox who “cracked”, furnishing the investigators with the circumstances on what happened that night. But she may also be responsible for having altered the murder scene. The charges, for everybody, are wilful murder in company and sexual assault in company”. (6)

The dynamics. The investigators are focussing their attention on two of the three people arrested, thinking that they were present in the murder room, and hypothesising that the person who struck Meredith Kercher was one of the two men. The focus is on Lumumba Diya, the lad (ragazzo) who works in a bar frequented by the university students. The role of Raffaele Sollecito would be more background, however different. Underlying what has emerged so far, there is still uncertainty about what happened. Something might come out: putting the investigators on the correct track would have been Amanda Marie Knox, who fell, more than once, into contradictions during her interrogatory.” (6)


Those arrested. The twenty-year-old arrested, born in Washington, was studying an Italian language course at the Università per stranieri di Perugia; her Italian boyfriend is close to graduating, fuorisede (=“not a permanent resident where he is studying”), at Perugia University. The foreigner [=Lumumba] arrested by the police has been in Italy since 1988 and has a regular job. A musician, he was even worked in conjunction with various local public entities to organize concerts. Since August he has been managing a pub in the historic centre of Perugia frequented by university students. He played ethnic and reggae music with his group. Recently he seems to have also bought a house where he lived with his wife and little son. Knox, occasionally, worked for him, doing volantinaggio (=”distribution of leaflets”) for his pub.” (6)


“Raffaele Sollecito is the son of a well-known urologist, who immediately left for Perugia. His mother is no longer alive; he was about to graduate in engineering: the exams are scheduled for 15 November. He was in Germany as part of Project Erasmus. As far as the investigators lead us to understand, his position [in the crime] would have been in the background. He lives in Giovinazzo in Bari, and attended Molfetta school. He had a blog on which various insulting messages appeared today.” (6)

“Amongst the prime hypotheses of the investigators is the one that the victim probably knew her killer, and that more than one person would have been at the crime scene.” (6)







WEDNESDAY – 07 NOVEMBER 2007

“So what happened on the night of 1/2 November? Amanda Marie Knox recounts the death of Meredith Kercher like this: ….{ quotes from her “We wanted to have fun” statement }” (7)


“Amanda is a liar. For four days she has not stopped lying. And maybe, as the next few hours will show, she will continue to lie. At least in part. …{ summarises her “on that morning” story } (7)

“When, however, Raffaele contradicts her and ends up maintaining that, in reality, he and Amanda were not together on the night of the murder, she explains that, yes, she returned to the house she shared with Meredith, but can remember nothing about what happened. ‘I had been drinking. I fell asleep. …’ ” (7)


“Probably (although the circumstance has not yet been confirmed), Meredith was alone at that moment. And only after a couple of hours, did Amanda, Raffaele and Diya join her. At this point, if Amanda is telling the truth, she [=Meredith] was invited to ‘have a bit of fun’. At this point, if Amanda is telling the truth, Meredith resisted Diya and, out of sight of the two lovers, paid with her life.” (7)


“For the investigators, leaving aside Amanda’s words, what happened from there onwards can be “reasonably supported” by circumstantial evidence of a scientific and technical nature. Before leaving the house, the murderer(s) clumsily simulated a burglary attempt, breaking the glass of one of the French windows with a stone that would be later found in the room. Maybe (but this can only be confirmed by forensics examinations still under way) trying a “tidy-up” of the crime scene.” (7)


“These [the traces forensics have been finding] can help to establish whether Amanda is telling the truth or is continuing to hide significants parts of it.” (7)






THURSDAY – 08 NOVEMBER 2007
Today [Sollecito, Knox and Lumumba] are going to answer the questions put by the GIP, Claudia Matteini, who will decide whether to validate the arrests as requested by the public prosecutor Giuliano Mignini.” (8)

“The public prosecutor, in his address, points out the ‘contradictions’ the two lovers fell into…The public prosecutor points out how, regarding Knox’s phone, there is “a void in traffic from 20:35 of the 1st November until midday of the 2nd” (8)

“[Sollecito’s lawyer] Tiziano Tedeschi, replies: “It was him who called the carabinieri (=the police). And the girl [=Amanda] has demonstrated a spregiudicata (=”unscrupulous”, “uninhibited”) propensity to lie.” (8)


“[Lumumba] spoke during the interrogatory for the validation of the arrest…His lawyers attacked Amanda Knox: ‘She is an absolute mentitrice (=”liar-ess), unscrupulous just like the public prosecutor has said. Major objective riscontri (=”confirmations”) are needed exactly because they arise from [such] a co-accused. They are slanderous.’

…The American, Amanda Knox, who availed herself of her right to not respond in front of the GIP, has, however, let it be known that at the moment of Meredith’s murder she was in the house, but not in the room in which the English student had her throat cut. Tomorrow, Amanda’s mother will be joined in Perugia by her husband. And in the next few days, maybe on Saturday, the two of them might be able to visit their daughter in prison. The GIP, in fact, has authorised contact between the three and their relatives.

Raffaele Sollecito, instead, defended himself, responding to the GIP’s questions and denying all the accusations. … Meanwhile, the investigators are trying to understand whether a fourth person helped the young ones to clean the house.” (9)










References

1 – Repubblica 02 November 2007
2 – Repubblica 03 November 2007
3 – Repubblica 04 November 2007
4 – Elsa Vinci, Repubblica 05 November 2007
5 – Repubblica 05 November 2007
6 – Elsa Vinci, Repubblica 06 November 2007
7 – Carlo Bonini, Repubblica 07 November 2007
8 – Elsa Vinci, Repubblica 08 November 2007
9 – Repubblica 08 November 2007



Note:
To put a kind interpretation on the slanders against the investigators, I think a (deliberate?) misunderstanding of the GIP arrest-validation hearing may have been the major source of the misrepresentation that the “prosecution” was “leaking” details. To put a realistic interpretation on the same slanders, I think certain people were maliciously taking advantage of other peoples’ lack of knowledge of the Italian legal system, and thereby abusing their trust.
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:46 am   Post subject: Pictorial version   

For the visual thinkers among us, these are the photos that the Repubblica used to accompany the articles I quoted.

They tell the same story.



















Top Profile 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 8:06 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Immediately after the murder, before she was even suspected, did Amanda make any attempt to speak to the Family of Meredith Kercher?
Top Profile 

Offline Professor Snape


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:53 pm

Posts: 247

Location: Seattle. WA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:05 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Jester wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:

Adentre, I am beginning to think your tone and aim do not fit well with this board. The word dude is, like, a dead giveaway. Please stop posting here. Your tone and personal attack mode are offensive, and I am not available for babysitting duties tonight.
A verdict was handed down against AK and RS and we, like many, believe it was after a fair trial. You won't convince anyone here, dude, and we aren't interested in spats with people whose concept of crime comes from reading Agatha Christy. By the way, you know that Craigslist killer, the straight A med student? It's so strange, but the prosecutor has no motive whatsoever. Nonetheless, he isn't worried about that at all. Wow, dude. How 'bout that?


Perhaps a ruse ... the bit about being Canadian. Canadians aren't usually that perverse in their understanding of the law.

Adentre, Since there's a possibility that you're not Canadian, let me clarify what I mean when I say the story was covered in Canadian news three times: arrest, trial, and conviction. That means a 10-20 second blip during the evening news each time.
Canadians are very civil. This guy is just a bonehead and no doubt lives in Seattle and he ranks extremely low on the creative-O-meter.
His points are as dull as his personality and glad Skep gave him the boot.
mop-)

_________________
"Wizard of Healing Potions and Alibis"
Top Profile 

Offline lamaha


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:08 am

Posts: 36

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:52 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Hammerite wrote:
adentre wrote:
First of all I would like to state that I have not come to a complete decision on the guilt of AK and RS. I do believe that RG is guilty without a doubt. I would like to voice my concerns over guilt of AK and RS. I am a Canadian and do not feel like I would take sides because of nationality. I must say I am leaning more towards they are innocent, but I do have some serious concerns over their alibis etc.

These are reasons I believe AK and RS are not guilty:
etc........
adentre wrote:

Hello adentre,

Welcome to this forum. Like you I too am a recent poster here. I am surprised however by your lack of detailed knowledge on the specifics of this complex case. If as you state you are concerned with learning the truth about this horrific murder than your next step is to go to the trouble to inform yourself of the facts.

You are free to explore the vast amount of verifiable data that has been assembled here and on the True Justice for Meredith Kercher site. If you are prepared to do your homework you can fill in all of the huge gaps in information that are missing on your post. In addition there has been extensive and exhaustive discussion on these sites covering all of the points you allude to; and you might find it interesting to look over these to also contribute to your knowledge of this case.

Proffering inaccurate and wrong facts is most disrespectful. At the very least you should debate with the facts and the truth; you need to start from this position. Don’t treat people here as your personal tutors, show respect to others and be assured it will be shown to you.
Be of no doubt that learning the facts will be time consuming. This however will not pose an obstacle to a true seeker of the truth and will show that you are not merely a time waster here.

It is not fair to expect posters here that have been over this ground many many times before to do your research for you; it is like a student arriving late for a lecture and expecting the entire class to back up and start all over again from the beginning just for them.

Best wishes.



adente, I too am a new poster and have been mainly lurking, but even I could see how little research you had done before posting, and even I immediately recognised all your many fallacies. I would advise you to do as I do: lurk, and figure out things for yourself, before you burst in here with your own theories.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 11:24 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Geologist wrote:

The Canadians I know all think she's guilty.

Nobody suspected Karla Homolka of being a murderer till she confessed after leaving Paul Bernardo.

Sometimes the most (seemingly) normal people do the most horrendous things.

Because trials in Canada are not discussed until trial, everyone is very comfortable with reading about the case as the trial details are published. Emotional remarks from family are dismissed for what they are, and American talking heads are little more than an ill informed amusement. I can't imagine a Canadian standing up and stomping their feet because irrelevant information was not presented at trial, or regurgitating the family's inability to deal with reality ... I can, actually ... but it would be someone emotionally involved with the case, not an objective perspective.
Top Profile 

Offline Rebel


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 3:25 am

Posts: 129

Location: Bellingham WA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

I have two problems with the assumption that the scream that was heard by the apartment dwellers above the cottage was from Meredith. I don't doubt that Meredith screamed when she was attacked but I don't think her screams were heard outside the cottage that night.

The first problem has to do with acoustics. Kermit did a very meticulous study of the crime scene in his Powerpoints. This is what he wrote about the infamous screams in his presentation named PerugiaLocations-pt0b.pps (KERMIT'S POWERPOINTS & PRESENTATIONS in the Media section). The following quote is taken from slide 9:

Kermit wrote:
"I don’t want to reflect on the CCTV cameras, but on the relative isolation of the girls’ house. I have this terrible feeling that the screams, shouts and general commotion during the night came from the perpetrators as they ran in and out the house. And that the victim’s screams were never heard by anyone, given the old thick walls of the house, the orientation of her bedroom away from town and towards the valley, and the absorption of sound by the viaduct / road, and carpark."


I totally agree with Kermit based on the physical fact that high-pitched sounds are readily absorbed by thick materials. The cottage has massive stone walls and a terra-cotta roof. I think it very unlikely that a scream emanating from inside the house could be heard by anyone in the apartments above. The sound would have to have come from the porch or driveway of the cottage.

The other problem I have is one that Michael pointed out. There was not enough time (maybe a minute) between the scream and the running away for the perpetrators to have inflicted all of the horrible wounds on Meredith.

So who's scream did Nara Capezzali and Antonella Monacchia hear? Could it have been Amanda rather than Meredith? In the initial interrogation why did Amanda emphasize that she heard Meredith scream so forcefully that she had to cover her ears? Was is to deflect suspicion away from her own scream that she feared was heard by possible witnesses?

Rudy claims he had a scuffle with Raffaele in the kitchen, but did he neglect to mention a scuffle with Amanda on the porch or driveway? Ms. Monacchia claims to have heard a man and woman arguing in Italian just before the scream. Did Rudy threaten Amanda, perhaps scraping her neck with a sharp object to enforce their pact of silence? Saying something like, "Hey bitch, better not snitch, or you'll be next". That would explain the argument, the scream, and Amand's neck wound. It would also explain the perpetrators running off in two different directions.

Does this alternative scenario for the scream resonate with anyone?
Top Profile 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 2:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Rebel points out:
Quote:
I totally agree with Kermit based on the physical fact that high-pitched sounds are readily absorbed by thick materials. The cottage has massive stone walls and a terra-cotta roof. I think it very unlikely that a scream emanating from inside the house could be heard by anyone in the apartments above. The sound would have to have come from the porch or driveway of the cottage.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Being overly simplistic is something I have often been accused of in my 68 years.....

1)But I cannot help but evaluate the effect of per chance an open/not fully closed window or door
2) Also, what motivation would prompt neighbors to state that they heard screams if acoustics actually made this impossible/improbable?
Top Profile 

Offline equinox


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:22 pm

Posts: 140

Location: WA, USA

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 2:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

I am overcome again with deep emotions reading Catnip's early timeline leading up to the arrest of Patrick. I try to imagine what it must have been like to be a hard working immigrant, with a wife and young child, a public business life and an essentially crime free background, to be yanked from home by arresting police and accused of the most horrific crime imaginable -a sexually motivated murder of a young woman. It's nightmarish beyond description. At that moment in time, no matter what innocence can be proven in the future, your old life has ended and a new one has begun.

Perhaps the only real benefit of the worldwide publicity of this case is the dissemination of Patrick's vindication to as wide an audience as possible. It seems the least that can be done, as for him there is no going back, that his name will always be regarded in association with this horrible crime is irreversible. I can only hope that the community of Perugia has enveloped him with compassion and consideration, and helped him in every way possible to restore his devastated life.

For two weeks AK allowed Patrick Lumumba to be believed a vicious murderer at her words. This is an eternity of hell and shame and pure horror. (I was falsely accused of a fairly trivial thing once and cried myself to sleep at night for a week.) The helplessness and feeling of being stripped bare and paraded in front of those whose opinions you value is heart-rending. Add to that the knowledge of your loved ones being assaulted by the media, and the stares and disdain of the community, despite any fervent effort on their part to believe in and protest to your innocence -well again, I cannot even begin to imagine his suffering. There is good reason why "bearing false witness" has been considered such an immoral crime throughout history.

Those in defense of AK, always trump the imagined statistics of thousands upon thousands of people who supposedly have confessed to crimes under police persecution. I think its very important to remember, that this is NOT what she did. She did not confess, she deliberately lied to the police, contrived an alternate scenario of the night of the murder, that at least in her own mind, painted her as innocent, and she pointed falsely the finger of accusation at an absolutely innocent man. This fact bears no resemblance whatsoever to those who have, in desperation, admitted to crimes they are innocent of. This is simply a dodge, an avoidance, a deflection of the unwanted attention being directed at her, with her objective being to have someone else replace her in that chair, being scrutinized, suspected and questioned. To then leave Lumumba in prison, being accused, interrogated and condemned for a full two weeks - an eternity! - is unequivocal to me that her accusations were not contrived by the police or coerced. She accused him wickedly, deliberately and with pure evil intentions - with an almost equal malice to which she directed towards Meredith. Perhaps he is lucky to be alive.

"Yes, Yes, I did it - Please stop hitting me"
"Okay, He did it - Here, I will give you a gift telling you how it went down."

There is no comparison.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 2:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Rebel wrote:
I have two problems with the assumption that the scream that was heard by the apartment dwellers above the cottage was from Meredith. I don't doubt that Meredith screamed when she was attacked but I don't think her screams were heard outside the cottage that night.

The first problem has to do with acoustics. Kermit did a very meticulous study of the crime scene in his Powerpoints. This is what he wrote about the infamous screams in his presentation named PerugiaLocations-pt0b.pps (KERMIT'S POWERPOINTS & PRESENTATIONS in the Media section). The following quote is taken from slide 9:

Kermit wrote:
"I don’t want to reflect on the CCTV cameras, but on the relative isolation of the girls’ house. I have this terrible feeling that the screams, shouts and general commotion during the night came from the perpetrators as they ran in and out the house. And that the victim’s screams were never heard by anyone, given the old thick walls of the house, the orientation of her bedroom away from town and towards the valley, and the absorption of sound by the viaduct / road, and carpark."


I totally agree with Kermit based on the physical fact that high-pitched sounds are readily absorbed by thick materials. The cottage has massive stone walls and a terra-cotta roof. I think it very unlikely that a scream emanating from inside the house could be heard by anyone in the apartments above. The sound would have to have come from the porch or driveway of the cottage.

The other problem I have is one that Michael pointed out. There was not enough time (maybe a minute) between the scream and the running away for the perpetrators to have inflicted all of the horrible wounds on Meredith.

So who's scream did Nara Capezzali and Antonella Monacchia hear? Could it have been Amanda rather than Meredith? In the initial interrogation why did Amanda emphasize that she heard Meredith scream so forcefully that she had to cover her ears? Was is to deflect suspicion away from her own scream that she feared was heard by possible witnesses?

Rudy claims he had a scuffle with Raffaele in the kitchen, but did he neglect to mention a scuffle with Amanda on the porch or driveway? Ms. Monacchia claims to have heard a man and woman arguing in Italian just before the scream. Did Rudy threaten Amanda, perhaps scraping her neck with a sharp object to enforce their pact of silence? Saying something like, "Hey bitch, better not snitch, or you'll be next". That would explain the argument, the scream, and Amand's neck wound. It would also explain the perpetrators running off in two different directions.

Does this alternative scenario for the scream resonate with anyone?



Hi Rebel. I take the opposite view. I think the scream could be heard by Nara. It has to do with the relative positions of their homes. You would have the amphitheatre effect. Also, it was cold, and sound travels better in the denser air. It was quiet, little traffic. Was it windy? If it was not windy, but cold with the amphitheatre effect, and Nara with only single glazing, I think she did hear it. A real, fear of your life scream is supposed to be penetrating and loud (our species' ultimate alarm cry) . Even if it was not so loud, there would be no mistaking what it was.And that's besides Nara's earnest and emotional testimony.
Top Profile 

Offline tigger3498


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 7:49 pm

Posts: 158

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 2:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Most excellent post Catnip! Your posts are always thought provoking and I have to read them carefully!
I for one, will ignore the troll. Machine, you have the patience of a saint! Maybe the Italians can spring OJ so he can help them look for the real killers....LOL!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline GameOver


Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 12:25 am

Posts: 42

Location: Southern California

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 2:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Equinox, I am so glad you posted about just how downright wicked and nasty Amanda's accusation against Patick truly was. I feel so much sympathy for him and his family. Even though the media circus has cooled considerably in regards to spotlighting his nightmarish adventure in the initial criminal proceedings, this episode in his life will continue to affect him for many years to come.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 3:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Not only was Amanda's accusation wicked against Patrick, but Mother Edda knew as well. This is a woman who is a teacher in school of other young children.
Top Profile 

Offline tigger3498


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 7:49 pm

Posts: 158

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

I found this image the other day and I was looking for it just now to upload it. It appears to have disappeared......To me, the facial expression was just eerie. Funny though, when I look through all the images, it occurred to me (imo) that amanda doesn't really know what type of facial expression is expected of her. The sad, confused,shocked expressions all look so contrived to me......
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 6:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

bucketoftea wrote:
Rebel wrote:
I have two problems with the assumption that the scream that was heard by the apartment dwellers above the cottage was from Meredith. I don't doubt that Meredith screamed when she was attacked but I don't think her screams were heard outside the cottage that night.

The first problem has to do with acoustics. Kermit did a very meticulous study of the crime scene in his Powerpoints. This is what he wrote about the infamous screams in his presentation named PerugiaLocations-pt0b.pps (KERMIT'S POWERPOINTS & PRESENTATIONS in the Media section). The following quote is taken from slide 9:

Kermit wrote:
"I don’t want to reflect on the CCTV cameras, but on the relative isolation of the girls’ house. I have this terrible feeling that the screams, shouts and general commotion during the night came from the perpetrators as they ran in and out the house. And that the victim’s screams were never heard by anyone, given the old thick walls of the house, the orientation of her bedroom away from town and towards the valley, and the absorption of sound by the viaduct / road, and carpark."


I totally agree with Kermit based on the physical fact that high-pitched sounds are readily absorbed by thick materials. The cottage has massive stone walls and a terra-cotta roof. I think it very unlikely that a scream emanating from inside the house could be heard by anyone in the apartments above. The sound would have to have come from the porch or driveway of the cottage.

The other problem I have is one that Michael pointed out. There was not enough time (maybe a minute) between the scream and the running away for the perpetrators to have inflicted all of the horrible wounds on Meredith.

So who's scream did Nara Capezzali and Antonella Monacchia hear? Could it have been Amanda rather than Meredith? In the initial interrogation why did Amanda emphasize that she heard Meredith scream so forcefully that she had to cover her ears? Was is to deflect suspicion away from her own scream that she feared was heard by possible witnesses?

Rudy claims he had a scuffle with Raffaele in the kitchen, but did he neglect to mention a scuffle with Amanda on the porch or driveway? Ms. Monacchia claims to have heard a man and woman arguing in Italian just before the scream. Did Rudy threaten Amanda, perhaps scraping her neck with a sharp object to enforce their pact of silence? Saying something like, "Hey bitch, better not snitch, or you'll be next". That would explain the argument, the scream, and Amand's neck wound. It would also explain the perpetrators running off in two different directions.

Does this alternative scenario for the scream resonate with anyone?



Hi Rebel. I take the opposite view. I think the scream could be heard by Nara. It has to do with the relative positions of their homes. You would have the amphitheatre effect. Also, it was cold, and sound travels better in the denser air. It was quiet, little traffic. Was it windy? If it was not windy, but cold with the amphitheatre effect, and Nara with only single glazing, I think she did hear it. A real, fear of your life scream is supposed to be penetrating and loud (our species' ultimate alarm cry) . Even if it was not so loud, there would be no mistaking what it was.And that's besides Nara's earnest and emotional testimony.


I think it is certain that Nara heard someone scream - the question is who? As for the distance, alot depends on atmospheric conditions. I don't see Nara as having anything to gain by fabulating. She definitely heard something.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 6:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Jester wrote:
Geologist wrote:

The Canadians I know all think she's guilty.

Nobody suspected Karla Homolka of being a murderer till she confessed after leaving Paul Bernardo.

Sometimes the most (seemingly) normal people do the most horrendous things.

Because trials in Canada are not discussed until trial, everyone is very comfortable with reading about the case as the trial details are published. Emotional remarks from family are dismissed for what they are, and American talking heads are little more than an ill informed amusement. I can't imagine a Canadian standing up and stomping their feet because irrelevant information was not presented at trial, or regurgitating the family's inability to deal with reality ... I can, actually ... but it would be someone emotionally involved with the case, not an objective perspective.


I truly appreciate the way Snape and everyone stepped up to the plate to call a spade a spade before moving on to the usual polite and intelligent give and take that characterizes our board. I did give Adentre the boot because I could see where he was headed, and he sounds oh so familiar by now. We have been down that road a hundred times. Coming to a board like this armed with a few talking points and a load of emotion just doesn't produce the kind of mostly harmonious and always thoughtful discussion we like.

At this point in the process, anyone who has swallowed the FOA talking points hook, line and sinker, who brings nothing else to bear and who is immediately aggressive will not survive here for very long.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline ttrroonniicc


Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:12 pm

Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 6:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Emerald wrote:
Not only was Amanda's accusation wicked against Patrick, but Mother Edda knew as well. This is a woman who is a teacher in school of other young children.


AK knew Lumumba well - he gave her a job. She made the accusation and thought nothing of it. She didn't revoke it. She related to Edda Mellas well after the supposed "coercion" that she'd made a "mistake" and PL was innocent. Neither did anything. PL was in jail for many days until the discovery of Guede released him. She related in the trial that she had no antagonistic feelings towards PL. She related that she didn't fear him - she had stated in her accusation that she was afraid of him. AK didn't explain why she had made a false accusation and why specifically she accused Lumumba. She showed no understanding of the wrong in accusing a friend.
Top Profile 

Offline lamaha


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:08 am

Posts: 36

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

She also did not apologize.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Not only that (excuse the irony) she never responded positively to any prompting for her to apologize.

Check out the P.S. in ViaDellaPergola's excellent video.

Her mother Edda Mellas appears to think condolence to the Kercher family is conditional on Amanda Knox being found not guilty.
Work that one out -
You have 5 seconds.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.


Last edited by DeathFish 2000 on Sun Jan 03, 2010 8:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

GameOver wrote:
Equinox, I am so glad you posted about just how downright wicked and nasty Amanda's accusation against Patick truly was. I feel so much sympathy for him and his family. Even though the media circus has cooled considerably in regards to spotlighting his nightmarish adventure in the initial criminal proceedings, this episode in his life will continue to affect him for many years to come.


As our poster Tara pointed out some time ago, when you google Patrick Lumumba you get thousands of hits that associate him with murder. And his fledgling business was not strong enough to survive the aftermath of his arrest, not to mention the closing of his bar for three months.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline lector


Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 1:25 am

Posts: 97

Location: swamps of Jersey

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 8:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

bucketoftea wrote:
Hi Rebel. I take the opposite view. I think the scream could be heard by Nara. It has to do with the relative positions of their homes. You would have the amphitheatre effect. Also, it was cold, and sound travels better in the denser air. It was quiet, little traffic. Was it windy? If it was not windy, but cold with the amphitheatre effect, and Nara with only single glazing, I think she did hear it. A real, fear of your life scream is supposed to be penetrating and loud (our species' ultimate alarm cry) . Even if it was not so loud, there would be no mistaking what it was.And that's besides Nara's earnest and emotional testimony.

Having heard the scream of a woman who had just been raped in our apartment building, decades ago, I give a lot of credence to Nara's testimony. Those sorts of screams are different from others and leave a lasting impression.

In my early readings (remember I've only been at this for a month), I kept wondering why Nara didn't call the police after hearing that, because I also kept wondering "What if...?" I doubt that it would have saved poor Meredith but it might have made the investigation that much simpler.

I've searched back to the discussions here in March 2009, which clarify the issue, & of course I'm sympathetic to what she has to live with now.

My reason for commenting here at all is the Micheli Report. I recently re-read the Google translation. There's a point where it looks to me like Micheli says that Nara had spoken to the police a few days earlier because she felt unsafe where she was living; there's the implication that she didn't call the police after hearing the scream because she didn't want to seem to be a bother to them, which is not unreasonable for a 68-year-old widow.

I may have this all wrong; because the Google translation is so jumbled, it's not always clear what is being said, but that is what I took away from it. I haven't seen this detail mentioned elsewhere so I may in fact be misunderstanding it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 8:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

I believe it is instinctive Lector.
I live near a university and sometimes at the weekends you hear young women screaming when they are walking home with a group or from bar to bar, which there are a lot of around here.
I think it would be quite easy to discern a blood curdling scream - and chilling when if you did hear one.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline Geologist


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 4:31 pm

Posts: 83

Location: Leeds and Toronto

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 8:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

DeathFish 2000 wrote:
Not only that (excuse the irony) she never responded positively to any prompting for her to apologize.

Check out the P.S. in ViaDellaPergola's excellent video.

Her mother Edda Mellas appears to think condolence to the Kercher family is conditional on Amanda Knox being found not guilty.
Work that one out -
You have 5 seconds.


The relationship between Knox and her mother is I think an often overlooked point, Edda is just as conniving, deceitful and morally bankrupt as her daughter.

For people still wondering where Amanda could have possible got her morals (or lack of) from, all you have to do is read a few quotes from her mum.

And she's a teacher!!?? - Teacher / Parent meetings must be a hoot with her.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 8:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Geologist wrote:
The relationship between Knox and her mother is I think an often overlooked point, Edda is just as conniving, deceitful and morally bankrupt as her daughter.

For people still wondering where Amanda could have possible got her morals (or lack of) from, all you have to do is read a few quotes from her mum.

And she's a teacher!!?? - Teacher / Parent meetings must be a hoot with her.


Hi Geologist,

I agree with you completely. Edda Mellas has lied repeatedly to the media, claiming that Amanda Knox lied only once and that she didn't have an interpreter when she was questioned on 5 November 2007.

I believe that Edda Mellas and Amanda Knox have something else in common, namely flying into a furious rage. There is a very ugly side to Edda Mellas's character, which hasn't been reported in the media as yet. That might change in the future.
Top Profile 

Offline lauowolf


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:50 am

Posts: 525

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

adentre wrote:
These are reasons I believe AK and RS are not guilty:

1)I do not believe AK and RS have a motive for the murder of MK. It surely wasn’t money, and I don’t believe it was because of arguments over cleaning of the house. I don’t believe it was a form of some Satanic ritual as there is no past behavior or involvement. I think the likelihood of AK and RS doing it for sexual pleasure and because they were high on drugs are pretty farfetched.


machine: People kill for the most trivial and banal reasons: they felt like it, they felt disrespected, somebody looked them in a funny way, petty jealousy etc. There have also been seemingly motiveless murders.
There was no logical reason to murder Meredith. In case you hadn't realized, murderers are not logical and reasonable people.

Machine: I really wonder how many murders are committed by people with no motive whatsoever? Most of ‘these types’ of murders are by people who are schizophrenic or delusional in some way. AK and RS simply do not fit the profile! So what is your theory on why the killed MK?



Machine is quite right here.
Motive is overrated.
To begin with, once you are talking about people who choose to kill someone else, you are dealing with a population that is not seeing things the way normal people do, since, by definition, deciding to murder another human being is not normal behavior.
So looking for a reason that would make sense to one of us to explain why the murder happened is sort of useless.
No, I wouldn't murder someone for 200 euros, or because I'd been fired and she'd been hired, or because I thought she was snooty, or felt threatened by her beauty or intelligence.
No one, including the prosecution, thinks it was a satanic ritual.
(And I wouldn't do that either!)
Most of us wouldn't, but some people do that kind of thing.
They pretty much look like anyone else, and are often high-functioning, normal seeming people.
That medical student who was murdering hookers for spare cash was after all in medical school, and had an attractive fiance.
If it weren't for pesky evidence, no one would suspect he might do such a thing.
And that was just for relatively small amounts of money, and - I assume - whatever other twisted needs drove him.
Doesn't seem like much of a motive.

Or sometimes there is even less.
Want some pointless murders?
No problem.

Well, here's one for you: http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/staceys ... 1115397490

A pair of lesbian lovers killed their roommate.
They had been drinking, and drove each other on.

According to the prosecution:
“There was a sheer lack of motive."
“She was killed simply because she was found to be annoying to her offenders.”

In addition, one killer's lawyer stated that:
"his client appeared to be partly motivated by a desire to dispel any notion she may have been sexually interested in Stacey.
"Both women appeared to be obsessed with proving their commitment to each other," Mr Edwardson said.

Here's another:
http://www.3news.co.nz/Two-girls-found- ... al+News%29

Motive?
Two young girls murdered an old man.
i think I remember reading that they had possibly been robbing his house.
The behavior of the murderer's families is worth noting.


Or here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... urder.html

Two young girls killed another to see how it felt.


I think haring off after motive leads to a dead end.
Meredith appears to have been a lovely young person, and no one had a rational cause to kill her.
There is no sane motive anyone could have had to kill her.
Unless the perpetrators decide to tell us their motives, we will never know why they did it.
I suspect that, just like in the cases above, we are looking at a desire to experience killing or inflict pain, to prove something to each other.
We do, though, have the evidence their actions left behind, so that we can with a fair degree of certainty, know what Amanda, Raphael, and Guido did.
And that's why they are in jail.
Motive would be nice to know, but it isn't really necessary.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Geologist wrote:
DeathFish 2000 wrote:
Not only that (excuse the irony) she never responded positively to any prompting for her to apologize.

Check out the P.S. in ViaDellaPergola's excellent video.

Her mother Edda Mellas appears to think condolence to the Kercher family is conditional on Amanda Knox being found not guilty.
Work that one out -
You have 5 seconds.


The relationship between Knox and her mother is I think an often overlooked point, Edda is just as conniving, deceitful and morally bankrupt as her daughter.

For people still wondering where Amanda could have possible got her morals (or lack of) from, all you have to do is read a few quotes from her mum.

And she's a teacher!!?? - Teacher / Parent meetings must be a hoot with her.


It is my opinion Edda Mellas is a thoroughly odious woman and a consumate actress, just like her daughter.
There's no surprise here.
She is responsible for the whole defence and ridiculous FOA charade we are still seeing now.
I would dare say if Knox was allowed to speak her own mind (rather than that of her mother's) she could quite possibly be in a better situation now due to having been transparent and telling the truth.
Mellas is a bully, she has verbally attacked and abused journalists who have reported on the case -
this because they were being honest, excercising their human right of free speech and voicing an opinion that Knox in all probability due to the facts and evidence apparent to all, is guilty of this crime.
She has interfered in this case and has been pulling Knox's strings from almost the first phone call she forgot making.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Mama knows best...


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

DF2K - The photo of Bongiorno is really funny with your caption. She does look like she just got a text message from "whocairz".

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline grushka


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:08 pm

Posts: 30

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Hi all,

I really don't mean to ask newbie questions but there are certain things I can't find elsewhere.

(And just for the record, Amanda Knox's (and RS's) guilt are as certain as anything gets in this world).

Anyway, what is the implication of Amanda's "scootching" the bath mat after her shower on the morning after she killed her roommate?

By implication, I mean what was she very likely doing? Was it part of the cleanup? Was it a lie to explain something else? I don't understand the significance of this (bizarre) action.

It's probably obvious but I can't quite figure it out.

Thanks in advance.
Top Profile 

Offline modest_ex


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 3:29 pm

Posts: 160

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

DeathFish 2000 wrote:
It is my opinion Edda Mellas is a thoroughly odious woman and a consumate actress, just like her daughter.
There's no surprise here.
She is responsible for the whole defence and ridiculous FOA charade we are still seeing now.
I would dare say if Knox was allowed to speak her own mind (rather than that of her mother's) she could quite possibly be in a better situation now due to having been transparent and telling the truth.
Mellas is a bully, she has verbally attacked and abused journalists who have reported on the case -
this because they were being honest, excercising their human right of free speech and voicing an opinion that Knox in all probability due to the facts and evidence apparent to all, is guilty of this crime.
She has interfered in this case and has been pulling Knox's strings from almost the first phone call she forgot making.


It does make me wonder whether, without the influence of their parents, RS and AK might have told the whole truth by now about what really happened. If perhaps they had been consistently told by people who loved them and could see clearly from the evidence that they had some involvement in the crime, some version of: "we love you no matter what, tell the truth and we'll deal with it, telling the truth will be the only way to help the Kerchers and start the process of healing your soul and atoning for whatever you did.".

The whole horrifying truth of the murder may never be known entirely if no-one confesses fully, and as many posters more eloquent than I have expressed in the last couple of pages, the "motive" is unknowable as it's obviously never going to be something that makes sense to a rational person, but it's all too easy to see the motive for the silence now....overbearing parents who have obviously made it their mission to prove their children's innocence no matter what, and what position does that place the children in? An uneasy knowledge that they will be supported by their families if and only if they continue the charade. It's another crime really, another group dynamic, another complex combination of personalities and egos, where the whole structure would collapse without the collaboration.

One thing that has occurred to me (late, I'm sure very obvious to others who have been following this for longer) is that if there were anything to gain for ANY of the three by giving a full and truthful account of what happened to Meredith, if they could show themselves to be truly a horrified observer who reacted in a less-than-honorable/courageous way to an unexpected and horrifying situation, or an unwilling and coerced participant in something that got out of hand faster than they could react to withdraw, then by now one of them would have done just that. Their continuing silence convinces me that whatever their physical roles on the night, that they are equally culpable and they know it, the truth would not make any one of them look better (or less guilty).

Unless of course they (individually, perhaps not all of them) know that they COULD mitigate their involvement by telling the truth, but that in doing so they would be giving up the only thing they have left to make life bearable, the love and support of their family. Because nothing other than complete innocence (or the charade of it) will be good enough.

I have worked with young offenders, I've known people who have done some pretty horrible things, and I do have some compassion and sympathy for young offenders (some of them, not all), because teens and people in their early 20s are not mature, their brains are still developing, they are at the mercy of unruly emotions and hormonal highs and lows that few of us who have passed that stage would willingly go through again. I've said it before and I'll repeat: narcissism and elements of sociopathy can be seen in many people between puberty and maturity, people who go on to become fully functional, decent adults.
Top Profile 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 11:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

ttrroonniicc wrote:
Emerald wrote:
Not only was Amanda's accusation wicked against Patrick, but Mother Edda knew as well. This is a woman who is a teacher in school of other young children.


AK knew Lumumba well - he gave her a job. She made the accusation and thought nothing of it. She didn't revoke it. She related to Edda Mellas well after the supposed "coercion" that she'd made a "mistake" and PL was innocent. Neither did anything. PL was in jail for many days until the discovery of Guede released him. She related in the trial that she had no antagonistic feelings towards PL. She related that she didn't fear him - she had stated in her accusation that she was afraid of him. AK didn't explain why she had made a false accusation and why specifically she accused Lumumba. She showed no understanding of the wrong in accusing a friend.


Edda Mellas showed no understanding of teaching her very own child right from wrong. Yet, she is teaching children in the public school system.
Top Profile 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 12:35 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

grushka wrote:
Hi all,

I really don't mean to ask newbie questions but there are certain things I can't find elsewhere.

(And just for the record, Amanda Knox's (and RS's) guilt are as certain as anything gets in this world).

Anyway, what is the implication of Amanda's "scootching" the bath mat after her shower on the morning after she killed her roommate?

By implication, I mean what was she very likely doing? Was it part of the cleanup? Was it a lie to explain something else? I don't understand the significance of this (bizarre) action.

It's probably obvious but I can't quite figure it out.

Thanks in advance.



Hi Grushka. I've always wondered about that, too. It seems such a ridiculous part of the story that I thought she felt she needed that story to explain evidence away? Like the blood accumulated on the rug as she did so, or that she was concerned about any blood that may be found in her room. I suspect there is method in anything she says. Another eample is the bag for laundry she says she carried away from Raff's house.(She never said if she was carrying laundry to or from Raff's, either) I think she told us about that in case she'd been seen carrying such a bag (likely full of bloody clothes to dump).
Top Profile 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 12:45 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

I think you have it just about nailed there modest_ex.
I remember reading somewhere early on in the case that after Knox had blurted out her accusation of Patrick Lumumba and her involvement in the murder, the decision to formally arrest her was taken actually when they learned her mother was on her way to Perugia - they obviously had been listening in on their phone conversations.
The transcripts to those conversations would be interesting methinks.
Of course we all (well most) of us possess compassion for people, this is a tough subject and a position I have put myself in with regards to understanding this case and being a parent of girls of the same age as the killer.
Would I look after my daughter?
Of course I would, I would fight to the death for all of them (I have 4 girls).
Would I, knowing all the facts which indicated the guilt of my daughter do the same?
I have to say I wouldn't.
I would make sure that she was treated with all the fairness and human rights afforded to us in the civilised world were applied.
That is me, but other people are not like me.
One can go into very deep territory here and I know nothing like this has happened to me or my kids but at the end of the day I find it appalling when people are compassionate in respect of the lying at all costs Edda Mellas and her 'losing' her daughter - when someone has been brutally murdered - yet her parents will never get their daughter back.
This case is fascinating due to it's bizarre US mainstream media coverage and of course this situation exists due to the Knox/Mellas group employing a PR company.
Whoever saw in the past Ted Bundy's mother being interviewed after conviction?
How's Theo holding up in jail Mrs Bundy? Is he ok?

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.


Last edited by DeathFish 2000 on Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline TheFatCent


Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 6:43 am

Posts: 7

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:02 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

grushka wrote:
Hi all,

I really don't mean to ask newbie questions but there are certain things I can't find elsewhere.

(And just for the record, Amanda Knox's (and RS's) guilt are as certain as anything gets in this world).

Anyway, what is the implication of Amanda's "scootching" the bath mat after her shower on the morning after she killed her roommate?

By implication, I mean what was she very likely doing? Was it part of the cleanup? Was it a lie to explain something else? I don't understand the significance of this (bizarre) action.

It's probably obvious but I can't quite figure it out.

Thanks in advance.


Hi all, I introduced myself a couple days back, but nevertheless have since then resumed my former position as resident lurk. I didn't intend on being so quiet, but I'm finding myself content reading and considering the different ways everyone here sees the pieces of this puzzle fitting (or not fitting) together.

Anyway, another "newbie" is going to second this question. When I had read about the supposed one-footed, sometimes two-footed "scootching," I don't remember AK giving an explanation other than she was wet from having just got out of the shower and did the bath-mat-hustle to her room to retrieve clothing. I too would be interested in hearing the reasoning behind her highly specified description of this action.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:10 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

bucketoftea wrote:
Hi Grushka. I've always wondered about that, too. It seems such a ridiculous part of the story that I thought she felt she needed that story to explain evidence away? Like the blood accumulated on the rug as she did so, or that she was concerned about any blood that may be found in her room. I suspect there is method in anything she says. Another eample is the bag for laundry she says she carried away from Raff's house.(She never said if she was carrying laundry to or from Raff's, either) I think she told us about that in case she'd been seen carrying such a bag (likely full of bloody clothes to dump).


Amanda said in her prison diary the reason for the bag was to carry her dirty clothes. Makes no sense. Why the need to go home to change clothes?

The more Amanda speaks and writes, the more guilty she sounds. Lie after lie after lie after............

Speaking of blatant lies, what happened to all those supportive people in Perugia who opened their arms to Edda and Curt? Don't get me wrong, I believe the Italian people are a very friendly and welcoming bunch. It was Edda who misconstrued the facts. The interview Edda did a few weeks ago, she said either she or Curt would always be in Italy for la_).

In an interview a few days ago, Amanda's attorney said he was visiting her in jail, because no one from the Family was there. In the US, your attorney can visit with you in jail just about any time he/she wants to. Day or night.

Edda also reiterated the abuse allegations. Doesn't she face arrest in Italy for that?
Top Profile 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:15 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Quote:
Anyway, what is the implication of Amanda's "scootching" the bath mat after her shower on the morning after she killed her roommate?


The implication is that there is probably no other way to make the luminol footprints, but shuffling on a towel or a rug for traits of along the corridoor.
Her 'explanation' is quite telling - thus incriminating - giving the detailed explanation for how the prints could produced, but placing this memory in a time *after* the crime.
Top Profile 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:26 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Hi Yummi.

In Edda's lengthy radio interview a few weeks ago, she restated the abuse allegations. Can Edda still be arrested in Italy for that?
Top Profile 

Offline equinox


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:22 pm

Posts: 140

Location: WA, USA

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:47 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

TheFatCent wrote:
grushka wrote:
Hi all,

I really don't mean to ask newbie questions but there are certain things I can't find elsewhere.

(And just for the record, Amanda Knox's (and RS's) guilt are as certain as anything gets in this world).

Anyway, what is the implication of Amanda's "scootching" the bath mat after her shower on the morning after she killed her roommate?

By implication, I mean what was she very likely doing? Was it part of the cleanup? Was it a lie to explain something else? I don't understand the significance of this (bizarre) action.

It's probably obvious but I can't quite figure it out.

Thanks in advance.


Hi all, I introduced myself a couple days back, but nevertheless have since then resumed my former position as resident lurk. I didn't intend on being so quiet, but I'm finding myself content reading and considering the different ways everyone here sees the pieces of this puzzle fitting (or not fitting) together.

Anyway, another "newbie" is going to second this question. When I had read about the supposed one-footed, sometimes two-footed "scootching," I don't remember AK giving an explanation other than she was wet from having just got out of the shower and did the bath-mat-hustle to her room to retrieve clothing. I too would be interested in hearing the reasoning behind her highly specified description of this action.



I would be interested to know when was the first point that she made this description. It's in her trial testimony, but I wonder how soon in the investigation she contrived this story?

I've seen this fairy tale of AK as having multiple purposes in her contrivance of an alibi for showering in a blood-stained bathroom.

1) (As Yummi mentions) She used it as an effort to explain away her "faint" footprints in Meredith's blood, revealed only by luminol. If she had hopped down the hallway on the bathmat, then perhaps people would believe that her footprint had transferred by squeezing the blood from the mat mixed with shower water onto the hallway floor. 'See! Not only do I have an explanation for why my footprints are in Meredith's blood in the hallway, but I can explain why they are so faint they appear to have been cleaned up."

2) Since there was doubt that she had even had the shower she claimed in her apartment, her hopping use of the bathmat would prove that she showered, and thus explain why the mat was still wet but not the shower enclosure.

3) I recall reading that the investigators believed an effort had been made to wash the footprint from the mat, that the blood stain was very dilute and not formed in such a way as it would have appeared if a bloody foot were applied to it directly. (Kermit?) What remained was an indelible stain and not a full blood transfer footprint as in the bedroom. To claim to have used the mat extensively while soaking wet and naked would become a (failed) effort to explain this dilution.

4) Finally, except in the mind of the forensic experts who examined the mat, there has always been a public confusion about to whom the bloody footprint belonged, perhaps she also wasn't sure that the footprint on the mat wasn't her own and was hoping to create a scenario that would explain why her footprint might be found on the mat. This is why I was wondering when she first contrived this detail, as before forensic evidence was released to her defense she may have believed it was her own footprint until that time.

*edit because I thought of one more possibility:
5) Also possibly they may have forensically examined her feet, boots and socks during the investigation, and certainly after her arrest and she wanted a way to explain away any of Meredith's blood found there. Again when did she first say this?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline jw


Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 6:06 am

Posts: 177

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 2:41 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Yummi wrote:
Quote:
Anyway, what is the implication of Amanda's "scootching" the bath mat after her shower on the morning after she killed her roommate?


The implication is that there is probably no other way to make the luminol footprints, but shuffling on a towel or a rug for traits of along the corridoor.
Her 'explanation' is quite telling - thus incriminating - giving the detailed explanation for how the prints could produced, but placing this memory in a time *after* the crime.


In addition to Equinox's and Yummi's ideas, shuffling on a damp, bloodstained bath mat through the bathroom and hallway could also be an excuse for any signs of wiping, scrubbing on the floor tiles or to any footprint or other evidentiary remnants thereon.

"That isn't attempts to wipe up evidence, I merely was innocently shuffling along through here on a damp bathmat - it just looks like someone tried to scrub up."

JW
Top Profile 

Offline martin


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:28 pm

Posts: 362

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 2:52 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
GameOver wrote:
Equinox, I am so glad you posted about just how downright wicked and nasty Amanda's accusation against Patick truly was. I feel so much sympathy for him and his family. Even though the media circus has cooled considerably in regards to spotlighting his nightmarish adventure in the initial criminal proceedings, this episode in his life will continue to affect him for many years to come.


As our poster Tara pointed out some time ago, when you google Patrick Lumumba you get thousands of hits that associate him with murder. And his fledgling business was not strong enough to survive the aftermath of his arrest, not to mention the closing of his bar for three months.


>Before christmas, I "yahooed" "Rudy Guede trial and got hits about ak. I just met a girl from CA, she thought the crime took place in Spain and ak is kept in a spanish jail.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline modest_ex


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 3:29 pm

Posts: 160

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 2:57 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

DeathFish 2000 wrote:
I find it appalling when people are compassionate in respect of the lying at all costs Edda Mellas and her 'losing' her daughter - when someone has been brutally murdered - yet her parents will never get their daughter back.


Absolutely, and thanks for taking the time to read my post.

My compassion, if there is any (and it is conditional upon the notion that AK or RS would confess or at least give a proper account of what happened were it not for the parental coercion) is solely for the entirely imagined scenario that someone has done something horrific and inexcusable while part of a rabid group dynamic and high to the point that all normal inhibitions are gone, would seek to at least tell what they knew to provide some closure for the victim's family at least, in the absence of anything else they could do to turn back time.

No compassion from me for anyone who might fight that outcome in order to save family face, or justify all the time/money/energy spent on insisting on 100% innocence/non-involvement of their precious offspring.
Top Profile 

Offline martin


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:28 pm

Posts: 362

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:11 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

ttrroonniicc wrote:
Emerald wrote:
Not only was Amanda's accusation wicked against Patrick, but Mother Edda knew as well. This is a woman who is a teacher in school of other young children.


AK knew Lumumba well - he gave her a job. She made the accusation and thought nothing of it. She didn't revoke it. She related to Edda Mellas well after the supposed "coercion" that she'd made a "mistake" and PL was innocent. Neither did anything. PL was in jail for many days until the discovery of Guede released him. She related in the trial that she had no antagonistic feelings towards PL. She related that she didn't fear him - she had stated in her accusation that she was afraid of him. AK didn't explain why she had made a false accusation and why specifically she accused Lumumba. She showed no understanding of the wrong in accusing a friend.

No, it's far more complicated: She had a vision of what might have happened but she was not sure about her visions and maybe she was there or maybe PL was there because maybe he wanted her and perhaps she was not in ther kitchen but with raffaele, maybe rs killed her but she is absolutely sure that she didn't do anthing wrong and you know, it's difficult to keep track of your whereabouts after you smoked a joint and that's the way it is
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Rebel


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 3:25 am

Posts: 129

Location: Bellingham WA

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:28 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

stint7 wrote:
Rebel points out:
Quote:
I totally agree with Kermit based on the physical fact that high-pitched sounds are readily absorbed by thick materials. The cottage has massive stone walls and a terra-cotta roof. I think it very unlikely that a scream emanating from inside the house could be heard by anyone in the apartments above. The sound would have to have come from the porch or driveway of the cottage.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Being overly simplistic is something I have often been accused of in my 68 years.....

1)But I cannot help but evaluate the effect of per chance an open/not fully closed window or door
2) Also, what motivation would prompt neighbors to state that they heard screams if acoustics actually made this impossible/improbable?


Stint7, you have 12 years on me ss-) but I will attempt to address your points:

1) I carefully considered this possibility before writing my post. From Kermit's PP's: Only the roof of the cottage is visible from Nara's apartment and the front door of the cottage faces about 120 degrees away from her windows. The window of the bedroom that was Meredith's faces the opposite direction in relation to the apartments and overlooks the valley below. The only window facing the apartments is a small bathroom window that is diagonally opposite the area where the attack took place. So if any of these were cracked open I doubt there would be much effect.

2) To be clear, I am NOT doubting that a scream was heard by the witnesses and I am NOT doubting that Meredith screamed. It just seems more probable that the scream the witnesses heard emanated from outside the house rather that from within. Glass is thin and smooth so sound passes through it readily although somewhat diminished if there are two layers. Nara mentioned having double-paned windows in her testimony.

Apparently there was a heated argument in front of the cottage just before the perpetrators ran away, so I am assuming that this occurred shortly after the murder. Could this have resulted in Amanda letting out a chilling scream? Given her spontaneous nature, intoxicated state, and aggravated emotions I think it is quite possible.
Top Profile 

Offline jsbjoey


Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:43 am

Posts: 1

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:54 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

I do not know whether Amanda is guilty or not. Nor do any of you. From what has transpired in court, it certainly seems likely.

What I do know is that this forum is not hospitable towards people who have an open mind on the issue. You are not taken seriously here unless you are certain of Amanda's guilt. People who express contrary opinions are subject to ridicule.

NO ONE who posts regularly here possesses an ounce of intellectual honesty.

Those who commit heinous crimes deserve to be punished. No such crime should go unpunished. The need to punish the guilty is the seed of intellectual dishonesty.

Personally, I believe in the death penalty, and believe that those who killed Meredith should be executed. But I don't know who they are.

I have no reason to dispute the verdict, but I hope that it is subject to severe scrutiny. If Amanda is guilty, put her to death.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:01 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

jsbjoey wrote:
I do not know whether Amanda is guilty or not. Nor do any of you. From what has transpired in court, it certainly seems likely.

What I do know is that this forum is not hospitable towards people who have an open mind on the issue. You are not taken seriously here unless you are certain of Amanda's guilt. People who express contrary opinions are subject to ridicule.

NO ONE who posts regularly here possesses an ounce of intellectual honesty.

Those who commit heinous crimes deserve to be punished. No such crime should go unpunished. The need to punish the guilty is the seed of intellectual dishonesty.

Personally, I believe in the death penalty, and believe that those who killed Meredith should be executed. But I don't know who they are.

I have no reason to dispute the verdict, but I hope that it is subject to severe scrutiny. If Amanda is guilty, put her to death.


And a very warm welcome to you too. I bet you are the life of any party and always know how to make a good first impression among strangers! Thanks for stopping by.

Actually, we are very hospitable toward people who make sense and who are open minded.

This may disappoint you, but I think most people here -- having examined the evidence with more care than most -- are comfortable with the verdict that was handed down. That doesn't make us intellectually dishonest. Anyway, if you want to learn more about why we think the verdict and trial were fair, there is ample material here for you. No need to come in the door shouting.

And please put down your weapon. We don't allow them here.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline lauowolf


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:50 am

Posts: 525

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:22 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/413745_knox04.html
Last updated January 3, 2010 8:12 p.m. PT
Seattle Prep to hold fund-raiser, letter-writing campaign for Amanda Knox

ack
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline h-iroller


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 11:17 pm

Posts: 14

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:13 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Hi Guys,

I've been lurking around on this site ever since the awful Amanda Knox edition of Dateline. (I should specify that it was the awful December 6th edition since there was more than one awful Amanda Knox Dateline.) Since the show was so sketchy about the details of the case, I started searching for more information. Originally, I figured Amanda was innocent based on the US media's skewed presentation of the evidence and the never-ending deluge of FOA propaganda. This message board set me straight. Thank you for your insightful presentation of reliable information and serious analysis of issues connected with the case. It's certainly a complex and multi-faceted crime and subsequent media spectacle.

The most disturbing aspect of the crime for me is the banality of its participants. Despite her anti-social, seemingly psychotic personality, Amanda Knox still reminds me a little of myself -- an American girl studying abroad, trying to learn Italian, longing to see the world. From what I've read on the board, a lot of us can relate with Amanda or with her mother to some degree -- we've had similar situations in college, have traveled to the area, or maybe have had children overseas. Since I see some of myself in Amanda, I keep reading and rereading the information presented on this board trying to figure out what happened or what it was inside her that caused her to do such terrible things. I don't know if anyone on here has ever read _The Banality of Evil_ by Hannah Arendt about the every day-ness of the Nazi perpetrators, but it's worth a read. The banality of Amanda, escalated through the American media's constant barrage of baby Amanda photos and testimonials to her innocence is a very clever PR manipulation that makes us feel even closer to the case, obviously. I feel sick for the "fame" she has garnered as a result.

Anyway, I decided to post because I had my first Edda Mellas eye roll moment awhile back (and came up with the "eye roller" username for myself). I know this video was posted on this board December 21 when CBS aired it, but one portion of it bothered me in particular, and I wanted to quickly present it again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKdLoxJXVAE


At 40 seconds, the reporter asks what it's like for Amanda in prison. Mellas flippantly answers, "Ya know, boring. She's doing a lot of reading. Ya know, she's really decided that this is the time she can read a lot of classics." It bothers me for so many reasons, especially since it illustrates so many things about Edda's character that you guys have already so thoughtfully discussed on the board. I don't mean for overkill here since of course she's completely biased, but Edda seems to ignore the true gravity of the situation. Regardless of her ideas about Amanda's guilt, that child is imprisoned -- this is not a summer camp. I know Amanda's got to do something inside her prison cell to pass the time, but the way Edda says, "She can read a lot of classics" just seems so elitist, especially considering her daughter's current circumstance, and it bothers me. A lot. Maybe Amanda could start a prison book club; she could rival Oprah. I probably shouldn't give the FOA trolls any ideas, huh. I'm sure in no time at all, the PR train will roll by and claim that Amanda is reading the classics aloud to small children on that prison playground of hers...

Thanks for creating a place to discuss and analyze the case; I really enjoy this message board.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:36 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

lauowolf wrote:
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/413745_knox04.html
Last updated January 3, 2010 8:12 p.m. PT
Seattle Prep to hold fund-raiser, letter-writing campaign for Amanda Knox

ack


Seattle Prep has its image to protect. I wonder if the school is allowing dissenting faculty, staff and students equal time.

As for the Comedy Underground fundraiser, which is separate, I find it tacky that this is being treated as a comedy by some.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:38 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

h-iroller wrote:
Hi Guys,

I've been lurking around on this site ever since the awful Amanda Knox edition of Dateline. (I should specify that it was the awful December 6th edition since there was more than one awful Amanda Knox Dateline.) Since the show was so sketchy about the details of the case, I started searching for more information. Originally, I figured Amanda was innocent based on the US media's skewed presentation of the evidence and the never-ending deluge of FOA propaganda. This message board set me straight. Thank you for your insightful presentation of reliable information and serious analysis of issues connected with the case. It's certainly a complex and multi-faceted crime and subsequent media spectacle.

The most disturbing aspect of the crime for me is the banality of its participants. Despite her anti-social, seemingly psychotic personality, Amanda Knox still reminds me a little of myself -- an American girl studying abroad, trying to learn Italian, longing to see the world. From what I've read on the board, a lot of us can relate with Amanda or with her mother to some degree -- we've had similar situations in college, have traveled to the area, or maybe have had children overseas. Since I see some of myself in Amanda, I keep reading and rereading the information presented on this board trying to figure out what happened or what it was inside her that caused her to do such terrible things. I don't know if anyone on here has ever read _The Banality of Evil_ by Hannah Arendt about the every day-ness of the Nazi perpetrators, but it's worth a read. The banality of Amanda, escalated through the American media's constant barrage of baby Amanda photos and testimonials to her innocence is a very clever PR manipulation that makes us feel even closer to the case, obviously. I feel sick for the "fame" she has garnered as a result.

Anyway, I decided to post because I had my first Edda Mellas eye roll moment awhile back (and came up with the "eye roller" username for myself). I know this video was posted on this board December 21 when CBS aired it, but one portion of it bothered me in particular, and I wanted to quickly present it again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKdLoxJXVAE


At 40 seconds, the reporter asks what it's like for Amanda in prison. Mellas flippantly answers, "Ya know, boring. She's doing a lot of reading. Ya know, she's really decided that this is the time she can read a lot of classics." It bothers me for so many reasons, especially since it illustrates so many things about Edda's character that you guys have already so thoughtfully discussed on the board. I don't mean for overkill here since of course she's completely biased, but Edda seems to ignore the true gravity of the situation. Regardless of her ideas about Amanda's guilt, that child is imprisoned -- this is not a summer camp. I know Amanda's got to do something inside her prison cell to pass the time, but the way Edda says, "She can read a lot of classics" just seems so elitist, especially considering her daughter's current circumstance, and it bothers me. A lot. Maybe Amanda could start a prison book club; she could rival Oprah. I probably shouldn't give the FOA trolls any ideas, huh. I'm sure in no time at all, the PR train will roll by and claim that Amanda is reading the classics aloud to small children on that prison playground of hers...

Thanks for creating a place to discuss and analyze the case; I really enjoy this message board.


Welcome to our board. Hannah Arendt was talking about Eichmann, I believe, when she coined the phrase "the banality of evil". I wonder if Hannah Arendt is among the authors Knox is reading while in prison. Arendt had very strong feelings about the Nazis and their banal evil. Your comment reminded me of the famous photo of Amanda Knox on the receiving end of a machine gun, apparently having the time of her life. On another occasion she is reported to have joked to a Seattle Jew, "my people killed your people". Are these the values being instilled at Seattle Prep? If not, what does Seattle Prep have to say about such antics? Is the purpose of the fundraiser to cover the expenses of a propaganda campaign? Love the sinner hate the sin?

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Earthling


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:25 pm

Posts: 512

Location: USA

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:47 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

May I just say that I think Adentre was naughty just for using that awful blue font and placing it inside quote boxes, so it was really tiny.

My ol' eyes cannot handle tiny blue fonts on black background, sorry!!! Trying to read it felt like this: :shock: Horrible! n-((
Top Profile 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:57 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Hi h-iroller, and welcome.
Inbetween reading all the classics that are so obviously available in Capanne prison, she is also learning (I think 3 at the last count) languages (although this was changed down from 5, [I think they thought they had to tone the claims down a bit in case people started asking her questions in the said languages]) and she is also teaching the rest of the other low life prisoners how to read and write (and probably talk) - then there is the needlepoint she is expert at (exceptional, considering that according to her mother she has gone virtually blind since her arrest). She is also probably giving counsel to the whole prison and will soon be canonised for her piety alone.
We still unfortunately dont have the time and date that the Pontiff will be granted an audience with her yet.
All in all she is simply a good egg!
But really, elitist yes.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.


Last edited by DeathFish 2000 on Mon Jan 04, 2010 7:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline grushka


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:08 pm

Posts: 30

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:58 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

jsbjoey wrote:
I do not know whether Amanda is guilty or not. Nor do any of you. From what has transpired in court, it certainly seems likely.


Personally, I believe in the death penalty, and believe that those who killed Meredith should be executed. But I don't know who they are.

I have no reason to dispute the verdict, but I hope that it is subject to severe scrutiny. If Amanda is guilty, put her to death.


One of the things that fascinates me about the Internet is encountering minds who are wrong about everything.

Like this one.

Leaving aside all the stuff about this site and "open minds" - the assertion about the death penalty here just makes me sick. Having the state apply the cold, rational apparatus of death in the name of retribution and justice is appalling.

And while I hesitate to speak for the Kerchers, I think it highly likely that they would be disgusted by the death penalty being applied to their daughter's murderers. Judging from their demeanor, I think they know any solace would be short-lived and such events ultimately highly distressing.

And assuming that Amanda, Raffaele and Ruede maintain the sentences they now have, I think it far more humane - in the roundest sense of that word, to have them serve out their time rather than be put to death. While Amanda strikes me as having some sociopathic traits, even she will probably come to be haunted by what she did. Especially late at night when she's alone with herself.

Having all three realize that they have taken an irreplaceable human life is far deeper punishment than a rush of horror and then silence after being executed. Moment by moment they must face what they have done.

And even if Amanda doesn't have that place within her that can feel guilt, it is still infinitely preferable that she not be put to death despite her own crimes.

Everything about your post depressed me. But the chest-beating over the death penalty was just nauseating.
Top Profile 

Offline h-iroller


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 11:17 pm

Posts: 14

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 7:03 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Welcome to our board. Hannah Arendt was talking about Eichmann, I believe, when she coined the phrase "the banality of evil". I wonder if Hannah Arendt is among the authors Knox is reading while in prison. Arendt had very strong feelings about the Nazis and their banal evil. Your comment reminded me of the famous photo of Amanda Knox on the receiving end of a machine gun, apparently having the time of her life. On another occasion she is reported to have joked to a Seattle Jew, "my people killed your people". Are these the values being instilled at Seattle Prep? If not, what does Seattle Prep have to say about such antics? Is the purpose of the fundraiser to cover the expenses of a propaganda campaign? Love the sinner hate the sin?



The connections definitely make that disconcerting and inappropriate photo even more chilling. When I was in DC in 2007, I had to leave the exhibit because the magnitude of the Holocaust hit me all at once, and I could not stop crying -- that place more than any other, was solemn, dignified, and reverent. Knox really does lack empathy and respect for life if she could take a photo like that in a place like that -- and the person on the other side of the camera should be ashamed of himself/herself as well. I hope in addition to Arendt, Amanda's reading some Edgar Allen Poe. I keep thinking of "The Telltale Heart."

It's amazing to me that in all of this, Amanda Knox and her family are still being treated as the victims while the Kerchers suffer in quiet dignity. Some of the comments on the SeattlePi article even dare to villanize the Kercher family, as though the Kerchers were personally persecuting Amanda -- clearly, one of the posters was well-informed in the details of the case, as he kept writing "Kircher." Care packages and fundraisers for convicted a murderer? The money would be better spent as a scholarship for study abroad in Meridith Kercher's name, especially given that Seattle Prep is a place of learning, IMO.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bilko


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 7:25 pm

Posts: 198

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 7:07 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

Thanks lauowolf for the link to the Seattle PI story. I am particularly interested in how the media is covering the case. I noticed that one poster there has praised the school for doing the Christian thing in supporting one of their own. They also go on to say:

"As for the Kirchers, no sympathy from me anymore. They have gone along with this whole vicious process. Wake up Kirchers; it won't ease your pain to have these children in jail and their families as distraught as you are."

Possibly a new low in a very sordid campaign.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Earthling


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:25 pm

Posts: 512

Location: USA

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 7:08 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

jsbjoey wrote:
NO ONE who posts regularly here possesses an ounce of intellectual honesty.
....
Those who commit heinous crimes deserve to be punished.
....
The need to punish the guilty is the seed of intellectual dishonesty.
....
Personally, I believe in the death penalty, and believe that those who killed Meredith should be executed.

huh-)
Top Profile 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 8:42 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

bilko wrote:
Thanks lauowolf for the link to the Seattle PI story. I am particularly interested in how the media is covering the case. I noticed that one poster there has praised the school for doing the Christian thing in supporting one of their own. They also go on to say:

"As for the Kirchers, no sympathy from me anymore. They have gone along with this whole vicious process. Wake up Kirchers; it won't ease your pain to have these children in jail and their families as distraught as you are."

Possibly a new low in a very sordid campaign.


It's vile, but they're just quoting Edda.
Top Profile 

Offline Hammerite


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 3:46 pm

Posts: 517

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 9:01 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

jsbjoey wrote:
I do not know whether Amanda is guilty or not. Nor do any of you. From what has transpired in court, it certainly seems likely.

What I do know is that this forum is not hospitable towards people who have an open mind on the issue. You are not taken seriously here unless you are certain of Amanda's guilt. People who express contrary opinions are subject to ridicule.

NO ONE who posts regularly here possesses an ounce of intellectual honesty.

Those who commit heinous crimes deserve to be punished. No such crime should go unpunished. The need to punish the guilty is the seed of intellectual dishonesty.

Personally, I believe in the death penalty, and believe that those who killed Meredith should be executed. But I don't know who they are.

I have no reason to dispute the verdict, but I hope that it is subject to severe scrutiny. If Amanda is guilty, put her to death.




Hello jsbjoey,

quote:- “NO ONE who posts regularly here possesses an ounce of intellectual honesty”

I do not agree with this statement although I accept that it is your opinion and you are certainly entitled to hold opinions. However if you choose to place those opinions in to a public forum then you must be prepared to defend your hypothesis. Can you prove it?

I come to the tragic demise of MK from a data analysis perspective. In the absence of a valid description of actual events on that tragic murder from those who partook, interested parties are left with no choice but to gather as much of the information that is available and come to an informed opinion based on this.

The important thing here is to ensure that the information (data) is accurate and verifiable. If like me you have exhausted every possible source that you can find and assembled the data that can be verified, than you are then in a position to make an informed decision on this case.

That is the process ongoing in this forum. Being human it is possible that our previous life experiences and other factors will lead to a degree of unconscious bias; but this is not the same as intellectual dishonesty. The fact is that those who post here regularly are looking to uncover the truth of what happened to MK on that night. To date the information leads to a conclusion that RG, AK & RS were involved. This conclusion is bias free as it is proven in a court of law. Where is the proof for your statement?

If you have any additional information on this tragic case it is most welcome, the process is ongoing.

On a personal note I cannot justify the use of the Death Penalty under any circumstances, but that is just my opinion.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 9:16 am   Post subject: Re: A thread from the first week, via Repubblica newspaper   

Catnip wrote:

SomeAlibi (and others),
About your timeline thingy, in your (legal) experience, what is best way for understanding and showing how someone’s understanding of events has changed through time?

I thought dot points, or maybe a tree structure, but it seems to be more like a tapestry than anything else, with the intertwining between events on any one day, and across days, building up the bigger picture.

For example, taking just one thread of events only – the one with Amanda at one end, and “a roommate” at the other – and taking just one newspaper (the Repubblica), and for only one week of reports (from 2 Nov to 8 Nov), it becomes obvious that the newspaper reports are (necessarily) incomplete, and that the threads of knowledge cross over and under each other. Sometimes suffused with conjecture, sometimes with certainty, sometimes with information that is later corrected and revised.

Definitely a tapestry.




Catnip

I've seen timelines done a number of different ways and often not terribly effectively. Straight textual timelines are common.

My personal preference to get my head around things is an event chain diagram with timeline running along the X axis and then the events that occur being completed as individual bars of 'activity' placed one underneath each other with their start point and duration. I always (probably incorrectly) think of one of these as a Gantt chart without the "project management" part. I'm sure many people have seen and / or worked with Gantt charts but I'll link it here - disclaimer: linking wikipedia is something I'm usually rather warying of doing but of a quick scoot round for images, the top right is a better illustration than the others I came across so shrug - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gantt_chart .

Advantage to me is that you can define the granularity / fineness of timeline how you like on successive charts - days for certain 'topics' which you then list out bars representing different events running down the page, or perhaps minutes and seconds for the phonecalls to the police / Meredith / the flatmates phones etc. Again, for anyone who hasn't used these, the overlapping length of events is useful since the bars show both the starting time of things but also their duration through the length of the bars.

They are good for objectively true records of fact like telephone calls, internet access, events witnessed by multiple people which are agreed by all sides. The problem with using them over disputed fact can be that when you get into contested versions of multiple events and try to start putting the defence versus the prosecution's versions above / below each other, the visual overload can be destructive to understanding. Particularly when of course you've got multiple defendents and their team's versions of what happened. It is possible though - all the skill really is in the logical grouping of activities / events together.

But complexity is often why so much is done through the oral debate in court and references to huge stacks of evidence. Large scale fraud trials are the worst imho. Hours of lugging in box after box of the stuff into court and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of pages, making even the evidentary bundle in this case look small. I did two multi-monthers (5 days a week) many years ago and frankly if I ever have to do another one, I am leaving the country on a merchant steamer for South America and changing my name. wg-))

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.


Last edited by SomeAlibi on Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 9:28 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

I should add, in a mortgage fraud trial I did, one of the barristers coughed discreetly to point out that several of the jurors had nodded off (which was not flipping surprising, it was in a non-air-conditioned civic room in a hot British summer (the British being fanatically dedicated to not preparing for hot summers or alternatively two inches of snow) and the temperature in court was stifling and the material boring beyond belief). The exchange went something like this;

Barrister 1: *cough*
Barrister 2: ...and if the members of the jury could turn to bundle two.... folder four.... section XIV.... page 432.... paragraph six... (this takes a couple of minutes for everyone who is awake to find it - the prosecution barrister hasn't even noticed about the asleep jurors because he's off in his own little world and we've been doing this for months)... there you will see the mortgage application for 1 Arcadia Avenue...
Barrister 1: *cough* *cough* *COUGH!*
Barrister 2: ... a property worth... uh? Oh! Excuse me, members of the jury, m'learned friend apparently would like to discuss something...
Barrister 1: {whispered} Three of them are asleep!
Barrister 2: Oh..... ah.... well m'learned friend points out that it is terribly hot in here and perhaps a recess is in order. So your honour (the judge), may I suggest we take a 15 minute break?
Court-room: Silence
Barrister 2: Your honour?
Court-room: Silence
Barrister 2: YOUR HONOUR!
Judge: Whaaa....what... yes... yes... umm... I didn't quite hear that, could you please repeat....

The judge, of course, had gone to sleep as well... :)

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.


Last edited by SomeAlibi on Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 10:41 am   Post subject: Re: XIV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 -   

SomeAlibi wrote:
Barrister 2: Oh..... ah.... well m'learned friend points out that it is terribly hot in here and perhaps a recess is in order. So your honour (the judge), may I suggest we take a 15 minute break?
Court-room: Silence
Barrister 2: Your honour?
Court-room: Silence
Barrister 2: YOUR HONOUR!
Judge: Whaaa....what... yes... yes... umm... I didn't quite hear that, could you please repeat....

The judge, of course, had gone to sleep as well... :)



:D :D :D cl-) :D
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 12:28 pm   Post subject: La Signora C   

lector wrote:
... the Micheli Report. I recently re-read the Google translation. There's a point where it looks to me like Micheli says that Nara had spoken to the police a few days earlier because she felt unsafe where she was living; there's the implication that she didn't call the police after hearing the scream because she didn't want to seem to be a bother to them, which is not unreasonable for a 68-year-old widow.

I may have this all wrong; because the Google translation is so jumbled, it's not always clear what is being said, but that is what I took away from it. I haven't seen this detail mentioned elsewhere so I may in fact be misunderstanding it.


Hi Lector,

"Not sure", is how I read it. The implication of not wanting to seem to be a bother was there (at the beginning), but (as we learned last March) after she found out from other people later that there had been a murder, she decided to go to the police.


Sounds like you might be talking about the paragraph in Micheli's judgement that begins In quel frangente, mentre era.

At that point in the judgement, he is summarising her statement to the investigators, and highlighting the inferences that can be drawn from it.

The last half of that paragraph says (my paraphrase), that afterwards [i.e., after hearing the blood-curdling scream and, less than a minute later, the running away of multiple persons in different directions, but not actually seeing anyone or anything even though she looked], she didn’t hear anything more, and wasn’t able to fall asleep again soon because of the anxiety the scream had given her; in fact, she even got up a second time to get a drink of water, but, just like the first time she got up, she did not take a look at the clock to see what the time was.

The judge continues:
She mentioned, lastly, that she “telephoned the police only the day before her [witness] deposition because of her health and the fact that initially she wasn’t feeling sure/confident (sicura), but however remained firm in the certainty of having heard that very loud scream, thus she herself had linked the scream to the murder case.”



How many lives are wrecked or deeply affected by a murder.
:cry:
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:12 pm   Post subject: Story use: re the bathmat   

equinox wrote:
I would be interested to know when was the first point that she made this description. It's in her trial testimony, but I wonder how soon in the investigation she contrived this story?


Hi Equinox,

Usage(s) and contrivance might be two separate things.

One early usage of the bathmat is at the interview in prison on the 17 December 2007, after her lawyers were encouraged by her "lucidity" after 41 days in prison and allowed the investigators in.


«Ero andata lì per farmi la doccia. Ho notato il bagno sporco, le feci nel water ma non vi ho dato peso. Non c' erano asciugami e ho usato il tappettino per slittare* sino alla mia camera~».


“I went there [to via della Pergola, no 7] to have a shower. I noticed the dirty bathroom, the faeces in the toilet but I didn’t give it much thought. There were no towels and I used the bathmat to slide along up to my room…”

– “I don’t know why I accused Patrick”, in [ Repubblica ] 18 December 2007


This is the interview where she started to answer the question about why she told Marco Zaroli about seeing Meredith’s body next to the wardrobe, but ended up saying, after catching her lawyer’s eye, “Mi avvalgo della facoltà di non rispondere» (i.e., the classic “No comment”).

Her lawyers were scuri in volto (“grim-faced”) afterwards.

I can imagine.



*slittare = what sleighs do, slide, slip, skid; “shuffle along” if you’re on a mat, or on a bench.
Another midnight, time for me to "slide along" to bed.
Buona notte a tutti! Night all!
Top Profile 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 1 of 12 [ 2769 posts ]
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 12  Next


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

  

Judge Massei Sentencing Report     The Meredith Kercher Fund     The Murder Of Meredith Kercher Wiki     True Justice For Meredith Kercher     Judge Nencini Sentencing Report 


29,448,267 Views