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: Sat Nov 18, 2017 1:44 pm
It is currently Sat Nov 18, 2017 1:45 pm
All times are UTC

Forum rules

XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21,10 - JAN 22, 11

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


 Page 14 of 14 [ 3425 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14
Author Message

Offline bedelia


User avatar


Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 10:12 am

Posts: 167

Location: New York

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Michael wrote:
bucketoftea wrote:
Curt says it's emotional every time you hear about it. Yah, it makes my eyes water every time I hear the same old bullshit.



PMF issues safety kit to its members to help protect against this. Draw yours from the PMF quartermaster. Please wear your safety equipment at all times:


Where do we get these Michael? :D
Top Profile 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Amanda may have kept her passport with her for identification. She would not have been in Italy long enough to need a drivers license or whatever other ID the State issues.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

dgfred wrote:
Michael wrote:
Emerald wrote:
Michael wrote:
Emerald, no...the bag was to collect her dirty clothes 'from' the cottage. She took an empty bag to the cottage.

Yet, she left the cottage with no dirty clothes, only a mop. According to her.


What was Amanda going to do with the clothes she collected? I thought they were going to a festival in another town (Gubio?)

I don't believe that relationship had much more steam. It would have been over very soon. Amanda would have run through her boudoir repertoire very quickly, leaving to seek new chapters. She was loud, slovenly, obnoxious, ill-bred and bossy. Papa Sollecito was probably glad his son took an interest in the 'delights', but a suitable life long mate Amanda would not be.




Your guess is as good as mine. When asked about her laundry arrangements she claimed she didn't use the cottage washing machine as it didn't work. This was false since Meredith's and some of Amanda's clothes were found in the washing machine. Amanda instead claimed that she would use the laundrette. Yet this makes no sense...was Amanda planning to go to the laundrette instead of going to Gubbio? She also made zero mention of using or ever planning to use Raffaele's washing machine. Finally, even though one of her specific stated reasons for returning to the cottage was to deal with her laundry...yet, she did not. Why is this?


Was it ever told what exactly of AK's was in the washer? wm)



No, they had Filomena check the contents but no list of items, as far as I'm aware, was ever published.

_________________
"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: Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Emerald wrote:
Amanda may have kept her passport with her for identification. She would not have been in Italy long enough to need a drivers license or whatever other ID the State issues.


In which case, why didn't she have it on her when she spent the previous day and night with Raffaele? What was the pressing need that caused her to think she suddenly needed it 'then' but not before?

_________________
"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 Agatha


Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:38 pm

Posts: 33

Highscores: 1

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Solange wrote:
WOW. So it wasnt the creepy landlord??? Who is this guy they arrested?
He lives in an adjacent flat to Joanna's, possibly the one immediately above, and is also an architect. I hope for his sake he is guilty, as his reputation has already been thoroughly trashed on facebook and twitter.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Underhill


Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:56 pm

Posts: 80

Location: Suffolk, UK

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Agatha wrote:
... his reputation has already been thoroughly trashed on facebook and twitter.


Why doesn't he find himself a PR company?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 868

Location: New York

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

beans wrote:
The University for Foreigners website (http://www.unistrapg.it) describes various courses of study: first level beginner, second level beginner, first level intermediate, etc. They first level beginner course lasts for a period of one month, the higher level courses last for three months. The beginning and intermediate language and culture courses cover various topics (writing, speaking, pronunciation, etc.) dependent on the course. There are 20 hours of class time per week for the lower level courses or 27 hours per week if one takes an intensive course.

So the likelihood was that Amanda had at least 20 hours of class per week and presumably, if she planned to stay in Perugia for a year, she would have taken succeedingly higher level courses as the year progressed.


The courses are said to be easy and relatively undemanding. In part they are intended as the founder wanted them to be: simply to make foreigners like Italy a little bit more.

I walked all around inside and everyone was having a really good time. Noisy and a lot of laughter. (Very ornate interior too.)

Meredith and all her friends had a much heavier study load than AK and were well funded, purposeful and ambitious.

As Michael said, we dont know that AK planned to stay for a full year.

Without question she was already running rather low on funds, had no Italian work permit, and may have been about to lose the bar job.

She may have turned to daddy if and when the funding ran out or she might have simply headed back to Seattle.

Read this post below for how loose and unusual AK's "arrangements" were.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... n_perugia/

Stewart Home counsels students and parents in this area and he told me AK's "arrangements" were almost uniquely loose and irresponsible.

Peter Quennell
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline norbertc


User avatar


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 1:16 am

Posts: 307

Location: France

Highscores: 2

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

bedelia wrote:
Michael wrote:
bucketoftea wrote:
Curt says it's emotional every time you hear about it. Yah, it makes my eyes water every time I hear the same old bullshit.



PMF issues safety kit to its members to help protect against this. Draw yours from the PMF quartermaster. Please wear your safety equipment at all times:


Where do we get these Michael? :D


One solution is to wear a dive mask while reading that kind of material - which also works for cutting onions.



.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

yuppi du wrote:
Michael wrote:
Emerald wrote:
According to Amanda, she awoke at Raffaele's @ 10 am. Got a plastic bag to transport dirty clothes back to her own apartment.

Question: If she had excess clothes at Raffaele's, how did they get there? Why would she need another bag to transport them back home?

Did LE find the plastic bag with the dirty clothes? Nowhere have I found that Amanda described the 'dirty clothes'.



Emerald, no...the bag was to collect her dirty clothes 'from' the cottage. She took an empty bag to the cottage.

Yet, she left the cottage with no dirty clothes, only a mop. According to her.



`Thankfully` she also managed to get her passport and purse before the door to Merediths room had been knocked down, before Merediths body had been discovered and before the house was sealed off as it was now a crime scene..Thankfully.


And the Bayesians still wonder why she immediately came under suspicion.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

stilicho wrote:
yuppi du wrote:
Michael wrote:
Emerald wrote:
According to Amanda, she awoke at Raffaele's @ 10 am. Got a plastic bag to transport dirty clothes back to her own apartment.

Question: If she had excess clothes at Raffaele's, how did they get there? Why would she need another bag to transport them back home?

Did LE find the plastic bag with the dirty clothes? Nowhere have I found that Amanda described the 'dirty clothes'.



Emerald, no...the bag was to collect her dirty clothes 'from' the cottage. She took an empty bag to the cottage.

Yet, she left the cottage with no dirty clothes, only a mop. According to her.



`Thankfully` she also managed to get her passport and purse before the door to Merediths room had been knocked down, before Merediths body had been discovered and before the house was sealed off as it was now a crime scene..Thankfully.


And the Bayesians still wonder why she immediately came under suspicion.


How do we know she got them before the door was broken down?

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline Earthling


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:25 pm

Posts: 512

Location: USA

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 7:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

The Bard wrote:
bedelia wrote:
Welcome History11. I'm assuming you are tired of hearing the same talking points of the FOA over and over. If that's the case, then I think you will enjoy reading here. For my part, it doesn't really matter to me how, when or why the murder was done. I only care that it was done and those who did it should be held accountable. The numbers are meaningless to me. The world is a multi-dimensional space and the numbers flatten everything into 2 dimension with a beginning, middle, and end. Time does that too. However, time is not the only element involved here. There is the space of the cottage, the space of Perugia. The multiple languages and cultures. The levels of inebriation and sobriety. The mental states of all involved. I find these interesting to talk about.


bedelia, are you on drugs tonight?!!! I love that paragraph! Far OUT!!! Just don't try any of that reaaaaallly bad Perugian weed, that like, makes you forget everything after like ONE JOINT....Maaaaaaan that was a good night....Oh? Really? It wasn't? Shit! (Exit left followed by a mop)

I do actually like this paragraph. I think it is very other extreme of many posters here. Some are brilliant at minute detail and facts and getting the facts absolutely spot on; and other people are collectors, who amass images and links like treasure; some just stand back and make all sorts of tangential comments and links between what's happening and the outside world, and you badelia are in the world of the Cat. Kind of looking down on it all, and seeing the big pictures and how it all interconnects. I think part of both of them actually WANTS to be found guilty.

Oh dear. I really actually AM on drugs right now which are making me type slower and less spelly by the moment. They help me sleep (Oh Sleep! It is a gentle thing/Beloved from pole to pole) but I took them a bit early and now the world's just slllloooooooowwwwwwd downnnnnn. I like it. And Pogo. And locks.

Ok. I'll get my coat (British reference)

Night all

Hammer! Mungo has his furry nose in a bowl of parsnip carrot and fresh thyme. Rabbit bliss out. I asked him about locks and he gave me a withering look...

Has anyone seen Skep? I miss her. And she owes us a Munchie picture!
In honor of bedelia and The Bard, and to increase the BFQ by proxy, here's one of my faves, Year of the Cat by Al Stewart.

I've always liked this song, but it particularly reminds me of one incident. I had moved back from Boston to Columbus in the mid-'80s, and I was going skating with some old friends from childhood. This song came on the loudspeaker. Something about this song is great for when you're in your mid-20s and you're looking back on your past and forward to the future, and you're skating around a rink......

It also reminds me of meeting up with my friend Nathan in Harvard Square, in his raincoat in the rain, I felt like Bacall to his Bogie.... :)

Ah youth.... its only downfall, it never lasts LOL.....
\

As for Pogo, Walt Kelly got involved in the environmental cause by his cartoon that got us all thinking in the '70s, Earth Day and all:


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

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 7:03 pm   Post subject: Re: Teacher's Pet?   

The 411 wrote:
Emerald wrote:
I haven't read that Amanda studied very much. Did she always attend class?


Emerald:

Actually...

One former prof. of Knox's in Perugia, Antonella Negri, described described Miss Knox as "diligent" and "attentive".

I think it's fair to say that whatever class or classes she attended, AK was intent on doing whatever it took to capture the attention of her instructors. I seem to remember reading that she was ALWAYS on time, if not early, for classes. I seem to remember reading AK always sat in the front row, in her classes.


Personal anecdote: When I was an undergrad and on the debate team at my university, I discovered to my glee that one of the judges, who was going to review our performances and select a team to travel out of town (on the student union's dime), was also a professor in one of my courses. I made certain that I didn't skip any classes, sat in the front or second row, and always participated in the discussion when there was an open floor for questions or commentary. I actually read the class work so I could be sure my questions and comments were actually relevant.

When the debate team selection took place, I expressed 'pleasant surprise' at seeing Dr S----- there, shook his hand, waited my turn, and earned very high marks from him and his fellow judges.

Moral? Actually, I'm not sure there really is a moral because what I did was simple manipulation. I was about Knox's age when I did that too. You don't have to be a narcissist to do something like that but just have to know how to get what you want.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 7:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Michael wrote:
Emerald wrote:
Amanda may have kept her passport with her for identification. She would not have been in Italy long enough to need a drivers license or whatever other ID the State issues.


In which case, why didn't she have it on her when she spent the previous day and night with Raffaele? What was the pressing need that caused her to think she suddenly needed it 'then' but not before?


Why do you think she didn't? I used to keep my passport in my handbag all the time and I wasn't even abroad. It was useful if I needed ID for any reason. It seems from what has been quoted that she grabbed her coat and bag. That is not odd at all if you are asked to leave your house and there isnt' actually a fire. Not to me, anyway
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 7:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Blimey, more drama at the Bard household today (look away now LJ), with Mr Bard phoning me this morning with severe chest pain. He was ordered down to A&E and seen within minutes, while I made a dash for the train, which takes around an hour. Happy ending thank goodness - the pain was related to recent back problem, just muscles round the heart area this time.

BUT, absolutely fascinating to observe the effect of shock, and it has made me think about AK. I think I was in shock from the minute I got the phone call, and heard the panic in his voice. I began to feel light-headed. I could tell the pain was severe and he was beginning to panic. Reassurance from NHS Direct didn't seem to sink in (they didn't think it was cardiac) and all the way to London I was in a state of suppressed panic, imagining the worst. British listeners to The Archers recently will understand the scenario unfolding in my head.

What I noticed, observing my own physiological reactions trying to keep calm, was that breathing became shallower with anxiety, with - I assume - a consequent loss of oxygen to the brain. I lost the ability to think things through clearly, and had to ring a friend to ask her what to do eg. I could not work out which station to go from and how to get there; I couldn't work out which mainline station was closest; I couldn't work out what tube train I needed; I could not decide what to take with me and seemed to be distracted by the smallest irrelevant details. The ability to think clearly and sensibly was massively reduced. I assume this was because part of my brain was preoccupied with what 'might' be happening and the consequences of that. I don' t know.

The thought I had about AK was this: if you find that someone has been murdered in the house you live in, I think it would be a normal reaction to go into shock. The other girls did, I believe, even those who were not there when it was discovered - Meredith's friends. They were severely affected. In the first couple of hours after Meredith was discovered, where did AK go? I know I should know this, but I can't remember if they went for questioning/statements immediately or not. Could someone remind me? Is this when the 'She ...bled to death' comment was made, and the canoodling? What happened today made me think about her questioning a little differently.

ETA: Mr Bard now doped up with painkillers and resting. He's fine.

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 7:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fast Pete wrote:
beans wrote:
The University for Foreigners website (http://www.unistrapg.it) describes various courses of study: first level beginner, second level beginner, first level intermediate, etc. They first level beginner course lasts for a period of one month, the higher level courses last for three months. The beginning and intermediate language and culture courses cover various topics (writing, speaking, pronunciation, etc.) dependent on the course. There are 20 hours of class time per week for the lower level courses or 27 hours per week if one takes an intensive course.

So the likelihood was that Amanda had at least 20 hours of class per week and presumably, if she planned to stay in Perugia for a year, she would have taken succeedingly higher level courses as the year progressed.


The courses are said to be easy and relatively undemanding. In part they are intended as the founder wanted them to be: simply to make foreigners like Italy a little bit more.

I walked all around inside and everyone was having a really good time. Noisy and a lot of laughter. (Very ornate interior too.)

Meredith and all her friends had a much heavier study load than AK and were well funded, purposeful and ambitious.

As Michael said, we dont know that AK planned to stay for a full year.

Without question she was already running rather low on funds, had no Italian work permit, and may have been about to lose the bar job.

She may have turned to daddy if and when the funding ran out or she might have simply headed back to Seattle.

Read this post below for how loose and unusual AK's "arrangements" were.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... n_perugia/

Stewart Home counsels students and parents in this area and he told me AK's "arrangements" were almost uniquely loose and irresponsible.

Peter Quennell


Now there's a writer. He cut straight through all the nonsense in about 1,000 words.

I am not sure I agree that Knox's situation was unique. There are likely thousands of American students attending this unstructured type of programme in various countries. The risk is something that few parents would consider once their son or daughter was legally an adult. (I believe Americans still consider the age of 21 to be adulthood but they're unique in the world for that; in Canada the highest 'legal' age anywhere is 19 and it's normally 18).

I think that, even when provided with individual counselling on the risks, Knox's parents would have nevertheless eagerly signed off on their daughter's overseas adventure. We know her stepfather enjoyed watching her dive in the mud for a $5 tip.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 7:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

The Bard wrote:
stilicho wrote:
yuppi du wrote:
Michael wrote:
Emerald wrote:
According to Amanda, she awoke at Raffaele's @ 10 am. Got a plastic bag to transport dirty clothes back to her own apartment.

Question: If she had excess clothes at Raffaele's, how did they get there? Why would she need another bag to transport them back home?

Did LE find the plastic bag with the dirty clothes? Nowhere have I found that Amanda described the 'dirty clothes'.



Emerald, no...the bag was to collect her dirty clothes 'from' the cottage. She took an empty bag to the cottage.

Yet, she left the cottage with no dirty clothes, only a mop. According to her.



`Thankfully` she also managed to get her passport and purse before the door to Merediths room had been knocked down, before Merediths body had been discovered and before the house was sealed off as it was now a crime scene..Thankfully.


And the Bayesians still wonder why she immediately came under suspicion.


How do we know she got them before the door was broken down?


Her alibi email says this:

Alibi Email 04 NOV 2007 wrote:
at the time i had only what i was wearing and my badg, which thankfully had my passport in it and my wallet.


Her jacket was still inside so presumably the Postals got all the people out of the house without any delay. The question isn't whether it is known but whether it might raise a few eyebrows down at the Questura.

My comment was directed at the Bayesians who are reading here but not commenting. They seem to think that all things were equal among the eighty or so individuals they'd questioned in the days leading up to the arrests. Clearly they weren't and they'd have to wonder about that detail along with the torrent of other unusual things about Knox and Sollecito.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 7:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fiona wrote:
Michael wrote:
Emerald wrote:
Amanda may have kept her passport with her for identification. She would not have been in Italy long enough to need a drivers license or whatever other ID the State issues.


In which case, why didn't she have it on her when she spent the previous day and night with Raffaele? What was the pressing need that caused her to think she suddenly needed it 'then' but not before?


Why do you think she didn't? I used to keep my passport in my handbag all the time and I wasn't even abroad. It was useful if I needed ID for any reason. It seems from what has been quoted that she grabbed her coat and bag. That is not odd at all if you are asked to leave your house and there isnt' actually a fire. Not to me, anyway


In her alibi email, she said she did not have her jacket when asked to leave the cottage.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

The Bard wrote:
....

BUT, absolutely fascinating to observe the effect of shock, and it has made me think about AK. I think I was in shock from the minute I got the phone call, and heard the panic in his voice. I began to feel light-headed.

....

What I noticed, observing my own physiological reactions trying to keep calm, was that breathing became shallower with anxiety, with - I assume - a consequent loss of oxygen to the brain. I lost the ability to think things through clearly, and had to ring a friend to ask her what to do

....

The thought I had about AK was this: if you find that someone has been murdered in the house you live in, I think it would be a normal reaction to go into shock. The other girls did, I believe, even those who were not there when it was discovered - Meredith's friends.

....


Knox is said to have broken down several times, including the early hours of 06 NOV 2007, in the meeting with Mignini (DEC 2007), and during the opening of the kitchen drawer at the cottage on 04 NOV 2007. I think it's safe to say she was in a similar state as you were and reacted similarly. There were other anxious times for Knox when she acted entirely differently and this includes the proud smiling and arrogant preening at her court appearances, her rambling off-topic discourses during her testimony and at Guede's hearing, mugging with Sollecito in the Questura, and performing cartwheels.

It could just be her level of maturity. She doesn't do a lot of parading in the courtroom any more. We don't know much about her behaviour behind bars but Knox probably doesn't experience that much intense anxiety. She appears to welcome the structured environment of a prison setting.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

stilicho wrote:
The Bard wrote:
....

BUT, absolutely fascinating to observe the effect of shock, and it has made me think about AK. I think I was in shock from the minute I got the phone call, and heard the panic in his voice. I began to feel light-headed.

....

What I noticed, observing my own physiological reactions trying to keep calm, was that breathing became shallower with anxiety, with - I assume - a consequent loss of oxygen to the brain. I lost the ability to think things through clearly, and had to ring a friend to ask her what to do

....

The thought I had about AK was this: if you find that someone has been murdered in the house you live in, I think it would be a normal reaction to go into shock. The other girls did, I believe, even those who were not there when it was discovered - Meredith's friends.

....


Knox is said to have broken down several times, including the early hours of 06 NOV 2007, in the meeting with Mignini (DEC 2007), and during the opening of the kitchen drawer at the cottage on 04 NOV 2007. I think it's safe to say she was in a similar state as you were and reacted similarly. There were other anxious times for Knox when she acted entirely differently and this includes the proud smiling and arrogant preening at her court appearances, her rambling off-topic discourses during her testimony and at Guede's hearing, mugging with Sollecito in the Questura, and performing cartwheels.

It could just be her level of maturity. She doesn't do a lot of parading in the courtroom any more. We don't know much about her behaviour behind bars but Knox probably doesn't experience that much intense anxiety. She appears to welcome the structured environment of a prison setting.


Well, I guess then my thinking is that she wouldn't have been in any fit state to be questioned in the hour or so immediately after the discovery of the body. I wonder if the police take shock and its reactions into account when they question people in the immediate aftermath of a crime such as this. I felt very shaky and stressed the whole time, and would have gone to pieces at the drop of a hat. If I had been in this condition straight after the discovery of a murder at my house, would my reaction have been seen as a sign of guilt? Whereas not being able to think straight, breaking down, and a sense of unreality would be perfectly normal. I had some really inappropriate thoughts too - not immediately accepting the gravity of the situation and telling Mr Bard I would be at the gym for the next couple of hours but I would leave my phone on. It was only when I came off the phone that I thought 'Shit, I have to get there, fast!'. I also wasted time thinking what I should wear. And I also now writing an (over) detailed account of it!!!! The need to recount details of a traumatic experience are well known. It happened to a member of my family after a car crash. He went over and over and over it in minute detail. There is some dispute about whether it is good for people who have had a traumatic experience to relive it over and over.

Anyway, it did make me think about AK's questioning, and the treatment of all the other young women actually. It must have been an appalling experience. Very frightening.

I know it's not the same, but it just made me think about how they would have coped, and how AK might have come across and why. I also think if she had taken part in the murder she would have been in even deeper shock. Isn't this the time most murderers give themselves away?

I also agree that the rambling discourse is partly about avoidance of difficult emotions with her.

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

The Bard wrote:
stilicho wrote:
The Bard wrote:
....

BUT, absolutely fascinating to observe the effect of shock, and it has made me think about AK. I think I was in shock from the minute I got the phone call, and heard the panic in his voice. I began to feel light-headed.

....

What I noticed, observing my own physiological reactions trying to keep calm, was that breathing became shallower with anxiety, with - I assume - a consequent loss of oxygen to the brain. I lost the ability to think things through clearly, and had to ring a friend to ask her what to do

....

The thought I had about AK was this: if you find that someone has been murdered in the house you live in, I think it would be a normal reaction to go into shock. The other girls did, I believe, even those who were not there when it was discovered - Meredith's friends.

....


Knox is said to have broken down several times, including the early hours of 06 NOV 2007, in the meeting with Mignini (DEC 2007), and during the opening of the kitchen drawer at the cottage on 04 NOV 2007. I think it's safe to say she was in a similar state as you were and reacted similarly. There were other anxious times for Knox when she acted entirely differently and this includes the proud smiling and arrogant preening at her court appearances, her rambling off-topic discourses during her testimony and at Guede's hearing, mugging with Sollecito in the Questura, and performing cartwheels.

It could just be her level of maturity. She doesn't do a lot of parading in the courtroom any more. We don't know much about her behaviour behind bars but Knox probably doesn't experience that much intense anxiety. She appears to welcome the structured environment of a prison setting.


Well, I guess then my thinking is that she wouldn't have been in any fit state to be questioned in the hour or so immediately after the discovery of the body. I wonder if the police take shock and its reactions into account when they question people in the immediate aftermath of a crime such as this. I felt very shaky and stressed the whole time, and would have gone to pieces at the drop of a hat. If I had been in this condition straight after the discovery of a murder at my house, would my reaction have been seen as a sign of guilt? Whereas not being able to think straight, breaking down, and a sense of unreality would be perfectly normal. I had some really inappropriate thoughts too - not immediately accepting the gravity of the situation and telling Mr Bard I would be at the gym for the next couple of hours but I would leave my phone on. It was only when I came off the phone that I thought 'Shit, I have to get there, fast!'. I also wasted time thinking what I should wear. And I also now writing an (over) detailed account of it!!!! The need to recount details of a traumatic experience are well known. It happened to a member of my family after a car crash. He went over and over and over it in minute detail. There is some dispute about whether it is good for people who have had a traumatic experience to relive it over and over.

Anyway, it did make me think about AK's questioning, and the treatment of all the other young women actually. It must have been an appalling experience. Very frightening.

I know it's not the same, but it just made me think about how they would have coped, and how AK might have come across and why. I also think if she had taken part in the murder she would have been in even deeper shock. Isn't this the time most murderers give themselves away?

I also agree that the rambling discourse is partly about avoidance of difficult emotions with her.


Now you probably realise why I'd love to get my hands on the notes from the first four days after Meredith's body was discovered. I would really like to know just what Knox told the police on 02 NOV 2007. The others too. That would be a very interesting primary source for detailing the deepening sense among the investigators that Knox was protecting someone. I've always thought they suspected Sollecito did it, initially, and that Knox was just covering up for him but I'd still like to see those transcripts.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Stan


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 10:35 am

Posts: 130

Highscores: 5

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

yuppi du wrote:
smacker wrote:
yuppi du wrote:
Michael wrote:
Emerald wrote:
According to Amanda, she awoke at Raffaele's @ 10 am. Got a plastic bag to transport dirty clothes back to her own apartment.

Question: If she had excess clothes at Raffaele's, how did they get there? Why would she need another bag to transport them back home?

Did LE find the plastic bag with the dirty clothes? Nowhere have I found that Amanda described the 'dirty clothes'.



Emerald, no...the bag was to collect her dirty clothes 'from' the cottage. She took an empty bag to the cottage.

Yet, she left the cottage with no dirty clothes, only a mop. According to her.



`Thankfully` she also managed to get her passport and purse before the door to Merediths room had been knocked down, before Merediths body had been discovered and before the house was sealed off as it was now a crime scene..Thankfully.


How did it become known that AK had managed to grab her passport prior to MK's body being discovered ?



Amanda said so herself in her email. She said she managed to get her coat and bag which `Thankfully` contained her passport and purse. Its not possible to get these items after the body was discovered as everybody was ordered out the cottage and she couldn`t have done it as the door was being knocked down as she was at the entrance to the cottage when the door was knocked down. She picked up these items just after her 12:40 call to her mother (and call to her aunt if i remember correctly).



Sorry if topic has moved on.....didn't Raf lend her his coat outside the cottage ??? Why does she say in her email she managed to get her coat and bag ?? I havn't checked both of these, maybe is)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Stan


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 10:35 am

Posts: 130

Highscores: 5

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Oh.....my question has already been answered, and yes is)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline yuppi du


Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2010 11:57 pm

Posts: 92

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

@stan

It was me who spoke about the coat and bag. The coat of course came from RS.

i am under the impression knox didn`t have her bag with her when she went to the cottage, as i cant see a reference to it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

stilicho wrote:
Now you probably realise why I'd love to get my hands on the notes from the first four days after Meredith's body was discovered. I would really like to know just what Knox told the police on 02 NOV 2007. The others too. That would be a very interesting primary source for detailing the deepening sense among the investigators that Knox was protecting someone. I've always thought they suspected Sollecito did it, initially, and that Knox was just covering up for him but I'd still like to see those transcripts.


The FOA goes on and on about 40+ hours of grilling Amanda, but I think you're right - they were more interested in Raffaele. And over those 40+ hours where do you suppose the FOA draws the line between her "helping the investigation" and "being abusively grilled"? Who knows, but it is critically important to note that on the night Knox was arrested she wasn't even asked to come in for questioning - they only wanted to follow up with Raffaele. Knox, however, gleefully went along with him apparently so she could practice her gymnastics in the waiting room. Meanwhile, Raffaele cracked during his questioning and was quietly taken down the hall to a jail cell. Since Amanda was already there in the waiting room, guess what happened next - within a few hours she was saying she let Lumumba into the cottage where he raped and killed Meredith - and they didn't even want to talk to her!?!?!?!?!
Top Profile 

Offline bobc


Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:23 pm

Posts: 69

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
stilicho wrote:
Now you probably realise why I'd love to get my hands on the notes from the first four days after Meredith's body was discovered. I would really like to know just what Knox told the police on 02 NOV 2007. The others too. That would be a very interesting primary source for detailing the deepening sense among the investigators that Knox was protecting someone. I've always thought they suspected Sollecito did it, initially, and that Knox was just covering up for him but I'd still like to see those transcripts.


The FOA goes on and on about 40+ hours of grilling Amanda, but I think you're right - they were more interested in Raffaele. And over those 40+ hours where do you suppose the FOA draws the line between her "helping the investigation" and "being abusively grilled"? Who knows, but it is critically important to note that on the night Knox was arrested she wasn't even asked to come in for questioning - they only wanted to follow up with Raffaele. Knox, however, gleefully went along with him apparently so she could practice her gymnastics in the waiting room. Meanwhile, Raffaele cracked during his questioning and was quietly taken down the hall to a jail cell. Since Amanda was already there in the waiting room, guess what happened next - within a few hours she was saying she let Lumumba into the cottage where he raped and killed Meredith - and they didn't even want to talk to her!?!?!?!?!


Exactly, and you show how ridiculous it is for the FOA to suggest that Perugia police had a prepared agenda which involved Amanda and wanted to frame her for the murder. They didn't even know they would be interviewing Amanda until they had spoken to Raffaele late that night, although I have seen it suggested that "they called in Rafaele knowing that Amanda would come too" which is preposterous.

I have thought it would look a lot better if Raffaele and Amanda were not questioned late at night, to remove any possibility of accusations of unfair treatment, but they could hardly let Raffaele and Amanda go home and work on their alibi if they had sufficient grounds to make them suspects.

Depending on which timeline you pick there is no more than 6 hours of Amanda being questioned. I also wonder where they get idea there were 12 police officers involved in the questioning.
Top Profile 

Offline observer


Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:36 pm

Posts: 178

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

observer wrote:
Please remind me - perhaps I was dreaming this - but was the lead of Amanda's lamp (placed on the floor in Meredith's room) coming out from under Meredith's closed door?


Can somebody put me straight on this, please?
hugz-)
Top Profile 

Offline thoughtful


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:48 pm

Posts: 1225

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Michael wrote:
Quote:
No, they had Filomena check the contents but no list of items, as far as I'm aware, was ever published.


I remember seeing a list somewhere. Eight t-shirts belonging to Meredith, a bit of underwear, and two towels, I think. But the towels were tested for blood and nothing was found. The idea was to see whether the things in there had been used in the clean-up. They didn't yield anything, though.
Top Profile 

Offline thoughtful


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:48 pm

Posts: 1225

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

observer wrote:
Quote:
Please remind me - perhaps I was dreaming this - but was the lead of Amanda's lamp (placed on the floor in Meredith's room) coming out from under Meredith's closed door?


The wire from Amanda's lamp was coming out from Meredith's open door, with the plug lying just over the threshold, after the door was broken down. But it wasn't there when the door was closed. SomeAlibi's theory, which in my opinion must be right, is that the lamp was placed on the floor and plugged into a socket near Meredith's door, and the violent motion of the door being broken open swept the lamp across the floor in an arc to the wall, jerking the plug out of the socket so it fell in the open doorway by whiplash.
Top Profile 

Offline thoughtful


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:48 pm

Posts: 1225

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

stilicho wrote:
Quote:
I actually read the class work


Haha - the joke's on you, then! That's all your professor probably wanted; for you to read the class work. It doesn't really matter why you do stuff, not so much as the fact that it gets done. If everybody's real motivations for doing anything were to be examined under a microscope, nothing would be as simple as it looks.
Top Profile 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

The Bard wrote:
Blimey, more drama at the Bard household today ...etc., etc., etc.

No-drama video here:


Top Profile E-mail 

Offline observer


Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:36 pm

Posts: 178

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 10:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

thoughtful wrote:
observer wrote:
Quote:
Please remind me - perhaps I was dreaming this - but was the lead of Amanda's lamp (placed on the floor in Meredith's room) coming out from under Meredith's closed door?


The wire from Amanda's lamp was coming out from Meredith's open door, with the plug lying just over the threshold, after the door was broken down. But it wasn't there when the door was closed. SomeAlibi's theory, which in my opinion must be right, is that the lamp was placed on the floor and plugged into a socket near Meredith's door, and the violent motion of the door being broken open swept the lamp across the floor in an arc to the wall, jerking the plug out of the socket so it fell in the open doorway by whiplash.


I must have missed this part of the discussion, whenever it was. Thanks for troubling to post about it! th-)
Top Profile 

Offline observer


Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:36 pm

Posts: 178

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 10:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

PS That penguin is adorable! And it's lovely seeing the Japanese just as ordinary, quirky, affectionate folk...
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 10:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Yay!!! Piktor!!!! Love the penguin. His day looks more laid back than mine has been, for sure.

p.s I think the fishmonger lady was really telling the tv crew she's been trying to choke the little bugger for weeks by shoving oversized fish down it's throat...

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline bedelia


User avatar


Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 10:12 am

Posts: 167

Location: New York

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 10:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Catnip wrote:
How would you rank these statements of mine when the vase falls off the table in your living room, and I gave only one of these answers to you:
-- "I wasn't there"
-- "I can't remember"
-- "The cat did it"
-- {silence}

compared to when I give you all those answers in sequence?

Are you starting from my inconsistent/uncorroborated alibis, or ending with them?

If starting with them, then that makes it 100%, doesn't it? (Or 99.99% if I am making things up for some reason, e.g. like a short story competition entry, and I dont care about you or your vase.)


Catnip, I love this post, especially the underlined part. Your wit is enviable.
Top Profile 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 10:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

thoughtful wrote:
stilicho wrote:
Quote:
I actually read the class work


Haha - the joke's on you, then! That's all your professor probably wanted; for you to read the class work. It doesn't really matter why you do stuff, not so much as the fact that it gets done. If everybody's real motivations for doing anything were to be examined under a microscope, nothing would be as simple as it looks.


I didn't mind having to work at it but he was not aware that I knew who the judges were going to be. It could be that he was a better actor than I took him for but it's very unlikely since he'd been uninvolved with the debate team until that point. The class was on Media and Politics, too, which is a bit of a coincidence.

Cue Twilight Zone music now...
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 10:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

observer wrote:
thoughtful wrote:
observer wrote:
Quote:
Please remind me - perhaps I was dreaming this - but was the lead of Amanda's lamp (placed on the floor in Meredith's room) coming out from under Meredith's closed door?


The wire from Amanda's lamp was coming out from Meredith's open door, with the plug lying just over the threshold, after the door was broken down. But it wasn't there when the door was closed. SomeAlibi's theory, which in my opinion must be right, is that the lamp was placed on the floor and plugged into a socket near Meredith's door, and the violent motion of the door being broken open swept the lamp across the floor in an arc to the wall, jerking the plug out of the socket so it fell in the open doorway by whiplash.


I must have missed this part of the discussion, whenever it was. Thanks for troubling to post about it! th-)


There are pictures of the lamp in the photo section. They obviously don't show the situation before the door burst open but they give you a good indication of where the lamp, the cord, and the outlet were. The outlet was quite close to the door jamb, on the opposite side to its hinges.

My hypothesis is that the lamp was knocked over in the process of opening the door and was swept behind it as the room was entered and the door fully opened. The cord could easily have been kicked, forcing the lamp to fall in the opposite direction.

The real puzzle, of course, is what the lamps were doing scouring the floor before the door was locked. What was Knox looking for?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bedelia


User avatar


Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 10:12 am

Posts: 167

Location: New York

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

The Bard wrote:
bedelia wrote:
Welcome History11. I'm assuming you are tired of hearing the same talking points of the FOA over and over. If that's the case, then I think you will enjoy reading here. For my part, it doesn't really matter to me how, when or why the murder was done. I only care that it was done and those who did it should be held accountable. The numbers are meaningless to me. The world is a multi-dimensional space and the numbers flatten everything into 2 dimension with a beginning, middle, and end. Time does that too. However, time is not the only element involved here. There is the space of the cottage, the space of Perugia. The multiple languages and cultures. The levels of inebriation and sobriety. The mental states of all involved. I find these interesting to talk about.


bedelia, are you on drugs tonight?!!! I love that paragraph! Far OUT!!! Just don't try any of that reaaaaallly bad Perugian weed, that like, makes you forget everything after like ONE JOINT....Maaaaaaan that was a good night....Oh? Really? It wasn't? Shit! (Exit left followed by a mop)

I do actually like this paragraph. I think it is very other extreme of many posters here. Some are brilliant at minute detail and facts and getting the facts absolutely spot on; and other people are collectors, who amass images and links like treasure; some just stand back and make all sorts of tangential comments and links between what's happening and the outside world, and you badelia are in the world of the Cat. Kind of looking down on it all, and seeing the big pictures and how it all interconnects. I think part of both of them actually WANTS to be found guilty.


ha, ha, ha Bard! I just noticed your response to my post. hugz-) It's different than my other posts because I'm slow to warm up to a group and feel comfortable enough to be myself.

I was reading daily for about 8 months before I even joined. I'd been following TJMK for the entire trial. My feelings have evolved despite my fairly quick realization of guilt. I think it was reading the summaries of the Micheli report several times that totally confirmed it for me. I agree with a poster there who said that Micheli is much tighter than Massei.

But I've always felt that the circumstantial evidence is like a tidal wave in this case. You can't go from point A to point B in one step. You may have to go two or three steps to get there. But there are so many links that take you to the same conclusion, there is no doubt for me. You can't approach this case from one level, reality is too complex.

I'm honored to be put in the same sentence with the Cat but I'm afraid I couldn't hold a candle to his knowledge. w-((

I also appreciate all the other excellent posters here. Lively and intelligent reading can always be found!
Top Profile 

Offline orange


User avatar


Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:36 pm

Posts: 9

Location: England

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Hi everyone :)

I know this has been asked a few times, but I can't find the responses and I've forgotten the answer, sorry! When Is Knox back in court? I know it's very soon.

Thanks in advance,

Katie.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:10 pm   Post subject: OT ALERT: SHOCK and DRAMA   

The Bard wrote:
Blimey, more drama at the Bard household today (look away now LJ), with Mr Bard phoning me this morning with severe chest pain. He was ordered down to A&E and seen within minutes, while I made a dash for the train, which takes around an hour. Happy ending thank goodness - the pain was related to recent back problem, just muscles round the heart area this time.

BUT, absolutely fascinating to observe the effect of shock, and it has made me think about AK. I think I was in shock from the minute I got the phone call, and heard the panic in his voice. I began to feel light-headed. I could tell the pain was severe and he was beginning to panic. Reassurance from NHS Direct didn't seem to sink in (they didn't think it was cardiac) and all the way to London I was in a state of suppressed panic, imagining the worst. British listeners to The Archers recently will understand the scenario unfolding in my head.

What I noticed, observing my own physiological reactions trying to keep calm, was that breathing became shallower with anxiety, with - I assume - a consequent loss of oxygen to the brain. I lost the ability to think things through clearly, and had to ring a friend to ask her what to do eg. I could not work out which station to go from and how to get there; I couldn't work out which mainline station was closest; I couldn't work out what tube train I needed; I could not decide what to take with me and seemed to be distracted by the smallest irrelevant details. The ability to think clearly and sensibly was massively reduced. I assume this was because part of my brain was preoccupied with what 'might' be happening and the consequences of that. I don' t know.

The thought I had about AK was this: if you find that someone has been murdered in the house you live in, I think it would be a normal reaction to go into shock. The other girls did, I believe, even those who were not there when it was discovered - Meredith's friends. They were severely affected. In the first couple of hours after Meredith was discovered, where did AK go? I know I should know this, but I can't remember if they went for questioning/statements immediately or not. Could someone remind me? Is this when the 'She ...bled to death' comment was made, and the canoodling? What happened today made me think about her questioning a little differently.

ETA: Mr Bard now doped up with painkillers and resting. He's fine.


BARD!!
Soooooo sorry to hear about this latest episode.

At the risk of being accused of DOI (Diagnosing On the Internet)...and you just KNOW this will warrant a mention about this on our favorite forums...heheheh, all the more reason to do it!

I'm wondering if the source of Signor Bard's excruciating pain might be his gallbladder. Have the docs DEFINITELY ruled that out? Gallbladder pain can present in different ways...there's not one specific pain pattern.

ALSO-Just because he has back pain, doesn't preclude him from having stones in his gallbladder than can cause colic that can mimic heart pain. It's more common in men than you'd think. A friend of mine was rushed away from work in early December because she had been told her father was in Emergency with excruciating chest pains. As she was running out the door, I yelled (trying to reassure her): "Maybe it's not his heart. It could be his gall bladder ya know......"

Well, I have to say...he had a ton of diagnostics...

BUT. in the end, THE 411 nailed the diagnosis, a priori, sight unseen!

Hope they get to the bottom of this with Signor Bard, and that there are no further emergencies chez Bardolini.
............................................................................................

Sorry to indulge in the annoying habit of presenting a parallel story to yours, in YOUR moment of shock... BUT...

I had a similar reflection about shock when I had a veterinary emergency this past New Year's Eve. My extremely healthy, but old dog suddenly could not really walk. She literally looked like she was drunk. Getting up and then a shaky gait, and then she would fall down, again and again.

She vomited profusely just trying to stand up and refused her breakfast. She seemed restless. Next I noticed she had (around the "eyebrow" area) brisk, continuous muscular twitching, and something drastically wrong with her eyes, which I knew is nystagmus, -- involuntary movement of the eyes dart back and forth, rhythmically, left and right, like fast windshield wipers, uncontrollably. Then her head was completely tilted to the left side.

I immediately thought: she's having a stroke. My vet was away on holiday for three days. :(

Long story....She required round-the-clock TLC....etc. but The upshot was...it turned out to be a a worst/best of times type situation.

Worst ...because watching a sweet gentle innocent animal overcome with an attack of vertigo--her whole world was spinning out of control-- and not being able to explain it to her--is heartbreaking.

Best... because "Old Animal Vestibular Syndrome" GETS BETTER on its own even WITHOUT INTERVENTION.

It is idiopathic (unknown cause) and reassuringly, as I've mentioned it gets better on its own. Many vets just will tell you to wait 72 hours, before doing expensive neurological testing.

By the way, while Googling around, I found out that this disease affects many types of animals, like cats and rabbits. YES!!!

God forbid that Mungo would ever be affected...but to you and to THE ZOO OF ANIMAL OWNERS here...if your middle-aged or aging dog, cat, rabbit or other critter shows the above-mentioned symptoms, by all means, consult your vet.

But it's heartening to realize that even elderly animals with such devastating early symptoms--DO fully recover.

Here's that article that I swear popped up (or should I say HOPPED UP) when I did a search about my dog's condition, but was directed to a RABBIT SITE!! bu-)
http://www.rabbit.org/health/tilt.html

Rabbit.org :lol: Gotta luv it!!!

Get some good rest, Bardolina and family! BUON RIPOSO A TUTTI!!! p-(((

And now we return our readers to our regularly scheduled topic...
Top Profile 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 868

Location: New York

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

orange wrote:
Hi everyone :)

I know this has been asked a few times, but I can't find the responses and I've forgotten the answer, sorry! When Is Knox back in court? I know it's very soon.

Thanks in advance,

Katie.


Hi Orange. This saturday.

Pete
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline orange


User avatar


Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:36 pm

Posts: 9

Location: England

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fast Pete wrote:
orange wrote:
Hi everyone :)

I know this has been asked a few times, but I can't find the responses and I've forgotten the answer, sorry! When Is Knox back in court? I know it's very soon.

Thanks in advance,

Katie.


Hi Orange. This saturday.

Pete


Very fast indeed, thanks Pete ;)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

stilicho wrote:
observer wrote:
thoughtful wrote:
observer wrote:
Quote:
Please remind me - perhaps I was dreaming this - but was the lead of Amanda's lamp (placed on the floor in Meredith's room) coming out from under Meredith's closed door?


The wire from Amanda's lamp was coming out from Meredith's open door, with the plug lying just over the threshold, after the door was broken down. But it wasn't there when the door was closed. SomeAlibi's theory, which in my opinion must be right, is that the lamp was placed on the floor and plugged into a socket near Meredith's door, and the violent motion of the door being broken open swept the lamp across the floor in an arc to the wall, jerking the plug out of the socket so it fell in the open doorway by whiplash.


I must have missed this part of the discussion, whenever it was. Thanks for troubling to post about it! th-)


There are pictures of the lamp in the photo section. They obviously don't show the situation before the door burst open but they give you a good indication of where the lamp, the cord, and the outlet were. The outlet was quite close to the door jamb, on the opposite side to its hinges.

My hypothesis is that the lamp was knocked over in the process of opening the door and was swept behind it as the room was entered and the door fully opened. The cord could easily have been kicked, forcing the lamp to fall in the opposite direction.

The real puzzle, of course, is what the lamps were doing scouring the floor before the door was locked. What was Knox looking for?



Her earing. There's far too much talk of earings, blood related to piercings in the bathroom, Raffale washing her ears, her washing her ears and all the rest of it.

_________________
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 

Online The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2308

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

SomeAlibi wrote:
stilicho wrote:
observer wrote:
thoughtful wrote:
observer wrote:
Quote:
Please remind me - perhaps I was dreaming this - but was the lead of Amanda's lamp (placed on the floor in Meredith's room) coming out from under Meredith's closed door?


The wire from Amanda's lamp was coming out from Meredith's open door, with the plug lying just over the threshold, after the door was broken down. But it wasn't there when the door was closed. SomeAlibi's theory, which in my opinion must be right, is that the lamp was placed on the floor and plugged into a socket near Meredith's door, and the violent motion of the door being broken open swept the lamp across the floor in an arc to the wall, jerking the plug out of the socket so it fell in the open doorway by whiplash.


I must have missed this part of the discussion, whenever it was. Thanks for troubling to post about it! th-)


There are pictures of the lamp in the photo section. They obviously don't show the situation before the door burst open but they give you a good indication of where the lamp, the cord, and the outlet were. The outlet was quite close to the door jamb, on the opposite side to its hinges.

My hypothesis is that the lamp was knocked over in the process of opening the door and was swept behind it as the room was entered and the door fully opened. The cord could easily have been kicked, forcing the lamp to fall in the opposite direction.

The real puzzle, of course, is what the lamps were doing scouring the floor before the door was locked. What was Knox looking for?



Her earing. There's far too much talk of earings, blood related to piercings in the bathroom, Raffale washing her ears, her washing her ears and all the rest of it.


That would explain why Amanda Knox's blood was found on the basin in the bathroom and why she was missing an earring the next day.
Top Profile 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

The Bard wrote:
Yay!!! Piktor!!!! Love the penguin. His day looks more laid back than mine has been, for sure.

p.s I think the fishmonger lady was really telling the tv crew she's been trying to choke the little bugger for weeks by shoving oversized fish down it's throat...


I love it when wild nature and human nature decide to make things good.

Here's another amazing story:

http://www.animaltalk.us/lost-baby-moose/

Attachment:
09.jpg


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

Offline TomM


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 7:28 pm

Posts: 583

Location: California

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Earthling wrote:
As for Pogo, Walt Kelly got involved in the environmental cause by his cartoon that got us all thinking in the '70s, Earth Day and all:

I think this is the first version of it.


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

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

I'm up to date on reading...this is just a message to my pals. Bardo, you are also going through the ringer. I hope you're taking care of yourself as well.

411, I'm so relived your dog is better. We do suffer when they do. I'm a little stressed, as my youngest is off to the Doc in a couple of hours. Blurred vision, from 4 days ago. Feeling worried, this is a welcome place for me, when I don't want repartee, per se. I can't believe I've been biting my thumbnail.

I hear you, Bedelia. It may have taken you a long time to post, but you're a wonderful addition, and so appreciated.

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Btw, I told my eldest last night about the snacking seagull. He says, Mom, that's an old one. Check out gawkers. I can't seem to find it, and he's not available. Anyone know? Apparantly, it's a site that gives the top little clips.

I just need to be distracted :(

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
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 21, 2011 12:09 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

bobc wrote:
Fly by Night wrote:
stilicho wrote:
Now you probably realise why I'd love to get my hands on the notes from the first four days after Meredith's body was discovered. I would really like to know just what Knox told the police on 02 NOV 2007. The others too. That would be a very interesting primary source for detailing the deepening sense among the investigators that Knox was protecting someone. I've always thought they suspected Sollecito did it, initially, and that Knox was just covering up for him but I'd still like to see those transcripts.


The FOA goes on and on about 40+ hours of grilling Amanda, but I think you're right - they were more interested in Raffaele. And over those 40+ hours where do you suppose the FOA draws the line between her "helping the investigation" and "being abusively grilled"? Who knows, but it is critically important to note that on the night Knox was arrested she wasn't even asked to come in for questioning - they only wanted to follow up with Raffaele. Knox, however, gleefully went along with him apparently so she could practice her gymnastics in the waiting room. Meanwhile, Raffaele cracked during his questioning and was quietly taken down the hall to a jail cell. Since Amanda was already there in the waiting room, guess what happened next - within a few hours she was saying she let Lumumba into the cottage where he raped and killed Meredith - and they didn't even want to talk to her!?!?!?!?!


Exactly, and you show how ridiculous it is for the FOA to suggest that Perugia police had a prepared agenda which involved Amanda and wanted to frame her for the murder. They didn't even know they would be interviewing Amanda until they had spoken to Raffaele late that night, although I have seen it suggested that "they called in Rafaele knowing that Amanda would come too" which is preposterous.

I have thought it would look a lot better if Raffaele and Amanda were not questioned late at night, to remove any possibility of accusations of unfair treatment, but they could hardly let Raffaele and Amanda go home and work on their alibi if they had sufficient grounds to make them suspects.

Depending on which timeline you pick there is no more than 6 hours of Amanda being questioned. I also wonder where they get idea there were 12 police officers involved in the questioning.


Didn't Raffaele tell the police that he couldn't come in for questioning earlier in the day? As I understand it, he put them off but they insisted by saying something like, "well, we really need to talk to you so when are you finally free - sometime in the evening perhaps?" or something to that effect.
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:15 am   Post subject: Sam the Seagull   

Thanks for your empathetic words, Cape.

BTW, That's not simply a snacking seagull, Cape--that's a SHOPLIFTING SEAGULL!

Here's the video I think you wanted ..."Sam, the seagull stealing Doritos"
--the original version, when it was "just" a breaking feature story on Scottish TV.

I can't embed it for some reason... is) Paging Michael or PIKTOR!!!!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kqy9hxhU ... re=related
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 21, 2011 12:18 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

capealadin wrote:
Btw, I told my eldest last night about the snacking seagull. He says, Mom, that's an old one. Check out gawkers. I can't seem to find it, and he's not available. Anyone know? Apparantly, it's a site that gives the top little clips.

I just need to be distracted :(


Here's one: Gawker.com.

Don't know if it's the one, but it is certainly distracting. :)
Top Profile 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:20 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

The Bard wrote:
stilicho wrote:
The Bard wrote:
....

BUT, absolutely fascinating to observe the effect of shock, and it has made me think about AK. I think I was in shock from the minute I got the phone call, and heard the panic in his voice. I began to feel light-headed.

....

What I noticed, observing my own physiological reactions trying to keep calm, was that breathing became shallower with anxiety, with - I assume - a consequent loss of oxygen to the brain. I lost the ability to think things through clearly, and had to ring a friend to ask her what to do

....

The thought I had about AK was this: if you find that someone has been murdered in the house you live in, I think it would be a normal reaction to go into shock. The other girls did, I believe, even those who were not there when it was discovered - Meredith's friends.

....


Knox is said to have broken down several times, including the early hours of 06 NOV 2007, in the meeting with Mignini (DEC 2007), and during the opening of the kitchen drawer at the cottage on 04 NOV 2007. I think it's safe to say she was in a similar state as you were and reacted similarly. There were other anxious times for Knox when she acted entirely differently and this includes the proud smiling and arrogant preening at her court appearances, her rambling off-topic discourses during her testimony and at Guede's hearing, mugging with Sollecito in the Questura, and performing cartwheels.

It could just be her level of maturity. She doesn't do a lot of parading in the courtroom any more. We don't know much about her behaviour behind bars but Knox probably doesn't experience that much intense anxiety. She appears to welcome the structured environment of a prison setting.


Well, I guess then my thinking is that she wouldn't have been in any fit state to be questioned in the hour or so immediately after the discovery of the body. I wonder if the police take shock and its reactions into account when they question people in the immediate aftermath of a crime such as this. I felt very shaky and stressed the whole time, and would have gone to pieces at the drop of a hat. If I had been in this condition straight after the discovery of a murder at my house, would my reaction have been seen as a sign of guilt? Whereas not being able to think straight, breaking down, and a sense of unreality would be perfectly normal. I had some really inappropriate thoughts too - not immediately accepting the gravity of the situation and telling Mr Bard I would be at the gym for the next couple of hours but I would leave my phone on. It was only when I came off the phone that I thought 'Shit, I have to get there, fast!'. I also wasted time thinking what I should wear. And I also now writing an (over) detailed account of it!!!! The need to recount details of a traumatic experience are well known. It happened to a member of my family after a car crash. He went over and over and over it in minute detail. There is some dispute about whether it is good for people who have had a traumatic experience to relive it over and over.

Anyway, it did make me think about AK's questioning, and the treatment of all the other young women actually. It must have been an appalling experience. Very frightening.

I know it's not the same, but it just made me think about how they would have coped, and how AK might have come across and why. I also think if she had taken part in the murder she would have been in even deeper shock. Isn't this the time most murderers give themselves away?

I also agree that the rambling discourse is partly about avoidance of difficult emotions with her.



How unpleasant for both of you Bard :( . Mr Bard needs a jolly good rest and full service!

One big difference you have to bear in mind in your well described symptoms of shock and panic is that by the time the body is discovered in this case, Amanda and Raffaele are some thirteen hours past the initial shock and panic. Now, they are of course, under a very large degree of pressure and stress but extremely unhelpfully for them, they have several control specimins around them with whom the police are interacting in the minutes and hours immediately after discovery - the flatmates and their partners are living, breathing, entirely natural examples minute to minute of what brand-new shock looks like. Great stress and shock are aligned, but as anyone who has seen someone be told of a death knows, the two are absolutely not the same.

If D = discovery of the body then at D+10 seconds to D+5 minutes, Amanda and Raffaele have thought how they will be reacting for some hours. They may take cues off those around them. The police will also be shocked. But ultimately, they should not screw this bit up - there's enough shock and confusion and they are ready for it. They back off the scene and Raffaele gets Amanda (and therefore both of them) out of the cottage.

However, thereafter, what they have been obsessing about for the last 13 hours is not getting caught for murder. They cannot afford to be flaky and those concerns must start coming to the fore immediately. They are D+13.5 hours when the other young people are D+30 minutes and so on. At this stage, all those things people do in shock, like getting obsessed with small details / persuing illogical concerns are coming out in the others. Amanda and Raffaele by comparison are hyper sensitive to trying to keep on top of the information stream that's coming out of everyone there, the questions that are being asked and trying not to screw up at all. See the testimony concerning Raffaele's aggressive questioning about what was said in the lift to the Questura. Getting in a closed environment with no police around them after the initial prolonged stress must have been like a kettle whistle going off inside his head. I'm not surprised he gave himself away.

As the police are asking questions at the property, they are dealing with 100% genuine control specimens of the right age group and... Biff and Anita... Police attend shocked people week in week out, month in month out, year in year out. They see a spectrum of behaviour but they know what it is. Biff and Anita have never had a single experience of reacting to the news of the violent death of a friend to base their immediate need to act-for-their-lives and it *is* going to crash and burn, especially with the others around them. When the flatmates/friends are at D+45 minutes, they are at D+13.75 and therefore also three-quarters of an hour into the stress of not trying to screw up in questioning, which if it goes wrong, may see you in prison for life. Are you going to be the same? No. And not just for a few minutes - the observation period is going to be many hours and that 13 hour time difference is a constant that never goes away...

Remember how different you are mentally at 13 hours on from where you were today Bard. And now add an absolute need to stay in control to avoid yourself slipping up, while still acting. Consider the likelihood of managing to appear to match those control specimens of people going through it for real in the immediate minutes but then hours and hours and hours after too. It's a monstrous ask. This IS why many police CAN smell wrong behaviour in connected persons in the aftermath of crimes. It is not a precise science, of course not, and it can go wrong, but it is a highly normal and prevalent phenomena that drives many initial investigative focuses. One of the many things that Filomena did for Meredith in this case was to be there as a control the police could judge Knox and Sollecito against and like that famous photo of the detective with his hand on his head, a terrible suspicion began to sink in pretty fast.

_________________
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 piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:38 am   Post subject: Re: Sam the Seagull   

The 411 wrote:
Thanks for your empathetic words, Cape.

BTW, That's not simply a snacking seagull, Cape--that's a SHOPLIFTING SEAGULL!

Here's the video I think you wanted ..."Sam, the seagull stealing Doritos"
--the original version, when it was "just" a breaking feature story on Scottish TV.

I can't embed it for some reason... is) Paging Michael or PIKTOR!!!!!




You gotta remove extra stuff from the url starting from "&"

http: //www. youtube.com/watch?v=Kqy9hxhUxK0 &feature=related
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Patzu


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:10 pm

Posts: 158

Highscores: 1

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:42 am   Post subject: Re: Sam the Seagull   

The 411 wrote:
Thanks for your empathetic words, Cape.

BTW, That's not simply a snacking seagull, Cape--that's a SHOPLIFTING SEAGULL!

Here's the video I think you wanted ..."Sam, the seagull stealing Doritos"
--the original version, when it was "just" a breaking feature story on Scottish TV.

I can't embed it for some reason... is) Paging Michael or PIKTOR!!!!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kqy9hxhU ... re=related


Just use the [youtube]paste/your/url/here[/youtube] tag and delete the last bit &feature=related
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:47 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

capealadin wrote:
Btw, I told my eldest last night about the snacking seagull. He says, Mom, that's an old one. Check out gawkers. I can't seem to find it, and he's not available. Anyone know? Apparantly, it's a site that gives the top little clips.

I just need to be distracted :(


See this:

http://purinaanimalallstars.yahoo.com/
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:57 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

I LOVE you guys!!!! I really do. I'm going to look at all of them. It made me think...it kind of puts the fallacy of bird brain..well, to the birds. I suppose you realize by now, that I adore animals. All of them. ( Although, I have been known to absolutely FReAK OUT when seeing a cockraoch or rat). Urr, I kinda like them cuddly :)

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

SomeAlibi wrote:
The Bard wrote:
stilicho wrote:
The Bard wrote:
....

BUT, absolutely fascinating to observe the effect of shock, and it has made me think about AK. I think I was in shock from the minute I got the phone call, and heard the panic in his voice. I began to feel light-headed.

....

What I noticed, observing my own physiological reactions trying to keep calm, was that breathing became shallower with anxiety, with - I assume - a consequent loss of oxygen to the brain. I lost the ability to think things through clearly, and had to ring a friend to ask her what to do

....

The thought I had about AK was this: if you find that someone has been murdered in the house you live in, I think it would be a normal reaction to go into shock. The other girls did, I believe, even those who were not there when it was discovered - Meredith's friends.

....


Knox is said to have broken down several times, including the early hours of 06 NOV 2007, in the meeting with Mignini (DEC 2007), and during the opening of the kitchen drawer at the cottage on 04 NOV 2007. I think it's safe to say she was in a similar state as you were and reacted similarly. There were other anxious times for Knox when she acted entirely differently and this includes the proud smiling and arrogant preening at her court appearances, her rambling off-topic discourses during her testimony and at Guede's hearing, mugging with Sollecito in the Questura, and performing cartwheels.

It could just be her level of maturity. She doesn't do a lot of parading in the courtroom any more. We don't know much about her behaviour behind bars but Knox probably doesn't experience that much intense anxiety. She appears to welcome the structured environment of a prison setting.


Well, I guess then my thinking is that she wouldn't have been in any fit state to be questioned in the hour or so immediately after the discovery of the body. I wonder if the police take shock and its reactions into account when they question people in the immediate aftermath of a crime such as this. I felt very shaky and stressed the whole time, and would have gone to pieces at the drop of a hat. If I had been in this condition straight after the discovery of a murder at my house, would my reaction have been seen as a sign of guilt? Whereas not being able to think straight, breaking down, and a sense of unreality would be perfectly normal. I had some really inappropriate thoughts too - not immediately accepting the gravity of the situation and telling Mr Bard I would be at the gym for the next couple of hours but I would leave my phone on. It was only when I came off the phone that I thought 'Shit, I have to get there, fast!'. I also wasted time thinking what I should wear. And I also now writing an (over) detailed account of it!!!! The need to recount details of a traumatic experience are well known. It happened to a member of my family after a car crash. He went over and over and over it in minute detail. There is some dispute about whether it is good for people who have had a traumatic experience to relive it over and over.

Anyway, it did make me think about AK's questioning, and the treatment of all the other young women actually. It must have been an appalling experience. Very frightening.

I know it's not the same, but it just made me think about how they would have coped, and how AK might have come across and why. I also think if she had taken part in the murder she would have been in even deeper shock. Isn't this the time most murderers give themselves away?

I also agree that the rambling discourse is partly about avoidance of difficult emotions with her.



How unpleasant for both of you Bard :( . Mr Bard needs a jolly good rest and full service!

One big difference you have to bear in mind in your well described symptoms of shock and panic is that by the time the body is discovered in this case, Amanda and Raffaele are some thirteen hours past the initial shock and panic. Now, they are of course, under a very large degree of pressure and stress but extremely unhelpfully for them, they have several control specimins around them with whom the police are interacting in the minutes and hours immediately after discovery - the flatmates and their partners are living, breathing, entirely natural examples minute to minute of what brand-new shock looks like. Great stress and shock are aligned, but as anyone who has seen someone be told of a death knows, the two are absolutely not the same.

If D = discovery of the body then at D+10 seconds to D+5 minutes, Amanda and Raffaele have thought how they will be reacting for some hours. They may take cues off those around them. The police will also be shocked. But ultimately, they should not screw this bit up - there's enough shock and confusion and they are ready for it. They back off the scene and Raffaele gets Amanda (and therefore both of them) out of the cottage.

However, thereafter, what they have been obsessing about for the last 13 hours is not getting caught for murder. They cannot afford to be flaky and those concerns must start coming to the fore immediately. They are D+13.5 hours when the other young people are D+30 minutes and so on. At this stage, all those things people do in shock, like getting obsessed with small details / persuing illogical concerns are coming out in the others. Amanda and Raffaele by comparison are hyper sensitive to trying to keep on top of the information stream that's coming out of everyone there, the questions that are being asked and trying not to screw up at all. See the testimony concerning Raffaele's aggressive questioning about what was said in the lift to the Questura. Getting in a closed environment with no police around them after the initial prolonged stress must have been like a kettle whistle going off inside his head. I'm not surprised he gave himself away.

As the police are asking questions at the property, they are dealing with 100% genuine control specimens of the right age group and... Biff and Anita... Police attend shocked people week in week out, month in month out, year in year out. They see a spectrum of behaviour but they know what it is. Biff and Anita have never had a single experience of reacting to the news of the violent death of a friend to base their immediate need to act-for-their-lives and it *is* going to crash and burn, especially with the others around them. When the flatmates/friends are at D+45 minutes, they are at D+13.75 and therefore also three-quarters of an hour into the stress of not trying to screw up in questioning, which if it goes wrong, may see you in prison for life. Are you going to be the same? No. And not just for a few minutes - the observation period is going to be many hours and that 13 hour time difference is a constant that never goes away...

Remember how different you are mentally at 13 hours on from where you were today Bard. And now add an absolute need to stay in control to avoid yourself slipping up, while still acting. Consider the likelihood of managing to appear to match those control specimens of people going through it for real in the immediate minutes but then hours and hours and hours after too. It's a monstrous ask. This IS why many police CAN smell wrong behaviour in connected persons in the aftermath of crimes. It is not a precise science, of course not, and it can go wrong, but it is a highly normal and prevalent phenomena that drives many initial investigative focuses. One of the many things that Filomena did for Meredith in this case was to be there as a control the police could judge Knox and Sollecito against and like that famous photo of the detective with his hand on his head, a terrible suspicion began to sink in pretty fast.


You have to add the enormity of the deed. How do you carry on your shoulders the fact that you have just killed a person. Right in front of investigating police.

Already the people around them were having suspicions. For the police it had to be obvious.

Unless you are a trained killer with several jobs under your belt, there is no way you can possibly hide in plain sight your culpability.

The police saw right through them bright, clear and in Technicolor.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 1:00 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

I just have to say: Between Michael, Clander and Catnip...well, I could become a techie before I know it!!! I can feel the shudders. ( I know that Michael is a little Pi**ed off with the Bard, for explaining how to use the smilies :)

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 1:02 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

I did forget to welcome History. And I do.........

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
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: Fri Jan 21, 2011 1:20 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

smacker wrote:
Is Hayden Panatierre a midget ?


No. Ukrainian wrestlers make anyone look small. Any wrestlers do, in fact. :)

[IMDB] lists her at 5' 4½" (1.64 m).
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 1:45 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
Didn't Raffaele tell the police that he couldn't come in for questioning earlier in the day? As I understand it, he put them off but they insisted by saying something like, "well, we really need to talk to you so when are you finally free - sometime in the evening perhaps?" or something to that effect.


Apparently both Amanda and Raffaele were questioned by the police at 5pm on November 5th, 2007. Up until that point the only apparent discrepancy between Raffaele's and Amanda's statements to the police were in regards to the unflushed toilet - Raffaele claimed that when he looked he saw nothing in the toilet, however the Carabinieri confirmed that the water was still unflushed as Amanda claimed.

Something about that questioning session didn't add up, because at 10:40pm Raffaele was back at the police station for more questioning and he wound up changing his version of events, now saying that the afternoon and evening of November 1 he was with Amanda continuously but that they both went into the city centre around 8:30 or 9pm.

Sollecito went on to say that Knox then left him, saying she was heading over to Le Chic to meet some friends. Raffaele told the police that he then returned to his apartment and that he received a phone call from his father on his fixed line at 11pm. He claimed he was using his computer for several hours while smoking a joint. He also told police that Amanda did not return until around 1am and that they didn't wake up until 10am the following morning when Amanda left his apartment to return to Via della Pergola.

He fully retracted his previous statement in which he said they remained inside his apartment together all evening and night, and justified making it by saying that it was Knox who convinced him to give a false version of events to protect her. It was at this point that Raffaele was arrested and Amanda Knox was approached in the waiting room...
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 21, 2011 2:23 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Version 1: Amanda was with him, all evening and during the night.

Version 1 retracted: "I've told you a load of balls, because Amanda had convinced me of her version of the facts and I had not considered the incongruenties."

Version 2:
Quote:
On the 1st November I woke around 11:00, I had breakfast with Amanda, then she went out and I returned to bed. Around 13:00, 14:00, I met up with her at her place. Meredith was there too. Amanda and I had lunch together, while Meredith did not eat with us. Around 16:00 she left in a hurry without saying where she was going. Amanda and I stayed until 18:00. Then we went into the city centre, but I don't remember what we did. At 21:00 I returned home alone to my place, while Amanda had said that she was going to Le Chic pub. I sat at the computer, I had a joint. Certainly I had dinner but I don't remember what I ate. Around 23:00 my father called on the landline.

I surfed on the computer for another two hours and I stopped around 01:00 in the morning, when Amanda came back. ...

-- Sarzanini book, p107


There was no call on the landline; by that stage of the evening, the mobile was off; etc.

Vague, contradictory, outright lies. One lie would be enough to place the whole account under suspicion. And it is already at version 2.

The time period of being outside in the city centre earlier in the evening (and not remembering what was happening) is a crucial part of the "recall" narrative. Something is hidden in there, behind his vagueness. Also, the period 21:00 to 23:00 remains sensitive, as well as the couple of hours up to 01:00 when Amanda came back (and presumably everything was OK, in the "Honey, I'm home!" sense, if it were a normal soap-opera day, or if this were a normal narrative of an everyday couple).

He's also completely forgotten about his medical-student friend, the one asking for the lift to the station. That is understandable. There is a lot of stress that comes from sitting in front of the computer, and stress can affect memory.

Also unmentioned is his talking to his father way before 21:00 and during the washing up, therefore after dinner, and mentioning the broken drainpipe and that Amanda was going to be spending the night.

Lots of "holes", of various sorts, in that story.
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 21, 2011 2:39 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Also, the movie, Amelie, which comes in in later versions of the alibis.
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 21, 2011 2:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

orange wrote:
Hi everyone :)

I know this has been asked a few times, but I can't find the responses and I've forgotten the answer, sorry! When Is Knox back in court? I know it's very soon.

Thanks in advance,

Katie.


Tommorow :)

_________________
"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 21, 2011 3:10 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Bard _

I'm sorry to hear about Mr Bard and your panic. But I'm glad it turned out not to be serious. I wish you both the best (hot water bottle...put the kettle on).

Anyway, to cheer you up, here's a cross-eyed opossum:



_________________
"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 stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 3:14 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Catnip wrote:
Version 1: Amanda was with him, all evening and during the night.

Version 1 retracted: "I've told you a load of balls, because Amanda had convinced me of her version of the facts and I had not considered the incongruenties."

Version 2:
Quote:
On the 1st November I woke around 11:00, I had breakfast with Amanda, then she went out and I returned to bed. Around 13:00, 14:00, I met up with her at her place. Meredith was there too. Amanda and I had lunch together, while Meredith did not eat with us. Around 16:00 she left in a hurry without saying where she was going. Amanda and I stayed until 18:00. Then we went into the city centre, but I don't remember what we did. At 21:00 I returned home alone to my place, while Amanda had said that she was going to Le Chic pub. I sat at the computer, I had a joint. Certainly I had dinner but I don't remember what I ate. Around 23:00 my father called on the landline.

I surfed on the computer for another two hours and I stopped around 01:00 in the morning, when Amanda came back. ...

-- Sarzanini book, p107


There was no call on the landline; by that stage of the evening, the mobile was off; etc.

Vague, contradictory, outright lies. One lie would be enough to place the whole account under suspicion. And it is already at version 2.

The time period of being outside in the city centre earlier in the evening (and not remembering what was happening) is a crucial part of the "recall" narrative. Something is hidden in there, behind his vagueness. Also, the period 21:00 to 23:00 remains sensitive, as well as the couple of hours up to 01:00 when Amanda came back (and presumably everything was OK, in the "Honey, I'm home!" sense, if it were a normal soap-opera day, or if this were a normal narrative of an everyday couple).

He's also completely forgotten about his medical-student friend, the one asking for the lift to the station. That is understandable. There is a lot of stress that comes from sitting in front of the computer, and stress can affect memory.

Also unmentioned is his talking to his father way before 21:00 and during the washing up, therefore after dinner, and mentioning the broken drainpipe and that Amanda was going to be spending the night.

Lots of "holes", of various sorts, in that story.


How did this author get the text of the 17:00 05 NOV 2007 interview? This is the kind of information I'd like to see but not in book form. Is there a set of transcripts somewhere of all Knox and Sollecito interviews and their times and dates?
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: Fri Jan 21, 2011 3:28 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

stilicho wrote:

How did this author get the text of the 17:00 05 NOV 2007 interview? This is the kind of information I'd like to see but not in book form.


They're extracts from official court documents.

So I presume they were tendered for the arrest validation hearings, the bail application hearings, the early Supreme Court points-of-law decisions, and so on.

I suppose someone could ask her.


A lot of the witness statements and so on that she quotes were also reported on and quoted in various newspaper articles under different editorships, so presumably the information is not hard to get.

Quote:
Is there a set of transcripts somewhere of all Knox and Sollecito interviews and their times and dates?


Probably.
Do you mean online? Don't know; I expect someone would have them.
Don't know who, though.
Some things would be under privacy wraps (like the autopsy report), and other things would be under strategy wraps (like Bongiorno's decision not to bring Raffaele's drug habit into the courtroom).
Top Profile 

Offline TomM


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 7:28 pm

Posts: 583

Location: California

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 3:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

The Bard wrote:
***
Well, I guess then my thinking is that she wouldn't have been in any fit state to be questioned in the hour or so immediately after the discovery of the body. I wonder if the police take shock and its reactions into account when they question people in the immediate aftermath of a crime such as this. I felt very shaky and stressed the whole time, and would have gone to pieces at the drop of a hat. If I had been in this condition straight after the discovery of a murder at my house, would my reaction have been seen as a sign of guilt? Whereas not being able to think straight, breaking down, and a sense of unreality would be perfectly normal. I had some really inappropriate thoughts too - not immediately accepting the gravity of the situation and telling Mr Bard I would be at the gym for the next couple of hours but I would leave my phone on. It was only when I came off the phone that I thought 'Shit, I have to get there, fast!'. I also wasted time thinking what I should wear. And I also now writing an (over) detailed account of it!!!! The need to recount details of a traumatic experience are well known. It happened to a member of my family after a car crash. He went over and over and over it in minute detail. There is some dispute about whether it is good for people who have had a traumatic experience to relive it over and over.

Anyway, it did make me think about AK's questioning, and the treatment of all the other young women actually. It must have been an appalling experience. Very frightening.

I know it's not the same, but it just made me think about how they would have coped, and how AK might have come across and why. I also think if she had taken part in the murder she would have been in even deeper shock. Isn't this the time most murderers give themselves away?

I also agree that the rambling discourse is partly about avoidance of difficult emotions with her.

Hello Bard,

I hope Mr. Bard was a quick and complete recovery.

I have thought about your two posts on this subject. I find less similarity between your fresh experience that that of AK than you do. As individuals, I find little or no similarity between you and AK.

Btw, I don't think "shock" had much of a role in her state of mind. I think she had fear or anxiety about being caught, but I don't know that she found it appalling. What she said was, "I want this to be over." In any event, I would think an innocent would be less disturbed by this questioning than someone who knew that she had actually done it.


Last edited by TomM on Fri Jan 21, 2011 4:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline pataz1


Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:02 am

Posts: 303

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 4:21 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Early on, before the massei report was released & translated, I had drafted a blog post on looking at the various parts of F's bedroom and the purported break-in. I had put it on hold, figuring I'd wait until the actual decision came out. I've finally had a chance to get back to that. Using elements from the english translation section on the state of F's bedroom, this is a visual guide to the purported break-in:
http://aklwei.wordpress.com/2011/01/21/ ... -break-in/
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 4:34 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

pataz1 wrote:
Early on, before the massei report was released & translated, I had drafted a blog post on looking at the various parts of F's bedroom and the purported break-in. I had put it on hold, figuring I'd wait until the actual decision came out. I've finally had a chance to get back to that. Using elements from the english translation section on the state of F's bedroom, this is a visual guide to the purported break-in:
http://aklwei.wordpress.com/2011/01/21/ ... -break-in/


Very well thought out, Pataz. Kermit's powerpoints approached the staged breakin, without the benefits of Massei, in convincing fashion. It's a good resource to have a post-Massei interpretation too.

It's also important to note (as you did) that only Knox seriously considered that window as the entry point into the cottage. Nobody else thought so.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 4:56 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Just got the news from the Doctor. My baby has diabetes. Putting on my big girl pants. Deep breaths.

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 4:57 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

My synapses are misfiring on this issue of phone calls between Amanda and the cocaine dealer. Y'all are moving faster than I want to keep up.

Can this add more time to her sentence?
Top Profile 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:02 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Emerald wrote:
My synapses are misfiring on this issue of phone calls between Amanda and the cocaine dealer. Y'all are moving faster than I want to keep up.

Can this add more time to her sentence?


Why should it?

The impact of the calls to the convicted drug dealer is not in the facts of her participation in Meredith's murder but in the increasingly unsupportable image of Knox as an honours student diligently pursuing her education in a foreign country. Instead, she's looking more and more like an unsupervised ticking time bomb abroad, living out her fantasies of drug abuse, promiscuity, domination of her peers, and finally murder.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:09 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

stilicho wrote:
Why should it?

The impact of the calls to the convicted drug dealer is not in the facts of her participation in Meredith's murder but in the increasingly unsupportable image of Knox as an honours student diligently pursuing her education in a foreign country. Instead, she's looking more and more like an unsupervised ticking time bomb abroad, living out her fantasies of drug abuse, promiscuity, domination of her peers, and finally murder.


This is information the prosecutor has had since the beginning. When did the defense team find out? Do you think Amanda's defense team may have considered walking out a few times?
Top Profile 

Offline DLW


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:41 pm

Posts: 623

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:31 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Version 2:
Quote:
‘On the 1st November I woke around 11:00, I had breakfast with Amanda, then she went out and I returned to bed. Around 13:00, 14:00, I met up with her at her place. Meredith was there too. Amanda and I had lunch together, while Meredith did not eat with us. Around 16:00 she left in a hurry without saying where she was going. Amanda and I stayed until 18:00. Then we went into the city centre, but I don't remember what we did. At 21:00 I returned home alone to my place, while Amanda had said that she was going to Le Chic pub. I sat at the computer, I had a joint. Certainly I had dinner but I don't remember what I ate. Around 23:00 my father called on the landline.
I surfed on the computer for another two hours and I stopped around 01:00 in the morning, when Amanda came back. …’
-- Sarzanini book, p107

I could agree with what Raffaele says here except for when he says they split up their separate ways at 21:00. It had to be earlier. Say 18:00, or soon after they left the cottage.. Raff returns to his appt. alone. Amanda doesn’t come back at 01:00 the next morning, but soon after Amanda got her text message from Patrick at around 20:15. Say at 20:30 in time for the witness to see Amanda at Raff’s appt. Maybe a short dinner afterwards. The kitchen pipe breaks and they both decide to get the hell out of there. Also Raff’s father called his unplugged cell phone, not the landline (Nice try Raff) He probably surfed the net, the one or two hours while he was alone that evening.
After 21:15 they were together and as free as the wind. They both may have returned to Raff’s at 01:00, after throwing the cell phones away. That’s where the 01:00 comes from.

capealadin: I’m so sorry to hear that news. It is very treatable.
Bard: Fortunately it wasn’t anything serious. Maybe to feel safer keep nitro pills on hand?
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:18 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

piktor wrote:
The Bard wrote:
Blimey, more drama at the Bard household today ...etc., etc., etc.

No-drama video here:





Hello Piktor & good moaning,

Could you see to it to have an array of pram pushers, Fisher pushing whoever, Mellas pushing Wilkes, Preston pushing Moore, baby bonnets all pushing books and their own trumpet blowing?
Feel free to include all those who didn't get a mention in the 'all you need is a murderer club'.




_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:40 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Catnip wrote:
stilicho wrote:

How did this author get the text of the 17:00 05 NOV 2007 interview? This is the kind of information I'd like to see but not in book form.


They're extracts from official court documents.

So I presume they were tendered for the arrest validation hearings, the bail application hearings, the early Supreme Court points-of-law decisions, and so on.

I suppose someone could ask her.


A lot of the witness statements and so on that she quotes were also reported on and quoted in various newspaper articles under different editorships, so presumably the information is not hard to get.

Quote:
Is there a set of transcripts somewhere of all Knox and Sollecito interviews and their times and dates?


Probably.
Do you mean online? Don't know; I expect someone would have them.
Don't know who, though.
Some things would be under privacy wraps (like the autopsy report), and other things would be under strategy wraps (like Bongiorno's decision not to bring Raffaele's drug habit into the courtroom).


A lot of this information came directly the Matteini Report - a summary in the Telegraph was recently posted here at PMF: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... eport.html

The FOA has focused entirely on the wrong adversarial: Matteini was far more instrumental than Mignini could ever hope to be in condemning Knox and Sollecito. The Matteini document came forward at an extremely early phase in the investigative process.

The Matteini Report is extremely valuable in that it provides a narrative for an unfolding of events that neutralizes almost all of the FOA rhetoric. This narrative of how things unfolded, all in proper context within a coherent timeline, is critical to understanding why things turned out the way they did and reveals an obvious progression of lies leading ever deeper into a spider web of contradictions.
Top Profile 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 7:33 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Emerald wrote:
stilicho wrote:
Why should it?

The impact of the calls to the convicted drug dealer is not in the facts of her participation in Meredith's murder but in the increasingly unsupportable image of Knox as an honours student diligently pursuing her education in a foreign country. Instead, she's looking more and more like an unsupervised ticking time bomb abroad, living out her fantasies of drug abuse, promiscuity, domination of her peers, and finally murder.


This is information the prosecutor has had since the beginning. When did the defense team find out? Do you think Amanda's defense team may have considered walking out a few times?


Is the information relevant to prosecuting Knox for the murder of Meredith Kercher? I don't think it is. Could you explain how you think it would have been?

I have few doubts that Knox's defence team knew she was a ticking time bomb and that she had displayed a wide array of risky behaviour during her brief time in Europe. Their job was to defend the vicious little angel and not to judge her on her promiscuity and drug abuse.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 7:46 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
Catnip wrote:
stilicho wrote:

How did this author get the text of the 17:00 05 NOV 2007 interview? This is the kind of information I'd like to see but not in book form.


They're extracts from official court documents.

So I presume they were tendered for the arrest validation hearings, the bail application hearings, the early Supreme Court points-of-law decisions, and so on.

I suppose someone could ask her.


A lot of the witness statements and so on that she quotes were also reported on and quoted in various newspaper articles under different editorships, so presumably the information is not hard to get.

Quote:
Is there a set of transcripts somewhere of all Knox and Sollecito interviews and their times and dates?


Probably.
Do you mean online? Don't know; I expect someone would have them.
Don't know who, though.
Some things would be under privacy wraps (like the autopsy report), and other things would be under strategy wraps (like Bongiorno's decision not to bring Raffaele's drug habit into the courtroom).


A lot of this information came directly the Matteini Report - a summary in the Telegraph was recently posted here at PMF: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... eport.html

The FOA has focused entirely on the wrong adversarial: Matteini was far more instrumental than Mignini could ever hope to be in condemning Knox and Sollecito. The Matteini document came forward at an extremely early phase in the investigative process.

The Matteini Report is extremely valuable in that it provides a narrative for an unfolding of events that neutralizes almost all of the FOA rhetoric. This narrative of how things unfolded, all in proper context within a coherent timeline, is critical to understanding why things turned out the way they did and reveals an obvious progression of lies leading ever deeper into a spider web of contradictions.


FBN, I know all about that report. I meant only the transcripts of the interviews between the discovery of the body and those leading to their arrests. They were each interviewed more than once between the 2nd and the 5th and it would be great to have the originals of those transcripts. I would like to read for myself just what Knox was saying prior to her having to write it all down on the early morning of 04 NOV 2007. It would help me fill in the blanks and see how the investigators started to close in on the murderous pair.

I'm only guessing but I'd bet it's a treasure trove of Knox's famously incoherent ramblings.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 8:12 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Thanks for all the furries - the cross-eyed mongoose and the rescued moose are crackers! Y'all know how to cheer a Bard xxx Ty and Mr Bard much more comfortable today, and off to doc later.

Cape - what a shock. Our thoughts are with you. Stay strong lovely. I have pm'd you Xxx

SA - I agree with your point about ak and rs being further on along the shock route. I am still amazed that they could have held it together at all, even given the time lag. I think your analysis could well be spot on about the police too: they know what it looks like, and the pair were not there. Also agree with Tom that I am nothing like AK in make up. However, I would think shock is something that affects you powerfully whatever your make up. UNLESS of course you are psychopathic, i.e unable to react as others would in identical circumstances.Remember Brady making a cup of tea after killing his last victim? It's that kind of reaction that must ring all the alarm bells, and exactly what the Jo Yeates appeal was high-lighting in things to look out for.

I don't know, it seems inconceivable to me that anyone would not still be off the planet having committed murder, spent all night cleaning up to save my life, then standing around waiting for the whole thing to be discovered. At the point of discovery you'd think their heads would be fit to explode. The tell tale leaks were inevitable.

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 9:47 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

capealadin wrote:
Just got the news from the Doctor. My baby has diabetes. Putting on my big girl pants. Deep breaths.


Hang in there! Everything's gonna be fine. Keeping my fingers crossed!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline BellaDonna


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 3:44 pm

Posts: 138

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 10:40 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

capealadin wrote:
Just got the news from the Doctor. My baby has diabetes. Putting on my big girl pants. Deep breaths.


I hope you're ok. My five year-old niece has type 1 diabetes, which was diagnosed after she was constantly thirsty and hungry. They found great advice and support from local diabetes support groups. I'm not sure where you're based but here in the UK, there are loads of groups, both online and meet ups. My niece is just like any other happy little girl and her health is managed excellently by two calm parents. Diagnosis is a shock, but its very manageable. Sending good wishes x
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 21, 2011 11:02 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Cape,

Sending good wishes also.
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 21, 2011 11:10 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

stilicho wrote:
Emerald wrote:
stilicho wrote:
Why should it?

The impact of the calls to the convicted drug dealer is not in the facts of her participation in Meredith's murder but in the increasingly unsupportable image of Knox as an honours student diligently pursuing her education in a foreign country. Instead, she's looking more and more like an unsupervised ticking time bomb abroad, living out her fantasies of drug abuse, promiscuity, domination of her peers, and finally murder.


This is information the prosecutor has had since the beginning. When did the defense team find out? Do you think Amanda's defense team may have considered walking out a few times?


Is the information relevant to prosecuting Knox for the murder of Meredith Kercher? I don't think it is. Could you explain how you think it would have been?

I have few doubts that Knox's defence team knew she was a ticking time bomb and that she had displayed a wide array of risky behaviour during her brief time in Europe. Their job was to defend the vicious little angel and not to judge her on her promiscuity and drug abuse.


No judgments. Best defence.

Part of that is being firm. E.g., early on Ghirga saying to her, stop changing your stories or I'm out. And she did stop (sort of). So he stayed in.

That was on one of the Porta-a-Porta shows, I think. Very early on.
Top Profile 

Offline jfk1191


Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:46 am

Posts: 286

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:17 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

pataz1 wrote:
Early on, before the massei report was released & translated, I had drafted a blog post on looking at the various parts of F's bedroom and the purported break-in. I had put it on hold, figuring I'd wait until the actual decision came out. I've finally had a chance to get back to that. Using elements from the english translation section on the state of F's bedroom, this is a visual guide to the purported break-in:
http://aklwei.wordpress.com/2011/01/21/ ... -break-in/


That was well done.

Whats your input on Rudy saying he looked out the window before fleeing the murder scene?
(Filomenas shutters were open per Rudy)
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: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:30 am   Post subject: Nazzi blog 21 January 2011   

Stefano Nazzi has another blog entry up here:

Quote:
And meanwhile in Italy, the Simonetta Cesaroni murder trial is reaching a conclusion...

And meanwhile, at Avetrana, investigations and searches are continuing...

And meanwhile, in Perugia, they're about to officially task the super partes experts who are going to examine the presumed DNA traces left by Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito in the house where Meredith Kercher was killed. The judicial panel [giuria = "jury"] has tasked the experts because it wants to arrive at a decision which overcomes any reasonable doubt. It will do so with the instruments that the law provides for, as is obviously the case.

And meanhwile, ...
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 21, 2011 11:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Pat,

Well done.

A visual representation is very helpful.

No-one got in through that window.

And no-one stole anything from the "ransacked" room - even Raffaele mentioned that.

"Nailed - All because of a nail" (Well, not just a nail.)

Rudy got in through the front door. Amanda had the key for that.

Rudy left through the front door. Was that where he saw Amanda from, at the end of the driveway? So either he passed her on the way to the disco, or climbed up over the side railings straight onto the road, and then away. Or he waited a moment, and then legged it. He might have seen Amanda's silhouette through the gap in the shutters of Filomena's window, from the door to Filomena's room, in the hallway on his way out (but that could put Amanda much closer to the cottage, depending on the angles). But Filomena's door was closed the next morning, according to Amanda or Raffaele (it's getting confusing keeping up with who said what version when).
Top Profile 

Offline thoughtful


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:48 pm

Posts: 1225

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:55 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

capealadin wrote:
Quote:
Just got the news from the Doctor. My baby has diabetes. Putting on my big girl pants. Deep breaths.


Is it your youngest kid, Cape? How old is he/she? Do you know what type of diabetes? Crossing fingers for you.
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

I am sorry to hear that, Cape :(
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Michael wrote:
Emerald wrote:
Amanda may have kept her passport with her for identification. She would not have been in Italy long enough to need a drivers license or whatever other ID the State issues.


In which case, why didn't she have it on her when she spent the previous day and night with Raffaele? What was the pressing need that caused her to think she suddenly needed it 'then' but not before?


I wasn't aware the any form of legal ID was required in Europe.......certainly an 'emotive' topic in Britain, and a matter that has been hotly debated and roundly rejected bu the British people. Only in the US is big brother watching.

Except I don't pay attention to that on principal.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

The Bard wrote:
Blimey, more drama at the Bard household today (look away now LJ), with Mr Bard phoning me this morning with severe chest pain. He was ordered down to A&E and seen within minutes, while I made a dash for the train, which takes around an hour. Happy ending thank goodness - the pain was related to recent back problem, just muscles round the heart area this time.

BUT, absolutely fascinating to observe the effect of shock, and it has made me think about AK. I think I was in shock from the minute I got the phone call, and heard the panic in his voice. I began to feel light-headed. I could tell the pain was severe and he was beginning to panic. Reassurance from NHS Direct didn't seem to sink in (they didn't think it was cardiac) and all the way to London I was in a state of suppressed panic, imagining the worst. British listeners to The Archers recently will understand the scenario unfolding in my head.

What I noticed, observing my own physiological reactions trying to keep calm, was that breathing became shallower with anxiety, with - I assume - a consequent loss of oxygen to the brain. I lost the ability to think things through clearly, and had to ring a friend to ask her what to do eg. I could not work out which station to go from and how to get there; I couldn't work out which mainline station was closest; I couldn't work out what tube train I needed; I could not decide what to take with me and seemed to be distracted by the smallest irrelevant details. The ability to think clearly and sensibly was massively reduced. I assume this was because part of my brain was preoccupied with what 'might' be happening and the consequences of that. I don' t know.

The thought I had about AK was this: if you find that someone has been murdered in the house you live in, I think it would be a normal reaction to go into shock. The other girls did, I believe, even those who were not there when it was discovered - Meredith's friends. They were severely affected. In the first couple of hours after Meredith was discovered, where did AK go? I know I should know this, but I can't remember if they went for questioning/statements immediately or not. Could someone remind me? Is this when the 'She ...bled to death' comment was made, and the canoodling? What happened today made me think about her questioning a little differently.

ETA: Mr Bard now doped up with painkillers and resting. He's fine.


What with Mr Bard's back'n'all the NHS must be running short of painkillers by now. Beer on the NHS amnyone ?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

ID is not required in the UK if what you mean is that you are expected to carry any form of it: but it is handy sometimes for particular purposes. Most obviously people who look younger than their years may find it handy if they have trouble getting into pubs.

We dont need ID: we have CCTV!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
stilicho wrote:
Now you probably realise why I'd love to get my hands on the notes from the first four days after Meredith's body was discovered. I would really like to know just what Knox told the police on 02 NOV 2007. The others too. That would be a very interesting primary source for detailing the deepening sense among the investigators that Knox was protecting someone. I've always thought they suspected Sollecito did it, initially, and that Knox was just covering up for him but I'd still like to see those transcripts.


The FOA goes on and on about 40+ hours of grilling Amanda, but I think you're right - they were more interested in Raffaele. And over those 40+ hours where do you suppose the FOA draws the line between her "helping the investigation" and "being abusively grilled"? Who knows, but it is critically important to note that on the night Knox was arrested she wasn't even asked to come in for questioning - they only wanted to follow up with Raffaele. Knox, however, gleefully went along with him apparently so she could practice her gymnastics in the waiting room. Meanwhile, Raffaele cracked during his questioning and was quietly taken down the hall to a jail cell. Since Amanda was already there in the waiting room, guess what happened next - within a few hours she was saying she let Lumumba into the cottage where he raped and killed Meredith - and they didn't even want to talk to her!?!?!?!?!


What did Raff say that led to him being hurled in a jail cell......any ideas ?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

I think admitting that he had previously lied might have had something to do with it. I could be wrong but I tend to think that the police take a dim view of being lied to in a murder investigation.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

smacker wrote:
I wasn't aware the any form of legal ID was required in Europe.......certainly an 'emotive' topic in Britain, and a matter that has been hotly debated and roundly rejected bu the British people. Only in the US is big brother watching.

Except I don't pay attention to that on principal.


There are many needs for legal identification. When I use my credit card in the grocery store, they ask for ID. Truly, it irks me when they don't ask. Somebody could have stolen MY card and tried to use it. My car battery is dead in the freeze. Need to call AAA when it gets light. The guy will ask for ID.
Top Profile 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 1:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fiona wrote:
I think admitting that he had previously lied might have had something to do with it. I could be wrong but I tend to think that the police take a dim view of being lied to in a murder investigation.


Hi Fiona,

thanks, finally caught up and realised that my question was somewhat late.........multiple changing stories.

To Bard's point about how RS and AK held it together after several hours of urder and clean up, I'm surprised they didn't work backwards and set a deadline to be away from the house and off to Gubbio; ie, we leave the house at midday, what do we have to do by then to be comfortable that when MK's found we are in the clear ?

I assume that the onset of shock wasted several hours of clear thinking to put a plan together in order to cope ?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 1:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Emerald wrote:
smacker wrote:
I wasn't aware the any form of legal ID was required in Europe.......certainly an 'emotive' topic in Britain, and a matter that has been hotly debated and roundly rejected bu the British people. Only in the US is big brother watching.

Except I don't pay attention to that on principal.


There are many needs for legal identification. When I use my credit card in the grocery store, they ask for ID. Truly, it irks me when they don't ask. Somebody could have stolen MY card and tried to use it. My car battery is dead in the freeze. Need to call AAA when it gets light. The guy will ask for ID.


Credit cards are a menace in the US because they are not PIN associated. Debit cards are far safer.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Stan


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 10:35 am

Posts: 130

Highscores: 5

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 1:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Cape.......thinking of you and sending lots of positive thoughts your way. hugz-)

There are really some great advances in the treatment of diabetes. I am surrounded by them, both my wife and my dog are diabetic. My wife quite often forgets her medication, but we never forget my dog...... nw) Just keep your chin up and keep positive, I am sure things will work out fine.

Stan.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 1:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Emerald are you in the uk? I have never, ever heard of anyone having to have ID for grocery shopping and I have never heard of it for the AA either. That quite shocks me, I must say
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: Fri Jan 21, 2011 1:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Friday lunchtime news (Italian time) from ANSA:

The two experts, Stefano Conti and Carla Vecchiotti, from the forensics institute at the Universita' La Sapienza of Rome, will be in court tomorrow to receive their taskings about the DNA and its reliability.
Top Profile 

Offline Underhill


Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:56 pm

Posts: 80

Location: Suffolk, UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 1:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

I have always understood that, in Italy, foreigners need to carry their passports for ID purposes. So I always do that when I'm in Italy. I've never actually checked the Italian laws though, so maybe it is just an urban myth that has circulated around English tourists and travellers.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 1:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fiona wrote:
Emerald are you in the uk? I have never, ever heard of anyone having to have ID for grocery shopping and I have never heard of it for the AA either. That quite shocks me, I must say


Fiona,

I think Emerald is referring to AAA in the US, which is similar to the AA in Britain. The issue in the US is that chip and pin doesn't exist, and only debit cards seem to require a PIN. If you use a credit card here in the US no-one bothers to check signatures and once the transaction is cleared the purchase is complete. The whole business is riddled with security issues. If your card gets lost or stolen you'd better report it immediately before the spending spree commences.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 1:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fiona wrote:
Emerald are you in the uk? I have never, ever heard of anyone having to have ID for grocery shopping and I have never heard of it for the AA either. That quite shocks me, I must say


I don't need the card for buying groceries. Just to paying for them. My card can be used as debit and credit. Either way, it comes out of the same account immediately. AAA needs it to verify I'm the one with the account. That's the point of membership.
Top Profile 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 2:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Used my passport for ID when my driver's license was misplaced. Found it in a jeans pocket I had folded and put away. Also found $58. That was fun.

So, everyone gearing up for court soon? I sure am!
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 2:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

smacker wrote:
Fiona wrote:
Emerald are you in the uk? I have never, ever heard of anyone having to have ID for grocery shopping and I have never heard of it for the AA either. That quite shocks me, I must say


Fiona,

I think Emerald is referring to AAA in the US, which is similar to the AA in Britain. The issue in the US is that chip and pin doesn't exist, and only debit cards seem to require a PIN. If you use a credit card here in the US no-one bothers to check signatures and once the transaction is cleared the purchase is complete. The whole business is riddled with security issues. If your card gets lost or stolen you'd better report it immediately before the spending spree commences.


Well you have to report it here too: but the time it happened to me they refunded all the money spent that wasnt me: even the money spent between the theft and my reporting it. Because they did not steal the card I did not report it till the next statement came in. Somehow they had cloned it. But I got the money back
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 21, 2011 2:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Knox lawyers confident ahead of appeal in Italy .
Friday, 21 January 2011 19:31 Mohideen Mifthah

THE TIMES

_________________
"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 dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 2:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Catnip wrote:
Friday lunchtime news (Italian time) from ANSA:

The two experts, Stefano Conti and Carla Vecchiotti, from the forensics institute at the Universita' La Sapienza of Rome, will be in court tomorrow to receive their taskings about the DNA and its reliability.


So they haven't done their work yet, they will only be 'tasked' with it at this court session Sat? huh-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 2:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

stilicho wrote:
Emerald wrote:
My synapses are misfiring on this issue of phone calls between Amanda and the cocaine dealer. Y'all are moving faster than I want to keep up.

Can this add more time to her sentence?


Why should it?

The impact of the calls to the convicted drug dealer is not in the facts of her participation in Meredith's murder but in the increasingly unsupportable image of Knox as an honours student diligently pursuing her education in a foreign country. Instead, she's looking more and more like an unsupervised ticking time bomb abroad, living out her fantasies of drug abuse, promiscuity, domination of her peers, and finally murder.


'Increasingly unsupportable image'... I like that statement. angel-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline yuppi du


Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2010 11:57 pm

Posts: 92

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 3:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

AMANDA KNOX TRIAL TESTIMONY, FRIDAY, JUNE 12, 2009.


CDV: Okay now, a practical question. Immediately after the finding of the
body, were you allowed to take any personal effects out of the house?

AK: I took my bag, which was on the sofa. But apart from that I couldn't
take anything.

CDV: No intimate garments, for example?

AK: [Laughing] No, just what I was wearing, nothing else. In my bag there
were just my schoolbooks.


AMANDA'S EMAIL HOME, NOV 4, 2007


i was in the kitchen stadning aside, having really done my part for
the situation. but when they opened merediths door and i heard
filomena scream "a foot! a foot!" in italian i immedaitely tried to
get to merediths room but raffael grabbed me and took me out of the
house. the police told everyone to get out and not long afterward the
carabinieri arrived and then soon afterward, more police
investigators. they took all of our informaton and asked us the same
questions over and over. at the time i had only what i was wearing and
my badg, which thankfully had my passport in it and my wallet. no
jacket though, and i was freezing. after sticking around at the housr
for a bit, the police told us to go to the station to give testimony,
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline observer


Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:36 pm

Posts: 178

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 3:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Yes, credit cards that do not use chip and pin technology have to be signed for instead. The store clerk is supposed to check that the signatures match, and that you are who you say you are, by asking for ID. In Italy, I have NEVER seen a store clerk check the signature, NEVER, and have even on occasion lectured the bewildered clerk about the need for it. And, the only places I have been asked for ID is in large supermarket chains, hardly EVER in small shops. So, anyone getting their hands on your card wouldn't have much trouble spending your money until such time as the card gets blocked by reporting it missing.
Top Profile 

Offline yuppi du


Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2010 11:57 pm

Posts: 92

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 3:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

I spent 5 days in Madonna Di Campiglio and never took my passport or drivers licence anywhere.

I wasn`t asked for ID at any time.

Same as when i go to SIGEP in the expo in rimini. i just give my ticket and thats that.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline windfall


Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:22 pm

Posts: 608

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 3:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Two notes on the link Michael just posted to THE TIMES (actually The Times of Sri Lanka!).

One, the reporter seems to believe that Meredith's body was found "in a pool" in her room (presumably the words "of blood" are missing, but it's an unfortunate error).

Second, a mention of the stain on the pillow and a proffered explanation that I had not come across before. Have a look for yourselves if you are interested, I can't bring myself to cut and paste it, let alone repeat it.

http://www.sundaytimes.lk/world-news/41 ... l-in-italy
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 21, 2011 3:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Cape -

I'm sorry to hear the bad news :( My best wishes to you.

_________________
"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 bedelia


User avatar


Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 10:12 am

Posts: 167

Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 3:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Well I'm off to court today to emotionally support my husband! He is asking the court to emancipate his 23 and 21 yr old sons. Their mother is fighting it tooth and nail as her own lawyer. My husband is still paying child support to her for both of them, even though the older one was living with us for the last 8 months!

Cape, good luck with your baby! My thoughts are with you!

The Bard, I'm glad your husband is feeling better. I hope the surgery will end these kinds of scares. Best of luck to you!

I'm feeling positive for both court appearances - my husband's and the Meredith Kercher appeal's! Fingers crossed!
Top Profile 

Offline equinox


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:22 pm

Posts: 140

Location: WA, USA

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 3:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

favicon FTW! (Clander?)


Sorry, I should read before posting congratulations. I'm like a bull in a china shop now.

Cape, sorry to hear of the diagnosis, you have a lot of really knowledgeable friends here who will have a ton of great advice to share, you do just need to wear the big girl pants for a bit.

Bard and Mr. Bard - what a scare. Horrible to think of the pain and fear, but this is just like you Bard, to turn it into a teaching moment for all of us. You gave us some great and immediate insight into how people behave in a state of shock, and it triggered SA into yet another brilliant post explaining why the police couldn't possibly have missed AK' and RS' out of place behavior in the minutes and hours immediately after the discovery. So.. even in your very worst moment you couldn't help but think about Meredith and your friends here. Quite something.

..foot removed from mouth..
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 4:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

BellaDonna wrote:
capealadin wrote:
Just got the news from the Doctor. My baby has diabetes. Putting on my big girl pants. Deep breaths.


I hope you're ok. My five year-old niece has type 1 diabetes, which was diagnosed after she was constantly thirsty and hungry. They found great advice and support from local diabetes support groups. I'm not sure where you're based but here in the UK, there are loads of groups, both online and meet ups. My niece is just like any other happy little girl and her health is managed excellently by two calm parents. Diagnosis is a shock, but its very manageable. Sending good wishes x


Cape:
BellaDonna is right! Once you are able to have the time to assimilate this news, you'll learn that diabetes doesn't have to rule your life. BTW, is it type 1 diabetes, type 2....or maybe diabetes insipidus? (completely different animal)

But don't just take our word for it!

Rania Al-Abdullah, Queen of Jordan (who made the list of Forbes Most Powerful Women)

and Halle Berry are just two people among MILLIONS of people who "have" diabetes and are (OBVIOUSLY!!)thriving--not to mention GORGEOUS!

If you Google "Famous People with Diabetes" or similar phrase, I think you'll be amazed to see "your baby" is in good company.

Knowledge is power, as always.
Top Profile 

Offline Solange305


Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 12:14 am

Posts: 604

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fiona wrote:

Well you have to report it here too: but the time it happened to me they refunded all the money spent that wasnt me: even the money spent between the theft and my reporting it. Because they did not steal the card I did not report it till the next statement came in. Somehow they had cloned it. But I got the money back



I had a checking account with a debit card here in the US with TD Bank, and someone somehow charged 300 bucks to my account using a cloned card or something right before Christma (this was two years ago). They bought something from online at Toys R Us. I saw it right away and called Toys R Us and tried to cancel it, but they wouldnt let me since I couldnt tell them the shipping address, even though it was MY billing info! I figured I would just report it to the bank and get my money back like you, well, after waiting 7 days like they told me to, they declined it, saying that since whomever used it knew my address, it must have been me. I was like, people do this all the time and somehow get the info, how can you say that????? I was livid. It took me weeks to finally get the money back, I had to go file a police report, and at first the cops wouldn't let me since the theft didnt take place in my city and it was online, I begged this young cop who was there to please help me and he finally caved and gave me a report (see, there are many nice cops), anyway, the only reason I got my money back is I called the bank and instead of talking to the lady who was handling my account, I went to a random person instead, and she gave me my money back right then and there. It made me wonder if the other lady I was dealing with was just a bitch. It was horrible because I dont make much money, and that money was part of what I was using to my son his Christmas gifts. Banks suck, I hate them.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline TomM


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 7:28 pm

Posts: 583

Location: California

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Underhill wrote:
I have always understood that, in Italy, foreigners need to carry their passports for ID purposes. So I always do that when I'm in Italy. I've never actually checked the Italian laws though, so maybe it is just an urban myth that has circulated around English tourists and travellers.

It does happen. Last Spring we were on a day trip from Montepulciano to Cortona and came upon a fork in the road where two uniformed police were standing, one holding a plastic wand which he stuck out and I correctly interpreted as a signal to come to a stop. He gestured to me to circle the car to stop next to him. I did and he asked for my identity documents and driver's license. He looked at them, returned them, and we were on our way in less than two minutes. Luckily he did not ask for my wife's passport, as this was the only day on our trip that she left her passport at the hotel.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Me too Solange. I am an insurance agent. The banks now will give customers a 'discount' if they take their home, health, life and even auto insurance with them. It is killing off independent insurance agencies IMO. They are bankers, not insurance agents. pro-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline TomM


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 7:28 pm

Posts: 583

Location: California

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fiona wrote:
smacker wrote:
Fiona wrote:
Emerald are you in the uk? I have never, ever heard of anyone having to have ID for grocery shopping and I have never heard of it for the AA either. That quite shocks me, I must say


Fiona,

I think Emerald is referring to AAA in the US, which is similar to the AA in Britain. The issue in the US is that chip and pin doesn't exist, and only debit cards seem to require a PIN. If you use a credit card here in the US no-one bothers to check signatures and once the transaction is cleared the purchase is complete. The whole business is riddled with security issues. If your card gets lost or stolen you'd better report it immediately before the spending spree commences.


Well you have to report it here too: but the time it happened to me they refunded all the money spent that wasnt me: even the money spent between the theft and my reporting it. Because they did not steal the card I did not report it till the next statement came in. Somehow they had cloned it. But I got the money back

Several years ago a pick pocket extracted my wife's wallet from her purse on a crowded bus. We notified the bank and the card companies the following morning. We were not out anything, but some leather merchant was out some $3,000.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

jfk1191 wrote:
pataz1 wrote:
Early on, before the massei report was released & translated, I had drafted a blog post on looking at the various parts of F's bedroom and the purported break-in. I had put it on hold, figuring I'd wait until the actual decision came out. I've finally had a chance to get back to that. Using elements from the english translation section on the state of F's bedroom, this is a visual guide to the purported break-in:
http://aklwei.wordpress.com/2011/01/21/ ... -break-in/


That was well done.

Whats your input on Rudy saying he looked out the window before fleeing the murder scene?
(Filomenas shutters were open per Rudy)


When did Guede testify that he was in Filomena's room and that the shutters were open? Or was this another one of the shifting and changing stories that each of them knocked around before settling on a final version of their lies?

What do you make of their credibility as opposed to, say, Filomena herself, who stated clearly and unequivocally in the courtroom that she had closed her shutters?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

I thought I'd fling a familial woe into today's medical melting pot.

My 'middle' daughter is 17 and has suffered from Anorexia Nervosa since July of last year. She was admitted to hospital as an emergency case since her blood sugar level had dropped so low she would not have survived the night had she made it to bed. She actually passed out at around 7pm and that saved her life.

She has now recovered her weight loss and has a provisional discharge date of April 21st from an Eating Disorder Hospital in England. We live apart and she hasn't spoken to me since last July.

Delighted as I am that she may see an opportunity to start to lead a normal life again she still struggles with weight gain and counts every calorie. This is also a terrible illness !
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

TomM wrote:
Fiona wrote:
smacker wrote:
Fiona wrote:
Emerald are you in the uk? I have never, ever heard of anyone having to have ID for grocery shopping and I have never heard of it for the AA either. That quite shocks me, I must say


Fiona,

I think Emerald is referring to AAA in the US, which is similar to the AA in Britain. The issue in the US is that chip and pin doesn't exist, and only debit cards seem to require a PIN. If you use a credit card here in the US no-one bothers to check signatures and once the transaction is cleared the purchase is complete. The whole business is riddled with security issues. If your card gets lost or stolen you'd better report it immediately before the spending spree commences.


Well you have to report it here too: but the time it happened to me they refunded all the money spent that wasnt me: even the money spent between the theft and my reporting it. Because they did not steal the card I did not report it till the next statement came in. Somehow they had cloned it. But I got the money back

Several years ago a pick pocket extracted my wife's wallet from her purse on a crowded bus. We notified the bank and the card companies the following morning. We were not out anything, but some leather merchant was out some $3,000.


In Canada it is common to be asked for ID when presenting a credit card. It is really common sense for a merchant to ask for it. Chip technology is widespread here too. I am always surprised that American merchants still accept paper cheques. I haven't used a cheque to pay for anything in years.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

It is a terrible illness, Smacker. I really hope she makes a full recovery: that is a hard fight
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

stilicho wrote:
jfk1191 wrote:
pataz1 wrote:
Early on, before the massei report was released & translated, I had drafted a blog post on looking at the various parts of F's bedroom and the purported break-in. I had put it on hold, figuring I'd wait until the actual decision came out. I've finally had a chance to get back to that. Using elements from the english translation section on the state of F's bedroom, this is a visual guide to the purported break-in:
http://aklwei.wordpress.com/2011/01/21/ ... -break-in/


That was well done.

Whats your input on Rudy saying he looked out the window before fleeing the murder scene?
(Filomenas shutters were open per Rudy)


When did Guede testify that he was in Filomena's room and that the shutters were open? Or was this another one of the shifting and changing stories that each of them knocked around before settling on a final version of their lies?

What do you make of their credibility as opposed to, say, Filomena herself, who stated clearly and unequivocally in the courtroom that she had closed her shutters?


Why would Filomena have cause to lie ? If I were her and leaving the property for a day or two, I wouldn't leave the shutters open and my PC and other personal possessions out on view for the next human fly that came along.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Earthling


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:25 pm

Posts: 512

Location: USA

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Yesterday, snow came down steadily all day. Blizzardy. This morning, outside it looks for all the world like a little kid who misbehaved yesterday, but is happy and bubbly today, as if to say "See? I'm not a bad kid! I'm happy now!"
And then the kitty started playing with a ribbon on the table, afterward looking up guiltily:


picture of a pumpkin
This Post has been edited by a Moderator
Details: Removed photos at poster's request
Top Profile 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fiona wrote:
It is a terrible illness, Smacker. I really hope she makes a full recovery: that is a hard fight


Thank you Fiona; as her days darkened she'd bump into friends who complimented her on how skinny she looked...........very bloody helpful. She declined rapidly and has bucked the trend by recovering very slowly. Typically that's not what happens. Rapid decline = rapid recovery in most cases.

Bard, you must have been terrified.......Cape, sorry to hear about your woes too.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

TomM wrote:
Underhill wrote:
I have always understood that, in Italy, foreigners need to carry their passports for ID purposes. So I always do that when I'm in Italy. I've never actually checked the Italian laws though, so maybe it is just an urban myth that has circulated around English tourists and travellers.

It does happen. Last Spring we were on a day trip from Montepulciano to Cortona and came upon a fork in the road where two uniformed police were standing, one holding a plastic wand which he stuck out and I correctly interpreted as a signal to come to a stop. He gestured to me to circle the car to stop next to him. I did and he asked for my identity documents and driver's license. He looked at them, returned them, and we were on our way in less than two minutes. Luckily he did not ask for my wife's passport, as this was the only day on our trip that she left her passport at the hotel.


Foreigners don't HAVE to carry their passport as long as they have with them some other form of ID (ID card, driving license) with their picture on it.
http://www.camera.it/parlam/leggi/deleghe/98286dl.htm
Art.6, comma 5:
"Lo straniero che, a richiesta degli ufficiali e agenti di pubblica sicurezza, non esibisce, senza giustificato motivo, il passaporto o altro documento di identificazione, ovvero il permesso o la carta di soggiorno, è punito con l'arresto fino a sei mesi e l'ammenda fino a lire ottocentomila".
(passport or other identification document)

If you really want to play it safe, make a photocopy of your passport and bring that with you (along with an another original ID document).

ETA:
I personally recommend NOT to always carry your passport around with you in Italy unless you really need it for something.
If every tourist in Rome went around with his/her passport, Embassies/Consulates in Rome would have a really hard time keeping up with all those that need a document to get back to their own country (because the number of people losing their passport or getting it stolen would sky rocket).


Cape and smacker,
my best wishes to you and your families.

Equinox,
:D
Thanks. ;)
Top Profile E-mail 

Online The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2308

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Michael wrote:
Knox lawyers confident ahead of appeal in Italy .
Friday, 21 January 2011 19:31 Mohideen Mifthah

THE TIMES


They were also confident before the trial.
Top Profile 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

The Machine wrote:
Michael wrote:
Knox lawyers confident ahead of appeal in Italy .
Friday, 21 January 2011 19:31 Mohideen Mifthah

THE TIMES


They were also confident before the trial.


Maybe SA can help here; who was the last lawyer who went into a trial publicly announcing that they weren't very confident ?
Top Profile E-mail 

Online The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2308

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

history11 wrote:
Given the lack of defensive wounds and lack of dna evidence in the room (other than that being reevaluated), I wanted to know whether the posters question the three-on-one story. If they don't, that's fine - there is poorly collected dna against RS and LCN dna against AK


Meredith had defensive wounds on both hands.

Why do you think the bra clasp was poorly collected?

LCN DNA evidence is allowed in Italy. What's your point?

It's strange how almost no-one mentions the fact that there was none of Guede's DNA in Filomena's room or the blood-spattered bathroom. I also don't see anyone arguing that some the DNA evidence against Guede should be discounted because it's LCN DNA and was it collected six weeks later.


Last edited by The Machine on Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:19 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

smacker wrote:
stilicho wrote:
jfk1191 wrote:
pataz1 wrote:
Early on, before the massei report was released & translated, I had drafted a blog post on looking at the various parts of F's bedroom and the purported break-in. I had put it on hold, figuring I'd wait until the actual decision came out. I've finally had a chance to get back to that. Using elements from the english translation section on the state of F's bedroom, this is a visual guide to the purported break-in:
http://aklwei.wordpress.com/2011/01/21/ ... -break-in/


That was well done.

Whats your input on Rudy saying he looked out the window before fleeing the murder scene?
(Filomenas shutters were open per Rudy)


When did Guede testify that he was in Filomena's room and that the shutters were open? Or was this another one of the shifting and changing stories that each of them knocked around before settling on a final version of their lies?

What do you make of their credibility as opposed to, say, Filomena herself, who stated clearly and unequivocally in the courtroom that she had closed her shutters?


Why would Filomena have cause to lie ? If I were her and leaving the property for a day or two, I wouldn't leave the shutters open and my PC and other personal possessions out on view for the next human fly that came along.


That's what I was asking jfk too.
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 21, 2011 6:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

The Machine wrote:
history11 wrote:
Given the lack of defensive wounds and lack of dna evidence in the room (other than that being reevaluated), I wanted to know whether the posters question the three-on-one story. If they don't, that's fine - there is poorly collected dna against RS and LCN dna against AK


Meredith had defensive wounds on both hands.

Why do you think the bra clasp was poorly collected?

LCN DNA evidence is allowed in Italy. What's your point?

It's strange how almost no-one mentions the fact that there was none of Guede's DNA in Filomena's room or the blood-spattered bathroom. I also don't see anyone arguing that some the DNA evidence against Guede should be discounted because it's LCN DNA and was it collected six weeks later.


Whoever it was that strangled Meredith, to the point of breaking a bone in her neck, forgot to leave DNA evidence on her body. Must have been a bunch of absent minded killers to have left so little DNA evidence - and all three convicted murderers fit the "absent minded" profile.


Last edited by Fly by Night on Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline DLW


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:41 pm

Posts: 623

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

windfall wrote:

‘Second, a mention of the stain on the pillow and a proffered explanation that I had not come across before. Have a look for yourselves if you are interested, I can't bring myself to cut and paste it, let alone repeat it.’

The part where supposedly Rudy or is it his unnamed friend masturbated in the murder room. Interesting that Mario Alessi claims this, so Raff’s attorneys look at the first stain they find in that room and claim its semen. Also interesting that the Times Online writes a two paragraph synopsis of the Appeals process and this one detail, which has a snow balls chance of getting into trial, is so extremely important that it deserves honorable mention.
National Enquirer type journalism is Standard Operating Procedure or SOP. It’s very economic, and their readership loves it.
Top Profile 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

The Machine wrote:
Michael wrote:
Knox lawyers confident ahead of appeal in Italy .
Friday, 21 January 2011 19:31 Mohideen Mifthah

THE TIMES


They were also confident before the trial.


Funny how these stories are so full of confidence while ignoring truly damning evidence such as the various locations where Knox's DNA was found mixed with that of the victim.

Disco Shuttle Bus to the rescue!

Image
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 21, 2011 6:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

DLW wrote:
windfall wrote:

‘Second, a mention of the stain on the pillow and a proffered explanation that I had not come across before. Have a look for yourselves if you are interested, I can't bring myself to cut and paste it, let alone repeat it.’

The part where supposedly Rudy or is it his unnamed friend masturbated in the murder room. Interesting that Mario Alessi claims this, so Raff’s attorneys look at the first stain they find in that room and claim its semen. Also interesting that the Times Online writes a two paragraph synopsis of the Appeals process and this one detail, which has a snow balls chance of getting into trial, is so extremely important that it deserves honorable mention.
National Enquirer type journalism is Standard Operating Procedure or SOP. It’s very economic, and their readership loves it.


The obvious problem is that there is absolutely no way to date or otherwise associate an anonymous stain (allegedly semen, but couldn't it be turnip juice?) with the murder itself. That stain can never be anything more than a hypothetical element.
Top Profile 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

DLW wrote:
windfall wrote:

‘Second, a mention of the stain on the pillow and a proffered explanation that I had not come across before. Have a look for yourselves if you are interested, I can't bring myself to cut and paste it, let alone repeat it.’

The part where supposedly Rudy or is it his unnamed friend masturbated in the murder room. Interesting that Mario Alessi claims this, so Raff’s attorneys look at the first stain they find in that room and claim its semen. Also interesting that the Times Online writes a two paragraph synopsis of the Appeals process and this one detail, which has a snow balls chance of getting into trial, is so extremely important that it deserves honorable mention.
National Enquirer type journalism is Standard Operating Procedure or SOP. It’s very economic, and their readership loves it.


Even if the pillow were tested, the results wouldn't count because it would have necessarily been collected more than 47 days after the murder. Isn't that the FOA trope? No evidence collected more than 47 days after a crime is ever admissible?

I really must have missed that episode of Cold Case Files.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline TomM


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 7:28 pm

Posts: 583

Location: California

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Clander wrote:
TomM wrote:
Underhill wrote:
I have always understood that, in Italy, foreigners need to carry their passports for ID purposes. So I always do that when I'm in Italy. I've never actually checked the Italian laws though, so maybe it is just an urban myth that has circulated around English tourists and travellers.

It does happen. Last Spring we were on a day trip from Montepulciano to Cortona and came upon a fork in the road where two uniformed police were standing, one holding a plastic wand which he stuck out and I correctly interpreted as a signal to come to a stop. He gestured to me to circle the car to stop next to him. I did and he asked for my identity documents and driver's license. He looked at them, returned them, and we were on our way in less than two minutes. Luckily he did not ask for my wife's passport, as this was the only day on our trip that she left her passport at the hotel.


Foreigners don't HAVE to carry their passport as long as they have with them some other form of ID (ID card, driving license) with their picture on it.
http://www.camera.it/parlam/leggi/deleghe/98286dl.htm
Art.6, comma 5:
"Lo straniero che, a richiesta degli ufficiali e agenti di pubblica sicurezza, non esibisce, senza giustificato motivo, il passaporto o altro documento di identificazione, ovvero il permesso o la carta di soggiorno, è punito con l'arresto fino a sei mesi e l'ammenda fino a lire ottocentomila".
(passport or other identification document)

If you really want to play it safe, make a photocopy of your passport and bring that with you (along with an another original ID document).

ETA:
I personally recommend NOT to always carry your passport around with you in Italy unless you really need it for something.
If every tourist in Rome went around with his/her passport, Embassies/Consulates in Rome would have a really hard time keeping up with all those that need a document to get back to their own country (because the number of people losing their passport or getting it stolen would sky rocket).

One needs a passport to get into the country, and once there, you have to keep it somewhere. I prefer to keep it, along International Driving Permit, state driver's license, credit and atm cards, and any major amount of cash securely on my person in a nylon zippered pouch. The pouch has a loop at the top that the belt passes through; the pouch is then slipped inside the top of the pants, and is not accessible to anyone else. We do always put photocopies of the passports in each piece of luggage, just in case.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

TomM wrote:
One needs a passport to get into the country, and once there, you have to keep it somewhere. I prefer to keep it, along International Driving Permit, state driver's license, credit and atm cards, and any major amount of cash securely on my person in a nylon zippered pouch. The pouch has a loop at the top that the belt passes through; the pouch is then slipped inside the top of the pants, and is not accessible to anyone else. We do always put photocopies of the passports in each piece of luggage, just in case.


Life will be so much easier when we're tattooed with a UPC code on our wrists and get the RFID chip implants:

Top Profile E-mail 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

TomM wrote:
Clander wrote:
TomM wrote:
Underhill wrote:
I have always understood that, in Italy, foreigners need to carry their passports for ID purposes. So I always do that when I'm in Italy. I've never actually checked the Italian laws though, so maybe it is just an urban myth that has circulated around English tourists and travellers.

It does happen. Last Spring we were on a day trip from Montepulciano to Cortona and came upon a fork in the road where two uniformed police were standing, one holding a plastic wand which he stuck out and I correctly interpreted as a signal to come to a stop. He gestured to me to circle the car to stop next to him. I did and he asked for my identity documents and driver's license. He looked at them, returned them, and we were on our way in less than two minutes. Luckily he did not ask for my wife's passport, as this was the only day on our trip that she left her passport at the hotel.


Foreigners don't HAVE to carry their passport as long as they have with them some other form of ID (ID card, driving license) with their picture on it.
http://www.camera.it/parlam/leggi/deleghe/98286dl.htm
Art.6, comma 5:
"Lo straniero che, a richiesta degli ufficiali e agenti di pubblica sicurezza, non esibisce, senza giustificato motivo, il passaporto o altro documento di identificazione, ovvero il permesso o la carta di soggiorno, è punito con l'arresto fino a sei mesi e l'ammenda fino a lire ottocentomila".
(passport or other identification document)

If you really want to play it safe, make a photocopy of your passport and bring that with you (along with an another original ID document).

ETA:
I personally recommend NOT to always carry your passport around with you in Italy unless you really need it for something.
If every tourist in Rome went around with his/her passport, Embassies/Consulates in Rome would have a really hard time keeping up with all those that need a document to get back to their own country (because the number of people losing their passport or getting it stolen would sky rocket).

One needs a passport to get into the country, and once there, you have to keep it somewhere. I prefer to keep it, along International Driving Permit, state driver's license, credit and atm cards, and any major amount of cash securely on my person in a nylon zippered pouch. The pouch has a loop at the top that the belt passes through; the pouch is then slipped inside the top of the pants, and is not accessible to anyone else. We do always put photocopies of the passports in each piece of luggage, just in case.


TomM,

being that organised means less time trying to find pubs and restaurants. drin-)
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 21, 2011 7:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

stilicho wrote:
...They were each interviewed more than once between the 2nd and the 5th and it would be great to have the originals of those transcripts. I would like to read for myself just what Knox was saying prior to her having to write it all down on the early morning of 04 NOV 2007. It would help me fill in the blanks and see how the investigators started to close in on the murderous pair.

I'm only guessing but I'd bet it's a treasure trove of Knox's famously incoherent ramblings.


I think the police used cell phone records to trip up the pair, because it’s a fact that those records do not corroborate their stories. Among other things, the police must have told Raffaele that the cell phone records revealed that Amanda was not at his flat all evening. My guess is that, in a pinch, Raffaele came up with the "land line" phone call lie (not thinking about the obvious consequences) because they were waving cell records in front of his face - maybe even slapping him on the back of the head with them. Amanda was probably brought down the same way because we know she was being confronted with cell phone evidence, and in a tight pinch she did the same thing Raffaele did - lie without regard for the consequences. Even without the entire body of DNA evidence, how on earth can they ever rise above all the lies they told?
Top Profile 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 7:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Thank you so much, all you Darlings for your kind thoughts and good wishes. We will only know on Monday, just what is going on. His blurred vision and unquenchable thirst was frightening. I won't bring this to the Board again, as I am ever respectful as to why we're here. But I appreciate you all so much. Truly. I'm good in the trenches, and will make sure there is a happy outcome. I am a bit numb, at the moment, but heartwarmed by you all.

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Earthling


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:25 pm

Posts: 512

Location: USA

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 7:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

capealadin wrote:
Thank you so much, all you Darlings for your kind thoughts and good wishes. We will only know on Monday, just what is going on. His blurred vision and unquenchable thirst was frightening. I won't bring this to the Board again, as I am ever respectful as to why we're here. But I appreciate you all so much. Truly. I'm good in the trenches, and will make sure there is a happy outcome. I am a bit numb, at the moment, but heartwarmed by you all.

Take care of yourself, too. I've learned that caregivers need care, too. I'm glad all those here with more experience of this disease have given you help and advice. These really are the best times to be alive medically. There's allopathic medicine, and then there are lifestyle changes. There is so much that can be done these days.

And Bard, same wishes for you. Take care of yourself. Best wishes for the Mr's rapid recovery.

hugz-) to all!
Top Profile 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 7:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
stilicho wrote:
...They were each interviewed more than once between the 2nd and the 5th and it would be great to have the originals of those transcripts. I would like to read for myself just what Knox was saying prior to her having to write it all down on the early morning of 04 NOV 2007. It would help me fill in the blanks and see how the investigators started to close in on the murderous pair.

I'm only guessing but I'd bet it's a treasure trove of Knox's famously incoherent ramblings.


I think the police used cell phone records to trip up the pair, because it’s a fact that those records do not corroborate their stories. Among other things, the police must have told Raffaele that the cell phone records revealed that Amanda was not at his flat all evening. My guess is that, in a pinch, Raffaele came up with the "land line" phone call lie (not thinking about the obvious consequences) because they were waving cell records in front of his face - maybe even slapping him on the back of the head with them. Amanda was probably brought down the same way because we know she was being confronted with cell phone evidence, and in a tight pinch she did the same thing Raffaele did - lie without regard for the consequences. Even without the entire body of DNA evidence, how on earth can they ever rise above all the lies they told?


It must have been something tangible like that but that's still the evening of the 5th. I'm thoroughly interested in what they said before that and how the noose was tightened.

I am not sure if you meant the head slapping literally but Sollecito never claimed he was hit. Knox did but proved herself a liar when she refused to identify her attacker. I seriously doubt either of them experienced anything worse than raised voices. And that had to have only happened at the final interview once the police knew without a doubt that both of them were involved.

I wonder if the cops told Sollecito on the 5th that they knew the burglary was staged and that they knew Knox had let another man in the front door with her key. That logical step might have caused Sollecito to understand that the police knew a lot more than he thought they did. Combine a few of those zingers with the cell phone records and I could see why he'd abandon his previous position.

No hitting required! rt-))
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 21, 2011 7:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

smacker wrote:
What did Raff say that led to him being hurled in a jail cell......any ideas ?


Raffaele's prison diary, which begins on November 7, 2007, indicates that it was simply because he changed his story and that he regretted not sticking with the same old tune of staying in his flat together all night long. Sorry Raff - in light of cell phone evidence and the obvious lies you told it's just not that simple.

It's interesting to note that he never retracts his statement that Knox was out on her own the night of the murder - he resorts to "maybe she was, maybe she wasn't" and saying that he's tending towards this or tending towards that. Too much dope smoking, he claims - impossible to say for sure - let's wait until more evidence comes in so I can match my story to it.

He remains certain of one thing, however: without a doubt, that is Meredith's DNA on his knife.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 7:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

stilicho wrote:
Fly by Night wrote:
stilicho wrote:
...They were each interviewed more than once between the 2nd and the 5th and it would be great to have the originals of those transcripts. I would like to read for myself just what Knox was saying prior to her having to write it all down on the early morning of 04 NOV 2007. It would help me fill in the blanks and see how the investigators started to close in on the murderous pair.

I'm only guessing but I'd bet it's a treasure trove of Knox's famously incoherent ramblings.


I think the police used cell phone records to trip up the pair, because it’s a fact that those records do not corroborate their stories. Among other things, the police must have told Raffaele that the cell phone records revealed that Amanda was not at his flat all evening. My guess is that, in a pinch, Raffaele came up with the "land line" phone call lie (not thinking about the obvious consequences) because they were waving cell records in front of his face - maybe even slapping him on the back of the head with them. Amanda was probably brought down the same way because we know she was being confronted with cell phone evidence, and in a tight pinch she did the same thing Raffaele did - lie without regard for the consequences. Even without the entire body of DNA evidence, how on earth can they ever rise above all the lies they told?


It must have been something tangible like that but that's still the evening of the 5th. I'm thoroughly interested in what they said before that and how the noose was tightened.

I am not sure if you meant the head slapping literally but Sollecito never claimed he was hit. Knox did but proved herself a liar when she refused to identify her attacker. I seriously doubt either of them experienced anything worse than raised voices. And that had to have only happened at the final interview once the police knew without a doubt that both of them were involved.

I wonder if the cops told Sollecito on the 5th that they knew the burglary was staged and that they knew Knox had let another man in the front door with her key. That logical step might have caused Sollecito to understand that the police knew a lot more than he thought they did. Combine a few of those zingers with the cell phone records and I could see why he'd abandon his previous position.

No hitting required! rt-))


Don't forget that police were also tapping AK/RS phones following the murder and whatever is in those recordings is part of the 10.000+ pages investigation file.

ETA: The tapping of phones was not limited to the lovebirds, the other two housemates, downstairs boys and Meredith's friends also had their phones intercepted.


Last edited by Jools on Fri Jan 21, 2011 7:42 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: Fri Jan 21, 2011 7:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

stilicho wrote:
...I'm thoroughly interested in what they said before that and how the noose was tightened.


I'm with Mellas on this one - I WANT THOSE TAPE RECORDINGS!!! For both Amanda and Raffaele :lol:

stilicho wrote:
...I am not sure if you meant the head slapping literally but Sollecito never claimed he was hit.


Just taking some dramatic license here :D
Raff says he was "psychologically tortured" in his prison diary - they took his shoes, you know. pf-))
Top Profile 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 7:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
smacker wrote:
What did Raff say that led to him being hurled in a jail cell......any ideas ?


Raffaele's prison diary, which begins on November 7, 2007, indicates that it was simply because he changed his story and that he regretted not sticking with the same old tune of staying in his flat together all night long. Sorry Raff - in light of cell phone evidence and the obvious lies you told it's just not that simple.

It's interesting to note that he never retracts his statement that Knox was out on her own the night of the murder - he resorts to "maybe she was, maybe she wasn't" and saying that he's tending towards this or tending towards that. Too much dope smoking, he claims - impossible to say for sure - let's wait until more evidence comes in so I can match my story to it.

He remains certain of one thing, however: without a doubt, that is Meredith's DNA on his knife.


FBN,

thanks for this; I'd eventually realised the changing story thing was causing a problem but I didn't realise you could end up in jail for it. As we piece together the events from 'the night of' up until the point at which information starts to become public knowledge (around Nov.7th) it's clear there's an entire sequence of little things that lead to their downfall and subsequent arrest. 1 cellphone discovery, then another, the bomb hoax that caused the postal Police to visit the cottage to talk to someone completely unconnected with anything, D+13 hours reaction to discovery of body, failure to discuss stories and how to match them......if they'd set themselves a hard deadline for leaving for Gubbio and not been caught outside the cottage things might have been quite different.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 7:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
stilicho wrote:
...I'm thoroughly interested in what they said before that and how the noose was tightened.


I'm with Mellas on this one - I WANT THOSE TAPE RECORDINGS!!! For both Amanda and Raffaele :lol:

stilicho wrote:
...I am not sure if you meant the head slapping literally but Sollecito never claimed he was hit.


Just taking some dramatic license here :D
Raff says he was "psychologically tortured" in his prison diary - they took his shoes, you know. pf-))


And they didn't allowed him to call Papa. Mua-)
Top Profile 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 8:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

smacker wrote:
Fly by Night wrote:
smacker wrote:
What did Raff say that led to him being hurled in a jail cell......any ideas ?


Raffaele's prison diary, which begins on November 7, 2007, indicates that it was simply because he changed his story and that he regretted not sticking with the same old tune of staying in his flat together all night long. Sorry Raff - in light of cell phone evidence and the obvious lies you told it's just not that simple.

It's interesting to note that he never retracts his statement that Knox was out on her own the night of the murder - he resorts to "maybe she was, maybe she wasn't" and saying that he's tending towards this or tending towards that. Too much dope smoking, he claims - impossible to say for sure - let's wait until more evidence comes in so I can match my story to it.

He remains certain of one thing, however: without a doubt, that is Meredith's DNA on his knife.


FBN,

thanks for this; I'd eventually realised the changing story thing was causing a problem but I didn't realise you could end up in jail for it. As we piece together the events from 'the night of' up until the point at which information starts to become public knowledge (around Nov.7th) it's clear there's an entire sequence of little things that lead to their downfall and subsequent arrest. 1 cellphone discovery, then another, the bomb hoax that caused the postal Police to visit the cottage to talk to someone completely unconnected with anything, D+13 hours reaction to discovery of body, failure to discuss stories and how to match them......if they'd set themselves a hard deadline for leaving for Gubbio and not been caught outside the cottage things might have been quite different.


There is no jurisdiction in the world (that I can think of) where it is not a criminal offence to lie to the police. Just Google "obstruction+of+justice+lying+to+the+police". For the adventurous among you, try it yourself when pulled over for a minor infraction. Make up a name for yourself or provide confusing and contradictory information and see just what happens.

In the case of the vicious little murdering angels, they lied repeatedly and we only have the tip of the proverbial iceberg. They said they were in bed until 10:00 or 10:30. Proved to have been a lie. They said they had a late supper. Proved to have been a lie. Went to the city centre? Spilled the water on the floor and left it overnight? Having sex while activating unknown log files on his MacBook? Where does it start or stop?

The loads of crap they kept feeding the police would have landed them in prison in Canada, the UK, or even *gasp* the USA.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 8:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

stilicho wrote:
smacker wrote:
Fly by Night wrote:
smacker wrote:
What did Raff say that led to him being hurled in a jail cell......any ideas ?


Raffaele's prison diary, which begins on November 7, 2007, indicates that it was simply because he changed his story and that he regretted not sticking with the same old tune of staying in his flat together all night long. Sorry Raff - in light of cell phone evidence and the obvious lies you told it's just not that simple.

It's interesting to note that he never retracts his statement that Knox was out on her own the night of the murder - he resorts to "maybe she was, maybe she wasn't" and saying that he's tending towards this or tending towards that. Too much dope smoking, he claims - impossible to say for sure - let's wait until more evidence comes in so I can match my story to it.

He remains certain of one thing, however: without a doubt, that is Meredith's DNA on his knife.


FBN,

thanks for this; I'd eventually realised the changing story thing was causing a problem but I didn't realise you could end up in jail for it. As we piece together the events from 'the night of' up until the point at which information starts to become public knowledge (around Nov.7th) it's clear there's an entire sequence of little things that lead to their downfall and subsequent arrest. 1 cellphone discovery, then another, the bomb hoax that caused the postal Police to visit the cottage to talk to someone completely unconnected with anything, D+13 hours reaction to discovery of body, failure to discuss stories and how to match them......if they'd set themselves a hard deadline for leaving for Gubbio and not been caught outside the cottage things might have been quite different.


There is no jurisdiction in the world (that I can think of) where it is not a criminal offence to lie to the police. Just Google "obstruction+of+justice+lying+to+the+police". For the adventurous among you, try it yourself when pulled over for a minor infraction. Make up a name for yourself or provide confusing and contradictory information and see just what happens.

In the case of the vicious little murdering angels, they lied repeatedly and we only have the tip of the proverbial iceberg. They said they were in bed until 10:00 or 10:30. Proved to have been a lie. They said they had a late supper. Proved to have been a lie. Went to the city centre? Spilled the water on the floor and left it overnight? Having sex while activating unknown log files on his MacBook? Where does it start or stop?

The loads of crap they kept feeding the police would have landed them in prison in Canada, the UK, or even *gasp* the USA.


OK; still didn't think they'd fling you in prison........Rudy did far worse things in Milan and the Police didn't seem even slightly concerned. However, as you rightly point out there's lying and then relentless lying.

SA would call them criminals who just weren't good at what they did.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 8:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

What worse things than lying to the police in a murder investigation did RG do in Milan?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 9:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fiona wrote:
What worse things than lying to the police in a murder investigation did RG do in Milan?


Fiona,


I didn't word that well at all. Thank you and sorry.

My thoughts hadn't got as far as RS lying in a murder investigation; more that he was lying during questioning prior to being charged where RG was caught with stolen goods after he'd broken in to someone else's property.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 9:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

smacker wrote:
stilicho wrote:
smacker wrote:
FBN,

thanks for this; I'd eventually realised the changing story thing was causing a problem but I didn't realise you could end up in jail for it. As we piece together the events from 'the night of' up until the point at which information starts to become public knowledge (around Nov.7th) it's clear there's an entire sequence of little things that lead to their downfall and subsequent arrest. 1 cellphone discovery, then another, the bomb hoax that caused the postal Police to visit the cottage to talk to someone completely unconnected with anything, D+13 hours reaction to discovery of body, failure to discuss stories and how to match them......if they'd set themselves a hard deadline for leaving for Gubbio and not been caught outside the cottage things might have been quite different.


There is no jurisdiction in the world (that I can think of) where it is not a criminal offence to lie to the police. Just Google "obstruction+of+justice+lying+to+the+police". For the adventurous among you, try it yourself when pulled over for a minor infraction. Make up a name for yourself or provide confusing and contradictory information and see just what happens.

In the case of the vicious little murdering angels, they lied repeatedly and we only have the tip of the proverbial iceberg. They said they were in bed until 10:00 or 10:30. Proved to have been a lie. They said they had a late supper. Proved to have been a lie. Went to the city centre? Spilled the water on the floor and left it overnight? Having sex while activating unknown log files on his MacBook? Where does it start or stop?

The loads of crap they kept feeding the police would have landed them in prison in Canada, the UK, or even *gasp* the USA.


OK; still didn't think they'd fling you in prison........Rudy did far worse things in Milan and the Police didn't seem even slightly concerned. However, as you rightly point out there's lying and then relentless lying.

SA would call them criminals who just weren't good at what they did.


I know what you're trying to say but, in all honesty, nothing Guede did or said in Milan was remotely similar to the endless stream of horseshit Knox and Sollecito were expecting the Perugia police to swallow down. Even though we only have media reports of Guede's "activities", it doesn't appear that he provided the police information they could interpret as outright lies. In fact, we don't know that he didn't find a place to crash after paying someone 50 euros, or that he'd acquired some computer equipment through an unknown contact. It all sounds very suspicious to me but I'd allay judgement until I had all the information. The "best" information is all from some rather speculative sources.

This speculation falls straight into the FOA trap. They want you to think that Guede lied to the police and got away with it. All they're missing, of course, is evidence.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline smacker


User avatar


Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:33 pm

Posts: 399

Location: The King's Head, SW17

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 10:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Not sure I suggested RG lied; RG was caught red handed and got away with it, but that was breaking and entering, not murder.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Hammerite


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 3:46 pm

Posts: 517

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

bedelia wrote:
Well I'm off to court today to emotionally support my husband! He is asking the court to emancipate his 23 and 21 yr old sons. Their mother is fighting it tooth and nail as her own lawyer. My husband is still paying child support to her for both of them, even though the older one was living with us for the last 8 months!

Cape, good luck with your baby! My thoughts are with you!

The Bard, I'm glad your husband is feeling better. I hope the surgery will end these kinds of scares. Best of luck to you!

I'm feeling positive for both court appearances - my husband's and the Meredith Kercher appeal's! Fingers crossed!


Hi bedilia,

A sincere message of goodwill from a fan of yours from afar; your posts are always grounded in sincerity, an admirable quality in these harsh times on the net.

Best wishes for your upcoming court appearances.

H
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Hammerite


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 3:46 pm

Posts: 517

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Hi Cape,

Sorry to hear of your bambinos misfortune.

The good news is that modern medicine has rendered treatment to be hugely successful.

Very best wishes and personal regards to you.

H
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Hammerite


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 3:46 pm

Posts: 517

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Hi 411,

Great news about the beloved k9.

Somehow I always get the impression when reading your posts (which are extremely enjoyable) that you occupy the Latin Quarter of PMF (something to do with FREE SPIRIT & WAY OUT THERE' ism.). Long may you continue.

H
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline lisareik


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:42 pm

Posts: 62

Location: Israel

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Michael wrote:
Knox lawyers confident ahead of appeal in Italy .
Friday, 21 January 2011 19:31 Mohideen Mifthah

THE TIMES



The Times of Sri Lanka?
Aside from all the untruths bandied about, the writer cites one unheard of "retired doctor of medicine" sounding in on the case as his grand finale.

What has haened to journalism, or has it always been this lowbrow.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline norbertc


User avatar


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 1:16 am

Posts: 307

Location: France

Highscores: 2

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

The Machine wrote:
Michael wrote:
Knox lawyers confident ahead of appeal in Italy .
Friday, 21 January 2011 19:31 Mohideen Mifthah

THE TIMES


They were also confident before the trial.


Seriously, what defense lawyer is going to say:

"Well, the prosecution's case looks airtight to me. My client is in deep trouble. On the other hand, a 26-year jail sentence means lots of time for Amanda to perfect her Italian."

.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

From UmbriaJournal:

Meredith: Tomorrow experts in court in the Knox-Sollecito appeal trial to receive the task of DNA.

The two experts, Stefano Conti and Carla Vecchiotti, from La Sapienza University of Rome, chosen by the Court of Assizes for the genetics testing of the bra clasp and the knife at the core of the trial of Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox for the murder of Meredith Kercher, will be tomorrow morning, January 22 2011, in court to receive the assignment. The questions for which they will be call upon to respond were already indicated by the rule on December 18, when the judges accepted the request of the legal defenders of the two accused by agreeing to the examination. Conti and Vecchiotti “if possible, by new lab testing” they should be attributing the DNA present on the hook of the bra worn by Kercher when she was killed (victim's mixed with that of Sollecito, according to the scientific police tests) and the knife (victim’s and Knox, according to tests carried out so far).

If a new test does prove not possible, (to be carry out by the genetic material of the samples) the Court has asked the experts to assess “on the basis of the documents on file” the level of reliability on the genetic findings carried out by the scientific police on the exhibits. Regarding even a possible contamination. Its likely that the experts, as it often happens, will ask the court for 60 or 90 days to provide their responses. Sollecito and Knox, sentenced at first instance to 25 and 26 years imprisonment, have always claimed of being innocent of the Kercher murder. Their defences have repeatedly contested the reliability of the results obtained by the scientific police, even hypothesizing a contamination of the evidence. Tomorrow the Assize Court of Appeal will also establish the timetable on the basis of which testimonies are to be allowed to be examined in relation to the homeless Antonio Curatolo’s statement regarding the presence of the two youths near the crime house on the evening of November 1 2007 when Kercher was killed.
UmbriaJournal
Top Profile 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

A bit OT)))))))) d-))

Try as I might to keep up with the board, the posts fly by. I must have missed the discussion about the ABSOLUTELY STUNNING NEW PICTURE AT THE TOP OF THE PMF FORUM!!!!!

Is this a PIKTOR original? BRAVO! I just LOVE it! hugz-)

To all who are dealing with angst and stress, sending good thoughts from Seattle...

_________________
“If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything” ~Mark Twain~
Top Profile 

Offline Hammerite


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 3:46 pm

Posts: 517

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Hi Bard,

Cripes, Mr Bard is attracting more than his fair share of misfortune. My best wishes to you and no doubt the collective goodwill of the PMF community are bestowed on you and your clan in these difficult times.

On a lighter note it might be worth trying something that always works for me when my PC is suffering glitches. No reason why it shouldn’t work for Mr Bard also...no charge.

You simple turn Mr Bard off and on and ...PRESTO...everything is fixed, something to do with re-booting or the like.

On second thoughts it might be best to run this by “Drive By Doc” here.

On further reflection it might be even wiser to run this by SA, TomM, Lex, Jackie, Mignini just in case.

Kind personal regards.

H


Last edited by Hammerite on Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline lisareik


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:42 pm

Posts: 62

Location: Israel

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

smacker wrote:
I thought I'd fling a familial woe into today's medical melting pot.

My 'middle' daughter is 17 and has suffered from Anorexia Nervosa since July of last year. She was admitted to hospital as an emergency case since her blood sugar level had dropped so low she would not have survived the night had she made it to bed. She actually passed out at around 7pm and that saved her life.

She has now recovered her weight loss and has a provisional discharge date of April 21st from an Eating Disorder Hospital in England. We live apart and she hasn't spoken to me since last July.

Delighted as I am that she may see an opportunity to start to lead a normal life again she still struggles with weight gain and counts every calorie. This is also a terrible illness !


I am sorry to haer about yourdaughter's illness.
I apologize for wiritng you a PM as well; I thought it would be too personal for the board.

As a practicing psychologist I would ask that you consider professional treatment for yourself, as well as your daugher who is receiving psychological support for er condition.
I would encourage you to seek a group of mothers/parents of anorexic girls to share experience and wisdom and hopefully guides for finding the light in the darkness.
I do believe family issues play an important role in underlying issue in this illness.

I would be happy to offer you online support if you have questions or wish to respond to my letter. I live in Israel, so writing is my best suggestion.

I wish you and your daughter well; that she make a full recovery and that you both learn and grow from this experience.

Sincerely,

Lisa Reik
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Tara wrote:
A bit OT)))))))) d-))

Try as I might to keep up with the board, the posts fly by. I must have missed the discussion about the ABSOLUTELY STUNNING NEW PICTURE AT THE TOP OF THE PMF FORUM!!!!!

Is this a PIKTOR original? BRAVO! I just LOVE it! hugz-)

To all who are dealing with angst and stress, sending good thoughts from Seattle...


Hello Tara,
yes, that is a PIKTOR ORIGINAL. :D

There was no discussion about it. :D

The other day I sent him a PM asking if he could make us a new banner.
I received it this evening, I edited a few files on the server and I uploaded it only a few minutes ago.
It's amazing.

Thank you so much Piktor.
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 21, 2011 11:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Tara wrote:
A bit OT)))))))) d-))

Try as I might to keep up with the board, the posts fly by. I must have missed the discussion about the ABSOLUTELY STUNNING NEW PICTURE AT THE TOP OF THE PMF FORUM!!!!!

Is this a PIKTOR original? BRAVO! I just LOVE it! hugz-)

To all who are dealing with angst and stress, sending good thoughts from Seattle...


No, there was no discussion of this, Tara. These moderators seem to feel they can do as they please...
wor-)) :lol: wor-))
Top Profile 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Tara wrote:
A bit OT)))))))) d-))

Try as I might to keep up with the board, the posts fly by. I must have missed the discussion about the ABSOLUTELY STUNNING NEW PICTURE AT THE TOP OF THE PMF FORUM!!!!!

Is this a PIKTOR original? BRAVO! I just LOVE it! hugz-)

To all who are dealing with angst and stress, sending good thoughts from Seattle...


Thank you, Tara.

Clander is renewing PMF in ways seen and unseen. Yay-) He asked me to do the top image. :idea:

One has to be amazed at the beauty Italians created with stone. wor-))
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Wow! I just noticed the picture at the top.

THAT'S A LOVELY PICTURE! THANK YOU PIKTOR AND CLANDER FOR THAT BEAUTIFUL CONTRIBUTION TO THE BOARD . Yay-) cl-) cl-) cl-) tt-)


Last edited by Jools on Sat Jan 22, 2011 12:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Clander wrote:
Tara wrote:
A bit OT)))))))) d-))

Try as I might to keep up with the board, the posts fly by. I must have missed the discussion about the ABSOLUTELY STUNNING NEW PICTURE AT THE TOP OF THE PMF FORUM!!!!!

Is this a PIKTOR original? BRAVO! I just LOVE it! hugz-)

To all who are dealing with angst and stress, sending good thoughts from Seattle...


Hello Tara,
yes, that is a PIKTOR ORIGINAL. :D

There was no discussion about it. :D

The other day I sent him a PM asking if he could make us a new banner.
I received it this evening, I edited a few files on the server and I uploaded it only a few minutes ago.
It's amazing.

Thank you so much Piktor.


. cl-) cl-) THANK YOU, CLANDER, FOR ALL YOU ARE DOING AT PMF. cl-) cl-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
Tara wrote:
A bit OT)))))))) d-))

Try as I might to keep up with the board, the posts fly by. I must have missed the discussion about the ABSOLUTELY STUNNING NEW PICTURE AT THE TOP OF THE PMF FORUM!!!!!

Is this a PIKTOR original? BRAVO! I just LOVE it! hugz-)

To all who are dealing with angst and stress, sending good thoughts from Seattle...


No, there was no discussion of this, Tara. These moderators seem to feel they can do as they please...
wor-)) :lol: wor-))



THANK YOU DR. J. !!

For a moment, this old timer thought she was getting old timers. sun-)

_________________
“If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything” ~Mark Twain~
Top Profile 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

piktor wrote:
Tara wrote:
A bit OT)))))))) d-))

Try as I might to keep up with the board, the posts fly by. I must have missed the discussion about the ABSOLUTELY STUNNING NEW PICTURE AT THE TOP OF THE PMF FORUM!!!!!

Is this a PIKTOR original? BRAVO! I just LOVE it! hugz-)

To all who are dealing with angst and stress, sending good thoughts from Seattle...


Thank you, Tara.

Clander is renewing PMF in ways seen and unseen. Yay-) He asked me to do the top image. :idea:

One has to be amazed at the beauty Italians created with stone. wor-))


You're too modest, Piktor. The banner is gorgeous. Thank you so much for ALL the beauty you bring here.

CLANDER - THANK YOU AS WELL! tt-)

_________________
“If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything” ~Mark Twain~
Top Profile 

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 12:10 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

piktor wrote:
. cl-) cl-) THANK YOU, CLANDER, FOR ALL YOU ARE DOING AT PMF. cl-) cl-)


My pleasure always.

@TARA,
Thank you.

ETA:
clicking on the banner takes you to the forum main page.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 12:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

smacker wrote:
Not sure I suggested RG lied; RG was caught red handed and got away with it, but that was breaking and entering, not murder.


I'd simply ask you to read Massei pp 45ff. There is no evidence whatsoever that he was guilty of breaking and entering nor any evidence that he lied to the police. This is a standard FOA trope. I think that his previous adventures were suspicious but I don't have all the information. Neither do you and neither does the FOA. The police who asked him about his presence in the day-care centre and his possession of stolen property did have all the information and they were apparently not convinced that Guede was lying to them.

The FOA argue that he was caught breaking and entering and that he was proved to have lied to the police. They argue the same thing you do, in the main, and that the police should have had him arrested on at least three occasions prior to Meredith's murder. Did they have the evidence they needed?

What do you think Guede "got away with" in his previous encounters with the police?

I'm challenging you on this not out of a desire to be "right" or anything like that. I agree that Guede's activities were shady at best. Yet, I think that the FOA has been largely successful in convincing people--even us "guilters"--that Guede ought to have been arrested prior to Meredith's slaying. I just want to see the evidence from primary sources that this is the case.
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: Sat Jan 22, 2011 12:42 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

Nice banner.

Guarda che bello!
(Look! How lovely!)

Piktor, you've captured the music in the stone.
Perugia is a living city.

Well done, Clander, also.
Top Profile 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 12:42 am   Post subject: Re: XXI. MAIN DISCUSSION, DEC 21 -   

norbertc wrote:
The Machine wrote:
Michael wrote:
Knox lawyers confident ahead of appeal in Italy .
Friday, 21 January 2011 19:31 Mohideen Mifthah

THE TIMES


They were also confident before the trial.


Seriously, what defense lawyer is going to say:

"Well, the prosecution's case looks airtight to me. My client is in deep trouble. On the other hand, a 26-year jail sentence means lots of time for Amanda to perfect her Italian."

.


Knox appears to thrive in the structured environment that a long prison sentence offers. Her Italian is much better now and she'll have plenty of time to write and draw, without any distractions, for the next 26 years. Once strike two has come and gone, we'll probably be treated less of her hand turkey tracings but I suppose we'll become accustomed to such disappointment.
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 22, 2011 12:47 am   Post subject: LOCKING THREAD!   

picture of a pumpkin
This topic has been locked by a Moderator
Reason: I am now locking this thread. Please continue the discussion in the brand new main discussion thread: XXII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JAN 22 -

Thank You
Top Profile E-mail 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 14 of 14 [ 3425 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], The Machine 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 


29,421,582 Views