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: Wed Feb 21, 2018 5:22 am
It is currently Wed Feb 21, 2018 5:22 am
All times are UTC

Forum rules

VI. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 1 - Feb 28, 09

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


 Page 8 of 11 [ 2503 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next
Author Message

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 8:27 pm   Post subject:    

Welcome to Fence Sitter, who wrote:

Quote:
The impression I get is that Merediths friends and the italian roommates have painted a picture of a very chaste girl interested in only in studying, coming home at 9pm and not partying, and who did not really have a close relationship with amanda due to a vibrator, condomns or general toilet habits. The testimonies of the boys downstairs contradict this to some degree, stating there was no problems. The two girls were even hanging out with them together on several occasions, and on one they were out drunk or stoned together with the group at the disco together just a few weeks before meredith's death. On this night amanda had the famous one night stand with daniel, meredith started an affair (apparently not a relationship) with one of the boys downstairs. Amandas sex life and apparent promiscuity is highly publicised, and Merediths is not (likely out of respect for her, which I can understand). But lets be totally honest, this is normal behaviour for exchange students in this day and age, so why is there so much focus on merediths "chastity" and amandas "sluttiness" when both were doing what exchange students do? The presentation is not only prude but also artificial. Does anyone know if there is an english translation of the testimonies online?


I think your take on the girls' testimony may be a bit exaggerated. I don't think they meant that the relationship was bad because of those habits, only that those habits may have contributed to the way Meredith really felt about her flatmate. Meredith may have said things to her friends that she may not have felt comfortable vocalizing to the person she was displeased with. I don't even feel comfortable trying to imagine what Meredith may have felt to be honest. Many in-depth reports (for example, in Vanity Fair last May) have drawn a contrast between the two that I think comes out in the testimony. Amanda herself is quoted as saying Meredith was studious and quiet. As for the boys downstairs, they are boys and as such probably less in tune to underlying tensions that may exist between girls.
It looks to me as if the two did some socializing but were not close.

I also think you are overreaching by stating that Meredith was not in a relationship with Giacomo. They unfortunately did not have time to take their relationship much further because Meredith was killed, but I don't think that means they were having an "affair" as opposed to a relationship.

As for Meredith's reputation as a "prude," this may in part be because she was shocked that Amanda already had taken up with a guy (as she told her dad - he is quoted as saying this). Plus, we now have testimony that Meredith was a little shocked or maybe disapproved of Amanda's open relationship or whatever it was with DJ. From the evidence available, it sounds as if Meredith was a fairly conservative person in matters of the heart. As Laura has testified, she said she disapproved of cheating and would never do it.

Unfortunately, Meredith is not here to clarify any of these things. I can only speak for myself, but can I ask that you not write about her in a way that is disrespectful? She has no way of ever setting the record straight for herself.
In fact, calling Meredith a "prude" or Amanda a "slut" just does not fly here. That kind of Madonna/Whore dichotomy has been used to keep women down for centuries and I don't think the tone of this board and its posters has ever played into that.

FS wrote:
Quote:
Amanda and Meredith met Rudy downstairs. That means that Meredith knew at least one (probably all) of her killers. Although there a ton of evidence to refute the lone wolf theory, is it impossible that meredith would have opened the door if he rang first and the others came later?


The boys downstairs and Laura testified that Meredith would probably not even have opened the door for someone she had met briefly if she was home alone. She apparently had a reputation for being very cautious.

FS wrote:

Quote:
What do the boys downstairs say about Rudy's character? or was that not a topic due to the fast track trial?


They did not testify at his trial insofar as I know. We do have anecdotal testimony from a former poster here, O8, whose son was studying in Perugia and who hung out with Rudy. He says people liked Rudy. Character witnesses were called to speak at this trial - you can read all about it in press reports.

FS wrote:

Quote:
Has it been established in court that the police really arrived before Raffeale made the call on nov 2?


There is more testimony from police to come, but it is established for most people and has been for a long time. But in some quarters, there is an intense desire to keep that one in doubt. In the same quarters, you hear things like "Laura was bullied by police into noticing the scratch." There is an explanation for every new piece of information, and it generally entails police brutality or incompetence or an evil prosecutor who believes in witches. People who get their information from that factory are bound to be confused.

Incidentally, the PI blog devoted to Amanda Knox claimed for months that Silenzi (or was it Bonassi) was a tainted witness because he accepted money from a UK tabloid. This sparked a discussion revealing that the blogger had no proof but was relying on the fact that it was an exclusive and the tabloids pay for those. In fact, I have been told that each witness at the trial so far has been asked whether or not they have been paid to give information to the media and all have passed the test.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline mojo


Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:31 pm

Posts: 225

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 8:55 pm   Post subject:    

give me strength... :roll: Meredith Kercher murder house ransacked by intruders

<snip>

The cottage has been sealed off since the crime. Police said they were investigating whether the break-in was the result of a "Satanic ritual" or a "message in code" relating to the killing. Ms Kercher's throat was allegedly slit by a kitchen knife found at Mr Sollecito's flat, and Ms Knox and Mr Sollecito are accused of smashing a window to make it look as if Ms Kercher was attacked by a burglar.

Francesco Maresca, the Italian lawyer for the Kercher family, said he was "astonished and appalled. I hope the matter will be cleared up as soon as possible".
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 8:57 pm   Post subject:    

FenceSitter wrote:
Hi! thank you here at the site (and at TJMK) for providing and translating so much information pertaining to the case. I have only been following things since the trial started in Jan. Seems to be quite bizarre in many regards. I am trying to focuss only on the evidence, but I am starting to get a bit frusterated with the conflicting information that is out there, especially since the beginning of the trial as things should have become more clear with the testimonies. I have a couple of questions - maybe some of you who have been following this longer, and/or speak italian can help? Please dont misunderstand me if my questions seem harsh, I feel terribly for Meredith and her family, and hope that they can find some sort of closure.

- The impression I get is that Merediths friends and the italian roommates have painted a picture of a very chaste girl interested in only in studying, coming home at 9pm and not partying, and who did not really have a close relationship with amanda due to a vibrator, condomns or general toilet habits. The testimonies of the boys downstairs contradict this to some degree, stating there was no problems. The two girls were even hanging out with them together on several occasions, and on one they were out drunk or stoned together with the group at the disco together just a few weeks before meredith's death. On this night amanda had the famous one night stand with daniel, meredith started an affair (apparently not a relationship) with one of the boys downstairs. Amandas sex life and apparent promiscuity is highly publicised, and Merediths is not (likely out of respect for her, which I can understand). But lets be totally honest, this is normal behaviour for exchange students in this day and age, so why is there so much focus on merediths "chastity" and amandas "sluttiness" when both were doing what exchange students do? The presentation is not only prude but also artificial. Does anyone know if there is an english translation of the testimonies online?

- Amanda and Meredith met Rudy downstairs. That means that Meredith knew at least one (probably all) of her killers. Although there a ton of evidence to refute the lone wolf theory, is it impossible that meredith would have opened the door if he rang first and the others came later?

- what do the boys downstairs say about Rudy's character? or was that not a topic due to the fast track trial?

- has it been established in court that the police really arrived before Raffeale made the call on nov 2?

thanks :) keep up the good discussion forum!


Hi Fencesitter,

Meredith’s friends and Italian roommates are not painting any pictures about chastity or sluttiness. They haven’t said that Meredith never went partying, I think that you will find that they gave details of places where she went drinking and dancing, never said that she came home every night at 9pm. That she was interested in her studies, yes, but what chastity has to do with that?

There is nothing normal about amanda’s “sluttiness” behaviour not before or after as an exchange student. Have you seen what she is written about her sexual escapades either before or after being arrested? If you haven’t perhaps you should read it (you will find it somewhere in this board) and then you tell us whether you think if that is the normal behaviour for anybody let alone one who is only 20 years old.
To have sex with a stranger on a train, multiple one night stands without using protection, she sure took a lot of risks… Is this for you normal student behaviour?
She is either ignorant or a slut or both.

This presentation of her “sluttines” that you mentioned is very much due to her writings on her myspace open site and her family leaking parts of her prison diary to sympathetic bloggers or to a certain Seattle judge who then with the help of a Seattle lawyer decided to put out in their FOA blog for the whole world to see.
As you said it is your impression but is not what happened at the trial.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 9:02 pm   Post subject:    

SH 2000 wrote:

Quote:
I was cracking up because Nancy Grace, Geraldo, Greta, etc all said to the FOA they were interviewing that they were told directly from the Police that there is significant evidence (both circumstantial and physical) against Amanda… the response from FOA members on live TV… “that is not true…they have NO evidence whatsoever, Amanda never changed her story she was very clear from day one, that confession?...oh that..that was nothing its not admissible… blah blah blah”… and the host of the show are like WTF!!???? who gave me this info..OMG this poor girl…Italians are so mean and stupid…. So the host who has no other information gives them a pass.
And they think people will believe the bullshit they are spewing? Really pisses me off.
Tell the truth and “let justice be done though the heavens may fall”


I've been thinking about your post since I saw it last night. Aside from making me laugh, it also made me think about the role the US media is playing in this case. As you say, the host who has not done his or her homework gives people a pass and as a result fails to inform viewers of anything. The local media in Seattle has done the same thing. Some reporter is told to write a story and goes to the FOA website for information, stopping there. No digging. I know the media is in crisis and people who still have jobs are poorly paid, but still. Wouldn't you be driven to take things a little further just out of curiosity? Never mind the need to provide some balance.

It is so refreshing to read reports filed by people who actually know what they're talking about, are versed in Italian, understand how the process works, are undeterred by bullshit and keep digging, etc.

Also, I was wondering where Paul Ciolino had gone? He made lots of noise in Seattle, got a local reporter in hot water, got frozen "live" by Geraldo Rivera, and has not been seen or heard from since. Is it possible he's still sitting on Salty's deck, frozen like a fish stick and waiting to hear Geraldo's voice?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline FenceSitter


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:29 pm

Posts: 16

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 9:14 pm   Post subject:    

Thanks, Skeptical Bystander, for your response. I am sorry if I seemed like I was being disrespectful to meredith, that was not my intention at all.

"In fact, calling Meredith a "prude" or Amanda a "slut" just does not fly here. That kind of Madonna/Whore dichotomy has been used to keep women down for centuries and I don't think the tone of this board and its posters has ever played into that."

That is exactly my complaint with the information currently available (not with this board but in the press), and that is why I used quotation marks. I was trying to make it clear that I am not a fan of the branding that seems to be going on in the press based on the sex lives of those involved, but sorry if that was misunderstood. As a woman myself, I find it extremely uncomfortable how message is being projected and find it distracting.

I am interested in the facts - thats why I wanted to know if there are full copies of the testimonies online.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 9:35 pm   Post subject:    

FS wrote:

Quote:
That is exactly my complaint with the information currently available (not with this board but in the press), and that is why I used quotation marks. I was trying to make it clear that I am not a fan of the branding that seems to be going on in the press based on the sex lives of those involved, but sorry if that was misunderstood. As a woman myself, I find it extremely uncomfortable how message is being projected and find it distracting.


If you stay away from the tabloids and the US press (except Barbie Nadeau and Andrea Vogt, both in Italy, both clearly fluent in Italian), I think you can get the information in fairly straightforward fashion. I would be amazed if the transcripts were available, however.

I hope you understand why I reacted to your post as I did. Comparisons between the two seem wrong. I think the best sense of what the relationship between the two women may have been like is provided by Knox herself, in her email home. It also says loads about Knox, and is totally unfiltered by the press.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline FenceSitter


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:29 pm

Posts: 16

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 9:36 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Jools - thanks for your answer. dont get me wrong - I dont find amandas behaviour normal to any degree. Several judges think so. The multiple alibies, the bizarre and detached group email a few days after the murder, the apparent compulsive lying and self absorbed behaviour also point to her being a bit wacky. I just find the focus on sex bizarre. I find the drug aspect that has come up interesting. Does anyone know if the suspects have been tested? Maybe something like acid could induce violent tendencies if there were a group who collectively tripped?
Top Profile 

Offline disillusioned


Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:18 pm

Posts: 5

Location: NZ

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 9:48 pm   Post subject:    

I would just like to weigh in briefly regarding AK's statement "...and used their hairdryer to obviously dry my hair..." This is clearly not the case, as many have pointed out. In addition, it is clear from the bags under her eyes that she has had little sleep. A shower also gets the capillaries running, often helping to alleviate the tired, drawn look, and even the bags under the eyes.

Re: the class-A drug hypothesis.
I have taken a snippet from Wiki regarding the effects of methamphetamine:
The various physical effects include increased energy, change in libido...insomnia, dilated pupils, increased heart rate, increased blood pressure, dry mouth, etc.
The psychological effects include euphoria, dysphoria, increased attention, increased alertness, excessive talking, rapid speech, irritability, nervousness, anxiety, paranoia, delusions of grandeur, panic, aggressive and sometimes violent behavior, severe depression, suicidal tendencies, hyperactivity and excitability, increased sense of well-being, and emotional lability.

Also: Users may exhibit sexually compulsive behaviour while under the influence...Among the effects reported by methamphetamine users are increased libido and sexual pleasure...In addition to increasing the need for sex and enabling the user to engage in prolonged sexual activity, methamphetamine lowers inhibitions and may cause users to behave recklessly or to become forgetful.

The use of a drug such as this cannot be discounted, especially since it can lower inhibitions, boost sexual desire and lead to aggressive, even violent behavior. In addition, the behavior of AK the following day, especially at the police station, makes more sense if we assume she was on a hard-core come-down (excessive talking, nervousness, anxiety, delusions of grandeur, etc.). It is very difficult to act normally the morning after a night of drug taking under ordinary circumstances, let-alone one such as this.

I tried to get a closer view of AK's eyes in the pictures taken the morning after outside the cottage, but it was too difficult to see whether her pupils were dilated. At first look, they don't seem to be, but then again, I wonder how long it takes for the pupils to come back to normal. I know they can stay dilated up until the next evening close to 24 hours later, but this varies widely depending on individual and other factors. Dilation may also only last 6-8 hours. With heroin, pupils constrict, but the effects of this drug are vastly different from meth.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 9:48 pm   Post subject:    

FS wrote:

Quote:
But lets be totally honest, this is normal behaviour for exchange students in this day and age, so why is there so much focus on merediths "chastity" and amandas "sluttiness" when both were doing what exchange students do?


Just out of curiosity, what cultural framework are you looking at things from? I ask because one thing that has hit home since I returned to the US after a long time abroad is how the whole "girls gone wild" and "desperate housewives" mindsets have permeated American culture and influenced what is considered to be acceptable, sexually liberated behavior on the part of women. 30 Rock does a great job of lampooning one aspect of it with the MILF (Moms I'd Like to Fuck) Island reality show created by Liz Lemon's boss. The idea is that a bunch of 12-year old boys are on an island with "hot moms," with only one left standing at the end.

One aspect of this tragedy that has not been given adequate consideration - indeed, that may be impossible - is to what degree Knox's behavior would have seemed perfectly normal in her culture, but would seem inappropriate viewed from the prism of another. My guess, and it is only that, is that some of Knox's weird ways (the guitar playing, the yoga poses) would appear perfectly normal to her group of friends in Seattle. I'm talking about the faux hippie types. Not all Seattelites are like that - far from it. I for one would find it downright bizarre if someone started doing yoga poses out of the blue, but I can see that somewhere in Seattle it could happen without raising an eyebrow. As for playing the same chord over and over, my husband does that because he likes to think of himself as a guitar player. He doesn't do it while I'm listening to the radio or talking to him, however.

I must say, though, seeing the t-shirt was kind of a shocker. It just looked so terribly inappropriate on every level. It is hard to write that off as being a Seattle thing. And I am also surprised that Knox chose to make her debut on the stand to talk about the vibrator. I can think of a million better ways to make the point that you aren't the loose woman you have been portrayed as.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 9:53 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Also, I was wondering where Paul Ciolino had gone? He made lots of noise in Seattle, got a local reporter in hot water, got frozen "live" by Geraldo Rivera, and has not been seen or heard from since.


I think Paul is waiting for his last invoice to be paid before he does any further work for FOA.

My suggestion to FOA would be to contract their "experts" not on a hourly or time basis, but rather on the basis of results achieved (for example, through an audience test, where a Nielsen-type company asks CBS viewers: did this man convince you of anything?)

And if they continue to work with Paul, FOA should buy him a new video camera to replace his old Betamax, with longer lasting batteries, so that he can finally do the acoustic test of running up the metal stairs.

Top Profile 

Offline Ferret


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:21 am

Posts: 101

Location: Hidden Hills, CA

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:02 pm   Post subject:    

FenceSitter wrote:
Hi Jools - thanks for your answer. dont get me wrong - I dont find amandas behaviour normal to any degree. Several judges think so. The multiple alibies, the bizarre and detached group email a few days after the murder, the apparent compulsive lying and self absorbed behaviour also point to her being a bit wacky. I just find the focus on sex bizarre. I find the drug aspect that has come up interesting. Does anyone know if the suspects have been tested? Maybe something like acid could induce violent tendencies if there were a group who collectively tripped?


I think there is a focus on sex, because everyone has an opinion about it. People are comparing their sexual mores to Amanda's sexual history. The British but mainly the Italian media have gone rabid about Amanda as a "Huntress of Men"(cacciatrice d'uomini). Combine with Meredith being sexually assaulted when she was murdered. Amanda is young and kind of attractive, so it just makes good tabloid headlines, ditto with the victim. Also a great way to sell newspaper is some sort lurid sexual crime with an attractive perpetrator.

To me, the only reason to discuss Amanda's sexual proclivities, is to find out if it fits as a symptom of a personality disorder, or if she has something else serious like a schizo-affective disorder(s). If her sexual history a sign that she is acting out some sort problem.

I don't remember when her mother got married to Chris Mellas, but I think it is around the time Amanda was a young teenager, that could be confusing time for Amanda, and how she interacted with Chris could cause problems with intimacy and sexual anxiety. I don't know the details or I am not interested in finding them out, but I guess I am more interested in how she was brought up, if she had identity problems, had male role models issues.

I am remember reading, perhaps in "The Stranger" weekly in Seattle, that Amanda played some sort April Fool's prank near U-Dub, in which she staged a mock robbery? or some sort of break in, I forgot what, perhaps I am making all this up.. If the prank was true, I think that gives more of opening of what makes Amanda tick than her flings.

I don't know if she is a pathological liar, but people with NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder) tend to be proud of the lies they come up with, to show how superior to mere mortals who have to wallow in the truth and manners that don't apply to super beings like people with NPD. Amanda could be also showing signs and symptoms of Histrionic Personality Disorder, giving her acting out to those around her, the time she was in the police station with Meredith's friends, showed someone who wanted the focus on herself.


Last edited by Ferret on Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline petafly


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:08 pm

Posts: 278

Location: Switzerland/Germany

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:09 pm   Post subject:    

I just thought about the character of the two girls and a possible quarrel and escalation. And the good-girl bad-girl thing doesnt work for me.
I can't (and i don't want to) imagine they tortured and killed Meredith just because the situation between the girls got bitchy. Why would i.e. Rudy do that? Let the girls fight. Uptied girls are nothing unusual. I'stoned. It' fun. I'm fine.

Meredith must have been a real threat for all of them. For example if she was going to call the police (in my drug theory), a serious situation emerges for Rudy (he would go to jail), for Raffaele (would get trouble with his Dad and the police) and for Amanda (the trip in Italy would be over once and for all).

They absolutely had to stop her no matter the cost.

peter
Top Profile 

Offline Jumpy


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 4:27 pm

Posts: 231

Location: US

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:18 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Ferret,
I remember reading about the mock breakin. It was from a message board written by a guy who went to school with Amanda. Then, poof, disappeared.

Here is hoping that as the trial progresses we might be able to put this idea to rest, one way or another.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:19 pm   Post subject:    

Kermit wrote:

Quote:
I think Paul is waiting for his last invoice to be paid before he does any further work for FOA.


You mean he isn't working pro bono, like he said?

One of Paul's memorable phrases went through my head as I read summaries of the testimony given by the boys donwstairs: "Amanda don't know Rudy; Raffaele don't know Rudy." It probably served as the basis for one of the ten FOA commandments, ie, There is no evidence that Amanda knew Rudy.

I was once told she "knew of" Rudy, but I could never quite figure out what that was supposed to mean.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline FenceSitter


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:29 pm

Posts: 16

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:23 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:

Just out of curiosity, what cultural framework are you looking at things from? .


Maybe I was misunderstood - I didnt want to label anyone as chaste or slutty. I am a canadian who has been in europe for 10 years. I find it weird to judge women (or people, but somehow it is more often women) on their sexual behaviour. Period. I have read Knox's blogs and such, but that aspect just doesnt interest me or strike me as particulary remarkable in comparison to the rest of her strange actions. But I agree with you.

Skeptical Bystander wrote:

One aspect of this tragedy that has not been given adequate consideration - indeed, that may be impossible - is to what degree Knox's behavior would have seemed perfectly normal in her culture, but would seem inappropriate viewed from the prism of another. My guess, and it is only that, is that some of Knox's weird ways (the guitar playing, the yoga poses) would appear perfectly normal to her group of friends in Seattle.


I agree with you here. It is difficult here to distinguish whether this was a wacky, fun loving girl and somebody who may actually be dangerously derranged. I guess the lying, the deceit and the framing of innocent people is more clear cut.

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
I must say, though, seeing the t-shirt was kind of a shocker. It just looked so terribly inappropriate on every level.


Based on her own writing, she just doesnt seem to be overly bright or perceptive. And extremely self absorbed (although blog entries may have that about them). Maybe it was simply a sign to her dad - he gave it to her, didnt he? But terribly misplaced and inappropriate. But that is another thing about the coverage that bothers me - ok, the shirt was strange, but I want to know what was said in the testimonies! I had to read A LOT of news reports just to collect a handful of details.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:30 pm   Post subject:    

Jumpy wrote:

Quote:
Hi Ferret,
I remember reading about the mock breakin. It was from a message board written by a guy who went to school with Amanda. Then, poof, disappeared.

Here is hoping that as the trial progresses we might be able to put this idea to rest, one way or another.


Hey Jumpy and Ferret: Here's what I can tell you for sure. The comment was left on the slog by a guy with a facebook account. I signed up for facebook and got him to contact me. He said that he had been told this story by a guy he was working with at the time who was one of Knox's housemates (in the house where the wild party took place). He confirmed that the story told to him was of a fake break-in and kidnapping, with Knox (and co-perps) wearing face/ski masks. He said he had no reason to doubt the guy but he had lost touch with him because they no longer worked together. I have the name of this person but do not want to give it out here, for fear his life could be made miserable by people who don't want him to talk about that stuff. I haven't tried to contact him, for reasons I don't want to go into here. Thank goodness Charlie Wilkes isn't around to give me shit about not disclosing certain information about people on a public board.

I just think it is wrong to give out people's names without their permission. But naturally, I bear no grudge against the nice people who have given out my name, posted a photo of me, told everyone who my husband is, linked to my personal blog, etc. Actually, they have done me a world of good. Now Hollywood, Bollywood, Wall Street, the Paris Bourse, the Cirque du Soleil, the Big Apple Circus, the NY Yankees, the Philadelphia Eagles and numerous other legendary famous insitutions are calling me day and night. Not to mention a half dozen publishing houses, The New York Times and the Nobel Museum people who do those prizes. Question: would I be better off with a Nobel or a Pulitzer?

But enough about me!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Principessa Etrusca


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 12:15 am

Posts: 33

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:32 pm   Post subject:    

Hi to all!

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Although I have never been able to find it again (and indeed may have imagined it), I once saw an article early on stating that police believed Knox and Sollecito (and Rudy?) were in Knox's room when the trouble began or escalated out of control. I don't know how they would know, perhaps it has something to do with the clean-up of her room. Anyway, it fits with your scenario. A drug deal was going down or had just gone down, maybe the drugs were in the process of being consumed.


According to that version which I too remember reading about, Meredith had gone into Knox’s room and confronted her there, possibly about the missing money (or about something else).

Obviously, whatever happened in that room would have directly incriminated Knox and it was the reason for the thorough clean-up: if nothing significant had happened there, no clean up would have been necessary and normal traces of Knox’s presence would have been preserved.
Top Profile 

Offline Jumpy


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 4:27 pm

Posts: 231

Location: US

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:38 pm   Post subject:    

Nope, I don't expect you to throw out a name. Quite the no-no.

But if this did happen I hope it comes out.

Okay, next subject.

:-)
Top Profile 

Offline Ferret


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:21 am

Posts: 101

Location: Hidden Hills, CA

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:45 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Jumpy wrote:

Quote:
Hi Ferret,
I remember reading about the mock breakin. It was from a message board written by a guy who went to school with Amanda. Then, poof, disappeared.

Here is hoping that as the trial progresses we might be able to put this idea to rest, one way or another.


Hey Jumpy and Ferret: Here's what I can tell you for sure. The comment was left on the slog by a guy with a facebook account. I signed up for facebook and got him to contact me. He said that he had been told this story by a guy he was working with at the time who was one of Knox's housemates (in the house where the wild party took place). He confirmed that the story told to him was of a fake break-in and kidnapping, with Knox (and co-perps) wearing face/ski masks. He said he had no reason to doubt the guy but he had lost touch with him because they no longer worked together. I have the name of this person but do not want to give it out here, for fear his life could be made miserable by people who don't want him to talk about that stuff. I haven't tried to contact him, for reasons I don't want to go into here. Thank goodness Charlie Wilkes isn't around to give me shit about not disclosing certain information about people on a public board.


Thanks for the response Skep. I just remember reading the mock break in once, and could never find it again, or more specifically a verifiable source. If the rumor can't be verified, then it is immaterial to this case.. I guess I am always looking at motivation of crimes, and this case perplexes me on motivation, . and I am leery in believing the prosecution's motive for the murder.

About a certain Mr. Wilkes, I have dealt with his Alice in Wonderland paradigm on the Usenet about this case, and he pulled that "I have seen privilege information that shows I am right, but I can't show it to you, because it is super secret" argument, a couple times, mainly about the direct evidence. He also relies on the FOA deductive reasoning defense, (Amanda is a good girl, good girls don't murder, so Amanda is innocent.)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:55 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Principessa Etrusca - nice to see you again.

PE wrote:

Quote:
Obviously, whatever happened in that room would have directly incriminated Knox and it was the reason for the thorough clean-up: if nothing significant had happened there, no clean up would have been necessary and normal traces of Knox’s presence would have been preserved.


If the room was cleaned, then there can be no doubt that something happened in there.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline mistercrunch


Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 2:43 pm

Posts: 160

Location: Germany

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:55 pm   Post subject:    

petafly wrote:
I just thought about the character of the two girls and a possible quarrel and escalation. And the good-girl bad-girl thing doesnt work for me.
I can't (and i don't want to) imagine they tortured and killed Meredith just because the situation between the girls got bitchy. Why would i.e. Rudy do that? Let the girls fight. Uptied girls are nothing unusual. I'stoned. It' fun. I'm fine.

Meredith must have been a real threat for all of them. For example if she was going to call the police (in my drug theory), a serious situation emerges for Rudy (he would go to jail), for Raffaele (would get trouble with his Dad and the police) and for Amanda (the trip in Italy would be over once and for all).

They absolutely had to stop her no matter the cost.

peter


To call the police, or at least to suggest that you have to call the police now, could be the result of an (in step 1 verbal) escalation, so my scenario and your example may fit together. But that is just a guess how this tragedy could have started, it doesn´t explain the sexual/rape-element of that crime.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 11:00 pm   Post subject:    

Ferret wrote:

Quote:
Thanks for the response Skep. I just remember reading the mock break in once, and could never find it again, or more specifically a verifiable source. If the rumor can't be verified, then it is immaterial to this case.. I guess I am always looking at motivation of crimes, and this case perplexes me on motivation, . and I am leery in believing the prosecution's motive for the murder.


I'm not sure there is a motive for this set of crimes that makes sense. The role of drugs is one of the great question marks.

Ferret added:

Quote:
About a certain Mr. Wilkes, I have dealt with his Alice in Wonderland paradigm on the Usenet about this case, and he pulled that "I have seen privilege information that shows I am right, but I can't show it to you, because it is super secret" argument, a couple times, mainly about the direct evidence. He also relies on the FOA deductive reasoning defense, (Amanda is a good girl, good girls don't murder, so Amanda is innocent.)


I think old Charlie actually helped Paul Ciolino forge the main tenets of the defense. I hear they used Occam's Razor, though Paul didn't know what it was so Charlie had to explain it to him.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline mistercrunch


Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 2:43 pm

Posts: 160

Location: Germany

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 11:04 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:

If the room was cleaned, then there can be no doubt that something happened in there.


Or at least, AK´s room was cleaned to make sure that there is no evidence that they did NOT stay at RS´s place all night long. Assuming that this is the pre-decided alibi.
Top Profile 

Offline petafly


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:08 pm

Posts: 278

Location: Switzerland/Germany

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 11:21 pm   Post subject:    

Quote:
it doesn´t explain the sexual/rape-element of that crime.


I think the rape is staged, but they humiliated her sexually, yes. Perhaps as a attempt at intimidation. The reason why i think the rape is staged is a) there would be much more stains on her body b) never heard of a mixed group rape c) the bedroom is so narrow, they couldnt have moved too much.

I wonder if the police reconstructs the cleanup. The pattern of the cleanup alone probably speaks volumes.
Top Profile 

ugehring


PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 11:47 pm   Post subject: Charlie Wilkes was replaced by Harry Wilkens !   

Didn't you notice that since Charlie Wilkes disappeared, that weird guy Harry Wilkens took over? How comes that Wilkens knows about the cigarette butts left behind by the intruders of this strange "Black Mass"?
Top

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:05 am   Post subject: TG5   

TG5 seems to say that 3 cigarette butts were found on the floor, the knives were from Knox's suitcase under her bed? (Weren't these taken as evidence?), and a duvet that belonged to Amanda was in Meredith's room? Also, a candle WAS burned in Meredith's room?

HELP ITALIAN TRANSLATORS!

THANKS SO MUCH!

TG5
Top Profile 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:14 am   Post subject: ASCA article   

Here's another recent article from ASCA. I won't google translate, but there is something about an envelope with "Police" written on it, and the envelope contained a knife?

A translation would be great! Thanks

ASCA
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2316

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:44 am   Post subject:    

petafly wrote:
Quote:
it doesn´t explain the sexual/rape-element of that crime.


I think the rape is staged, but they humiliated her sexually, yes. Perhaps as a attempt at intimidation. The reason why i think the rape is staged is a) there would be much more stains on her body b) never heard of a mixed group rape c) the bedroom is so narrow, they couldnt have moved too much.

I wonder if the police reconstructs the cleanup. The pattern of the cleanup alone probably speaks volumes.


Hi Peter,

Rudy Guede was convicted of sexually assaulting Meredith. Judge Paolo Micheli believed the penetration was manual. The medical examiner wasn't sure whether the penetration was genital or manual. Some of Knox's supporters didn't seem to understand his report and started claiming there was no sexual assault. The prosecutors believe that Knox and Sollecito helped Guede to sexually assault Meredith; Sollecito by restraining Meredith and Knox by threatening her and possibly using the knife.

There was a case in England where a young woman was convicted of helping several men rape another woman. There have also been high profile cases where women have helped their partners sexually assault other women or girls, most notably Fred and Rosemary West, and Brady and Hindley.

I think the bra was removed later on to focus the police's attention on Guede.

I highly recommend the piece below by Miss Represented, who examines the subject in more detail:

http://missrepresented.wordpress.com/20 ... -the-rape/
Top Profile 

Offline mistercrunch


Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 2:43 pm

Posts: 160

Location: Germany

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:40 am   Post subject:    

BILD

writes something about some "horror-freaks" who did the break-in yesterday. But thats just what yellow press says in germany.
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: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:40 am   Post subject:    

Hi, FenceSitter

The others will probably be able to give full and complete answers to your questions when they get back.

In the meantime, briefly, and from memory:

FenceSitter wrote:
... why is there so much focus on merediths "chastity" and amandas "sluttiness" when both were doing what exchange students do?


The question is one of degree: between someone who asks her friend whether she should be be watering the
plants as asked while the owner (a boy she liked enough) is away, versus a full-on party girl with accompanying beautycase
who's been doing marijuana for ages (besides writing in her journal that Raffaele used to use a great many drugs - though
how true journal entries are and whether Raffaele was bragging are different matters).

Quote:
- what do the boys downstairs say about Rudy's character? or was that not a topic due to the fast track trial?


The general opinion by anyone who knew him seems to be that he was an aimless drifter, habitually drunk, perhaps
a bit lonely. He knows where the happening's at, and where the kebab places are. His attempts at trying to help
Meredith with towels and tissues, while ultimately unsuccessful, shows there is some compassion in him even
though he is almost at the bottom rung of the social ladder.
Quote:
- has it been established in court that the police really arrived before Raffeale made the call on nov 2?


Yes, if you mean the Postal police.
The Carabinieri arrived after, but by that stage the door to Meredith's room had been broken down and
the Postal Police had ushered everyone out of the cottage. The Carabineri were surprised there was a police presence
already there - Mr S had neglected to tell them that in his calls.
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: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:52 am   Post subject:    

I should actually turn the page over before I respond.

Does anyone else get the feeling that sometimes one or other of the accused turns over two pages
at once when reading from the alibi script?
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2316

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 11:04 am   Post subject:    

Raffaele Sollecito admitted in his witness statement that he hadn't called the police before the postal police turned up at the cottage and that he had lied at the behest of Knox:

He said he went outside "to see if I could climb up to Meredith's window" but could not. "I tried to force the door but couldn't, and at that point I decided to call my sister for advice because she is a Carabinieri officer. She told me to dial 112 (the Italian emergency number) but at that moment the postal police arrived." He added: "In my former statement I told you a load of rubbish because I believed Amanda's version of what happened and did not think about the inconsistencies." (The Times, 7 November, 2007).

Strangely enough, Candace Dempsey and Frank Sfarzo don't ever mention Sollecito's admission that he hadn't actually called the police. The CCTV camera recorded the postal police arriving at the cottage at 12.26pm. Sollecito phoned the police at 12.51pm and 12.54pm.

Knox and Sollecito both lied from the very beginning, so their lies cannot be attributed to the police's "interrogation methods" as Friend of Amanda, TruthSeeker, erroneously claimed on TJMK. Considering his profession, you would have thought he would have researched the case more thoroughly.
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: Thu Feb 19, 2009 11:21 am   Post subject:    

Tara,

Here's the TG5 report.

I'm not sure what a "State Police Publicity Envelope" is yet.

Quote:
Seals broken at Meredith’s house

Fifteen months after Meredith’s murder, someone broke into the house in via della Pergola where the English student was killed. Agents from the Perugia Flying Squad discovered the intrusion when this morning they were supposed to release the personal effects of the two Italian room mates. The police had just entered when they noticed the broken glass of the window opening on to the rear of the house. There was much disorder inside: in the kitchen, the discovery of three large black-handled knives. They were those packed in Amanda’s suitcase under the bed in her room. They found them on the sofa, next to the fridge and on top of the bookcase. Another (knife), but belonging to the (Italian) girls’ set, was instead found on the floor resting on a plastic publicity envelope as used by the state police. Also found were some candles that belonged to one of the Italian girls. They had been lit. On the floor as well, there were three cigarette butts. In one of Meredith’s room mate’s rooms, lying on the bed, was a blue bedcover that used to be on Amanda’s (bed). Whoever had gotten into the murder house had then tried to leave by the front door but was unable to, though they left visible signs of forcing the lock. Whoever had entered had had time to re-arrange the wooden Persians (shutters) but had committed the error of positioning them the wrong way round. The actions of a mythomane have not been excluded.

TG5 19-Feb-2009
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: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:28 pm   Post subject:    

ASCA on the cottage raid:

Quote:
Meredith case: Unknown persons enter into the still-sealed murder house

(ASCA) - Perugia, 18 Feb – A nocturnal entry, perhaps robbery-related (checks are under way to ascertain if anything has been removed), was discovered by Perugian police agents who this morning entered the house (still placed under a sequestration order [as a crime scene]), where the murder of English student Meredith Kercher occurred. She was killed during the night of 1 and 2 November in 2007, for which Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito have been accused of murder-in-company. The other youth, Ivorian Rudy Guede, has already been sentenced via fast-track trial for the same murder-in-company to 30 years.

The police agents had had the permission of the Court of Assises to access (the place) to retrieve objects belonging to Amanda and Meredith’s Italian room mates (who had made a request to regain possession of various things). The via della Pergola apartment had been minutely searched [rovistato] by unknown persons; the police are following lines of investigations which, focusing [spaziano] purely in the scientific field of prints (because various knives already in the house, and some candles, might have been touched), may throw some light [on the matter]. To enter into the house, the unknown persons would have had to pass through the kitchen after having shattered the glass of the window.

More detailed [minuziosi] checks are in progress to ascertain if anything may have been carried off, while print verification searches are under way, including on an envelope with “police” written on it containing a knife. The “raid” by unknown persons has raised troubling questions in legal circles [in Procura], on (criminal) defence and civil (sides) equally: for Raffaele Sollecito, Marco Brusco and Luca Maori, this is “a confirmation that anybody could have gotten into the house and contaminated the crime scene”.

Advocate Maresca (on the civil side, representing the Kercher family) spoke instead of “a story which leaves you stunned (with amazement)” and is keenly desiring “clarification, as soon as”.

Amanda Knox and the young informatics engineer from Giovinazzo, Raffaele Sollecito, will be before the Court of Assises of Perugia Friday 27 February when it resumes hearing the case.

The hearing, the sixth, is of utmost importance because the police agents who arrived on the scene [intervenuti] after the murder call will be heard.

red/sam/ss
ASCA 18-Feb-2009
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: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:48 pm   Post subject: Cottage raid   

ANSA reports the various investigatory hypotheses, and mentions the "police" envelope does not belong to the
Perugian police.

ANSA


TEMPO mentions the four knives visibly placed, one candle, and in Meredith's room, some wax was found.
TEMPO

TGCOM has a long article, says the candle was in Meredith's room and the blue plastic evidence envelope
is not the Perugian police's.
TGCOM

All lines of enquiry are being pursued.

I'll put up a full version of each tomorrow.
Top Profile 

Offline Mutley


User avatar


Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 10:38 pm

Posts: 71

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:02 pm   Post subject:    

Quote:
- what do the boys downstairs say about Rudy's character? or was that not a topic due to the fast track trial?


The general opinion by anyone who knew him seems to be that he was an aimless drifter, habitually drunk, perhaps
a bit lonely. He knows where the happening's at, and where the kebab places are. His attempts at trying to help
Meredith with towels and tissues, while ultimately unsuccessful, shows there is some compassion in him even
though he is almost at the bottom rung of the social ladder.
[quote]


Do we know that RG tried to staunch the bloodflow or is it just in the realms of his story to paint himself in a better light? If he (or one of the others) did try to initially stop the flow then it would suggest shock that she had been stabbed, an escalation of violence to an end that had not been forseen and had been conducted spontaneously without the prior agreement of one or more of the other participants. If I can mutilate Oliver Cromwell's comment slightly; None go so far as those who know not where they go.

But if there was an initial attempt to stop the blood then it was not a concerted effort and was very fleeting. He or they rapidly changed their minds and ensured that
1. Meredith Kercher would be unable to summon help on her own.
2. No attempt was made to call an ambulance despite the presence of multiple phones.
ie. Her death at that point was their aim even if it had not been earlier. They were ALL willing to go all the way to avoid having to take responsibility for their part in the chain of events that led up to it. A physical and moral cowardice that is their only bond and the only constant in their positions since.
And that is the MOST charitable interpretation I can see. A less charitable is that they watched for some while before fleeing. With all the fog of war thrown out I am confused as to how long an interval there was between the scream and the witnesses seeing / hearing the fleeing perpetrators. RG bumped into passers-by in the vicinity in his escape and made no attempt to summon help. Was he sure she was dead? His only concern was to get away from the crimescene as rapidly as possible.

As for the earlier stages of the attack, I prefer not to dwell on too much. Suffice to say that terrorizing, humiliating, injuring, sexually assualting and attempting rape of an individual suggests sadism. Any degree of compassion by RG should have been manifest by then. But he was an active participant. I cannot help thinking that the shock of the stabbing that may have led to a temporary attempt at aid (if it happened at all) was from the timing not from the act itself; the sexual assault was probably not complete as it was manual. If it had proceeded, the stabbing would probably have been by mutual agreement because of their mutual willingness to go all the way. They would hardly be letting her go after what they had already done. That would have meant facing responsibility and accepting consequences which all have demonstrated their refusal to do. Their characters would have dictated their final course of action and compassion doesn't appear in the list, only the worst form of self interest.

All in all I cannot see a cigarette paper's width between the three of them. Which is probably why they are so reluctant to point at each other. They all grit their teeth and go for broke.
Top Profile 

Offline FenceSitter


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:29 pm

Posts: 16

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:05 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Catnip, thanks for your response. I also got some good answers from Skeptical Bystander and Jools. Generally I was slightly confused when I read the boys testimonies - I didnt know that Rudy and Meredith had met downstairs until reading about this last weekend (sorry! dont remember the source!) although it seemed already established at an earlier time that amanda knew Rudy. To me there the testimonies from the boys and from the english girls seem quite subjective and slightly contradictory- but this is is more than likely taken into account by judge and jury, and probably the idea is to get a bit of a picture of amandas character and the relationship between the two girls from several perspectives.
Top Profile 

Offline rxflg


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:16 am

Posts: 17

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:06 pm   Post subject:    

RS' defense team has posed 2 scenarios for his movements 1 Nov:
A=Alone at his apartment all night with AK
B=At the apartment all night with AK gone from 9 pm til 1 am
Obviously the truth would be best but the cannabis induced amnesia won't allow (sarcasm included here). What is the benefit of keeping both scenarios active? It seems that either would allow RS to be innocent of murder (best case for his defense) and just involved in the clean up if the dna evidence puts him at the scene (seems it does but hasn't been presented at trial yet). I don't understand why one route is not chosen?
Top Profile 

Offline FenceSitter


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:29 pm

Posts: 16

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:11 pm   Post subject:    

sorry - i forgot to write my actual point! for that reason, it would be interesting to know what the boys say about Rudy, who was already convicted for the murder, and compare this to the testimony about amanda. And additionally what they say about associations between amanda and rudy, and meredith and rudy.
Top Profile 

Offline Munch


Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:12 pm

Posts: 5

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:22 pm   Post subject:    

The Daily Mail and the Daily Star (UK tabloids) have surpassed themselves with their headlines today!

"Satanist's desecrate Meredith Kercher murder house in bizarre devil worship ritual"

THE DAILY MAIL

"Kercher's home is target of devil worshippers"

THE DAILY STAR

Maybe that will turn out to be the case but the British tabloids are making sweeping assumptions based on a statement that "'We cannot exclude anything and it is possible it was for some unnatural reason such as Satanism." A little insensitive of our wonderful British press to the Kercher's I feel but then that's the way the tabloids operate!


MODERATOR EDIT: Michael - Shortened url's
Top Profile 

ugehring


PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:28 pm   Post subject: The Italian media too talk more and more about Satanism:   

http://www.lagiustainformazione2.it/mer ... litto.html
Top

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2316

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:29 pm   Post subject:    

FenceSitter wrote:
To me there the testimonies from the boys and from the english girls seem quite subjective and slightly contradictory- but this is is more than likely taken into account by judge and jury, and probably the idea is to get a bit of a picture of amandas character and the relationship between the two girls from several perspectives.


Hi FenceSitter,

Which parts of the boys' and English friends' testimonies were slightly contradictory?

I thought the English friends' testimonies, in particular, were consistent. I think the prosecutor wanted to draw attention to Knox's and Sollecito's bizarre and inappropriate behaviour in the police waiting room and the lies that Knox told e.g. she found Meredith's body and that she did/did not have a shower when she got back to the cottage.

Filomena's testimony that the washing machine was still warm when got back to the cottage and that it contained Meredith's clothes implicates Knox because she is the only person who could have started the wash. Why would she have put Meredith's clothes into the washing machine and washed them? According to Frank Sfarzo Knox never used the washing machine.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:38 pm   Post subject: Barbie Nadeau   

Barbie Nadeau's article in 'The Beast' is now back up: BARBIE NADAEU

_________________
"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 FenceSitter


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:29 pm

Posts: 16

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:40 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Machine, the english girls testimonies are consistent amongst themselves but (perhaps it is a problem with my interpretation of what was said) seemed to paint a different picture than what the boys downstairs said. I understood from the girls testimonies that meredith didnt know rudy (although their statements may have only pertained to halloween - ie, that she didnt meet him on that night as he claimed). But you make a good point - the testimonies shed light on the bizarre behaviour after the murder. Filomena talks about the washing machine running but I guess the testimony for what was in the machine is still to come? Additionally the mop may be the most interesting "witness" of all - was it analysed?
Top Profile 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:42 pm   Post subject: ENTOURAGES' WISHFUL THINKING   

Okay, I admit that yesterday, I was quite ticked off about the break-in from the point of view of the trial. Upon reading more about what actually happened (notwithstanding the Daily Mail's "Satanism" references, and possible interpretations of trying to influence the present trial), and in spite of what Raffaele's legal team and The Entourage in Seattle have said, I think that the impact of this break-in for the trial is minimal. (A new crime has been committed and I hope they catch the perpetrators, but this will not change the inexorable progress in the present trial)

Now, for the Kerchers and Meredith's friends, having some intruders walk over her blood, drip wax around, stir up her belongings, that must be a like a punch in the stomach.
=============

Some observers have been trying to dramatise the importance of the intrusion. Here's Nick Pisa's coverage of the breakin, for the Daily Mail:
"Sollecito's lawyer, Marco Brusco, said: "This break-in just shows what we have always said - anyone could get into the house. It proves how easy it is to get into the house and tamper with the crime scene .... it proves what we have always said that a thief broke into the house and murdered poor Meredith Kercher."

It proves???? I think that Daisyhill could diversify its training activities and set up a training facility for the legal profession.

Meanwhile, thousands of miles away, Candace posted this comment, giving Amanda's Home Town Blog perspective:
#259569 Posted by Candace Dempsey at 2/18/09 8:42 a.m.
Frank of Perugia Shock just wrote about the house being vandalized. He notes that they got in through the balcony window, which makes more sense. It's on the right-hand side (looking away from the city)and faces the traffic. (So much for the theory that nobody would enter through a window visible to cars) or that the neighbors would surely spot anybody coming in through a window.
:roll:

I don't know where you got that from, or what context you're saying it in, but don't get ahead of yourself, Candace.

Who can see what from where?
The location of the balcony and the kitchen on the other side of the house excludes any of the neighbours being able to see anything.

The only nearby building with a window which may offer a view of the oblique angle where the kitchen window is situated, is a structure I identified in the House Plan powerpoint as the San Tommaso convent (although it may not be, or maybe was and is no longer). However, this building is not residential. Let's assume the break-in was at night. No one in that building would have been looking out, across the brightly lit road, and into the contrasting darkness beyond. Perhaps if someone parked his/her car in the far right part of the parking lot, on the edge overlooking Via Sant'Antonio, they may have seen something. However, this parking lot wouldn't have any movement in the wee hours of the morning.






Beyond the convent/institute, there is just the long old city wall, and the empty space of the Bulagaio ravine.



What did Candace say? "So much for the theory that nobody would enter through a window visible to cars) or that the neighbors would surely spot anybody coming in through a window."

Well, we see that the second part of her comment is irrelevant, as there aren't any neighbours to see anything happening at the kitchen window.

What about the first part of her comment ... ¿is the kitchen window all that visible to cars? Let's take a spin (only the first 20 seconds are relevant):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vsbq7T8Tn4M

I think that we can conclude that in the middle of the night, on the winding Via Sant'Antonio, a driver alone in his vehicle would not see anything, otherwise he would have an accident. And even if there was a passenger, I doubt that he or she would be capable of focussing his or her eyes throught the trees and bushes, out into the blackness of the ravine and shout out "Hey, look! There's a burglary going on over in yonder cottage!"

That is not a walking route, so you wouldn't find stargazers on a midnight stroll either.

Basta! I don't think that this break-in is at all relevant to the staged break-in on the other side of the cottage, in Filomena's room, with an inexistent Spiderman breaking her unreachable window under the full intensity of the street lights and the powerful carpark lights, and then performing a gymnast's maneuver to get through the glass shards.

Now that we've dispatched The Entourage's perspective, what about Marco Brusco? "It proves how easy it is to get into the house and tamper with the crime scene ... it proves what we have always said that a thief broke into the house and murdered poor Meredith Kercher."

Well, the first part is true. It is easy to get into the house ... BUT NOT THROUGH FILOMENA's WINDOW!!! And tamper with the crime scene? Of course, someone could have taken a pneumatic jack hammer to the house too ... but in both cases, the police would detect the intrusion: Seals on the kitchen window were broken and the window itself was broken ... ¡Mr. Brusco! is there any evidence that in the days and weeks following 2 November 2007 seals were broken on the doors or windows, and that doors or windows were broken when the main forensic work was being carried out? Raffaele's Team is not going to convince many persons if this is the argument for DNA contamination.

Neither does the intrusion in the cottage prove that Meredith died at the hands of a lone-wolf thief.

Bongiorno & Co., get back to work!!


Last edited by Kermit on Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 895

Location: New York

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:48 pm   Post subject:    

FenceSitter wrote:
Please dont misunderstand me if my questions seem harsh, I feel terribly for Meredith and her family, and hope that they can find some sort of closure.


No I am sure we dont misunderstand you. We all see that this reeks of phoniness.

FenceSitter wrote:
The impression I get is that Merediths friends and the italian roommates have painted a picture of a very chaste girl interested in only in studying, coming home at 9pm and not partying...


There is a mountain of evidence that Meredith worked hard and behaved herself. Nobody ever said she did not go to parties.

FenceSitter wrote:
Amandas sex life and apparent promiscuity is highly publicised... this is normal behaviour for exchange students in this day and age


It's largely out there because Amanda put it out there. You might not have noticed, but she put the stories out there herself.


Last edited by Fast Pete on Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:51 pm   Post subject: Re: The Italian media too talk more and more about Satanism:   

ugehring wrote:
http://www.lagiustainformazione2.it/meredith-kercher/230-incursione-nella-casa-del-delitto.html


...and Harry Wilkens is now a journalist. Everybody wants to be a journalist and grow up to be like papa-bear Doug Preston. Give me a break!
Top Profile 

Offline FenceSitter


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:29 pm

Posts: 16

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:00 pm   Post subject:    

Fast Pete wrote:
FenceSitter wrote:
Please dont misunderstand me if my questions seem harsh, I feel terribly for Meredith and her family, and hope that they can find some sort of closure.


No I am sure we dont misunderstand you. We all see that this reeks of phoniness.

FenceSitter wrote:
The impression I get is that Merediths friends and the italian roommates have painted a picture of a very chaste girl interested in only in studying, coming home at 9pm and not partying...


There is a mountain of evidence that Meredith worked hard and behaved herself. Nobody ever said she did not go to parties.

FenceSitter wrote:
Amandas sex life and apparent promiscuity is highly publicised... this is normal behaviour for exchange students in this day and age


It's largely out there because Amanda put it out there. You might not have noticed, but she put the stories out there herself.


I have the feeling I am being continually forced to apologise for asking some questions about the case. I am not truthseeker, nor do I have any ties with anything to do with this case at all. I do sincerely feel for meredith and her family, sorry pete if my condolescences dont do it for you. I am interested in sifting through the crap that some of the media has put out in order to find out what the facts are. I only wanted to ask a few critical quesions and hoped for a few answers from people who have been following it for some time.
Top Profile 

Offline LucyJ


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:11 pm

Posts: 23

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:04 pm   Post subject:    

I've shared a few student houses in my time (tahkfully those dyas are now over!) and I can honestly say that I find it quite extraordinary that AK left her vibrator on full display in a shared bathroom.

For her to have one in her bedroom - fair enough. I'm sure she wouldn't be the only one. But to, in effect, display it? Very strange and exhibitionist behaviour, as if she was trying to proved something.

AK was the one who brought her sexuality into this whole business. It seems it never was a "private life" as far as she was concerned.
Top Profile 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 895

Location: New York

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:12 pm   Post subject:    

bolint wrote:
The headquarters of the Postal Police:

Compartimento Polizia Postale Umbria
Via M. Angeloni, 72
06100 (PERUGIA - PG)

On Google in straight line it is about 1.5 km from the cottage.


That's right across from the station. Could be the same building as the main Perugia police station.

They would not need to drive through the old city to get to Meredith's house. There is a fast route around, below the wall.

I would reckon about 10 minutes. The two mobiles were tossed into the garden from that road.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline LucyJ


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:11 pm

Posts: 23

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:15 pm   Post subject:    

I have a question for some of you.

It's about AK's shower (or not, as the case may be). I've always felt a bit undecided as to whether she looked like someone who had washed and blowdried her hair. Certainly, she didn't look like someone who had styled it. On the other hand, her hair does look slightly fluffy, as if she has perhaps washed it and allowed it to dry naturally, without the benefit as so much as a comb through. My hair sometimes looks a bit like that if I'm too busy to get round to blow-drying it properly.

Hair styling aside, I agree completely with whoever said that they didn't think AK looked as if she had showered (talkng about the morning after shot). She looks like someone who has been up all night (or at best, hardly slept) and distinctively un-showered.

My question is - wouldn't one assume that a guilty AK must have showered? One would imagine that she must have been covered in blood and who knows what other forensic evidence. So how about shower shortly after event to remove evidence, but no time (and, one would hope, inclination) to style hair. No shower in the morning in the "broken into" flat with an open door.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:32 pm   Post subject: Kermit's Mini-Presentation   

Kermit, exellent mini-presentation on the break-in there! :) For posterity, so it's easy for members to find, I've copied it into the 'Kermit's Powerpoints' thread in the Media forum...HERE

_________________
"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 Hungarian


Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 2:40 am

Posts: 155

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:38 pm   Post subject:    

FenceSitter wrote:
I have the feeling I am being continually forced to apologise for asking some questions about the case. I am not truthseeker, nor do I have any ties with anything to do with this case at all. I do sincerely feel for meredith and her family, sorry pete if my condolescences dont do it for you. I am interested in sifting through the crap that some of the media has put out in order to find out what the facts are. I only wanted to ask a few critical quesions and hoped for a few answers from people who have been following it for some time.


No, sorry, FenceSitter, your questions are typical -- and also boring, no real curiosity in them, they are absolutely transparent (if one already read a little, not much, about this case) -- the concept shines through clearly
Top Profile 

Offline lady garden


Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 3:46 pm

Posts: 25

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:46 pm   Post subject:    

I used to live with a girl who was overtly sexual-dragging all sorts home and leaving her "toys" around-she ended up as a psychologist which we all thought she needed
Top Profile 

Offline nowo


Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 12:35 pm

Posts: 186

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:49 pm   Post subject:    

Thank you Kermit!

Michael...repel all boarders!
Top Profile 

Offline LucyJ


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:11 pm

Posts: 23

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:53 pm   Post subject: Re: Kermit's Mini-Presentation   

Michael wrote:
Kermit, exellent mini-presentation on the break-in there! :)


I agree. Many thanks to all who have taken the time and trouble to produce the presentations, powerpoints, etc. Very interesting and thought-provoking.
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:23 pm   Post subject:    

Quote:
Fencesitter wrote:
"Filomena talks about the washing machine running but I guess the testimony for what was in the machine is still to come? "


In the news it was only that Filomena said that the machine was warm.
No news came from the trial that someone saw it running.
Next week the police investigatros/carabinieri will testify, I hope that this will also be a topic.
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:26 pm   Post subject:    

Quote:
Fast pete wrote:

There is a fast route around, below the wall.
I would reckon about 10 minutes. The two mobiles were tossed into the garden from that road.


Especially considering that Via della Pergola is the direct continuation of that road ending at the garage.
And the Postal Police car we have seen on the video comes from that direction, too.
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:39 pm   Post subject:    

The gates from the iron rails of Piazza Grimana



Top Profile 

Offline FenceSitter


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:29 pm

Posts: 16

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:40 pm   Post subject:    

thanks, bolint. I also recall reading that the postal police heard the machine running when they arrived but I dont know if this is official.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2316

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:43 pm   Post subject:    

FenceSitter wrote:
Hi Machine, the english girls testimonies are consistent amongst themselves but (perhaps it is a problem with my interpretation of what was said) seemed to paint a different picture than what the boys downstairs said. I understood from the girls testimonies that meredith didnt know rudy (although their statements may have only pertained to halloween - ie, that she didnt meet him on that night as he claimed). But you make a good point - the testimonies shed light on the bizarre behaviour after the murder. Filomena talks about the washing machine running but I guess the testimony for what was in the machine is still to come? Additionally the mop may be the most interesting "witness" of all - was it analysed?


The English girls said that they didn't see Meredith with Rudy at the Halloween party on 31 October. Incidentally, there is a prosecution witness who is going to testify that he saw Meredith, Knox, Sollecito and Guede together a few days before the murder.

One of the boys downstairs said that he saw Meredith, Knox and Guede and others in the boys' apartment. Knox and Guede have both admitted that they knew each other.

Filomena has already confirmed that Meredith's clothes were inside the washing machine:

Filomena Romanelli, the Italian from whom Knox and Kercher sublet rooms in the villa, testified that the washing machine was warm when she arrived on the scene. She later identified the contents of the washing machine as Kercher's even though the Briton had been dead for at least 10 hours before her body was found, implying that someone else started the laundry. (Newsweek, 17 February, 2009).

The mop will have been repeatedly and thoroughly cleaned. The question, for me, is where did Knox and Sollecito clean it? The postal police found Knox and Sollecito outside the cottage with the bucket and mop when they arrived. This tells me that Knox and Sollecito cleaned the knife, and bucket and mop at Sollecito's apartment.


Last edited by The Machine on Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:44 pm   Post subject:    

Fence sitter wrote:

Quote:
Fast Pete wrote:
FenceSitter wrote:
Please dont misunderstand me if my questions seem harsh, I feel terribly for Meredith and her family, and hope that they can find some sort of closure.


No I am sure we dont misunderstand you. We all see that this reeks of phoniness.

FenceSitter wrote:
The impression I get is that Merediths friends and the italian roommates have painted a picture of a very chaste girl interested in only in studying, coming home at 9pm and not partying...


There is a mountain of evidence that Meredith worked hard and behaved herself. Nobody ever said she did not go to parties.

FenceSitter wrote:
Amandas sex life and apparent promiscuity is highly publicised... this is normal behaviour for exchange students in this day and age


It's largely out there because Amanda put it out there. You might not have noticed, but she put the stories out there herself.


I have the feeling I am being continually forced to apologise for asking some questions about the case. I am not truthseeker, nor do I have any ties with anything to do with this case at all. I do sincerely feel for meredith and her family, sorry pete if my condolescences dont do it for you. I am interested in sifting through the crap that some of the media has put out in order to find out what the facts are. I only wanted to ask a few critical quesions and hoped for a few answers from people who have been following it for some time.


The only problem I have, Fence Sitter, aside from the comments I made yesterday, is that you seem to be complaining about the focus on Knox's sex life and yet your focus seems to be on somehow forcing the point that Knox's sex life should not be front and center, Meredith was just "as bad," and anyway, this is normal behavior.

So in a sense, you are trying to bring the focus to Knox's sex life and defend it by drawing what I consider to be a false comparison with Meredith and other young women.

As you can see from Kermit's post above, as well as thousands of posts we have all been making for more than a year now, we are not interested in dwelling on whether or not Knox was a "slut." In fact, only one poster here used the term and I quietly asked that he change his post. He did and that was the end of the story.

The critical questions at this point have to do with circumstantial evidence, witness testimony (what is the gist? what does it mean?), forensic evidence, alibi problems and the campaign being waged behind the scenes, seemingly to prevent any of this from being examined in the courtroom.

As for Knox's sex life, it is of no interest to me beyond the ways in which it may have contributed directly to this crime. But as Pete and others have pointed out, the case can be made for Knox herself bringing sex into the mix. It is a constant theme in her writings, it seems. And in the courtroom. Her first statement, probably prepared, was about the vibrator. Of all the ways to correct the bad girl image, this has to be the worst.

It is perhaps inevitable that, in a country like Italy, a bit of the Madonna/Whore dichotomy would seep in. And once that happens, it is a short and slippery slope to painting the victim as a Madonna (a real one, not the pop icon) and the female suspect as a whore. I for one think that is simplistic, unfair and unfortunate. But no one here has contributed to that development.

Finally, note that you are not being asked to apologize for asking critical questions about the case. From reading all the posts, I get the feeling that others take issue not with your questions but with statements like "this is normal behavior for exchange students" and "Meredith's friends have painted her as a chaste girl," (with the implication being "but I know better, she too slept with a guy at the drop of a hat" etc.). Meredith's friends were not in court to paint a picture or recite a hagiography. They were there to answer questions about a critical moment and the events that led up to it. If Meredith comes off as a good and gentle girl, perhaps it is simply because she was one.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:53 pm   Post subject:    

" I also recall reading that the postal police heard the machine running when they arrived but I dont know if this is official. "

Frank, about two weeks ago, vowed that he would post something on the washing machine the following days.

I'm afraid that post will be overly sophisticated and incomprehensibly detailed. :D
Top Profile 

Offline LucyJ


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:11 pm

Posts: 23

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:53 pm   Post subject:    

Do you think AK and RS had just arrived with a sanitised mop and bucket? Or were they taking it away for a clean up?

Does anyone know whether there is any truth in the alleged water spill at RS's apartment? Didn't he claim at one point that the pipe under the simk had come away? Could RS and/or AK have emptied something down the sink at RS's place, and then become concerned it might have stuck in the waste trap? (Often lies are built on some little gem of truth).

Then again, if the pair were as stoned as they claimed, it would seem doubly surprising that they would somehow remember a water spill the following morning and get a mop from a different house to clean it up. It defies belief, really.
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:12 pm   Post subject:    

LucyJ wrote:

"Do you think AK and RS had just arrived with a sanitised mop and bucket? Or were they taking it away for a clean up? "

I think they didn't take nor bring the mop.
I suppose that the mop was found in a place where it shouldn't have been if they story were true and they invented the flood rescue explanation.

"Does anyone know whether there is any truth in the alleged water spill at RS's apartment? Didn't he claim at one point that the pipe under the simk had come away?"

Raffaele says in his jail dairy:

Quote:
"The questions the agents of the Squadra Mobile
me have made me to remember that that day the water pipe under to sink
was detached and thing I find very suspicious, I've seen that it is
not possible to so detach alone, at any rate, the fact is that it
flooded half the house."


Not exactly what Amanda says in her email:
Quote:
"after dinner raffael had spilled a lot of water on the floor of his kitchen by accident "


"Then again, if the pair were as stoned as they claimed, it would seem doubly surprising that they would somehow remember a water spill the following morning and get a mop from a different house to clean it up. It defies belief, really. "

Good point.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2316

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:18 pm   Post subject:    

LucyJ wrote:
Do you think AK and RS had just arrived with a sanitised mop and bucket? Or were they taking it away for a clean up?

Does anyone know whether there is any truth in the alleged water spill at RS's apartment? Didn't he claim at one point that the pipe under the simk had come away? Could RS and/or AK have emptied something down the sink at RS's place, and then become concerned it might have stuck in the waste trap? (Often lies are built on some little gem of truth).

Then again, if the pair were as stoned as they claimed, it would seem doubly surprising that they would somehow remember a water spill the following morning and get a mop from a different house to clean it up. It defies belief, really.


Hi Lucy,

It's possible that they tried to clean the kitchen pipes to makes sure that was no incriminating evidence after they had cleaned the kitchen knife, and possibly the bucket and mop, at Sollecito's apartment.

Long term use of cannabis over several months can affect short term memory. Judge Paolo Micheli rightly dismissed their claims that they were suffering from cannabis induced amnesia. Besides, Sollecito only claimed he smoked one joint on the night of the murder and that he smoked it alone as Knox had gone out for four hours.

The number of coincidences are worth revisiting:

1. Knox and Sollecito turning off their mobile phones at the same time shortly before Meredith's murder.

2. Knox and Sollecito turning on their mobile phones together at 5.32am when they both claimed to be sleeping.

3. Knox and Solecito being at least two places at once on the night of the murder. Sollecito at the imaginary party and his apartment, and Knox at Sollecito's apartment and the cottage.

4. Sollecito's pipes under the kitchen sink mysteriously breaking on the night of the murder.

5. Knox and Sollecito both conveniently couldn't remember most of what happened on the night of the murder because they were suffering from cannabis induced amnesia.

6. Knox and Sollecito both conveniently could remember exactly what they were doing at 11pm despite remembering little else that evening. 11pm is significant because it is Meredith's estimated time of death.


Last edited by The Machine on Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:19 pm   Post subject:    

I don't think the beak-in has helped the defense in any way.

It's probably more of an aid to the prosecution.

It ably demonstrates just what point of entry into that cottage a real-life intruder has chosen.
Top Profile 

Offline FenceSitter


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:29 pm

Posts: 16

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:19 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Skep, thanks for your detailed reply. I do appreciate the comments. I think we may agree, even if it doenst seem like it. I am not trying to compare the two girls or say that meredith was "as bad as" amanda. I do not want to pass judgement (in the sense of "slutty" or "chaste" - these were indeed my words) on either here. At this point I think it maybe better to leave meredith out of the discussion - I am sorry that I brought her into it. As far as amanda's behaviour, it strikes me as "normal" in the sense of being "within the norm". I lived with a number of american exchange students in a university town, and the behaviour as far as sex goes, was to a large extent comparable to what amanda reports herself. In that sense I meant it is "unremarkable". Very unnormal sex habits for comparison are seen in the case of Paul Bernardo (maybe a poor comparison, but do you see what I mean?). Vibrators and one night stands (although the latter can be associated with risky) are still in the realm of normal for college students. As far as the publicity goes, Amanda may be responsible for leaking those details, but the public fixation on those details has developed a life of its own. And Skep, I have seen some discussion here on those points. There has already been speculation that her childish and inappropriate shirt at the trial was a defence strategy to derail this image - unfortunately, as you point out, she mentioned the vibrator to explain its existence - maybe backfired.
Anyways, I seem to have started out on the wrong foot. Thanks to you who were constructive about it.
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:23 pm   Post subject:    

On the mop, continued ...

As Charlie Wilkes claimed the police found a broken pipe in Raffaele's kitchen but that pipe was not freshly broken and had already been replaced.
So a possibly explanation for the discrepancies of the pair's different versions is the following:

The police questiond Amanda about the mop and she was forced to say something and she invented that she had taken it to Raffaele's place.
Then the police asked Raffaele about the water but he didn't know what they were talking about and sometimes later when he understood that it is about the mop he came up with the broken pipe explanation that indeed had happened earlier.

I expect that the rumoured plumber witness of Raffaele's defense is the one who had repaired that broken pipe but well before the murder.
Top Profile 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:33 pm   Post subject: Thank yous!   

CATNIP! :)

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TRANSLATIONS! They are time consuming, but are so vital to the discussion here. You're a very important and kind lion, and we're lucky to have you!

KERMIT! :)

Another great perspective about the break-in. It is very upsetting that this would happen.

From Sollecito's lawyers:
Quote:
Sollecito's lawyer, Marco Brusco, said: 'This break-in just shows what we have always said - anyone could get into the house.
'It proves how easy it is to get into the house and tamper with the crime scene.
'We are very concerned about what happened but at the same time it proves what we have always said that a thief broke into the house and murdered poor Meredith Kercher.'


"We are very concerned about what happened BUT..."

That word "but" just infuriates me! It reminds me of when I was robbed and the policeman said "I'm sorry you're house was broken into, BUT oftentimes owning a big dog scares intruders away - maybe you should get one"!

To me, the word BUT negates everything previously said.
Top Profile 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:54 pm   Post subject:    

LucyJ wrote:
AK was the one who brought her sexuality into this whole business. It seems it never was a "private life" as far as she was concerned.

In addition to what other posters have commented, I would like to add a couple of things:

  1. All persons, including the Pope, Queen Elizabeth II, and a homeless drunkard have their own sexuality. The victim of this crime too. Now, in the case of the victim, if that sexuality were somehow linked to the crime, perhaps it would be of interest. The first confusing day after the crime, on 2-3 November 2007, the same media which published titles yesterday like "Satanism" or "Black Mass in Meredith's Bedroom", would have had us believe that somehow the victim's sexuality was a factor in the crime. They would love it.

    The investigation quickly showed that the only behaviour (sexual or otherwise) on the part of Meredith which contributed to her attack and murder, was going home because she was tired.

    And beyond that, it's a moot point.

    Did she have an Italian boyfriend? Great. After the investigation quickly confirmed a year ago that Giacomo didn't have anything to do with the crime, we have now heard him in the trial to see if he has any other information which may help understand what happened. And maybe there are a couple of details of interest: that even though the English friends could state that they aren't aware of Rudy socialising with Meredith on Halloween, she probably did meet Rudy at some point through the boys downstairs. (But another detail: that Rudy wasn't interested in Meredith, but rather, in Amanda). I don't know if the Italian flatmates describing a conversation between Amanda and Meredith about faithfulness is sexual in nature, but it's another little detail.

    Do we need to know anything else about her sexuality? No.
  2. I think there is consensus amongst 99% of us about the above point. We don't want to talk about the victim's sexuality. We don't need to do so (beyond the basic information already introduced, that she had just started a relationship with an Italian ...)

    Yet, from some quarters there have been periodic efforts to artificially drag her sexuality into the discussion:

    John Follain's interview with Curt and Edda 15 June 2008: "The family hesitate when I ask whether they have anything they would like to say to Meredith's family. Edda is the first to break the silence: "We're in a sticky situation because of what people have written about Amanda. We’d like to reach out, but what will they think if we say to them, 'Your daughter was my daughter's housemate and we can only imagine your pain'? I can't imagine what they are having to live through. It's horrific, and every time rubbish comes out about the alcohol level in Meredith's blood or her sexual activity, my first thought is, 'My God, that poor family has to hear this again and again.'"

    When I read that, I honestly don't know what the heck she is talking about. The alcohol question was a technical forensic issue for a whole 24 hours or so. And "sexual activity"??

    Like I said, beyond the first day of reporting on the crime in November 2007, I don't think that there has been any dedication of time or space by news services to the sexuality of the victim - "rubbish" or non-rubbish. It's a non-issue.

    In fact, it makes you look bad just trying to dredge where the water is clear and the river bottom has no mud.


Last edited by Kermit on Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline mojo


Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:31 pm

Posts: 225

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:58 pm   Post subject:    

Brian S. wrote:
I don't think the beak-in has helped the defense in any way.

It's probably more of an aid to the prosecution.

It ably demonstrates just what point of entry into that cottage a real-life intruder has chosen.



Hmmmm. :shock:
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:09 pm   Post subject: A couple of problems...   

FenceSitter wrote:
Vibrators and one night stands (although the latter can be associated with risky) are still in the realm of normal for college students. As far as the publicity goes, Amanda may be responsible for leaking those details, but the public fixation on those details has developed a life of its own.


Amanda Knox would not be the object of any public fixation, except for, 1. the fact that she was found by police at the scene of the murder of her roommate without a credible alibi, and 2. the HUGE disconnect between the image she continually portrays of herself and the image her family/friends attempt to portray on her behalf.
Top Profile 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:14 pm   Post subject:    

LucyJ wrote:
My question is - wouldn't one assume that a guilty AK must have showered? One would imagine that she must have been covered in blood and who knows what other forensic evidence. So how about shower shortly after event to remove evidence, but no time (and, one would hope, inclination) to style hair. No shower in the morning in the "broken into" flat with an open door.


You're bringing up some good points, Lucy.

As Raffaele and Amanda went separately through the different versions of their alibis (often caveated with a drug haze), Amanda mentioned (from Capanne prison, I believe), that after supper at Raffaele's place, she showered and he cleaned her ears. (Why she would shower late at night then shower again first thing in the morning, on a lazy vacation weekend is beyond me).

I wouldn't be surprised that - in line with your scenario - she / they could have showered on the night of November 1, at the cottage. And not in the morning. In that case, the little sky light on the ceiling of the small bathroom would have been quite illuminated for some part of the night.

In the straw poll we did a couple of days ago with the "washed and blow-dry" photos, almost all commenters said Amanda's hair was neither washed nor blow-dried on the morning of November 2. A number of commenters, however, did say that it could have been washed the day before and slept on (or simply air-dried and uncombed).
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:20 pm   Post subject:    

Kermit wrote:

Quote:
When I read that, I honestly don't know what the heck she is talking about. The alcohol question was a technical forensic issue for a whole 24 hours or so. And "sexual activity"??

Like I said, beyond the first day of reporting on the crime in November 2007, I don't think that there has been any dedication of time or space by news services to the sexuality of the victim - "rubbish" or non-rubbish. It's a non-issue.

In fact, it makes you look bad just trying to dredge where the water is clear and the river bottom has no mud.



Thanks for your post, Kermit. With regard to what Edda may have been referring to, I can only guess that she may have been referring to the Nov 4 email from her daughter, where details from the questioning that related to the victim and that AK was explicitly asked not to repeat were in fact repeated in written form and delivered by email to her UW contact and about 23 additional family and friends. :shock: As if this weren't bad enough, Frank Sfarzo published the email in its entirety. He will probably view me as one of those uptight prudes who would be comfortable hanging out with Judge Matteini and PM Mignini, but I think he showed bad judgement and tremendous insensitivity in publishing that paragraph. And AK showed bad judgement and tremendous insensitivity in repeating this information in an email to friends, family and advisor back home. Not a crime, mind you, but not an exemplary act by any stretch of the imagination.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline daisysteiner


Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:59 pm

Posts: 490

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:21 pm   Post subject:    

Absolutely Tara, it's stands up against the old favourites like racism "I'm not a racist, one of my best friends is Jewish but..."

LucyJ, welcome and well done for hitting the nail on the head! Anyone who believes the cannabis amnesia story has either never come into contact with the stuff or cannot use Google to do basic research (Google 'talktofrank' for the UK Government drug education pages if anyone has any specific questions about hashish.). In the history of alibi's, that is up there with "Miss, my dog ate my homework"

Also, the pipe thing you mention is also very true. Isn't it amazing how the two of them can remember how much water came out, who broke what and how they dealt with the problem; yet they cannot even recall if they were both in the same apartment that night!!!! Utterly insane and ultimately such a poor alibi is an insult to the court system. A court does not look favourably on time wasters and liars....Rudy proved that much by copping a full sentence despite opting for a shorter trial which helps both the cost of holding a trial and the impact on the victim's family. His sentence is one that already has 1/3 deducted from it, meaning Knox is looking at the thick end of a 45 yr sentence if convicted.

Fencesitter - Welcome also. I echo what Skep has said too. I never thought I would recommend this but have a look at Italian Woman at the Table and Perugia Shock, if for no other reason than to understand why people got a bit suspect of your posts. For God's sake don't try and post there if your opinion differs from theirs or you cannot phrase yourself like a lawyer! How Finn stays cool and posts is a mystery to me but more power to him for it! In other forums, the phrase "Lurk Moar" would be ringing around the board but not here. Ask anything you like either on the board or PM, no question is too daft, no observation insignificant! The hive mind here is good at sorting the relevant from the irrelevant! Might I also recommend a look at Kermit's Powerpoint presentations as they explain the evidence in the case very well. In fact, I'm amazed that they aren't court evidence they are so precise! They are also visually very good for debunking Friends of Amanda myths. Enjoy! :D

Who the **** is Harry Wilkins. I thought he was a Candace troll who was going for us but he is now trolling IWATT too (OT observation, shame Candace isn't from Trinidad or Turkey, the acronym would have been much more appropriate!)! Perhaps he's an equal opportunities troll? I remove my trolling cap to the bloke if he is, he's the best I've seen in years for irritating both sides of this argument! He's two mad posts from getting banned by Candy though!

Finally, for those who are wondering, I'm not Miss Represented! I'd be commenting on my own posts if I was! Thank you so much to those who thought I was, very flattering indeed although Miss R may not feel the same way :D

There endth the essay... :D
Top Profile 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 895

Location: New York

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:55 pm   Post subject:    

daisysteiner wrote:
A court does not look favourably on time wasters and liars.... Rudy proved that much by copping a full sentence despite opting for a shorter trial which helps both the cost of holding a trial and the impact on the victim's family. His sentence is one that already has 1/3 deducted from it, meaning Knox is looking at the thick end of a 45 yr sentence if convicted.


Nicely put. You could see the jury conspicuously not grinning at the t-shirt last Saturday.

Prosecutor Mignini only asked for 25 years for Guede by the way. He got 30 years. There was some concern Germany would protest. But Judge Micheli had really no time for the lack of repentance - and the enormous depravity of the crime.

For those who may not know this: what Micheli wrote about the violence of the crime (which we have not posted online) had just about everyone who read it in Italian in tears.

And someone who had to see the autopsy photos for professional reasons said they cried for hours and were haunted for days.

Those who did it really were the true out-of-control maniacs here. Not Mignini. These killers.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline LucyJ


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:11 pm

Posts: 23

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:04 pm   Post subject:    

I'm glad if I haven't been asking too many inane questions - I am relatively fresh to the case. (Well, obviously, I've read about it in the papers, and remember a Sunday Times interview with AK's parents from a year or so ago. They struck me, even back them, as being somewhat deluded about their daughter and about what she was really like. That's without even considering her involvement in this case. But I don't have the in depth knowledge that some of you guys have acquired).

It's funny how all the focus is on AK. It was seeing photos of her beaming face in a news report that made me curious to find out more information on the net. Eevn if one suspends disbelief and allows for her being completely innocent of all charges, that it's all been a dreadful mistake.... even then, her behaviour is shockingly inappropriate. This is about the brutal assault and murder of an innocent young girl. It is absolutely no place for inane grins, smiles and tasteless t-shirts. At the very least, someone should tell her to show a little respect for MK and her family.

Yet her fellow defendent seems to fade into the background and is little discussed. I suppose in part it is because he is a male, and , as such, more typical of the "normal" perpetrator of such a crime. At the same time, there is nothing in his behaviour that is so glaringly inappropriate (I'm referring here to his court room appearances.) And I've read some of his letters where he talks of "poor Meredith" and generally comes across as showing more empathy and humanity. It would seem to me that, if anyone has a conscience and is goiung to crack, then RS seems the most likely candidate.

Sorry if this is a but rambling - I've been thinking about this all afternoon. And how it has all become about Ak.
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:30 pm   Post subject:    

"It would seem to me that, if anyone has a conscience and is going to crack, then RS seems the most likely candidate. "

In my opinion he will not crack.
His lawyers keep telling him that he will be saved. (Otherwise how could they bill? :D)
Also his family tells him to be strong. Not the slightest weakness, they expect.
And he believes them that somehow he would get out.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:35 pm   Post subject:    

Bolint wrote:

Quote:
"It would seem to me that, if anyone has a conscience and is going to crack, then RS seems the most likely candidate. "

In my opinion he will not crack.
His lawyers keep telling him that he will be saved. (Otherwise how could they bill? )
Also his family tells him to be strong. Not the slightest weakness, they expect.
And he believes them that somehow he would get out.


I tend to agree. He and his family are convinced that he should not have to be accountable for this one small misstep in an otherwise unblemished life. Just the other day, we read that he wants nothing to do with the other inmates, as they have nothing in common. Those others are criminals, miscreants, losers. Raffaele is from a well-to-do family and has a bright future ahead. Things like this just don't happen to people like him. It is unthinkable. So even if he is guilty as charged, he will never, ever admit that.

Of course, I am just speculating. So many strange things have happened in this case.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:56 pm   Post subject:    

LucyJ wrote:
Yet her fellow defendent seems to fade into the background and is little discussed. I suppose in part it is because he is a male, and , as such, more typical of the "normal" perpetrator of such a crime. At the same time, there is nothing in his behaviour that is so glaringly inappropriate (I'm referring here to his court room appearances.) And I've read some of his letters where he talks of "poor Meredith" and generally comes across as showing more empathy and humanity.

Keep in mind, Lucy, that the courtroom behaviour and dress of the suspects at the end of the day are just embellishments to this story.

In fact, if you rewind through the historical archives of this discussion, starting with Steve Huff's initial Haloscan page (which he probably thought wouldn't last more than a few days) you'll see that Raffaele and Rudy have undergone the same amount, type and depth of scrutiny as Amanda. The male suspects' diaries have been translated, their pre and post crime movements studied, their possible involvement analysed, etc. etc.

Do some say that Amanda in particular is being turned into a Devil? ... Once in a while Amanda's Entourage suggests that they are "astounded at the anger, conspiracy theorizing and vicious language" directed at them. When I read those sorts of comments, I look over my shoulder to see who they're referring to ... and then I look directly back at them. Who is it who is turning The Entourage into the new victims of this case? (The last time I counted, there are about 25 victims in this case, if you don't count Meredith ... oh, okay, I'll include her).

I deal with those comments in the same way I deal with false dredging of the victim's sexuality (see my earlier post): they are diversionary tactics. The people who "leaked" the existence of Amanda's vibrator months ago were neither Mignini nor any "anti-Amanda" bloggers wanting to kick up the dirt, but rather Amanda's own team (later it was posted on Amanda's Home Town Blog as if the leaker was Mignini ... I think they still haven't corrected that).

I think that the best way not to fall into the vortex of "you only want to see Amanda in prison, you don't want justice", is to continue to:

1) keep to the evidence as it becomes known
2) don't get caught up in the Spinners' Songs and Yarns

Otherwise you only help contribute to the morbid sales of the products and services of parasitical hangers-on.

The basis of the case, and the interest in following it is not a rabbit shaped vibrator, but a complex combination of crimes, each one with the same --OR-- different (direct) participants, and each crime carried out at a phased moment during the night of 1-2 November 2007. The potential involvement of each suspect is:

- Amanda is charged with Murder, Sexual Assault, Simulation of a Crime, Theft, Transporting a Weapon and False Accusation
- Raffaele is charged with Murder, Sexual Assault, Simulation of a Crime, and Theft
- Rudy has been found guilty of Murder

(Catnip, did I get that right? :) )

From a legal point of view, each one of them may be guilty of some, none, or all of those crimes.

From a moral point of view - while I respect their right as suspects to maintain silence and also their right to lie before the court - I desperately wish they would invoke neither of those rights, but that they do as they should have done since well over a year ago, which is to collaborate fully in responding to the questions and analyses of the investigation and trial.

(edited to modify charges - thanks TM)


Last edited by Kermit on Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2316

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:33 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Kermit,

Kermit wrote:
Keep in mind, Lucy, that the courtroom behaviour and dress of the suspects at the end of the day are just embellishments to this story.


I couldn't agree more. I get the impression that certain posters pointedly choose not to address relevant points that have been raised about the evidence and testimonies, and focus on froth.

Kermit wrote:
I think that the best way not to fall into the vortex of "you only want to see Amanda in prison, you don't want justice", is to continue to:

1) keep to the evidence as it becomes known
2) don't get caught up in the Spinners' Songs and Yarns

Otherwise you only help contribute to the morbid sales of the products and services of parasitical hangers-on.

The basis of the case, and the interest in following it is not a rabbit shaped vibrator, but a complex combination of crimes, each one with the same --OR-- different (direct) participants, and each crime carried out at a phased moment during the night of 1-2 November 2007. The potential involvement of each suspect is:

- Amanda is charged with Murder, Simulation of a Crime, Theft and False Accusation
- Raffaele is charged with Murder, Simulation of a Crime, and Theft
- Rudy has been found guilty of Murder

(Catnip, did I get that right? :) )

From a legal point of view, each one of them may be guilty of some, none, or all of those crimes.


I believe Knox and Sollecito have been charged with sexual assault and Knox with transporting the knife from Sollecito's apartment.

Kermit wrote:
From a moral point of view - while I respect their right as suspects to maintain silence and also their right to lie before the court - I desperately wish they would invoke neither of those rights, but that they do as they should have done since well over a year ago, which is to collaborate fully in responding to the questions and analyses of the investigation and trial.


The Italian Supreme Court noted that both Knox and Sollecito lied and were reluctant to cooperate. For me, there is a very simple explanation why they have lied and refused to cooperate with the investigators. If Knox and Sollecito cared about Meredith and her family, and were innocent, they would have told the truth from the very beginning and done all they could to help the police when they were questioned.

Knox invoked her right to silence when Mignini asked her how she knew precise details about Meredith's murder. However, her silence is eloquent enough.


Last edited by The Machine on Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:43 pm   Post subject:    

FenceSitter wrote:
Hi Skep, thanks for your detailed reply. I do appreciate the comments. I think we may agree, even if it doenst seem like it. I am not trying to compare the two girls or say that meredith was "as bad as" amanda. I do not want to pass judgement (in the sense of "slutty" or "chaste" - these were indeed my words) on either here. At this point I think it maybe better to leave meredith out of the discussion - I am sorry that I brought her into it. As far as amanda's behaviour, it strikes me as "normal" in the sense of being "within the norm". I lived with a number of american exchange students in a university town, and the behaviour as far as sex goes, was to a large extent comparable to what amanda reports herself. In that sense I meant it is "unremarkable". Very unnormal sex habits for comparison are seen in the case of Paul Bernardo (maybe a poor comparison, but do you see what I mean?). Vibrators and one night stands (although the latter can be associated with risky) are still in the realm of normal for college students. As far as the publicity goes, Amanda may be responsible for leaking those details, but the public fixation on those details has developed a life of its own. And Skep, I have seen some discussion here on those points. There has already been speculation that her childish and inappropriate shirt at the trial was a defence strategy to derail this image - unfortunately, as you point out, she mentioned the vibrator to explain its existence - maybe backfired.
Anyways, I seem to have started out on the wrong foot. Thanks to you who were constructive about it.


Fence Sitter,

Here is a situation for you. Since you are new to the case. That’s this strike you as “normal” or “within the norm”?

Amanda Knox had a myspace page, amongst the contacts/friends where her: stepfather, sister, aunties, friends etc.

In this her page, which btw every journalis seeking info on the suspects had a good look into it before it was removed, yes, she wrote all sort of things but also wrote about some sexual activity, which you might think is normal student behaviour, but… Do you also think, (not what she did or didn’t do regarding sex) but to let members of her family know about it: with who, where, and how?

I think NOT WITHIN THE NORM AT ALL.

I’m guessing here, but since her site was open for anybody who cared to visited maybe her mother, her biological father, grandmother, perhaps even her younger sisters could have also seen this information and if so, by nobody doing anything about it even to the extent of some of them jolly commenting back on some guy named Federico, seems to me that they also maybe agree with you, that this was normal behaviour.

Why do you think this girl shared this sort of information with any member of her family but especially with her stepfather, who incidentally she referred to him as a jerk?
Top Profile 

Offline LucyJ


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:11 pm

Posts: 23

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:49 pm   Post subject:    

I certainly agree that the courtroom behaviour and demeanour are mere embelishments to the story.

I think what I was trying to say was that it was AK's behaviour that troubled and intrigued me and made me want to find out more about the case. And I think this, in part, is what accounts for the high profile she has taken and her almost "celebrity" status. Sickening.

I don't think she has been in any way demonised by the press. Far from it. I see someone revelling in their notoriety and perhaps arrogant enough to believe that they might, quite literally, get away with murder.
Top Profile 

Offline FenceSitter


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:29 pm

Posts: 16

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:30 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Daisysteiner, thanks for the welcome and for the tips!

Jools wrote:
Here is a situation for you. Since you are new to the case. That’s this strike you as “normal” or “within the norm”?

Amanda Knox had a myspace page, amongst the contacts/friends where her: stepfather, sister, aunties, friends etc....
.


Hi Jools, yup. I stll do. Shall we agree to disagree?
Kermit and a few of the others made some good points, so did misrepresented today, and convinced me to let it be. The sexuality discussion isnt really the point. There is some hard evidence linking the defendents to the case, and that is the point.

Back to the topic of the mop, who I still consider to be the star witness - I heard that the italian girls only used aromatic cleaners in the cottage. So if bleach was found on it, this would probably be a blow for the defence. I heard one account of RS pipes leaking/bursting but amanda claims in her email that he spilled the water on the floor. Could anything be determined from his kitchen or was it checked?
Top Profile 

Offline Ferret


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:21 am

Posts: 101

Location: Hidden Hills, CA

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:41 pm   Post subject:    

LucyJ wrote:
I certainly agree that the courtroom behaviour and demeanour are mere embelishments to the story.

I think what I was trying to say was that it was AK's behaviour that troubled and intrigued me and made me want to find out more about the case. And I think this, in part, is what accounts for the high profile she has taken and her almost "celebrity" status. Sickening.

I don't think she has been in any way demonised by the press. Far from it. I see someone revelling in their notoriety and perhaps arrogant enough to believe that they might, quite literally, get away with murder.


I think she has been demonised in the Media, but she also has been painted as an All American Girl in the Media as well. If putting the murder aside and the evidence that Amanda was one of the culprits, for a brief moment, (if that is possible) There was many value judgments by the British and especially the Italian Media. . The biggest value judgements after her myspace page was found by the media. I think there were some faulty deductive logic in the Media as the Knox's PR team uses. Basically, the media did something like this, Knox is beautiful, Beautiful people only kill for sex, Knox killed she needed to fulfill her sexual urges." When one of the top Italian newspaper: Corriere della Sera label Amanda as "insaziabile a letto" "insatiable in bed", they might as well label her the modern day Elizabeth Bathory, who came to Italy to feast on other young students.

I think also the Media whether the pressure of deadlines, trying to stand out for extra notice, revert to stereotypes. When a young college female student murders another young attractive female college student, they take literary license, mainly about the motive.


I think the biggest problem with the prosecution's case is motive. The case is strong on opportunity, and strong on method, but the motive is still kind of opaque to me, unless they are using the autopsy report as a road map for the motive. I don't think the prosecution has to worry about their case, unless some bombshell comes out about the testing of the direct evidence. I think the media just can extrapolate the material out there to make Amanda, a bloodthirsty temptress if they want to, especially the Italian Media from the beginning because their main sources was the police and prosecutor's office, and FOA couldn't counteract until they were organized. However she isn't an All American Girl either. I think there is something in the middle of the dichotomy, which is still bad enough for Amanda. If Amanda comes across as monster, I don't think Raffaele comes across very well either, but maybe a tad bit better than Amanda.

Rudy's "I am vampire" video on youtube was enough for him to get convicted, prejudicial or valid.


Last edited by Ferret on Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:47 pm   Post subject:    

FBN wrote:

Quote:
ugehring wrote:
http://www.lagiustainformazione2.it/mer ... litto.html


...and Harry Wilkens is now a journalist. Everybody wants to be a journalist and grow up to be like papa-bear Doug Preston. Give me a break!


Wow! I just had a look at Gabriella Carlizzi's long telephone interview with none other than Harry Wilkens. If someone could do a proper translation, it would be a big help. I was most interested in one part of the article, which I believe is Gabriella giving us her global conspiracy riff on the murder of Meredith Kercher, although Harry may have helped. It is hard to tell.

She does provide some details on the recent break-in, with lots of talk about whether it was meant to simulate a black mass or really was one. She mentions that the only two objects brought in from the outside were 3 cigarette butts (maybe they were actual cigarettes when brought in ) and the police bag with the knife through it. She notes that the bag did not have the name or address of the local police.


Then Gabriella moves on to some observations about Meredith's murder. I surely have a few nuances wrong, but this seems to be the gist of it and before anyone asks, I swear I'm not making this up. Here's what she writes. My comments are in parentheses and italics:

1) The crime was committed in Italy prior to the US elections, when many were fearing that a man of color could be elected (not me!): Obama.

2) The crime was committed in Perugia, where there is a connection to the Monster of Florence/Narducci case.

3) Perugia is a conservative town but has a growing Masonic (Free Masonry) presence.

4) The outgoing President George Bush "called on" esoteric beliefs (I'm not sure what she is referring to, but she mentions something (a book?) that google translated into French as L'assistant du chapeau (The assistant of the hat?!) and the name Massimo Introvigne.)

NOW HERE IS WHERE IT STARTS TO GET REALLY SCARY:

5) Obama is a man and the son of a white woman and a black man

6) Meredith was a woman and the daughter of a white man and a black woman (not quite right, but whatever)

7) AK = Knox and Fort Knox is the symbol of the power and economic wealth of the US. This fortune is at risk with the election of Obama (Is she saying that all people of color are thieves?)

8) AMANDA = NA DAMA (A woman)

9) AMANDA = DA AMARE (???)

10) Amanda is the true symbol of the true American youth: white, attractive, healthy, efficient, seductive, sporty, a winner (Sounds like the Spice Girls, all rolled into one)

NOW GABRIELLA RAISES HER QUESTIONS (presumably related to the above):

1) The murder of a "hybrid" (her term, not mine). Did the murderer want to exorcise the danger of miscegenation (i.e., the mixing of the races, especially whites and blacks)?

2) Who received the order (or mandate) to sacrifice?

3) Is it possible the presumed killer came from the ocean (???) on a mission to activate a campaign for the "belle innocente" student from America?

4) (This is not clear but seems critical to her argument, if you want to call it that) Is there a relationship between the Satanic Seven and America?

5) A "species" whose adepts (followers) include actors, stars, etc (From personal experience, I think she is referring to the Church of Scientology, a favorite target of the conservative Catholic Church and the Masons in Europe)?

6) (And here she loses me completely, but seems to be saying): All confronted by the same US-Italian "loggia", the enslaved Martinique to France (or that enslaved Martinique to France?)

People, I can understand some of what she is saying and where she's coming from due to an unfortunate brush with the rivalry in France between the Masons, the Scientologists and the Church many years ago. I'm sure our European posters know this, but Scientology is viewed as a dangerous sect by many and as a rival for the power to run the world by others (namely, the Masons and others who see the world in terms of conspiracies).

This woman is way, way out there. She and Harry seem to be thick as thieves. Why are they coming out of the woodwork now?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline FenceSitter


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:29 pm

Posts: 16

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:10 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Ferret, you've made some really good points about the media, and about the motive. There is a lot of discussion about the role of drugs but I dont know if the prosecution considered this to be the main motive (due to the evidence at the crime scene? I dont know myself). What do you think? is the motive very important if the defendents can be tied to the crime scene?
Top Profile 

Offline DLW


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:41 pm

Posts: 623

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:12 pm   Post subject:    

‘Ms Butterworth described how she and two other friends had eaten supper together on 1 November, the night Ms Kercher died. "We invited Meredith to have dinner together and watch a film," she said.
Ms Butterworth also mentioned how Ms Kercher had said that Ms Knox had asked her if she would like to go out with her that evening, "but Meredith had already arranged to have dinner with us". Ms Kercher felt bad about turning her flatmate down, she added‘…. Peter Popham 2 /14/09

As I read this, it seems to imply that Robyn was referring to the evening of Nov. 1. I know about the text messages where Amanda asked Meredith to go out with her on Halloween night , the previous night, which was Oct. 31. But this dinner is the evening of the murder. Not sure which night Robyn was referring to? If it was Nov. 1, then that seemingly contradicts Amanda’s necessity for going to work that evening, and the lovebirds not knowing about Meredith’s whereabouts for that night.
Also I guess Amanda was doing the neighborly thing by asking Meredith to go out with her.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:34 pm   Post subject:    

Miss Represented has another post up called Understanding Feminism: the making of Amanda Knox.

missrepresented.wordpress.com


Her blog must be making an impact, because she is now on the FOA attack list. A particularly ugly poster called Female Lawyer, after first criticizing Miss Represented for not revealing her name and professional credentials (not that the cowardly Female Lawyer does, mind you), is now asking MR when the last time was she got laid, suggesting that lack of sex is behind her interest in and analysis of Amanda Knox.

My guess is that FOA, and in particular the mostly behind the scenes steering committee, is now operating in desperation mode. The attack on Mignini totally backfired, and they ended up with smoke and ash all over their faces. Paul Ciolino has gone into hiding. Worse, in the last couple of weeks the media has started to take notice not just of the FOA-approved internet presence, but also the presence of other viewpoints.

A consistent theme in the attacks now is identity: who are the posters on the boards and the pro-justice blogs? How dare they criticize and express their opinions from behind the mask of anonymity. Funnily, though, I don't see them putting the same pressure on Frank Sfarzo, who blogs under a pseudonym - and who nearly had a heart attack when I jokingly referred to it as a stage name.

I want to reassure everyone here that your identity is your own business, and none of you has to say who you really are. As your co-administrator, I can assure you that I would go to jail before I revealed anyone's name (not that I know your names) or IP address. Just keep posting away. Ignore these threats, or view them as indicative of your collective efficiency and tenacity. But be aware that sheer frustration is driving some people to do rash things.

Fast Pete has revealed his identity. He did so to raise the profile of his pro-justice for Meredith web site. My identity has been in the public domain for some time. Others have usurped it to write inane posts or felt free to post my photo and so on. No problem. It doesn't change a thing for me.

I don't like the idea of anyone being bullied or pressured into revealing their identity, especially when those doing the bullying and pressuring remain anonymous (even though they leave style tracks, which are kind of like skid marks on your undies - excuse me, I couldn't resist that, they are just such poopheads). There are one or two "anonymous" posters for FOA who should really think about coming clean, though. Just sayin'.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2316

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:36 pm   Post subject:    

FenceSitter wrote:
Hi Ferret, you've made some really good points about the media, and about the motive. There is a lot of discussion about the role of drugs but I dont know if the prosecution considered this to be the main motive (due to the evidence at the crime scene? I dont know myself). What do you think? is the motive very important if the defendents can be tied to the crime scene?


Proving the motive for Meredith's murder would be very important, if the prosecution were trying to prove that the murder was premeditated. However, the prosecution are not alleging the murder was premeditated.

We may never know the motive for this senseless murder. Meredith's murder might have been motiveless. Judge Paolo Micheli didn't believe that Meredith's murder was planned, but believed things got out of hand very quickly and the violence escalated. His starting point was the numerous pieces of forensic evidence that placed Knox, Sollecito and Guede at the cottage on the night of the murder.

We don't know why Rudy Guede did what he did, but we do know that he lied repeatedly and that there was enough forensic evidence to convict him.

There are many parallels to Knox's and Sollecito's situation: they gave triple alibis and lied repeatedly, Knox admitted that she was at the cottage when Meredith was killed, and there is very damning forensic evidence against them, which has been independently confirmed as being accurate and reliable.

Knox and Sollecito are the only people who could have taken part in the clean up and the staging of the burglary.


Last edited by The Machine on Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:41 pm   Post subject:    

DLW wrote:

Quote:
Ms Butterworth described how she and two other friends had eaten supper together on 1 November, the night Ms Kercher died. "We invited Meredith to have dinner together and watch a film," she said.
Ms Butterworth also mentioned how Ms Kercher had said that Ms Knox had asked her if she would like to go out with her that evening, "but Meredith had already arranged to have dinner with us". Ms Kercher felt bad about turning her flatmate down, she added‘…. Peter Popham 2 /14/09

As I read this, it seems to imply that Robyn was referring to the evening of Nov. 1. I know about the text messages where Amanda asked Meredith to go out with her on Halloween night , the previous night, which was Oct. 31. But this dinner is the evening of the murder. Not sure which night Robyn was referring to? If it was Nov. 1, then that seemingly contradicts Amanda’s necessity for going to work that evening, and the lovebirds not knowing about Meredith’s whereabouts for that night.
Also I guess Amanda was doing the neighborly thing by asking Meredith to go out with her.


I read this differently from you, DLW. It suggest that Amanda asked Meredith to have dinner that very night. It is hard to see how this fits with the fact that Amanda was on call at Le Chic. I'm guessing there was little chance she would be called in to work that night, however. Nov 1, a holiday with a long weekend? Italians gone to visit family, foreigners probably partied out from the night before, etc.
At the same time, I admit that I find Popham hard to understand at times.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline disillusioned


Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:18 pm

Posts: 5

Location: NZ

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:00 pm   Post subject:    

Sorry for jumping in with a few questions that have no doubt been covered already, but would someone mind helping me out with a few areas that I'm unsure of?

1. Wouldn't CCTV show:
(a) What time AK and RS arrived at the flat the morning after, whether they were together or alone, and if AK did actually go back to RS flat (with mop) and return together with him later? It should also show how long AK stayed at the cottage "to shower" etc. I assumed the CCTV footage of the night in question is unclear since it is night-time, but what time does the sun rise in Perugia in November in order to get a clear shot? Surely CCTV footage gives undeniable proof of the movements of both AK and RS the morning after, as well as the mop. Excuse me if I've missed something regarding the CCTV footage, and whether there's an alternative, logical route between the cottage and RS flat that bypasses the camera.
(b) Whether the mop did in fact travel from the cottage to RS apartment, and if so, at what times did it come and go?

2. Concerning the mop:
(a) Assuming the mop was cleaned thoroughly afterwards, was the cleanser used to clean the mop the same as the cleanser used in the clean-up? I presume tests would be able to reveal this. This could be very damning evidence....
(b) Also, if the mop had been totally sanitized (and presumably it had), how can AK and RS explain the use of bleach or whatever simply to clean up spilt water at RS flat? Did they decide to give the floor a thorough going over at the same time? This just doesn't hold water for me (excuse the pun).
(c) Is there evidence showing that that was the mop used in the clean-up? ie same cleanser on mop as floor, can bristle strokes be a clue?

Thanks again everyone for the amazing amount of effort you are putting in to bring justice for Meredith and her family.
Top Profile 

ugehring


PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:10 pm   Post subject: But what happened to the "Le Chic" CCTV footage ?   

Why did this videotape suddenly "disappear". It gives so many answers to many questions, because many persons entering and leaving this bar are also related to the cottage girls and Rudy. Who are the persons they want to protect? That's the main question, and nobody talks about it... You can be sure that the real murder - if any besides Rudy - is shown on this tape...
Top

Offline mojo


Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:31 pm

Posts: 225

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:12 pm   Post subject:    

attacking MR?..they must be feeling cornered by the little evidence we have seen so far. it reeks of desperation :(
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:28 pm   Post subject:    

Ugehring wrote:


Quote:
Why did this videotape suddenly "disappear". It gives so many answers to many questions, because many persons entering and leaving this bar are also related to the cottage girls and Rudy. Who are the persons they want to protect? That's the main question, and nobody talks about it... You can be sure that the real murder - if any besides Rudy - is shown on this tape...


I'm afraid you've lost me here. Have you read something about a videotape from the Le Chic bar? This is the first I have heard of it. And you have read that it "disappeared" at some point? Can I ask where you read this and why you feel that the murderers (Rudy and others?) are on this videotape? If you could provide documentation, that would be great.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Paton Burns


Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:39 pm

Posts: 1

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:45 pm   Post subject:    

I'm new to the details of this case: I've been looking into it for a few days now - it really is quite extraordinary, the fact that no one seems to be able to establish a thing beyond reasonable doubt. Its a mystery, but underneath, i fear, its a simple, sordid affair. There are a few things on my mind I'd like to share. Please forgive anything I may have overlooked, there's so much to take in, I'm far from having a grasp on things.

Allow me to speculate a little. I don't pretend to offer anything new, I am perhaps going over old ground. I don't think a real motive can be established in such cases, only a projection of psychological and physical events leading up to the act.

Firstly, the fact that none of the suspects is able to come up with a coherent version of events, naming the murderer, is damning for them all. It implies that they were all involved to such an extent that any such exposé would implicate them to an almost equal degree. Indeed, you very much get the impression that they are protecting something (this is where the notion of a satanic ritual spings to mind), or rather, hiding the true horror/banality of what went on (even perhaps from themselves?) I don't believe the murder was premeditated, but I believe that ongoing psychical 'conversation', a series of mutual affirmations and suggestions, especially between Knox and Sollecito in the weeks before, led into the final act of violence.

Within hours of meeting, Knox and Sollecito were in bed together. Allow me to speculate further: I suspect that in the following weeks they experienced rather an intense affair, one in which both felt at ease to speak openly about their sexuality, perhaps for the first time. Now let me bring in some background. I was struck yesterday when reading Alexander Smoltczyk's artcile, part 2, 'Attracted to Violence'. There's an extract from a piece of creative writing by Knox: is this authentic? Was it written prior to the murder? I wonder if in the course of their affair Knox alluded such a theme, that is, non consensual sex plus violence. Now, Sollecito's hard drive etc: violent pornography? To what degree and frequency? substanciated? Violent comics elsewhere? I'm not sure on all this. But let us suppose they spoke idly on the subject, wallowing in their darkest inmost phantasies, and perhaps encouraged and even spurred each other on. Perhaps this was the very substance of their relationship. Another conjecture: eventually, they agreed to play out a rape scene. This is not uncommon. Maybe on the same occassion, perhaps subsequently, one of them introduced a knife, playfully, as it were. It was an act, a game, and yet one that more or less touched on the reality, in accordance with the chimeras of desire etc. Perhaps there was real fear, perhaps they hot upon something very powerful in each other. It have happened once, or on numeruos occassions, in anycase, the effect was profound and remained very much in their thoughts and exchanges. This is the shared state of mind in which they approached the fateful night on which Meredith was tragically murdered. They were on the verge of something, they were driving each other to the limit, sharing their wildest phantasies, and as such, relatively unhinged - everything was new and dangerous. You get the idea, this i suggest, is the general direction they were going in.

As for the rest, their are endless possibilites. Here is one idea. Meredith goes home tired, for an early night. Either Knox is already there or turns up shortly, Sollecito and Guede join her at some point. There are underlying tensions between Knox and Meredith. Perhaps Meredith catches Knox in the act of something underhand. Perhaps Meredith is attempts to sleep. Perhaps they have a heated exchange. The exact order/turn of events is not what I want to establish, only their nature. Perhaps they simple have a chat. Perhaps Knox, Sollicito and Guede are high on drugs, or coming down: on edge, paranoid, delusional etc. There's a trigger of some sort. Some kind of altercation of insinuation, perhaps Meredith complains about their boisterous/wild behaviour. Meredith leaves them, perhaps returning to her room. She leaves them on edge. Knox and Sollecito and still reeling from the sex theyve been having. Perhaps Sollecito resents Guede's intrusion. There could be all sorts of tensions between all four of them. Knox wants to bring Meredith down a peg or two, she could be jealous, resentful for any number of reasons. Knox has an idea, an extension of her previously acted out phantasy, and perhaps hints at an idea, only Sollecito understands at first. Theyre in high spirits, theyre feeling unihibited and dangerous, powerful and roused at their own daring. Guede gets the idea to some extent: theyre going to put pressure on Meredith, theyre going to play something out, and there could be sex involved.

They go to Meredith's room, together, or gradually. There is a slow escalation of events. Sollecito and Knox think they have comeplete control - theyve done this before. But there's something didnt account for, something unknown: real fear. As they escalate things, going from playful innuendo to physical advances on Meredith, they begin to sense Meredith's fear. A knife is brandished as in previously acted out phantasies. Perhaps at first Meredith mocks them and this only fuels there knowing conspiracy. They think they know what they are doing. But now they are a group: there is a new dynamic, something unfamiliar. Though they imagine its a game, they are in fact in a real position of power. Meredith doesnt quite know how to judge, perhaps they tell her its just a game, but things increasingly look otherwise, when real physical advances are made. She's more and more fearful and the others feed off this. Things begin to spiral out of control. They pass the point of no return and this must begin to dawn of them. Whatever happens now, theyve gone too far, and theyll be notorious trouble. Meredith becomes increasingly distressed, and resists more and more. They become increasingly forceful and desparate: they dont know how this will end but time is running out. Meredith is more and more vocal, one of them takes her by the throat in an attempt to quieten her, she lets out a scream which provokes the final act of violence.

I only hope to claify the nature of events, and this is merely a speculative attempt.


Drugs may have been involved. Perhaps this accounts for Guede's presence, as a dealer? And the reports of ransacking for cash. The effects of some psychotropic substances may help to explain the turn of events, but they may not be necessary. If drugs were a factor, then to admit so would be as much as to admit guilt, and perhaps they have been so advised.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2316

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 11:31 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Paton,

Here are a couple of questions for you:

Why did Knox and Sollecito turn off their moblies shortly before Meredith was murdered?

Why did Knox and Sollecito take a kitchen knife from Sollecito's apartment to the cottage?

Where did Knox and Sollecito meet Guede?
Top Profile 

ugehring


PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 11:34 pm   Post subject: "Telecamera" in front (?) of LE CHIC   

SKEP:

I am just repeating what I did read in Carlizzi's website, 1st interview:

"Ed infine vorrei chiedere : chi erano i frequentatori del locale di Lumumba ?
Perchè dopo che Lumumba è stato scagionato, quel locale è rimasto vuoto tanto da dover essere chiuso ?
Chi ha temuto di essere ripreso con la telecamera ?
E Amanda lo avrebbe riconosciuto ?"

Anyway, it is known that the Brigata Stupefacenti likes to install such cameras near places where their "customers" show up...
Top

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 11:48 pm   Post subject:    

ugehring wrote:

Quote:
SKEP:

I am just repeating what I did read in Carlizzi's website, 1st interview:

"Ed infine vorrei chiedere : chi erano i frequentatori del locale di Lumumba ?
Perchè dopo che Lumumba è stato scagionato, quel locale è rimasto vuoto tanto da dover essere chiuso ?
Chi ha temuto di essere ripreso con la telecamera ?
E Amanda lo avrebbe riconosciuto ?"

Anyway, it is known that the Brigata Stupefacenti likes to install such cameras near places where their "customers" show up...


Carlizzi is not a good source of information. I would not believe anything I read on her website unless it was corroborated elsewhere, by a reputable source. Do you realize she links this murder to the election of Obama?! :shock:
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline petafly


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:08 pm

Posts: 278

Location: Switzerland/Germany

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 11:58 pm   Post subject:    

Quote:
Drugs may have been involved. Perhaps this accounts for Guede's presence, as a dealer? And the reports of ransacking for cash. The effects of some psychotropic substances may help to explain the turn of events, but they may not be necessary. If drugs were a factor, then to admit so would be as much as to admit guilt, and perhaps they have been so advised.


If the three were sober that night, Amanda must have known that a physical attack on Mez, any violence in the house would imply at least the end of her stay at the cottage. Iam sure, smart as she can be while sober, she would have stopped it. Not for Meredith, only for herself.
But nobody said: "Meredith, dont scream, it was just a game. HAppy Halloween". No, they got more and more sadistic, strangled her, humiliated her, abused her, laughed at her, stabbed her and watched her die. They were Intoxicated! My guess. Combined with weird characters. (didnt Amanda call Filomena later, wether or not she can stay further on at the cottage, while already in Prison? Is she crazy or what?)

IF Meredith would have been an italien girl, Berlusconi would introduce the death penalty this summer.
Top Profile 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 11:59 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
FBN wrote:

Quote:
ugehring wrote:
http://www.lagiustainformazione2.it/mer ... litto.html


...and Harry Wilkens is now a journalist. Everybody wants to be a journalist and grow up to be like papa-bear Doug Preston. Give me a break!


Wow! I just had a look at Gabriella Carlizzi's long telephone interview with none other than Harry Wilkens......Then Gabriella moves on to some observations about Meredith's murder. I surely have a few nuances wrong, but this seems to be the gist of it and before anyone asks, I swear I'm not making this up. Here's what she writes. My comments are in parentheses and italics:

1) The crime was committed in Italy prior to the US elections, when many were fearing that a man of color could be elected (not me!): Obama.

2) The crime was committed in Perugia, where there is a connection to the Monster of Florence/Narducci case.

3) Perugia is a conservative town but has a growing Masonic (Free Masonry) presence.

4) The outgoing President George Bush "called on" esoteric beliefs (I'm not sure what she is referring to, but she mentions something (a book?) that google translated into French as L'assistant du chapeau (The assistant of the hat?!) and the name Massimo Introvigne.)

NOW HERE IS WHERE IT STARTS TO GET REALLY SCARY:

5) Obama is a man and the son of a white woman and a black man

6) Meredith was a woman and the daughter of a white man and a black woman (not quite right, but whatever)

7) AK = Knox and Fort Knox is the symbol of the power and economic wealth of the US. This fortune is at risk with the election of Obama (Is she saying that all people of color are thieves?).......This woman is way, way out there. She and Harry seem to be thick as thieves. Why are they coming out of the woodwork now?


Cos they're crazies Skep.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I wouldn't bother to attempt to understand their motives.

When Meredith was murdered, conservative America was worried about Hilary Clinton. Barak Obama was a no-hoper 20% behind in the polls for the Democratic nomination. The primaries hadn't started and it was another 8 months before they even resulted in his selection as Democratic candidate.

Meredith was murdered way back on the 1st day of November 2007
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:25 am   Post subject:    

Brian wrote:

Quote:
I wouldn't bother to attempt to understand their motives.

When Meredith was murdered, conservative America was worried about Hilary Clinton. Barak Obama was a no-hoper 20% behind in the polls for the Democratic nomination. The primaries hadn't started and it was another 8 months before they even resulted in his selection as Democratic candidate.

Meredith was murdered way back on the 1st day of November 2007


Don't confuse Gabriella and Harry with the facts, Brian! :lol:
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Professor Snape


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:53 pm

Posts: 247

Location: Seattle. WA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 1:47 am   Post subject:    

Munch wrote:
The Daily Mail and the Daily Star (UK tabloids) have surpassed themselves with their headlines today!

"Satanist's desecrate Meredith Kercher murder house in bizarre devil worship ritual"

THE DAILY MAIL


Maybe that will turn out to be the case but the British tabloids are making sweeping assumptions based on a statement that "'We cannot exclude anything and it is possible it was for some unnatural reason such as Satanism." A little insensitive of our wonderful British press to the Kercher's I feel but then that's the way the tabloids operate!


Further clarification from U.K. commentor, Carolyn, sez, "Uh they aren't Satanists. They're just devil worshippers. There is a difference."

"Yeah, what SHE said!" Now I just have to go upstairs and look it up in my big book.

BTW Munch, don't be too hard on the tabloids, hard to find a respectable lot no matter where you live. Hell, look where I live and it took a whole lot to get just ONE of them to say NOT EVERYONE IN SEATTLE IS FOR AMANDA!

Now I'm off to hurt the defense right in there wallets ...no more MACY'S cardholders in this wing.



MODERATOR EDIT: Michael - Shortened url in quote

_________________
"Wizard of Healing Potions and Alibis"
Top Profile 

Offline Bess


Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:41 pm

Posts: 69

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:17 am   Post subject:    

I've been thinking about Curt Knox's "hickey" defence and Edda's "pierced ears" defence, and on and on with all the rest of the rellies' excuses.

Obviously they have facilitated her lifestyle for some time and it is unfortunate that they are now endeavouring to find the solutions to her problems, e.g., the PR campaign, rather than letting her, as an adult, resolve these on her own. To me a crucial element is: have they always treated her in such a manner? They're excusing her behaviour and are indeed going further by putting their own financial futures on the line. Do they somehow feel responsible for the situation in which she has found herself? Why wish that the prosecutors and the judge would change their behaviour and accommodate their daughter? At times, I wonder if they see themselves in her? Or, is there guilt for enabling this behaviour, possibly from childhood?

Chinese Proverb:
Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you've fed him for a lifetime.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline anne


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 12:04 pm

Posts: 173

Location: Berlin Kreuzberg

Highscores: 3

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:55 am   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
FBN wrote:

Quote:
NOW HERE IS WHERE IT STARTS TO GET REALLY SCARY:

5) Obama is a man and the son of a white woman and a black man

6) Meredith was a woman and the daughter of a white man and a black woman (not quite right, but whatever)

7) AK = Knox and Fort Knox is the symbol of the power and economic wealth of the US. This fortune is at risk with the election of Obama (Is she saying that all people of color are thieves?)

8) AMANDA = NA DAMA (A woman)

9) AMANDA = DA AMARE (???)

10) Amanda is the true symbol of the true American youth: white, attractive, healthy, efficient, seductive, sporty, a winner (Sounds like the Spice Girls, all rolled into one)

[/u]


Sounds like a bad copy of this here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOkCzOIePBY

At least it reminded me of it. Enjoy ;)
Top Profile 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:20 am   Post subject: Tapes of conversations in Prison   

I overheard, and it is most likely just a rumor, that the Italian authoriries are aloowed to record conversations betwen prisoners and visitors possibley without their knowledge. I recall reading that Amanda and her mom were meeting shortly after her incarceration and during that time a comversation took place whereby Amanda stated " I was there, mom, sooner or later they are gonna figure out I was there...". The authorities thought to themselves..."we got her".
I was told that when the defense was confronted with this evidence their reply was "she was not talkning about the cottage where the murder took place she was talking about Rafaelle's house"....sharp!

Is this all BS or did anyone hear about this at all?
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 Feb 20, 2009 4:29 am   Post subject: Here we go again   

Here we go again:


Candace Dempsey wrote:
Posted by Candace Dempsey at 2/19/09 7:59 p.m.

Okay, I promised not to discuss the stupidities said about me elsewhere, but sometimes I cannot resist.

The new rumor is that I have LIED about what year I got my master's degree in journalism. So I will now correct the record.

Yes, I did graduate in 1977, NOT 1997. Yes, there was a typo on my Linked In site that said 1997. Yes, I have now fixed it.

Why the year I got the master's degree would be of interest to anybody but me is a matter of mystery. Imagine an entire message board (PMF) where people are so devoid of a life that they would take the trouble to surf the Internet endlessly, looking for photos and "facts" about me.

These are the same "people" who believed they saw me emerge from a police car at the Amanda Knox fundraiser with my "husband and sister in tow." They will always be remembered for floating that bogus story, for creeping around in the dark, taking photos through the windows. For peeking at Amanda's little sisters in the ladies' room.

As I have said many times: You could not make this stuff up.



THE COOK'S SMOG


Actually Candace, this is completely untrue. The date you published for your masters actually contained TWO typos, typos you 'corrected' one at a time over a period of several days. The second point, NOBODY said they saw you 'emerging' from a police car. If you think you can prove me wrong, please provide the quote and link. And Candace, as for your last Paragraph, you've already had one post of yours deleted off of your own blog by the Seattle-PI for posting that crap (oh sweet irony indeed), Candace, you really need to get over this obsession you have with yourself...and seem to think everyone else therefore shares!

_________________
"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 Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 4:57 am   Post subject:    

Michael wrote:

Quote:
Actually Candace, this is completely untrue. The date you published for your masters actually contained TWO typos, typos you 'corrected' one at a time over a period of several days. The second point, NOBODY said they saw you 'emerging' from a police car. If you think you can prove me wrong, please provide the quote and link. And Candace, as for your last Paragraph, you've already had one post of yours deleted off of your own blog by the Seattle-PI for posting that crap (oh sweet irony indeed), Candace, you really need to get over this obsession you have with yourself...and seem to think everyone else therefore shares!


Everybody who linked to the CV when Kermit posted it knows exactly what was written there initially. I saw the intermediate version and then the final version, as Candace inched toward reality. So yes, Candace made two typos or has some other explanation for the 20-year discrepancy. I don't know if Candace was intending to provide false information about the dates of her master's, or why on earth she would do so, but I do know beyond the shadow of a doubt that she tried to pass off two "typos" as one. And that looks pretty bad. I saw it with my own eyes: Candace has lied about it. If she wants to turn around now and cast aspersions on me or anyone else who bore witness to it, then that's her problem. She knows the truth and so do I.

I may or may not ask the PI to delete Candace's post about Salty's. They had no problems deleting her last post, which also contained false information about me. But I fear this is a never-ending task. I have better things to do, and I think Candace's credibility is less than zero at this point. As far as I'm concerned it is. Let others judge for themselves.


Last edited by Skeptical Bystander on Fri Feb 20, 2009 5:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 5:09 am   Post subject: And Another Thing   

Candace Dempsey wrote:
Why the year I got the master's degree would be of interest to anybody but me is a matter of mystery.



If it is such a 'mystery' to you why anybody but 'you' would be interested in the date you did your masters, it's a 'mystery' to 'me' why you posted it up in PUBLIC in the first place.

_________________
"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 Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 5:16 am   Post subject:    

Michael wrote:

Quote:
Candace Dempsey wrote:
Why the year I got the master's degree would be of interest to anybody but me is a matter of mystery.


If it is such a 'mystery' to you why anybody but 'you' would be interested in the date you did your masters, it's a 'mystery' to 'me' why you posted it up in PUBLIC in the first place.


It is normal to do background checks on people, and Candace has made much of her credentials as a journalist. I would think that she, as a journalist and in the course of an investigation, would do background checks. At least I hope so. The dates, as initially given, looked fishy to me: it said 1996-1997, and Candace was born in 1950 (also a matter of public record). So that would make her a graduate student at the age of 46. I am about to become one for the second time at the age of 52, so that's not the problem. It's that it did not tally with what I had been told "par l'intéressée," as we say in French. So I checked it out and there it was. Not very difficult or time-consuming.

Just a mystery.
Now it's fixed.
Let the show go on.
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 Feb 20, 2009 5:16 am   Post subject: Re: Tapes of conversations in Prison   

stewarthome2000 wrote:
I overheard, and it is most likely just a rumor, that the Italian authoriries are aloowed to record conversations betwen prisoners and visitors possibley without their knowledge. I recall reading that Amanda and her mom were meeting shortly after her incarceration and during that time a comversation took place whereby Amanda stated " I was there, mom, sooner or later they are gonna figure out I was there...". The authorities thought to themselves..."we got her".
I was told that when the defense was confronted with this evidence their reply was "she was not talkning about the cottage where the murder took place she was talking about Rafaelle's house"....sharp!

Is this all BS or did anyone hear about this at all?



Hi SH2000 :) You're quite right and it isn't a rumour, the ILE can and do bug the convos of prisoners, or at least, they do in cases of the most serious crimes. Indeed, there is also the infamous bugged convo between Raffaele and his father, where he stated that when he got out he'd like to run right over the head of the commander of the Perugia murder squad in his car and keep on driving as though nothing had happened. There is also the conversation recorded where his parents discuss Amanda with him.

_________________
"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 Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 5:33 am   Post subject: Re: Tapes of conversations in Prison   

stewarthome2000 wrote:
I overheard, and it is most likely just a rumor, that the Italian authoriries are aloowed to record conversations betwen prisoners and visitors possibley without their knowledge. I recall reading that Amanda and her mom were meeting shortly after her incarceration and during that time a comversation took place whereby Amanda stated " I was there, mom, sooner or later they are gonna figure out I was there...". The authorities thought to themselves..."we got her".
I was told that when the defense was confronted with this evidence their reply was "she was not talkning about the cottage where the murder took place she was talking about Rafaelle's house"....sharp!

Is this all BS or did anyone hear about this at all?


Yes,

it's all here, somewhere back in the record of last year.

It isn't a rumour. The authorities are allowed to and do tap the conversations between prisoners and their visitors. At one time, someplace, Curt Knox joked "he could see the microphone". But I can't at this moment remember whether it was a prison tap or a phone tap which turned up this statement by Amanda.

The investigators did claim that Amanda was referring to the cottage and the Knox's claimed that they had lost the nuance of the converstion in translation to Italian, she was in fact talking about Raffaele's. I assume the tape will turn up as evidence at some stage. Native English speakers can then decide for themselves just where it was that Amanda was referring to.
Top Profile 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:03 am   Post subject: many thanks   

thanks Michael and Brian S. for clearing that up...I knew I read something in the Italian papers which btw are much more reliable despite much crticism from FOA, etc.

Candace Dempsey and the word journalist should not be used in the same sentance; she's a legend in her own lunchtime...man get past yourself.
cheers
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:16 am   Post subject:    

Brian wrote:
Quote:
Native English speakers can then decide for themselves just where it was that Amanda was referring to
.

One of many points to be clarified.

SH2000 - Are you in Perugia?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:13 am   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Brian wrote:
Quote:
SH2000 - Are you in Perugia?


Yep...been in PG for almost 10 years...love it.
GREAT place for college and university students...and anyone. But like anywhere it is not without its problems.
I will soon write about the intoxicating lifestyle vortex to which I believe the "not so angelic" Knox became addicted.

a presto!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline LucyJ


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:11 pm

Posts: 23

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:40 am   Post subject:    

Bess wrote:
I've been thinking about Curt Knox's "hickey" defence and Edda's "pierced ears" defence, and on and on with all the rest of the rellies' excuses.



I think it's self defence on the part of AK's parents. It's easier to remain in denial about the true nature of their daughter than to accept it. Easier to be the parent of the victim of a miscarriage of justice than the parent of a promiscuous, drug-taking murderesss. They can tell themselves they're helping Amanda, but I think it's just as much about helping themselves.

I think AK's parents are in a sh*t situation. I don't agree with how they have behaved in many instances and think their denial and excuses does neither them nor their daughter any favours. But I can see how scary the alternative must be. This is a heinous, high profile crime - if (and probably when) AK is convicted, they will be forever linked to it. What a vile stain on their lives. Easier to close their eyes and hope that if they wish hard enough and shout loud enough, then all this unpleasant business will just go away. Leaving no questions about whether they might, inadvertently, have created this "monster". And life can just go back to normal... with perhaps a book or film deal for good measure.
Top Profile 

Offline daisysteiner


Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:59 pm

Posts: 490

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:34 am   Post subject:    

IN reply to LucyJ, you've hit on another thing which really gets to me about this case. I feel sorry for Curt Knox. Edda Mellas strikes me as a woman made her bed long ago & is well used to lying in it. Curt though is the breadwinner from the four parental adults, I'm guessing in his position at Macy's, he out earns Chris M by a significant amount. So I'm also going to guess that Curt has the most financially to lose from all of this as well as losing his first born to the Italian prison system through no fault of his own. If you watch his interviews after each day's hearing, his body language speaks louder than this words - he's convincing himself of Amanda's innocence daily rather than having it cemented into his head. Edda has interesting body language too, similar to her daughter, she screaming "I'M LYING" from every pore while her mouth forms other contradictory phrases. Although I know Edda will have to tell the truth in court if she is a witness as I don't think she even she can lie when a perjury conviction could be swung her way if proved to be lying.

Speaking of liars, if Seattle PI was hosted in the UK, Skep & Snape would have a cast iron libel suit against Candace. Suggesting that they were "peeking" at little girls in the bathroom comes under child abuse laws here. You cannot make those sorts of allegations without backing it up with hardcore evidence. Remember why Tom Cruise sued South Park IN ENGLAND? Freedom of Speech is of course allowed but cross the line and you'd better get a solicitor- Google Private Eye as Hislop is a past master of UK libel trials. Based on Candace's theorising, everytime I go to a public bathroom where there is an underage child, I'm peeking at them. Nice lady that Dempsey woman isn't she, I wonder why sex obsessed nutters post on her site...
Top Profile 

Offline Munch


Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:12 pm

Posts: 5

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:48 am   Post subject:    

LucyJ - Interestingly there is a reference to the family's defence of AK in my favourite UK tabloid (the Daily Mail) today - article by Jan Moir, "It's never right for a parent to protect their criminal child" - specifically about the murder of Rhys Jones where the murderer's mother has now admitted to lying for her son to protect him from conviction. Of course, we shouldn't tar them with the same brush given Knox has not been convicted but it raises a good point and a real issue more broadly.
Top Profile 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:56 am   Post subject: Re: Tapes of conversations in Prison   

Brian S. wrote:
stewarthome2000 wrote:
I overheard, and it is most likely just a rumor, that the Italian authoriries are aloowed to record conversations betwen prisoners and visitors possibley without their knowledge. I recall reading that Amanda and her mom were meeting shortly after her incarceration and during that time a comversation took place whereby Amanda stated " I was there, mom, sooner or later they are gonna figure out I was there...". The authorities thought to themselves..."we got her".
I was told that when the defense was confronted with this evidence their reply was "she was not talkning about the cottage where the murder took place she was talking about Rafaelle's house"....sharp!

Is this all BS or did anyone hear about this at all?


Yes,

it's all here, somewhere back in the record of last year.

It isn't a rumour. The authorities are allowed to and do tap the conversations between prisoners and their visitors. At one time, someplace, Curt Knox joked "he could see the microphone". But I can't at this moment remember whether it was a prison tap or a phone tap which turned up this statement by Amanda.

The investigators did claim that Amanda was referring to the cottage and the Knox's claimed that they had lost the nuance of the converstion in translation to Italian, she was in fact talking about Raffaele's. I assume the tape will turn up as evidence at some stage. Native English speakers can then decide for themselves just where it was that Amanda was referring to.



More:

03 Dec 2007

Dramatic new evidence has emerged that may help prove that Amanda Knox, the American girl accused of murdering Meredith Kercher, was present when the British student died.

Knox was secretly bugged by investigators while talking to her parents in prison, in a conversation which appears to contradict her previous insistences that she was not in the house on the night of the murder.

Police sources revealed that when the conversation turned to whether Knox, 20, was at the scene, she said: “It’s stupid, I can’t say anything else, I was there and I cannot lie about it.”

“It is clear to us that she was talking about being at the scene,” said the police source.

“There are several other moments when she alludes to it,” he added.

However, Knox's lawyers have said she was referring to being at her boyfriend's house....

Knox has denied that she was present, and broke down in tears yesterday as she pleaded her innocence before a court.

The police source said: “She denies everything, but we did submit the recordings as evidence at the court.”

It is believed that the evidence was sufficient for Judge Massimo Ricciarelli to deny a request from Knox’s lawyers that she be freed into house arrest.

Elsewhere in the conversation, Knox said she was “very worried” about the discovery of an eight-inch kitchen knife at the house of her boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, 23...She told her parents that she “could not understand” how the knife “had been found at Raffaele’s house”....

Mrs Mellas refused to comment on the bugged conversation, which dates from November 17....


Daily Telegraph


And while I'm on the subject of that bugged conversation, it reminds me why I have doubts that "the knife" belongs to Raffaele;

From a story containing an interview with Edda Knox in Vanity Fair

In December, when the decision to keep Amanda in jail until trial came down, Mignini was so thrilled he actually embraced the lawyer for Meredith’s family. “It was a home run,” Maresca tells me, contented. “It meant all the evidence was good.”

That same month, Mignini grilled Amanda again and again about a kitchen knife thought to be the murder weapon. It had been found in Raffaele’s house. On its blade was Meredith’s DNA; near the handle, Amanda’s. A sure sign, the prosecutor thought, that Amanda had handled the weapon that killed the girl. What accounted for those two different DNA sources?, the prosecutor demanded.

“I don’t know! I can’t understand!” Amanda replied, in an interrogation punctuated with violent sobs, during which she eventually exercised her right not to speak.

And, as Amanda informed her parents during a jail visit, she has no idea how that large knife managed to migrate from her own kitchen to her boyfriend’s house.



Nowhere, but nowhere, have I seen confirmation that Raffaele owned that knife. Just that it was found at his place. It's known from the testimony of Filomena and Laura that it wasn't part of the kitchen set at the cottage, BUT Amanda had her own set which she kept in a case uder her bed. Did it come from there????

And a question:

Why did the police pick on "that knife" to put in the shirt box to pass on to forensics? Why didn't they take his whole cutlery set? Why did that knife stand out?


Last edited by Brian S. on Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline loz


Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 10:15 pm

Posts: 15

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:03 am   Post subject:    

Hello people. This post is 'froth' and frustrating because we can only ever speculate but I do wonder what happened to Meredith's missing beauty bag and/or make-up case. Could it have contained the money, did AK steal the case before or after the murder I wonder.
----------
Speculation on AKs sexuality:

I think AK sees sex (apart from with RS) as a 'conquest' from the way she boasted about it, either that or she's 'proving' to the world she's hot and 'in demand'.
I would not be surprised if she initiated the sexual attack on MK.
As far as who dealt the deadly 'blow' I wouldn't be surprised if it was RS, he seems a little sociopathic to me.
-----
satanic break-in; I wonder if "xin" posts here under another pseudonym as she suggested from the start this was a ritualistic murder. perhaps she said it at the time because of the date, the bloody nature, to implicate others to redeem AK, who knows.
I also wonder if the date of this break-in is significant to the "Masonic" or whatever calendar.
Top Profile 

Offline loz


Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 10:15 pm

Posts: 15

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:13 am   Post subject:    

LucyJ wrote:
Bess wrote:
I've been thinking about Curt Knox's "hickey" defence and Edda's "pierced ears" defence, and on and on with all the rest of the rellies' excuses.



I think it's self defence on the part of AK's parents. It's easier to remain in denial about the true nature of their daughter than to accept it. Easier to be the parent of the victim of a miscarriage of justice than the parent of a promiscuous, drug-taking murderesss. They can tell themselves they're helping Amanda, but I think it's just as much about helping themselves.

I think AK's parents are in a sh*t situation. I don't agree with how they have behaved in many instances and think their denial and excuses does neither them nor their daughter any favours. But I can see how scary the alternative must be. This is a heinous, high profile crime - if (and probably when) AK is convicted, they will be forever linked to it. What a vile stain on their lives. Easier to close their eyes and hope that if they wish hard enough and shout loud enough, then all this unpleasant business will just go away. Leaving no questions about whether they might, inadvertently, have created this "monster". And life can just go back to normal... with perhaps a book or film deal for good measure.



From the media it seems AKs parents know she is not totally innocent, just of the attack on meredith. From the leaked prison telephone convo between AK and her mum AK said to her mum something like "But it's poitless and/or stupid to deny I was in the house at the time. Bear in mind AKs quote that if she had been in that room the murder wouldn't have happened. Perhaps she convinced her mum/family she was in the house but she had nothing to do with the murder.

However, since her parents knew she was in the house how do they reconcile their daughter STILL standing by the murderous RS & RG and not trying to help MK by phoning an ambulance. Maybe they just don't want to seee their daughter jailed for anything but it would have been better for them to let AK publically admit some guilt, but not murder. They obviously think she can get away with the whole lot, even though I don't think she can because to me she is clearly complicit at the very least.

Perhaps AK persuaded them she defended RS because she's hopelessly smitten, even after he became a murderer (sick), that she was in the kitchen cradling herself and covering her ears, or that she was scard of RS and/or RG.


and who knows perhaps AK vacated the room then RS stabbed MK and AK helped him clean up. sorry for yet more speculation. I guess though the prosecuters suspect AK as the killer because of the evidence found on the knife and it's the best chance of securing a murder conviction.

=======================
Steve Huff mentioned in this article:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and- ... -in-italy/
Top Profile 

Offline Mutley


User avatar


Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 10:38 pm

Posts: 71

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:22 am   Post subject:    

I've been watching the Curt Knox body language for a while and it has struck me as resigned. I think he's trying to hypnotizie himself with the mantra 'Amanda is innocent. It will all be well' and not quite managing it. The statements he comes out with as standard bearer for the FOA 'it's a railroad job by evil prosecutors' scenario are becoming increasingly bizarre. After the court days he was telling journalists that the contradictions in evidence were quickly becoming apparent and then that the prosecution case was 'already collapsing' :shock: Planet Earth to Curt, are you receiving? Four days of testimony and the defendents lies are already being exposed, their alibis sinking, the lone wolf evaporating and all AK has managed to dispute is the size of her dildo. But Curt was not really interested in listening to any of that, he didn't use the interpreter. Just kept repeating that mantra. Once the 'real' evidence goes to court it will all collapse and Mignini will go to jail instead.

I keep wondering whether both the Knox clan and the Sollecito Clan would rather the pretence is kept up to the end for their own benefit rather than that of the accused. Much better to be victims of a misscarriage of justice with their offspring in jail than face the humiliation of them admitting guilt in this most shameful and disgusting of crimes. Their own status will suffer and there would be no avoiding some degree of self analysis as to how they raised a viper. Both mobs have far too much of their own esteem invested in this to allow any acceptance of guilt by their offspring. The Knox lot mostly emotional but for the Sollecitos also social. That connected and respected family will be neither in short notice.

The self delusion that the whole case will just collapse with AK skipping home happily has already slipped for a moment when Curt stated that he will take the case to appeal and supreme court if AK is convicted.

RS does not want to associate with the 'criminals' in the prison. Such people are beneath him. He has nothing in common with such characters. :lol: :lol: :lol: Wakey Wakey Raff old boy! Sex criminals are the lowest of the low in prison. Your social status will take a bit of a tumble if this goes against you.

So for now at least they shut their eyes, grit their teeth and go for broke. The only question for Raffa to wile away the hours in the company of Raffa's Riff Raff is 'was she or wasn't she?' Is it better to remember her there all night? Is the alibi stronger for their bond? Is it possible to cut loose and leave the blame to two? But if one really nice college student can be a killer then why not two? If she starts sinking she can turn and point. But she's bonkers. She wont will she. But I would still have to admit to helping with the cleanup. I would still go to prison. ME!!! Go to prison. MEEEEE!. What would Papa say??? Endless questions. But the more I think the more I remember her there. Too dangerous not to. Maybe we can wait and see how it goes. Memory is still fuzzy. It could clear later on if it needs to. On the other hand...
Top Profile 

Offline Wistar


Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 7:25 am

Posts: 15

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:36 am   Post subject:    

I'm with you loz. I believe Amanda has told her parents some version of events, which includes her presence at the crime scene, but definitely not an active involvement. This is obviously a crime to some degree. When the police swooped in on her and all the evidence started stacking up, I think her parents became frightened that she would go down for murder. Perhpas they do honestly feel she has been victimized (in a sense, i think we can all agree that the media frenzy is unhealthily focused on this girl) and that certain aspects of the police investigation were unprofessional. I'm sure they believe her when she tells of '14 hour interrogation' and 'beatings'. They must be terrified that she is going to get swept up by what they consider a mentally unstable prosecuter and circumstantial evidence. They can't be proud of her, that's for sure, and I'm certain there must be some doubt their mind.
If they knew for certain that she was guilty (ie, she had broken down and confessed to them), I could still see them being as supportive as possible, hiring the best legal team they could find, and flying to italy regularly to see her - but I could NOT understand the launching of such a ridiculous PR campaign.
Whether or not they entertain the possibility that she may be lying to them, they have given her the benefit of the doubt and convinced themselves of her innocence because they love her.
Top Profile 

Offline loz


Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 10:15 pm

Posts: 15

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:51 am   Post subject:    

Wistar wrote:
Whether or not they entertain the possibility that she may be lying to them, they have given her the benefit of the doubt and convinced themselves of her innocence because they love her.


never a truer word spoken.
Top Profile 

Offline daisysteiner


Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:59 pm

Posts: 490

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:13 pm   Post subject:    

Munch wrote:
LucyJ - Interestingly there is a reference to the family's defence of AK in my favourite UK tabloid (the Daily Mail) today - article by Jan Moir, "It's never right for a parent to protect their criminal child" - specifically about the murder of Rhys Jones where the murderer's mother has now admitted to lying for her son to protect him from conviction. Of course, we shouldn't tar them with the same brush given Knox has not been convicted but it raises a good point and a real issue more broadly.


And in true Daily Mail style, here's the opposite opinion on Janette Mercher from a few days previously...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... ARLER.html

For those unfamiliar with the British Press, the Daily Mail readers tend to be the very worst of the right wing, little englanders who miss the Empirea having nothing else to do but moan about what is wrong with the world, they complain about how many immigrants we have and how they are taking British jobs from British workers, blah blah blah. I'm sure USA has it's equivilent....whoever was loving Bush in power would be likely candidates. Nick Pisa is a good journalist who works for some bloody awful newspapers.
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:41 pm   Post subject:    

"they complain about how many immigrants we have "

Not without reason.
Top Profile 

Offline daisysteiner


Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:59 pm

Posts: 490

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:53 pm   Post subject:    

bolint wrote:
"they complain about how many immigrants we have "

Not without reason.


Me thinks that's a discussion for another time on another board... :D 8-)
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 Feb 20, 2009 1:06 pm   Post subject:    

Here are some of the early reports of the break-in at the cottage. They seem to have used the same wire service, and have slightly different sub-editing (for the young ones, sub-editing is when you copy-and-paste the same text differently to someone else. :) )


The conspicuous placing of the knives in full view has a subtext undercurrent of the perpetrator saying, "Analyse this!"

I've put implied words in round brackets ().

Quote:
Mez: vandals in the murder house

Perugia – they used knives and a candle

Unknown persons entered into the Perugia house where Meredith Kercher was killed. The vandals have ransacked the apartment [: messo a soqquadro – literally, “created great disorder”] and used various large knives and a candle.
The situation was discovered during the course of operations for the return of various items still inside the house to the two Italian house mates of the victim and Amanda Knox, the young American accused of the murder.

Investigations are under way by the Perugia police flying squad coordinated with the local delegates [procura]. A rite whose nature is still unclear may have unfolded in the house. This seems to be shown by the use of a candle which was found inside Meredith’s room, where it had been fastened/stuck with wax.

The knives, four (of them), of large size and a kitchen type, had been placed – we learn from the investigators – in a most visible way on the floor of the kitchen. One was on top of a blue plastic envelope with “State Police” written on it – (the kind) usually used for “bagging” objects, but not used by the police of the Umbrian capital. Another one of the knives was on a piece of furniture in front of one of the rooms. One of the knives came from the kitchen sink of the house. The others – (this) is one of the investigators’ hypotheses – may have been removed from a suitcase in the house. In any case, whether any have been taken outside has not been excluded.

The investigators – still based on what has been learned – have ascertained that a glass pane in a window on the terrace located at the rear, which looks onto the kitchen, was smashed to gain entry into the house.

The house where Meredith Kercher was killed was under sequestration from the moments immediately following the discovery of the body, which occurred on the morning of 2 November 2007.

Currently, the trial of Amanda Knox and her ex-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito, (both) accused of the murder, is in progress before the Court of Assises of Perugia. In the course of the last few hearings, the judges authorised the two Italian house mates to remove the(ir) things still inside the house. This was the [causative] reason for the crime scene that arose from the unsettling discovery.

Rudy Guede has already been sentenced to 30 years’ imprisonment via fast track trial for the murder. All the accused have however always proclaimed themselves extraneous to every charge [addebito : literally, “debit”, “responsibility”].

Kercher lawyer: it’s an ugly story
"It’s a ugly story and I’m flabbergasted/disconcerted [allibito]" – thus lawyer Francesco Maresca, representing the civil part (of the case) for the Kercher family, commenting in the intrusion into the house where the student was killed. According to the lawyer, what happened “reinforces the attention that is on this case”. “The hope”, he says, concluding (the conversation), “is that it will be cleared up as soon as possible”.

TGCOM 18/2/2009



Quote:
Knives and candles found
Meredith (case): break-in at the murder house

Mystery in the house in via della Pergola in Perugia where Meredith Kercher was killed. Someone, during the night, trespassed against the seals and broke into the apartment. The forces of (law and) order found two large knives and one candle.

Unknown persons entered into the Perugia house where Meredith Kercher was killed. The vandals have ransacked the apartment [: messo a soqquadro – literally, “created great disorder”] and used various large knives and a candle.
The situation was discovered during the course of operations for the return of various items still inside the house to the two Italian house mates of the victim and Amanda Knox, the young American accused of the murder.

The knives, four (of them), of large size and a kitchen type, had been placed – we learn from the investigators – in a most visible way on the floor of the kitchen. One was on top of a blue plastic envelope with “State Police” written on it – (the kind) usually used for “bagging” objects, but not used by the police of the Umbrian capital. Another one of the knives was on a piece of furniture in front of one of the rooms. The police also found a used candle in the apartment.

In the room where Meredith was killed, some wax was found, but on this matter, investigations [accertamenti] are still under way. The investigators – still based on what has been learned – have ascertained that a glass pane in a window on the terrace located at the rear, which looks onto the kitchen, was smashed to gain entry into the house.

The house where Meredith Kercher was killed was under sequestration from the moments immediately following the discovery of the body, which occurred on the morning of 2 November 2007. Currently, the trial of Amanda Knox and her ex-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito, (both) accused of the murder, is in progress before the Court of Assises of Perugia. In the course of the last few hearings, the judges authorised the two Italian house mates to remove the(ir) things still inside the house. This was the [causative] reason for the crime scene that arose from the unsettling discovery. Rudy Guede has already been sentenced to 30 years’ imprisonment via fast track trial for the murder. All the accused have however always proclaimed themselves extraneous to every charge.

TEMPO 18/02/2009




Quote:
Break-in at the Perugia murder house

Perugia – The items found during today’s crime scene investigation in various places inside the abode where Meredith Kercher was killed were already present in the house in via della Pergola before the break-in by persons unknown. A knife was found on top of an envelope with “police” written on it but, however, not in use by the Perugia police.

Among the hypotheses at the top of the investigators’ list, is that the envelope could be part of promotional material that the police occasionally hand out in various initiatives. One of the knives probably came from the kitchen sink of the house. The others – (this) is one of the investigators’ hypotheses – may have been removed from a suitcase in the house.

In any case, whether any have been taken outside has not been excluded. As for the candles, even these were already present in the house and it seems that they belong to one of Meredith Kercher and Amanda Knox’s Italian house mates. A leading hypothesis among the investigators is that they were used for lighting in the house during the “raid”, even though other possibilities have not been excluded.

As for the reasons for the break-in, the investigators are following up all lines of enquiry. At the moment, they do not want to exclude any hypothesis, (anything) from a rite of unclear nature to an intimidating act.

ANSA 2009-02-19 09:02

Top Profile 

Offline Principessa Etrusca


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 12:15 am

Posts: 33

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 1:29 pm   Post subject: Re: Tapes of conversations in Prison   

Brian S. wrote:


[i]03 Dec 2007

Dramatic new evidence has emerged that may help prove that Amanda Knox, the American girl accused of murdering Meredith Kercher, was present when the British student died.

Knox was secretly bugged by investigators while talking to her parents in prison, in a conversation which appears to contradict her previous insistences that she was not in the house on the night of the murder.

Police sources revealed that when the conversation turned to whether Knox, 20, was at the scene, she said: “It’s stupid, I can’t say anything else, I was there and I cannot lie about it.”


I am not a native English speaker, but to me “It’s stupid, I can’t say anything else, I was there and I cannot lie about it” cannot possibly be referring to Raffaele's flat.

If indeed Knox had been at Raffaele's flat at the time of the crime, i.e. innocent of Meredith's murder, why on earth would anybody, least her mother, have expected her to lie about her whereabouts.

"I cannot lie" could only have been said if the truth (her presence at the cottage) had been a less advantageous option (the one which would have implicated her directly) and she had been asked/expected by her mother to lie and present the police with a false account.

I believe that Edda's sudden arrival to Perugia at the beginning of the investigation has immeasurably damaged the investigation.
Top Profile 

Offline Brogan


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:41 am

Posts: 306

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 1:48 pm   Post subject:    

I love the way the break in at the flat became a satanic ritual because some items were moved and candels lit, no mention of sacrificed goats or pentangles it must have been a slow news day.

I must confess I do take the Daily Mail occasionally, it has decent sports coverage and a cross word that I can knock off in less than five minutes, the rest is just partisan and puriant dross.

At the moment I begining to think that AK and RS are going to turn on each other sometime soon in the hope of a lesser sentence. I'd put odd's on RS trying to cut a deal as he realises he is just a bit part player in the Amanda show.
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 Feb 20, 2009 1:50 pm   Post subject:    

Some more articles about the break-in.
The facts have not stabilised yet.
Full translation tomorrow.

Briefly,

GIORNALE, 19 Feb 2009 07:00
- Flowerpot used to break window
- one knife on the kitchenette floor
- one on a sofa with one of Meredith’s blankets
- one on a stand behind the front door
- one on the floor in front of the victim’s room
- the rest from a suitcase in which Italian girls had placed all the unused utensils
- candles either for a satanic rite or as a lighting source (on account of no electricity)
- could be either intimidation or dissing the police
- Filomena and Laura’s things not returned
- Monica Napoleoni (police) led the squad, and Federico Centrone (lieutenant procurator) has opened a casefile

AGI
- The parking station security camera being examined again
- 2 knives from the kitchen
- 2 from Amanda’s suitcase
- 1 left back in the kitchen on an envelope used for promotional leaflets
- everything messed about, nothing apparently taken
- used candles belonging to Italian girl

NAZIONE
- Roman police leaflet dropped by perpetrator
- scientific police back again at via della Pergola
- 3 cigarette butts in Laura’s room
- knives placed to give a message
- the plastic envelope
- the plastic flowerpot used to break the window
- checking YouTube just in case it was yahoos
- almost impossible to tell if anything was taken
- everything upside down
- even Meredith’s suitcase with her clothes and underwear
- Amanda’s knives not murder weapon
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 Feb 20, 2009 1:54 pm   Post subject: Re: Thank yous!   

Tara wrote:
CATNIP! :)

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TRANSLATIONS! They are time consuming, but are so vital to the discussion here. You're a very important and kind lion, and we're lucky to have you!




Prrrrrrrr! :D
Top Profile 

Offline FinnMacCool


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 11:42 am

Posts: 299

Location: Cionn tSáile, Poblacht na hÉireann

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:34 pm   Post subject:    

daisysteiner wrote:
Nice lady that Dempsey woman isn't she, I wonder why sex obsessed nutters post on her site...


How very dare you.
Top Profile 

Offline Giustizia


Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:13 pm

Posts: 113

Location: New York City

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:31 pm   Post subject: Meredith, we hardly knew you   

Yesterday I read Barbie Latza Nadeau's article Sex and Murder in Italy in The Daily Beast and quickly fell down the Internet rabbit hole. I'm sure you all know the feeling--that's what happens when you begin clicking on contextual links and, before you know it, many hours have passed and you've analyzed incredibly detailed PowerPoint presentations about the Meredith Kercher murder (if I didn't know any better, I would have thought Kermit was a forensic science expert who did this for a living--phenomenal work), read hundreds of posts on message boards, watched video clips w/interviews of various Knox family members (are there any with Kercher's family?), and slogged through the flame wars that have erupted in the blogosphere between the innocentisti and colpevolisti (comments on The Daily Beast article turned ugly rather quickly when Candace Dempsey felt compelled to justify herself yet again and prattle on endlessly about her awards and education and experience).

But I digress. What has struck me more than anything are the images of the grisly crime scene (particularly those photos in which the victim's body are evident) and the Helter Skelter-like mayhem in that apartment--drugs, blood, upturned furniture, broken glass, and even shit in the toilet (haven't found that photo yet, and have no interest in viewing it, but apparently it exists). Pure chaos and utter madness. It's the pictures that snapped me back to reality--a woman was sexually abused and murdered by one or more sadistic, depraved, morally corrupt individuals.

Whatever /really/ transpired that night in Perugia at via della Pergola 7, I can say with 100% certainly that Meredith Kercher suffered tremendous, agonizing pain. During a couple or three torturous hours she experienced an unimaginable Hell. Her life was snuffed out in a heinous, brutal senseless act.

Meredith Kercher was innocent in every sense of the word. Let's never forget that, and let no one and nothing--not high-priced PR firms, not bumbling PI's, not family members with an agenda, not amoral lawyers who spread wicked lies, not journalists in the U.S., the U.K., and Italy who don't know the basics of conducting independent research into this or any other crime--stand in the way of the facts, the evidence, and the truth. Meredith Kercher is dead, a victim of a horrific crime, and we owe it to ourselves, as a civilized society, to seek justice, regardless of our personal opinions.
Top Profile 

Offline daisysteiner


Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:59 pm

Posts: 490

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 4:16 pm   Post subject:    

FinnMacCool wrote:
daisysteiner wrote:
Nice lady that Dempsey woman isn't she, I wonder why sex obsessed nutters post on her site...


How very dare you.


Ah you missed the secret code in the ellipsis, it stands for "cept for Finn". ;D
Top Profile 

Offline daisysteiner


Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:59 pm

Posts: 490

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 4:44 pm   Post subject:    

Brogan wrote:
I love the way the break in at the flat became a satanic ritual because some items were moved and candels lit, no mention of sacrificed goats or pentangles it must have been a slow news day.

I must confess I do take the Daily Mail occasionally, it has decent sports coverage and a cross word that I can knock off in less than five minutes, the rest is just partisan and puriant dross.

At the moment I begining to think that AK and RS are going to turn on each other sometime soon in the hope of a lesser sentence. I'd put odd's on RS trying to cut a deal as he realises he is just a bit part player in the Amanda show.


The Italian Satanism allegation/obsession thing is interesting. Mainly because the word Lucifer comes from Italian folklore and means "the bringer of light". Lucifer was the consort of the witch Aradia, who is the mother figure of the 3 stages of a wiccan witch (maiden, mother & crone). Lucifer was hijacked by the Catholic Church and his name & image used for the Christian devil. In reality, Lucifer is a good god from ancient times. Does that mean that so called Satanic rituals in Italy could be related to ancient folklore & worship, like druids in the UK still worship at Stonehenge at Solstice time? This is all from memory, I need to do more research but no doubt someone somewhere already has :D

I read the Daily Mail online occasionally in for "know thy enemy" reasons, my Old skool Labour voting dad father would kill me if I paid money for it. Your cleverer than me, I struggle with the tea break quickie in the Daily Star! Sudoku is a different matter though, am a veritable Gary Kasperov of Sudoku!

We've been speculating for a while on whether RS will crack first or not. The first time Knox attempts to shift the blame onto Sollecito to his face (as opposed to the disputed context of her accusing him of killing meredith while she slept in her diary), he'll get out of his chair and put her back in her box. You just need Knox to bite hard on some evidence and RS will go for her in my opinion. You'll note how Sollecito has no idea how the scratch came about and if the two of them were really in this together, they'd stop refering to themselves as individuals and have their lawyers refer to them as a team. Just get RS angry and his mask will drop. Knox managed to sit in a room with nine of girls, two of them supposed to be her friends telling the court room things about her that were less than complimentary and yet all Knox could object to is the vibrator and she managed that with little emotion other than a snigger when she started talking about the toy. She's a machine (no offense The Machine!) and apparently mad one at that; Sollecito isn't, he's still got emotions that are sane & connected to the present. He looks remorseful, she looks mental.
Top Profile 

Offline Giustizia


Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:13 pm

Posts: 113

Location: New York City

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 4:53 pm   Post subject:    

daisysteiner wrote:
The Italian Satanism allegation/obsession thing is interesting. Mainly because the word Lucifer comes from Italian folklore and means "the bringer of light". Lucifer was the consort of the witch Aradia, who is the mother figure of the 3 stages of a wiccan witch (maiden, mother & crone).


And Amanda Knox has sometimes been referred to in the Italian press as la luciferina.
Top Profile 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 5:09 pm   Post subject: study abroad under scrutiny....   

I just read the article from Nadeau who states,
"Knox, 21, who was a fresh-faced, middle-class student on a study-abroad program from the University of Washington"...
UW does not have a study abroad program in Perugia!

I have read this countless times that Knox was on a "study abroad program". It is precisely that she was NOT on a study abroad program that she was able to adopt a lifestyle that led her to where she is now. To go on a study abroad “program” means that you attend an organized and SUPERVISED educational program abroad most often with peers, faculty and/or at the very least a local administrative staff assigned to at least periodically look after the participants behavior and well-being.

Knox took the non-conformist path to study abroad. I recall she purposely did not want to go on a program to not follow the group so to speak. She did it cheaply, outside of the University of Washington, and completely on her own. This is characteristic of at least two type of people..those wo are adventurous and want a true full-immersion experience into the cultural (usually Italian majors), and those who want to be un-tethered and have total freedom and no one to answer to so they can do as they wish... I have no doubt Knox is the latter.

Parents especially should know that if she had attended a legitimate study abroad program, her attendance in class would have been monitored, and any behavior that would upset roommates may have been reported. In these programs for the most part there are strict housing rules... not overnight guests, let alone bringing guys to sack up with, ...most of the times other roommates complan to the program admin that they have an out of control roommate bringing guys home, drinking excessively or doing drugs. Not always of course, but programs with the proper supervision have enough of a presence to let the participants know that someone is at least checking up now and again and as a result they watch their behavior.

In addition, they are given significant preparation about living in the host country with pre-departure materials and perhaps meetings, talking with ex-participants, and attending an extensive multi-day orientation where staff and even local police lecture them about the many pitfalls of living in a foreign and new environment away from home…..the laws are different and more importantly there are some bad people walking the streets... enjoy yourself and learn, but also be careful, stay alert, out of trouble, etc.

I work in study abroad and we know what unleashed unsupervised colleges students get themselves into; we are trained to look for potential problems and we visit all students accommodations at least once per month and speak with everyone. We have open-door counseling and professionals with years of experience on staff. We watch out for all our students regularly... we know what behavior to look for and when to intervene...well most of the time.

Yes..it costs more to attend the Universita' per Stranieri through a legitimate US-college or - university sponsored program, but the situation Amanda has created or at least found herself in, is much less likely to happen to students on a proper accredited study abroad program. Let's face it at the age of 20, 21, 22, many are still kids, naive and vulnerable, especially those who have yet to explore their “wild side”, they sometimes see this as an opportunity to make up for lost time. Bottom line, they need guidance and no more so than when they are 8000 miles from home and on their own.

Knox took the "I am too good to go on study abroad program with fellow students" route and the cheap way out....not so cheap anymore. He parents should have known better. Either make sure the students are mature enough, or make sure they have a structured environment that can assist them while abroad; it’ well worth the extra cost and peace of mind.

So all you journalist please get it straight… Amanda Knox was NOT on a study abroad program. She took a leave from the University of Washington to study Italian at nothing more than a glorified language school which ANYONE, and I mean anyone can attend, and she did so on her own, the cheapest way possible with no supervision. She most likely would have a very difficult time getting credit from UW as well. It is obvious she was looking to break away.
basta...
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 5:16 pm   Post subject:    

Daisysteiner wrote:

Quote:
Speaking of liars, if Seattle PI was hosted in the UK, Skep & Snape would have a cast iron libel suit against Candace. Suggesting that they were "peeking" at little girls in the bathroom comes under child abuse laws here. You cannot make those sorts of allegations without backing it up with hardcore evidence. Remember why Tom Cruise sued South Park IN ENGLAND? Freedom of Speech is of course allowed but cross the line and you'd better get a solicitor- Google Private Eye as Hislop is a past master of UK libel trials. Based on Candace's theorising, everytime I go to a public bathroom where there is an underage child, I'm peeking at them. Nice lady that Dempsey woman isn't she, I wonder why sex obsessed nutters post on her site...


I was hoping that when the PI agreed to delete Candace's libelous post about me the other day, that would be the end of it. I have several eye witnesses who know very well that I did none of the things Candace has accused me of. Not one. In other words, Candace is lying and spreading malicious gossip with no basis in fact.

It isn't my way to respond in kind to that kind of thing. My philosophy has always been to take the high road and stay on it, no matter how low and dirty others may get. As a friend of mine once said: If you take the high road, you can always switch to the low road if you absolutely have to. Conversely, if you start out on the low road you are stuck with that path. It is impossible to switch to the high road once you have shown yourself to be someone who shoots from the hip and deals low blows.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline daisysteiner


Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:59 pm

Posts: 490

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 5:23 pm   Post subject:    

SH2k - THAT my friend is top quality information which I have not seen anywhere else. I must admit I thought she was on some kind of programme as Meredith came to Perugia as an Erasmus student. So was Knox totally independent from UW then, that is also super interesting? I know that you're pretty free on Erasmus but there has to be an official link between your home Uni and the host Uni in order to be allowed to go. I take it that wasn't there in any way shape or form for UW then, like it has to be for Leeds Uni? If that is the case, then no wonder Edda was on the plane like a shot. Knox was basically on her gap year and could have smoked, pilled n partied her way around the world for the same level of academic accreditation?
Top Profile 

Offline daisysteiner


Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:59 pm

Posts: 490

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 5:30 pm   Post subject:    

I know your a high ground type of person Skep, never in dispute mate. Lets just say that paragraph was meant for unregistered users :D
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 5:53 pm   Post subject: Wanna be a slob?   

I guess the black T-shirts were a bit plain and not selling much. So now the FOA’s are hoping to crack it by introducing the Valentine version.

Would this one be a flop?


Top Profile 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:01 pm   Post subject:    

daisysteiner wrote:
SH2k - THAT my friend is top quality information which I have not seen anywhere else. I must admit I thought she was on some kind of programme as Meredith came to Perugia as an Erasmus student. So was Knox totally independent from UW then, that is also super interesting? I know that you're pretty free on Erasmus but there has to be an official link between your home Uni and the host Uni in order to be allowed to go. I take it that wasn't there in any way shape or form for UW then, like it has to be for Leeds Uni? If that is the case, then no wonder Edda was on the plane like a shot. Knox was basically on her gap year and could have smoked, pilled n partied her way around the world for the same level of academic accreditation?


That is right... Mez was on an Erasmus program, which has modicum of structure at least, but more importantly it is very common for EU students to do what Mez did and with other students as well. There is an Erasmus (i.e. international studies) office for visiting students in Perugia. Mez had access to support and she was obviously much more mature... if nothing else her statement "i am not interested in boy, I came here to study" demonstrates. Light years ahead of Amanda.

Its likely that Amanda had access to no one; she was on her own. She took off from University to do as she wished and it was not sanctioned by UW. She could have drunk excessively, took drugs and explored every kind of perversion with no one to answer too.

In addition, since the Stranieri language program does not have stringent oversight or the same accreditation standards and most US colleges and universities (at the Stranieri you’re on your own) Amanda would have been hard pressed to get any credit for her time abroad unless she demonstrated her learning with an additional exam at UW when she returned. And even then it would probably be partial if any. When you attend a study abroad program, it’s examined by the home school and approved before you go. Your coursework is signed by your home school advisor for credit, you attend a legitimate university and you get an accredited transcript that has your courses, grades and credits. You most likely stay matriculated at your home institution and pay them tuition and, most of the time but not always, they pay the overseas school. Nevertheless, someone knows where you are and what you’re doing and can check up on you….there is accountability.

Amanda was on a year off more than anything, and came to Italy and enrolled a language school which she could attend or not attnd as she wished...she had no accountability to anyone- free as a bird and ready to party. She was NOT a study abroad program student.
With her level on maturity, and her mmmmm "love for life" as they say, it was an accident waiting to happen.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:05 pm   Post subject: Anybody know Bremner's number?   

daisysteiner wrote:
Speaking of liars, if Seattle PI was hosted in the UK, Skep & Snape would have a cast iron libel suit against Candace. Suggesting that they were "peeking" at little girls in the bathroom comes under child abuse laws here. You cannot make those sorts of allegations without backing it up with hardcore evidence. Remember why Tom Cruise sued South Park IN ENGLAND? Freedom of Speech is of course allowed but cross the line and you'd better get a solicitor- Google Private Eye as Hislop is a past master of UK libel trials. Based on Candace's theorising, everytime I go to a public bathroom where there is an underage child, I'm peeking at them. Nice lady that Dempsey woman isn't she, I wonder why sex obsessed nutters post on her site...


I'm sure Candace Dempsey is walking a fine line here in the US too, daiseysteiner. It's going to be very interesting to find out how she has filed her complaint and "request for protection" with the Mercer Island Police Department. Skep wondered earlier, "What names did she use and what reasons were cited?" If she used the names "Tara" "Professor Snape" and "Skeptical Bystander" then it's all rather frivolous isn't it, but if she used real names and addresses then I think she's looking straight into a lawsuit.
Top Profile 

Offline Giustizia


Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:13 pm

Posts: 113

Location: New York City

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:23 pm   Post subject: Pronto. Chi c'è?   

I've just joined this forum, and made it a point to read as many message threads as possible before jumping into the discussion (if you want to know the truth, I've spent the past two days reading them). One particular detail I find astonishing concerns Meredith Kercher's two cellphones.

1) Has anyone proposed a credible theory (in terms of timing and who tossed them over the wall) about how they (Meredith Kercher's two cellphones) ended up in Elisabetta Lana's garden on via Sperandio? My understanding is that the police determined it was impossible to obtain any legitimate DNA evidence from them, since so many people handled them.

2) There are a few instances cited in which one or another of those phones ring throughout the early hours of November 2. A couple of quotes from this message thread:

"One of Meredith’s two phones connected to the Internet for about 7-8 seconds at 10.pm. By Meredith or the killer? The second [thing] is an unanswered call from England at 00.05am; the phone was already abandoned, in the garden where it would be found."

"Between 9am and noon on 2 November, Meredith’s two phones were found by accident. Says the one who found them: “At a certain point, one of the two phones rang several times, in the garden as well as the house. In particular, I remember that while it was ringing in the house, I looked at the display and I saw the name “Amanda” appear."

Now THAT is fascinating. If true, why would someone use Amanda Knox's phone to call Meredith's cell?! I'm assuming, of course, that Meredith Kercher only had one "Amanda" saved in her cellphone. In the same vein, another quote from primary sources indicates that: "And that unexpected ringtone only added to her [Elisabetta Lana's] worry. She decided to call the police. On arrival, the postal police agents examined the handsets. They ran through the display to see the last outgoing and incoming calls."

I wonder if they noted that the name Amanda appeared, and if so, did the police question Amanda Knox why she made that call? And if she said yes, then what time did she claim to have made it? Another potential timeline trap.

3) It's been mentioned before, and I find it utterly amazing, that only sheer unadulterated coincidence led to a quick encounter - not more than 12 hours, in fact - between the police and AK/RS. That is, a prank phone call--a bomb scare--by a young boy late that fateful night led to the chain of events in which a woman is spooked when she finds a cellphone in her garden the next morning, calls the police, Meredith's phones are handed over to the postal police, and two agents immediately visit via della Pergola to arrange for their return. At which point they find AK and RS in front of the villa. I can only imagine the look on their faces when the postal police came knocking.

If you saw it in the movies or read it in a book you wouldn't believe it. What are the odds that, of all the people in Umbria that could have received that prank phone call, it was the woman who lived not more than a few hundred meters down the street from the murder, and not only that, it was in her garden where someone tossed Meredith's cell phones. At to top it off, the phone call probably happened very close to the time of her death. As someone else mentioned, the sheer unpredictability is mind-blowing.

Which leads me to play devil's advocate here. Has anyone considered how this entire horrible tragedy would have played out if that prank phone call wasn't made (or another number was dialed)? Or if the cellphones in Lana's garden weren't discovered for at least several days? Would AK/RS have notified the police on November 2 of a break-in, or after bleaching the villetta and trying to scrub clean evidence, would they have holed up at RS's apartment, waiting a day or two for one of the other roommates to discover the body? I say that because the police HAD to sense something terribly amiss with AK/RS's demeanor on November 2. If those two had another day or two to "sleep on it" they might have been able to sync up their alibi better. Or not (something tells me they would have smoked pot and had sex in an attempt to forget the gruesome horror they left behind at via della Pergola 7). But the discovery of the murder would have happened in quite another way.

And finally, did the police actually visit Lana's home immediately after she received the prank phone call? Perugia Shock claims that they did - which means that police were in the area of the murder that night, probably within an hour or so of Meredith's death, and AK/RS might even have seen them pass by (didn't a witness place them in a park later that night - a location that would have allowed them to bird's-eye view of the villa, to see if anyone happened to arrive there?).

One thing is certain. Cell phones have become the one of the best crime-solving tools.
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:33 pm   Post subject:    

Giustizia wrote:

"Now THAT is fascinating. If true, why would someone use Amanda Knox's phone to call Meredith's cell?!
...
I wonder if they noted that the name Amanda appeared, and if so, did the police question Amanda Knox why she made that call? And if she said yes, then what time did she claim to have made it? "

Amanda called at 12:08 Nov 2 and another time a couple of minutes later.
In the email she said that she made two calls to that phone from the cottage.
The first rang but was not answered, the second did not ring but an English automatic voice said that the phone is not available. (I think that those who found it in the garden switched it off or put it in some place where there was no connection).
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:36 pm   Post subject: Credit for What?   

stewarthome2000 wrote:
Amanda was on a year off more than anything, and came to Italy and enrolled a language school which she could attend or not attnd as she wished...she had no accountability to anyone- free as a bird and ready to party. She was NOT a study abroad program student.
With her level on maturity, and her mmmmm "love for life" as they say, it was an accident waiting to happen.


Because Frank recently posted the name of Anni Fuller as the primary recipient of Amanda's November 4th email home we know that Knox arranged her studies in Italy through the International Programs & Exchanges group located in one of the central administrative buildings (Schmitz Hall) of the University of Washington. Fuller would have been her adviser in the program and both the University of Perugia and Universitá per Stranieri di Perugia are listed as institutions that have direct exchange agreements with the University of Washington. Whatever it was she was actually doing, I'm certain she was earning credit towards an undergraduate degree from the UW in the fall of 2007.[/quote]
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:50 pm   Post subject:    

Jools wrote:

Quote:
I guess the black T-shirts were a bit plain and not selling much. So now the FOA’s are hoping to crack it by introducing the Valentine version.

Would this one be a flop?


Not a flop by any means. How nice of you to provide the t-shirt with a women's cut. The man's cut would be good too, but for sleepwear.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Corrina


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 4:20 pm

Posts: 625

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:50 pm   Post subject: RE: New Heavy Evidence Against Amanda !   

Methinks we have a troll...


Last edited by Corrina on Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline nicki

Forensics Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:27 am

Posts: 847

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:51 pm   Post subject: Re: "Telecamera" in front (?) of LE CHIC   

ugehring wrote:
SKEP:

I am just repeating what I did read in Carlizzi's website, 1st interview:

"Ed infine vorrei chiedere : chi erano i frequentatori del locale di Lumumba ?
Perchè dopo che Lumumba è stato scagionato, quel locale è rimasto vuoto tanto da dover essere chiuso ?
Chi ha temuto di essere ripreso con la telecamera ?
E Amanda lo avrebbe riconosciuto ?"

Anyway, it is known that the Brigata Stupefacenti likes to install such cameras near places where their "customers" show up...

Ugehring,

My advice to you is not to waste your time and efforts in posting about Carlizzi. This woman's problems go back as far as 1995-1996 when she was arrested for circumvention of unsound- mind persons (she was the head of a sect whose members "donated" her 2 million euro) and was sent to trial for slandering the Chief of Criminalpol. She is obsessed with murders and crime in general, sees esoteric conspiracies everywhere, and she 's obviously obsessed with the Law enforcement to the point that PM Mignini-during the investigation on the Narducci-Monster of Florence ties-asked for a restraint order, a forcible pshychiatric assessment and finally house arrest.
http://tinyurl.com/cwbpsw
http://tinyurl.com/cdlfvg

As you can see, there's no relation whatsoever between PM Mignini and Carlizzi, whose psychologic problems seem to have got worse over the years. And the crap that has been written on other blogs about Mignini "consulting" her is totally false. No proof anywhere.

I really hope this is the last I read about Carlizzi. She has been ranting about every single murder case happened in Italy for over a decade now, claiming she has an explanation for each one-always related to complicated conspiracies involving in turn: the Vatican, Satanic sects, Masonry etc. I've never seen anybody paying the slightest attention to her, except for some blogs that will use any fact in order to discredit the prosecution.Even the most absurd ones.

PS : I live in Italy and never heard of the "Brigata Stupefacenti". In Italy they are called "La Narcotici" . "Brigata Stupefacenti" sounds more of a Swiss term to me ( I live 40 kms from Switzerland).

Top Profile 

Offline Ferret


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:21 am

Posts: 101

Location: Hidden Hills, CA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:53 pm   Post subject:    

daisysteiner wrote:
Speaking of liars, if Seattle PI was hosted in the UK, Skep & Snape would have a cast iron libel suit against Candace. Suggesting that they were "peeking" at little girls in the bathroom comes under child abuse laws here. You cannot make those sorts of allegations without backing it up with hardcore evidence. Remember why Tom Cruise sued South Park IN ENGLAND? Freedom of Speech is of course allowed but cross the line and you'd better get a solicitor- Google Private Eye as Hislop is a past master of UK libel trials. Based on Candace's theorising, everytime I go to a public bathroom where there is an underage child, I'm peeking at them. Nice lady that Dempsey woman isn't she, I wonder why sex obsessed nutters post on her site...


No, they wouldn't have a cast iron defamation case. It would be quite risky if it went to trial. Yes, UK libel laws favour the plantiff (s) beside other Commonwealth countries, and have limited defense options for the defendant, beside the burden of proving is on the defendant. However that isn't sureproof for the plantiff. Discovery could cast a very wide net, that both sides wouldn't be exactly wild about. Going to trial, is always a big risk for both plantiff and defendant, because a trial takes on a life of its own.

If any defamation case in the UK should be used as example of how a defamation case could backfire was McDonald's Restaurants v Morris & Steel, which was a PR nightmare for McDonald's, and dragged on for twenty or so years. The only reason to file a libel case in the UK for the plantiff (s), if they have no qualms taking the risk of losing and paying the other sides cost, and putting a huge amount of money for their own case.

Here is an article about "libel tourism", routinely practiced by Khalid bin Mahfouz.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/15/opini ... ef=opinion


Last edited by Ferret on Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:59 pm   Post subject:    

Giustizia wrote:

Quote:
Meredith Kercher was innocent in every sense of the word. Let's never forget that, and let no one and nothing--not high-priced PR firms, not bumbling PI's, not family members with an agenda, not amoral lawyers who spread wicked lies, not journalists in the U.S., the U.K., and Italy who don't know the basics of conducting independent research into this or any other crime--stand in the way of the facts, the evidence, and the truth. Meredith Kercher is dead, a victim of a horrific crime, and we owe it to ourselves, as a civilized society, to seek justice, regardless of our personal opinions.


Welcome Giustizia and thank you for expressing a key thought so forcefully and so eloquently. I find it strange that people who share your view are sometimes made to feel that they are doing something wrong. What happened to Meredith Kercher could have happened to anyone - of any race, creed or gender - and shouldn't happen to anyone in a civilized society. When it does happen, we owe it to ourselves to support the quest for clarity, truth and justice.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:02 pm   Post subject:    

Corrina wrote:
Methinks we have a troll...


I know we have a troll...
Top Profile 

Offline Ferret


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:21 am

Posts: 101

Location: Hidden Hills, CA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:15 pm   Post subject: Re: Anybody know Bremner's number?   

Fly by Night wrote:
daisysteiner wrote:
Speaking of liars, if Seattle PI was hosted in the UK, Skep & Snape would have a cast iron libel suit against Candace. Suggesting that they were "peeking" at little girls in the bathroom comes under child abuse laws here. You cannot make those sorts of allegations without backing it up with hardcore evidence. Remember why Tom Cruise sued South Park IN ENGLAND? Freedom of Speech is of course allowed but cross the line and you'd better get a solicitor- Google Private Eye as Hislop is a past master of UK libel trials. Based on Candace's theorising, everytime I go to a public bathroom where there is an underage child, I'm peeking at them. Nice lady that Dempsey woman isn't she, I wonder why sex obsessed nutters post on her site...


I'm sure Candace Dempsey is walking a fine line here in the US too, daiseysteiner. It's going to be very interesting to find out how she has filed her complaint and "request for protection" with the Mercer Island Police Department. Skep wondered earlier, "What names did she use and what reasons were cited?" If she used the names "Tara" "Professor Snape" and "Skeptical Bystander" then it's all rather frivolous isn't it, but if she used real names and addresses then I think she's looking straight into a lawsuit.


No, I doubt that Candace Dempsey is walking a fine line in the States. If she was serious about her allegations, she would file a restraining order, and see what a judge thinks about the allegations. The Police may have a report, but there isn't much they can and won't do. Seattle PD has a threat assessment section for example, and they wouldn't even lift a finger at the current level of testiness.

A restraining order is a civil action, and just needs a hearing, so the burden of proof is much lower than for a criminal case, but if CD seriously believed some of the stuff she is writing, she would file a restraining order, everything else is borderlines on legal gimmicks and window dressing.

Both sides should take a chill pill. Both sides need to realize that cases like this, emotions run high, and both sides can get easily offended. US has the most favourable defendant friendly defamation tort laws in the world. The US Supreme court pretty much set precedents of "malicious intent" in NY Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964) and refine it in Gertz v. Robert Welch Inc. (1974). Opinion and insults can be used as defense in defamation cases in US courts. Most defamation cases in the US are long messy affairs, which last for years, and the punitive damages are always lowered to the point that the plantiff pays more their legal case than what they are awarded, if they are awarded.

Candace Dempsey has to walk a fine line in what she says in Italy, ditto for Paul Ciolino. Both of them basically have been put on notice, by Mignini. In the United States, CD and PC are not even near 'malicious intent" standard for a defamation tort.


Last edited by Ferret on Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:34 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:18 pm   Post subject:    

Ferret wrote:

Quote:
daisysteiner wrote:

Speaking of liars, if Seattle PI was hosted in the UK, Skep & Snape would have a cast iron libel suit against Candace. Suggesting that they were "peeking" at little girls in the bathroom comes under child abuse laws here. You cannot make those sorts of allegations without backing it up with hardcore evidence. Remember why Tom Cruise sued South Park IN ENGLAND? Freedom of Speech is of course allowed but cross the line and you'd better get a solicitor- Google Private Eye as Hislop is a past master of UK libel trials. Based on Candace's theorising, everytime I go to a public bathroom where there is an underage child, I'm peeking at them. Nice lady that Dempsey woman isn't she, I wonder why sex obsessed nutters post on her site...


No, they wouldn't have a cast iron defamation case. It would be quite risky if it went to trial, and UK libel laws favour the plantiff beside other Commonwealth countries, and have limited defense options for the defendant, beside the burden of proving is on the defendant. Discovery could cast a very wide net, that both sides wouldn't be exactly wild about.

If any defamation case in the UK should be used as example of how a defamation case could backfire was McDonald's Restaurants v Morris & Steel, which was a PR nightmare for McDonald's, and dragged on for twenty or so years. The only reason to file a libel case in the UK for the plantiff (s), if they have no qualms taking the risk of losing and paying the other sides cost, and putting a huge amount of money for their own case.


Don't worry. I can't speak for Snape and the others, but I have no intention of filing suit against anyone. In this particular case, Candace Dempsey is endlessly repeating absurd statements that even she probably doesn't believe. The people who take her seriously already believe I am evil incarnate. I just keep asking the PI to delete the libelous statements, and so far they have been very obliging.

But otherwise, I am not losing any sleep over this. Candace Dempsey has already accused me publicly of things I haven't done and has already had to retract at least once. It would so much simpler if she just dropped it.

I think it is important at this point to focus on the here and now. The trial, for example. Candace Dempsey seems to thrive on this kind of attention, so maybe it is time to stop feeding the beast. Candace who?

Reply to Corinna: Sometimes it's fun to see what the trolls are up to. Did you read my lame attempt to decipher Gabriella Carlizzi's interview with Harry Wilkens? I forgot to give the title of the article: When Two Lunatics Meet, Conversation Naturally Turns to Conspiracies of Vast Proportions (subtitle: Where Did You Find That Cute Picture of the Asian Woman Defecating?) :lol:
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 Feb 20, 2009 7:22 pm   Post subject: Re: RE: New Heavy Evidence Against Amanda !   

Corrina wrote:
Methinks we have a troll...



Dealt with :)

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


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

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:32 pm   Post subject: Re: RE: New Heavy Evidence Against Amanda !   

Michael wrote:
Corrina wrote:
Methinks we have a troll...



Dealt with :)


Parasites!

Thanks Michael. :D
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:38 pm   Post subject:    

Ferret wrote:

Quote:
Candace Dempsey has to walk a fine line in what she says in Italy, ditto for Paul Ciolino. Both of them basically have been put on notice, in the US, they are not even near 'malicious intent" standard for a defamation tort.


I am not a lawyer, but I am sure you are right. I don't think it is worth the time, the trouble or the expense. As for whether or not Candace has sought or obtained a restraining order, I seriously doubt it.

For one thing, she only knows my real name. I doubt that talk of being stalked by Professor Snape, Tara and (I don't know who else has admitted to being there, so I will leave this blank)... etc. would be compelling to a judge. Lions and Witches and Bears, oh my!
Secondly, I think I would have been served papers.
Thirdly, if all she has to go on is my coincident presence at a public venue located a mile from my home, and at which I am an occasional patron, then I think that would be viewed as frivolous.
Fourthly, returning to the specific case of alleged "stalking," Candace was not approached by any of her alleged stalkers and in fact only realized "they" were in the same crowded public venue as she was at the same time is that one of them (me) reported this coincident attendance on a public message board.
Fifthly, on the night in question I had no way of knowing that Candace Dempsey would be present at Salty's. In fact, although you have to take my word for it, I didn't even think about whether or not she would be there. It had nothing to do with my reasons for being there.
Finally, I have never sent or otherwise communicated any threats of any kind to the attention of Candace Dempsey (or anyone else for that matter).

I rest my case.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:42 pm   Post subject: Re: Credit for What?   

Fly by Night wrote:
stewarthome2000 wrote:
Amanda was on a year off more than anything, and came to Italy and enrolled a language school which she could attend or not attnd as she wished...she had no accountability to anyone- free as a bird and ready to party. She was NOT a study abroad program student.
With her level on maturity, and her mmmmm "love for life" as they say, it was an accident waiting to happen.


Because Frank recently posted the name of Anni Fuller as the primary recipient of Amanda's November 4th email home we know that Knox arranged her studies in Italy through the International Programs & Exchanges group located in one of the central administrative buildings (Schmitz Hall) of the University of Washington. Fuller would have been her adviser in the program and both the University of Perugia and Universitá per Stranieri di Perugia are listed as institutions that have direct exchange agreements with the University of Washington. Whatever it was she was actually doing, I'm certain she was earning credit towards an undergraduate degree from the UW in the fall of 2007.
[/quote]

This is the site for supervised "sponsored programs" and its these programs to which I was referring.
http://depts.washington.edu/frenital/study-abroad.html

http://depts.washington.edu/frenital/st ... rome09.htm
Notice that Participating faculty will be Giuseppe Leporace as director of the program and Ruggero Taradel.

There is a huge difference between supervised programs and UNISTRAPG which is totally unsupervised.
Anni Fuller does little more than process paperwork.

If you look carefully through the other programs you will see "special courses for UW students" or sponsoring entity, department or specific faculty member contact. The UNIPG just says "International Programs and Exchanges" because there is no contact.

I recall that Amanda stating that "took a year off from UW" to go to PG...in either case she proved too immature for the independent experience.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Corrina


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 4:20 pm

Posts: 625

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:57 pm   Post subject:    

Thanks, Michael. Any way of moderating the comment, though? I know the attempt is at making the board appear as "hate-mongers", so leaving up the name-calling confirms (in those eyes) just that. Of course, censoring it makes us little better than the one re-writing the truth. Damned either way, eh? ;)
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:07 pm   Post subject: Dempsey   

Candace Dempsey wrote:
Posted by Candace Dempsey at 2/20/09 11:22 a.m.

DelD, I get what you're saying, but that only makes sense if money is a motive. AK & RS didn't need to steal the money and Rudy's fingerprints are on the bag. If anybody needed money it would be him because he needed to pay his rent. Which he did not do, of course.

Also, no relationship is perfect. It's hard to live with another person. But people don't kill over such minor things. It's the best the prosecution has, but it isn't much. Instead they are playing the sex game card. They may or may not win with that, but that is certainly what we've seen so far. The plastic bag! Vibrators. Condoms. Kissing a boy in the Red Zone. Having sex. Smoking weed.



THE COOK'S SMOG


Candace repeatedly trots these lines out like a little mantra. Sir Allen Stanford and Bernard Madhoff (two of a long list of illustrious examples) didn't 'need' to steal any money either, they were billionaires, yet you don't hear anyone coming forward to defend their alleged crimes with the line - 'they didn't need to steal the money'. Theft through GREED is as a common a motive as need. THe fact that they didn't 'need' the money is also in fact in dispute, with Raffaele only having 40 Euros in his account to last him a month and Amanda (who I suppose worked in a bar for fun, rather then she 'needed' the money?) was out of a job. Just a couple of days before the murder Amanda was telling her housemates that she was quitting working at the bar because Patrick hadn't paid her and if she didn't quit, it looks like she was going to be sacked anyway. Rudy's fingerprints on the handbag (for which there is NO evidence it contained her rent money in any case) under forensic scrutiny show it was gripped in order to lift and move, but never 'opened', at least not by Rudy. Moreover, as you've been informed multiple times but have completely ignored, Rudy was not in 'need' of money to pay his rent, the unemployed in Italy get their rent paid by the government. If, as even you concede, he didn't pay his rent anyway, how can a need for rent money possibly form a motive for him stealing the money in any case? He steals money because he 'needs' it to pay his rent and then promptly doesn't pay his rent? You contradict yourself with your own argument.

People do kill each other over minor things...it happens all the time, depressingly. However, I'm not saying those 'minor things' formed the motive in this case, only nobody can say for sure that they didn't. It is also FAR from being all the prosecution has...how can that possibly be said when we have only heard up to Day 3 of the trial??? The testimony we've so far heard has been only to set the context. The evidence itself hasn't even begun to be introduced yet.

_________________
"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 Ferret


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:21 am

Posts: 101

Location: Hidden Hills, CA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:14 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Ferret wrote:

Quote:
Candace Dempsey has to walk a fine line in what she says in Italy, ditto for Paul Ciolino. Both of them basically have been put on notice, in the US, they are not even near 'malicious intent" standard for a defamation tort.


I am not a lawyer, but I am sure you are right. I don't think it is worth the time, the trouble or the expense. As for whether or not Candace has sought or obtained a restraining order, I seriously doubt it.

For one thing, she only knows my real name. I doubt that talk of being stalked by Professor Snape, Tara and (I don't know who else has admitted to being there, so I will leave this blank)... etc. would be compelling to a judge. Lions and Witches and Bears, oh my!
Secondly, I think I would have been served papers.
Thirdly, if all she has to go on is my coincident presence at a public venue located a mile from my home, and at which I am an occasional patron, then I think that would be viewed as frivolous.
Fourthly, returning to the specific case of alleged "stalking," Candace was not approached by any of her alleged stalkers and in fact only realized "they" were in the same crowded public venue as she was at the same time is that one of them (me) reported this coincident attendance on a public message board.
Fifthly, on the night in question I had no way of knowing that Candace Dempsey would be present at Salty's. In fact, although you have to take my word for it, I didn't even think about whether or not she would be there. It had nothing to do with my reasons for being there.
Finally, I have never sent or otherwise communicated any threats of any kind to the attention of Candace Dempsey (or anyone else for that matter).

I rest my case.


If Candace filed for a restraining order against whomever, the person would get a notice about the upcoming hearing. All other saber rattling is inconsequential, and it is just that: saber rattling, with a plastic saber, or one of the Star War light saber they sell at Toy R US. Anyone can file a restraining order, whether it is granted is a different story.

Harassment, IIRC under RCW (Revise Code of Washington) is a (gross) Misdemeanor, so is Stalking, unless there are previous stalking incidents.

http://tinyurl.com/ce7m8d
http://tinyurl.com/388nzj

Holding an event that is open to the media and public, (and strong encouragement for the media and public to come) as the FOA event, is not exactly a good foundation for a harassment complaint to Law Enforcement. Filing a harassment/stalking complaint based on public and media friendly event is a good foundation to be sent to Steilacoom.

Law Enforcement is going to take the attitude of "Stop wasting our time", if it is just petty sniping of people who just don't like each other. They will get involved when repeated threats of physical violence are issued or repeated threats of financial harm or physical property are involved. Most major law enforcement agencies and police departments have some serious threat assessment sections.

Just to be clear, I am not a lawyer, I just happened to have read much about tort law.


Last edited by Ferret on Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:24 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:16 pm   Post subject: Re: Credit for What?   

stewarthome2000 wrote:
There is a huge difference between supervised programs and UNISTRAPG which is totally unsupervised. Anni Fuller does little more than process paperwork. If you look carefully through the other programs you will see "special courses for UW students" or sponsoring entity, department or specific faculty member contact. The UNIPG just says "International Programs and Exchanges" because there is no contact. I recall that Amanda stating that "took a year off from UW" to go to PG...in either case she proved too immature for the independent experience.


I agree, SH2K - a HUGE difference in these programs! Technically though, I believe she was able to maintain her UW student status and actually earn some credit for whatever it was she was doing in Perugia. I'm also sure it totally felt like taking some time off - we've seen some evidence of that. :twisted:
Top Profile 

Offline Giustizia


Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:13 pm

Posts: 113

Location: New York City

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:17 pm   Post subject: SMS: For me, tomorrow or tonight Meredith dies   

Has this claim ever been verified--that is, two days before Meredith Kercher was murdered, a mysterious text message was sent to a man in Rome? And if he did receive that SMS, were the police ever able to determine what phone it was sent from?

Kermit notes it in his PPP 3, and it was mentioned in several U.K. newspapers just days after the crime occurred:

'Meredith dies tonight': Chilling text message predicted student's sex murder

Text predicted Meredith murder
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:19 pm   Post subject:    

Ferret wrote:

Quote:
Holding an event that is open to the media and public, (and strong encouragement for the media and public to come) as the FOA event, is not exactly a good foundation for a harassment complaint to Law Enforcement. It is a good foundation to be sent to Steilacoom.


:lol: :lol: :lol:

Thanks for the insights.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:22 pm   Post subject: not her, again...   

Ferret wrote:
Law Enforcement is going to take the attitude of "Stop wasting our time", if it is just petty sniping of people who just don't like each other.


Yep - can't you just hear the MIPD officers muttering under their breath every time Candace walks in the door...
Top Profile 

Offline Corrina


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 4:20 pm

Posts: 625

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:25 pm   Post subject: Re: SMS: For me, tomorrow or tonight Meredith dies   

Giustizia wrote:
Has this claim ever been verified--that is, two days before Meredith Kercher was murdered, a mysterious text message was sent to a man in Rome? And if he did receive that SMS, were the police ever able to determine what phone it was sent from?

Kermit notes it in his PPP 3, and it was mentioned in several U.K. newspapers just days after the crime occurred:

'Meredith dies tonight': Chilling text message predicted student's sex murder

Text predicted Meredith murder


Hi Giustizia,

It was unrelated to the case. I think it had something to do with a TV show and a character on the show.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:25 pm   Post subject:    

Corrina wrote:
Thanks, Michael. Any way of moderating the comment, though? I know the attempt is at making the board appear as "hate-mongers", so leaving up the name-calling confirms (in those eyes) just that. Of course, censoring it makes us little better than the one re-writing the truth. Damned either way, eh? ;)



No, it's okay, I've deleted it and no foul there. Any Moderator, anywhere, has the right to delete posts that are blatant trolls and that is enshrined in our board rules. It was a flame, which is also covered in our rules and finally, it was posted by a poster who has already been banned on a previous occassion and has no right to post here anyway. There is a vast difference between a moderator dealing with blatant trolls and who would be in neglect if they didn't, to one that persecutes posters that simply post polite respectful views that differ from their own. There can be no comparrison between the two sites :)

_________________
"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 Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:34 pm   Post subject:    

Loz wrote:

Quote:
satanic break-in; I wonder if "xin" posts here under another pseudonym as she suggested from the start this was a ritualistic murder. perhaps she said it at the time because of the date, the bloody nature, to implicate others to redeem AK, who knows.
I also wonder if the date of this break-in is significant to the "Masonic" or whatever calendar.


Loz, it's great to see you posting here! I don't think xin posts here any more. She may be registered under another pseudonym; she posts from time to time on Frank's blog. I recall that she was very interested in the ritualistic aspect of the murder.

What you say about the break-in and the Masonic calendar is really interesting. Gabriella Carlizzi, whose wacky interview with a guy named Harry Wilkens I tried to decipher yesterday, is really into that stuff. Her interview/article was in part about the break-in, whether it was really to perform a black mass or other ritual or "staged" to look that way. Let's see if we can find a Masonic calendar - I didn't know there was one!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:52 pm   Post subject: Re: Credit for What?   

I agree, SH2K - a HUGE difference in these programs! Technically though, I believe she was able to maintain her UW student status and actually earn some credit for whatever it was she was doing in Perugia. I'm also sure it totally felt like taking some time off - we've seen some evidence of that. :twisted:[/quote]

Thanks Fly by Night. I stand corrected...I thought I was told that she took a semester off and simply got the idea from IPE to go to Perugia. I have read so many things that were inaccurate its no wonder. Yes.. there is a big difference in programs hence the point stands had there been supervision and/or on-site faculty or some authoritative figure her experience abroad may have turned out differently. I firmly believe that given all we do with our study abroad students.

Important thing is that we get the facts. That is why I love this blog, misinformation is challenged to get it right and fair.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 9:04 pm   Post subject:    

Corinna wrote:

Quote:
Giustizia wrote:
Has this claim ever been verified--that is, two days before Meredith Kercher was murdered, a mysterious text message was sent to a man in Rome? And if he did receive that SMS, were the police ever able to determine what phone it was sent from?
Kermit notes it in his PPP 3, and it was mentioned in several U.K. newspapers just days after the crime occurred:
'Meredith dies tonight': Chilling text message predicted student's sex murder
Text predicted Meredith murder

Hi Giustizia,
It was unrelated to the case. I think it had something to do with a TV show and a character on the show.



This is from the comments section of the Seattle Crime Blog:

Sienna - November 10, 2007 9:52 PM
In regards to that message that was received, apparently on Nov 1 ian episode of Gray's Anatomy was screened where the character of Meredith dies, so it could have been a red herring referring to that.

But I don't think its dodgy to delete a text message. He might have thought it was a prank, not necessarily a death threat. I don't live in America, but I know if I received a message like that, I would have deleted it and assumed it was someone playing a prank.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Mutley


User avatar


Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 10:38 pm

Posts: 71

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 9:15 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Corinna wrote:

Quote:
Giustizia wrote:
Has this claim ever been verified--that is, two days before Meredith Kercher was murdered, a mysterious text message was sent to a man in Rome? And if he did receive that SMS, were the police ever able to determine what phone it was sent from?
Kermit notes it in his PPP 3, and it was mentioned in several U.K. newspapers just days after the crime occurred:
'Meredith dies tonight': Chilling text message predicted student's sex murder
Text predicted Meredith murder

Hi Giustizia,
It was unrelated to the case. I think it had something to do with a TV show and a character on the show.



This is from the comments section of the Seattle Crime Blog:

Sienna - November 10, 2007 9:52 PM
In regards to that message that was received, apparently on Nov 1 ian episode of Gray's Anatomy was screened where the character of Meredith dies, so it could have been a red herring referring to that.

But I don't think its dodgy to delete a text message. He might have thought it was a prank, not necessarily a death threat. I don't live in America, but I know if I received a message like that, I would have deleted it and assumed it was someone playing a prank.




If I remember rightly they did track the sender. The text did refer to the upcoming episode of Gray's Anatomy and the text had been sent to the wrong person in error.
Top Profile 

Offline Professor Snape


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:53 pm

Posts: 247

Location: Seattle. WA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:20 pm   Post subject: Peeping Trolls and nonsense   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Ferret wrote:

Quote:
daisysteiner wrote:

Speaking of liars, if Seattle PI was hosted in the UK, Skep & Snape would have a cast iron libel suit against Candace. Suggesting that they were "peeking" at little girls in the bathroom comes under child abuse laws here. You cannot make those sorts of allegations without backing it up with hardcore evidence. Remember why Tom Cruise sued South Park IN ENGLAND? Freedom of Speech is of course allowed but cross the line and you'd better get a solicitor- Google Private Eye as Hislop is a past master of UK libel trials. Based on Candace's theorising, everytime I go to a public bathroom where there is an underage child, I'm peeking at them. Nice lady that Dempsey woman isn't she, I wonder why sex obsessed nutters post on her site...


No, they wouldn't have a cast iron defamation case. It would be quite risky if it went to trial, and UK libel laws favour the plantiff beside other Commonwealth countries, and have limited defense options for the defendant, beside the burden of proving is on the defendant. Discovery could cast a very wide net, that both sides wouldn't be exactly wild about.

If any defamation case in the UK should be used as example of how a defamation case could backfire was McDonald's Restaurants v Morris & Steel, which was a PR nightmare for McDonald's, and dragged on for twenty or so years. The only reason to file a libel case in the UK for the plantiff (s), if they have no qualms taking the risk of losing and paying the other sides cost, and putting a huge amount of money for their own case.


Don't worry. I can't speak for Snape and the others, but I have no intention of filing suit against anyone. In this particular case, Candace Dempsey is endlessly repeating absurd statements that even she probably doesn't believe. The people who take her seriously already believe I am evil incarnate. I just keep asking the PI to delete the libelous statements, and so far they have been very obliging.

But otherwise, I am not losing any sleep over this. Candace Dempsey has already accused me publicly of things I haven't done and has already had to retract at least once. It would so much simpler if she just dropped it.

I think it is important at this point to focus on the here and now. The trial, for example. Candace Dempsey seems to thrive on this kind of attention, so maybe it is time to stop feeding the beast. Candace who?


Thank you Daisysteiner and Ferret.

Skep, while I appreciate and know the respectable road you do travel and that you know (who) Candace is – that you have chosen not to pursue legal action but Candace is claiming I was "peeping on young girls in the GIRLS restwoom."

Candace is really treading on thin water with me and my patience.

I suppose I haven’t thought twice of it because I know it's not true and I have read and re-read the manner in which I presented the facts.

For the moment there is only one reason I am not pressing charges and that is so I will not be party to supporting her twisted book any more than I will provide one penny for the Knox family.

Candace and the Knox family have one thing in common – they are both desperate. I hope Candace knows she has a lot to lose if she keepss this nonsense up. Nuff said here.

_________________
"Wizard of Healing Potions and Alibis"
Top Profile 

Offline mistercrunch


Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 2:43 pm

Posts: 160

Location: Germany

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:50 pm   Post subject:    

LucyJ wrote:
My question is - wouldn't one assume that a guilty AK must have showered? One would imagine that she must have been covered in blood and who knows what other forensic evidence. So how about shower shortly after event to remove evidence, but no time (and, one would hope, inclination) to style hair. No shower in the morning in the "broken into" flat with an open door.


Thats what i think, too.

Thinking about the bloody footprints, you would have to take a shower to get rid of the blood on your feet. Or at least wash your feet, so why not take a full shower?

I also think that she had dryed her hair, but not styled/combded it. Just my impression of the picture.
Top Profile 

redneck


PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:38 pm   Post subject: Washing rites in the cottage   

Why should Amanda have washed her feet? The priest of Capanne took care of this. And Raffaele cleaned her ears. I never heard that somebody cleans his girlfriend's ears. Did Frank disappear? Any news from him?
Top

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:42 pm   Post subject:    

Candace wrote:

Quote:
These are the same "people" who believed they saw me emerge from a police car at the Amanda Knox fundraiser with my "husband and sister in tow." They will always be remembered for floating that bogus story, for creeping around in the dark, taking photos through the windows. For peeking at Amanda's little sisters in the ladies' room.
As I have said many times: You could not make this stuff up.


I hadn't noticed the last line before: you could not make this stuff up. And yet, that is precisely what Candace has done here.

As for the "they will always be remembered as...", followed by the four libelous statements, it makes me wonder if Candace isn't planning to include this in her book. In a way, I hope she does. The libel standard is lower in England and if just one English person buys a copy via amazon, then we could sue for defamation.
Whether we do or not, though, my reply to her "they will always be remembered as" is this: I would rather be remembered for this than for trying to pass myself off as a 1997 graduate of the University of Oregon rather than as a 1977 graduate and, worse, for trying to cover up for this lie by engaging in a two-step phased "bleaching" of my CV.

Maybe I should take a page from Candace's book, so to speak, and morph my master's degree in philosophy into a PhD. I could also say I got it in 1995, rather than 1985, and gain an automatic 10 years of youth. And while I'm at it, I think I'll change the school. I was accepted into programs other than the University of Washington's, at fancier schools. If anyone finds information online that indicates otherwise, I'll just change it back, little by little, hoping that no one notices.

Snape wrote:

Quote:
Skep, while I appreciate and know the respectable road you do travel and that you know (who) Candace is – that you have chosen not to pursue legal action but Candace is claiming I was "peeping on young girls in the GIRLS restwoom."

Candace is really treading on thin water with me and my patience.

I suppose I haven’t thought twice of it because I know it's not true and I have read and re-read the manner in which I presented the facts.

For the moment there is only one reason I am not pressing charges and that is so I will not be party to supporting her twisted book any more than I will provide one penny for the Knox family.


Everyone has to do what is best for them. It is true that being accused of "peeking" at little girls in a restroom is particularly serious in the world we live in. I find it odd that Candace is so terribly shocked by this false story she has cooked up and yet tolerates Harry Wilkens and his obsession with dirty old men and young virginal girls on her own blog.

One thing you might do is contact these two people at the PI*** and tell them you are not happy with the reappearance of Candace's false statements since she is referring to you. You might mention that although she omits your name here, she claimed in an earlier email that she had given "names" to the police, so you have every right to at least wonder if she plans one day to put your real name beside her lie.

I hope you realize that I see no reason to take action against Candace because I feel that most people (except Funnycat, Tufa and Bob) pay not the slightest bit of attention to her when she makes these ridiculous claims. But if she's saying stuff like this online, you have to wonder what she's telling people in her entourage. I bet that's a great story, featuring grown men terrifying young girls by exposing themselves in the ladies restroom and threatening Miss Marple herself at gunpoint. :shock:

***Here are the two email addresses:

DonSmith@seattlepi.com (I believe he is Candace Dempsey's editor)
glenndrosendahl@seattlepi.com (newmedia guy)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:45 pm   Post subject: Re: Here we go again   

Michael wrote:
Here we go again:


Candace Dempsey wrote:
Posted by Candace Dempsey at 2/19/09 7:59 p.m.

Okay, I promised not to discuss the stupidities said about me elsewhere, but sometimes I cannot resist.

The new rumor is that I have LIED about what year I got my master's degree in journalism. So I will now correct the record.

Yes, I did graduate in 1977, NOT 1997. Yes, there was a typo on my Linked In site that said 1997. Yes, I have now fixed it.

Why the year I got the master's degree would be of interest to anybody but me is a matter of mystery. Imagine an entire message board (PMF) where people are so devoid of a life that they would take the trouble to surf the Internet endlessly, looking for photos and "facts" about me.

These are the same "people" who believed they saw me emerge from a police car at the Amanda Knox fundraiser with my "husband and sister in tow." They will always be remembered for floating that bogus story, for creeping around in the dark, taking photos through the windows. For peeking at Amanda's little sisters in the ladies' room.
As I have said many times: You could not make this stuff up.



THE COOK'S SMOG


Actually Candace, this is completely untrue. The date you published for your masters actually contained TWO typos, typos you 'corrected' one at a time over a period of several days. The second point, NOBODY said they saw you 'emerging' from a police car. If you think you can prove me wrong, please provide the quote and link. And Candace, as for your last Paragraph, you've already had one post of yours deleted off of your own blog by the Seattle-PI for posting that crap (oh sweet irony indeed), Candace, you really need to get over this obsession you have with yourself...and seem to think everyone else therefore shares!


Thank you Michael for posting this. I'd like to take a closer look at that last paragraph that I've enlarged for better viewing purposes.

1) I NEVER SAID CANDACE, HER HUSBAND & SISTER EMERGED FROM A POLICE CAR.

2) I NEVER CREPT AROUND IN THE DARK & TOOK PHOTOS.

3) I NEVER PEEKED AT AMANDA KNOX'S LITTLE SISTERS IN THE LADIES ROOM.

STOP TELLING LIES CANDACE. NOW.

As far as the comment "These people will always be remembered as floating bogus stories...", I really hope Candace is not going to "assist" people in remembering by inserting these LIES into her book. If she does, I guess we'll have another issue on our hands.

I have reported her comment as a violation early this morning. I see that it has been reviewed and the comment stands.

I will be writing to Don Smith, the editor of the Seattle PI and ask to have this libelous comment removed.
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:48 pm   Post subject: Re: Credit for What?   

stewarthome2000 wrote:
Thanks Fly by Night. I stand corrected...I thought I was told that she took a semester off and simply got the idea from IPE to go to Perugia. I have read so many things that were inaccurate its no wonder. Yes.. there is a big difference in programs hence the point stands had there been supervision and/or on-site faculty or some authoritative figure her experience abroad may have turned out differently. I firmly believe that given all we do with our study abroad students. Important thing is that we get the facts. That is why I love this blog, misinformation is challenged to get it right and fair.


You raise an important point, SH2K. If Knox is found guilty, the issue of University of Washington student conduct and supervision (both on campus and abroad) will be scrutinized, probably to the detriment of quality students in quality programs. If Knox is found guilty, I think its safe to say that the UW will seek to further distance itself from its former Honor Student as it did when, on January 14, 2008, Monica Guzman on her PI Big Blog posted the following: "Knox, who has long been referred to as a University of Washington student, no longer is. UW spokesman Bob Roseth was surprised to hear the question this afternoon. "I don't know. No one's ever asked me that," he said, but he'd check. A few minutes later he called back. "She's not registered, so technically she's not a student right now. She's a former student and could be a student in the future, but she's not a student now."

What we're talking about is an important point because Knox was an enrolled student at the UW in the fall of 2007 when Meredith was murdered. There is likely to be a bit of institutional fallout if she is found guilty. I'm guessing Knox was probably given automatic "on leave" status in the winter of 2008, since being in jail at the time she would not have been able to continue her studies.

But, there is no such student status as "not registered" - you are either registered or on leave. Contrary to what Guzman said, Knox probably had some kind of official status as a student at the UW in January of 2008 and probably still does today. If she is found guilty that association will, most likely, quickly end because she'd be in violation of student conduct rules, but the question of appropriate supervision will linger long after.
Top Profile 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:51 pm   Post subject: Thanks Skep   

Hi Skep!

Thanks for those email addresses - you just saved me some time so I can get right on this issue.

Tara
Top Profile 

Offline Professor Snape


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:53 pm

Posts: 247

Location: Seattle. WA

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:01 am   Post subject: Re: Thanks Skep   

Tara wrote:
Hi Skep!

Thanks for those email addresses - you just saved me some time so I can get right on this issue.

Tara



ditto

_________________
"Wizard of Healing Potions and Alibis"
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:39 am   Post subject: Don't Look At Me!!!   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
I doubt that talk of being stalked by Professor Snape, Tara and (I don't know who else has admitted to being there, so I will leave this blank)...


Hey now - don't look at me Skep! My lips are sealed about Salty's because I, too, am an award winning graduate of the University of Oregano School of Journalbalaya and am thus pledged to abide by their rigorous journalistic code of ethics, specifically Section 3: Fear Not the Chasm Between Advocacy and Reporting, Rule 2a: Thou shalt never admit to fraternizing with subjects of your fair and balanced reporting as others would consider you as biased and unethical, even though we have taught you well how to avoid those pitfalls.

Thank goodness I didn't go to a Society of Professional Journalists member School of Journalism because I would then be subject to that needlessly nit-picky code of ethics they subscribe to that would seriously interfere with my ability to make a living.


Last edited by Fly by Night on Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Bess


Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:41 pm

Posts: 69

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:57 am   Post subject:    

To anyone's knowledge, is the American Embassy involved at all with this case?

Given the discussion regarding AK's status as a current University of Washington student, is anyone aware as to whether the university is involved in any manner -- financially or otherwise?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:34 am   Post subject:    

Bess wrote:
To anyone's knowledge, is the American Embassy involved at all with this case?


We can be certain that since a US Senator from Washington State is well aware of the case and has contacted Italian authorities asking that they insure a fair trial - anything that can be done for Knox at the political level has been done (or attempted).

Bess wrote:
Given the discussion regarding AK's status as a current University of Washington student, is anyone aware as to whether the university is involved in any manner -- financially or otherwise?


I'm pretty sure that the UW has taken a complete hands-off approach to the situation. I read somewhere that early on in the investigation, perhaps before she was arrested, an official at the UW did contact her to ask if she needed anything. But, legally, I doubt the UW has any role to play and would probably not seek to be associated in any way with a case like this if they didn't have to. In fact, Knox probably signed some kind of limit-of-liability contract as part of her (as SH2K cited) very unstructured study program. Also, she would still be subject to Washington State's Student Conduct Code for the University of Washington which, due to her own admission during the investigation phase, she was probably in serious violation of - meaning the UW could legally wash their hands of her anyways. Heck, they could have kicked her out for being cited by the Seattle Police in early July of 2007, but since they don't kick out the football players for getting cited by the police they couldn't justify doing that to her.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2316

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:37 am   Post subject:    

Hi Bess,

As far as I'm aware the American Embassy are not involved and they have no reason to be involved. Italy is a sovereign country with an excellent legal system, which has plenty of checks and balances to make sure that every citizen's rights are protected. Numerous judges have looked at the evidence and come to the same conclusion that there are serious indications of Knox's and Sollecito's guilt.

The forensic investigators were praised by Dr. Renato Biondo, head of the DNA Unit of the forensic police in Rome, for the excellence of their work and their professionalism. The defence lawyers were informed about every development in the forensic investigation. Dr. Biondo also provided independent confirmation that the forensic results are accurate and reliable.

Knox has legal representation and a PR company, who have led a very aggressive PR campaign on her behalf. The Italian Supreme Court noted that both Knox and Sollecito lied and were reluctant to cooperate with the police.

Manuela Comodi, the deputy prosecutor, said that the prosecution had not called either Ms Knox or Mr Sollecito as witnesses “because there is no point. Every time they were questioned during the pre-trial investigation they lied or tried to derail the inquiry. (The Times, 19 Janurary, 2009).


Last edited by The Machine on Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

redneck


PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:39 am   Post subject: Amanda's life is great danger !   

A constant US observer is sitting in the court room. Negotiations are underway to get Amanda out of Capanne before she gets "suicided".
Maybe she will be flown out still before Obama will meet Berlusconi. Amanda is an Obama supporter. Obama is kept informed by the FOA.
Top

redneck


PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:42 am   Post subject:    

The Machine - You are a bullshitter!
We will get Amanda out of this hell and her torturers into jail. Be sure of this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Top

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2316

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:49 am   Post subject:    

Hi Redneck/Harry,

You've certainly chosen an appropriate name. Why don't you go back to Candace Dempsey's blog where you'll find people who are very similar to yourself? You and Candace have many things in common.
Top Profile 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 895

Location: New York

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:52 am   Post subject: Re: Here we go again   

Tara wrote:
I will be writing to Don Smith, the editor of the Seattle PI and ask to have this libelous comment removed.


Good on you Tara - but is Don Smith actually the editor?

Edited: yes Skep has it right - he is the blogs editor. They seem to have blinked a few times lately.

Skep, if you read this: was there a final outcome with the West Seattle Herald?

Blinking is good, Seattle media! It is one of the steps to getting out of the Vale of Shame.


Last edited by Fast Pete on Sat Feb 21, 2009 2:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2316

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:57 am   Post subject:    

Harry,

Why don't you find another woman to get obsessed about? Knox won't be released from prison for at least another 30 years. I believe she will never be released from prison.

Goodbye Harry, you were the weakest link :D
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 2:06 am   Post subject:    

Hi everyone,
Redneck asked me to inform you that he unfortunately won't be able to post here any more because he is a complete moron. He said he was going to return to the safety of Gabriella and Candace's asylums and also wreak his havoc over on Frank's blog as usual.
In other words, he got the gong.

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

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 2:18 am   Post subject:    

A hairy little redneck wrote:

Quote:
A constant US observer is sitting in the court room. Negotiations are underway to get Amanda out of Capanne before she gets "suicided".
Maybe she will be flown out still before Obama will meet Berlusconi. Amanda is an Obama supporter. Obama is kept informed by the FOA.


If President Obama is getting his intelligence from FOA then we are all in big trouble.

Harry, you should translate Gabriella's wonderful interview with your good self and send it to President Obama. This will give him insight into what is really going on ;) .
And make sure you send along that "disappeared" videotape - you know, the one that shows top government and Vatican officials hanging out with Rudy Guede and Amanda Knox in the Le Chic bar.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Bess


Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:41 pm

Posts: 69

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 2:23 am   Post subject:    

Fly by Night, thanks for posting the Student Conduct Code. I am aware that Knox had an altercation in 2007 and I was wondering if the UW would take that into account. (And BTW, I'm with you on the sports analogy!) Also, if you read between the lines, it's very good politics for the Senator to ask for a "fair trial". ;)

Thanks The Machine. I was curious if the U.S. Embassy had commented on the case at all (?) and I was certain that it was beyond the point where the Embassy would intervene and for good reason in my opinion. From all I have read, the trial is more than fair -- even to the point of permitting the defendants to "testify" unchallenged!!

To take the question further, I was wondering how deep the Knox PR machine has been able to penetrate into the American political system and into academia, local or otherwise, and to be clear, I'm not talking about the U.S. media markets.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2316

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 2:50 am   Post subject:    

Hi Bess,

The ultimate goal of the FOA is to secure the release of Knox through political presssure. They need the media to achieve this goal. As Barbie Nadeau correctly pointed out they try to discourage the media from digging deeper into the case. I know that certain individuals from the FOA have attempted to bully/intimidate/silence journalists who don't toe the official FOA party line, which is absolutely outrageous.

The FOA have lobbied various American politicians, but I don't know if they've managed to recruit them to join their cause. I don't know how much influence they've had on any academic institutions.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 3:05 am   Post subject:    

Fast Pete wrote:

Quote:
Tara wrote:
I will be writing to Don Smith, the editor of the Seattle PI and ask to have this libelous comment removed.


Good on you Tara - but is Don Smith actually the editor?

Edited: yes Skep has it right - he is the blogs editor. They seem to have blinked a few times lately.

Skep, if you read this: was there a final outcome with the West Seattle Herald?

Blinking is good, Seattle media! It is one of the steps to getting out of the Vale of Shame.


Beginning with the WS Herald: all quiet on the Western Front. Frankly, I think the WS Herald has multiple problems to deal with. The paper is getting more than a run for its money from the West Seattle Blog, a place that increasingly is the resource of choice for up-to-the-minute local news. The WSH even ran an incredibly defensive editorial about why it is better than the WSB a week or so ago. Trouble ahead, trouble behind.....

As for the PI, it too has life-threatening issues, as we all know. The PI deleted Candace's first post and I am waiting for a reply on the second one. It would be odd to refuse the second request, since it is libelous for the same reason as the first one. But maybe the PI will take pity on Candace, since it seems she can't leave her blog these days without getting pilloried.

I just saw the comments under Barbie Nadeau and Andrea Vogt's piece in The Daily Beast. Ouch! Of course, Candace brings it on herself with her self-promotional spiels and fantasy story about the typo. I think too many people saw both the initial version and the "intermediate" version (The Halfway To Truth CV). Candace is trying to turn it into an Internet rumor, but that doesn't seem to be working out too well for her.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jumpy


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 4:27 pm

Posts: 231

Location: US

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:39 am   Post subject:    

I was thinking about Miss Represented's article about Amanda's email home, and the talking points of the mop and the detailed description of Meredith possibly doing her laundry that day.

In the same way that Amanda is talking talking talking details (and then shockingly cannot remember anything in detail that night) about the day of the murder, the comments Raffaele made in the same fashion still bother me along that line.

Why did Raffaele make the comment about Meredith and how cute she looked in her jeans which supposedly belonged to a boy in England? Initially I thought it was because they were playing cat and mouse with Meredith that day. Sick to imagine, I know. But this is a sick crime and I have always had a feeling that Meredith was avoiding Amanda before she was killed.

I really look forward to detailed list of what items were in the washing machine. I hope that evidence comes out on whose jeans were laying on the floor. I may be reaching here, but wonder if the jeans were planted and the real clothes with potential dna were in the wash. Whose jeans are they? Why did Raffaele make such a deal about the clothes that Meredith was wearing when she left that afternoon? We know Meredith's clothes were in the wash, and the wash was warm when Meredith was discovered murdered.

I don't believe for one second that Raffaele is a pawn in Amanda's game. I think he is just as fucked up as the other two.
Top Profile 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:31 am   Post subject:    

Jumpy wrote:
I was thinking about Miss Represented's article about Amanda's email home, and the talking points of the mop and the detailed description of Meredith possibly doing her laundry that day.

In the same way that Amanda is talking talking talking details (and then shockingly cannot remember anything in detail that night) about the day of the murder, the comments Raffaele made in the same fashion still bother me along that line.

Why did Raffaele make the comment about Meredith and how cute she looked in her jeans which supposedly belonged to a boy in England? Initially I thought it was because they were playing cat and mouse with Meredith that day. Sick to imagine, I know. But this is a sick crime and I have always had a feeling that Meredith was avoiding Amanda before she was killed.

I really look forward to detailed list of what items were in the washing machine. I hope that evidence comes out on whose jeans were laying on the floor. I may be reaching here, but wonder if the jeans were planted and the real clothes with potential dna were in the wash. Whose jeans are they? Why did Raffaele make such a deal about the clothes that Meredith was wearing when she left that afternoon? We know Meredith's clothes were in the wash, and the wash was warm when Meredith was discovered murdered.

I don't believe for one second that Raffaele is a pawn in Amanda's game. I think he is just as fucked up as the other two.



Hi Jumpy,

I'm sure your observation has some substance.

I've said before, that somehow, before a trial, all evidence looks equal. The temptation is just to read it like a list.

But once at trial, some evidence starts to stand out as much more important, whilst other evidence has reduced significance.

Yes, Filomena said the washing machine was warm, that it contained Meredith's clothes. That by itself means little as Amanda could have switched it on thinking/claiming she was doing Meredith a good turn.

But another thing I noticed from last week, were the reports in the press that one of Meredith's friends cried in court when asked to identify a coat as the one she had last seen Meredith wearing. That coat and her tears made the news, but I bet that wasn't the only item of Meredith's clothing which was identified as worn by Meredith at their last get together before she was killed.

It will become interesting when the investigators reveal just which pair of Meredith's jeans were in that wash.
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

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

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:40 am   Post subject: Another batch   

Another batch of reports on the break-in.

Some slight progress.

Quote:
The Mystery of via della Pergola
Trespass clues for Scientific Police
Postal Police check YouTube



Whoever got into the house may have betrayed themselves. There is at one least clue, left behind during their departure, that could give the flying squad an answer. It was an item, perhaps a leaflet found by the Roman scientific police – according to the leading hypothesis – dropped by one of the traspassers [: literally, “profaners”] of the house, and of the memory of Meredith Kercher, the English student murdered on 1 November 2007 and for which the trial against her “friend” Amanda Knox and boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito is under way.


Perugia, 20 February 2009 – The “intruders” may have betrayed themselves. They left at least one clue, during their escape, that might help the flying squad track them down. It was an item. perhaps a leaflet found by the Roman scientific police that – according to the main hypothesis – was dropped by one of the trespassers of the house, and of , and of the memory of Meredith Kercher, the English student murdered on 1 November 2007 and for which the trial against her “friend” Amanda Knox and boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito is under way.

The day after the discovery of the “raid” [: in English] on the cottage at via della Pergola 7 – still under seal – investigators are already at work. The scientific police laboratories are analysing the three cigarette butts found in Laura Mezzetti’s room, the four knives “positioned” as if to convey a worrying message, the plastic envelope with the state police logo, and also the plastic flowerpot which was used to break the glass of the window at the rear of the villette. All to find one print or one genetic trace that could give a name and a face to the intruders.

Even if the examining judges are inclined to exclude the trail of idiots [balordi] and macabre fetish collectors, the postal police have started checking the Internet – and, in particular, YouTube – to see if a stupid filming of the breached crime scene took place. It is almost impossible to verify whether anything was taken away. The Flying agents found the house ransacked [: sottosopra = “everything upside down”]. Even Meredith’s suitcase. Where the victim’s clothes and underwear were kept, (even that) had been rifled through.

Just like those things which Amanda had under her bed: from there came at least two of the four knives spread through the cottage in a fine display. Those (knives) of the American were still in their original wrapping [confezionati] and for this (reason) had never been bagged for analysis [repertati]. It is impossible they they could be the murder weapon. Meanwhile the flying squad has acquired – and is viewing – the pictures recorded by the San Antonio parking lot CCTV [US: security camera], (from) in front of the cottage. The same fine-toothed combing (as) after the murder. As for the motive, nothing (obviously) stands out [si sbilancia] but to the examining judges it looks like [è apparsa] yet another “staging” ['messinscena'].

Erika Pontini

La Nazione 20 Feb 2009



Quote:
TRESPASS IN THE HOUSE OF HORRORS” MACABRE RITES IN MEZ’S ROOM
NOCTURNAL ENTRY INTO MURDERED STUDENTS VILLETTE
KNIVES AND CANDLES FOUND, SYMBOLS OF SOME “OCCULT” PLOY
by Clero Bertoldi


Perugia – Mystery within mystery. The Meredith Kercher murder is being painted with elements, if possible, that are even more worrying. As the trial in the Court of Assises against the presumed murders of the English student (Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito –the third co-accused, Rudy Guede, has already been sentenced, via fast track trial, to 30 years) continues and had reached its fifth hearing, unknown persons got into the murder cottage (still under judicial sequestration). The alarming and unsettling break-in occurred, probably, at night. The “usual suspects” [ “soliti ignoti”] had entered by a side window, after having scaled the cottage wall with the assistance of a grating of the apartment below ground [seminterrato].

A flowerpot was thrown against the fixtures and panes of the window. Once inside, the criminals [malviventi] found themselves in the lounge room and turned the place upside down. Concerning [Addirittura] the four knives found in the apartment, one had been placed on the floor of the dining area [tinello] on top of an envelope which, probably thanks to a photomontage, displayed the letters “Police”. Another knife had been deposited on an armchair where a blanket belonging to Meredith was. A third knife has been positioned [piazzato] on a stand behind the front door and the last was discovered on the floor in front of the victim’s room, the one in which the atrocious murder (by a cut to the throat) had been carried out.

The first knife probably came from the washboards of the apartment kitchen. The others may have been taken from a suitcase in the house, where the Italian room mates had placed all the utensils of the house (and which they would never had used) when they started renting the property.

The candles were probably already in the house and it seems that they belonged to one of the Italian room mates. There is the suspicion that someone had carried out some satanic-flavoured macabre rite in the house of horrors. The other hypothesis, instead, is that the candles were used as lighting in the house during the raid, seeing as there was no electricity. The conjecture, in conjunction with the fact that the next hearings (27 and 28 February) will be focusing on the investigators who carried out the investigations, is it was an action done as intimidation or as an insult [sfregio] to the police.


It’s not possible to restore the goods under property sequestration to the two room mates from the murder cottage, Filomena Romanelli and Laura Mezzetti, both legal assistants, (until) who knows when the break-in will be solved. The police, yesterday morning, had arranged an appointment, as per the order [disposto] last week of the Court of Assises (president Giancarlo Massei, with Beatrice Cristiani a latere [=”assisting”]) to the two room mates of poor Meredith, who had formally requested and obtained permission to collect their things (still sequestered, for judicial reasons, in the murder house).

When the police (led by acting inspector Monica Napoleoni, who had supervised [gestito] the investigations on the murder) had removed the seals from the front door and had entered the apartment, the surprising discovery [was made).

Obviously the scientific police were called to examine traces and carry out other investigation activity. Lieutenant procurator [procuratore reggente] Federico Centrone, who has had a meeting [incontro] with the two public prosecutors leading the trial, Giuliano Mignini and Manuela Comodi, has announced the opening of an inquiry [inchiesta].

Il Giornale 19-Feb-2009 07:00



Quote:
Meredith case: break-in at house, police view film footage

(AGI) – Perugia, 19 Feb – The Perugia Flying Squad investigation continues after the break-in by unknown persons discovered yesterday morning in the cottage in via della Pergola where, during the night of 01-02 November 2007, English student Meredith Kercher was killed.

According to the investigators’ reconstruction, whoever entered into the murder house (on which there were still seals) did so by climbing onto the terrace looking over the rear of the property [stabile], then by breaking [infrangere] the glass of the kitchen window and (so) getting themselves inside. The scientific police are also at work (and) may soon provide an initial response/answer. Especially about the four knives discovered in various places in the house: two seem to have come from the kitchen and the other two from a suitcase belonging to Amanda, still kept under her bed. One of the knives had been found in the kitchen, on top of a blue-coloured plastic envelope with “police” written on it, similar to those distributed on the occasion of demonstrations and promotional events. The others were found on a stand in the hall, another on the mattress leaning against the sofa and the fourth (was) in front of Meredith’s room. On the floor, as well, there were found used candles, belonging to one of the two Italian room mates who shared the apartment with Meredith Kercher and Amanda Knox. Preliminary findings seem (to indicate) that the house, put into compete disarray by whoever broke in, had had nothing taken from it. The police still seem, however, to be ruling nothing out. A trial for the murder of Meredith is in progress before the Court of Assises of Perugia, which is seeing (as) the accused the victim’s American ex-roommate, Amanda Knox, and the Giovanozzo student, Raffaele Sollecito.

Rudy Hermann Guede has already been sentenced by fast track trial to 30 years for the same
murder.

AGI




Quote:
MEZ CASE: A RECEIPT IN MURDER HOUSE
AFTER THE BREAK-IN IN THE PAST FEDW DAYS, PERHAPS DROPPED BY ACCIDENT


(ANSA) - PERUGIA, 20 FEB – After the break-in discovered two days ago, a leaflet/piece of paper [biglietto] found in the room where Meredith Kercher was killed. The news was reported today by various newspapers on the local pages. However, the investigators are maintaining maximum reserve [riserbo=” tight-lipped-ness”] on the discovery. The piece of paper, according to what has been learned, does not contain anything special in the way of writing and anyway (there is) no message relating to the proceedings. Investigators think that it was accidentally dropped by whoever had entered the house.

Vergilio Notizie
Also, Unita
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:16 pm   Post subject:    

In a recent video on the intrusion on Youtube there is a short view of a mop and bucket outside the house.
There is no way that they are the ones in question.
Does anyone know something more?





Anyway, the mop without the bucket and the handle is not much more than any rag.
Did Amanda carry them, too?
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

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

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:24 pm   Post subject:    

Kermit wrote:

- Amanda is charged with Murder, Sexual Assault, Simulation of a Crime, Theft, Transporting a Weapon and False Accusation
- Raffaele is charged with Murder, Sexual Assault, Simulation of a Crime, and Theft
- Rudy has been found guilty of Murder

(Catnip, did I get that right? :) )



Kermit,
Yes, quite close.

The charges were laid by judge Micheli at the preliminary hearing in 28 Oct 2008, and are quoted in Sarzanini's book.

A&R are both accused of 5 things (collapsing all the penal code articles and sections into single phrases): murder-in-company; transporting-a-knife-in-company out of RS's place without justification; restraint-and-injury-of-MK-in-company for the purposes of sexual assault; unjust-profit-in-company (stealing the rent money, 2 phones, and 2 credit cards); staging-of-a-burglary-in-company.

The "-in-company" bit (as I translate it; or "complicity amongst themselves", or "by/for/in a common purpose" in common law phraseology) is important: it automatically converts a murder sentence to the maximum, namely life imprisonment.

Amanda has the additional charge of falsely accusing Patrick Lumumba for the purpose of deflecting blame from Rudy - this, if proved, will become a stepping stone on the path to recovering defamatory damages on the civil side by PL.


[hr]

But why bother stealing credit cards? If they wanted to not get caught, they could easily just break down Meredith's door, leave footprints everywhere, touch everything while trying to give ostensible first aid, call the ambulance, etc etc. It's as if they didn't care.

But staging a burglary (and a TV-style sexual attack) is exciting, isn't it? Like a film script. And watch the plods try to solve the clues!

And blurting out "It could have been me" in the waiting room at the police station does garner you some sympathy, especially when one of your friends notices some sort of wound or injury on your throat and becomes worried for you because, not knowing the evidence, they imagine what the murderer might easily have done to you.

The unspoken thought that floats into the following silence, though, can never be proven one way or the other, and is pure conjecture: "but I beat her to it."

The evidence is speaking (if not at the level of motive (yet)), and so far, all of it is still pointing towards the epicentre.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2316

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:43 pm   Post subject:    

Jumpy wrote:
Why did Raffaele make the comment about Meredith and how cute she looked in her jeans which supposedly belonged to a boy in England? Initially I thought it was because they were playing cat and mouse with Meredith that day. Sick to imagine, I know. But this is a sick crime and I have always had a feeling that Meredith was avoiding Amanda before she was killed.


You've raised a very interesting point. Meredith could have asked Knox and Sollecito to join them on 31 October if she wanted to meet Knox. However, she chose not to despite Knox's repeated text messages.

Jumpy wrote:
I really look forward to detailed list of what items were in the washing machine. I hope that evidence comes out on whose jeans were laying on the floor. I may be reaching here, but wonder if the jeans were planted and the real clothes with potential dna were in the wash. Whose jeans are they? Why did Raffaele make such a deal about the clothes that Meredith was wearing when she left that afternoon? We know Meredith's clothes were in the wash, and the wash was warm when Meredith was discovered murdered.


The washing machine incriminates Knox. She's the only person who could have put Meredith's clothes in the washing machine and why would she do that? According to Frank, She NEVER used the washing machine because it was always broken. It was claimed on Porta a Porta that the washing machine contained the bloody towels of Meredith and Knox. All roads lead back to Knox. She's the one who put Meredith clothes in the washing machine, and she and Sollecito used the bucket and mop they were found with outside the cottage to clean away the bloody trial of different sized bloody footprints.

Jumpy wrote:
I don't believe for one second that Raffaele is a pawn in Amanda's game. I think he is just as fucked up as the other two.


I agree completely. The Italian Supreme Court said the following to Raffaele Sollecito:

“You are a flight risk because of the gravity of the charges. Your danger to society matches your weak character and your personality, which we can’t define in terms of harmless juvenile stereotypes, since the context includes the habitual use of drugs.

It is clear the judges believe that Sollecito is mentally unstable and a danger to society. Sollecito was assessed by a psychologist while was in prison and the psychologist's report must have informed the judges' opinions about Sollecito's mental health.

Drugs may well have played an important role in what happened on 1 November. Sollecito was known by the police in his hometown for his drug use and Knox wrote about it in her prison diary. Was taking dangerous class A drugs part of the extreme experience Sollectio wanted on the night of the murder? Did Sollecito buy his drugs from Rudy Guede?

I believe that Sollecito played an active part in Meredith's murder. He and Knox both turned off their mobile phones at the same time shortly before Meredith was killed and the double DNA was taken from his kitchen. The knife must have been taken with his knowledge and his permission.

The idea that Knox phoned him up after Meredith was murdered to ask for his help with the clean up is absolute nonsense. Besides, Sollecito does not have a credible alibi for the night of the murder. He was given another opportunity to tell the truth about what happened that night and he chose to lie deliberatley and repeatedly again. He couldn't tell the truth because he was involved. If he had played a lesser role or just had helped with clean up, he would have come clean a long time ago. Knox and Sollecito will be found guilty of murdering Meredith. Even ardent Knox supporters like Ciolino and Dempsey are resigned to guilty verdicts.

Rudy Guede testified that he saw Sollecito and Knox at the cottage. Toto saw him and Knox watching the gate of the cottage shortly afterwards. Judge Paolo Micheli claims that Toto is a reliable witness who can be trusted. The car mechanic from the breakdown truck saw a dark car parked outside the cottage at around 10.45pm. The only person with a dark car who had reason to visit the cottage that night is Sollecito and the forensic evidence places him there.

Hekuran Kokomani, who saw the breakdown truck, broken down car and the described the people involved, claimed he saw Knox and Sollecito watching the cottage, which corroborates Toto's testimony.

The forensic evidence tells us that Sollecito and Knox were walking round the cottage barefooted after Meredith was killed. Sollecito's and Knox's DNA on Meredith's bra clasp prove that they both removed Meredith's bra some time after she had been murdered. Knox's and Meredith's DNA was on the double DNA knife that was used to stab Meredith. The double DNA knife came from Sollecito's kitchen.

We haven't seen all of the evidence against Knox and Sollecito yet, but the evidence we know about is highly incriminating.
Top Profile 

Offline GreenWyvern


User avatar


Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:41 pm

Posts: 252

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 2:02 pm   Post subject:    

Catnip wrote:
If they wanted to not get caught, they could easily just break down Meredith's door, leave footprints everywhere, touch everything while trying to give ostensible first aid, call the ambulance, etc etc. It's as if they didn't care.

That's an excellent point. If Amanda and Raffaele had done that, they might have succeeded in putting all the blame on Rudy, and come out of it with halos round their heads.

Everything about the cover-up was very amateurish. With modern forensic techniques cleaning up is a bad idea. You're sure to miss something, and anyway there will be signs that a clean-up has taken place. It's much more logical to create a valid reason why your traces should be found at the scene, such as trying to help the victim.

In implicating Patrick Lumumba, Amanda also clearly didn't think it through. It was an obvious possibility that he might have a good alibi, and then what? Attention just turns back on the accuser and her motives.

It seems to be a case of wrongheaded/fuzzy thinking all the way through - and still continuing with Amanda smiling in court, "All you need is love", etc.
Top Profile 

Offline petafly


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:08 pm

Posts: 278

Location: Switzerland/Germany

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 2:11 pm   Post subject:    

I've read, you can recognise a narcissist by looking at the partners they choose. They tend to be lame!

I've to watch such a couple very closely in my family. She's a painfully selfcentered person, not unlike Amanda, and he is a shallow nothing. I'm astounded to this very day how the two got together, how it started. She saw him on a short vacation trip and attacked him straight. He didnt do anything, didnt say anything, he didn't flirt with her, he hasn't any obvious talent, any opinions, he wasn't and isn't interesting at all. In three days she occupied him completely. It happened too quick for him to realise what was going on. She had preplanned their life already.
This was no "love at first sight". She does not respect him as a partner. She chose him, because he is weak! She instinctively knew, in a second, he would be the man who won't interfere with her ego ever. And so he'd be perfect for her. And he is. They are married now and she treats him like a adopted child.

I find it telling that Amanda chose Raffele and not someone more interesting. I think she chose him especially beacuse he is weak! A virgin Nerd with a knife collection. There wouldnt be enough space for two egos anyway.

Perhaps Raffaele wasn't man enough to realize (and to stop!) Amanda when she flipped! Apparently he isn't man enough to tell everyone the truth. But why? He receives a life sentence one way or the other ...
Top Profile 

Offline Giustizia


Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:13 pm

Posts: 113

Location: New York City

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 3:45 pm   Post subject: Spread your DNA everywhere   

GreenWyvern wrote:
That's an excellent point. If Amanda and Raffaele had done that, they might have succeeded in putting all the blame on Rudy, and come out of it with halos round their heads. er-up was very amateurish. With modern forensic techniques cleaning up is a bad idea. You're sure to miss something, and anyway there will be signs that a clean-up has taken place. It's much more logical to create a valid reason why your traces should be found at the scene, such as trying to help the victim.


I agree. If I were to offer advice to anyone involved in a crime such as this (how imbecilic does that sound?), don't attempt to cover it up since 1) you will miss something, 2) it will be obvious a clean-up has taken place, and 3) modern-day forensics and DNA analysis will enable the police to gather a lot more information than you could ever imagine.

So instead of scurrying down to the local shop to buy two jugs of bleach at 7 AM in the morning on November 2, 2007, so that they could scrub down the villetta, and carrying a bucket and mop back and forth in the historic town of Perugia, and fabricating a web of lies and deceit that have no sense in reality, here's how AK and RS could have gotten themselves out of the troubles they find themselves in now:

Very late in the evening of November 1, 2007, instead of staging a break-in at via della Pergola 7, do everything you can to disturb Meredith Kercher's room. It sounds counterintuitive, but spread your DNA everywhere. Get your hands bloody, rub them on everything, scream in horror so that the neighbors can hear, knock over furniture, move the victim's body in an attempt to save her. Then call the police and tell them you just "happened" to return to the apartment when you found Meredith. You didn't know if she was dead so you tried to help your roommate, and when it was apparent that she was dead, you called the police.

Then, the defense lawyers would be able to sew a lot of doubt about the legitimacy of any DNA results. "Of /course/ my client's DNA is everywhere in that room. Of /course/ those bloody footprints belong to my client. They tried to save Meredith, in and their cannabis-induced fugue, contaminated the crime scene to such an extent that no forensic results can possibly be relied upon."
Top Profile 

Offline petafly


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:08 pm

Posts: 278

Location: Switzerland/Germany

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:02 pm   Post subject:    

Quote:
spread your DNA everywhere. Get your hands bloody, rub them on everything


Rudy defended himself that way. He said he tried so save her life.
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:09 pm   Post subject:    

Quote:
Giustizia wrote:
"Very late in the evening of November 1, 2007, instead of staging a break-in at via della Pergola 7, do everything you can to disturb Meredith Kercher's room. It sounds counterintuitive, but spread your DNA everywhere. Get your hands bloody, rub them on everything, scream in horror so that the neighbors can hear, knock over furniture, move the victim's body in an attempt to save her. Then call the police and tell them you just "happened" to return to the apartment when you found Meredith. You didn't know if she was dead so you tried to help your roommate, and when it was apparent that she was dead, you called the police. "


Easier said than done.
The police would come, they would separate them and start to question them: where have you been, what did you do, whom did you meet (my blue eyed son) and in no time they would be in contradiction and would be forced to not remember and exercise their right to silence.

Just as Amanda and Raffaele did.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:20 pm   Post subject:    

Green Wyvern wrote:

Quote:
Catnip wrote:

If they wanted to not get caught, they could easily just break down Meredith's door, leave footprints everywhere, touch everything while trying to give ostensible first aid, call the ambulance, etc etc. It's as if they didn't care.


That's an excellent point. If Amanda and Raffaele had done that, they might have succeeded in putting all the blame on Rudy, and come out of it with halos round their heads.

Everything about the cover-up was very amateurish. With modern forensic techniques cleaning up is a bad idea. You're sure to miss something, and anyway there will be signs that a clean-up has taken place. It's much more logical to create a valid reason why your traces should be found at the scene, such as trying to help the victim.



These are very interesting points. Why didn't Raffaele (perhaps soliciting the help of Amanda, a short but apparently strong young woman) succeed in kicking that door in? Luca managed. If repeated knocking on the door and phone calls had no effect (and in light of the front door being open, the feces, the mess in Filomena's room and last but not least the blood), and there was reason to think that Meredith might be in danger, then why not just open the door?

When I was a sophomore in college, I shared a room with a young woman who seemed nice but a bit sad. In particular, she had no boyfriend and that was a problem for her. One Saturday night, she went off to a party. I didn't hear her come back in. The next morning, she was conked out on her bed. I went to work (scullery maid in the college dining room) and came back several hours later. She was still conked out on the bed, in the same position. I went over to make sure she was breathing and tried to rouse her. She was breathing, but oddly, and I couldn't get her to wake up. That's when I noticed all these little white things on the floor around the bed. They were barbituates. She had taken an intentional overdose. I called the campus medics. They said we're on our way, get her up and in the shower. I got someone in the next room to help me lift her (she was a big woman) and we got her into the shower.

She survived but left school and was treated for depression.

The point is, when there is evidence that something is amiss, swift action is often needed to save a life.

If it turns out that Knox did say it was normal for Meredith's door to be locked, then something is really fishy to me.

I think it is the fact that they were alarmed and yet not is one of the most troubling comportmental clues.

The problem is that it is hard to use any kind of "but it all happened so quickly" argument here. They had two and a half hours to act. In fact, things did start to happen quickly once the police arrived; but is this because of or in spite of Knox and Sollecito?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:26 pm   Post subject: volunteer to take a lie detector...   

I know it may not be admissible in court, but many times US police ask suspects to take a lie detector test in hopes of perhaps confirming suspicions or helping to eliminate them as a suspect, regardless of it legality in court. It is actually quite common in the US and many people who are under investigation, who trumpet their innocence, volunteer to do so.

It suppose that in Italy like most countries, lie detector results cannot be used as convicting evidence of guilt.
But if there were any suspects who claim innocence and are in desperate need of turning public opinion, it’s the defendants in this case. If Amanda is as innocent as she and FOA claim... what is their/her response when asking if she will take a lie detector test? Why doesn’t she volunteer?...maybe she did I dunno…anyone?

Seems to me, if it was not brought up before, FOA should be asked about this. Most innocent people agree to take one without worry. Me?, I think they are scared shitless of that prospect and would run for the hills or come up with some/any reason to avoid it if asked, but who knows. I can see them turning white now.
Can anyone comment if the idea of using lie detector came up in this case? Was she asked? Is it even used in Italy?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:46 pm   Post subject:    

Boling wrote:

Quote:
The police would come, they would separate them and start to question them: where have you been, what did you do, whom did you meet (my blue eyed son) and in no time they would be in contradiction and would be forced to not remember and exercise their right to silence.
Just as Amanda and Raffaele did.


Thanks, Bolint, for providing musical inspiration. Yes, a hard rain's a-gonna fall:

A Hard Rain's a-gonna Fall - Bob Dylan

Oh, where have you been, my blue eyed son?
Oh, where have you been, my darling young one?

I've stumbled on the side of twelve misty mountains
I've walked and I've crawled on six crooked highways
I've stepped in the middle of seven sad forests
I've been out in front of a dozen dead oceans
I've been ten thousand miles in the mouth of a graveyard
And it's a hard, and it's a hard, it's a hard, and it's a hard
And it's a hard rain's a gonna fall
Oh, what did you see, my blue eyed son?
Oh, what did you see, my darling young one?
I saw a newborn baby with wild wolves all around it
I saw a highway of diamonds with nobody on it
I saw a black branch with blood that kept drippin'
I saw a room full of men with their hammers a bleedin'
I saw a white ladder all covered with water
I saw ten thousand talkers whose tongues were all broken
I saw guns and sharp swords in the hands of young children
And it's a hard, and it's a hard, it's a hard, it's a hard
And it's a hard rain's a gonna fall
And what did you hear, my blue eyed son?
And what did you hear, my darling young one?
I heard the sound of a thunder, it roared out a warnin'
Heard the roar of a wave that could drown the whole world
Heard one hundred drummers whose hands were a blazin'
Heard ten thousand whisperin' and nobody listenin'
Heard one person starve, I heard many people laughin'
Heard the song of a poet who died in the gutter
Heard the sound of a clown who cried in the alley
And it's a hard, and it's a hard, it's a hard, it's a hard
And it's a hard rain's a gonna fall
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Giustizia


Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:13 pm

Posts: 113

Location: New York City

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:51 pm   Post subject: Re: Another batch   

Catnip wrote:
The “intruders” may have betrayed themselves. They left at least one clue, during their escape, that might help the flying squad track them down.[/b] It was an item. perhaps a leaflet found by the Roman scientific police that – according to the main hypothesis – was dropped by one of the trespassers of the house, and of , and of the memory of Meredith Kercher, the English student murdered on 1 November 2007 and for which the trial against her “friend” Amanda Knox and boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito is under way.


The break-in at the villetta is disturbing, to say the least. Someone obviously wanted to intimidate and taunt the Perugian legal authorities, starting from the judges and prosecutors on down to the postal police and Carabinieri, and mock the forensic science work. The break-in itself was a way of saying: "See, someone /could/ break into the building very easily." The envelope was a direct reference to forensic experts (they collect evidence in similar bags), and the distribution of the knives were a macabre way, obviously, of showing that there were many of them in the house at the ready to be used to commit murder.

Catnip wrote:
Meanwhile the flying squad has acquired – and is viewing – the pictures recorded by the San Antonio parking lot CCTV [US: security camera], (from) in front of the cottage. The same fine-toothed combing (as) after the murder. As for the motive, nothing (obviously) stands out [si sbilancia] but to the examining judges it looks like [è apparsa] yet another “staging” ['messinscena'].


You would think by now that someone - the police, the owner of the parking lot (it's a municipal parking lot, right? so the local authorities) would upgrade the San Antonio parking lot CCTV. If none of the many images it has captured of individuals are clear enough to make a positive identification, than it serves no purpose as a crime-deterrent. I count several photos taken over a few days back in November 2007 that were too grainy and washed out for use by the police.

Frankly, if I were a member of the Perugian police and were to conjecture about who might have broken into the house, Franco Sollecito would be a person of interest and the very first individual I would interview. He's already been implicated, back in June 2008 when police tapped his phones, in making plans to get senior politicians to use their influence and get detectives whom the Sollecitos considered hostile taken off the case.

From Phone-Tap Drama in Meredith Murder:

Quote:
'We've got to flay the Perugia flying squad,' a family member was overheard saying, according to the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera. 'If we can get rid of the head of homicide and that other one, we'll be OK.'

Relatives of Sollecito, including his sister, a policewoman, were also overheard discussing politicians who could help their case. Giulia Buongiorno, a lawyer and MP in Silvio Berlusconi's ruling coalition, has now been retained to represent Sollecito. 'She can help out on this case at a political level,' Sollecito's father was overheard saying.

Sollecito's father, Franco, a well-to-do doctor from Bari in southern Italy, has campaigned to prove his son's innocence, even to the point of allegedly leaking to a TV station a video obtained from the crime scene showing Kercher's corpse, as well as highlighting perceived errors by the investigators, including the delayed recovery of parts of Kercher's bra strap which were found to carry Sollecito's DNA.


The point is this. If I'm looking for a motive for breaking into the building and giving the proverbial middle finger to the police in Perugia, there's already someone connected to the Kercher murder who has, over the past year-and-a-half now, show himself /very/ willing to complicate matters, to propagandize for his son's innocence, and even to break the law--in other words, do anything and everything necessary to secure his son's freedom. How great a leap of the imagination is it to envision Franco Sollecito paying two or three local youths to break in to the building, ransack the place, and arrange those knives?
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:59 pm   Post subject:    

SH2000, you asked about the use of polygraph testing in Europe. Here is what wikipedia says:

Quote:
Europe
In most European jurisdictions, polygraphs are not considered reliable evidence and are not generally used by police forces. However, in any lawsuit, an involved party can order a psychologist to write an opinion based on polygraph results to substantiate the credibility of its claims. The party must bear the expense themselves, and the court weighs the opinion like any other opinion the party has ordered. Courts themselves do not order or pay for polygraph tests. In most cases, polygraph tests are voluntarily taken by a defendant in order to substantiate his or her claims.


Here's what wiki says about reliability:

Quote:
There is little scientific evidence to support the reliability of polygraphs.[16][17] Despite claims of 90% - 95% reliability, critics charge that rather than a "test", the method amounts to an inherently unstandardizable interrogation technique whose accuracy cannot be established. A 1997 survey of 421 psychologists estimated the test's average accuracy at about 61%, a little better than chance.[18] Critics also argue that even given high estimates of the polygraph's accuracy a significant number of subjects (e.g. 10% given a 90% accuracy) will appear to be lying, and would unfairly suffer the consequences of "failing" the polygraph. In the 1998 Supreme Court case, United States v. Scheffer, the majority stated that “There is simply no consensus that polygraph evidence is reliable” and “Unlike other expert witnesses who testify about factual matters outside the jurors' knowledge, such as the analysis of fingerprints, ballistics, or DNA found at a crime scene, a polygraph expert can supply the jury only with another opinion...”.[19] Also, in 2005 the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals stated that “polygraphy did not enjoy general acceptance from the scientific community”.[20] Charles Honts, a psychology professor at Boise State University, states that polygraph interrogations give a high rate of false positives on innocent people.[21] In 2001 William G. Iacono, Distinguished McKnight University Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience and Director, Clinical Science and Psychopathology Research Training Program at the University of Minnesota, published a paper titled “Forensic “Lie Detection": Procedures Without Scientific Basis” in the peer reviewed Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice. He concluded that

Although the CQT [Control Question Test] may be useful as an investigative aid and tool to induce confessions, it does not pass muster as a scientifically credible test. CQT theory is based on naive, implausible assumptions indicating (a) that it is biased against innocent individuals and (b) that it can be beaten simply by artificially augmenting responses to control questions. Although it is not possible to adequately assess the error rate of the CQT, both of these conclusions are supported by published research findings in the best social science journals (Honts et al., 1994; Horvath, 1977; Kleinmuntz & Szucko, 1984; Patrick & Iacono, 1991). Although defense attorneys often attempt to have the results of friendly CQTs admitted as evidence in court, there is no evidence supporting their validity and ample reason to doubt it. Members of scientific organizations who have the requisite background to evaluate the CQT are overwhelmingly skeptical of the claims made by polygraph proponents. [22]
[/quote]

Admissibility of polygraphs in court: The United States

Quote:
In 2007, polygraph testimony was admitted by stipulation in 19 states, and was subject to the discretion of the trial judge in federal court. The use of polygraph in court testimony remains controversial, although it is used extensively in post-conviction supervision, particularly of sex offenders. In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993),[36] the old Frye standard was lifted and all forensic evidence, including polygraph, had to meet the new Daubert standard in which "underlying reasoning or methodology is scientifically valid and properly can be applied to the facts at issue." While polygraph tests are commonly used in police investigations in the US, no defendant or witness can be forced to undergo the test. In United States v. Scheffer (1998),[37] the U.S. Supreme Court left it up to individual jurisdictions whether polygraph results could be admitted as evidence in court cases. Nevertheless, it is used extensively by prosecutors, defense attorneys, and law enforcement agencies. In the States of Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, Delaware and Iowa it is illegal for any employer to order a polygraph either as conditions to gain employment, or if an employee has been suspected of wrongdoing. The Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988 (EPPA) generally prevents employers from using lie detector tests, either for pre-employment screening or during the course of employment, with certain exemptions.[38]

In the United States, the State of New Mexico admits polygraph testing in front of juries under certain circumstances. In many other states, polygraph examiners are permitted to testify in front of judges in various types of hearings (Motion to Revoke Probation, Motion to Adjudicate Guilt).

In 2007, in Ohio v. Sharma, an Ohio trial court overruled the objections of a prosecutor and allowed a polygraph examiner to testify regarding a specific issue criminal examination. The court took the position that the prosecutors regularly used a polygraph examiner to conduct criminal tests against defendants, but only objected to the examiner's testimony when the results contradicted what they hoped to achieve.[39] Dr. Louis Rovner[7], a polygraph expert from California, tested the defendant and testified as an expert witness both at a pretrial admissibility hearing and at trial. The defendant, who had been charged with sexual battery, was acquitted.[40]
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Giustizia


Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:13 pm

Posts: 113

Location: New York City

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:05 pm   Post subject: Re: Another batch   

This seems trivial, but at the very least it points out how the parents of offspring accused of murder and sexual assault will say anything to dismiss disturbing DNA evidence. It's a comment made in January 2008 by Franco Sollecito, a urologist from southern Bari who has now apparently made a mid-life career change to work as a sales assistant at Victoria's Secret:

Primary sources:
Meredith murder probe 'breakthrough'
UK student killed in sex game

Quote:
Media reports said Sollecito's DNA was detected on a fragment of the bra that was found in a second search of the crime scene in the medieval university town.

It had been cut from the bra with a knife, and Sollecito's DNA was found close to the cut, the ANSA news agency reported.

Sollecito's father Francesco, a prominent urologist in southern Bari, dismissed the new evidence against his son, telling reporters: "The most plausible explanation is that Amanda may also have worn the bra and therefore Raffaele would have touched it when she was wearing it."


No, Signor Sollecito, I think that's the LEAST plausible explanation. I ask the women out there in the blogosphere: How easy is it to share bras?! It's not an article of clothing like a t-shirt that can easily fit anyone within a certain size range.

I think RS inherited his ability to make up fantastical explanations on the spot from his father.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:24 pm   Post subject: Re: volunteer to take a lie detector...   

stewarthome2000 wrote:
I know it may not be admissible in court, but many times US police ask suspects to take a lie detector test in hopes of perhaps confirming suspicions or helping to eliminate them as a suspect, regardless of it legality in court. It is actually quite common in the US and many people who are under investigation, who trumpet their innocence, volunteer to do so.

It suppose that in Italy like most countries, lie detector results cannot be used as convicting evidence of guilt.
But if there were any suspects who claim innocence and are in desperate need of turning public opinion, it’s the defendants in this case. If Amanda is as innocent as she and FOA claim... what is their/her response when asking if she will take a lie detector test? Why doesn’t she volunteer?...maybe she did I dunno…anyone?

Seems to me, if it was not brought up before, FOA should be asked about this. Most innocent people agree to take one without worry. Me?, I think they are scared shitless of that prospect and would run for the hills or come up with some/any reason to avoid it if asked, but who knows. I can see them turning white now.
Can anyone comment if the idea of using lie detector came up in this case? Was she asked? Is it even used in Italy?



Polygraphs are not consider reliable evidence anywhere I doubt that they are used by police in Italy at all or most of Europe. I believe there is a psychologist evaluation that was done to the suspects when first arrive at Capanne prison and this I presume could be use in court if need be.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:41 pm   Post subject: Re: Another batch   

Giustizia wrote:
This seems trivial, but at the very least it points out how the parents of offspring accused of murder and sexual assault will say anything to dismiss disturbing DNA evidence. It's a comment made in January 2008 by Franco Sollecito, a urologist from southern Bari who has now apparently made a mid-life career change to work as a sales assistant at Victoria's Secret:

Primary sources:
Meredith murder probe 'breakthrough'
UK student killed in sex game

Quote:
Media reports said Sollecito's DNA was detected on a fragment of the bra that was found in a second search of the crime scene in the medieval university town.

It had been cut from the bra with a knife, and Sollecito's DNA was found close to the cut, the ANSA news agency reported.

Sollecito's father Francesco, a prominent urologist in southern Bari, dismissed the new evidence against his son, telling reporters: "The most plausible explanation is that Amanda may also have worn the bra and therefore Raffaele would have touched it when she was wearing it."


No, Signor Sollecito, I think that's the LEAST plausible explanation. I ask the women out there in the blogosphere: How easy is it to share bras?! It's not an article of clothing like a t-shirt that can easily fit anyone within a certain size range.

I think RS inherited his ability to make up fantastical explanations on the spot from his father.


Papa Sollecito, has an explanation for everything. Didn’t he also say that the borrowing of the bra was possible since AK apparently borrow his son’s underware?
I remember reading about it a long time ago when Papa Sol was on the media every other day.

I don't believe any woman or man for that matter will take somebody else under ware.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:52 pm   Post subject:    

A command from Etruscan enemy Malakas-Wilkens to the Cook HAHAHAHA

*Posted by Harry R. Wilkens at 2/21/09 7:51 a.m.
We should give our readers COMPLETE UNCENSORED INFORMATION or no information at all!*
Top Profile 

Offline Anastasia


Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 5:13 pm

Posts: 47

Location: Seattle, WA

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:05 pm   Post subject: rent   

This has been bothering me for some time now, and I remember it being discussed back on haloscan, maybe here too in the beginning, but not recently.
What about Meredith's missing rent money? Wasnt it verified by the landlady that Meredith didnt pay her rent that was due at the beginning of the month. And Amanda had precisely that amount on her, minus a few euros, maybe for buying undies and a bite to eat.
But yet we know Amanda was bitching about how it sucks that they cant live at the house even though rent was paid up for the next month, so where did she acquire said amount, that happened to be so close to the amount of actual rent. Was it Meredith's rent money? And doesnt that put another chink in Amanda's already holey armour?
Do we have verification that Amanda did in fact pay her rent that month AND was a sum of money equal to what rent would be at the villa, found on Amanda when she was finally jailed?
Its interesting her griping to (I cant remember who specifically now) seems to say that she did indeed pay her rent though.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:13 pm   Post subject:    

Jools wrote:

Quote:
A command from Etruscan enemy Malakas-Wilkens to the Cook HAHAHAHA

*Posted by Harry R. Wilkens at 2/21/09 7:51 a.m.
We should give our readers COMPLETE UNCENSORED INFORMATION or no information at all!*


It reminds me of the punchline of a joke about the Lone Ranger and Tonto: "Kimosabe! What is this 'we" shit?" :lol:

I suppose Harry wants to bring Gabriella in, with her insights into the connection between Obama and Perugia, and the disappeared videotape, not to mention the penis pumps hidden beneath the robes of the Dirty Old Men, the ones who are in need of a young woman to sacrifice on the altar of a Black Mass, to be later passed off as a suicide, while they in turn look for their next victim and try to figure out how to kill all the Scientologists and break into Fort Knox, where all the gold is hidden...

And these people think Mignini is fond of conspiracy theories? :shock:
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:19 pm   Post subject:    

Anastasia wrote:

Quote:
Do we have verification that Amanda did in fact pay her rent that month AND was a sum of money equal to what rent would be at the villa, found on Amanda when she was finally jailed?
Its interesting her griping to (I cant remember who specifically now) seems to say that she did indeed pay her rent though.


For what it's worth, I think Chris Mellas once posted that the rent had been paid. In her email to her IPE advisor Anni Fuller with about 22 other people copied in, Knox does say the rent has been paid. Several newspapers reported that Knox had 215 euros (I think that's right) on her person when arrested. And to anticipate the question, I don't think Euro notes can be dusted for fingerprints. I think banknotes can be tricky - depending on what they're made of - and that they do often bear traces, for example of cocaine, but not DNA. Or something like that. I have found it very hard to get information on this subject.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:22 pm   Post subject:    

Jools wrote:

Quote:
Papa Sollecito, has an explanation for everything. Didn’t he also say that the borrowing of the bra was possible since AK apparently borrow his son’s underware?
I remember reading about it a long time ago when Papa Sol was on the media every other day.

I don't believe any woman or man for that matter will take somebody else under ware.


Oh, yes, he said that and a number of other silly things. I have never, ever borrowed anyone's bra or panties and would say no if someone asked to borrow mine. I think it's called intimate apparel for a reason? :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Brogan


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:41 am

Posts: 306

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:26 pm   Post subject:    

The subject of lie detectors is interesting, true that the results are not addmissable in court but they are about to be used in the UK as part of a monitoring system for sex offenders. The technology used in modern lie detectors is very sophisticated and sensitive.

I too am suprised that Amandas family have not had a session arranged to lend support to their campaign in the US. I know that their use is commonplace on some US TV shows as it is here in the UK so there is a deree of social acceptability for the results. Prehaps the FOA don't want to risk a negative result.
Top Profile 

Offline GreenWyvern


User avatar


Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:41 pm

Posts: 252

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:51 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Jools wrote:

Quote:
Papa Sollecito, has an explanation for everything. Didn’t he also say that the borrowing of the bra was possible since AK apparently borrow his son’s underware?
I remember reading about it a long time ago when Papa Sol was on the media every other day.

I don't believe any woman or man for that matter will take somebody else under ware.


Oh, yes, he said that and a number of other silly things. I have never, ever borrowed anyone's bra or panties and would say no if someone asked to borrow mine. I think it's called intimate apparel for a reason? :)

In the early days of the investigation, I remember reading about this. I don't know now where the article appeared, but I'm sure the source of the information wasn't FS.

It was to the effect that police officers searching RS's apartment found a pair of his underpants stained with blood, and his explanation was that Amanada had borrowed them and the blood was from her period.
... Not the most pleasant detail to read about, but perhaps it says something about the nature of their relationship, or the nature of their weirdness.

s-(((
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:56 pm   Post subject:    

Quote:
Skep wrote:
And thus, on November 4 Knox informs her email recipients that she cannot leave Italy. Edda has stated on at least one occasion (I believe it was one of the crime as entertainment programs in the US) that her German relatives sounded the alarm, stating that if Amanda was being questioned so intensively it meant that something was up. And that, at least as the story goes, is why Edda hopped on a plane - shortly after receiving this email, I would guess.


Yes, on Sunday (Nov 4) Amanda wrote about it in another email:

Quote:
Seatlle Times (Nov 7 2007)

"On Sunday she sent a message to Brett Prim, also a student at the University of Washington, and said she "wasn't feeling great" and that her mother was flying from Seattle to be with her in Italy."
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:03 pm   Post subject:    

"The Sunday prior to the dramatic news briefing and Knox's arrest, Edda Mellas began what would be a circuitous trip to Italy from Seattle, via Philadelphia and Zurich. She was determined to be with Amanda, who was insisting that even though the flat was now a sealed-off crime scene, leaving her "basically homeless," she wanted to stay in Perugia to at least finish out the quarter and to help the police. Knox had worked several jobs over the summer to defray the cost of her year in Perugia and had chosen to study there, over the more popular Florence, because "it's not your typical tourist trap."
(...)
It was en route to Italy, Mellas recalls, that she first learned Amanda was a suspect. She describes that moment in a wobbly voice as "awful." "I was physically sick to my stomach," she says. "I was just such a wreck." Mellas, having imagined she was headed to Italy to find a new apartment for her scared daughter, was shaking from head to toe. She arrived in Perugia late at night, stunned, and in the morning set about finding a lawyer."
Top Profile 

Offline Mutley


User avatar


Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 10:38 pm

Posts: 71

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:16 pm   Post subject:    

The Sollecitos get caught up in the web they spin with their on the spot ridiculous lies. The discovery of the knife led RS to sudenly remember pricking Meredith with the knife because they often cooked together. He apologised, she was ok with it. All explained. Except everybody says Meredith did not visit his house and RS now wants to minimise the time he knew AK down to a week which is a small window for getting to know Meredith and often cooking together. Where does that leave the other defence team who want to claim that the DNA is variously somebody else, half of Italy, nobody at all, an animal or a fish. 20% match, 1% match. Pick a number and divide by your grandmother's age.

They pick and choose which lies to run with to fit the current story and quietly try to discard the rest. The speed and willingness to make up such things speaks volumes for their credibility. Is the cooking incident drivel admissable as evidence? I think it was entered in RS's prison diary as well but I don't know it's status.
Top Profile 

Offline observer


Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:36 pm

Posts: 178

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:00 pm   Post subject:    

There is no way I can imagine Meredith sharing underwear with Amanda, especially as she had voiced her distaste at Amanda's personal habits - bringing strange men home, keeping condoms and vibrators on view in the shared bathroom, etc.
Top Profile 

Offline DLW


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:41 pm

Posts: 623

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:10 pm   Post subject:    

‘The subject of lie detectors is interesting, true that the results are not addmissable in court but they are about to be used in the UK as part of a monitoring system for sex offenders. The technology used in modern lie detectors is very sophisticated and sensitive.
I too am suprised that Amandas family have not had a session arranged to lend support to their campaign in the US. I know that their use is commonplace on some US TV shows as it is here in the UK so there is a deree of social acceptability for the results. Prehaps the FOA don't want to risk a negative result‘…. Brogan

If she could have passed a polygraph test it certainly would have given her a PR boost. But her lawyers (FOA) would never have agreed to it, and the prosecution can’t use the results in trial. In the USA I believe it’s usually used in the very beginning to help focus on a line of investigation, but they are well past that point. I don’t know the legalities in Italy, but if I was the police I wouldn’t have tipped her off before she was arrested. She couldn’t answer Mignini’s straight forward questions without a mental break down, so I don‘t see how a polygraph test would have ended much differently. Plus no one knows exactly her thought process. If she took the test now , one of her lawyers , mom, dad, Anne Bremner, would end up answering the questions for her anyways. None of which have had much to add. A full trial will get us closest to the truth.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:32 pm   Post subject:    

DLW wrote:
‘The subject of lie detectors is interesting, true that the results are not addmissable in court but they are about to be used in the UK as part of a monitoring system for sex offenders. The technology used in modern lie detectors is very sophisticated and sensitive.
I too am suprised that Amandas family have not had a session arranged to lend support to their campaign in the US. I know that their use is commonplace on some US TV shows as it is here in the UK so there is a deree of social acceptability for the results. Prehaps the FOA don't want to risk a negative result‘…. Brogan

If she could have passed a polygraph test it certainly would have given her a PR boost. But her lawyers (FOA) would never have agreed to it, and the prosecution can’t use the results in trial. In the USA I believe it’s usually used in the very beginning to help focus on a line of investigation, but they are well past that point. I don’t know the legalities in Italy, but if I was the police I wouldn’t have tipped her off before she was arrested. She couldn’t answer Mignini’s straight forward questions without a mental break down, so I don‘t see how a polygraph test would have ended much differently. Plus no one knows exactly her thought process. If she took the test now , one of her lawyers , mom, dad, Anne Bremner, would end up answering the questions for her anyways. None of which have had much to add. A full trial will get us closest to the truth.


Hi DLW,

This is so true. In fact she has hardly answer any questions either before or after she was charged with Meredith’s murder. Most of her answers -at least in the US media- have been given by people who apart from not being there when Meredith was murdered they ( the FOA) are lying and contradicting themselves most of the time.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:12 pm   Post subject:    

Mutley wrote:

Quote:
The Sollecitos get caught up in the web they spin with their on the spot ridiculous lies. The discovery of the knife led RS to sudenly remember pricking Meredith with the knife because they often cooked together. He apologised, she was ok with it. All explained. Except everybody says Meredith did not visit his house and RS now wants to minimise the time he knew AK down to a week which is a small window for getting to know Meredith and often cooking together. Where does that leave the other defence team who want to claim that the DNA is variously somebody else, half of Italy, nobody at all, an animal or a fish. 20% match, 1% match. Pick a number and divide by your grandmother's age.


I think that leaves the other defense team tearing its hair out and wondering if it is too late to bail on this leaky boat. Pretty soon, the not-so smiling team will be claiming that Raffaele actually met Amanda after Nov 1.

Mutley added:

Quote:
They pick and choose which lies to run with to fit the current story and quietly try to discard the rest. The speed and willingness to make up such things speaks volumes for their credibility. Is the cooking incident drivel admissable as evidence? I think it was entered in RS's prison diary as well but I don't know it's status.


The question is whether that diary is admissible as evidence. It was sold to La Nazione, which may compromise its status. Also, since the actual diary has not been shown in public (that I know of), we don't know if it was handwritten and signed. If I understand correctly, if it is not handwritten, a hard copy must bear the signature of the author for it to be admissible.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:36 pm   Post subject: Lies and more lies   

Here are some recent comments from CW nothing new... This FOA still spewing the same rubbish.

"Micheli is full of shit when he says Meredith's bra was
removed after her death."
Charlie
=========
"the authorities have run a massive PR campaign to
demonize Amanda Knox and misrepresent the case against her."
Charlie
========
"Guede cleaned up in that bathroom after he killed Meredith."
Charlie
========

"The footprints weren't outside the front door. They were in the hallway
between the bathroom and Knox's room, they all belong to Knox, and they
prove nothing."
Charlie
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:46 pm   Post subject:    

Jools wrote:

Quote:
Here are some recent comments from CW nothing new... This FOA still spewing the same rubbish.


Charlie just sounds a little angrier these days. His campaign against Mignini backfired and he's not to happy. He was one of the first to jump on the bandwagon and he went for it whole hog. It was right up his, alley-wise: wrongful convictions, over-zealous prosecutors, the authorities in general. The right-wing anarchist in Wilkes said F*ck yeah!

And then along came Wilkens, his soul mate. They make a pretty good team. In fact, I was thinking Wilkens should contact Ciolino, who is Charlie's friend. Wilkens wants to break Knox out of that prison and so does Ciolino. I think they could pull it off as a team. I'm pretty sure they could dress up as prison chaplains or get themselves smuggled inside by hiding in a laundry bin.

Or maybe Frank could get them in through his secret conduit to AK. The possibilities are endless.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:08 pm   Post subject: BEST KEPT SECRET IN THE CASE-RELATED BLOGOSPHERE - KIND OF   

Once again, I recommend that anyone looking for intelligent life in the blogosphere pay a visit to button's eclectic chapbook (eclectchap.blogspot.com). This week, button has several entries about the Meredith Kercher Murder (and thank you, button, for keeping the victim's name where it should be). I am posting my favorite one below.

Incidentally, button used to comment occasionally at Frank's but seems to have stopped. A couple of months ago, she posted something and that goofy little tattletale who never misses an opportunity to distort a critical remark made by Frank elsewhere and call it to Frank's attention rushed in to "tell" on button. It seems button was (allegedly) the author of some comment that Frank had disapproved of - to be honest, I couldn't figure out what the post was - and goofy little tattletale wanted to make sure that the link someone else provided to button's blog was deleted and the blog placed on the ban list. Something tells me button is totally indifferent.

Her blog is seriously entertaining and she never fails to share her common-sense yet original views on this case. Below is her entry from Thursday in full. Highlights are mine. And thanks DLW: had you not mentioned button's blog at least a year ago, I'm not sure I would have found it on my own.



Thursday, February 19
Mez: PARTLY CLOUDY -
Meredith Kercher Murder -

Some Clarifications . . .

Q: Is this a legitimate or illegitimate Blog?

--A:: LOL, there is no such thing.

Q: Are you going to write a book about this case?

--A:: No.

Q: innocentisti or colpevolisti?

--A:: Neither. I would like to see the Prosecution present its case before I form an opinion on that. Along the way, I've just been sharing my impressions and trying out various theories of the crime.


Q: What is your impression of the crime at this point?

--A:: I currently think it may have been a vampire experiment, acting out a role-playing game. I understand this is called RPG or LARP and the people who participate are called LARPers
. I don't know much about this subject, but I do know that we've had a few crimes which fit that genre here in the U.S. and I've read a bit about them.

Q: Did you know that the Prosecution has been checking your blog?

--A:: Yes and No. I was aware that they were reading my Blog because I keep an eye on my site meters, but I thought it was a detective from the Postal Police. It doesn't bother me.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Charlie Wilkes


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 3:26 am

Posts: 1

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:10 pm   Post subject:    

The Machine wrote:
I know that certain individuals from the FOA have attempted to bully/intimidate/silence journalists who don't toe the official FOA party line, which is absolutely outrageous.


Not true.
Top Profile 

Offline nicki

Forensics Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:27 am

Posts: 847

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:14 pm   Post subject: Re: Lies and more lies   

Jools wrote:
Here are some recent comments from CW nothing new... This FOA still spewing the same rubbish.

"Micheli is full of shit when he says Meredith's bra was
removed after her death."
Charlie
=========
"the authorities have run a massive PR campaign to
demonize Amanda Knox and misrepresent the case against her."
Charlie
========
"Guede cleaned up in that bathroom after he killed Meredith."
Charlie
========

"The footprints weren't outside the front door. They were in the hallway
between the bathroom and Knox's room, they all belong to Knox, and they
prove nothing."
Charlie


Hi Guapa,

For a long time now, I've noticed how Knox's supporters seem to be uncapable to discuss the case in an objective and civilized manner. They either resort to insults or to outright denial of clearly demonstrated facts. But what are they afraid of, if they truly believe the two defendants are as innocents as lambs? I for one would be so happy to learn that these two young and promising kids have nothing to do with this heinous crime. But the problem is that as of now, all the evidence is pointing at them. And ranting and raving about supposed conspiracies/incompetences etc of the system that's going to decide about their involvement is not helping them at all. Actually it makes their position worse.If it could be made any worse than it is already now...
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:28 pm   Post subject:    

Charlie wrote:

Quote:
The Machine wrote:
I know that certain individuals from the FOA have attempted to bully/intimidate/silence journalists who don't toe the official FOA party line, which is absolutely outrageous.


Not true.


Sorry, Charlie, but it is true. I also have heard it from reliable sources.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:30 pm   Post subject:    

Message to Charlie: You were suspended from posting on the previous iteration of this board and the suspension still stands until further notice.
Thanks.

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

Offline Ferret


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:21 am

Posts: 101

Location: Hidden Hills, CA

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:56 pm   Post subject:    

bolint wrote:
"The Sunday prior to the dramatic news briefing and Knox's arrest, Edda Mellas began what would be a circuitous trip to Italy from Seattle, via Philadelphia and Zurich.."


Yuck. That wouldn't be a fun journey, plane trip wise. If she went on Southwest Air, she may had stopped in Phoenix on the way to Philadelphia. I took US Air a couple times that flew into Philadelphia from Sea-Tac. She definitely was trying to save money by taking the super masochist route. She should had gone out of Vancouver on Air Canada with a stop in Toronto then to Rome or just use American Airlines to JFK and then an Alitalia flight to Rome. She could also use Alaska Air to Newark and get a flight from there to Rome. Sometimes the cheapest fare isn't the best way to go, especially flying into a very stressful situation. The frequent fliers miles via one world program would probably help with the next ticket to Rome, rather than taking USAir or Southwest to Philly.

I just hate having multiple stops, I would have no problem eradicating O'Hare Airport from the face of the earth, given I use to stop there all the time to get medium size cities throughout the East Coast. (I guess Seattle to Hartford direct isn't going to be a money maker)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 12:01 am   Post subject: Classic   

A classic post some anon made on Frank's which I couldn't resist sharing:


Quote:
How do we know that Candace didn't post something here today? It is easy to tell: she doesn't say mean things about people nor indulge in putdowns.

February 21, 2009 12:11 AM



:lol:

_________________
"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 nowo


Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 12:35 pm

Posts: 186

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 12:45 am   Post subject:    

Charlie, can it really be you? My heart is beating....
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2316

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:07 am   Post subject:    

Charlie Wilkes is no postition to assert that members of the FOA haven't attempted to bully/intimidate/silence some journalists. He is not omnipresent. I know for a fact that some of the FOA have attempted to bully/intimdate/silence some journalists. Charlie's problem is that sees the world how he wants it to be and not how it is.

Here's another excellent piece by Charles Mudede about being bullied by David Marriott who was hired by Curt Knox and Edda Mellas to run the awful PR campaign:

Amanda

posted by Charles Mudede on March 28 at 10:42 AM

A deeper look into Guede’s recent claim about Amanda Knox being at home at the time of the murder makes him more guilty of the crime than Knox. For one, it’s the most foolish statement he could have made. It contains no sense, and it sounds as if he is purely making up things. Now, if Amanda had actually been in the room when Meredith was murdered, why does Guede need to make shit up? If he wants to incriminate Amanda, why not say exactly what happened that night? If she was there, this would be an easy thing to do. But instead Guede is saying fantastic things like: “I heard Amanda at the doorway.” Such a claim is made from the stuff of air.


That said, Amanda’s family has hired the worst publicity agent, David Marriott, to improve Amanda’s public image. He writes rough letters to the press, calls everyone who is not on Amanda’s side wrong or stupid or unprofessional. (Does he communicate with European journalists in this way? If so, I feel sorry for Amanda’s parents. They have no idea of the kind of damage he is doing overseas.)

David Marriott, it’s not a matter of bullying reporters to take your side on an issue that is as convoluted Meredith’s murder; it’s a matter of being there when the press needs real information, and keeping Amanda’s family in a friendly light. At present, you sound desperate and like an ugly American.

Checkout this terrible press release:

Information being attributed to Rudy Guede regarding the investigation into the murder of Meredith Kercher is impossible to believe. There is no evidence to support his suggestion that Amanda and Raffaele Sollecito were present when Meredith was murdered. Guede lacks credibility just as his current statement lacks credibility.

We find it quite interesting that this information comes forward just a few days before a Supreme Court hearing in Rome to determine whether or not Amanda should continue to be held in the Le Capanne jail in Perugia.

Guede said before that he did not see Amanda and Rafaelle that night, and is now telling a different story.

We know that Amanda is innocent. There is no evidence against her, and we await her release.

What’s wrong with this letter? For one, Amanda changed her story several times, too. Which changes are we now supposed to believe? Why should we believe Amanda’s changes instead of Guede’s? Because the statement is written as if Amanda did not change her story, it has about it a ring of arrogance: it accuses another person of doing precisely what has been done by the accuser. (This kind of arrogance characterizes American foreign policy.) More sensitivity to the past (and more sensitivity in general) would help rather than harm Amanda’s case.
Top Profile 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:30 am   Post subject: YIKES SKYPE!   

Ever since I read Candace Dempsey's latest entry about her interview with David Johnsrud, something has been nagging me from the past where I specifically read about SKYPE and I finally found what I was looking for. First, here's DJ's comment:

Quote:
7. How closely did you keep in touch while she was in Perugia? Didn't you buy her a Skype headset?

Well, like I said, twice a week we talked over Skype. I can't even imagine how much money she must have spent at internet cafes.


It's a cheap way to keep in touch - according to the SKYPE website, in Italy calls to another computer cost
$0.024USD (a little over 2 pennies!) and calls to a mobile are about $0.35USD per minute.

Back on the first DATELINE program which aired December 2007, this information was in the program transcript (page 4) with comments by Richard Owen:

Quote:
The Italian papers reported that the night of the murder Rudy was seen later dancing into the wee hours at a Perugia student disco.

Why, asked the police, had Amanda and he reportedly talked by cell phone both before and after the murder?

The biggest question was: where was Rudy now?

The police quickly had a high-tech line on Rudy's whereabouts.

Richard Owen (reporter): They knew that he had used the internet a lot and had a 'Skype' account and they tracked it.

A SKYPE account allows people to talk computer to computer over the internet using it as a telephone.

Rudy, it turned out, was making calls to his friends in Perugia from Germany. Dusseldorf. He was in quick order arrested.


So now it's confirmed that both Knox and Guede had SKYPE accounts. The cops took Rudy's phone? No problem for him, because he can SKYPE his friends! Was Amanda Knox on his SKYPE call list? What a shame her computer was ruined...and what ever happened to Rudy's computer?

I'm sure we'll hear in court if those SKYPE records are relevant.

Also, since DJ says Knox "must have spent a fortune in internet cafes", is he saying that the cottage DIDN'T have an internet connection?
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:39 am   Post subject:    

Tara wrote:

Quote:
Also, since DJ says Knox "must have spent a fortune in internet cafes", is he saying that the cottage DIDN'T have an internet connection?


Maybe Knox ran into Rudy a few times in those Internet cafés. If she spent a fortune, then she also spent a lot of time.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jumpy


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 4:27 pm

Posts: 231

Location: US

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:39 am   Post subject:    

Edda Mellas should have stayed in Zurich and written off that good for nothing daughter.

Beautiful city. Expensive, but not as expensive as the lost cause she has since embraced.
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

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

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:39 am   Post subject: Connections   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Wow! I just had a look at Gabriella Carlizzi's long telephone interview with none other than Harry Wilkens. If someone could do a proper translation, it would be a big help.



Skep,

You might already know the answer to this one.

Seeing as how it’s somewhat quiet on the translation front, I was thinking of getting my claws into some more peripheral stuff.

Sometimes new insights and fresh perspectives are gained by “going outside the square”, so with that in mind, I had a look at Carlizzi’s “interview”.

Nicki is right – there is no value-add there. There are no new facts, and the “joining of the dots” regarding esoteric conspiracies makes better sense in Google trans than the original Italian (not a good sign) and I doubt I could improve on it. The page is not so much froth, as foaming. Besides, she is promoting (a) her book, and (b) herself (again, not a good sign).

Anyway, the mainstream Italian press are not that much better, doing 1+1 and getting 15 gazillion, as when a blogger notes how hysterical the Corriere della Sera gets compared to the sober and prudent BBC when reporting on that English fellow who was recently charged with Italian bribery. Blogger adds parenthetically, “It’s enough to see how the American media behave with Amanda Knox to know where to draw the line”.
- Karat45 at Giornalettismo

A new word I found there, “arzigogoli” (daydreams, quibbles), in the sense of “fantastically contorted logic”, may come in useful here later in certain contexts.


Another commentator, about the multiple judgements of the Italian legal system, mentions in passing how the Guede judgement reasons “are weighing heavily like a millstone on the arguments, if not the decisions” of the Amanda and Raffaele case.
- Paolo Berardengo at 24ore


And then there are the Facebook wars, with a “pro group-rape” page (thankfully now removed) countered by a corresponding “Get rid of…” page, drawing inspiration and tactics from earlier pro-mafia and pro-Amanda fan pages.
- Gregori at Giornalettismo


Even the Russian media are easily sidetracked, like when they run with the goth and emo connections of that recent murder in St Petersburg on 19 Jan, where two 19-year-old males, one a florist and the other a street-stall drug-addict butcher from Murmansk with psychiatric problems, drowned, cooked and ate a schoolgirl in their apartment (they were hungry, they told the prosecutor).

Her grandmother said, “Зачем писать то, чего не было?” (“Why write something that was not?” - Google). It wasn’t linked to youth subculture; it was an “ordinary crime”.
MK 18 Feb 2009

A drug-addict with a penchant for knives, and a friend, and a senseless murder

Sounds familiar.

The chemical-physiological removal of the morals guardian of the brain – now, there is an esoteric connection worth pursuing.

отморозков (otmorozkov = “scumbags”) – says the grandmother

Карина (Carina)
She was 16 and wanted to learn German (because of her favourite band) and become a journalist.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:46 am   Post subject:    

Catnip wrote:

Quote:
A new word I found there, “arzigogoli” (daydreams, quibbles), in the sense of “fantastically contorted logic”, may come in useful here later in certain contexts.


It sounds like this could be Candace Dempsey's middle name. :)

The story about the Russian girl is absolutely disgusting. Unspeakable.

What else is out there that you've been keeping from us?

If Carlizzi makes more sense in my English translation, then I can just imagine the conversation she must have had with that Harry Redneck from Geneva.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:55 am   Post subject:    

The Machine wrote:
What’s wrong with this letter? For one, Amanda changed her story several times, too. Which changes are we now supposed to believe? Why should we believe Amanda’s changes instead of Guede’s? Because the statement is written as if Amanda did not change her story, it has about it a ring of arrogance: it accuses another person of doing precisely what has been done by the accuser. (This kind of arrogance characterizes American foreign policy.) More sensitivity to the past (and more sensitivity in general) would help rather than harm Amanda’s case.
[/i]


nicki wrote:
For a long time now, I've noticed how Knox's supporters seem to be uncapable to discuss the case in an objective and civilized manner. They either resort to insults or to outright denial of clearly demonstrated facts. But what are they afraid of, if they truly believe the two defendants are as innocents as lambs? I for one would be so happy to learn that these two young and promising kids have nothing to do with this heinous crime. But the problem is that as of now, all the evidence is pointing at them. And ranting and raving about supposed conspiracies/incompetences etc of the system that's going to decide about their involvement is not helping them at all. Actually it makes their position worse.If it could be made any worse than it is already now...


Absolutely...this is the MO of the FOA.
I live in PG, and I can say unequivically they are hurting Knox in ways they cannot even imagine. Many Perugians are peeved at the coverage and forum for FOA in the States and Knox is taking the hit. But it goes beyond just spin and double standards. The FOA, Amanda and her family too...lying bastards. COWARDS who are afraid of the conseqences of the truth yet claim complete innocence. I see where Amanda get it..its like inherent in the genes or something. They must hypotise themselves to believe the crap that poors out of their mouths beforehand. Everytime they open ther mouth and spew...a new copevolista is born.

Don't worry...people will get wise to their BS...its happening already.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Giustizia


Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:13 pm

Posts: 113

Location: New York City

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:19 am   Post subject:    

Catnip wrote:
A new word I found there, “arzigogoli” (daydreams, quibbles), in the sense of “fantastically contorted logic”, may come in useful here later in certain contexts.

Yes indeed. Definitely need to add this to my vocabulary list. It's a 50¢ SAT word--

arzigogolare
1. creare castelli in aria
2. lavorare d'immaginazione, fantasticare (to daydream)
3. cavillare (to quibble)
Fare arzigogoli

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
It sounds like this could be Candace Dempsey's middle name. :)

Just call her Candace "Arzigogolante" Dempsey!
Top Profile 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:29 am   Post subject: OPINION POLL   

If I may, I am curious how this turns out.

CLICK THE LINK BELOW TO TAKE THE POLE AND VOTE ON AK's GUILT OR INNOCENCE (You may only vote once):

http://www.micropoll.com/akira/mpview/546552-142429
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 3:26 am   Post subject: Re: rent   

Anastasia wrote:
This has been bothering me for some time now, and I remember it being discussed back on haloscan, maybe here too in the beginning, but not recently.
What about Meredith's missing rent money? Wasnt it verified by the landlady that Meredith didnt pay her rent that was due at the beginning of the month. And Amanda had precisely that amount on her, minus a few euros, maybe for buying undies and a bite to eat.
But yet we know Amanda was bitching about how it sucks that they cant live at the house even though rent was paid up for the next month, so where did she acquire said amount, that happened to be so close to the amount of actual rent. Was it Meredith's rent money? And doesnt that put another chink in Amanda's already holey armour?
Do we have verification that Amanda did in fact pay her rent that month AND was a sum of money equal to what rent would be at the villa, found on Amanda when she was finally jailed?
Its interesting her griping to (I cant remember who specifically now) seems to say that she did indeed pay her rent though.



Anastasia,

The rent is an interesting subject and I do think it will crop up at the trial in relation to the theft of Meredith's money.

It's interesting that Guede was never charged with the theft and there is probably a good reason.

I'm not at all sure that the rent was ever paid.

The girls at the cottage last spoke of it the day before the holiday. They agreed to have it ready for payment after. Both Filomena and Laura gave evidence about this conversation last week. In the days following the murder was there ever an opportunity to pay the rent? Did Amanda just give it to Filomena (she was the one who dealt with the landlord)? There would have been a shortfall because of Meredith's missing money. Was anyone inclined to a discussion on making up this shortfall when it was becoming apparent that no-one would be able to live at the cottage? Did anyone except Amanda even think about the rent during this time?

Some parts of the rent conversation earlier leaked:

Meredith said she had already withdrawn her money and had it in her room.

Amanda said that Patrick owed her, but hadn't paid. She didn't expand on the implications of that statement to her housemates and the conversation finished. The Knox's claim she had plenty in the bank.


IT WILL BE A FACT KNOWN to the prosecution whether Amanda ever parted with that 300E rent to anybody. Depending on that, the 300E will either be in addition to the money Amanda was in possesion of when arrested, or she was arrested with the remains of 300E.

Amanda will have to account for her acquisition of either approx. 250E or approx 550E.

Did Patrick pay her some money?

It's known that Raffaele only had 40E in the bank the day before Meredith was killed. If he claims to have lent her the money can he show the transaction which acquired it?

Can Amanda show a bank transaction which acquired it?

Only Amanda and Raffaele have been charged with the theft from Meredith, NOT RUDY. I wonder why?
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

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

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:02 am   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
What else is out there that you've been keeping from us?


Skep,
Nothing deliberate - Just googling around in a quiet moment.

Speaking of which, I just found an indirect reference to the postal police and Sollecito's emergency call.

Quote:

THE CARABINIERE WHO RESPONDED TO SOLLECITO TALKS

Appuntato Daniele Ceppitello remembers well that day of 2 November 2007, at 12:51: he was working at the Perugia Carabiniere Call Centre, when, for the first time, that boy called advising of a burglary at via della Pergola. The tape of that call spools in court, followed immediately after by another, at 12:54.


The appuntato [rank equivalent to captain] could not have known it, but in his conversation with that young man with the southern accent, there was buried the beginning of one of the most intricate mysteries of recent years, the Perugia murder [delitto], the murder [omicidio] of Meredith Kercher.

Making the call was Raffaele Sollecito, a Pugliese student from Giovinazzo; next to him can be heard the voice of a foreigner, Amanda Knox. The body of Meredith had not yet been found, but Raffaele informs 112 [=the emergency centre] that “someone entered into the house, a door is open, there’s been a burglary”. In the second call, he says that “there are traces of blood, a door is locked”. The soldier sends a patrol to the spot, who arrive, though, to find two postal police agents, Inspector Battistelli and a colleague. The two are there because someone had found two cell phones – which, as will be learned (later), belong to the victim – hidden amongst the bushes of a neighbouring villa. It will be them who proceed with the investigations, advising the breaking down of the door to the locked room: behind (it) is the sacrificed body of Mez.

But it is exactly over this 112 phone call that the prosecution and defence are battling. The times are certain, recorded at the carabinieri operations centre: 12:51 and 12:54. But were the two policemen already there? Or were they still on the way, seeing as they turned up following a phone theft trail? For the Raffaele defence, the lad called before the agents arrived, therefore the alarm was raised in a genuine way. “One hears/understands from the high timbre of the voice, anxious/nervous [concitato], that the call was genuine,” explains lawyer Marco Brusco, who is defending him together with Luca Maori and Giulia Bongiorno, “Raffaele did not make a furtive phone call.”

The prosecution has a different take. For the Public Prosecutor, Raffaele called when he sees the agents arrive: he wanted to establish an alibi before the police entered in the house. The prosecution scenario puts faith in the witness testimony of the two agents, who had never seen Raffaele make a call and who say they had arrived at the house of that yet-to-be-discovered-murder around 12:35. At approximately 13:10, the concern about Meredith’s absence persuaded them to advise the occupants [padroni] of the house to break down the door. Then that bluish foot from under the bedcover, a sea of blood. And the start of the Perugia mystery.

Alf.Vac.


24ore 15 Feb 2009
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:18 am   Post subject:    

Charlie, please, explain us this spilled water vs. broken pipe controversy.

What was exactly on the police video made in Raffaele's kitchen?
Top Profile 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 8 of 11 [ 2503 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], CommonCrawl [Bot] and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

  

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


30,219,404 Views