AmyStrange
Philosopher
Last edited:
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito
- Thread starter anglolawyer
- Start date
- Status
AmyStrange
Philosopher
The odd thing for me is the double standard in use in the conviction of Sollecito and Knox. So we have the supreme court criticising Hellman for including as evidence Guede's not mentioning the presence of Sollecito or Knox in his Skype call; but Nencini can use Guede's statement that Kercher believed Knox stole her money. Either Guede's statements ca be accepted or not, but it does not seem just to say only those statements of Guede's that diminish his guilt are to be believed. Most people would tend to distrust self serving statements, but not apparently Nencini.
Who would suggest murder was on his mind when he climbed in the window? Absolutely no one.
He has a way with words, and a belief in conversation to negotiate adverse circumstances. Obviously both he and Meredith have ended in bad places, unplanned by either, but solely due to Rudy Guede's actions.
Clearly the best endeavours film script must make a guess at what words were spoken, and how it turned to murder.
How would anyone (other than Guede) know what was on his mind?
The practice of breaking into a place where people are not home and lying in wait for them so as to assault and/or kill them is not unknown in the US.
In the US, killing someone "accidentally" in the course of committing another crime (felony) is considered murder and is actually often considered more heinous than a murder with no such felony attached. (Depends on the jurisdiction - of course.)
To be clear, the bolded and/or highlighted clauses, and the general context of the paragraph and the article, are the source for my satirical observation that "Some Italians consider reading too many books a sign of bad character" (or words to that effect).
As pointed out by another poster, Amanda was continuing her college studies at UW while a prisoner, and no doubt some of the books were for those courses. But the fact that reading books rather than interacting with convicted criminals was considered an issue speaks loudly to me.
The envy and unjustified hatred displayed toward Amanda by Antonelli (the "lady" prison guard) and Victoria (the prisoner) are overwhelming clear, IMO.
Last edited:
anglolawyer
Banned
It might help if you occasionally said what you are saying.
I am speculating by assessing the known history of recent behavior, where he broke into three places, and on two occasions, the kindergarten and Cristian Tramontino he negotiated an exit. Part of my point is to arrive by discussion at a most likely narrative, as it is my belief that all the facts are known concerning this 7 year debacle except these few minutes, which must be extrapolated from every thing known about Rudy before, and his communications since.
Inevitably a film will or should be made that is the best approximation of the seven years, to help the many victims be understood.
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2012
- Messages
- 41,028
I'm sorry Amy. I think you ran the train right off the rails with this idea. How is it possible that Meredith's murder was accidental? Do you think Rudy accidentally put a knife to Meredith's throat?
AmyStrange
Philosopher
-
I just said it's possible that after putting the knife to her throat to quiet her, she struggled, they fell and that's when she was stabbed.
All the evidence against him only points to the fact (which he admits) is that he was there, and that's all it proves. If you want to conclude that this proves he killed her, that's fine, I really can't argue successfully against that, but to me he just doesn't have the personal history or character of a violent person, but that's just my opinion. I'm not saying it's a fact, it's just my opinion,
d
-
-
I just said it's possible that after putting the knife to her throat to quiet her, she struggled, they fell and that's when she was stabbed.
All the evidence against him only points to the fact (which he admits) is that he was there, and that's all it proves. If you want to conclude that this proves he killed her, that's fine, I really can't argue successfully against that, but to me he just doesn't have the personal history or character of a violent person, but that's just my opinion. I'm not saying it's a fact, it's just my opinion,
d
-
Last edited:
It seems likely he always relies on a knife for self defence, so the old adage live by the sword die by the sword is relevant. He should never be released until he submits to cross examination, to discover what he did in those few minutes. He would tell a cogent truth to gain freedom, and the two innocent defendents would be absolved.
(I just thought of that as a real world solution).
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2012
- Messages
- 41,028
While I think it is possible that Rudy did not intend to kill Meredith, I have no doubt that he did. Ask any police officer about the murders where the suspect did not intend to kill his victim but something went awry is actually a common refrain. The victim resisted and they were left with no choice. They didn't mean to pull the trigger. They were drunk. Rudy at least put himself in a position that caused the death of Meredith. To me, that is murder. It may not be premeditated murder. But it is murder.
AmyStrange
Philosopher
-
Yeah, I wish to hell the defense had been allowed to cross-examine him and it makes me very suspicious of the prosecution for weaseling their way out of that. It just looks to me like they were afraid of what he might say if he had been cross-examined, something that might have blown their whole case right out of the water, if the defense had been given that chance.
I just have the impression from everything I've read about him, that he's an opportunist, someone who uses intimidation instead of violence, and also someone who believes he can talk his way out of any situation, but all that is just my opinion, and not a fact.
All of the evidence points to him being there (he even admits it, and has never recanted it), but none of it proves he killed her. I'm not saying that he didn't, I'm just saying I'm not willing to say absolutely that he did it, or that he did it in a premeditated sense, but once again, I'm not saying that as a fact, just as an opinion,
d
-
-
Yeah, I wish to hell the defense had been allowed to cross-examine him and it makes me very suspicious of the prosecution for weaseling their way out of that. It just looks to me like they were afraid of what he might say if he had been cross-examined, something that might have blown their whole case right out of the water, if the defense had been given that chance.
I just have the impression from everything I've read about him, that he's an opportunist, someone who uses intimidation instead of violence, and also someone who believes he can talk his way out of any situation, but all that is just my opinion, and not a fact.
All of the evidence points to him being there (he even admits it, and has never recanted it), but none of it proves he killed her. I'm not saying that he didn't, I'm just saying I'm not willing to say absolutely that he did it, or that he did it in a premeditated sense, but once again, I'm not saying that as a fact, just as an opinion,
d
-
AmyStrange
Philosopher
-
Plus, he did nothing to get her outside medical attention. That doesn't help his case either. He might have thought that if he did do that, he would be accused of her murder or assault, but THAT IS NO DAMN EXCUSE IN MY BOOK.
Here in Seattle (and other places too) that's a crime. I can't remember if it's a felony or what exactly it's called, but it's still a crime that's on the books here.
I'm against the death penalty, but if it can ever be absolutely proven beyond a shadow of a doubt (especially considering the horrible, terrifying way Meredith died) that Rudy killed her willfully (or even if it was proven without a doubt that Raffaele and/ or Amanda did it), I would be the first to vote for any law allowing him or them to be slowly and painfully executed,
d
-
-
Plus, he did nothing to get her outside medical attention. That doesn't help his case either. He might have thought that if he did do that, he would be accused of her murder or assault, but THAT IS NO DAMN EXCUSE IN MY BOOK.
Here in Seattle (and other places too) that's a crime. I can't remember if it's a felony or what exactly it's called, but it's still a crime that's on the books here.
I'm against the death penalty, but if it can ever be absolutely proven beyond a shadow of a doubt (especially considering the horrible, terrifying way Meredith died) that Rudy killed her willfully (or even if it was proven without a doubt that Raffaele and/ or Amanda did it), I would be the first to vote for any law allowing him or them to be slowly and painfully executed,
d
-
On reflection, you are quite right. I wonder whether from Mignini down, any of them want Rudy subjected to cross examination. All prevarication can be only attributed to doubt of Amanda's and Raffaele's involvement.
If I were to ask Machiavelli or Mignini for example, would you like Rudy to be interrogated/ cross examined in order to find exactly what happened,
Who on this thread believes the answer would be a straight yes?
Who on this thread does not expect a rambling dissertation on the judicial reasons this question is now irrelevant.
Here is an open question to Machiavelli, Vibio, platonov, CoulsdonUK, Stilicho, and any one else.
Would you like Rudy Guede to be subjected to a searching interrogation/cross examination?
The response is limited to yes or no.
I expect there will be no response.
This is not a variation on, have you stopped beating your wife? by the way, semantic intent is quite different.
If the prosecution were not acutely aware that he would have been a major liability and that his story would have totally fallen apart under cross examination, they would have done everything in their power to get him to testify against the other two
Instead, they mostly just ignore Guede or minimise his involvement to also there
Kevin_Lowe
Unregistered
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2003
- Messages
- 12,221
That's the good thing about never talking about any issue of substance. You can never be shown to be wrong about any issue of substance.
I would be pleasantly surprised if you ever told a coherent story about what you did intend to convey with your "random" rumination about race but I won't be holding my breath.
AmyStrange
Philosopher
-
Yeah, I'd suspect you're right about that, but I wouldn't limit it to a yes or no answer, but Mach might surprise us with an actual straightforward yes or no, and CoulsdonUK too, but I'm not holding my breath.
Another thing I'd like done is to have that knife opened up and if they found an abundant amount of Meredith's blood AND DNA under there, that would be enough for me to rethink my position on their probable innocence, but I highly doubt that would happen, especially with my TOD probabilities being that death occurred before 9:30, at least in my opinion anyway.
BUT, and I emphasize this very strongly, I WOULD NOT LET STEFFY ANYWHERE NEAR THAT KNIFE while that was being done,
d
-
-
Yeah, I'd suspect you're right about that, but I wouldn't limit it to a yes or no answer, but Mach might surprise us with an actual straightforward yes or no, and CoulsdonUK too, but I'm not holding my breath.
Another thing I'd like done is to have that knife opened up and if they found an abundant amount of Meredith's blood AND DNA under there, that would be enough for me to rethink my position on their probable innocence, but I highly doubt that would happen, especially with my TOD probabilities being that death occurred before 9:30, at least in my opinion anyway.
BUT, and I emphasize this very strongly, I WOULD NOT LET STEFFY ANYWHERE NEAR THAT KNIFE while that was being done,
d
-
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 12,986
Chen test meal compared with Hellmig
one egg yolk and two egg whites were microwaved
2 slices of white bread
7 grams of margarine
8 grams of of grape jelly
150 mL of water
The total number of kilojoules of the test meal was 1088.
The above is the test meal in the 2006 study by Hellmig. There is also a study by Chen and coworkers (Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (2003) 18, 41–46) that uses a similar test meal.
one egg yolk and two egg whites were microwaved
2 slices of white bread
7 grams of margarine
8 grams of of grape jelly
150 mL of water
The total number of kilojoules of the test meal was 1088.
- Status