Continuation Part 16: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Vixen]

No she urges them not to talk about it or share it.

This is an email for everyone, because I would like to get it all out and not have to repeat myself a hundred times like Ive been having to do at the police station. Some of you already know some things, some of you know nothing. What I'm about to say I cant say to journalists or newspapers, and I require that of anyone receiving this information as well.

Oh yeah? You're on the front page of the world press and you reckon +25 people in a round robin will keep schtum?

lmao

 

[Vixen]

It's both. But misspelled regardless

It's also Cockney.

 

[Vixen]

What would that be?

In the post directly above you once again avoided actually taking any position at all, and continue to cling to your mystical agnosticism on any and all matters of the case.

I'll repeat my request for you, since you seemed not to have digested it:

""Originally Posted by carbonjam72 Would you please reveal what you do believe then? After your 1,000+ posts here, I think its fair to ask. Do you believe Rudy's version? That he was there on a date and let in by Meredith, and had consensual relations? It would be helpful to understanding your views if you could provide a timeline you believe to be accurate, as to when and where Amanda and Raf were that night, and when you believe the assault occurred and who participated. (Given that a witness saw them at Raf's apt at 840pm, and most here think the crime occurred shortly after 9pm and Meredith could not have been alive after roughly 10pm.) Rather than hiding behind generalities and obscurantism, why not just lay your cards on the table? Put forward a concrete hypothesis that can actually be tested, and lets have a real discussion, eh? Considering your great number of posts, I think its a reasonable request.""

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=10756837#post10756837

 

[Kauffer]

There is lots of evidence. For example, John Kercher in his book. Mez' friends in their statements. The email home to +25 people can hardly be described as "private", [/HILITE]when Amanda therein urges these +25 people to talk to journalists (presumably to set off the spin set out in the email).[/HILITE]

You're making stuff up again. It's not good. This is what she said from the source you dare to cite:

"What I'm about to say I cant say to journalists or newspapers, and I require that of anyone receiving this information as well."

She said the complete opposite of what you said she said.

 

[carbonjam72]

I don't know if anyone else will have addressed this issue in the meantime, but I believe the clear reason why the police/PM were fearful of the impact of Knox's mother's arrival was nothing at all to do with "lawyering up". In my opinion, it had everything to do with Knox's mother saying to Knox "enough of all this - I'm taking you back to Seattle immediately". And the police/PM knew that a) they had no valid legal reason at that time to compel Knox to remain in Italy, and b) if Knox did go back to the US, they'd certainly have huge trouble extraditing her in the future, and indeed might never be able to extradite her at all.

And that is why (in my view) the police and PM were desperate to "break" Knox - and thereby give them a valid reason to arrest and detain her - before she ever had the opportunity to meet up with her mother. They thought there was a strong possibility that if they didn't do so, Knox would meet with her mother on 6th November in Perugia, and they would both be on flights back to the US by the evening of the same day.

(And that also explains why they didn't feel the same time pressure with Sollecito. Sollecito's whole family and support network was in Italy. There was a very low possibility that he'd be going anywhere abroad, and in any case, even if he did, they'd have far less trouble getting an Italian citizen returned to Italy (especially if Sollecito chose to travel to somewhere in the EU). In addition, I think the police at that time didn't believe that Sollecito was directly involved in the murder - I think they believed he was simply lying to protect Knox. It was Knox who they really wanted to get, and they wanted to use (and "break") Sollecito to get to her.)

I think it was Patrick who they really wanted to get, and to place Patrick at the crime scene they had to get Knox to do it. They had to break Raf to break Amanda's alibi.

Amanda's role I believe was originally that of a lesser player, until they lost patrick and slotted in Rudy. Is that right?

 

[Kauffer]

This is an email for everyone, because id like to get it all out and
not have to repeat myself a hundred times like ive been having to do
at the police station. some of you already know some things, some of
you know nothing. what im about to say i cant say to journalists or
newspapers, and i require that of anone receiving this information as
well. this is m account of how i found my roommate murdered the
morning of friday, november 2nd.
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Amanda_Knox's_Email_Home

You have demonstrated your inability to interrogate a document for meaning if you think Amanda is asking her friends to contact journalists.

Astonishing.

 

[carbonjam72]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=10756837#post10756837

It's just a circular argument with you. Maybe you could try answering the question this time?


Originally Posted by carbonjam72
What would that be?

In the post directly above you once again avoided actually taking any position at all, and continue to cling to your mystical agnosticism on any and all matters of the case.

I'll repeat my request for you, since you seemed not to have digested it:

""Originally Posted by carbonjam72
Would you please reveal what you do believe then?

After your 1,000+ posts here, I think its fair to ask.

Do you believe Rudy's version? That he was there on a date and let in by Meredith, and had consensual relations?

It would be helpful to understanding your views if you could provide a timeline you believe to be accurate, as to when and where Amanda and Raf were that night, and when you believe the assault occurred and who participated. (Given that a witness saw them at Raf's apt at 840pm, and most here think the crime occurred shortly after 9pm and Meredith could not have been alive after roughly 10pm.)
Rather than hiding behind generalities and obscurantism, why not just lay your cards on the table? Put forward a concrete hypothesis that can actually be tested, and lets have a real discussion, eh?

Considering your great number of posts, I think its a reasonable request.""

 

[Grinder]

Oh yeah? You're on the front page of the world press and you reckon +25 people in a round robin will keep schtum?

lmao

but you wrote - There is lots of evidence. For example, John Kercher in his book. Mez' friends in their statements. The email home to +25 people can hardly be described as "private", when Amanda therein urges these +25 people to talk to journalists

similar to calling in only Raf right just like the police knew she would come in Amanda knew by telling people NOT to talk to the press would be urging them to do exactly that.

 

[Grinder]

It's also Cockney.

No it's not or no more than it's an English or American word.

 

[Kauffer]

Oh yeah? You're on the front page of the world press and you reckon +25 people in a round robin will keep schtum?

lmao

I think you've worked out your error.

Now you're trying to wriggle out of it by changing tack. You stated that Amanda asked her friends to contact journalists.

She did not. And you've been called out.

 

[Planigale]

My gut instincts and experience (from researching British Museum Newspaper Library) are that early reports and police investigations tend to be more accurate than late PR, political and defense spin. I have mentioned this before. For example, if you want to understand 9/11, watch the developing news broadcasts.

That's not to say the reports are accurate, but tend to be more true on an emotional level.

Think about it, history books are written by the victors. Go to a newspaper library to find out the story, before the victors won. That gives you a better over view.

In this case, you have a brutal murder. Police have to think on their feet. Faced with a stab in the neck, the police profilers will tell them they should be looking for a man, as female murders by stabbing are extraordinarily rare. (cf Jodi Arias, Joanna Dehenny, Tracey Andrews.)

Mignini saw the murder scene, the body and each of the accused in person.

IMV his early theory is more accurate than "row over unflushed toilet". There are lots of depraved sexual elements here, not to mention Kokomani's claim of rehearsal the day before.

That's not to say it is conclusive evidence. That was for the court to decide.

There are so many logical fallacies here it is hard to know where to start.
1) Your gut instinct is not reliable it certainly is not a good basis for an argument. But good for you, at least you recognise that what you rely on is gut instinct, now you just need to realise that this may not represent the truth.
2) The situation in England with sub juice laws is different from Italy where there are none.
3) Where is your gold standard for accuracy?
4) you say history books are written by victors? So there are no histories on America written by Brits? No histories of WW2 by Germans or Japanese? Do you think that Japanese histories of WW2 are more accurate than American or British by virtue of their being losers?

 

[zotz]

I think it was Patrick who they really wanted to get, and to place Patrick at the crime scene they had to get Knox to do it. They had to break Raf to break Amanda's alibi.

Amanda's role I believe was originally that of a lesser player, until they lost patrick and slotted in Rudy. Is that right?

I can imagine the police and Mignini, after Lumumba was proven innocent, standing around saying to each other 'She lied to us!'. Not only that but she made them look stupid through no fault of their own! That was the point when Amanda became truly evil in Mignini's mind.

I wonder how they think of her now.

 

[Kauffer]

Amanda was always quick to "drop people in it" IMV. She told police unprompted Laura and Filomena smoked pot, claimed Patrick murdered and raped Mez and volunteered Raff had a past history of "extensive drug use: cocaine and acid", and that "he suffered mental illness via depression".

Amanda to Mignini Mez' body was "covered in vaseline". In her email home, she informs +25 people police asked her whether Mez mentioned "anal sex". In the same email to +25 people Amanda confirms police had asked her to maintain confidentiality.

Maybe Mez did once ask for one of Amanda's condoms. Amanda telling all who will listen about this (one?) incident seems to me a self-serving attempt to depict Mez as some kind of a hypocrite for daring to object to Amanda bringing a string of strange men to the cottage. Rudy claimed Mez called Amanda, "a drugged up tart".

Of course, Amanda is free to be as promiscuous as she likes. However, it can be fairly argued she put her roommates - especially home-alone Mez - in a vulnerable position.

There is lots of evidence. For example, John Kercher in his book. Mez' friends in their statements. The email home to +25 people can hardly be described as "private", when Amanda therein urges these +25 people to talk to journalists (presumably to set off the spin set out in the email).

As I explained to you before, there is no evidence that Kercher complained about Amanda's male friends visiting her. You've made this up. The myth of the "strange men" started with Sophie Purton in her second (not her first) police interview, where she stated:

"I wish to refer to certain things that Meredith said about Amanda, who I don’t have the same closeness with that I had with Meredith. But I think they are important. Meredith told me that Amanda sometimes brought men into their home, I don’t know how many. Meredith spoke to me in particular about a man who works in a cyber cafè. It's where Amanda met him. Meredith thought this man was strange. At the time she didn’t add anything else. I only thought about this after what has happened. I don’t know how old this man is. As well as this man at least another man was brought into their home. I don’t know the nationality of these people.

I think that, for Amanda, some of these men were only friends, while I think she slept with the one who works in the cyber cafè."

As you can see, as Purton relates, there was no complaint from Kercher, merely a reported comment that Kercher thought one particular man was strange - meaning "odd". Kercher may or may not have said this, but even if she did, it is not accusatory in nature. It is just gossip. It would appear that Purton might be merely offering up this man as a possible suspect to the police rather than attempting to create a sense of friction in the minds of the police.

The important point is that Kercher never made any complaint and the reference to "strange men" is false.

 

[Vixen]

You have demonstrated your inability to interrogate a document for meaning if you think Amanda is asking her friends to contact journalists.

Astonishing.

Think about it. You want something to be top secret, so you send a round robin to +25 people saying, I have been told not to contact the press. Realising the contradiction, you add a lame, "and you are not to, either".

LOL.

 

[Vixen]

It's just a circular argument with you. Maybe you could try answering the question this time?


Originally Posted by carbonjam72
What would that be?

In the post directly above you once again avoided actually taking any position at all, and continue to cling to your mystical agnosticism on any and all matters of the case.

I'll repeat my request for you, since you seemed not to have digested it:

""Originally Posted by carbonjam72
Would you please reveal what you do believe then?

After your 1,000+ posts here, I think its fair to ask.

Do you believe Rudy's version? That he was there on a date and let in by Meredith, and had consensual relations?

It would be helpful to understanding your views if you could provide a timeline you believe to be accurate, as to when and where Amanda and Raf were that night, and when you believe the assault occurred and who participated. (Given that a witness saw them at Raf's apt at 840pm, and most here think the crime occurred shortly after 9pm and Meredith could not have been alive after roughly 10pm.)
Rather than hiding behind generalities and obscurantism, why not just lay your cards on the table? Put forward a concrete hypothesis that can actually be tested, and lets have a real discussion, eh?

Considering your great number of posts, I think its a reasonable request.""

My time line agrees with Mignini's.

 

[Vixen]

but you wrote - There is lots of evidence. For example, John Kercher in his book. Mez' friends in their statements. The email home to +25 people can hardly be described as "private", when Amanda therein urges these +25 people to talk to journalists

similar to calling in only Raf right just like the police knew she would come in Amanda knew by telling people NOT to talk to the press would be urging them to do exactly that.

Grinder, I am sure you have had gossips come up to you whispering, "Don't tell anyone, but..."

Do you feel for one minute you are under contract to uphold that person's secrets, which are not your secrets?

 

[Kauffer]

Think about it. You want something to be top secret, so you send a round robin to +25 people saying, I have been told not to contact the press. Realising the contradiction you add a lame, "and you are not to, either".

LOL.

I'm thinking about your false claim that Amanda told her friends to talk to journalists. That's what's making me LOL! You even posted the passage in her email thinking it said that rather than the complete opposite.

Nobody here puts any value on your ludicrous evidence absent concocted spin.

 

[Strozzi]

Strozzi as you said before the police could detain a material witness or they could have arrested her even without the statement. Why didn't they bring her in earlier to stop her from driving to Germany? It was Raf that cracked and spewed out crazy stuff - yes yes I know the police pressured him severely but had he not made that statement what would they have done?

And what if the text message wasn't there.

I'm convinced the PLE would have had no trouble keeping Amanda in Italy.

She wasn't driving to Germany (yet). Perhaps never. No desperate need to act on it yet, but the fact that Amanda's family was urging Amanda to go to Germany must have caused the police concern. In fact, we don't know what instructions were given to or would have been given to the surveillance team (presumably) watching Raffaele's apartment if they saw Amanda emerge from the building with luggage. Surveillance would have called it in, even if they already have standing instructions to intercept. 'They got in his car. She's got her suitcase with her. Her boyfriend is driving her to the train station.' (Is she heading to Rome, or Germany?)

In a worse preemptory way, the police could have taken her into protective custody (told her there were dangers). They could have also detained Amanda, Raffaele, and others on inconsequential drug usage charges as a way to prevent Amanda from leaving. Either step would have touched off a media frenzy and family-initiated lawyering-up for sure, and the police did not want either Amanda or Raffaele to have a lawyer between the police and them.

Two nights after police began investigating the murder Raffaele was approached by an anonymous policewoman in the parking lot as he left the police station. She told him to get a lawyer. She knew what the police inside were discussing and realized that they were going to move on Raffaele as a way to get at Amanda, even if they speculated he is innocent. Raffaele foolishly ignored the advise. Perhaps the policewoman should have told him more? She might have saved her police department, Italy, and the suspects a lot of time, expense, and great pain.

 

[Kauffer]

My time line agrees with Mignini's.

But the evidence does not.

 

[Vixen]

As I explained to you before, there is no evidence that Kercher complained about Amanda's male friends visiting her. You've made this up. The myth of the "strange men" started with Sophie Purton in her second (not her first) police interview, where she stated:

"I wish to refer to certain things that Meredith said about Amanda, who I don’t have the same closeness with that I had with Meredith. But I think they are important. Meredith told me that Amanda sometimes brought men into their home, I don’t know how many. Meredith spoke to me in particular about a man who works in a cyber cafè. It's where Amanda met him. Meredith thought this man was strange. At the time she didn’t add anything else. I only thought about this after what has happened. I don’t know how old this man is. As well as this man at least another man was brought into their home. I don’t know the nationality of these people.

I think that, for Amanda, some of these men were only friends, while I think she slept with the one who works in the cyber cafè."

As you can see, as Purton relates, there was no complaint from Kercher, merely a reported comment that Kercher thought one particular man was strange - meaning "odd". Kercher may or may not have said this, but even if she did, it is not accusatory in nature. It is just gossip. It would appear that Purton might be merely offering up this man as a possible suspect to the police rather than attempting to create a sense of friction in the minds of the police.

The important point is that Kercher never made any complaint and the reference to "strange men" is false.

"In her statements, Amanda had repeatedly claimed that 'Meredith was my friend'. Upon hearing this, my family and I were naturally upset. Meredith had constantly complained to her friends and our family that she was unnerved about the strange men Amanda brought home, and also about Amanda's bad hygiene habits. A friend of Meredith's also stated that on a return flight to London from Perugia, Meredith had complained about Amanda for almost the entire journey."

Meredith John Kercher