Amanda Knox put herself at the scene, once verbally, within an hour or so after voluntarily arriving at the Questura, when hearing Raff had withdrawn his alibi for her, telling police his initial statement had been a 'sack of ****', and twice more in writing by her own hand.
Her footprints in Mez' blood is highlighted by luminol. Her DNA is mixed in with Mez' DNA in the bathroom and in Filomena's room, and in one of the luminol highlighted footprint.
Oh, don't tell us: the luminol is all wrong.
Vixen,
If you wouldn't mind could you please answer a few questions;
- Do you agree the police saw the SMS exchange between Amanda and Lumumba and concluded it was evidence they met up the night of the murder or do you think they correctly understood it?
- Did you know that Amanda's 'interpreter', Donnino, explained to Amanda that she was likely forgetting things due to trauma, even going so far as to explain how that once happened to herself?
- Do you think it's possible the police told Amanda they knew she was at the cottage with Lumumba (because of the SMS message) and, seeing as she couldn't remember (due to trauma as per Donnino) what happened the police asked her to imagine what might have happened? If no, why not?
- Do you understand that there is a difference between Amanda saying "I stand by what I said last night" and Amanda putting herself at the cottage? (Hint: If you are convinced of something by others and make statements accordingly, and later realize you don't believe what you were told, you can still stand by the statements you made because they were based on what you believed at that time.)
- Do you realize that in both writings you refer to Amanda makes it very clear she does not trust these memories, that they do not seem real. In fact, in the second writing she makes it clear she is certain they were false memories, that she was at Raffaele's as she had said all along and that they should not be arresting someone based on the statements she signed. You do realize all this, right?
As to the Luminol...
- Do you understand Luminol is a presumptive test and only indicates a possibility of the presence of blood?
- Are you aware that it is documented a positive Luminol test MUST be followed up with a confirmatory test for blood and that without this test the Luminol results are meaningless?
- Do you understand a second presumptive test, TMB, was done and this test was negative on all Luminol traces?
- Do you understand that on all but three of the Luminol traces Meredith's DNA was not found?
- Can you offer a scientific explanation for how multiple traces made from Meredith's blood could be TMB negative and not contain Meredith's DNA?
Oh, don't tell us: TMB
and DNA profiling are all wrong.
The problem for you, Vixen, is you keep making claims which you know are not backed up by verifiable facts and/or science. If I had claimed Amanda was at the cottage at the time of the murder as many times as you I can guarantee you I would be prepared to explain exactly how that was known. But in all the dozens of times I've seen people ask you for evidence you've never been able to provide it. Ditto on washing Meredith's blood from her hands. Ditto on how the Luminol traces were made from Meredith's blood. Your arguments are all faith based... it's what you believe. The PIP arguments are based on science and indisputable logic. That's why the dedicated PGP cites refused to allow PIP to post - because they know they can't win arguments based on faith when others are presenting science and logic.
