Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[stilicho]

It is situation-dependant whether a single uncorroborated witness should be enough to get someone arrested. Maybe the investigator who declared the case "substantially closed" was a bit premature, however.

I think so.

I diverge in my assessment of the authorities somewhat from Fulcanelli in this regard. I have found that the public statements prior to the arrests of RS and AK were a little too nice and neat. However--and this is a big however--it could very well be that those statements were made to reassure the pair that they were free and clear. The statements after the capture of all three (including the unfortunate Mr Lumumba) possibly indicate reassurance to the public that the community is safe. I wouldn't have made them, myself, but I am not a police chief. They have a duty to the citizenry and that might include some overconfidence.

But the first line--situational dependence--is something that authorities cannot assess on the spot. This is why there are policies and procedures in place and this goes for everything from 911 calls to murder investigations. The last thing that police want to do is to leave a killer on the loose or, worse yet, release a captured killer into the community because they doubt one of the eyewitnesses to a murder.

 

[stilicho]

[There] was a major backlog at the lab. The results for all of the items would have taken weeks, possibly months to come in.

But on TV, all they do is throw the stuff into a centrifuge, look at a display, run through millions of IDs in their perfect database, and figure out the whole thing in a matter of under an hour!

You mean real life is different?

 

[Dan O.]

Now, I'm a bit confused. I must have missed where it was established that it was a staged rape scene, as opposed to a true rape. I was under the impression that the sexual assault had happened shortly before (and/or during) the murder.

Is this another of your "ignore all evidence I don't like" scenarios or did I miss this part of the forensics results?

You must be referring to Rudy's magic fingers that allows him to digitally penetrate Meredith while simultaneously restraining her and not getting his nuts crushed by the kick boxer in distress.

Neither Raffaele nor Amanda had any injuries. Their DNA was not found on Merediths body or cloths (except the bra that has so many DNA profiles that they can't be sorted). There is no evidence that they were even in the room where Meredith was murdered.

Rudy though admitted that he was knocked to the floor twice, once in the hall and again in the kitchen. As a basketball player, he should be able to move even backwards without falling over himself. Some of those bruises on Meredith probably came from beating back her assailant or assailants. The resulting bruised on the assailant would have shown up even a few days later but perhaps not after 3 or 4 weeks on dark skin.

 

[Dan O.]

I know how a presumptive blood test works!

Then you should know what has been left out that is necessary before a conclusion that the photo is showing real blood can be made.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Then you should know what has been left out that is necessary before a conclusion that the photo is showing real blood can be made.

What else would it be showing?

 

[Fulcanelli]

You must be referring to Rudy's magic fingers that allows him to digitally penetrate Meredith while simultaneously restraining her and not getting his nuts crushed by the kick boxer in distress.

I thought you guys believed Rudy had magic all sorts...that enabled him to climb up and enter a nearly impossible window without being seen, heard or leaving a trace. Rudy, who can magically search and toss rooms without leaving a trace, even though he was covered in blood. Rudy who can move and undress a body hours after death without even being in the cottage...the list could go on.

In any case, 'magic fingers' weren't required. He was holding Meredith's arm with one hand while assaulting her with the other. Meanwhile, Raffaele was holding the other arm and Amanda was keeping her under control while threatening her with a knife.

But anyway, you raise a valid point...Rudy would have certainly needed to have had magical fingers if he was a lone wolf attacker, since those fingers would have had to have been restraining her, threatening her with a knife and sexually assaulting her at the same time. Therefore, you yourself have highlighted why this had to be a crime carried out by multiple attackers.

Neither Raffaele nor Amanda had any injuries. Their DNA was not found on Merediths body or cloths (except the bra that has so many DNA profiles that they can't be sorted). There is no evidence that they were even in the room where Meredith was murdered.

That's because they didn't carry out the actual sexual assault, Rudy did. As for the clothes, perhaps you've forgotten the bra clasp already.

Rudy though admitted that he was knocked to the floor twice, once in the hall and again in the kitchen. As a basketball player, he should be able to move even backwards without falling over himself. Some of those bruises on Meredith probably came from beating back her assailant or assailants. The resulting bruised on the assailant would have shown up even a few days later but perhaps not after 3 or 4 weeks on dark skin.

She wouldn't have been able to beat anybody uf she was being restrained by three people, as was the case.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Then you should know what has been left out that is necessary before a conclusion that the photo is showing real blood can be made.

Phenolphthalein IS a presumptive blood test.

 

[lector]

Originally Posted by lector

Actually, I wonder about that - the defense lawyers' being unhappy with contradictory expert testimony. Having two different scenarios as to how the murder occurred might be construed as undermining the prosecution's scenario more severely than just one. It might have been a deliberate effort to create reasonable doubt.

There's more on the experts at PMF (just use their search function and type in the surname of Introna, Torre, Tagliabracci, etc). It really looks like all of them put together a road show for the case, took their $50,000 cheques, and that's the last they're heard of.

Fulcanelli might know more but I recall that one of Sollecito's lawyers even came down with a sudden mysterious illness on the day the decision was read and the sentence handed down. I think it was Bongiorno.

If I didn't know any better, I'd say that all of them were in it for the payday alone and couldn't care less about putting any real effort into a case so flush with rock-solid evidence against their clients. What were they thinking when they let Edda testify? The mind boggles.

I've often said that, for Amanda to be innocent in spite of the verdict, the jury would have had to be amazingly susceptible to manipulation & the defense incredibly incompetent. There is some justification for the latter argument.

 

[lane99]

Oh I don't think so
...

Why not?

 

[Fulcanelli]

Why not?

Why not what?

 

[stilicho]

I've often said that, for Amanda to be innocent in spite of the verdict, the jury would have had to be amazingly susceptible to manipulation & the defense incredibly incompetent. There is some justification for the latter argument.

There also would have to be considerably less evidence against her. I don't want to put words in your mouth but I think you have this a little backwards. I would say instead that for AK to have been found not guilty in spite of the evidence would have taken both a susceptible jury and an incredible feat of law-smithing.

Besides, her lawyers were only doing what the family and their PR consultants told them to do.

 

[lane99]

Just to bring you up to speed.

Amanda signed two statements during one night. The first at 1:45 AM and the second at 5:45 AM. Her interrogations were not recorded and Amanda did not have a lawyer present. Later that same day, she wrote a letter disclaiming the second statement.

It's that second statement Fiona is so fond of quoting. The one made at 5:45 AM on a night where Amanda got little if any sleep.

Thanks, I am generally aware of the circumstances, and the statements.

And certainly both the circumstances which produced them, and the statements themself are consistent with what might be expected in a false confession.

 

[Fiona]

Sollecito also had a (very expensive) defence team. Were they incredibly incompetent too? Unlucky!!

 

[Doghouse Reilly]

His afterword is full of mistakes and inaccuracies, it's common knowledge that the reporter he is quoting never made that statement to him and in any case, WHO gives a flying damn what Douglas Preston, high priest of the FOA, wrote???

Can you provide a reference for these claims?

Thanks.

 

[stilicho]

Thanks, I am generally aware of the circumstances, and the statements.

And certainly both the circumstances which produced them, and the statements themself are consistent with what might be expected in a false confession.

Except that it wasn't a confession of any kind. It was a deliberate accusation of murder and sexual assault levelled against her former boss.

Oh, and welcome to the JREF forums. You may find a variety of subjects here to suit your fancy. Or just this one.

We'll see.

 

[lane99]

And the hits were so incredibly unsettling that she broke down in tears and was unable to continue her testimony?

Didn't think so.

So if she was able to continue her testimony unfazed, what makes it plausible that the cuffs during the interrogation were able to faze her?

If you had been completely innocent, and been in Amanda Knox's shoes during her police interrogation, it wouldn't have frightened you if somebody had hit you?

Wouldn't that make almost everybody afraid?

 

[odeed]

From Amanda’s testimony:

“LG: Then, at midday, or one o'clock, we don't know exactly, they brought you a
paper called an arrest warrant. When they served you this warrant, it must
have been around twelve, one o'clock. Do you remember?

AG: So, all papers they brought me to sign, at that point, they were all the same
to me, so I can't even say what I had to sign, arrest warrant, declarations,
whatever, because at a certain point, I just wanted to sign and go home.” (emphasis added)

These words are almost eerily similar to what people who have made false confessions say, as reported by the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/08/weekinreview/08SAUL.html

What happens over time is that the suspect gets tired, and there is an intensification of techniques. The suspect is getting the message that denial is not the escape, so they offer something else."
Professor Kassin said that when false confessors are later asked why they confessed, the No. 1 answer is "something like `I just wanted to go home.' "

Just prior to the above testimony http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&p=31515 (also LG is Knox defense):

LG: During the interrogation, there were several people in the room, did someone
come who was involved in Raffaele Sollecito's interrogation? He was being
interrogated in one place, you in another.

AK: So, there were lots and lots of people who came in and went out, and after
one had come in and gone out, another policewoman told me that Raffaele
said that I went out of the apartment -- at least, Raffaele apparently said that
I [stammering] had gone out of his house.

LG: Okay. And the episode of the text message came later? After this person came
in and said that? You don't remember?

AK: Yes, yes. I think it happened after they told me that.

From what I can tell, the whole incident incriminating Lumumba in the statement came about because Sollecito said Knox had left his apartment on the night of the murder, so she had to come up with a story.

 

[lane99]

Except that it wasn't a confession of any kind. It was a deliberate accusation of murder and sexual assault levelled against her former boss.

Oh, and welcome to the JREF forums. You may find a variety of subjects here to suit your fancy. Or just this one.

We'll see.

Thanks for your welcome. Although I think the fact you seem interested to put me under survellience marks you as a bit odd. Why would you be watching to see whether I have the time to post on other topics?

Calling it a "deliberate accusation" is splitting hairs. I noticed that you are on of those who believe that Knox mentioning a scream is a sign of guilty knowledge. Please reconsider that position if you are interested in the truth. Because that is a not a credible argument.

 

[katy_did]

That's actually a very close approximation of her position just before her body was moved.

She may have been lying beside the closet, but I highly doubt she was ever stuffed into the closet with her foot sticking out. And this wasn't a slip of the tongue - Knox didn't say "She was found in the closet - um I mean lying on the floor". She told people the body was stuffed into the closet, because that is what she had understood from the bits and pieces Sollecito had translated for her, based on second-hand information of what the others had seen.

It's rather odd to infer from that that she somehow accidentally gave away that she knew the body had been elsewhere.

 

[katy_did]

The obvious flaw in your absolute statement is that you are taking Amanda's word for it. I can say Mickey Mouse is my brother, it doesn't make it so. Her statement is not supported with any evidence and she has a broad history of lying.

Her statement is certainly not contradicted by the evidence; when the police wrote up the formal statement, they could easily and very likely would have interpreted the conversation she describes as 'I was covering my ears to block out Meredith's screams'.

Of course, had the police released an audio recording or the full, unedited transcript of the interrogation there would be no need to take Amanda's word for it; as it is, that is all we have to go on (unless the police are now claiming they also 'lost' the transcript, too?).