Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[RoseMontague]

So rather than just take the drugs following a burglary - which would leave her in the clear, mind you - she decides to get involved in the murder?

Honestly, that's just as bad as if she were involved in the murder in the first place. It makes her no less a party to the murder.

You are not understanding her entire motive. It was also to fool Filomena into thinking a burglar took her drugs. If she just went in there and took the drugs without making it look a real mess and a break-in, she probably thought she would have been under suspicion. I think she liked her situation and wanted to keep it. She was even asking Filomena a few days later if they could still be roommates.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

You are not understanding her entire motive. It was also to fool Filomena into thinking a burglar took her drugs. If she just went in there and took the drugs without making it look a real mess and a break-in, she probably thought she would have been under suspicion. I think she liked her situation and wanted to keep it. She was even asking Filomena a few days later if they could still be roommates.

I think it's you who's not understanding here.

Amanda would have found Meredith brutally murdered and rather than call the police immediately, she looks for how she can benefit from it? And not just does she look to benefit from it, she repositions the body?

You don't see how this is just as bad as her being involved in the murder itself?

And you think she'd rather let herself rot in prison for decades rather than simply explain this is what happened to the courts?

 

[RoseMontague]

I think it's you who's not understanding here.

Amanda would have found Meredith brutally murdered and rather than call the police immediately, she looks for how she can benefit from it? And not just does she look to benefit from it, she repositions the body?

You don't see how this is just as bad as her being involved in the murder itself?

And you think she'd rather let herself rot in prison for decades rather than simply explain this is what happened to the courts?

I see it. I don't think she cared much for Meredith at all. That seems clear in that email. As I said in my "theory" I don't think they were party to the murder but they were party to a cover up. I don't see 2 new lovebirds so desperate for some new sex experience to go threating a roommate with a knife for group sex, nor do i see AK carrying around a big honker foot long of a knife and getting into an argument over a vibrator, pulling it out and killing her and having 2 other people join in the fun to help her out. What I am looking for is your help in my trying to resolve what I believe from the evidence.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I see it. I don't think she cared much for Meredith at all. That seems clear in that email. As I said in my "theory" I don't think they were party to the murder but they were party to a cover up. I don't see 2 new lovebirds so desperate for some new sex experience to go threating a roommate with a knife for group sex, nor do i see AK carrying around a big honker foot long of a knife and getting into an argument over a vibrator, pulling it out and killing her and having 2 other people join in the fun to help her out. What I am looking for is your help in my trying to resolve what I believe from the evidence.

Amanda had pulled a similar prank rape on one of her sorority sisters in Seattle.

 

[RoseMontague]

Amanda had pulled a similar prank rape on one of her sorority sisters in Seattle.

I have not seen that, Bob. Do you have a link? You might just change my mind about this, because right now the whole think makes little sense.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I have not seen that, Bob. Do you have a link? You might just change my mind about this, because right now the whole think makes little sense.

Here's where it was discussed in this thread, complete with links/cites:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5407306&postcount=1005

 

[RoseMontague]

Here's where it was discussed in this thread, complete with links/cites:


I'm sorry Bob, I really can't give that any more weight than a rumor. Perhaps you think I am one of those that is a FOA type poster. If you go to halides1's blog you can see that I give him a hard time constantly (I still think he is a good guy, btw). My interest here is getting at the truth of the case. I don't think the prosecution's theory is sound, and I have doubts that AK and RS are guilty of murder. Yet it seems obvious that they are hiding something. The what and why of that are a mystery to me. Having said that, can you take my theory and fit it in with the evidence and timeline as well as or better than the prosecution theory. Just a what if type of thing.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Here's where it was discussed in this thread, complete with links/cites:

I'm sorry Bob, I really can't give that any more weight than a rumor. Perhaps you think I am one of those that is a FOA type poster. If you go to halides1's blog you can see that I give him a hard time constantly (I still think he is a good guy, btw). My interest here is getting at the truth of the case. I don't think the prosecution's theory is sound, and I have doubts that AK and RS are guilty of murder. Yet it seems obvious that they are hiding something. The what and why of that are a mystery to me. Having said that, can you take my theory and fit it in with the evidence and timeline as well as or better than the prosecution theory. Just a what if type of thing.

I just don't see that theory as plausible. It doesn't seem to make all that much sense. If that's what they did, why not come out and say it rather than risk being charged with full-on murder in the 1st?

Not just that...like I asked before... why bother with the setup when it's already apparent the cottage had been burglarized? She and Raf could easily have stolen the drugs, returned to his apartment and had a bulletproof alibi.

It makes no sense for them to make any kind of changes to the crime scene - they would be superfluous.

Regardless, it still paints her in a horrific light.


I understand you want to make sense of this. I think we all do - this was a senseless waste of 4 lives (5 if you count the damage to Lumumba). Unfortunately, much happens that we just can't ever make sense of.

 

[RoseMontague]

I don't believe it was obvious there was a burglary. I think they made it that way. RG may have taken some money and the 2 cell phones as an afterthought. Amanda may have arrived after that. It is clear she hardly knew RG and she would have named him rather than Patrick if she had thought about it. I don't think she had a clue as to who the murderer was.
She arrives home again after 10:30 or so, sees Amanda on the floor laying on her side, goes to her and turns her over to see if she was still alive. She is not and now Amanda has blood on her and possibly other evidence of her being there. She, thinking of herself (as usual) is worried that she might be under suspicion now of a murder. She wants it to look more like a rape gone bad. The stealing of drugs from Filomena's room is just a bonus and she makes sure that looks like someone tore her room apart to find things. Maybe she knows Filomena has her stash well hidden and wants it to look like a real involved search.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I don't believe it was obvious there was a burglary. I think they made it that way. RG may have taken some money and the 2 cell phones as an afterthought. Amanda may have arrived after that. It is clear she hardly knew RG and she would have named him rather than Patrick if she had thought about it. I don't think she had a clue as to who the murderer was.
She arrives home again after 10:30 or so, sees Amanda on the floor laying on her side, goes to her and turns her over to see if she was still alive. She is not and now Amanda has blood on her and possibly other evidence of her being there. She, thinking of herself (as usual) is worried that she might be under suspicion now of a murder. She wants it to look more like a rape gone bad. The stealing of drugs from Filomena's room is just a bonus and she makes sure that looks like someone tore her room apart to find things. Maybe she knows Filomena has her stash well hidden and wants it to look like a real involved search.

Ok...but why not come clean in the aftermath?

I can't see how she would think she would be implicated if she just was checking on Meredith, found her dead, and called the police. I mean, that's what happens daily around the world.

Again, we're getting into picking which of the pieces of evidence we want to believe...

 

[odeed]

....


Debit cards are infinitely more tied to the murder than a laptop that can be wiped. Period. This is not some fantasy, or some random bit I'm picking out here and trying to tilt to fit what I want to believe happened. This is the real world. Where a debit card can be traced to a time, place, and be used to track a suspect down. A laptop cannot be traced in such a manner, at all.

So why, if he's trying to not be linked to the murder would he steal the debit card of a murdered girl, return later to reposition the body, and yet still not take anything else of value (laptop or otherwise)? The twists in logic required to believe this scenario are just too much for the scenario to be believable.

I would of thought mobile phones and debit cards would be worthless to thief or burglar, as a phone would normally be locked by the telecom provider when reported stolen, and a debit card would need a PIN to use, if the bank had not already canceled the card (Italy have Chip and PIN in 2007?). Also when Meredith's body was found, both would be traced electronically by the police if they were ever used.

However they are handy to hide on ones person, and get rid of soon after if someone trying to make it look like a burglary.

 

[stilicho]

BobTheDonkey,

You have done a good job in assembling some of the reasons to question the lone assailant theory, though I do not agree with all of them. If the defense had let the prosecution's claim of the need for multiple assailants go unchallenged, I would see this case very differently and might lean toward the guilt of RS and AK. That is why I included the link about Carlo Torre and his reconstruction of the crime.

Chris

Question the lone assailant theory? Who would do that and why? The evidence from the medical examiner's office was that Meredith was restrained and attacked by multiple assailants.

Nobody is questioning the lone assailant theory. There is simply no honest evidence to support it.

 

[Alt+F4]

She arrives home again after 10:30 or so, sees Amanda on the floor laying on her side, goes to her and turns her over to see if she was still alive. She is not and now Amanda has blood on her and possibly other evidence of her being there. She, thinking of herself (as usual) is worried that she might be under suspicion now of a murder. She wants it to look more like a rape gone bad. The stealing of drugs from Filomena's room is just a bonus and she makes sure that looks like someone tore her room apart to find things. Maybe she knows Filomena has her stash well hidden and wants it to look like a real involved search.

Then why not just tell the police this after being accused of murder? As Bob mentioned, why risk doing life in prison just for stealing drugs?

 

[stilicho]

What could she say that you would believe that would simultaneously have the effect of removing from her the label of a murderer?

At this point, not much. But if she recovered that elusive memory of hers it would certainly give us all much pause. The lies and the shifting stories are one thing but the "I-can't-remembers" are overwhelmingly problematic.

She would certainly be a lot closer to rehabilitation as a productive member of society.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I would of thought mobile phones and debit cards would be worthless to thief or burglar, as a phone would normally be locked by the telecom provider when reported stolen, and a debit card would need a PIN to use, if the bank had not already canceled the card (Italy have Chip and PIN in 2007?). Also when Meredith's body was found, both would be traced electronically by the police if they were ever used.

However they are handy to hide on ones person, and get rid of soon after if someone trying to make it look like a burglary.

Debit cards can be used like credit cards, so they can be useful in that aspect - no pin is required.

However, you still have to worry about it being tracked very easily. It's not useful to get cash as you'll need the PIN, and it's not useful as a means of purchasing a ticket as it gives a time/date/location that you were and a destination. Not exactly conducive to disappearing off the grid, ya know?

 

[RoseMontague]

Then why not just tell the police this after being accused of murder? As Bob mentioned, why risk doing life in prison just for stealing drugs?

I believe she knew they were innocent and there would be no evidence tying them to the crime. It would be more charges than just stealing some drugs as well. Probably 10-20 years for obstruction, lying to LE, etc. She is not the type to admit to anything bad (other than her memory) and poor Raffaele was snookered into involvement in this as well. She clearly lacks any common sense based on her behavior at the police station and at trial, this was definately a poor decision that she would not let go of.

 

[stilicho]

I don't disagree with any of this. I think that with each of these three defendants, there appears to be incomplete evidence that they may or may not be sociopathic. However, I also don't see that or not they are sociopaths has any real bearing on the likelihood that they did the crime. Perhaps it's just a red herring.

It is a bit of a derail but I am interested in it. I probably read only about one or two books on psychology or psychiatry each year and it utterly astounds me how the definitions seem to get more and more bogged down in self-referential jargon.

Thanks for the perspectives, though. I did appreciate the derail just for information's sake.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

At this point, not much. But if she recovered that elusive memory of hers it would certainly give us all much pause. The lies and the shifting stories are one thing but the "I-can't-remembers" are overwhelmingly problematic.

She would certainly be a lot closer to rehabilitation as a productive member of society.

I have to agree with this.

If she has nothing to hide, besides a minor drug charge, why did she work so hard to obfuscate the investigation.

She could have cleared Lumumba at any time before the police did, yet she didn't. She encouraged them to pursue a dead end.

We still don't know what she and Raf did that night, not exactly. And the fact that neither of them has been honestly forthcoming about their specific activities is pretty damning.

I can't imagine anyone here that would act the same way if in her shoes.

"I'm accused of a horrible murder. Well, I'll just conveniently forget what happened that night. And I'll send them on a wild goose chase and let him sit in jail for a few weeks. No, I don't need an alibi, I don't even have to have one at all, I'll just tell them I can't recall. That's the way to show I'm innocent."

 

[Alt+F4]

I believe she knew they were innocent and there would be no evidence tying them to the crime. It would be more charges than just stealing some drugs as well. Probably 10-20 years for obstruction, lying to LE, etc. She is not the type to admit to anything bad (other than her memory) and poor Raffaele was snookered into involvement in this as well. She clearly lacks any common sense based on her behavior at the police station and at trial, this was definately a poor decision that she would not let go of.

There is no way she would having facing the same amount of prison time for stealing and lying to the police as she would for murder. Her lawyers would have advised her of this and they, her family and her supporters never have suggested that her involvement was drug stealing gone bad.

 

[odeed]

Debit cards can be used like credit cards, so they can be useful in that aspect - no pin is required.

However, you still have to worry about it being tracked very easily. It's not useful to get cash as you'll need the PIN, and it's not useful as a means of purchasing a ticket as it gives a time/date/location that you were and a destination. Not exactly conducive to disappearing off the grid, ya know?

The reason why I asked if Italy had chip and PIN in 2007, is that you now need a PIN to use credit/debit cards in shops (I am speaking of UK for at least 4 years and Europe) rather than swipe and signature, which was easier to get away with. Though I cannot remember if there was a crossover period between the two types of systems.

Though it is still possible to use the card for online transactions, but banks are usually good at spotting fraudulent activities from my recent experience, and suspend the card which requires phoning the bank/card provider.