Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[Fulcanelli]

Who released the "bloody bathroom" photograph to the press and then didn't bother correcting the error?

Correcting 'what' error? And who should have done so...'The Perugian Police Error Correcting Department'?...A bit like the 'American Police Error Correcting Department'?

 

[Fiona]

I have been trying to see why this is important in any way.

It appears to be put forward as evidence that the police lied. However it is not a lie so that won't fly. Same with the footprint. They said what they thought and as the investigation progressed they changed their minds. Seems to indicate a proper investigation which followed the facts and the evidence.

Why are we even talking about this? Is the suggestion that the judges and lay judges who made the decision only took this into account? After months of evidence and cross examination? Really?

I find that implausible

 

[shuttlt]

I have been trying to see why this is important in any way.

It appears to be put forward as evidence that the police lied. However it is not a lie so that won't fly. Same with the footprint. They said what they thought and as the investigation progressed they changed their minds. Seems to indicate a proper investigation which followed the facts and the evidence.

Why are we even talking about this? Is the suggestion that the judges and lay judges who made the decision only took this into account? After months of evidence and cross examination? Really?

I find that implausible

I think the logic is that the pink bathroom caused the media to call it the "house of horrors". It being called the "house of horrors" led to an assumption by the court that they were guilty. I'm simplifying in a somewhat flippant manner, but this is the argument as I understand it.

 

[Fiona]

If a house where a young woman is brutally murdered is not "a house of horrors" it will do till "a house of horrors" comes along

 

[Moss]

Who released the "bloody bathroom" photograph to the press and then didn't bother correcting the error?

Who released it? Were there other photos released together with it? What information was provided with the photo? How much of that information was used by the press?
Is it the job of law enforcement to correct mistakes by the press? Or rather the job of journalists to report correctly?

 

[Kestrel]

Who released it? Were there other photos released together with it? What information was provided with the photo? How much of that information was used by the press?
Is it the job of law enforcement to correct mistakes by the press? Or rather the job of journalists to report correctly?

The photograph was taken by the police and released to the press by the police or prosecutors. Without a technical explanation, it's clearly a piece of propaganda. Intended to discredit Amanda's story that she took a shower in that bathroom on the morning of Nov. 2. To day it more bluntly, it's a lie.

At about the same time, the Perugia police were telling another lie. Claiming they had clearly identifiable video proving Amanda was at the cottage near the time of the murder.

 

[shuttlt]

OK. The pink bathroom is from 16th of January '08.

In chilling new photographs released by Italian police today,
.
.
.

The images also show the apartment's bathroom sink and walls smeared with blood.

DNA belonging to Amanda Knox, Meredith's American flatmate and one of the prime suspects in her murder, has allegedly been found in the bathroom.

Tests have shown that her DNA was found in a splash of blood on a tap, and on the plug in the sink, suggesting she may have washed her hands after the crime.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-508528/Chilling-pictures-Meredith-murder-scene-reveal-apartment-bloodbath-horror.html

Clearly this is well after the papers were calling the murder scene the "house of horrors". Also, the article focuses at least as much, if not more on the scene in the bedroom which I don't think anyone disputes.

 

[Dan O.]

It appears to be put forward as evidence that the police lied. However it is not a lie so that won't fly. Same with the footprint. They said what they thought and as the investigation progressed they changed their minds. Seems to indicate a proper investigation which followed the facts and the evidence.

How is the stained sole of Raffaele's shoe anything but a lie? They tested that shoe for blood and DNA and came up negative.

The investigators never changed their minds. The just kept changing the story every time the evidence proved them wrong.

 

[shuttlt]

Fox News certainly got the wrong end of the stick on the bathroom as well:

The photos, which can be viewed on the newspaper's Web site and are graphic, show blood spattered over the sink, toilet and cabinet of the bathroom she shared with American student Amanda Knox, who is one of three suspects.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,323185,00.html

Interestingly they are basing their story on having looked at the Daily Mail website. I wonder how many other uses of the photo are drawn from the Daily Mail article rather than directly from the police...

 

[Fulcanelli]

I have been trying to see why this is important in any way.

It appears to be put forward as evidence that the police lied. However it is not a lie so that won't fly. Same with the footprint. They said what they thought and as the investigation progressed they changed their minds. Seems to indicate a proper investigation which followed the facts and the evidence.

Why are we even talking about this? Is the suggestion that the judges and lay judges who made the decision only took this into account? After months of evidence and cross examination? Really?

I find that implausible

And what did it have to do with the trial? The picture never featured in the trial in the context that it did in early media reports almost two years ago and neither did the term 'House of Horrors'. It seems Kestrel is taking us back full circle to the point where they were all trying to pretend there has been no trial and Amanda is in jail solely on the basis of what some British tabloids printed a year or more ago. If the Prosecution has been guilty of any wrongdoing or dishonesty, how then was this not exposed by the defence teams and investigating judges during either the pre-trial or the trial?

It's nothing more then nonsense hyperbole by Amanda Knox supporters, desperate to paint a picture of a sinister conspiracy.

 

[Fulcanelli]

The photograph was taken by the police and released to the press by the police or prosecutors. Without a technical explanation, it's clearly a piece of propaganda. Intended to discredit Amanda's story that she took a shower in that bathroom on the morning of Nov. 2. To day it more bluntly, it's a lie.

At about the same time, the Perugia police were telling another lie. Claiming they had clearly identifiable video proving Amanda was at the cottage near the time of the murder.

The police don't release technical explanations with their pictures and they release multiple pictures at a time. It's the editors that decide which ones they use.

As for the video, the police believed they had. It was however determined by a COURT JUDGE that the quality was too low to be useful. This you've already been told Kestrel, yet you insist on perpetuating the conspiracy nut story. I'd call that plain dishonest.

 

[shuttlt]

The SUN also carried the photo of the bathroom on the same day as the Mail.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/692368/Meredith-Kercher-Italian-police-release-photos-of-flat-where-Brit-student-was-killed.html

 

[Fulcanelli]

How is the stained sole of Raffaele's shoe anything but a lie? They tested that shoe for blood and DNA and came up negative.

The investigators never changed their minds. The just kept changing the story every time the evidence proved them wrong.

Why is it a lie? They thought it matched Raffaele's shoe. His shoe soles are almost identical to Rudy's. They didn't have Rudy's shoes. They dropped its assignation to Raffaele because Rudy admitted that the print was probably his. But it still isn't certain it is, it can just no longer be assigned to Raffaele.

As for the story, of course they are going to change the story as more evidence arrives.

Although perhaps you could tell us exactly 'what' evidence 'should' have made them change their minds and why they should discard all that evidence that supports their constant position (Oh, it's probably Rudy's print...therefore we'll just assume it was a Lone Wolf crime and forget about all that other evidence, the evidence that shows the break-in was staged, the bloody footprints of the two angels, their mixed DNA in Meredith's blood, their DNA on the bra clasp, their total lies that form their alibis, their total lies about the morning after the murder, the double DNA murder knife, the witnesses that put them at the cottage and in the shop....like that you mean Dan_O?)

 

[Moss]

The photograph was taken by the police and released to the press by the police or prosecutors.

So we don't know who exactly allowed the release?

Without a technical explanation, it's clearly a piece of propaganda.

Do we actually know there was no explanation provided by the police or prosecution? Or was it "just" not provided by the press?

Intended to discredit Amanda's story that she took a shower in that bathroom on the morning of Nov. 2. To day it more bluntly, it's a lie.

See the question above. And even then it is hard to say whether that would have been from malice, stupidity, routine or another cause we may not guess correctly. Inferring a motive may lead you astray when you have no other evidence corroborating it.

At about the same time, the Perugia police were telling another lie. Claiming they had clearly identifiable video proving Amanda was at the cottage near the time of the murder.

In poker I'd call that a bluff if they actually lied to her. From what I gathered they thought it was the genuine thing at the time. And Amanda should have been capable of calling them out on it if she wasn't there.

 

[Kestrel]

The police don't release technical explanations with their pictures and they release multiple pictures at a time. It's the editors that decide which ones they use.

As for the video, the police believed they had. It was however determined by a COURT JUDGE that the quality was too low to be useful. This you've already been told Kestrel, yet you insist on perpetuating the conspiracy nut story. I'd call that plain dishonest.

For those that haven't seen it, the video is embedded in this article. It's now recognized that the woman circled in red is almost certainly Meredith returning to the cottage about 9 PM.

Claiming that it's a clearly identifiable image of Amanda is clearly false.

 

[shuttlt]

I've been experimenting with Google.it and have made, what seems to me, like an interesting discovery. Try as I might I can't find any Italian pages using the photo of the pink bathroom, I wonder whether English speaking coverage of the case is different to the Italian coverage. Presumably if the police/prosecutor wanted to poison the well and create an atmosphere where Amanda couldn't get a fair trial it's the Italian media that counts.

 

[shuttlt]

One other thing to add. If we are talking about who showed the public nasty pictures of the murder to create the idea that it was a "house of horrors", presumably the people behind leaking the video of Meredith's body have at least as much to answer for as anyone.

 

[Kestrel]

I've been experimenting with Google.it and have made, what seems to me, like an interesting discovery. Try as I might I can't find any Italian pages using the photo of the pink bathroom, I wonder whether English speaking coverage of the case is different to the Italian coverage. Presumably if the police/prosecutor wanted to poison the well and create an atmosphere where Amanda couldn't get a fair trial it's the Italian media that counts.

The local Perugia newspaper, Giornale dell'Umbria, would be the first place to look. Unfortunately the archives for this paper are hidden behind a paywall.

 

[shuttlt]

The local Perugia newspaper, Giornale dell'Umbria, would be the first place to look. Unfortunately the archives for this paper are hidden behind a paywall.

Thankyou Kestrel. It may be that the Italian media is less generous with their archives in general.

 

[Fulcanelli]

For those that haven't seen it, the video is embedded in this article. It's now recognized that the woman circled in red is almost certainly Meredith returning to the cottage about 9 PM.

Claiming that it's a clearly identifiable image of Amanda is clearly false.

Meredith wasn't wearing a white skirt.