Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.
RoseMontague,

What are your thought on the rest of the article about the blog wars, people getting harassed etc? My view is that if we are committed to a position where everybody is nice and good and in it for the right reasons then you can almost always find excuses for people, but it doesn't make it so. As starting assumptions go, this isn't a bad one, I started with it, but it's still a starting assumption and it isn't necessarily so.

You are correct shuttlt. Sometimes however, our initial impression is also correct. BTW, do we have confirmation that Frank is getting a paycheck or just having the costs of maintaining his blog paid? If someone wants to pay me for debating with you over our honest opinions just because they like my opinion on things, send me a PM would you? LOL.

Fair Warning however. I have no intention of changing my opinion because I am getting paid and my opinion is subject to change.
 
IIRC, Raffaele only says that they were cooking together, not where. Sorry, coffee break over...

I've been reading the translation at PMF again

I am convinced that she could not have killed Meredith and then return
home. The fact that there is Meredith's DNA on the kitchen is because
once while cooking together, I shifted myself in the house handling
the knife, I had the point on her hand, and immediately after I
apologized but she had nothing done to her. So the only real
explanation of the kitchen knife is this.
Emphasis mine, that does not indicate one or the other really.
But it doesn't read like it is only a hypothetical statement.
For the "they were all three cooking together at Meredith's and Amanda's house" scenario we need corroboration. Which makes me wonder why neither Philomena nor Amanda to my knowledge have said anything in that direction.
And that scenario doth clash with the contamination scenario.
 
I've been reading the translation at PMF again


Emphasis mine, that does not indicate one or the other really.
But it doesn't read like it is only a hypothetical statement.
For the "they were all three cooking together at Meredith's and Amanda's house" scenario we need corroboration. Which makes me wonder why neither Philomena nor Amanda to my knowledge have said anything in that direction.
And that scenario doth clash with the contamination scenario.

How likely is it that someone takes a kitchen knife from their own home to someone elses home in order to cook? I think that probability is so low, that the only reasonable explanation is that he's talking about cooking in his own house rather then cooking in the cottage.

It would be another story perhaps if witnesses were to come forward and testify that Raffaele regularly took his own kitchen knives with him when cooking in some other house then his own.
 
How likely is it that someone takes a kitchen knife from their own home to someone elses home in order to cook? I think that probability is so low, that the only reasonable explanation is that he's talking about cooking in his own house rather then cooking in the cottage.

It would be another story perhaps if witnesses were to come forward and testify that Raffaele regularly took his own kitchen knives with him when cooking in some other house then his own.

Maybe Amanda took that big honker of a knife out of her purse and said here use the one you gave me, while they were cooking over at Meredith's.
 
You are correct shuttlt. Sometimes however, our initial impression is also correct. BTW, do we have confirmation that Frank is getting a paycheck or just having the costs of maintaining his blog paid? If someone wants to pay me for debating with you over our honest opinions just because they like my opinion on things, send me a PM would you? LOL.

Fair Warning however. I have no intention of changing my opinion because I am getting paid and my opinion is subject to change.

There are no maintenance costs. It's a free blog, both software and hosting and he has no staff. He even makes a little change from the Google Adsense ads he has on there.
 
Maybe Amanda took that big honker of a knife out of her purse and said here use the one you gave me, while they were cooking over at Meredith's.

Since that is not mentioned in this particular scenario, we can safely discard that idea.
 
I've been reading the translation at PMF again


Emphasis mine, that does not indicate one or the other really.
But it doesn't read like it is only a hypothetical statement.
For the "they were all three cooking together at Meredith's and Amanda's house" scenario we need corroboration. Which makes me wonder why neither Philomena nor Amanda to my knowledge have said anything in that direction.
And that scenario doth clash with the contamination scenario.

It is actually very clear in the original Italian that he's referring to his apartment for the supposed meal. That doesn't come over so clearly in the English rendering.
 
In my case it is less than what I know, perhaps it would be better to state what I believe and what I don't believe.

I believe that the break-in was staged. I don't believe Rudy or anyone else entered by that window. I believe the rock was brought inside the flat and used to break the window after the room was trashed.

I believe you would have to live in a cartoon world to hold that belief. The outside shutters that cannot be latched will not offer sufficient resistance to deflect the rock if thrown from the inside. The rock would sail through the window and shutters and land outside with most of the glass.

The glass is scattered through the room in a pattern not inconsistent with a rock breaking the glass from the outside. There is no glass visible on top of the clothing and there is glass visible under the clothing. I saw this from the pictures that Charles produced even before Bruce joined in with the close ups.

Having dealt with several broken windows, I can tell you that more glass will fall out of the window after the initial breakage. Finding some glass on top of the computer and clothing under the broken window would not be surprising.

Can you identify what makes you believe that the break-in was staged?


I don't believe the various stories about the accidental water spill/busted pipe. Both Amanda and Raffaele put a lot of importance on the movement of the mop and the reasons for that movement.

There is a very good reason why both Amanda and Raffaele would be thinking or and writing about the movements of the mop. That is because the mop is something the cops were showing a great deal of interest in. Amanda probably made some mention of the mop in an early interview and that innocuous object would have shouted CLEANUP to the cops ears. In every interview after that, the pair would have been grilled on exactly what was done with the mop looking for excruciating details.


I don't believe Raffaele would have any problem breaking into Meredith's room. I don't believe that Meredith normally locked her door when she was away or sleeping and I believe Raffaele's statement to a reporter prior to his arrest that she didn't normally lock her door was a truthful one. I believe he got this information from Amanda.

That particular lock type requires a key to lock it. If Amanda and Raffaele had locked the door, they would have the key to unlock it. As for whether the door was normally locked, how would you tell by looking if the door was locked or unlocked? Do you normally go around checking your roommates doors to see if they are locked when they are asleep or away?

Raffaele tried hard enough to open the door that he managed to split the wood. A cheap american door would have blown open by then. How did Raffaele know how to not quite use enough force to break through?

I too believe that if he had continued trying he would have been able to break it open. But this would be about the same time that Amanda is talking to her mom and getting advice to call the police. Raffaele calls his sister, calls 211 and they both go outside to wait for the police to arrive.


I believe both Amanda and Raffaele knew what they would find when the door was forced (with little trouble) open.

Do you believe this because Amanda and Raffaele were not with the rest of the group in front of the door? You have a tight group of people with multiple people talking at the same time in a language that Amanda was barely conversant in. She would have felt invisible and retreated to avoid being trampled by the mob. Raffaele would have followed her. This is a social situation that can be repeated and studied and I think you would find the same response most of the time.
 
As for the key, they'd thrown it away somewhere from which it couldn't be retrieved, probably in the dark.

Regarding the door, Raffaele changed his mind part way through trying to break it in. They realised it was better kept locked.

Luca had no problem breaking in the door. Had he really been determined, neither would Raffaele.
 
Dan O said:
There is a very good reason why both Amanda and Raffaele would be thinking or and writing about the movements of the mop. That is because the mop is something the cops were showing a great deal of interest in. Amanda probably made some mention of the mop in an early interview and that innocuous object would have shouted CLEANUP to the cops ears. In every interview after that, the pair would have been grilled on exactly what was done with the mop looking for excruciating details.

Cite? Neither Raffaele nor Amanda have ever mentioned the police asked them anything about a mop. They were going on about the mop in order to try and establish their alibi...the supposed leak in the kitchen. Only, we now know, this leak occurred well before 8:40 PM and is no alibi at all. It was also part of Amanda's excuse for going back to the cottage.
 
I can't help noticing that you are trying to argue your case by using a diary PMF translated for you, I just though I'd point that out ;)

I actually cut and pasted that from a news article to use here. If PMF was doing translation for the news outlets then go ahead and pat yourself on the back. I am not sure what other relevance your post has.
 
It means that Knox's behavior was not what the Italian culture expects of an innocent roommate after a murder such as this.
I would think that behavior wouldn't be expected in any culture after being arrested or brought in for questioning by the police.
 
Well, Amanda's Facebook page says it is staffed by a professional team working 24/7. I guess they must work shifts, either that or indictable levels of exhaustion aren't limited to the interrogation rooms of Perugia.

Perhaps they are talking figuratively about the 24/7 thing, still there is a professional team running at least one of the web pages, or perhaps they were talking figuratively about that also.

There are a few "Amanda" facebook pages. None of them can be directly connected to Amanda. I would use other sources that facebook.
 
As I understand it, there was only one staff member present on the board (the other would not have been back for hours) and the staff member that was present had to also go off for some hours to deal with a home emergency and so the board would be left unsupervised. You were therefore told to stop posting. This was until such time as when the board would be under supervision again. You refused the request and continued to post.



You are kidding, right?



Except this is completely false. The memorial service started in Perugia at 8 PM. Amanda and Raffaele didn't even arrive at the police station until 10:15 PM. Up until that time, they had been out eating pizza. They were seen by a police officer out eating pizza instead of being at the memorial which he reported back. So, the order was given to call them in.

Why did you ask me if I'm kidding? If you read my entire post, I do fully acknowledge that a PR firm was hired. I am simply stating that people attempt to throw everyone into the same group.

Anyone that supports Amanda and Raffaele is accused of being "FOA" or "PR"

Are you really going to try and deny this?

As far the incriminating pizza eating, you have your facts of that day all wrong.
 
I can't speak for anyone else, and I won't presume to. Speaking strictly for myself, it was the PR campaign which kick-started my interest in the case. I was aware of it in a general, un-detailed sense, but when the sentence was handed down and the media was flooded with what were patently biased diatribes by an obviously coordinated source I became disturbed by the blatant appeals to emotion and incitement of xenophobia.

Until that time I was completely unaware of sites like PMF, or FOA for that matter. Experience in teaching myself the facts about other cases has led me to search for primary sources as much as possible. These sources were most easily discovered at the very sites which you find the most fault with. Why is that? Why is it that all of the very strident defense of Knox invariably traces back to the same small handful of actors which you claim have nothing to do with each other when it is apparent to any but the most gullible that they are working in concert?

Your protestations are much too fervent, and fail with even the most cursory examination.

Why is it that nearly all of their arguments in defense seem ultimately to devolve to the most torturous and implausible of casuistry, like the idea that Sollecito's tale about having Meridith over for dinner was merely some hypothetical musing taken out of context, or that Knox's multiplicity of conflicting stories were just "injected memories"? Why the constant assertions of blockbuster "proof" that never seems to be available just yet?

I cannot stress this enough. If not for the heavy-handed machinations of the PR operation whose very existence you so vehemently deny, I would still be content in the belief that Knox was an innocent victim of circumstances. Judging from the comments I have seen offered in this conversation and others like it I am not the only one.


What possible benefit do you suppose the Kercher family could garner from any involvement with the U.S. media? The slant that has been taken is quite apparent. Should the Kerchers even breathe a hint that they felt Knox might be complicit they would instantly be pilloried and reviled by the same accusations of anti-American prejudice that has been the core of the "defense" offered in this country. Why should they add to their grief by subjecting themselves to that?

They have wisely kept themselves out of the spotlight, and let professionals do their job, and let the evidence speak for their daughter's memory.

I can empathize with the despair that Knox's family must be undergoing, and even with the disbelief they suffer, but that does not mean that I have to be overwhelmed by it as well. They are not the only parents who cannot believe that their darling offspring could be guilty of such a heinous act, and they are not the only ones who may be wrong.

Raises hand.

I didn't even know of this case til I saw it here on JREF. The constant refrain of "evil satanic prosecutors" and "torture loving brute policemen" coupled with "corrupt and incompetent judges" tainted the defense case and seemed to be more important to them than the facts of the case.
 
Last edited:
Bruce Fisher said:
As far the incriminating pizza eating, you have your facts of that day all wrong.

Yet another generalised assertion without either explanation, elaboration or evidence.

So, which fact/s is it that's incorrect?

That the memorial started at 8 PM?
That Amanda and Raffaele arrived at the police station at 10:15 pm?
That they came down the police station after being called in as a result of a policeman seeing them out eating pizza rather then being at the memorial?
 
I do fully acknowledge that a PR firm was hired. I am simply stating that people attempt to throw everyone into the same group.
.
Bruce, I know you're into transparency. Could you tell us what is your relation with the persons who provided you with your photos from the case?

Also, when are you going to post all 5 supposed Nike prints on the pillow which you have said "match perfectly" with Rudy's shoes. You had said you were going to post all of these perfect matches.

As far the incriminating pizza eating, you have your facts of that day all wrong.
.
Are you still saying that they left the police station for pizza?

Another question: if they had supper at the pizzeria before going to the police station around 10.30 p.m., how can it be said that Amanda was deprived of food before her 1.45 statement? (Is she accustomed to a midnight bedtime snack even if she has already eaten supper?)

After her statement, when she was taken to the police station cafeteria where she had some tea, did she make it known she was hungry? (if she was hungry)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom