Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Amazer said:
Bruce,

I would have believed you if you hadn't posted just a few post earlier on Barbie's book and how it's supposedly disrespectful too. And in particular, asking us to condemn Barbie also.

That tells me you are just paying lip service to the family and friends of Meredith. But clearly you don't give a jot about Meredith, her family and her friends. Instead of telling Supernaut that he's out of line, you're first reaction is 'But look, Barbie does it too'. That tells me everything i need to know about where your priorities lie.

Amazer
Click to expand...

No, I am saying that everyone should refrain from this type of discussion. You can spin it anyway you like.
 
Bruce Fisher said:
No, I am saying that everyone should refrain from this type of discussion.
Click to expand...

If that was your intention, you should have put it like that. You didn't. You went right for the 'They are doing it too' defense.

You can spin it anyway you like.
Click to expand...
I'm not the one who is spinning here Bruce. You are.
 
Moss said:
Gods below, can we please get back to discussing the details of the case ...
Click to expand...
Okay, Moss, I agree, back to the case.

Here's a visual observation I made concerning the supposed point on the inside shutter where the rock hit:

1) it's a good sized rock
2) there are unbroken glass shards still in the wooden frame which get very close to the supposed point where the rock hit.

 
To be fair to Bruce Fisher, I have read his page on Meredith Kercher and her family, and have not seen him in anyway blame them for what he believes is a miscarriage of justice by the authorities in Italy.
 
Kermit said:
Okay, Moss, I agree, back to the case.

Here's a visual observation I made concerning the supposed point on the inside shutter where the rock hit:

1) it's a good sized rock
2) there are unbroken glass shards still in the wooden frame which get very close to the supposed point where the rock hit.

[qimg]http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/5530/bigrockbigshard.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

The rock has many surfaces. It is not one specific shape. Any portion of the rock could have made that mark. You cannot look at the mark and assume that it was the center of the rock that made the mark. It could have easily been a part of the rock that was protruding out toward the bottom of the rock. Keep in mind, this is the only fresh mark made to the wood of either the outside or the inside shutters.

If the rock was thrown from inside the room, where is the mark on the outside shutters?

If the rock was thrown from the inside to hit the already opened inside shutter, then most of the glass would be on the floor instead of the sill.

The most reasonable conclusion from looking at the photos is that the rock was thrown from outside. Guede closed the outside shutters after he entered the room. This is why the glass was pushed back toward the room. It is also very likely that Guede's body would have pushed glass toward the room as he dragged himself over the ledge. The glass is laying flat on the sill. It is not sticking up with jagged edges that would have Cut Guede. It is also very possible that he was wearing his coat and gloves.
 
Kermit said:
Thank you Mary H.

This comment is the first one in two and a half years by someone who is supportive of Amanda, where the police interviews of Nov. 2, 3 and 4 (a good part of the 50+ hours of torture which some FOA types and the Entourage refer to) are presented as simply routine, informal interviews.



Because not all murders are solved between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., especially when you have a sex murderer on the loose and he (she?) could strike again.



The only manner in which Amanda "controlled" the direction of the questioning was by giving answers to some questions, which would lead to further questions.

If you find it difficult to believe how Amanda brought up Patrick's name, please read her trial testimony, where she admits that she did indeed bring it up.
Click to expand...

Since the police didn't know Patrick's name before Amanda accused him it would be hard for them to bring it up.
 
Kermit said:
Okay, Moss, I agree, back to the case.

Here's a visual observation I made concerning the supposed point on the inside shutter where the rock hit:

1) it's a good sized rock
2) there are unbroken glass shards still in the wooden frame which get very close to the supposed point where the rock hit.

[qimg]http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/5530/bigrockbigshard.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

I might have to agree with Bruce, in that the rock looks irregular in shape.

My issue with theory that it was thrown outside, is where the rock struck the inside shutter, near the hinges, and whether there was enough force to open the shutter quick enough to allow glass to scatter across the room, and as far as the bed.
 
Bruce Fisher said:
[qimg]http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/3116/101ll.jpg[/qimg]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Click to expand...

Why do I have this strange sense of Deja vu?

The rock has many surfaces. It is not one specific shape. Any portion of the rock could have made that mark. You cannot look at the mark and assume that it was the center of the rock that made the mark. It could have easily been a part of the rock that was protruding out toward the bottom of the rock. Keep in mind, this is the only fresh mark made to the wood of either the outside or the inside shutters.
Click to expand...
It's been made with one of the pointed corners or the rock... neither the 'flat' sides of the rock, nor the edges produce that kind of damage.

If the rock was thrown from inside the room, where is the mark on the outside shutters?
Click to expand...
The rock wasn't thrown. You do not need to throw the rock in order to break the window.

If the rock was thrown from the inside to hit the already opened inside shutter, then most of the glass would be on the floor instead of the sill.
Click to expand...
Which tells us the rock was most likely not thrown.

The most reasonable conclusion from looking at the photos is that the rock was thrown from outside.
Click to expand...
That would have been a reasonable conclusion were it not that the rock couldn't landed where it did if it were thrown from outside AND damage the inside shutter the way it did. And that's the problem, you can achieve one of the two but you can't do both.

Guede closed the outside shutters after he entered the room. This is why the glass was pushed back toward the room.
Click to expand...
Ok, but the same is true for anyone else closing the outside shutter.

It is also very likely that Guede's body would have pushed glass toward the room as he dragged himself over the ledge.
Click to expand...
undoubtedly some of the glass would have been pushed into the room, but likewise some glass would have been pushed outside. But as someone else suggested, try this with scrabble pieces on window sill in your own home. I guarantee you that no matter how ofter you try, you will always have a few pieces that will fall outside.

The glass is laying flat on the sill. It is not sticking up with jagged edges that would have Cut Guede. It is also very possible that he was wearing his coat and gloves.
Click to expand...
Perhaps
 
Alt+F4 said:
No, I must have missed it. Thanks for the link.

So the pipe broke on the night of the murder, November 1 and it remained broken as late as November 17?
Click to expand...

There may be an excuse for it not being repaired over the long holiday weekend (not a satisfactory excuse given the ease of repair and a desire to keep sewer gases out of the kitchen). After the 5th, the police had taken over the apartment so it could not be repaired.

Alternatively, It may have been repaired the next day and the trap is missing on the 16th because the police took it to check for DNA evidence.
 
Amazer said:
I've been thinking of an appropriate response (one that wouldn't get me banned) while still conveying the utter disgust that I felt while reading this post.

Unfortunately I'm just not creative enough at the moment to achieve that feat.

As a result you have the dubious honor to be the first person to enter my ignore list.
Click to expand...

Look down and to the left of the post and you will see a triangle with a ! in it.
 
Bruce Fisher said:
Have you read the book? I have. I will not repeat Barbie's comments about Meredith because they are disgusting.

If you defend what Barbie wrote, it simply shows where you stand on this matter.
Click to expand...

I see, you won't evidence your assertions then. But then, why break a perfectly bad record?
 
Bruce Fisher said:
If the rock was thrown from inside the room, where is the mark on the outside shutters?
Click to expand...

Since the inside shutters would have had to have been open into the room when the window was broken from the inside, why is a mark required on the outside shutters? (you understand the window was also open when it was broken and that window opens inwards?).

Bruce Fisher said:
The most reasonable conclusion from looking at the photos is that the rock was thrown from outside. Guede closed the outside shutters after he entered the room. This is why the glass was pushed back toward the room. It is also very likely that Guede's body would have pushed glass toward the room as he dragged himself over the ledge. The glass is laying flat on the sill. It is not sticking up with jagged edges that would have Cut Guede. It is also very possible that he was wearing his coat and gloves.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. Did he also pick up all the shards of glass that fell to the ground below and and carry them back into the cottage to drop into the room or onto the inner or outer sill? If not, where is the glass that should be outside? The outer shutters were clearly closed when the window was broken.
 
tsig said:
Since the police didn't know Patrick's name before Amanda accused him it would be hard for them to bring it up.
Click to expand...

Total BS tsig. The police had already asked Amanda about the text message*. Even if Patrick wasn't named explicitly, he was the subject of the conversation at the time.


(*)"Ci vediamo piu tardi, Buona serata." (Translation: Lets have a jolly good time tonight and murder my roommate)
 
Dan O.: The POINT is, Patrick would never have been arrested had Amanda not falsely accused him. You don,t find that shameful? Or that NO apology was ever offered? I would like to think that even if we don,t agree as to the quilt or innocence of Amanda, at the very least , you would cede the point that there is never an excuse to blame an innocent person. No apology to Patrick, and no condolences to the Kerchers. If nothing else, could you admire those traits, in ANYONE? Because, in the end, it does go to charachter, and their value system. I won,t even go the anti semetic goings on.
 
Fulcanelli said:
Nonsense. Did he also pick up all the shards of glass that fell to the ground below and and carry them back into the cottage to drop into the room or onto the inner or outer sill? If not, where is the glass that should be outside? The outer shutters were clearly closed when the window was broken.
Click to expand...


Do you have evidence of that other than the what one officer said almost 2 years after the event? If it was so important to prove that the window was broken from the inside, where are the pictures of the ground below the window? Why doesn't the glass on the outer sill actually line up with the shutter line? Where is kermit with a PPT showing a pile of glass and an abrupt termination at the shutter line?

The evidence in that room is 100% consistent with someone throwing a rock in through the window from the outside. The conjecture that Amanda and Raffaele spent time meticulously staging the burglary 2 doors down from Amanda's murdered roommate is pure fantasy. There is zero evidence that the break-in was staged except for the circular reasoning that Amanda didn't need to break-in because she had a key.

And the Perugia police are so blind they couldn't see a stick if they were standing in front of a wall of sticks.
 
halides1 said:
BobTheDonkey,

I provided links to when Bernardo Provenzano was convicted in messages #7075 (p. 177) and 7137 (p. 179). Therefore, your statement that I did not provide this information is a lie, though not a very intelligent one, being so easy to disprove. With respect to the units of measuring DNA, if you had carefully checked what you said before commenting, you would have avoided engendering confusion and wasting everyone’s time.

Previously I asked you to apologize for calling me a liar repeatedly after I showed that you were wrong with respect to what I said bleach. Now you are defending yourself with a lie. I reiterate my request and add a new one, that you apologize for lying, for being sloppy with regards to facts and evidence, and for minimizing the severity of your carelessness when others rightfully call you on your errors.

halides1
Click to expand...
Nevermind. Halides is nothing less than disingenuous and I will no longer rise to his posts.
 
Last edited:
Dan O. said:
Total BS tsig. The police had already asked Amanda about the text message*. Even if Patrick wasn't named explicitly, he was the subject of the conversation at the time.


(*)"Ci vediamo piu tardi, Buona serata." (Translation: Lets have a jolly good time tonight and murder my roommate)
Click to expand...

No he wasn't, the text message was.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom