Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[Mary_H]

They might have but this sums up your entire reply. The police saw things at the crime scene that were suspicious to them. They didn't convict anyone of murder, all they did was ask the two persons who found the body to come in for further questioning? Are you insinuating anything further?

See my previous question, above: What was wrong with the information the police got from Amanda and Raffaele in the first three days following the murder?

 

[Malkmus]

5. Amanda's over explaination regarding the mop when the police at the scene didn't seem concerned about it at all.

But the mop was at the entrance; RS and AK made it important and we none of us know why.

Amanda explained the mop whenever summing up the events of the night before the murder and the morning of the discovery of the body. She mentions it in her testimony because she was asked to recall those events. Why do I get the feeling that if she didn't mention the mop in her writings that people would be jumping all over that too. "Why is she so vague about the mop?" "Look, she mentioned the mop in her testimony, but not in her letter! What is she hiding?"
There seems to be a "damned if she does, damned if she don't" in regards to anything Amanda and Raphaelle have said or done. Everything is suspicious, no matter the context apparently.

 

[Fiona]

1. Raffaele telling the police that nothing was taken from Filomena's room when he could not have known that.

Did the police at the scene know he had said that to the dispatcher? Was it a question at his interrogation?

I cannot remember if he repeated it to the postal police or the carabinieri who arrived later. Does it matter if the police at the scene knew it? The police would certainly know it once a murder investigation started.

2. Raffaele's claim that he couldn't break down Meredith's door when Filomeana's male friend did it with only three or four kicks

Raffaele used his shoulder; the other guy used his foot. How do you know Raffaele didn't weaken it for the other guy?

We don't. That is one possibility. It is not the only one. Should the police ignore possibilities?

3. The fact that both of Meredith's cell phones were taken. How would a stranger/burgler know she was using two cell phones?

Guede went through Meredith's purse.

Evidence for that? I have seen none

]4. The fact that after Filomeana's friend broke down Meredith's door Filomena looked in and freaked out at seeing Meredith's foot. Neither Amanda or Raffale were at the door or looked into the room after the door was opened

.

Have you seen the floor plan? How many people do you think could fit in the doorway to look at the foot? Do you think the police might have tried to stop anyone from looking at the scene?

Yes: they did do that and they said so. But it does not make RS and AK's behaviour any more explicable: who calls the police because they are so worried about a flatmate they try to break the door down, then leaves folk who do not live in the house to talk to the police, while they go into another room? Who does not take an interest when a door is being broken down in their own house, but retreats to another room ? Strikes me as odd: not conclusive in any way, but odd. I think the police might have thought so too.

5. Amanda's over explaination regarding the mop when the police at the scene didn't seem concerned about it at all.

Did she talk about the mop to the police?

Yes. Inevitably because it was part of her account of the events of the morning. It did not quite agree with RS's account at first: but they straightened that out later.

I'm not saying that any of the above is reason to convict someone of murder, but they are good enough to ask someone to come to the police station to answer questions in a more formal manner.

Not really.

I think certainly.

 

[Mary_H]

Actually, it's incredibly suspicious.


There was an apparent break-in (on subsequent inspection it was found to be suspicious), there was blood in the bathroom, Meredith's door was locked - contrary to usual, and you think it's not suspicious that Amanda went ahead and took a shower with all this going on. It was suspicious enough to cause them to call the police, but not suspicious enough to keep her from taking a shower first.

That's suspicious.

I think Malkmus has answered your question, Bob, with the revelation that Raffaele said there was a bloodstain, not a lot of blood. Amanda had no reason to check Meredith's door before she took her shower, nor to look in Filomena's room. As Amanda stated, when she began to get suspicious, she "certainly didn't think the worst." I think it's remarkable that she even noticed the feces. Surely if she were trying to cover up criminal activity, she would have flushed them.

 

[odeed]

Actually, it's incredibly suspicious.


There was an apparent break-in (on subsequent inspection it was found to be suspicious), there was blood in the bathroom, Meredith's door was locked - contrary to usual, and you think it's not suspicious that Amanda went ahead and took a shower with all this going on. It was suspicious enough to cause them to call the police, but not suspicious enough to keep her from taking a shower first.

That's suspicious.

To be fair, BobTheDonkey, she had to go and get her boyfriend to make sure what she had seen was real, just in case she imagined it all.

 

[Mary_H]

I cannot remember if he repeated it to the postal police or the carabinieri who arrived later. Does it matter if the police at the scene knew it? The police would certainly know it once a murder investigation started.

The point is, was this something the police used to suspect Raffaele? Or is it just something the guilters are troubled by?

We don't. That is one possibility. It is not the only one. Should the police ignore possibilities?

Again, is this something the police wondered about or just something the guilters are using to raise suspicions?

Evidence for that? I have seen none.

There is ample information available showing that Rudy went through Meredith's purse and left her blood and his DNA on it.

Yes: they did do that and they said so. But it does not make RS and AK's behaviour any more explicable: who calls the police because they are so worried about a flatmate they try to break the door down, then leaves folk who do not live in the house to talk to the police, while they go into another room? Who does not take an interest when a door is being broken down in their own house, but retreats to another room ? Strikes me as odd: not conclusive in any way, but odd. I think the police might have thought so too.

I believe at the time the door was broken down, Amanda was in the kitchen and Raffaele was in the same general vicinity as the kitchen/hallway/bathroom.

Yes. Inevitably because it was part of her account of the events of the morning. It did not quite agree with RS's account at first: but they straightened that out later.

Given that the police did not present evidence for a clean-up at trail, I don't think the mop was an issue for them; it shouldn't be for anyone else, either.

I think certainly.

And we disagree.

 

[Fiona]

It is perfectly possible that a person could come home and find their door lying open, but nobody home: assume that someone is in fact home, and go on in; unusual, but possible, given she said that occasionally happened when someone took out the trash. It is also possible that, based on that assumption, she would have gone into her room to get ready for her shower. The fact that the person taking the trash out did not return in that time, and this did not make her uneasy, is less understandable: but ok. It is possible she imagined they had gone to borrow a cup of sugar and got talking. It is possible that she then went to the bathroom and she noticed the blood spots, yet did not connect that with the open door and the no show of the briefly absent flatmate. It is getting harder, but again, ok. It is possible that she then went back to her room and got dressed then went to the other bathroom to dry her hair. It is possible she noticed the **** in the toilet, knew that was completely out of character for the folk who lived in the house, yet again did not make the connections. It is possible she stood and dried her hair with that **** lying there throughout, and, not having made any sinister conclusions, she yet did not flush it. But by now I am finding it a stretch. It is possible she started to feel uneasy, as she said, and got the mop she came to collect, and went back to RS's house. It is possible they then cleaned up the water and had breakfast before it occurred to her to mention any of this to RS: but now I have to reconcile all of that with the fact that she told Filomena she was in the cottage when she phoned her the first time. I can't. It is possible she and RS then returned to the cottage because of her concerns. It is possible they noticed the broken window (through Filomena's door which was open: or from outside because it was closed) and they became very concerned indeed. It is possible they were so worried they tried to peer in through the window and then to break the door down; and that they then took advice and called the police. It is possible that having done that they went and sat calmly in the garden to await the police's arrival. It is possible that having tried to break the door down Amanda then remembered that Meredith always locked her door and laughed at her earlier fears. It is possible that having realised they were overreacting they lost interest and left the scene of all this activity, having better things to do.

Anything is possible. I just don't find any of that very likely at all. Again it is not one thing: it is all of it

 

[BobTheDonkey]

To be fair, BobTheDonkey, she had to go and get her boyfriend to make sure what she had seen was real, just in case she imagined it all.

Oh, that's what I missed.

Mary, we're talking about suspicious behavior. Not behavior that was used to convict the duo, just behavior that lead to their further interrogations by Police Officers.

Not only is it very common for the people found at the scene of the crime, you know - the ones who discovered the scene - to be most heavily questioned. It is likewise suspicious for a pair with nothing to hide to do what they can to not be questioned alone.

Interestingly, as soon as the duo was questioned separately, Raffaele's alibi for him and Amanda broke down. You can imply/accuse the Police were responsible for implanting these "false memories" or "confessions" or that these two were under duress. But you have yet to actually prove that.

Of course the questioning got tough as the night wore on - the further into the interrogations the Police went, the more discrepancies were noted, and thus the story unraveled.

It takes far more than 1:45 for memories to be implanted. And it surely takes less than 2 weeks for the duress from an intense interrogation to wear off.

Of course, I suppose Amanda was still under duress due to being imprisoned.

 

[tsig]

What evidence did the police have that spurred them to examine the phone records and the computer? Why were they suspicious of the pair in the first place?

There was this dead body.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

I know this is off topic but I wanted to put it on here when I had the chance. Fulcanelli had stated that I was incorrect about a life sentence in Italy. I was 99% sure I had it right but I checked on it before I posted.

A life sentence in Italy is 30 years.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

You are mistaken. They were facing life. A reduction from that to 26 years is a huge reduction indeed.

Sorry, Found the original post.

A life sentence in Italy is 30 years. Just to clear that up

Mignini is appealing to get Amanda an additional 4 years.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Dan O

Please send me an email tonight. I will respond to your email. We need to talk tonight.


injusticeinperugia@yahoo.com

 

[Mary_H]

Oh, that's what I missed.

Mary, we're talking about suspicious behavior. Not behavior that was used to convict the duo, just behavior that lead to their further interrogations by Police Officers.

Not only is it very common for the people found at the scene of the crime, you know - the ones who discovered the scene - to be most heavily questioned. It is likewise suspicious for a pair with nothing to hide to do what they can to not be questioned alone.

Interestingly, as soon as the duo was questioned separately, Raffaele's alibi for him and Amanda broke down. You can imply/accuse the Police were responsible for implanting these "false memories" or "confessions" or that these two were under duress. But you have yet to actually prove that.

Of course the questioning got tough as the night wore on - the further into the interrogations the Police went, the more discrepancies were noted, and thus the story unraveled.

It takes far more than 1:45 for memories to be implanted. And it surely takes less than 2 weeks for the duress from an intense interrogation to wear off.

Of course, I suppose Amanda was still under duress due to being imprisoned.

Sorry, Bob, all your comments show is an incomplete understanding of how innocent people can be forced to confess to crimes they did not commit.

There is a photograph of Amanda being questioned alone by a group of men in the yard of the cottage. Do you have any evidence that Amanda and Raffaele "did what they could do to not be questioned alone?"

 

[Mary_H]

Fiona wrote: "Anything is possible. I just don't find any of that very likely at all. Again it is not one thing: it is all of it."

That and the fact that you want Amanda and Raffaele to be guilty.

 

[Fiona]

I cannot remember if he repeated it to the postal police or the carabinieri who arrived later. Does it matter if the police at the scene knew it? The police would certainly know it once a murder investigation started.

The point is, was this something the police used to suspect Raffaele? Or is it just something the guilters are troubled by?

Of course it was part of the police investigation. They were suspicious of the burglary from the start, according to their testimony. I do not think that is in dispute, is it? They could have been wrong, but there is no doubt that they would pay attention to what was said when the call was made. That is basic police work.

We don't. That is one possibility. It is not the only one. Should the police ignore possibilities?

Again, is this something the police wondered about or just something the guilters are using to raise suspicions?

I cannot make windows into their souls, and so I do not know. I would expect that they would wonder about it because they were told that RS tried to break the door down though it was not unusual for it to be locked; discrepancies like that tend to make people wonder

Evidence for that? I have seen none.

There is ample information available showing that Rudy went through Meredith's purse and left her blood and his DNA on it.

There is certainly his blood on the outside of the purse but I am very eager to see the "ample information showing Rudy went through her purse". I did not ask for your opinion: I asked for evidence. Please link. It is important

Yes: they did do that and they said so. But it does not make RS and AK's behaviour any more explicable: who calls the police because they are so worried about a flatmate they try to break the door down, then leaves folk who do not live in the house to talk to the police, while they go into another room? Who does not take an interest when a door is being broken down in their own house, but retreats to another room ? Strikes me as odd: not conclusive in any way, but odd. I think the police might have thought so too.

I believe at the time the door was broken down, Amanda was in the kitchen and Raffaele was in the same general vicinity as the kitchen/hallway/bathroom.

Agreed: curious, isn't it?

Yes. Inevitably because it was part of her account of the events of the morning. It did not quite agree with RS's account at first: but they straightened that out later.

Given that the police did not present evidence for a clean-up at trail, I don't think the mop was an issue for them; it shouldn't be for anyone else, either.

There was evidence of a clean up presented at the trial: you do not accept it. But that is not what we are discussing. I agree that the mop was not an issue for the police. So why is it an issue for AK and RS? That is the question.

I think certainly.

And we disagree.

We do. Perhaps our positions will converge a little when you show why you do not believe the police would be made suspicious by these things: they seem suspicious to me and I am not even paid to be suspicious.

 

[odeed]

Sorry, Found the original post.

A life sentence in Italy is 30 years. Just to clear that up

Mignini is appealing to get Amanda an additional 4 years.

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_imprisonment and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_imprisonment_(Italy)

In Italy, life imprisonment (ergastolo in Italian) has an indeterminate length.

 

[Fiona]

I know this is off topic but I wanted to put it on here when I had the chance. Fulcanelli had stated that I was incorrect about a life sentence in Italy. I was 99% sure I had it right but I checked on it before I posted.

A life sentence in Italy is 30 years.

That is correct in one sense: the significance of a life sentence is that any reduction for mitigation does not reduce the term: so it is 30 years and it remains 30 years.

ETA: That does not equate to an american conception of life without parole, however. Other ways of reducing the term served exist: but the kind of reduction for mitigation which has been applied would be applied to the life sentence: reducing it to ...life

 

[Fiona]

Fiona wrote: "Anything is possible. I just don't find any of that very likely at all. Again it is not one thing: it is all of it."

That and the fact that you want Amanda and Raffaele to be guilty.

No, MaryH. I believe them to be guilty because that is where the evidence has led me. If you wish to shift my opinion you need to provide credible evidence I do not yet have. You do not seem to understand that that is what is required: but it is really as simple as that

 

[Bruce Fischer]

That is correct in one sense: the significance of a life sentences is that any reduction for mitigation does not reduce the term: so it is 30 years and it remains 30 years.

Actually what I said wasn't correct in a sense, it was simply correct.


In the US, life means life. If you are 18, you get life without parole, you die in prison.

 

[Mary_H]

fiona wrote: "We do. Perhaps our positions will converge a little when you show why you do not believe the police would be made suspicious by these things: they seem suspicious to me and I am not even paid to be suspicious."

Well, we can go around and around discussing and documenting issues that have been discussed and documented a million times over, but we will end up back in the same place.

The point is, when Amanda and Raffaele said things the police wanted to hear, the police believed them. When they said things the police did not want to hear, the police refused to believe them. Pretty much the same as the guilters. This is because the idea of Amanda and Raffaele having committed the murder is attractive to them and to you.