• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.
BobTheDonkey said:
Well, Mary, how often are criminals found guilty on 1st trial and win either of their two appeals?

This was discussed earlier, actually. Quite a while ago, and only the once so far as I can recall.
Click to expand...

I don't getcha. Do you mean in Italy or elsewhere?
 
BobTheDonkey said:
Well, Mary, as we're discussing the Italian Judicial System and you made the accusations regarding the Italian Defense Attorneys, let's go with "yes, Italy"...
Click to expand...

I can't remember the exact figures, but I think a little over half of the first trial judgments are modified at the appeal. I don't know how many are overturned.

Can you imagine half of the verdicts in the United States being modified on appeal?
 
Mary_H said:
I can't remember the exact figures, but I think a little over half of the first trial judgments are modified at the appeal. I don't know how many are overturned.

Can you imagine half of the verdicts in the United States being modified on appeal?
Click to expand...

Numbers please, Mary (with citations).

Let's nail down a number for the Italian system before we start comparing.
 
stilicho said:
Yes, I believe that RG entered the cottage through the door and not through the window. I believe that he was allowed inside by AK on the evening of 01 NOV 2007. Reasoning: There is no evidence to support the claim that anyone entered the cottage through Filomena's window.

As for taking and keeping the keys:

Of all the things allegedly taken from the cottage on that night, only the keys, the cash, and the credit cards remain unaccounted for. The cell phones were found. If we assume that the same person or persons were responsible for all the missing items, then we can safely assume that all of them were discarded. We know the phones were. As for cash, that's fairly easy to dispose of. The credit cards? Who knows? Nobody has shown they were used after the murder so they were likely disposed of too. A real thief would have at least tried to use them; otherwise there's no reason to steal them.

That leaves us with the keys.

If the keys were to be retained for later use, that would mean the burglar (if there was one) intended to return to steal more things. In your scenario, the burglar (RG) instead went dancing after discarding Meredith's cell phones. When he returned (in your scenario) he took nothing further. Mighty odd behaviour for a burglar. He also left all the obvious clues to his presence, including his stool in the toilet and his DNA in the room where the victim lay dead.

So the evidence suggests that the keys were not retained for later use but discarded or disposed of like all the other things said to be taken.

By the way, in your scenario, RG took the cell phones but left no blood on them. How do you account for that? We know that AK must have washed up in the bathroom because her mixed DNA was found there. RG didn't wash up there.
Click to expand...
Hi Stilicho,
More specualtion again, which you can safely ignore if you want to.

We both agree that Guede probably came in thru the front door.
You probably agree that more than 1 person was involved in the murder of Miss Kercher, correct? Well, so do I. I believe that this other person is the one that Miss Formica stated in court was not Rudy Guede. Possibly the same person that Mr. Alessi alludes to in his recorded interview, which the defense for Raffaele Sollecito wants to bring up in appeal. So who is this person?

Well I was reading this again, earlier today. It might be another clue to his identity:
Date: 6/28/2009 Title: "The Boy with the Ball in his hands."

This part caught my eye:

"On the other hand clues of a murder committed by more than one person still stand.
As we know a witness heard two people running after a scream. Another witness met, at 22:30, a black person, who wasn't Rudi, having the typical way of walking of someone who absolutely didn't have to be seen in his face and didn't have his voice to be heard.
Introna's reconstruction, then, as we have seen, doesn't really work and didn't prove why Meredith didn't have defense wounds.
Analyzing the B & A at the lawyers' office, then, in which Rudi is almost certainly involved, we have noticed the presence of a quasi professional thief able to disable the antitheft. The burglar located the antitheft and disabled the automatic phone calls it does, something like that. A circumstance that makes one think that the basketball player may have gone to steal there together with a more experienced thief. And the mini gang may have done the same at Meredith's place."

Link: http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2009/06/boy-with-ball-in-his-hands.html

I was thinking that the person who might have been with Guede that night, that Miss Formica saw, was someone that Guede knew well.
You probably think that it was Raffaele and Amanda, I do not.

I wonder if the identity of that person is the same person that disconnected the "antitheft" as Frank Sfarzo calls it, at the lawyers office?
The same person that Mr. Alessi says Guede told him had stabbed Miss Kercher.
Could this be the person that murdered Miss Kercher?

If Guede did not stab Miss Kercher, but was there when it happened, maybe he didn't get blood on himself then. Running out of the apartment, he grabbed the phones and keys, which would answer your question as to why there was no blood on the phones.
If he did not physically stab Miss Kercher, he might not have even needed a shower to clean himself up to go out afterwards.
But if he did come back later after the bars/clubs closed down, broke the window to see if anyone was home, moved Miss Kercher and assaulted her then, well maybe that explains Guede getting blood on himself later. Who knows, maybe that's when he found her rent money too?
RWVBWL
 
BobTheDonkey said:
Numbers please, Mary (with citations).

Let's nail down a number for the Italian system before we start comparing.
Click to expand...

I'll have to go dig up some of my pal Al-Fakh Yugoudh's informative posts. First I'm going to go watch TV for awhile, though. "Breaking Bad" is on tonight, don'tcha know.

Speaking of TV, am I the only one on this thread who does not believe stilicho when he says he has never seen the video clip of Amanda and Raffaele kissing?
 
Mary_H said:
I'll have to go dig up some of my pal Al-Fakh Yugoudh's informative posts. First I'm going to go watch TV for awhile, though. "Breaking Bad" is on tonight, don'tcha know.

Speaking of TV, am I the only one on this thread who does not believe stilicho when he says he has never seen the video clip of Amanda and Raffaele kissing?
Click to expand...

I haven't seen it either.
 
Mary_H said:
I'll have to go dig up some of my pal Al-Fakh Yugoudh's informative posts. First I'm going to go watch TV for awhile, though. "Breaking Bad" is on tonight, don'tcha know.

Speaking of TV, am I the only one on this thread who does not believe stilicho when he says he has never seen the video clip of Amanda and Raffaele kissing?
Click to expand...

Primary sources, if you please. Not someone's blog post where they claim a reported close to 50% appeal rate. An actual evidence based number is required.
 
Hi, RWVBWL! I am leaving while you're arriving. :( Might see you later, or maybe tomorrow. Have fun.
 
Mary_H said:
Hi, RWVBWL! I am leaving while you're arriving. :( Might see you later, or maybe tomorrow. Have fun.
Click to expand...
Hi Mary H,
Have a good rest of your evening! I'm checking out too.

Ya know, the post I just wrote reminds me of days of my youth. I knew who to smoke out with, I knew who moved 420, or harder drugs. I knew that some of the crew were good fighters and had your back, I knew who were into breaking and entering. One guy even murdered his neighbor, but he was sooo far into hard drugs that it made sense, for he was robbing the old mans house, and killed him, seting the place ablaze afterwards.
He rots in jail still, almost 30 years later...

If Guede did not stab Miss Kercher, but this other person did, (that is not Raffaele or Amanda, as WE believe), well it seems rather obvious, to me at least, that Guede would know him quite well. Could it be the guy who disabled the alarm during the break-in at the lawyers office? Who is he? Did the cops get fingerprints from that burglary. I wonder if they did, if so, were they compared to any of the unattributed fingerprints from Miss Kercher's apartment? I wonder if there have been any more 2nd story robberies in the area after the murder of Miss Kercher?
Hmmm, just wondering.
RWVBWL
 
RWVBWL said:
Hi Mary H,
Have a good rest of your evening! I'm checking out too.

Ya know, the post I just wrote reminds me of days of my youth. I knew who to smoke out with, I knew who moved 420, or harder drugs. I knew that some of the crew were good fighters and had your back, I knew who were into breaking and entering. One guy even murdered his neighbor, but he was sooo far into hard drugs that it made sense, for he was robbing the old mans house, and killed him, seting the place ablaze afterwards.
He rots in jail still, almost 30 years later...

If Guede did not stab Miss Kercher, but this other person did, (that is not Raffaele or Amanda, as WE believe), well it seems rather obvious, to me at least, that Guede would know him quite well. Could it be the guy who disabled the alarm during the break-in at the lawyers office? Who is he? Did the cops get fingerprints from that burglary. I wonder if they did, if so, were they compared to any of the unattributed fingerprints from Miss Kercher's apartment? I wonder if there have been any more 2nd story robberies in the area after the murder of Miss Kercher?
Hmmm, just wondering.
RWVBWL
Click to expand...

That still doesn't explain Meredith's DNA on the knife, Raffaele's DNA on the bra clasp, the mixed DNA footprints, the faked break-in, the inability of Raffaele and Amanda to have consistent, congruent alibis, etc...
 
Mary_H said:
Hi capealadin. I did not claim that the police in the photo were sexually aroused. I said there was an undercurrent of sexuality that affected the attitudes of the investigators. John Winters wrote an illustrative observation about the photo, which I thought was entertaining enough to share.
Click to expand...

OK. Which is it? Are you claiming the Perugian authorities ignored all the evidence and regular police work?

Please establish, with cites, what this "undercurrent of sexuality" entails. Don't keep falling back on something you encountered on a 'comedian' blog.

We provided you with plenty of opportunity to tacitly withdraw this lie. Now you repeat it without any evidence.
 
Mary_H said:
I joined this forum in good faith.
Click to expand...

Prove it. Show us all how this "undercurrent of sexuality" dominated the work of, among others, Beatrice Cristiani, Monica Napoleoni, Manuela Comodi, and Patrizia Stefanoni.

You did not join in good faith. You have perpetuated lies and refused to source any of the challenges against your dishonest allegations against those investigating the murder. Your solitary weak attempt to back up your falsehoods was by deflecting your own words to some 'comedian'.

Do you support your own words or not?
 
HumanityBlues said:
With all due respect, most posters here aren't even qualified to say whether Amanda had a fair trial.
Click to expand...

Absolutely correct.

However, the Italians do have some things completely foreign to the so-called Anglo-American legal system. In the main, this is a responsibility of the court to explain their reasons for arriving at their decision. Aren't there literally dozens of cases in the US and Canada that you'd have been ecstatic to find something like this?

Moreover, the appeal process is automatic and doesn't depend on the whims of the authorities.

Even if the trial and the investigation were ruthlessly corrupt, the processes are probably superior to anything we have.
 
Mary_H said:
The cartwheel story, as I understand it, was a case of her doing some yoga-style stretching exercises while waiting at the police station. That does not strike me as outside the bounds of social convention. A lot of people stretch in a lot of situations that require a long wait, and Amanda is an athlete. There is even a report that an officer asked her to demonstrate what she could do, which I think is as likely as anything else.
Click to expand...

Do you have the precise quote? Are you certain it did not include the term ruota? Which yoga exercise includes the ruota or the ruota di carro?

Please include cites.

Mary_H said:
[Amanda] understands the importance of expressing appreciation to authority figures...
Click to expand...

Cite?
 
Mary_H said:
Speaking of TV, am I the only one on this thread who does not believe stilicho when he says he has never seen the video clip of Amanda and Raffaele kissing?
Click to expand...

You are alone in this baseless assertion too.
 
Fiona said:
Why would he go and wash blood off his shoe and then go back and get more on it? That does not make a lot of sense to me



Why would he remove his shoe if he was washing it in the bidet?



It isn't his footprint.



He did not go through her purse. Since this appears to be the only reason you have for him going back into her room after he cleaned his shoe this is not likely at all



See above
Click to expand...

You make bold statements as if you know these things for certain.

If Rudy wanted to clean off his show it would not be out of the ordinary to take it off.

The footprint on the bathmat is inconclusive. Seeing that the only shoe prints or footprints, set in Meredith's blood, in the cottage belong to Rudy, it is reasonable to say that the print belongs to him. The evidence points to Rudy.

Rudy took the duvet off the bed and covered Meredith. He put his bloody knife down on the bed making the imprint on the bed. He went through Meredith's purse. He took her cell phones and money. He stepped in blood on the way out of the room.

The evidence supports this scenario.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom