Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[Supernaut]

Fulcanelli + internet access = giving a monkey a gun.

 

[el buscador]

Shuttit, you and I have the same sources, just different conclusions.

 

[RoseMontague]

We were discussing this place at View From Wilmington and one of the warnings given was the name calling and personal attacks. Some of us enjoy a good discussion and debate with others we don't always agree with but don't see anything productive coming out of the exchanging of gratuitous insults.

 

[stilicho]

The Florida law mandates that all public records be freely available on request. This includes anything surrendered to (or from) a defense team through discovery, all recordings of suspect or witness interrogations, all jail recordings including visits from parents, all requests from the jail commissary ... you get the idea. Only very specific exceptions can be made under extremely limited circumstances, and a finding by a judge is required for each such exception.

By this one post you just made me second-guess my own position on the audio/visual recording of police interviews. So now what? Do we want CCTV records kept but not as a part of the public record? What would that accomplish? If they are not allowed as a part of the public record then they could not be brought into a courtroom as evidence of anything. Well, they could, but only if the trial was closed to the public. So then we'd be condoning secret trials.

I am beginning to believe that the whole issue of CCTV recording is truly a red herring. It deserves, perhaps, its own thread as HB suggested. And, furthermore, it doesn't seem to be an issue in Amanda's treatment or the others forgotten in all this: Raffaele, Rudy, and Patrick. And we'd have to have CCTV evidence of all the others brought in to be questioned so we can see how Luca or Marco explained away the pot plants downstairs as well as what Robyn Butterworth really said about Amanda.

This could truly become pure theatre if it isn't already.

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

This could truly become pure theatre if it isn't already.

It is. Very bad, tasteless, offensive theater which is almost an incontrovertible argument against judicial transparency.

Although it pains me to say this, and I ask for forgiveness in advance, just watch an episode or two of Nancy Grace.

Keep a barf bag close at hand. Remove all objects which might serve as projectiles from the vicinity of your TV screen or monitor.

Be prepared to seek anger management counseling afterward.

 

[stilicho]

Although it pains me to say this, and I ask for forgiveness in advance, just watch an episode or two of Nancy Grace.

I did watch one episode a while back because someone mentioned her at the PMF. Apparently she'd had someone on associated with this case. The episode I watched didn't have any lurid CCTV on it but featured the disappearance of two women somewhere in the LA area. She lets people phone in but talks right over them for a minute or two non-stop, then asks the caller to agree with her, and thanks them for calling.

It was a little unusual.

The only thing I can compare it to is my own conference call training sessions at work. I like to talk a lot, too, and the phones don't allow the listener to respond if I don't stop talking. At one session, we finally heard a beeping noise from the phone, which I discovered was one of those at the other end trying to get my attention. They asked me if I ever breathe when I talk because (apparently) I'd talked non-stop for fifteen minutes.

Maybe I should have my own true crime call-in show. It doesn't really seem that hard!

 

[el buscador]

While I can certainly agree with you guys about the barf reflex and other adverse feelings and reactions while watching a nancy grace episode, I would like to point out that that is pretty close to the feelings and reactions many of us get when reading the pmf discussion board. There does seem to be an inordinate amount of time and space dedicated to Amand'a wardrobe, smiles (or lack of), hair and looks with a huge dose of non-expert opinions about her psychological makeup.

 

[quadraginta]

I did watch one episode a while back because someone mentioned her at the PMF. Apparently she'd had someone on associated with this case. The episode I watched didn't have any lurid CCTV on it but featured the disappearance of two women somewhere in the LA area. She lets people phone in but talks right over them for a minute or two non-stop, then asks the caller to agree with her, and thanks them for calling.

It was a little unusual.

The only thing I can compare it to is my own conference call training sessions at work. I like to talk a lot, too, and the phones don't allow the listener to respond if I don't stop talking. At one session, we finally heard a beeping noise from the phone, which I discovered was one of those at the other end trying to get my attention. They asked me if I ever breathe when I talk because (apparently) I'd talked non-stop for fifteen minutes.

Maybe I should have my own true crime call-in show. It doesn't really seem that hard!

Episodes with the Caylee Anthony or Hayleigh Cummings cases featured are the worst, although she generally manages at least a flash or two on those even when focusing on other topics.

Florida stands out in the truly unambiguous and inclusive application of their Sunshine Law. I can think of no other state which even comes close. So cases from there provide the most fertile opportunities for the Grace creature's lurid version of "journalism".

I am probably oversensitized, having watched her spend a year airing virtually nothing else but the Caylee Anthony case. I was involved in a board discussing the topic, and found it needful to follow her show just to see all the things she got wrong which inevitably became quoted as authoritative source material in the discussion. Ultimately I could no longer stomach even that, and settled for a snarky anti-Nancy line in my sig. In my opinion her show acts as a buffer keeping people like Rush Limbaugh from reaching the bottom of the integrity heap. I doubt that she has ever been within ICBM range of a scruple in her lifetime.

Florida's Sunshine Law is like mother's milk to her. Italian coverage of the Knox case would have looked like it was written by FOA compared to what Grace would have done to her if she'd been arrested in Florida.

 

[Mary_H]

We've had that for years now. It's called Nancy Grace, and airs at 8:00pm Eastern Time every night on HLN (HeadLine News).

Nancy (may her shriveled, coprolitic substitute for a heart rot, burn, and freeze for all eternity in every Hell ever imagined by humankind) delights in taking full advantage of Florida's "Sunshine Law", which brings the thrust of this trend to its pitiful conclusion.

Jailhouse video of Casey Anthony visiting with her parents, complete with scary color saturation effects and weird strobe lighting are regular fare, as are learned discussions with "experts" in body language and pop psychology. Her consumption of snacks and her toiletry orders from the jail commissary are the subject of extended ridicule. The balance on her commissary account is analyzed in painful detail, and colorful suppositions about the motives of anonymous donors to that account are fruitful comedy territory. Each court appearance is good for a second-by-second commentary of her hairstyle, weight, and couture, with occasional brief references to the proceedings themselves.

Every night.

For nearly a year and a half it was almost the only content on her program.

Every night.

The cast of the Haleigh Cummings saga is mined with even more unrestrained glee, since they appear to be godsent caricatures of Central Casting white trailer trash....

The fun isn't limited to Florida cases, although they provide the most in contributions from the state. Halides1 might have some choice comments on the Grace creature's rendition of the Duke Lacrosse case.

When Knox defenders complain of the treatment she supposedly received in the Italian press, and wax philosophical about the shortcomings of Italian justice and the innate superiority of the American Way^TM I can only think of the old adage "Be careful what you wish for. ..."

She could have been busted in Florida.

It is. Very bad, tasteless, offensive theater which is almost an incontrovertible argument against judicial transparency.

Although it pains me to say this, and I ask for forgiveness in advance, just watch an episode or two of Nancy Grace.

Keep a barf bag close at hand. Remove all objects which might serve as projectiles from the vicinity of your TV screen or monitor.

Be prepared to seek anger management counseling afterward.

This is true and very funny, quadraginta. I laughed aloud; I'm sure many people would agree with you, as Nancy Grace is often spoofed in popular culture..

I see very little difference, however, between the behaviors you describe and the behaviors of some of Amanda's zealous detractors, especially in this paragraph: "Her consumption of snacks and her toiletry orders from the jail commissary are the subject of extended ridicule. The balance on her commissary account is analyzed in painful detail, and colorful suppositions about the motives of anonymous donors to that account are fruitful comedy territory. Each court appearance is good for a second-by-second commentary of her hairstyle, weight, and couture, with occasional brief references to the proceedings themselves."

Who can forget the famous cold sore incident? And the insistence that Amanda's supporters in the blogs are paid?

What little coverage I have seen of the Casey Anthony case includes video of shrieking bigots holding signs of protest on the sidewalk in front of Casey Anthony's parents' home, sticking their noses into a case that does not concern them.

How is this significantly different from the guilters calling for justice for Meredith?

I do see a difference in the way the two cases have been treated in the press. In the United States, coverage of the Casey Anthony case is primarily relegated to the Nancy Grace Show and similar tabloid-style TV. One very rarely reads about it in the mainstream news.

In Italy, the story of Amanda Knox was covered in every publication known to the culture.

In that sense, one might say Amanda was busted in the Florida of Europe.

 

[Mary_H]

He didn't need a lawyer by that point, the police were done with him.

That's not the point. The point was for people to be able see what is actually in Raffaele's letters, as they appear to have been greatly misconstrued on these pages.

Rubbish. If Rudy's lawyers wanted to 'persuade' him it wouldn't have taken them months to do it.

I completely agree. It took them four months to train Rudy to stick firmly to the details of the story he was to present to the court.

And it's worth noting, if Amanda and Raffaele were truly innocent, Rudy had EVERY reason from the get-go to say it was them he saw there. The only reason he'd have had to not say they were there is if they actually were, for then they could say things to damage him in return. Omerta.

Huh? Caught off guard and arrested, he first said he wasn't even there, then, over time, offered various versions of the activities at the crime scene, then finally settled on Amanda and Raffaele. Might as well, since they were already sitting in jail for the crime (how they could retaliate against him there, I don't know).

Rudy's first thoughts were about saving his own skin; at that time he wasn't thinking about the possibilities of implicating himself.

If you want to believe Rudy's story that Amanda and Raffaele were at the crime scene, then why don't you demand that his story matches Mignini's? He has never once referred to anything like a sex orgy gone wrong, or being talked into the project by Amanda.

 

[Mary_H]

And what is that alibi exactly Mary? Would that be the alibi where the time she had dinner changed at least 3 times?

Big deal. What time did you have dinner four nights ago? She spent the night at Raffaele's, as she has always held.

It took Rudy 4 months to add in a couple of little details? That's all that changed.

I printed those excerpts from the Times (and the links) so you could see that it was not just "a couple of little details." It went from a complete denial and saying Amanda was not there, to witnessing an unknown stranger whom he could not identify, to claiming that maybe he could identify the stranger after all, to full out claiming Raffaele and Amanda were the ones who committed the murder. I doubt the defendants would call those "a couple little details."

We've been over this and nobody is buying your 'police suggested Patrick Lumumba' rubbish.

Nobody?

The police never said Raffaele's pocket knife wasn't involved. In fact, Massei says that it was. But it is a fact, you may not like it, that Meredith was stabbed with at least two different knives.

The Times reported the police found no DNA on Raffaele's flick knife. "Detectives had said that a flick knife that Mr Sollecito carried around with him was “compatible” with the weapon used to slash the British student’s throat, but that that knife had yielded no DNA"
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2878243.ece

The prosecution alleges the murder was committed with two different knives; others disagree.

And really, are you an expert on the history of murder and know through some specific research that no murderer has ever kept a murder weapon in some rather ordinary place in their home?

No. As a person with some life experience, however, I would guess that the criminal who would be likely to do that would be practiced and maybe into keeping elements of his crime as trophies. Two young people who have never committed a crime would be completely horrified with the outcome of their "sex game" and would work immediately to hide all evidence.

 

[quadraginta]

While I can certainly agree with you guys about the barf reflex and other adverse feelings and reactions while watching a nancy grace episode, I would like to point out that that is pretty close to the feelings and reactions many of us get when reading the pmf discussion board. There does seem to be an inordinate amount of time and space dedicated to Amand'a wardrobe, smiles (or lack of), hair and looks with a huge dose of non-expert opinions about her psychological makeup.

Sounds like a good place to stay away from.

We've been getting some non-expert opinions about psychological makeup around here lately, too. More and more, it seems. Maybe they got lost on the way to somewhere else.

 

[shuttlt]

This is true and very funny, quadraginta. I laughed aloud; I'm sure many people would agree with you, as Nancy Grace is often spoofed in popular culture..

Aren't most posters and commentators on the case a bit despicable from this perspective? It's not just Amanda that has been picked apart and had all her movements and utterances criticised and been speculated about all over blogs, the TV and newspapers.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Big deal. What time did you have dinner four nights ago? She spent the night at Raffaele's, as she has always held.

Chinese take-out around 6:30/7pm (pepper steak, white rice, sprite). McDonalds around 1/2am (2 Big Macs (only ate one, gave the other away in the break room at work), large fries, Dr Pepper). (I work nights, thus the late night McDonalds...was the only thing open...f'n Taco Bell turned off their lights as I pulled in to the drive-thru)

I printed those excerpts from the Times (and the links) so you could see that it was not just "a couple of little details." It went from a complete denial and saying Amanda was not there, to witnessing an unknown stranger whom he could not identify, to claiming that maybe he could identify the stranger after all, to full out claiming Raffaele and Amanda were the ones who committed the murder. I doubt the defendants would call those "a couple little details."

We've already established that Rudy is a mostly unreliable witness. What exactly are we still debating here? Are you still attempting to prove that Rudy's statements were influenced by the Media/Police? We've already agreed that is a possibility. So what, exactly, are you trying to argue?

EDIT: To clarify, I understand why you're responding to Fulcanelli. However, what is the point of this discourse? This question goes to both Fulcanelli and Mary. Why are we still fighting over even this minor bit? Yes - Rudy pinned it on Amanda. Yes, that could have been influenced by the Media/Police. No, he is not a reliable witness. Even if we allow that his latest statements were due to suggestions from Media/Police sources, that does not mean Amanda's claims of suggestion are valid - there are various differences, most notably: time (1:45 vs 4 months).

Nobody?

Nobody who's honestly open-minded in regards to the evidence. Only those who want to believe what you've asserted deny what Amanda herself stated happened.

The Times reported the police found no DNA on Raffaele's flick knife. "Detectives had said that a flick knife that Mr Sollecito carried around with him was “compatible” with the weapon used to slash the British student’s throat, but that that knife had yielded no DNA"
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2878243.ece

The prosecution alleges the murder was committed with two different knives; others disagree.

Notably, the Forensics team disagrees. I would say that since they studied the body, not just pictures, their opinion is most relevant.

No. As a person with some life experience, however, I would guess that the criminal who would be likely to do that would be practiced and maybe into keeping elements of his crime as trophies. Two young people who have never committed a crime would be completely horrified with the outcome of their "sex game" and would work immediately to hide all evidence.

Speculation.

 

[RWVBWL]

Falling asleep on the toilet =/= forgetting to flush. Do you have any actual evidence that Rudy habitually forgot to flush?

Regardless, as I stated - that is my belief. However, we'll never know the truth unless all any one of the three stop lying and begins to tell what really happened that night. I'd like to add, as I have before, that my scenario in no way exculpates Rudy of guilt in this. He is as guilty as Amanda and Raffaele.


You are either being intentionally obtuse or lying. I have already posted plenty of evidence, from Raffaele's own prison diary, that Amanda was lying from the start - and that he was lying for her at her bequest. On top of that, apparently 1:45 in an interrogation room is enough to cause her to blurt out the first name that is presented to her and develop elaborate false memories that persist for weeks. If false memories are so easily implanted in her mind, then she is an incredibly unreliable witness.
So he was in contact with his lawyers from the start? And you're going to now claim that his false memories were implanted by himself?



When were the samples collected? The knife was collected early enough for Sollecito to have written about it early in his prison diary.

This argument of yours just doesn't fly. It requires a conspiracy of massive proportions, and there's just no reason to believe that's the most likely explanation for the evidence.

Hi Bobthe Donkey,
In reply to your post, I put forth a few words that I have read about a former Los Angeles Police Department officer named Raffaele Perez, whose work habits resulted in over 100 arrests or convictions being over turned due to police misconduct here in L.A. a few years back.

"Arrested and facing the prospect of a lengthy prison sentence, Perez cut a deal with prosecutors and, in the course of 35 interviews, began to unspool a story of widespread police misconduct ("believe me when I tell you, if there was 15 officers in CRASH, 13 of them were putting cases on people").

At his sentencing in February, 2000, Perez marketed his version of what went wrong. He offered apologies and accepted blame. But, he also blamed the "intoxicant" of police power. "The us-against-them ethos of the overzealous cop began to consume me. And the ends justified the means," he told the court. "We vaguely sensed we were doing the wrong things for the right reasons. Time and again, I stepped over that line. Once crossed, I hurdled over it again and again, landing with both feet sometimes on innocent persons. My job became an intoxicant that I lusted after."

The original link is here:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/lapd/scandal/eyeofstorm.html

More here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafael_Pérez_(police_officer)
__________________________________________________________________________

Anyways, the point of my rebuttal is that it only takes 1 or a few bad apples to spoil the whole bunch. If any part of the evidence were indeed "tainted", how would a judge or jury know? Or much less you and I, curious bystanders?
The story behind the convictions of Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox do not add up to me, and many others. Is their an over-zealous prosecutor in Perugia, as there was a short time ago in Durham, during the Duke Lacrosse case? I do not know, or have proof of any mis-conduct going on in Perugia, for how could I? But in my opinion, something seems strange in this particular case.
RWVBWL

 

[quadraginta]

This is true and very funny, quadraginta. I laughed aloud; I'm sure many people would agree with you, as Nancy Grace is often spoofed in popular culture..

I see very little difference, however, between the behaviors you describe and the behaviors of some of Amanda's zealous detractors, especially in this paragraph: "Her consumption of snacks and her toiletry orders from the jail commissary are the subject of extended ridicule. The balance on her commissary account is analyzed in painful detail, and colorful suppositions about the motives of anonymous donors to that account are fruitful comedy territory. Each court appearance is good for a second-by-second commentary of her hairstyle, weight, and couture, with occasional brief references to the proceedings themselves."

Who can forget the famous cold sore incident? And the insistence that Amanda's supporters in the blogs are paid?

What little coverage I have seen of the Casey Anthony case includes video of shrieking bigots holding signs of protest on the sidewalk in front of Casey Anthony's parents' home, sticking their noses into a case that does not concern them.

How is this significantly different from the guilters calling for justice for Meredith?

I do see a difference in the way the two cases have been treated in the press. In the United States, coverage of the Casey Anthony case is primarily relegated to the Nancy Grace Show and similar tabloid-style TV. One very rarely reads about it in the mainstream news.

In Italy, the story of Amanda Knox was covered in every publication known to the culture.

In that sense, one might say Amanda was busted in the Florida of Europe.

What cold sore?

I would not have even known about FOA if their self promotion hadn't brought this case to my interest in the first place, or about allegations of paid supporters if the debris from the Knox blog wars hadn't gotten scattered all over this thread.

The only way I can evaluate comparative coverage between the Anthony case here and the Knox case there is the way the Google searches come back, and I can tell you that it is much easier to find broad references to Casey Anthony over the total time span of the cases. Nancy Grace is egregious because of the style of her coverage as much as because of the amount of it, and her veiwership is not insignificant ... ~700,000 each night, with spikes of over 1,000,000. Mind you, that is only the Grace show we're talking about. There was more than a little national coverage in addition to her. Much more. And still is.

Coverage within Italy itself would be more accurately compared to coverage only within the state of Florida. It would be interesting to have a perspective from someone who was following local news in both places at the appropriate times, but I doubt that the Florida press would be relegated to much of a back seat in comparison.

Of course the point being addressed, as far as comparisons are concerned, is the difference in disclosure laws, and I stand by my assertion that Knox supporters should be very grateful Italy is not "the Florida of Europe" in that sense.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Hi Bobthe Donkey,
In reply to your post, I put forth a few words that I have read about a former Los Angeles Police Department officer named Raffaele Perez, whose work habits resulted in over 100 arrests or convictions being over turned due to police misconduct here in L.A. a few years back.

"Arrested and facing the prospect of a lengthy prison sentence, Perez cut a deal with prosecutors and, in the course of 35 interviews, began to unspool a story of widespread police misconduct ("believe me when I tell you, if there was 15 officers in CRASH, 13 of them were putting cases on people").

At his sentencing in February, 2000, Perez marketed his version of what went wrong. He offered apologies and accepted blame. But, he also blamed the "intoxicant" of police power. "The us-against-them ethos of the overzealous cop began to consume me. And the ends justified the means," he told the court. "We vaguely sensed we were doing the wrong things for the right reasons. Time and again, I stepped over that line. Once crossed, I hurdled over it again and again, landing with both feet sometimes on innocent persons. My job became an intoxicant that I lusted after."

The original link is here:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/lapd/scandal/eyeofstorm.html

More here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafael_Pérez_(police_officer)
__________________________________________________________________________

Anyways, the point of my rebuttal is that it only takes 1 or a few bad apples to spoil the whole bunch. If any part of the evidence were indeed "tainted", how would a judge or jury know? Or much less you and I, curious bystanders?
The story behind the convictions of Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox do not add up to me, and many others. Is their an over-zealous prosecutor in Perugia, as there was a short time ago in Durham, during the Duke Lacrosse case? I do not know, or have proof of any mis-conduct going on in Perugia, for how could I? But in my opinion, something seems strange in this particular case.
RWVBWL

What reason do you have to believe Rudy was more capable of murder than Amanda and Raffaele? Remember, we're not suggesting that Amanda set out to murder Meredith, just to scare her.

We can find a number of other Officers who lie, cheat, steal, plant evidence, etc. But for every one of those Officers, I can find you more that don't. That just do their job to the best of their ability in an honest and trustworthy manner.

What you have done is known is "poisoning the well" i.e. because this one Cop was bad, all Cops are bad.

So now, we can add this to the list:

1) DNA evidence is always invalid due to contamination
2) Italian men always think with their "intuition"
3) Statements made during Police interrogations cannot be trusted
4) All evidence is planted by bad cops.

 

[RWVBWL]

Exxxxcuuuuuse me!!!

What about walking away from a job placement in Germany... what about a hookup with a stranger on a train with younger sister in tow...

Hi 43degreesNorth,
Your post has me thinking...

"Hmmm, my relatives helped me get this job, but it SUCKS! I am sooo over it, but, hmmm, should I stay here because my realitives helped me get it, or should I just quit, because I can't stand it?"

Personally, I'm glad Amanda Knox quit a job she did not enjoy, or maybe had some problems with her fellow employee's while working there, or had harrassment going on. Would YOU want to keep working in a similiar scenerio? Of course not, unless you needed money bad or maybe had responsibilities like children, and a mortgage payment, which Amanda Knox did not. To me this story just sounds like a young gal learning to make her own decisions.

Amanda's sex life, for some reason, is still taked about. Why? Does her intimate encounters make her guilty of murder? Sex is an interesting topic. In my opinion, many people view sex in the context of their religion, and are intimate only after marrage.
Others, such as myself, experiment with their feeling of lust and so do indeed have "one night stands". Who cares? What's the big deal? Does it make a young girl "unclean" or "dirty"? I myself, and many others, have had 1 night stands, heck even more than once! It is simply a part of my life, as it would be with Amanda Knox, a small part of her life that might have helped her grow into the person she is inside.

If you are a religous person "43degreesNorth", well you might frown upon me, but in my opinion, keep in mind you might be casting judgement, which is frowned upon in the Bible, if you so read. Speaking of the Bible, reading from that many years ago helped me change many of my old ways and bad habits, and I learned to try to stop hating. Jesus was all about LOVE. Though I do not practice, I found the experience to be quite helpfull on my life's path. Maybe you too can have a read sometime...

As far as sex lives go in this murder case, I would much rather know about Rudy Guede's sex life than Amanda Knox's or Raffaele Sollecito's sex life, for it is Guede's DNA that is on and inside Miss Kercher's slain body that was found...
Did Guede even have a girlfriend or a recent ex-girlfriend?
How did he treat the girls he dated? Was he ever violent towards them or did he bring flowers, romance and luv into their lives?

To me, Guede's sex life is ALOT more important with regards to this case, as, once more, it was Guede's DNA found in and on Miss Kercher's dead body.
RWVBWL

 

[43degreesNorth]

Disappearing from a job without informing people is irresponsible and rude and immature. Hooking up when being responsible for a younger sister is also irresponsible. Just ask her parents what they think about this. Ask her uncle how he felt about her leaving the job without the courtesy to inform others.

 

[RWVBWL]

Disappearing from a job without informing people is irresponsible and rude and immature. Hooking up when being responsible for a younger sister is also irresponsible. Just ask her parents what they think about this. Ask her uncle how he felt about her leaving the job without the courtesy to inform others.

Hi 43degreesNorth,
How's the weather up North? It's sunny and bitchin' down here in Los Angeles right now.
Anyways, at my job, I have watched young adults walk of the job before, they just didn't want to do the work anymore. Not everyone give a **** about giving "2 weeks notice". In a way, it's always kinda amusing for me to see, since you can tell the person is fed up and thinks "take this job and shuvit!" as they split., hahaha...

As far as Amanda Knox's sex life goes, let us just disagree about it, OK? I know a little bit of how you feel about her lustfull luv life, so there is nothing more to say.

But on the flip side of the coin, can you tell me about Rudy Guede's sexual history?
I am only curious because it was poor ol' Rudy Guede's DNA that was found inside Miss Kercher's dead body...
Thanks, RWVBWL