• 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.
Mary_H said:
I also don't see any evidence that the family tried to out-strategize or usurp the powers of the attorneys in any way -- why would they, with reputable lawyers in a foreign country?
Click to expand...

Well, if you don't think they did then, what about now with Ted Simon onboard?
 
RWVBWL said:
Hi all,
I just had an interesting read over on TJ4MK. If you have the time, have a look:

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php

Now, I am what you might call an "innocentisti", so I try to look for clues into the identity of the person that might have stabbed Miss Kercher to her death, since I believe that it was not Raffaele Sollecito or Amanda Knox.
I read with interest an conversation that Rudy Guede had with Giacomo on Nov. 19, 2007 where-in he stated that when he left, Miss Kercher had her clothes on. There seems to be a problem with this though, for I believe that she was found differently. So who undressed her?
Hopefully the up-coming appeal trial will shed some more light on who might have undressed Miss Kercher, as Mr. Guede states, after her death and possibly left a stain, maybe semen, on a pillowcase, as shown here in this link:

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2009/10/defensive-strategy-for-knox-and.html

Since Mr. Guede has always maintained that he did not stab Miss Kercher, and he also says she was clothed when he left, the testing of this stain should show it not to belong to Mr. Guede. Potentially very good news for him, in my opinion.
And maybe a clue to the identity of the person that he has said did stab Miss Kercher to her death.
Hence potentially good news for Mr. Sollecito and Miss Knox also.
I hope the defense lawyers are there for that DNA testing. I bet though, the lab will be able to test it again and again, for it looks to be a good size sample...
Hmmm...
RWVBWL
Click to expand...

Wasn't Raffaele's DNA found on the bra clasp? Perhaps Raffaele is who undressed Meredith - you know, to stage the rape post-mortem... Kinda, sorta, like the Prosecution suggested and the Court agreed the evidence points to...
 
RoseMontague said:
here is the quote regarding the sweatshirt and the supreme court:



http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2008/04/amanda-q-and-with-supreme-court.html

That was the courts decision on April 1st. Six months later and this was still not found. The court obviously considered this important, yet Amanda had still not revealed the sweatshirt was in the washing machine? It does not make sense to me.
Click to expand...

It was lying on top of her bed, right where she told them she had left it.

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2008/03/we-were-joking.html
 
Re: Darkness Descending.

I noticed this book came up on the discusion. I have read it carefully and taken extensive notes. It describes dialog and events that are wholly imaginary. For example:

Pp. 45-46:

"Amanda breezed through her story again. 'I stayed the night in Raffaele's flat.' She let the image hang there for a second, so the middle-aged officer could salivate, if he chose, over what the euphemism 'stay the night' really meant when it involved a beautiful young student in full flower. The officer looked at Raffaele, the blank expression thinly veiling his smugness.

"Coyly, Amanda continued: 'And then I came back home to have a shower.' She let the image hang there, giving the officer a glimpse into a world he could only fantasize about. Now that all eyes were on her, Amanda switched the tone: 'When I got home I asked Raffaele to come along to take a look around.' Her delivery bright and bubbly now. 'I called my flatmate, Filomena. Raff called the Carabinieri.' Her American optimism unwavering. And, yes, Meredith usually did keep the door locked.' Supremely confident that her story would be believed."

Nobody has ever testified that Amanda's interaction with the police was anything like this. This is the kind of writing that makes people think Amanda's critics have an interest in her sexuality that is both obsessive and weird.

The authors did not trouble themselves to research Amanda's background or upbringing. Instead they made it up from scratch:

P. 60:

"Edda made sure that Amanda attended Mass and Bible classes, while she networked with prominent local Catholics."

In fact, Edda is not a Catholic, nor is anyone else in Amanda's family.

The authors also present incidents described by Rudy Guede as fact, embellishing on them liberally without mentioning that he is the only source.

Pp. 152-153:

"One evening after work Amanda went to the downstairs flat to see the boys and cadge a joint...

"The Italian lads excitedly introduced their shadowy new guest as The Baron. A white slash of teeth smiled back mischievously, forcefully streaming out a grey swirl of pot fumes. He revelled in the shady connotations of his nickname. He liked the strong identity, which made him stand out from the students. He squinted as the clouds drifted upwards over his red eye. Amanda sensed the danger. The basketball courts were the dark side of town, the centre of the local drugs trade. She was turned on. She felt a connection with The Baron."

"After all, wasn't she also a streetwise kid from an American city? They stole glances while the others weren't looking. Amanda threw him an 'I know you fancy me' smile, a glint of yearning in her stoned, passive eyes. The Baron thought he was on. The lads giggled - just minutes before Amanda had arrived they'd been fantasizing about having group sex with her, trying to convince The Baron that this girl was up for it.

Nobody except Guede has ever testified that Amanda mentioned him or showed the slightest interest in him.

These are just a few of the lies and errors of fact that litter the pages of this book.
 
Charlie Wilkes said:
"Edda made sure that Amanda attended Mass and Bible classes, while she networked with prominent local Catholics."
Click to expand...

LOL; that's pretty funny. Yeah, you know those prominent local Catholics and their Bible classes... :D

"After all, wasn't she also a streetwise kid from an American city?"
Click to expand...

That's another good one. The mean streets of west Seattle.... :D
 
BobTheDonkey said:
Tell you what, why don't you count the posts that are pointless bickering and/or name-calling and see just how much of this thread consists of such posts.
Click to expand...

Good grief, no thanks! What would be the point of that? Are you denying that much of this thread's 300 pages has been pointless bickering? If you want to go ahead and count the posts then be my guest, but I'm not going to do it. I consider that my point has already been proven by your reply (and by this reply to your reply!).

I'd be willing to bet you're wrong and that there are far more posts discussing the relevant information.
Click to expand...

That wouldn't make me wrong, though, would it? Much of the thread being pointless bickering does not preclude the possibility that more of it is relevant discussion. :rolleyes:
 
Mary_H said:
We need to keep in mind, too, that the most harmful passages -- the passages about Amanda's boyfriends -- would not even have been in the diary if she weren't responding to the HIV tests the police conducted. Is it possible her lawyers were trying to expose the police for, first, having conducted the tests, and next, for having reported false positives to Amanda, thus torturing her psychologically? Could her lawyers actually have thought this might reveal more about the police than about Amanda?

Doubtful, but you never know. I can't imagine any lawyers in any country wanting the list of boyfriends to become public knowledge for any reason.
Click to expand...

Oh, you're too funny. Since when did the police ever conduct an HIV test on Amanda? Mamma mia.
 
Mary_H said:
What makes you think this is an angle they're pushing? Amanda's parents aren't the only ones who are impressed with her. Journalists came to Seattle to dig up her friends after the crime and could find only one person they were able to trick into speculating she might have had any involvement. Her teachers and employers also appear to have very high opinions of her. From what I've seen, it doesn't looked like anyone was strong-armed into saying good things about Amanda.

I also don't see any evidence that the family tried to out-strategize or usurp the powers of the attorneys in any way -- why would they, with reputable lawyers in a foreign country?
Click to expand...

This is where you're entirely wrong. The people selected to speak on AK's behalf are vetted by the family and the heavily vested PR campaign. These are not random folks you see on your TV set. Of those selected from her private school, only those who say what the family wants them to say are provided support. Frank Sfarzo was the kids' babysitter when they were in Perugia.

Around JAN or FEB of 2009, it even appeared that Ghirga was sufficiently exasperated with the family to quit. Note that they have essentially played an end around with their original legal team by hiring the likes of Ted Simon. This is the evidence you need to correct your mistakes.
 
LondonJohn said:
I agree with you totally that it's unlikely that *even* AK and her family were stupid/arrogant enough to override advice from their local lawyer, who demonstrably would know more about Italian law (and, indeed, criminal law in general) than they did. Which, as you say, only leaves the option that the lawyer either advised or acquiesced in the matter of statements, diaries, letters and prison conversations after November 7th.
Click to expand...

Oh, but they were. It was common knowledge around the trial circuit that the family arrogant and constantly shrugged off the advice of their lawyers (and others who offered wisdom). Barbie Nadeau wrote of this. And there are some very good primary examples. Take for example the unfortunate and distasteful posing of the children outside the House of Horrors. Frank Sfarzo of Perugia Shock were with them at that day and on the photographer's request to pose them outside the cottage Frank advised them of how unwise that would be, but they didn't listen. He even pleaded with the photographer. The result? Rightfully, it was a PR disaster.

Let's take the matter of Amanda supposedly being hit during questioning. Her lawyers went to great pains to to state to the press that they never said she was hit. Then what happened? Chris Mellas flies over to Perugia declaring he's going to tell Amanda to stand up in court and say whatever she thinks. This she does, saying she was hit (but unable to identify the officer that supposedly hit her) while Chris Mellas sits watching approvingly from the gallery. Thanks to that, Amanda is now starting trial in 1st June charged with slander, facing potentially, a further 6 years on top of her sentence. Amanda's own lawyers have come out and declared the FOA's activities back home are damaging Amanda's case and appealed for it to stop, for all the good it did:

“Those American personalities are not helping Amanda”

Lawyer Ghirga: “I have spoken with Prosecutor Mignini”

by Enzo Beretta - Perugia

“There are people around the figure of Amanda who have no formal role in the student’s defence team, which is formed by myself together with my colleague Carlo Dalla Vedova.

These people are not only not helping our client in the difficult judicial process in the Corte d’Assise in which we have to defend her, but on the contrary, they are harming her judicial position.”

Luciano Ghirga, lawyer for the American accused by the prosecutor of sexually assaulting and killing Meredith Kercher with her former boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Hermann Guede, once again distances himself from the Stars-and-Stripes “know-it-alls” who repeatedly have tried to throw mud on the work of investigators and have even personally attacked Giuliano Mignini, head of the murder investigation.

There is strong evidence which supports the prosecution, unlike the “macaroni” pleading endlessly and one after the other on American television broadcasts, who pay lawyers, show-men and private investigators not much inclined to read the documentation.

That documentation was studied a lot by the Review and Court of Appeal judges, who confirmed preventive prison for the suspects, and the GUP Paolo Micheli, who has sentenced Rudy to thirty years in prison (with the abbreviated trial) and sent the ex-boyfriend and girlfriend to trial. This is a validation of the good work done by the investigators.

Lawyer Ghirga has not acted on a video in which the correctness of the findings of the forensic investigators is called into question, thereby attacking the protagonists of the case. But he will play his cards at the appropriate time in the trial, which resumes Friday.

“On a personal level I expressed my impressions to Dr. Mignini,” Ghirga said.

The lobbying work by Amanda’s side fits into a framework of traditional adversity by Americans when their fellow citizens are left in the hands of another country’s justice.
Click to expand...

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=3599#p3599
 
Charlie Wilkes said:
Re: Darkness Descending.

Pp. 45-46:

"Amanda breezed through her story again. 'I stayed the night in Raffaele's flat.' She let the image hang there for a second, so the middle-aged officer could salivate, if he chose, over what the euphemism 'stay the night' really meant when it involved a beautiful young student in full flower. The officer looked at Raffaele, the blank expression thinly veiling his smugness.
Click to expand...

I agree. Sounds like garbage to me.

Thank goodness there was a real trial and true evidence that convicted the murderers instead of this sort of salacious treacle.

I'll read the primary sources where available but, frankly, I wouldn't consider any of the books written on the case to be worth my money or my time.
 
Fulcanelli said:
“There are people around the figure of Amanda who have no formal role in the student’s defence team, which is formed by myself together with my colleague Carlo Dalla Vedova.

These people are not only not helping our client in the difficult judicial process in the Corte d’Assise in which we have to defend her, but on the contrary, they are harming her judicial position.”
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. I'd read that before but couldn't find it when I was searching for it in answering Mary.

The issue is that AK's genuinely disinterested supporters (like Mary H, halides1, Kestrel, Dan O, Matthew Best, LondonJohn) actually have no idea what sort of obstructionist tactics have been typically employed by Amanda's relatives. Charlie and Bruce probably do know as they are much closer to those who are performing the obstruction.

Many of those who are frightened of the PMF ought to spend more hours there reading up on the case and how it came to be something other than a garden-variety murder case involving three drifters and one victim.
 
stilicho said:
This is where you're entirely wrong. The people selected to speak on AK's behalf are vetted by the family and the heavily vested PR campaign. These are not random folks you see on your TV set. Of those selected from her private school, only those who say what the family wants them to say are provided support. Frank Sfarzo was the kids' babysitter when they were in Perugia.

Around JAN or FEB of 2009, it even appeared that Ghirga was sufficiently exasperated with the family to quit. Note that they have essentially played an end around with their original legal team by hiring the likes of Ted Simon. This is the evidence you need to correct your mistakes.
Click to expand...

And you have evidence for these claims, I presume? Tell, me, how did the family vet the people who were interviewed in Seattle the week after the crime when they didn't know who they would be?

January and February of 2009 were more than a year after the arrests. Meanwhile, a massive media blitz had already poisoned many people's minds. If you were in their place, you wouldn't give your support to anyone who wanted to trash your daughter, either.

If Amanda's Italian lawyers are ticked off about Ted Simon, then why don't they quit now?
 
Mary_H said:
So what is the true story, Fulcanelli?
Click to expand...

The true story is that, like all prisoners in Italian prisons, Amanda was given an HIV test by the prison doctor. The doctor and prison service is completely separate and independent from the Italian police and prosecution office.
 
Fulcanelli said:
Oh, but they were. It was common knowledge around the trial circuit that the family arrogant and constantly shrugged off the advice of their lawyers (and others who offered wisdom). Barbie Nadeau wrote of this. And there are some very good primary examples. Take for example the unfortunate and distasteful posing of the children outside the House of Horrors. Frank Sfarzo of Perugia Shock were with them at that day and on the photographer's request to pose them outside the cottage Frank advised them of how unwise that would be, but they didn't listen. He even pleaded with the photographer. The result? Rightfully, it was a PR disaster.

Let's take the matter of Amanda supposedly being hit during questioning. Her lawyers went to great pains to to state to the press that they never said she was hit. Then what happened? Chris Mellas flies over to Perugia declaring he's going to tell Amanda to stand up in court and say whatever she thinks. This she does, saying she was hit (but unable to identify the officer that supposedly hit her) while Chris Mellas sits watching approvingly from the gallery. Thanks to that, Amanda is now starting trial in 1st June charged with slander, facing potentially, a further 6 years on top of her sentence. Amanda's own lawyers have come out and declared the FOA's activities back home are damaging Amanda's case and appealed for it to stop, for all the good it did:
Click to expand...

This is not so much an opportunity to judge and disapprove of one side or the other as it is to observe a genuine clash of cultures. Apparently it is just as difficult for Chris Mellas to overcome the sense that he has the right to speak freely as it is for the Italian lawyers to overcome the sense that they do not.

And just because Barbie Nadeau said the photos were a PR disaster doesn't make it so.
 
Fulcanelli said:
The true story is that, like all prisoners in Italian prisons, Amanda was given an HIV test by the prison doctor. The doctor and prison service is completely separate and independent from the Italian police and prosecution office.
Click to expand...

Oh, I see, you're splitting hairs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom