Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[RWVBWL]

Why would Meredith Kercher want to borrow a lamp unless her own light was not working, and why was it on the floor?
_________________________________________________________________

Hi odeed,
Wow, I just asked a nice question, and you can't respond, instead asking your own question. Hmmm, ok...

Well, I will try to answer your question, but it will only be a guess.
Maybe she wanted to read while sitting on the floor, instead of on her bed. I've done that before. Maybe she wanted to give herself a pedicure, and used the lamp, like my sisters have done.

Who knows? Could it have been used after the murder, sure. Could it not have been used after the murder, but before, sure. Is katy_did's suggested theory a good one? I'd say yes.

Was the lamp tested for fingerprints and DNA? I would hope so, but the Perugia Police seemed to have not done some things that I would think that they would have done, so I don't know the answer to that one. Someone elsedoes, I bet.

Interestingly odeed, I do note that as I read different forums about this murder case, it seems most everyone looks for something sinister in every possible instance. Maybe some folks just watch too much TV, heck the daily news makes it seem like everyone is out to getcha. I don't even have a TV that I watch anymore, nor cable. And the crime shows, while interesting to view, always seemed to make me much more worried that something bad was going to happen. Free yourself from your TV, and most people seem pretty nice and sincere, in my opinion.
Have a good one,
RWVBWL

 

[odeed]

Why would Meredith Kercher want to borrow a lamp unless her own light was not working, and why was it on the floor?
_________________________________________________________________

Hi odeed,
Wow, I just asked a nice question, and you can't respond, instead asking your own question. Hmmm, ok...

Well, I will try to answer your question, but it will only be a guess.
Maybe she wanted to read while sitting on the floor, instead of on her bed. I've done that before. Maybe she wanted to give herself a pedicure, and used the lamp, like my sisters have done.

Who knows? Could it have been used after the murder, sure. Could it not have been used after the murder, but before, sure. Is katy_did's suggested theory a good one? I'd say yes.

Was the lamp tested for fingerprints and DNA? I would hope so, but the Perugia Police seemed to have not done some things that I would think that they would have done, so I don't know the answer to that one. Someone elsedoes, I bet.

Interestingly odeed, I do note that as I read different forums about this murder case, it seems most everyone looks for something sinister in every possible instance. Maybe some folks just watch too much TV, heck the daily news makes it seem like everyone is out to getcha. I don't even have a TV that I watch anymore, nor cable. And the crime shows, while interesting to view, always seemed to make me much more worried that something bad was going to happen. Free yourself from your TV, and most people seem pretty nice and sincere, in my opinion.
Have a good one,
RWVBWL

Just answering your question with a question.

And I am not the one advocating a conspiracy by the Italian authorities to convict innocent people, so who has been watching too much TV again?

 

[RWVBWL]

Just answering your question with a question.

And I am not the one advocating a conspiracy by the Italian authorities to convict innocent people, so who has been watching too much TV again?

Hello once again odeed,
Well, I guess you still do not wanna answer my first simple question, cool, I guess.

As far as conspiracies go, right now in Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A., there is a trial starting for former police Lt. Jon Burge, who is charged with lying about torturing suspects. In this day and age, police officers can and do lie, steal, plant evidence or torture. Even in big cities in America, with I'm sure, plenty of safeguards. Though most police officers do not lie, or steal, or plant evidence, or torture, I am sure that some do, but do not get caught. It's probably stemming from the "us against them" mentality, but I could be mistaken...

If you are curious about what I just wrote about a current happening in Chicago, just Google Chicago police torture.

Could something similiar have gone down in Perugia? Possibly. Do I have any evidence, no. But some things about this particular case, which we debate daily, do not add up to many of us.

Just a thought,
RWVBWL

 

[capealadin]

Hi, RWVBWL: QUOTE: But some things about this particular case, DO NOT ADD UP. END QUOTE. YESSSSSS!!! RW. Exactly right. Amanda's lies, changing stories,etc. That's partly why they're in prison.

 

[RWVBWL]

Hi, RWVBWL: QUOTE: But some things about this particular case, DO NOT ADD UP. END QUOTE. YESSSSSS!!! RW. Exactly right. Amanda's lies, changing stories,etc. That's partly why they're in prison.

Hi capealadin,
Actually, I said "But some things about this particular case, which we debate daily, do not add up to many of us.

And I am one of those many critical "thinkers" who come here on the James Randi Educational Foundation to discuss my skepticism about the guilty verdit in the trial of Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox...

Yourself, and others too, mostly agree with the guilty verdict, "y'que"...
It is however, for the most part an interesting discussion, .
Have a good one,
RWVBWL

 

[tsig]

Hi, Belz. I agree with Falconelli,s brief summation. To add insult to injury, long after Amanda has served her sentence, there will remain the fact that this is a person, with no empathy for the victim, has been callous to an extra-ordinary degree,i.e. *********** bled to death*, allowed an innocent man to be thrown in prison, has never offered condolences to the victim,s family. (how hard was that to do?) especially as she made it such a point to call Meredith a friend?) Just listening to her testimony, and written words, would for most people raise the biggest flag ever. Especially for police who are trained in getting the TRUTH.

Edited by LashL: 

Please see Rule 10 regarding masking profanity.

Exactly. Amanda started lying from the first moment when she lied about where she was, then when her alibi broke down immediately told another lie which landed and innocent man into jail.

Innocent people don't need to make up alibis or accuse others.

 

[capealadin]

I agree, RW. And I did know who you meant, but the devil made me say it. Yes, I find some of the debates in favour of Amanda's and Raff's innocence interesting. I suppose in some way, it's like looking at a glass with water, half full or half empty. At the end of the day, it's so sad to think how Meredith suffered, and how Amanda, Raffaele and Rudis' lives are ruined. Not to mention the families. And for what? Neither do I discount the pain that people who believe in their innocence feel. But next to the horror of what Meredith went through, and the sadness of her family and friends, I want the people who caused this to be punished. I believe the right people are in prison, obviously. The overwhelming feeling, though, is sadness.

 

[odeed]

Hello once again odeed,
Well, I guess you still do not wanna answer my first simple question, cool, I guess.

As far as conspiracies go, right now in Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A., there is a trial starting for former police Lt. Jon Burge, who is charged with lying about torturing suspects. In this day and age, police officers can and do lie, steal, plant evidence or torture. Even in big cities in America, with I'm sure, plenty of safeguards. Though most police officers do not lie, or steal, or plant evidence, or torture, I am sure that some do, but do not get caught. It's probably stemming from the "us against them" mentality, but I could be mistaken...

If you are curious about what I just wrote about a current happening in Chicago, just Google Chicago police torture.

Could something similiar have gone down in Perugia? Possibly. Do I have any evidence, no. But some things about this particular case, which we debate daily, do not add up to many of us.

Just a thought,
RWVBWL

To answer your question on the lamp stand, I see no reason for Meredith Kercher to want to borrow it.

I also partly answered in my second reply to you, but if the theory is Rudy broke in through window, and then attacked Meredith when she returned home, she would not have time to get the lamp stand.

Also, if Rudy did not know when anyone else would come home, as other posters have implied, why would he wait around after Kercher had got home so she could get the lamp, instead of making his escape immediately.

As for your second point, you have no evidence against the prosecution, so I guess that you are only asking questions then.

 

[tsig]

To answer your question on the lamp stand, I see no reason for Meredith Kercher to want to borrow it.

I also partly answered in my second reply to you, but if the theory is Rudy broke in through window, and then attacked Meredith when she returned home, she would not have time to get the lamp stand.

Also, if Rudy did not know when anyone else would come home, as other posters have implied, why would he wait around after Kercher had got home so she could get the lamp, instead of making his escape immediately.

As for your second point, you have no evidence against the prosecution, so I guess that you are only asking questions then.

The full phrase is "Just Asking Questions and Ignoring Answers"

 

[RWVBWL]

only asking questions[/B] then.

_________________________________________________________________

Hi odeed,
Re your last sentence: It is true, I am indeed asking questions! And some of the answers just don't jive, in my opinion, on both sides.

And you know what odeed, some people do feel that there has been an injustice done in Perugia, Italy! So asking questions and questioning authority is a good thing, in my opinion. But we may differ in our way of thinking, you know?

Fortunatley, some other people were asking questions about former LAPD officer Raffaele Perez, and now former Chicago police Lt. Jon Burge. Read more about these 2 former police officers if you wanna know what I speak of.
RWVBWL

 

[Chris_Halkides]

DNA transfer during strangulation

I didn't see Amanda, Italy in your post. Why do you continue to post off topic cases.

tsig,

The abstract I posted in message #14066 indicated that primary and secondary/tertiary DNA transfer is observed in a study of simulated strangulation.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5965322&postcount=14066

Meredith's hyoid bone was broken, which Professor Torre took as evidence of strangulation. If Raffaele or Amanda throttled Meredith, their DNA would have been transferred. This study is neither a case, nor is it off-topic.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...eredith-Kerchers-neck-blade-police-found.html

halides1

 

[Mr.D]

This seems to me to be another example of the conspiracy theorist symptom of ascribing the villains total idiocy one second and then supernatural competence at covering up their tracks the next.

Kevin,

It's a long thread, but you really ought to read more of it. There is plenty of "CT thinking" and fallacious argumentation to go around on both "sides." (It's part of why I keep reading the thread) It's a shame really because there's quite a few minor points worthy of being discussed that aren't because of the endless bickering.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Kevin,

It's a long thread, but you really ought to read more of it. There is plenty of "CT thinking" and fallacious argumentation to go around on both "sides." (It's part of why I keep reading the thread) It's a shame really because there's quite a few minor points worthy of being discussed that aren't because of the endless bickering.

It's true, and possibly Stilicho, Bob and Fulcanelli, Amazer, Capealadin and Tsig are doing a disservice to the Amanda-is-guilty case, but it does seem to me that their whole story feels like a pathological conspiracy theory.

The prosecution narrative about a rape plot turned into murder is unlikely, to say the least, yet every single little thing about the scenario (the lamp, the bathmat, the mobile phones, the door, everything) gets creatively turned into evidence that Amanda did it by the supporters of her guilt. Whereas absolutely nothing, as far as I can see, counts to them as evidence for her innocence.

My take on the Amanda-is-innocent case is that lots of little things can be construed as suspicious, but that doesn't make any difference to the central problems with the prosecution case, which are the lack of any proper evidence that Knox and Solecito were in the murder room, the lack of any evidence of motive, and the prosecution's pattern of forcing confessions and misinterpreting evidence to support their conspiracy theory narrative.

It simply doesn't matter how suspicious Amanda and Raffaele look if they couldn't have done it. It doesn't matter if they collected chainsaws and torture porn, worshipped Satan and told the police that the Easter Bunny did it, if they weren't in the murder room they weren't in the murder room.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Kevin,

It's a long thread, but you really ought to read more of it. There is plenty of "CT thinking" and fallacious argumentation to go around on both "sides." (It's part of why I keep reading the thread) It's a shame really because there's quite a few minor points worthy of being discussed that aren't because of the endless bickering.

Here's a minor insignificant point I’ve wondered about for years now that as far I know, has never been discussed. It’s almost meaningless though, but here it is anyway:

You know the lady that gave testimony about her friend being knocked down by ‘a man of color’. I’ve always wonder why she was the one who testified only, and I’ve never even heard of her friends name. I’ve read the whole story of what they did that evening, but I’ve always wondered why her friend isn’t mentioned or called to testify.
Well, after a year or two, I think I finally figured out the answer, anyone know?

 

[BobTheDonkey]

It simply doesn't matter how suspicious Amanda and Raffaele look if they couldn't have done it. It doesn't matter if they collected chainsaws and torture porn, worshipped Satan and told the police that the Easter Bunny did it, if they weren't in the murder room they weren't in the murder room.

So then where were they on the night of the murder?

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Here's my hangup on the footprint issue:

If we accept Amanda's story as she presented it - she went home, took a shower, became concerned, fetched Raffaele, etc... - at what point in time, while looking at a supposed break-in, did Raffaele feel it was appropriate to take off his shoes (how else did he leave the footprint in the hallway?)?

 

[Mary_H]

Interestingly, after a few months of this, Rudy Guede's lawyers lost patience and selected one Anglo Newspaper to make an example of...filing suit in Italy for slander against the Seattle Times for it's labelling of Rudy as a petty criminal and small time drug dealer. Amusingly, it seemed that the Anglo media took note and within a few days they were no longer referring to Rudy with the old label but were now describing him as 'part time gardener', here are a couple of examples:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...uede-fears-being-framed-by-former-lovers.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/07/4

Of course, it only took a couple of papers not to have got the message and apply the old label and then everyone else started to copy them and then once Rudy was convicted for murder nobody cared any longer anyway and so to this day, the small time drug dealer/petty criminal label is applied as a standard, even though it has no basis in fact whatsoever and all arose from a rumour circulated in the early days of the case.

A little case history lesson for you

Fulcanelli, can you provide a citation for your claim that Guede's lawyers filed suit against the Seattle TImes?

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

So then where were they on the night of the murder?

It doesn't matter where they were, if they weren't in the murder room with Meredith. I don't care if they were on the roof dancing a jig or up a gum tree.

That said, my current understanding is that all of the evidence the prosecution claimed put them in the house at the time fell to pieces under examination. Thus the claim that they were at Sollecito's house fits the available facts perfectly well as far as I am aware.

Here's my hangup on the footprint issue:

If we accept Amanda's story as she presented it - she went home, took a shower, became concerned, fetched Raffaele, etc... - at what point in time, while looking at a supposed break-in, did Raffaele feel it was appropriate to take off his shoes (how else did he leave the footprint in the hallway?)?

Unless I've lost the thread, we established that it's far from certain that he did so. The prosecution claimed that they had positively identified a bloody footprint as his, and they got away with it until it was proved that it couldn't possibly be Raffaele's because the second toe touched the ground in the print. They also claimed they had positively identified some luminol footprints as his which was also bogus because there simply isn't enough resolution with luminol to make that kind of identification. The simplest explanation is that all those footprints were Rudy's, and there seems to be no sound basis for claiming that any of the footprints can be known to be Raffaele's.

 

[Amazer]

It's true, and possibly Stilicho, Bob and Fulcanelli, Amazer, Capealadin and Tsig are doing a disservice to the Amanda-is-guilty case, but it does seem to me that their whole story feels like a pathological conspiracy theory.

Well I only started posting in this thread at the time the judgement came in (just after i think) and then only because of some fancy theories concerning the staged break in. Since Amanda had already been found guilty by the Court, i work under the assumption that the verdict is correct until I'm provided with evidence to the contrary. That evidence has not (yet) been provided.

The prosecution narrative about a rape plot turned into murder is unlikely, to say the least, yet every single little thing about the scenario (the lamp, the bathmat, the mobile phones, the door, everything) gets creatively turned into evidence that Amanda did it by the supporters of her guilt. Whereas absolutely nothing, as far as I can see, counts to them as evidence for her innocence.

I think you misunderstand my position here. It's not that everything about the scenario is evidence that Amanda did it. It's just that there's nothing in those scenario's that would allow me conclusively decide that Amanda is not involved.

My take on the Amanda-is-innocent case is that lots of little things can be construed as suspicious, but that doesn't make any difference to the central problems with the prosecution case, which are the lack of any proper evidence that Knox and Solecito were in the murder room, the lack of any evidence of motive, and the prosecution's pattern of forcing confessions and misinterpreting evidence to support their conspiracy theory narrative.

I agree that if you take out the bra clasp and the knife from Raffaele's apartment that there doesn't seem to be much to tie them to the scene. But those two pieces are a fact and until some evidence is provided that they should be discounted they will remain to be part of the evidence against Amanda and Raffaele.
You also keep claiming these confessions were forced, i still haven't seen any evidence that it was. The factors that were mentioned to play a role in false confession are also factors with 'normal'confession given in the course of 'regular' interrogations. So based solely on that I doubt you can conclusively state that the confessions were forced.

It simply doesn't matter how suspicious Amanda and Raffaele look if they couldn't have done it. It doesn't matter if they collected chainsaws and torture porn, worshipped Satan and told the police that the Easter Bunny did it, if they weren't in the murder room they weren't in the murder room.

I'd say that even if they weren't in the room but if they were present in the cottage that they are part and parcel of the murder. And it's quite simple, Amanda and Raffaele clearly didn't spent the evening/night in Raffaele's apartment. The accounts they gave individually of the events that would have transpired that night are just too divergent for that. So it's on Raffaele and Amanda to provide evidence what they really did that evening.

 

[odeed]

It doesn't matter where they were, if they weren't in the murder room with Meredith. I don't care if they were on the roof dancing a jig or up a gum tree.

....

Sollecito's DNA was found on the bra clasp, which was found in the murder room, and Knox DNA was found mixed with Meredith's blood in the apartments, including in Filomena's room which puts her there at the time of the murder IMO.

Also what "pattern of forcing confessions" did the prosecution undertake, there was only one confession from what I know, and it was accusing an innocent man of murder?