Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Solange305]

Well, you're right about it not making sense, but that is what we are up against with Giuliano Mignini. He is suing Amanda because she said she was hit. There is no way to know if the claims are untrue, because there is no recording of the interrogation.

The point of the lawsuit is to let people know they are not allowed to say the police hit them. If they are suing Amanda for that purpose, then it is likely they would sue anyone else who said the same thing.

I assume they are expecting to win the lawsuit against Amanda. Pretty unbelievable, huh?

Not to me. She couldn't even point out who hit her, and that is even more strange considering she testified that she turned around and looked at who hit her.

And I'm not saying I'm leaving, just that you don't seem to follow the same train of thought that I do in regards to this issue about the interpreter.

 

[Solange305]

Oh really?

SB: (shortly after the photos were posted) "I for one am grateful that she took advantage of an opportunity that presented itself and that she shared the findings with us."

SB (a little later): "Nell is actually mistaken to claim that the posting of these photos did not cause any discussion between the moderators about the legality, the FOA reaction, etc. Just for the record, Michael was concerned about what the FOA would think."

Like others have said, this was an unfortunate incident, which is not worth dwelling on, but I thought it was worth correcting an inaccuracy in your post. That's all, and it's increasingly off-topic so I won't post about it again.

Sorry, I missed that comment. I only remembered those that the original posters made. My mistake

 

[Chris C]

I agree that the semen stain on the bed sheet should have been tested. Even if the test can not determine when it was deposited, knowing who did so would be informative. However, I don’t see why the Raffaele’s defense attorneys would want it tested. If the stain is in fact semen there are three primary candidates: Meredith’s Italian boyfriend from downstairs, Rudy, or Raffaele. If the stain belongs to the Italian boy it’s meaningless because he was out of town the night of the murder. If it’s Rudy’s it doesn’t add much to the case because (i) we know he was in Meredith’s room (ii) we know that he assaulted Meredith; (iii) he has been convicted of taking part in her murder. If the stain belongs to Raffaele, then that posses a big problem for the defense.

1. I'm not aware of them taking a control sample from the boyfriend. Of course I dont think they took any control samples. If its the boyfriends, both Rudy and the Knox/Sollecito can claim the boyfriend did it. Thus forcing the police to investigate his alibi like they did Knox/Sollecito's. Its a smoking gun the police can't refuse to investigate since people are convicted of sexual assault.

2. If its Rudy's then it goes against the testimony Rudy presented at his appeal that was used against Knox/Sollecito at their trial. Testimony they where not allowed to cross examine by asking Rudy questions. It also goes against how the Prosecution claims this Murder happened. There by driving a major fissure in the already flawed conviction.

3. Why would the prosecution not want it tested. If its Sollecito's they have major evidence of 2 people raping Meredith that night. Knox/Sollecito end up getting life instead of 25 years for the rape and murder. If Sollecito didn't rape her, would he not want that semen tested.

4. The thing no one wants to discuss. If they test it and its not Rudy, Sollecito or Meredith's boyfriend. Then it sets Rudy free also. It gives his original story that a man other than himself killed Meredith and he fled the scene. Of course it gives that baby killers story alot of strength, that Rudy confessed to him another man sat over Meredith's body and ejaculated.

 

[Chris C]

Ok. What do you mean by outnumbered? Do you mean that if the interpreter had backed up Amanda's claim, the courts would have believed the police because more cops said it didnt happen as opposed to two separate people saying it did? That doesn't make sense to me.

Also, if the interpreter says, yes, this girl is telling the truth, she was hit. Are you claiming that they would charge her for lying too? So the whole system is set up to protect the police, and let them run rampant? You find that to be more believable than maybe Amanda made that up? I don't buy that explanation, I'm sorry. It sounds like you are reaching in that regard, considering that they made a valid point when pointing out that a third party was there, the interpreter.

Also, one thing, probably not that important, but I felt I should mention it:



LondonJohn, if Im not mistaken, one or two people who post at PMF mentioned "what would people at another site" think?. It was not the people who ran the site. They stated afterward that they were concerned with the pictures in general, not with what anyone else thinks. I think the whole situation was overblown, but I wanted to point that out. I think the people in charge of the site did the right thing, and for the right reasons...

Actually if the interpretor doesn't stop and report the incedent as soon as it happened she is just as guilty the police. However, Knox didn't say they beat her senseless. She just said she received a slap to the back of the head when she didn't remember something correctly. This is something I've witnessed parents do to their kids. Its something you would receive in a Catholic school when we were younger, that or a ruler to the hands. Not something that is physical abuse. Just something to catch their attention.

 

[Mary_H]

Not to me. She couldn't even point out who hit her, and that is even more strange considering she testified that she turned around and looked at who hit her.

And I'm not saying I'm leaving, just that you don't seem to follow the same train of thought that I do in regards to this issue about the interpreter.

Really? I thought we were communicating pretty well, even if we disagree with one another. It's true, Fulcanelli got us a little off track; that's his way. You really have to put a lot of effort into staying focused when he's around.

 

[Solange305]

Actually if the interpretor doesn't stop and report the incedent as soon as it happened she is just as guilty the police.

She is just as guilty according to whom? I can see it being frowned upon, but would she really be considered just as guilty?

 

[Chris C]

She is just as guilty according to whom? I can see it being frowned upon, but would she really be considered just as guilty?

Did they not arrest Knox for saying she was in the other room when Patrick killed her. They arrested Sollecito and he wasn't even in the apartment according to that statement. So therefore since the Interpreter was with the police when a slap occured, the interpreter was even suggesting questions to ask knox, so the interpreter is just as guilty for not stopping the interview to insure Knox's rights are not violated.

 

[Solange305]

Really? I thought we were communicating pretty well, even if we disagree with one another. It's true, Fulcanelli got us a little off track; that's his way. You really have to put a lot of effort into staying focused when he's around.

It's just that what one person find to be believable or unreasonable can be subjective, what I found to be unbelievable you find to be believable, and vice versa. That is mainly what I meant.

For whatever it's worth, Fulcanelli seems to know al ot more about this case then I do, even if you guys don't agree with him. I have known about it since almost the beginning, like most people, but haven't really read up on it much up until a couple weeks ago.

 

[Tricky]

Twice today we've moved groups of posts to AAH. We do not wish to return this thread to moderated status, so stop with the sniping, bickering and personalization.

Thank you

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky

 

[Solange305]

Did they not arrest Knox for saying she was in the other room when Patrick killed her. They arrested Sollecito and he wasn't even in the apartment according to that statement. So therefore since the Interpreter was with the police when a slap occured, the interpreter was even suggesting questions to ask knox, so the interpreter is just as guilty for not stopping the interview to insure Knox's rights are not violated.

Maybe, but I don't agree with your analogy. First of all, a murder is obviously a lot more serious then a slap on the back of the head. Secondly, I'm sure the arrest could also have to do with the fact that she changed her story to the Patrick one after saying she was somewhere else, making it look to the police as if she was hiding something. Not to mention the thought that someone would sit by and cover their ears while their supposed "friend" is raped or murdered is pretty unbelievable.

So I have to respectfully disagree, I don't think anyone would have found the interpreter as guilty as the police for speaking up afterward instead of on the spot. I still think that the fact that she corroborates the police's account that Amanda wasn't hit is still a valid point, although I agree that it's possible that she may not want to get on the bad side of the police department she works for (or with). I won't argue that that is entirely impossible.

 

[Mary_H]

It's just that what one person find to be believable or unreasonable can be subjective, what I found to be unbelievable you find to be believable, and vice versa. That is mainly what I meant.

Very true.

For whatever it's worth, Fulcanelli seems to know al ot more about this case then I do, even if you guys don't agree with him. I have known about it since almost the beginning, like most people, but haven't really read up on it much up until a couple weeks ago.

Fulcanelli does know a lot about the case.

You'll catch up fast here, I think.

 

[Mary_H]

Maybe, but I don't agree with your analogy. First of all, a murder is obviously a lot more serious then a slap on the back of the head. Secondly, I'm sure the arrest could also have to do with the fact that she changed her story to the Patrick one after saying she was somewhere else, making it look to the police as if she was hiding something. Not to mention the thought that someone would sit by and cover their ears while their supposed "friend" is raped or murdered is pretty unbelievable.

It's funny you should mention that. That was exactly the first thing I found unbelievable enough to make me look into the case more thoroughly.

 

[Solange305]

The whole thing is bizarre, I agree. Two men and a woman involved in a sexual crime like that is practically unheard of.

The thing that keeps me as part of the "guilters" though is the fact that there are many murders that happen for no rhyme or reason, that you have to ask yourself why would they do that? What would they gain from that? But anyway, I agree with the fact that the whole crime and motive is strange

 

[Chris C]

Maybe, but I don't agree with your analogy. First of all, a murder is obviously a lot more serious then a slap on the back of the head. Secondly, I'm sure the arrest could also have to do with the fact that she changed her story to the Patrick one after saying she was somewhere else, making it look to the police as if she was hiding something. Not to mention the thought that someone would sit by and cover their ears while their supposed "friend" is raped or murdered is pretty unbelievable.

So I have to respectfully disagree, I don't think anyone would have found the interpreter as guilty as the police for speaking up afterward instead of on the spot. I still think that the fact that she corroborates the police's account that Amanda wasn't hit is still a valid point, although I agree that it's possible that she may not want to get on the bad side of the police department she works for (or with). I won't argue that that is entirely impossible.

Yet if the interrogator didn't stop the interview after the slap and report it. Would not that interrogator also be responsible for allowing a false statement be used to arrest 3 people. Which makes her just as guilty as the interrogators for allowing this.

 

[RWVBWL]

Okay Kevin...this is from an expert:
"Originally Posted by Fulcanelli quoting Derrick Pounder
Gastric contents

If the last known meal is still present in the stomach of a
corpse and the time of that meal is known, then it can give
some general indication of the interval between the meal and
death. In general if all or almost all of the last meal is present
within the stomach then, in the absence of any unusual factors,
there is a reasonable medical certainty that death occurred
within 3 to 4 hours of eating. Similarly if half of the meal is
present then it is reasonably certain that death occurred not
less than one hour and not more than 10 hours after eating.
However, these are broad generalisations and difficulties arise
in individual cases because the biology of gastric emptying is
complex and influenced by a wide variety of factors including
the size and type of meal, drugs, stress and natural disease.

Remarkably liquids, digestible solids and non-digestible solids
ingested together in the same meal will leave the stomach at
different rates. The emptying of low-calorie liquids is volume-dependant
(monexponential) resulting from the motor activity
of the proximal stomach. By contrast digestible solids empty
more slowly, in an approximately linear pattern after an initial
lag period, primarily as a result of the motor activity of the
distal stomach. Non-digestible solids which cannot be ground
up by the stomach into smaller particles are emptied after the
liquid and digestible solids, during the so called inter-digestive
period, as a result of a specific wave of motor activity in the
stomach. In general meals of a higher osmotic and caloric
content are emptied more slowly.

However, there is a substantial variation in gastric emptying
rates in normal people. Individuals who suffer severe injuries
resulting in coma and survive several days in hospital may still
have their last meal within the stomach at autopsy. These are
extreme examples of delayed gastric emptying but serve to
illustrate the point that the stomach is a poor forensic timekeeper.

There have been several cases of alleged miscarriages of
justice in which medical experts have wrongly used the
stomach contents at autopsy to provide estimates of time of
death to an accuracy of half an hour whereas the degree of
accuracy possible is at best within a range of 3 or 4 hours.
TIME SINCE DEATH

_________________________________________________________________

Greetings Fulcanelli,
Nice to see you back here.
I have a couple of questions for you.

If my memory is correct I recall reading that Miss Kercher hardly ate any pizza as she hung out with her English girlfriends that night. So does that effect the possible time of digestion? In other words, would eating less food than a normal meal start the digestion process sooner or later.

Miss Kercher was found to have a blood alcohol count of 0.43 grams/liter.
From what I have read, this is similiar to having half a glass of wine or one glass of beer.
The English girls said they did not drink that evening.
So how did Miss Kercher have a 0.43gram/liter BAC?
Did she drink some wine before she died that night?

I await your reply Fulcanelli, and please don't tell me, again, that "Google is my friend".
I would like to hear an answer from you, for you know A LOT about this case...
Thanks in advace,
RWVBWL

 

[Mary_H]

In addition to former FBI agent Steve Moore's many recent TV and radio appearances, today we have an editorial by Michael Scadron, a former Department of Justice lawyer, published in the Christian Science Monitor:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary...he-Italian-witch-hunt-Amanda-Knox-is-innocent

Never mind the Italian witch hunt -- Amanda Knox is innocent

Amanda Knox was convicted of murder in an Italian courtroom nearly a year ago. Her appeal will be heard this fall, and if the case is decided on fact rather than fiction, she will be set free.

 

[RWVBWL]

The whole thing is bizarre, I agree. Two men and a woman involved in a sexual crime like that is practically unheard of.

The thing that keeps me as part of the "guilters" though is the fact that there are many murders that happen for no rhyme or reason, that you have to ask yourself why would they do that? What would they gain from that? But anyway, I agree with the fact that the whole crime and motive is strange

Hi Solange305,
As I read more of this brutal murder, I have wondered how a young woman, who earlier had wrapped a present for 1 of her housemates, decides, after being informed that she does not have to work that night, to participate in the murder and rape of another housemate a few hours later? Strange, huh?
Hmmm...
RWVBWL

 

[el buscador]

Just finished reading this set of articles at Injustice in Perugia and found them very interesting: "Ron Hendry is a retired Forensic Engineer (aka Accident Reconstructionist) with 28 years of experience at evaluating and reconstructing serious to fatal incidents based on the physical evidence. Mr. Hendry is a degreed Mechanical Engineer who held a Professional Engineering License during his consulting career. His body of work was primarily with regard civil litigation matters. However, his work has required him to interact extensively with police and review their reports, interview witnesses, review autopsy reports, and review statements and depositions of witnesses and experts. Ron has extensive experience in evaluating incidents from scene photos and witness testimony in cases where the physical evidence was no longer around. In several instances, Ron has evaluated injuries of those involved to ascertain how they occurred.

Ron has written a series of articles for Injustice in Perugia. Four of the articles are now available. Ron's entire series will be added shortly."

Ron Hendry takes a professional look at the whole staged break-in theory and finds it less than believable.

 

[Scorpion NITE]

I wonder why anyone would think she will win on appeal. If, as Amanda's supporters think, the Perugia police and justice system are completely corrupt, plant evidence, and lie for each other then why do they think she could possibly win an appeal? On the other hand if she's guilty then she should not win her appeal.

Agreed.

If she is guilty, she should not win her appeal.

What do you believe should happen if she is innocent?

 

[Solange305]

Yet if the interrogator didn't stop the interview after the slap and report it. Would not that interrogator also be responsible for allowing a false statement be used to arrest 3 people. Which makes her just as guilty as the interrogators for allowing this.

Maybe. So why didn't she report it right away? Maybe because it didn't happen. Either way, it could be a lie or it could be true. You aren't really proving it one way or another, theorizing could go both ways. You can find reasons for why she would defend Knox or why she wouldn't. For me to believe that an interrogator would get charged for telling the truth about police abuse, I would have to believe that the majority of the justice system in Perugia is evil and corrupt. I dont believe that, obviously you do.

Hi Solange305,
As I read more of this brutal murder, I have wondered how a young woman, who earlier had wrapped a present for 1 of her housemates, decides, after being informed that she does not have to work that night, to participate in the murder and rape of another housemate a few hours later? Strange, huh?
Hmmm...
RWVBWL

Very strange. Are you insinuating that means she is innocent? You could say the same about a lot of murders involving a lot of suspects who seemed perfectly normal, etc. I agree it's strange, but I also think it's strange to believe that a police force, judges, dna experts and jury, who up until this case were all seemingly normal citizens, probably wrapping presents for their friends, raising their kids, etc., decided to take the life of an obviously innocent girl and put her in prison for life. It goes both ways my friend, I hope you realize that