• 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.

Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
1) Yes, no gripe with that at all.
(although the entire point simply was to ask cites equally from innocent or guilt persuaded posts, and not use to smother

2) Please inform the Mellox families as well as all those individuals they are begging from that thi$$ 3 year long effort is so worthless (in your opinion)

3) The scroll feature on your puter inop to force reading of 'uninteresting'??

4) Response counting used as evidence of quality is for good reason absent from all I have read about Mr Randi and JREF

5) I have lots more to continue direct refutation of L.J' errors about Marriott, so I respectfully suggest you seek repair of your scroll or familiarize yourself with other JREF provided easily accessed features to limit your exposure

Thank you for your advice but I do use the scroll feature to skim over your posts hoping, in time, for a change of subject. I do enjoy your "marmalade words" (isn't that what you called them?) and hope in time I will find them more to the point of innocence or guilt. Meanwhile, I'm sure LJ, if he so chooses, will be looking forward to answering your "lots more to continue direct refutation of L.J' errors about Marriott".
 
Thank you for your advice but I do use the scroll feature to skim over your posts hoping, in time, for a change of subject. I do enjoy your "marmalade words" (isn't that what you called them?) and hope in time I will find them more to the point of innocence or guilt. Meanwhile, I'm sure LJ, if he so chooses, will be looking forward to answering your "lots more to continue direct refutation of L.J' errors about Marriott".

Your suggestions to me to make my contributions here more to your personal liking are given all the consideration from me they rightfully deserve.

Thanks also for the marmalade accolade; as noted previously it served perfectly a very worthwhile purpose
 
The call for citations where specific claims are made is a tool to either confirm the claim or limit the spread of rumors where the claim is not supported. Someone that has researched the case and has evidence backing their claim would welcome the opportunity to bolster that claim by supplying the evidence. Someone that is just trying to spread rumors will complain about the call for citations because they will interpret it as equivalent to being called a liar.
 
/agree

I'm still waiting on some evidence to prove they are guilty. Sadly all I see is the prosecution presenting contradicting evidence, refusing to allow evidence to be examined, withholding evidence, and targeting Knox's reputation in the media to get a conviction. Perhaps the court will release some evidence that proves she did the crime. Sadly I think we would have seen that evidence by now if the prosecution had it.

If we focus on the guilt of Amanda Knox only, I would think that evidence would be in the murder room itself; can anyone direct me to where this specifically was discussed in this forum? I tried the search tool, and the results were not satisfactory. (I did not mention Raffaele only because I do not want to discuss the bra clasp evidence I believe was "contaminated".)
 
The call for citations where specific claims are made is a tool to either confirm the claim or limit the spread of rumors where the claim is not supported. Someone that has researched the case and has evidence backing their claim would welcome the opportunity to bolster that claim by supplying the evidence. Someone that is just trying to spread rumors will complain about the call for citations because they will interpret it as equivalent to being called a liar.

Hi Dan

Ditto to yourself for most of the reasons cited above for my admiration (but usually not full agreement) with halides

1) The purpose of the tool you eloquently reiterate is never questioned by me

2) Equal application of the well intended tool is the question
(Please see my examples above of unequal application)

3) Those of us with any sense of integrity do not consider an equally applied call for a cite equivalent to being called a liar as you insinuate.

4) Those of us having read very widely on the case do not have bibliographically enhanced mental processes to be able to immediately quote page and paragraph as you also insinuate f each word we share here

5) In an ideal world, all of us would post absolutely nothing here that we were not 100% certain of quick. easy, effort expense justified availability of quotes

May I humbly suggest to a senior member such as yourself that in this perfect world, this thread would experience a dramatic decline in declarations with a certainly not 'cost efficient' increase in quality
 
Last edited:
If we focus on the guilt of Amanda Knox only, I would think that evidence would be in the murder room itself; can anyone direct me to where this specifically was discussed in this forum? I tried the search tool, and the results were not satisfactory. (I did not mention Raffaele only because I do not want to discuss the bra clasp evidence I believe was "contaminated".)
I think you will find that there isn't much to discuss. Really, there is nothing of Amanda in the murder room. There is the kitchen knife found at Raffaele's place with the DNA of Amanda on the handle and the disputed LCN DNA of Meredith on the blade and mixed blood/DNA of Meredith and Amanda in their shared bathroom. Some footprints in the hallway that the prosecution has claimed are Amanda's made in Meredith's blood but that tested negative for blood. I'm sure I must be forgetting something because the list is so short.

I guess one question would be if you are looking for physical evidence or the belief in the "lies" Amanda supposedly told the night she was arrested, but even those do not actually place Amanda in the murder room.
 
Those of us with any sense of integrity do not consider an equally applied call for a cite equivalent to being called a liar as you insinuate.

But Dan didn't insinuate that at all! He flat out stated he was referring to people who are "just trying to spread rumors". I would have thought that would specifically disclude* people with a sense of integrity.

*Word inserted for your personal pleasure.
 
Pilot, Please scroll back to my last call for citations to see an example of equal application.

In the search for better understanding of this case, we all share what we have been able to discover. Providing references for where the information comes from aids in the sharing. If your memory is less than perfect, I would suggest taking notes to enhance it. I have a whole web site full of notes that I share from time to time.
 
But Dan didn't insinuate that at all! He flat out stated he was referring to people who are "just trying to spread rumors". I would have thought that would specifically disclude* people with a sense of integrity.

*Word inserted for your personal pleasure.

Your great insertion of word for humor about my verbiage is much appreciated

Permit me to have a somewhat different interpretation of this exact collection of words (beloved) molded into a well formed sentence

Someone that is just trying to spread rumors will complain about the call for citations because they will interpret it as equivalent to being called a liar.

I expand to mean
1) Anyone complaining about call for cite is just one trying to spread rumors
2) Anyone (they) described in (1) interprets cite request equivalent to being called liar

Matthew, again I appreciate your graciousness yesterday as well as your humor and understandable difference expressed so well today

Since I am feeling analogous to Amanda's original and Moore's oft repeated version of 12 the Interrogator dilemma, self induced by me simultaneously responding to several well versed opposing views so far today, and am about to retire to my bunker, so can we agree maybe to just disagree
very agreeably

All the Best to you, Matthew
 
Someone that is just trying to spread rumors will complain about the call for citations because they will interpret it as equivalent to being called a liar.

I expand to mean
1) Anyone complaining about call for cite is just one trying to spread rumors

No. This is wrong. You're not expanding the meaning, you are distorting it. It is equivalent to saying that a dog has four legs, therefore anything that has four legs is a dog.

Dan O states that Type A Persons will exhibit Behaviour X. That does not mean that all people exhibiting Behaviour X are Type A Persons. See?
 
Pilot, Please scroll back to my last call for citations to see an example of equal application.

In the search for better understanding of this case, we all share what we have been able to discover. Providing references for where the information comes from aids in the sharing. If your memory is less than perfect, I would suggest taking notes to enhance it. I have a whole web site full of notes that I share from time to time.

Long in tooth, suspected galloping senility impaired memory of mine is absolutely "less than perfect' Dan.

Guess most of my lifetime employment and subsequent associations, however was with individuals of shared integrity and shared sense of values that everything said not universally agreed to and not bibliographically enhanced was not considered to be a deliberate lie

Your note taking suggestion is an excellent one and fully admired and accepted
 
the dingo is innocent?

A little from the Chamberlain (Dingo) case that I'm amusing myself with recently:

From the High Court of Australia appeal verdict:
Indeed, it would seem fair to comment that the Crown case was, perhaps of necessity resulting from the absence of both the baby's body and direct evidence against Mrs. Chamberlain, directed more to destroying Mrs. Chamberlain's defence of the dingo than to positively establishing her guilt.

Interesting similarity, with the weakness of positive evidence of AK and RS guilt much effort of Massei goes to disproving the lone wolf theory.

From the Morling Report:
It is impossible in the above summary to capture the whole effect of the voluminous evidence given on the matters, which bear upon the dingo hypothesis, but, taken in its entirety, it falls far short of proving that Azaria was not taken by a dingo. Indeed, the evidence affords considerable support for the view that a dingo may have taken her. To examine the evidence to see whether it has been proved that a dingo took Azaria would be to make the fundamental error of reversing the onus of proof and requiring Mrs. Chamberlain to prove her innocence.

The difference here is that hardly any evidence disproves the lone wolf scenario, and Massei tried only to make it appear less probable. And he failed - the scenario of Rudy alone breaking and killing Meredith fits the evidence much better without mental gymnastics manifested in the Motivation.


There are many interesting similarities in there - the media frenzy, outburst of witch hunt mentality, speculations about satanic rituals, lack of motive, nonsensical scenario of crime, controversial forensics etc.
 
Crime Scene, Murder Room photos

I think you will find that there isn't much to discuss. Really, there is nothing of Amanda in the murder room. There is the kitchen knife found at Raffaele's place with the DNA of Amanda on the handle and the disputed LCN DNA of Meredith on the blade and mixed blood/DNA of Meredith and Amanda in their shared bathroom. Some footprints in the hallway that the prosecution has claimed are Amanda's made in Meredith's blood but that tested negative for blood. I'm sure I must be forgetting something because the list is so short.

I guess one question would be if you are looking for physical evidence or the belief in the "lies" Amanda supposedly told the night she was arrested, but even those do not actually place Amanda in the murder room.

So this forum did not discuss this particular issue at length, at least as long as it has been discussing the stomach contents of the victim, or where Amanda Knox happened to be when she received her text message from Lumumba?

Retired FBI agent Steve Moore, in his many televised appearances has maintained that this particular point, the murder room evidence and the copious blood, is of the highest importance and actually eliminates both Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito as suspects.

I would think this forum would be "all over" his comments, or maybe this forum just likes to argue?
 
So this forum did not discuss this particular issue at length, at least as long as it has been discussing the stomach contents of the victim, or where Amanda Knox happened to be when she received her text message from Lumumba?

Retired FBI agent Steve Moore, in his many televised appearances has maintained that this particular point, the murder room evidence and the copious blood, is of the highest importance and actually eliminates both Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito as suspects.

I would think this forum would be "all over" his comments, or maybe this forum just likes to argue?
Do you wish to discuss a certain aspect of the lack of evidence of Amanda in the murder room? If so, please feel free to ask and I'm certain someone here will oblige. Right now your posts seem so general that I'm not sure what it is you are asking.
 
If this was all we knew and all we had to decide I would agree with you.

However the Massei story is an attempt to explain away a patent absurdity, that there was no food in Meredith's duodenum yet Massei has her alive until 23:30.

As Ronchi was well aware, the only way this can be explained within the bounds of known science is if Dr. Lalli accidentally and unknowingly squeezed all the food in Meredith's duodenum down the ~5m length of her bowel to the very end of her small intestine in the process of botching the autopsy.

This would take considerable effort, because the bowel is an elastic tube rather than a rigid, garden-hose like organ. However if even "imperfectly tied" ligatures were also obstructing the bowel the idea that Dr Lalli accidentally squeezed all the digested matter through those obstructions as well becomes an absurdity on an absurdity.

If it happened that way, then Dr Lalli deserves the Million Dollar Prize for proving that the pizza Meredith ate was actually the reincarnation of Harry Houdini.

K-Lo,

I could rebut all this, but since Lex Rex did such a great job of it on PMF, I'll just repost his/her response here (I don't think he/she will mind):

LexRex on PMF said:
WARNING: Autopsy discussed below.

Okay. That's it. I can't stand it anymore. I'm going to vent, ask my questions, then endeavor to never mention JREF again. Please forgive me.

As many of you know, "Tex" (to use stilicho's term of endearment) has made a point of boasting about his alleged "scientific literacy" and his strict adherence to the notion that each premise of an argument must be supported by a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

And now I read THIS gem:

"...the only way this can be explained within the bounds of known science is if Dr. Lalli accidentally and unknowingly squeezed all the food in ...[the] duodenum down the ~5m length of ...[the] bowel to the very end of ...[the] small intestine in the process of botching the autopsy.

This would take considerable effort, because the bowel is an elastic tube rather than a rigid, garden-hose like organ. However if even "imperfectly tied" ligatures were also obstructing the bowel the idea that Dr Lalli accidentally squeezed all the digested matter through those obstructions as well becomes an absurdity on an absurdity. [emphasis added]"


Now, how can one claim to know how much "effort" is required, or describe the "elastic[ity,]" unless they are not only a medical doctor, but a medical doctor that has attempted to "squeeze...digested matter" down the length of someone's intestine both with, and without, ligatures?

Tex [his/her nickname for you, K-Lo] has NOT cited a peer-reviewed scientific journal in support of these claims.

In light of his unwavering insistence on this practice, we can only conclude that his claims required no such support from the literature because they were supported by his own training and expertise as a medical doctor with a sub-specialization in forensic pathology.

Either that or he's a flaming hypocrite.

Now, if I assume that he's not just another rank amateur (and that's an exceedingly difficult assumption to make), is there a medical expert here that can explain:

1) why Tex is insisting that "the ONLY way" is to push digested matter "TO THE VERY END" (Why must it be the very end?);

2) whether there is variation in the kinds or qualities of ligatures used from lab to lab, doctor to doctor;

3) whether there is a 'standard practice' for tying ligatures;

4) whether it is unusual for ligatures to fail;

5) whether it really is difficult for digested matter to be inadvertently moved along with, or without, the application of force; &

6) whether it is necessary to see a video recording of the autopsy in order to properly address the issues raised in respect of the ligatures?

Thanks.

Thanks in advance for answering all these questions, K-Lo. :)

And I'll just reiterate for myself that, unless you are a pathologist or have support in the medical literature for your assertions, there's no evidence for what you've said.

There's also the possibility that Meredith ate her one piece of pizza at 5:30 (Amy Frost testimony) and it was already into and through her duodenum by the time she ate the apple pie + ice cream at 8:15 or 8:30 pm. Many of the pathologists at the trial said that food can completely clear the stomach in 2-4 hours, which would be in that time-frame.

So the 500 mL (about 2 cups) in her stomach at death (in this case) was just apple crumble and ice cream.

------

And my "final word" to K-Lo and Lo-J and all the others who may believe this TOD due to stomach contents is this "clincher" to this case:

If this were such an important piece of evidence, why was it not raised at trial? Why would no defense pathologist swear that TOD was before 9:30 as you claim to have "proven"?

Were the defense pathologists stupid? Were they incompetent? You have to pick one or the other!

-------

And one more thing: Even if somehow you could prove, contra all pathologists' pronouncements that stomach contents can't be used to prove time of death, and contra all the books I've read (including one called Time of Death that I'm reading now), and contra all pathologists at the trial (even the defense pathologists), that Meredith died by 9:30 pm, it still wouldn't amount to a hill of beans (to coin a phrase).... because....

They only have a (very weak) alibi til 9:10 pm. (No K-Lo, the 9:26 time was brought up and dismissed at trial, and until a trial adjudicates otherwise, it is not valid.)

The walk from Raff's to Amanda's house was only about 5-10 minutes. They go to the cottage, find Rudy outside (as he testified he was there then), they go in together and murder Meredith.

There is no way past the DNA evidence. That proves them guilty as well as Rudy. It really doesn't matter what time of death you assert as long as it's after 9:15.

Thanks for playing, though! :)
 
Last edited:
You need to properly characterize this evidence:

A sighting where nothing was bought which was not remembered when questioned by the police in the days immediately following the murder but over time filled in with exact details.

A scream in the night which at first doesn't even warrant a phone call to the police even when it is learned the next day that there was a murder but which grows over time to be recognized as a death scream that keeps the hearer up at night.

A sighting of two people at night, strangers with no particular memorable characteristics, who were remembered in detail months later.


In all three cases, if the witness had come forward immediately to in some way create a contemporaneous record of the event it would have validated these memories of the events. But by waiting so long before coming forward, there is no way now to distinguish whether the memories of the events are real or simply false memories created from the news of the events.

Proper police work would have sought out these witnesses immediately and not waited until their memories were contaminated by the news reports.

Well, you have done it for me so thanks.

I cannot say what the police did or did not do to search out various witnesses. I guess can they ask for information but if people do not come forward how can they compel someone to?

In either event, whether their memories are real or false, I don't place much evidentiary weight on their testimony.
 
Murder Room, Crime Scene photographs

Do you wish to discuss a certain aspect of the lack of evidence of Amanda in the murder room? If so, please feel free to ask and I'm certain someone here will oblige. Right now your posts seem so general that I'm not sure what it is you are asking.

el buscador, thank you for asking.

My original request was for this forum's original discussion of the murder room crime scene and photographs and how it relates to the guilt of Amanda Knox. I had tried the search tool and the results were unsatisfactory leading me to believe that it was possible this forum just hasn't been "that into it."

Steve Moore, the retired FBI agent who has been widely seen on TV stated “The evidence doesn’t just say she didn’t do it; the evidence proved that she couldn’t have done it.” He also said "“In a crime scene like that, when you have so much blood, it’s as if you threw blood all over the floor,” he told Curry. “If Amanda Knox and her boyfriend and that drifter were involved in this, there would be three sets of fingerprints, three sets of footprints, DNA, hair samples. It would have been an absolute zoo of evidence."

My intention initially was to see how this was handled in the distant past by this forum. I don't think it has been, and one would think a thread titled "Discussion of the Amanda Knox case" would address Mr. Moore's subsequent points thoroughly, at least as long as stomach contents of the victim and cell phone tower showing where Miss Knox was when Lumumba texted her, both of which could never prove the guilt of a suspect.

What I would like to know, to be clear, is where this forum discussed this issue originally, the murder room crime scene, and how there is no fingerprints, footprints, hair samples, or DNA of Amanda Knox? And, why wouldn't a forum such as this discuss this for pages, unless it has more interest in arguing the details of Amanda Knox's non-related private life on Nov 1-2 instead of her guilt or innocence?
 
DNA evidence

Trigood,

I only have time for a brief response to LexRex, but to say that there is no way around the DNA evidence is nonsense. LexRex should read the Johnson/Hampikian open letter for starters. Then he is welcome to look here. Therefore, the rest of his remarks should be read with caution, IMHO.
 
Hi Trigood,

I'm obviously not Kevin_Lowe but maybe in answer to your "why must it be the very end" is because that is where contents were also found in the autopsy. As far as I've read nothing was found in any other locations in Meredith's digestive system except the stomach and the bottom of the intestines. But I could be wrong and look forward to any corrections you might want to post.
 
el buscador, thank you for asking.

My original request was for this forum's original discussion of the murder room crime scene and photographs and how it relates to the guilt of Amanda Knox. I had tried the search tool and the results were unsatisfactory leading me to believe that it was possible this forum just hasn't been "that into it."

Steve Moore, the retired FBI agent who has been widely seen on TV stated “The evidence doesn’t just say she didn’t do it; the evidence proved that she couldn’t have done it.” He also said "“In a crime scene like that, when you have so much blood, it’s as if you threw blood all over the floor,” he told Curry. “If Amanda Knox and her boyfriend and that drifter were involved in this, there would be three sets of fingerprints, three sets of footprints, DNA, hair samples. It would have been an absolute zoo of evidence."

My intention initially was to see how this was handled in the distant past by this forum. I don't think it has been, and one would think a thread titled "Discussion of the Amanda Knox case" would address Mr. Moore's subsequent points thoroughly, at least as long as stomach contents of the victim and cell phone tower showing where Miss Knox was when Lumumba texted her, both of which could never prove the guilt of a suspect.

What I would like to know, to be clear, is where this forum discussed this issue originally, the murder room crime scene, and how there is no fingerprints, footprints, hair samples, or DNA of Amanda Knox? And, why wouldn't a forum such as this discuss this for pages, unless it has more interest in arguing the details of Amanda Knox's non-related private life on Nov 1-2 instead of her guilt or innocence?
You might try searching the original thread "Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel" here at JREF. That thread has 378 pages and 15,000 posts. Below is the link to the last page.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=161229&page=378
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom