• 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.
halides1 said:
One, the evidence helped to make Guede a suspect. The evidence was only analyzed (and in some cases even collected) after Sollecito and Knox were already in custody. Therefore, the risk of investigator bias is real for AK and RS but not for RG.
Click to expand...

This is not quite true. Before this, and just as a reminder, we should keep in mind that false witness reports and inconsistent testimony is something called "evidence".
Then the fact is that all DNA evidence against Rudy Guede was analyzed after he was already a suspect. His name first appeared at a very early stage - i don't know if I remember correctly but i think around Nov. 10 - this after his fingerprint was matched with his name in the immigration database. Nothing was known about the DNA results at that stage. All RG dna results were analyzed whan he was already a suspect.
 
Katody Matrass said:
Well, you're wrong. The evidence was discredited and the verdict was discredited. That you can only defend the evidence by circular reasoning of constant and repetitious appeal to the "authority" of the discredited verdict is telling.
Click to expand...

I think that's rather a self contradiction. How could there be a guilty verdict if all the evidence was discredited? How can the verdict be discredited when we haven't even yet had the appeal?

I'm not appealing to authority. I'm appealing to the fact the defence arguments were TESTED in a court of law and they failed miserably because they were weak and plain wrong. U'm afraid it was the defence arguments that were completely discredited.
 
LondonJohn said:
Something occurs to me regarding Guede's initial statements to police:

Guede was quite clear in these statements that he arrived ....

..., because he knew that any lies about his coming and going might be able to be contradicted from eyewitnesses. .... if he left the cottage at around 10.00pm, he must have known that he might have been spotted. And, for the exit, this also partly explains why Guede's story has the killers rushing out first, because he then has an explanation as to why he might have been spotted leaving on his own at around 10.00pm.
Click to expand...


He was spotted, as Guede knew, by a couple going the other way that he almost ran into. The court just ignored this evidence.

It's interesting that his story says he waited around the cottage before entering. You might get the notion that he was casing the joint.
 
moodstream said:
I am not yet convinced that the courts of Perugia have a special interests in the waking habits of Amanda Knox. I understood the question to be did she return to the cottage to clean up in the morning, when, as the court put it, the lighting would be better? The reason her visit to the store is important is because cleaning agents are not missing from Sollecito's place or the cottage. So where did they come from? The court points out she visited a store where cleaning products are sold, according the the store's owner.
Click to expand...

More then that. The store owner also testified that when she left the store she headed off in the direction of the cottage (which is also the opposite direction to go back to Raffaele's).
 
Fulcanelli said:
Because Rudy was a necrophiliac? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

A comment in very poor taste, coupled with another smiley. We are talking about the murder of a young girl here.

As I understand it, Meredith's hyoid bone was broken which may have rendered her unable to resist the sexual assault. Presumably the stabbing came later?
 
Withnail1969 said:
Thank you for finally answering. The symbol, while winking, was also wearing a big smile. It seemed grotesquely inappropriate to me, but what do I know.
Click to expand...

It's an ironic smile. I didn't design the smilie or add it to the board. There was no other winky smilie to use.
 
RoseMontague said:
Not as far fetched as the prosecution theory of the crime. The case of Sarah Scazzi recently in the news over there is a gruesome example of sex after the murder so it does happen, unfortunately.
Click to expand...

I don't see much far fetched about gang rape. Sadly, it is quite common.
 
Fulcanelli said:
I think that's rather a self contradiction. How could there be a guilty verdict if all the evidence was discredited? How can the verdict be discredited when we haven't even yet had the appeal?
Click to expand...
We're not in an Italian court, we're on an internet forum. We don't have to wait for another verdict to opine that the recent one is worthless and erroneous. The motivation is on the web, everyone can see for themselves how ridiculous it's reasoning is.

Fulcanelli said:
I'm not appealing to authority. I'm appealing to the fact the defence arguments were TESTED in a court of law and they failed miserably because they were weak and plain wrong.
Click to expand...
That's bona fide circular reasoning. It's how the court of law "tested" the arguments what is under dispute.
 
RoseMontague said:
Italian Law has an appeal process so it is not meaningless in terms of Italian Law either.
Click to expand...
It is meaningless to base evidence or a verdict on an appeal that has not yet transpired.

As Fulcanelli writes, one can write whatever one likes in an appeal document.
 
RoseMontague said:
I believe the shoe prints at the end of the bad as well as the knife print are indicative of him taking his shoes off before he went to the bathroom.
Click to expand...

The shoe print at the end of the bed is him leaving the room.

Anyone could have put the knife on the bed.

I see nothing plausible about him sitting on the bed to take his shoes off to perform necrophilia.

Moreover, we know he didn't have sex with the victim. The sexual assault was digital.

Finally, if he'd just stabbed the victim, several times, you don't think he'd have blood on him already? You don't think he'd have blood on his hands which he's using to take off his pants which he...doesn't want to get blood on?

Doesn't logically stand up.
 
Fulcanelli said:
More then that. The store owner also testified that when she left the store she headed off in the direction of the cottage (which is also the opposite direction to go back to Raffaele's).
Click to expand...

I see you still believe Quintavalle's incredible memory. How do you cope with the discrepancies evidenced in the appeals? The fact that both the police and his coworker contradicted him?
 
loverofzion said:
It is meaningless to base evidence or a verdict on an appeal that has not yet transpired.

As Fulcanelli writes, one can write whatever one likes in an appeal document.
Click to expand...

Apparently one can write whatever one likes in a Motivation Report. The appeal is disputing the reasoning of that report and is the primary focus of the appeals.
The appeal court can decide if the Massei judgment holds water after reviewing both that report as well as the appeals. To say the appeal is meaningless or not worth squat is not correct, in my opinion.
 
Katody Matrass said:
We're not in an Italian court, we're on an internet forum. We don't have to wait for another verdict to opine that the recent one is worthless and erroneous. The motivation is on the web, everyone can see for themselves how ridiculous it's reasoning is.


That's bona fide circular reasoning. It's how the court of law "tested" the arguments what is under dispute.
Click to expand...
Well just make sure that you add it is your humble OPINION before making broad declarations about evidence and verdicts being discredited.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom