Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Mary_H]

I've been thinking about this post. There is something that rings so true about it, the Kercher's have been brutally mistreated by the Perugian authorities, from the police all the way through the courts. Starting with the possibility that Rudy Guede could have been taken off the streets long before he broke into Meredith's house, had the police actually arrested him in his previous brushes with the law. Then they apparently decided the best way to investigate this murder was to put the screws to the foreign exchange girl barely out of her teens who hardly spoke Italian in order to get a reason to arrest someone else entirely innocent.

It was all downhill from there, leading a prosecutor to spread her lifestyle throughout the tabloids and then try to back up a preposterous theory with scant and contrived evidence. That ensured that no one not already convinced of the guilt of two convicted would rest, and that the drama would continue endlessly making headlines at every stop along the Italian justice system.

The Kerchers could have received some closure by now; instead, as Antony wrote, they are in for more shock and disappointment.

Six months ago, before everyone had such itchy trigger fingers when it came to the report button, Supernaut wrote a provocative post about this issue. It generated several pages of reactions, all of which were allowed to stand.

Some of his insights:

The Italian prosecutions' elaborate and theatrical "narrative" of a "frenzy of drug-fuelled sex and violence" instigated by the charismatic "Luciferina" Knox seems to have hypnotised the Kerchers and served to allow them (and others) to remain in denial of the fact that Meredith’s death was the result of a completely random and meaningless act of savagery by an utter nobody, that she was NOT a protagonist in a tableau resembling a Greek tragedy.

Add to this an undoubted combination of ingratiation and badgering by Mignini (if not his typical bullying), and they simply allowed themselves to become (literally) mute bystanders to the spectacle he was orchestrating.<snip>

Guede, who by late 2007 had been steadily building a reputation as a drug-using, knife-wielding thief and burglar, should have been arrested before he ever got a chance to be in Meredith's home. The cops’ incompetence and negligence (or worse) had left him on the streets. I'm no lawyer, but I'd say they'd have a good case.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5879937&postcount=9033

 

[el buscador]

I wasn't aware of this. Where does Rudy say he ran into the drying rack? That really does make this a likely scenario that at some point he chases her back to her room.

Drying Rack:
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?id=106344459390034&pid=207544#!/photo.php?pid=425414&id=106344459390034




I've thought a similar thing. I only abandoned her going to the fridge for the mushroom because the piece hasn't been tested, so we don't know what it is for sure. It could have also been a piece of apple I'm told. The mushroom makes sense to me personally because she would have eaten the dessert at least an hour before hand.

Draca, it's from the Micheli report: "In retreating backwards, the first fall was prevented by a clothesline on the floor and then came back into the kitchen and fell between the table and the refrigerator because dell'incalzare of his antagonist, whom he described as wearing a save him "savagely" managed to grab a chair, pushed her against the other man, and these - after a brief moment of hesitation - he had fled, uttering the words in perfect Italian "is black, black man found, found guilty, let's go."

I did assume that the clothesline was the drying rack. I see also that rudy reported this incident as happening when he chased the intruder down the hall. But substitute Meredith's name and perhaps she did put a real fight.

 

[Fine]

As Matthew suggested already, I don't think that Knox implies this at all. It's as likely to be a matter of courtesy than the thought of actually locking somebody out.

Regarding your thoughts on the key situation:

1) A "convenience key" could not be left in the interior door lock, since this would prevent a key being inserted from outside - in other words, this sort of arrangement would prevent anyone from being able to open the door from the outside with a key.

2) If you stop to think about it, there's almost zero sense in having a "convenience key" hanging by the door. The only time this would make any sense would be if the person exiting the house planned to leave the door unlocked behind themselves (e.g. taking out the rubbish etc), and even then they probably wouldn't want to risk someone else locking the door while they were outside (assuming they replaced the "convenience key" once they used it to unlock the door). If someone were going out properly, then the door would need to be locked once they got outside - necessitating a key. So they would either take this "convenience key" and hold on to it while they were out - thus ruining the whole concept of a "convenience key - or they would take their own key (and therefore use it to both unlock and re-lock the door as they left).

3) Most landlords aren't fond of supplying more front door keys than there are tenants - for obvious reasons. If each tenant is personally responsible for her own key, then there's accountability. If there's a spare "convenience key" which just floats around, this is clearly more liable to go missing - with security consequences. It's therefore almost certain that the landlord would only want there to be four front door keys in existence, and that each of the tenants bore personal responsibility for her own key.

///

______________________________
John,

I still think that when Amanda says "so i closed the door behind me
but i didnt lock it, assuming that the person who left the door open
would like to come back in" Amanda is expressing fear that she might lock out one of her flatmates while she showered. And if she did see a key inside it couldn't have been that of Laura or Filomena since they took their keys with them. And it couldn't have been Meredith's key either, since it had been stolen the night before. And, of course, it couldn't have been Amanda's key either. Therefore it would have been a fifth, convenience, key.

I've followed the discussion of the front door lock on this forum and I wasn't convinced that a key could not be inserted from the outside while a convenience key was left inserted into the interior lock cylinder. The exact design of this front door lock was never ascertained.

The principal reason for the convenience key---the time "this would make any sense"--- would not be to run errands but to open the front door conveniently.....for a guest, or---on hot days--- even for ventilation.

And should the convenience key become stolen or misplaced, I suppose it would have been specified in the RENTAL AGREEMENT that the tenants pay for re-keying the locks. So no cost or security threat to the landlord. Whoever signed the RENTAL AGREEMENT would be responsible.

If there was no convenience key we should expect the defense attorneys---during the APPEAL--- to cite this fact as a motive for a LONEWOLF to steal Meredith's keys. So.........we'll see.

///

 

[christianahannah]

The Kerchers could have received some closure by now; instead, as Antony wrote, they are in for more shock and disappointment.

Six months ago, before everyone had such itchy trigger fingers when it came to the report button, Supernaut wrote a provocative post about this issue. It generated several pages of reactions, all of which were allowed to stand.

Some of his insights:



http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5879937&postcount=9033

Mary_H, I remember that post and found it to be offensive, especially the part about the Kercher family and compensation, however, I don't report posts. I either respond to what is posted or ignore it.

I am rather startled by the opinions of some towards the Kercher family. Just as Meredith was a victim, not of her own choosing, so are they.

 

[el buscador]

I wasn't aware of this. Where does Rudy say he ran into the drying rack? That really does make this a likely scenario that at some point he chases her back to her room.

Drying Rack:
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?id=106344459390034&pid=207544#!/photo.php?pid=425414&id=106344459390034




I've thought a similar thing. I only abandoned her going to the fridge for the mushroom because the piece hasn't been tested, so we don't know what it is for sure. It could have also been a piece of apple I'm told. The mushroom makes sense to me personally because she would have eaten the dessert at least an hour before hand.

I do remember how big a part the mushroom in Meredith's esophagus played in the first year or so of the case. Well, even further, though perhaps a more minor issue as the trial got under way. Interest was renewed when the defense announced that the mushroom could have been a piece of apple instead.

But for the first year there were all kinds of theories about how Amanda and Raffaele cooked mushrooms that night. Everyone knew that there had been no mushrooms on the pizza Meredith had consumed that evening. So, where did the mushroom come from? It was either reported or assumed that there were no mushrooms in the house. Then I read Candance's book and found out that each of the girl's in the house had their own shelf in the fridge and that on Meredith's shelf there was a package of mushrooms with the plastic pulled back on one corner. There is a photo somewhere of the open fridge which shows this that I've not seen.

The mushroom in the esophagus can be another clue as to how fast the attack happened because once swallowed the mushroom should have reached the stomach very quickly. But it didn't.

 

[Matthew Best]

______________________________
John,

I still think that when Amanda says "so i closed the door behind me
but i didnt lock it, assuming that the person who left the door open
would like to come back in" Amanda is expressing fear that she might lock out one of her flatmates while she showered. And if she did see a key inside it couldn't have been that of Laura or Filomena since they took their keys with them. And it couldn't have been Meredith's key either, since it had been stolen the night before. And, of course, it couldn't have been Amanda's key either. Therefore it would have been a fifth, convenience, key.

I've followed the discussion of the front door lock on this forum and I wasn't convinced that a key could not be inserted from the outside while a convenience key was left inserted into the interior lock cylinder. The exact design of this front door lock was never ascertained.

The principal reason for the convenience key---the time "this would make any sense"--- would not be to run errands but to open the front door conveniently.....for a guest, or---on hot days--- even for ventilation.

And should the convenience key become stolen or misplaced, I suppose it would have been specified in the RENTAL AGREEMENT that the tenants pay for re-keying the locks. So no cost or security threat to the landlord. Whoever signed the RENTAL AGREEMENT would be responsible.

If there was no convenience key we should expect the defense attorneys---during the APPEAL--- to cite this fact as a motive for a LONEWOLF to steal Meredith's keys. So.........we'll see.

///

I suppose you can imagine the existence of a "convenience key" if you want to, but it's not supported by any actual evidence and you seem to be the only person who believes in it. On that basis I think it's safe to ignore it.

 

[Kaosium]

The Kerchers could have received some closure by now; instead, as Antony wrote, they are in for more shock and disappointment.

Indeed, though it appears we have a Greek tragedy anyway. I wonder, however, just how pleased the Kerchers are with this verdict now. I could have sworn I just read a statement released by their lawyer which suggested that instead of the blanket approval they'd been on record for with the verdict, there was some doubt that had creeped in. However I cannot find it now, I thought it might have been on Candace Dempsey's blog but I'm not seeing it anymore.

You know another thing I can't find? That ridiculous Sun article about the colors, that disappeared a mere hours after I first read it.

 

[Mary_H]

Indeed, though it appears we have a Greek tragedy anyway. I wonder, however, just how pleased the Kerchers are with this verdict now. I could have sworn I just read a statement released by their lawyer which suggested that instead of the blanket approval they'd been on record for with the verdict, there was some doubt that had creeped in. However I cannot find it now, I thought it might have been on Candace Dempsey's blog but I'm not seeing it anymore.

You know another thing I can't find? That ridiculous Sun article about the colors, that disappeared a mere hours after I first read it.

Yeah, I heard they pulled it. The Mail still has it, as far as I know. There is a link to the Mail article in this piece:

http://seattlest.com/2010/11/01/from_the_department_of_are_you_kidd.php

The Sun must have really gotten a lot of flak for that (giggle).

 

[Draca]

Then I read Candance's book and found out that each of the girl's in the house had their own shelf in the fridge and that on Meredith's shelf there was a package of mushrooms with the plastic pulled back on one corner. There is a photo somewhere of the open fridge which shows this that I've not seen.

The mushroom in the esophagus can be another clue as to how fast the attack happened because once swallowed the mushroom should have reached the stomach very quickly. But it didn't.

I've seen the photo of the mushroom package in the fridge. I agree with what your saying. It can only be called a 'possible' clue though because the piece was never tested. The appeals are asking for the piece to be tested.

Photo of Mushroom pkg:
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=165784673446012&set=a.124466634244483.15396.106344459390034

 

[Mary_H]

Mary_H, I remember that post and found it to be offensive, especially the part about the Kercher family and compensation, however, I don't report posts. I either respond to what is posted or ignore it.

I am rather startled by the opinions of some towards the Kercher family. Just as Meredith was a victim, not of her own choosing, so are they.

Everyone realizes the Kerchers are victims and everyone has deep sympathy for them. The concern is that the truth is being withheld from them.

 

[el buscador]

I've seen the photo of the mushroom package in the fridge. I agree with what your saying. It can only be called a 'possible' clue though because the piece was never tested. The appeals are asking for the piece to be tested.

Photo of Mushroom pkg:
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=165784673446012&set=a.124466634244483.15396.106344459390034

There does seem to be some untested evidence. I did read an Italian bloggers take on what might have happened with the police and the scientific police in this case. It wasn't meant to be an excuse, just an observation. Budget cuts. Like other governments, Italy was forced to cut the budgets of the police and the judiciary. So, not enough people, not enough time and not enough money.

From Frank's blog he did say that the scientific police refused to test the incoming evidence from the March 2008 search. This is the search where they finally seized the beige bag that Meredith had carried that night. It was reported that there was blood inside. That could have been a false report, as so many other reports are false, but I do wonder if the beige bag was tested.

 

[Kaosium]

Everyone realizes the Kerchers are victims and everyone has deep sympathy for them. The concern is that the truth is being withheld from them.

Mine is that they've been used badly by the Italian officials involved in this case. That civil case ran concurrently with the trial of Amanda and Raffaele, didn't it? Suggesting to me it was just one more way the prosecution could use sentiment to damn Amanda and Raffaele.

I wish I could find that statement I'm sure I saw. It was just a day ago or so too. :-/

 

[Kaosium]

There does seem to be some untested evidence. I did read an Italian bloggers

Do you read Italian? If so could you tell me what 'culunnia'--or however you spell the word that is translated as 'slander'--means? I can't find a damn thing about it in English, though it appears there's some pages out there on it in Italian.

 

[el buscador]

Do you read Italian? If so could you tell me what 'culunnia'--or however you spell the word that is translated as 'slander'--means? I can't find a damn thing about it in English, though it appears there's some pages out there on it in Italian.

I do not read Italian. I've been reading an Italian blogger recently at another site. I haven't read everything the blogger has written so don't know about an explanation. I do know that the blogger isn't an attorney, however.

 

[Draca]

From Frank's blog he did say that the scientific police refused to test the incoming evidence from the March 2008 search. This is the search where they finally seized the beige bag that Meredith had carried that night. It was reported that there was blood inside. That could have been a false report, as so many other reports are false, but I do wonder if the beige bag was tested.

I asked Charlie about that. There is a beige purse listed on the pdf. but he said that is the brown leather purse. It looks like they never tested the beige tote bag or the long sleeve t-shirt she was wearing.

Budget cuts and lack of people help explain why the forensic team botched this case so badly. It may not be completely their fault.

http://www.friendsofamanda.org/selected_dna_results.pdf

 

[katy_did]

We wouldn't know if he rolled up the t-shirt while standing because it would have just rolled down. If she was on her knees in front of him he would have tried to remove the t-shirt from the back going over her head. Otherwise, why roll it up from behind when he can't see anything from the back anyway. The only time the t-shirt would be rolled up the way it was is when she was lying on her back.

I don't agree here - can't really see why the T-shirt wouldn't have stayed rolled up if she were standing, especially since I think it was rolled up around her neck? His aim in rolling up her clothing would probably have been to remove the bra whose strap he'd just cut, since otherwise it would've been held on by her clothing. IMO it's more likely she was standing or kneeling while he was trying to do that, and that it probably happened shortly after he cut the bra (while standing behind her).

In any case, I don't see that the rolled up T-shirts really tell us anything certain about where Rudy was standing at the time, nor about where Meredith was.

 

[el buscador]

Everyone realizes the Kerchers are victims and everyone has deep sympathy for them. The concern is that the truth is being withheld from them.

I believe the Kerchers did what they could to make sure they had as much information as they could possibly get about Meredith's murder. From reading and seeing the misfortunes of victim's families as they seek and rarely receive information in US cases, I think anyone would do the same if at all possible. Fortunately for them, Italy allows a civil trial to proceed at the same time as the criminal trial. By hiring a lawyer they had a dog in the fight and would, I assume, receive the same consideration and information as the other lawyers. What Maresca told them or showed them we have no idea.

However, it seems in Italy that many considered Maresca's inclusion in the trial as possibly seeking "revenge" and a hostile act against the defendants. Again, don't know if the Kerchers realized this or not.

From an Italian blogger: "Last week a muslim immigrant has killed his wife. After his arrest the "Ministry of Equal Opportunities", Mara Carfagna (who deals with "women's rights") has announced her intention to act as "civil part" against the man. Her objective is to prevent that to the murderer be granted mitigating circumstances that would allow him to get out of jail after 7-8 years.

Carfagna's attorney will fight for the murderer sentenced to life imprisonment."

 

[katy_did]

You best go with Kestrels idea - the lack of defensive wounds or trace evidence under the fingernails is problematic to say the least.

How so? I believe Massei gives one possible reason for lack of evidence under the fingernails in the fact that Meredith's nails were very short, and so she wouldn't have been able to scratch her attacker with them anyway.

But even leaving that aside, people don't always fight back when a knife is being held to their throat. Especially if the knife's initially being used to threaten, and they still hope that if they just comply, the attacker will let them go rather than kill them. In fact I think this kind of 'freeze' reaction is explained as a self-defence mechanism, in that fighting a much stronger aggressor (in this case a larger male armed with a knife) is more likely to lead to injury than complying.

I do think, however, that the lack of defence wounds points to a longer, escalating attack rather than a short intense one. In the latter there would likely have been more defence wounds from the knife, as she'd have had nothing to lose by fighting back; in the former, when she still hoped to survive, the lack of defence wounds is more explicable.

But if its short & sharp starting at 9 why does it take 40/50 + minutes to pick up keys & phone.

That's a long time to hang around the scene after an unplanned murder - yet he still forgets to flush, or wipe his bloody prints.

Hard to sell to a jury.

ETA That noisy 'break-in' may have created more problems than it solved - by fixing the start of the attack at 9.

.

Yes, I agree with most of what you say here. I think it's very unlikely Rudy would've hung around for 40/50 minutes, which is why I think the attack was more prolonged. I might even go so far as to say that if it could be proven the attack was over by 9:05, I'd have to question my belief that Rudy acted alone (at least in the matter of the taking of the cell phones).

 

[Chris_Halkides]

No guarantees in life

...But yet I remembered a young gal whom I never knew, near the same age as my youngest sisiter, who so brutally had her life taken away on this day a few years ago. And so I thought about her. And the pain her family must live with.

In Meredith Kercher's memory, I realize once more that life is short, with no guarantees.
So tell someone that you care about them or love them today...


RWVBWL

This is well said and humane. A good friend of mine recently lost a stepchild, and it reminded me of the pain that the Kercher family must feel.

 

[Antony]

Mary_H, I remember that post and found it to be offensive, especially the part about the Kercher family and compensation, however, I don't report posts. I either respond to what is posted or ignore it.

I am rather startled by the opinions of some towards the Kercher family. Just as Meredith was a victim, not of her own choosing, so are they.

Offensive in what way? It deals with a difficult element of the case in a way that is hard to disagree with. Do you mean that the Kerchers' view of the Knox/Sollecito prosecution is too sensitive a subject to touch?

Their tragedy is a desperate one: not only have they suffered a devastating personal loss, but their grief has been manipulated by a rogue police force and prosecutor to destroy the lives of 2 of Meredith's friends. It is easy to conclude that the truth is too unpleasant for them to face; but the truth has a habit of coming out in cases like this, and when it comes out it will be a further blow for them to come to terms with.

Of course, victims' families in cases like this seldom question the initial decision of the courts - the notable exception that springs to mind is Jim Swires, whose daughter died in the Lockerbie crash in 1989. The Kercher family can be excused for not seeing the verdict in an objective way; those others duped by the judicial farce have no such excuse.