Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Katody Matrass]

Ah, you are referring to the testimony of Maria del Prato, the owner of the nursery school. He has been caught burglarizing the school by her, yet he doesn't attempt to kill her, doesn't assult her and even waits around while she calls the police.

Could it be because she was not alone there?

 

[katy_did]

This may be adding to the confusion over what the defence case is.

If we cant tell the 'poes' from the genuine 'innocentsi' arguments, progress will be difficult.
& It also casts doubt on the soundness of the genuine 'innocentsi' arguments.

I can recall a similar discussion a few days back over a comment posted at Perugia Shock:

She is obviously a bestial and savage murderer on looking at this absolutely disgusting picture.
I don't know how you could post this Frank; look at her hands, they are the hands of lady Macbeth.
Vile, disgusting and hideous.I am appalled , shocked and saddened by this and the nudity is obscene in the extreme.

I thought it was an obvious PMF parody (the nudity being "obscene in the extreme" gave it away, I felt). Other posters disagreed, though. I assume the difficulty in telling the 'poes' from the 'guilters' would cast the same doubt on the soundness of the genuine 'guilter' arguments?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

stil waiting

Stilicho,

Nice to have you back posting. I collected a number of unanswered questions and comments in message #6663. I added a few more in message #8506. You and treehorn must be twin sons of different mothers.

 

[platonov]

Yeah, Judge Matteini was a good skeptic and did not believe Raffaele or Patrick. He sure showed us what critical thinking is all about. Case closed.

Case not fully closed - there is an appeal coming up shortly.

Lets see the translated docs if they are all out there and a treatment of same.

But simply taking the [changing] word of murder suspects is not how it works
in the real world - and it doesn't convince on a forum either.

BTW Patrick was released - he had an alibi.

.

 

[Scorpion NITE]

If Blogger opinion was all it took they would never have stood trial - never mind been convicted.

And several [many] members of the NYFD would be in prison over 911.

Is Frank S going to testify in the appeal ?

Either the defence can discredit C or they cant - have they new evidence.

Why didn't Frank mention this years ago - Oh he did. So what's new?

.

Having trouble with reading accurately, Platonov? I guess you missed the

'...But Sollecito's team will bring documentation for it....'

I guess you must have had difficulty with the comprehension too, as the obvious point (to most people) I was making was that Frank is a well-known PERUGIAN local. Pretty good chance he knows more about the buses than you and I, no? Especially when you look at how long he has covered this case. He is, of course, a respected journalist and blogger but that's not crucial - what is more important is the question about the buses (I see you don't answer that, but no prizes for guessing why), so I'll just leave you with the line,

''...But Sollecito's team will bring documentation for it...''

 

[Alt+F4]

Could it be because she was not alone there?

What was her trial testimony as to where her 6 year-old and the locksmith were when she confronted Rudy?

 

[Malkmus]

Ah, you are referring to the testimony of Maria del Prato, the owner of the nursery school. He has been caught burglarizing the school by her, yet he doesn't attempt to kill her, doesn't assult her and even waits around while she calls the police.

Rudy murdering Meredith was probably an unfortunate circumstance of sexually violating her. Had the nursery school owner been a young, attractive woman in her apartment, not a public place of work, and not during daylight, things may have gone differently. But you're also inferring that because some here think that Rudy acted alone in killing Meredith that we also think he was an uncontrollable killer, killing anyone who crossed his path. We know it was circumstantial, and the nursery school circumstances were different. As always, context.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Besides the break-in at the kindergarten, what other burglaries and break-ins did Rudy committ?

Are you absolutely sure, Alt+F4, that this topic has never come up before?

Are you completely certain that at no stage in this thread have we ever before discussed the evidence regarding Rudy Guede's previous criminal history, including his established association with crimes involving breaking second-storey windows with rocks, climbing inside, stealing and carrying knives?

Because I was pretty sure we had already talked about that, and that you were present for and involved with those discussions. Did that ever happen?

Maybe that all never happened and it's just a false memory on my part. However right now I'm struggling to see how you could be asking the above question as part of a discussion carried out in good faith to reach the best possible understanding of the case.

 

[Alt+F4]

Maybe that all never happened and it's just a false memory on my part.

Could be, false memory seems to be pretty common.

 

[Katody Matrass]

What was her trial testimony as to where her 6 year-old and the locksmith were when she confronted Rudy?

Exactly, what was it?

 

[Withnail1969]

Ah, you are referring to the testimony of Maria del Prato, the owner of the nursery school. He has been caught burglarizing the school by her, yet he doesn't attempt to kill her, doesn't assult her and even waits around while she calls the police.

You claim to be a skeptic, but it seems there are some things about which you have no skepticism at all. In fact for you these possibilities can under no circumstances be considered. Let me enumerate them for you.

1) Any possibility that the Italian justic system could be in any way in error or at fault in the Amanda Knox case, despite Italy's abysmal rank of 67 in the 2010 World Corruption Index. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index

2) Any possibility that any 'witnesses' in the case could be lying or mistaken, despite proof that they are.

3) Any possibility that the convicted murderer and sex criminal Rudy Guede had any history of crime, despite evidence to the contrary.

4) Any possibility that any discrepancies in Amanda and Raffaele's accounts of events are anything other than malicious lies, even when they do not benefit and in some cases harm their cases.

 

[Alt+F4]

Rudy murdering Meredith was probably an unfortunate circumstance of sexually violating her. Had the nursery school owner been a young, attractive woman in her apartment, not a public place of work, and not during daylight, things may have gone differently. But you're also inferring that because some here think that Rudy acted alone in killing Meredith that we also think he was an uncontrollable killer, killing anyone who crossed his path. We know it was circumstantial, and the nursery school circumstances were different. As always, context.

I thought the Rudy as the lone killer hypothesis involved Meredith being sexually violated after she was dead.

I'm curious, why do you think a woman has to be young and attractive to be sexually assulted and/or murdered? Also, women are sexually assulted/murdered during the day and at work.

 

[RoseMontague]

But simply taking the [changing] word of murder suspects is not how it works
in the real world - and it doesn't convince on a forum either.

BTW Patrick was released - he had an alibi.

.

I always thought it was silly of them to take Amanda's word for it when she accused Patrick. It was obviously a fantasy. You are right that they never took her word for being at Raffaele's all night. I figure they were wrong about that one as well.

 

[Scorpion NITE]

Could be, false memory seems to be pretty common.

With some more than others. Certainly a few repeat offenders it would seem.

Nevertheless, I see you didn't actually answer the original question posed to you?

Why wasn't Rudy Guede arrested for breaking into the school?

I'd like to also ask you what you thought Rudy was doing with the 16'' knife from the kitchen and also, where had the laptop in his possession come from?

No wish to overburden you with questions so that should suffice for now.

Thanks.

 

[Withnail1969]

I think drugs effect different people in different ways. With that said what we have now is that Rafaelle doesn't remember much of what happened that evening (as per his diary), doesn't remember the all night Internet session, doesn't remember watching Naruto but does remember with 100% certainity that Amanda was with him the entire night.

rubbish. it's entirely plausible that you wouldn't necessarily remember exactly what movies or music you watched or played but you would remember if somebody left the flat for an extended period. I watch a lot of films and play a lot of music and games myself and I can barely remember what i watched or played 2 days ago. But i would remember people coming and going.

 

[platonov]

I can recall a similar discussion a few days back over a comment posted at Perugia Shock:



I thought it was an obvious PMF parody (the nudity being "obscene in the extreme" gave it away, I felt). Other posters disagreed, though. I assume the difficulty in telling the 'poes' from the 'guilters' would cast the same doubt on the soundness of the genuine 'guilter' arguments?

In your post you were talking about H Wilkens in general.

Don't know how to break this but the ramblings of an 'expert' on a downmarket UK tabloid [or comment on same ] is not what convicted them.
Same paper has topless page 3 girls opining on events of the day - its not meant to be taken seriously.

.

 

[Malkmus]

I thought the Rudy as the lone killer hypothesis involved Meredith being sexually violated after she was dead.

I've always stated I think Rudy assaulted her sexually first, and that her death was the result of her not acquiescing. I've never bought in to the necrophilia aspect of it.

I'm curious, why do you think a woman has to be young and attractive to be sexually assulted and/or murdered? Also, women are sexually assulted/murdered during the day and at work.

I didn't say a woman has to be young and attractive to be assaulted. But I think Meredith fits the demographic of who he was sexually attracted to more than the nursery school owner - especially since we know from his own words that he was. And that, together with the other circumstances I mentioned, are very good reasons for him not to have tried to rape or kill her.

 

[katy_did]

In your post you were talking about H Wilkens in general.

Don't know how to break this but the ramblings of an 'expert' on a downmarket UK tabloid [or comment on same ] is not what convicted them.
Same paper has topless page 3 girls opining on events of the day - its not meant to be taken seriously.

.

This post bears so little relation to my own, I'm going to assume your hitting of the 'Quote' button was an act of pure random chance.

 

[Scorpion NITE]

I thought the Rudy as the lone killer hypothesis involved Meredith being sexually violated after she was dead.

I'm curious, why do you think a woman has to be young and attractive to be sexually assulted and/or murdered? Also, women are sexually assulted/murdered during the day and at work.

Have you seriously not considered the possibility of an 'escalation of violence' on Rudy's part? Seriously?

I'm sure any local library will contain plenty of information about offenders and the escalation of violence in many cases. I'm sure you have heard about some rapists starting off with minor sexual offences and then escalating...

How about some murderers starting off with minor offences (like burglary) and then escalating...

I really, really hope you realise how weak your points were and acknowledge so WITHOUT asking for cites to the above, although I am sure a few hours spent on your part doing some research might prove very informative and enlightening.

You might even decide to read back through the thread - ya know, like the previous occasion you and a number of others discussed the very same topic.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

thank goodness Patrick had an alibi

Case not fully closed - there is an appeal coming up shortly.

Lets see the translated docs if they are all out there and a treatment of same.

But simply taking the [changing] word of murder suspects is not how it works
in the real world - and it doesn't convince on a forum either.

BTW Patrick was released - he had an alibi.

.

Platonov,

Let us reconstruct this exchange, starting with what Mary_H wrote, “I am going to continue to infer, from the context of the deep, deep regret he expresses in the diary as a whole, that during his interrogation with the police, he said things he would not have said without their ‘encouragement.’” Danceme replied, “If that were true he would have said so, in his diary, regretting having succombed to their techniques.” I responded, “Raffaele made a de facto retraction of what he said on the 5th-6th with his statements in front of Judge Matteini on the 8th. Works for me.” You commented, “Yea that's fine, but it didn't work for Raff & Manders - murder investigators are slightly more skeptical than that.” You responded to a follow-up comment of mine by saying, “But simply taking the [changing] word of murder suspects is not how it works in the real world - and it doesn't convince on a forum either.”

My response (“works for me”) means that I agree with the inference drawn by Mary_H: Raffaele retracted what he said on the night of the 5th-6th and expressed his regret. I do not agree with Danceme: what he did not say in his diary does not change what he did say in front of Judge Matteini. I did not say that the police should simply stop the investigation at this point, which appears to be the straw man you assembled.

Suppose that Raffaele’s computer provides unimpeachable evidence that there was nearly activity between 9 PM and midnight on the night of the murder. How would your opinion of the case change?