Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
treehorn said:
Haven't you heard? India is the new hotbed of world-class medical research: The Indian Journal of Pharmacology is "The New NEJM."
Click to expand...


Ha. This comment reminds me of one I read on PMF today: "...To say Meredith was in a relationship with Rudy ...I'd be extremely insulted if I were the parents."

And you guys accuse us of racism.
 
Onofarar said:
Actually it is probable that the stain was deposited the night of the crime. Remember, MK was the clean freak (at least relative to AK) and she had just started a load of laundry that afternoon or early evening. Do you think she would not include in her laundry a stained pillowcase? If she was doing a load of "coloreds" and not "whites" then at the least she would remove the stained linen and replace it. Thus an inference can be made that the stain occurred after the laundry was started. When was it made that night? - The most probable time would be during Meredith's fight for her life (or thereafter if a sick sexual act/assault was made on Meredith while she lay dying).

Testing the stain would of course eliminate much of the speculation here and elsewhere. Why would a court "searching for the truth" not require a test of the stain?
Click to expand...

Not only that but its on her pillow. Are guilters suggesting that Meredith would lay her head on semen deposited by someone on her pillow? The prosecution doesn't care to find out whether its semen or not. Could that be because they dont want to explain why Meredith wouldn't wash a pillowcase that has semen on it? What kinda person believes that Meredith would rather lay her head in semen then wash her pillowcase? The only conclusion would be IF it is semen then it was deposited after she was attacked.
 
Last edited:
Hello, folks. I've been lurking in this forum since I read the English translation of the Massei report back in August. A true crime buff, I've been absorbed with the story since I saw a headline about it in La Repubblica during a trip to Italy in the fall of 2008.

I'm a news junkie, too, but have little patience for "Dateline" style TV journalism. Perhaps that's why my first exposure to it happened in Italy close to a year after it happened. When I came back to the states I caught up. I'm fascinated by the Rashomon-like version differences presented in Washington state based news sites vs. UK tabloids. I've read Barbie's and Candace's books and found similar discrepancies.

My big question, on the eve of the appeal, is about drug tests. The Massei report seems to indicate that AK and RS were not subject to any blood, urine, or hair tests. Evidence of consumption of meth, coke, LSD, or PCP may have helped the prosecution's case, given that there are precedents that using these substances can lead to violent crime. Were any drug tests, even for cannabis, conducted? Given that the accused admitted to toking, did law enforcement just take their word for it?

Law enforcement accepting their admittance of drug use, without drug testing, seems lax to me, given that AK and RS lied about the break in and the clean up. They could be lying about cannabis to conceal use of much harder drugs that lead to the murder.
 
Mary_H said:
Ha. This comment reminds me of one I read on PMF today: "...To say Meredith was in a relationship with Rudy ...I'd be extremely insulted if I were the parents."

And you guys accuse us of racism.
Click to expand...

Mary, this is the second time that you've conflated 'racism' with 'elitism' (for lack of a better word) and subsequently characterized my views on Indian medical science as being based upon "race" rather than academic renown/ prestige/ R&D funding/ scientific leadership/ university endowments/ etc..

I take the gravest possible exception to your unfounded and inappropriate accusation. If you had any manners, you'd apologize.
 
Last edited:
Mary_H said:
Ha. This comment reminds me of one I read on PMF today: "...To say Meredith was in a relationship with Rudy ...I'd be extremely insulted if I were the parents."

And you guys accuse us of racism.
Click to expand...

I'm not one of "them" - I haven't read PMF in ages and, as a result, have no idea what the context of that post might have been.

That said, the comment (as quoted) does not, on its face, necessarily imply that Guede's "race" (as opposed to, say, his conduct, for example) is the reason the author views Guede negatively.

To be fair, I've never seen "racist" views expressed on PMF. Not once. (Sadly, I cannot say the same for other case discussion boards.)
 
LondonJohn said:
I agree. This is why luminol testing can be extremely useful in detecting crime-scene clean-ups. Even if blood is wiped up (assuming that no bleach is used), very dilute blood will almost always still be left. This blood is invisible to the naked eye, but shows up under luminol. Had there been a clean-up of the hallway, Meredith's room or the small bathroom, one would not expect to see identifiable footprints with luminol; instead one would expect to see wiping/smearing patterns - invisible to the naked eye - caused by the removal of visible blood with a mop or rag. In the case of a tiled floor, one would also expect luminol to expose dilute blood in the grouting between the tiles.
Click to expand...

Also, they were supposed to be high as kites at that time. Personal experience with inebriation leads me to believe an error free clean up while high is impossible.

It would be pretty great if that weren’t the case though, wouldn’t it.
‘Honey, remember, today is the day we set aside to clean the bathroom and the floors.’
‘Okay, darling, I’ll start mixing the martinis and you fire up the bong. We’re going to have this place looking top shape in no time!’

Here is my take on the luminol print that seems clearly to be a footprint:

The footprint was found with luminol because it was not visibile. If it once had been visible, the visibility would have to been removed via cleaning, and it would smear. So it was never visible, and so not the product of Knox stepping directly into blood. If Knox had washed her feet, and walked barefoot without realizing each step was leaving a bloody footprint, there would be a clear trail of luminol detected prints for both feet, because it would not occur to her to clean them up. That only leaves the possibility that she inadvertently stepped in a pool of highly diluted blood with one foot. However, there should be a luminol enhanced spot where that pool was located, but there isn’t. Therefore, the print does not consist of diluted blood and is not connected to the crime.
 
ElsieEthrington said:
Law enforcement accepting their admittance of drug use, without drug testing, seems lax to me, given that AK and RS lied about the break in and the clean up. They could be lying about cannabis to conceal use of much harder drugs that lead to the murder.
Click to expand...

I doubt I will be the last to point this out, but that is hardly a given.
 
ElsieEthrington said:
Law enforcement accepting their admittance of drug use, without drug testing, seems lax to me, given that AK and RS lied about the break in and the clean up. They could be lying about cannabis to conceal use of much harder drugs that lead to the murder.
Click to expand...

What clean up? What part did they lie about the break in?
 
Chris C said:
...There was no evidence presented at trial that the food that was found in the small intestines was in the incorrect part of the small intestines...
Click to expand...

Were you in the Perugian courtroom?

Do you speak Italian?

Do you have translations of the expert testimony in this regard?

How did YOU avoid being asked to leave the courtroom, along with all of the media in attendance, when this evidence was adduced at trial?
 
Hello again, everyone:

I'm thinking of promoting a circus act. All videos of climbing the Wall, Bathroom gymnastics, would be welcome. All pertaining to explaining innocence, of course.

My thanks to Justinian, and RWV, for the enternaing stories of their life experiences.

And here I was, believing there was no smoke without fire :(.

Carry on..........
 
Chris C said:
Here you go.

http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=259
Click to expand...

I've read that translation of the Court's judgment. Carefully.

You'll note that the translation is devoid of ANY of the expert testimony, sworn statements, reports, photographs, and other exhibits and arguments routinely referred to/ cited throughout the course of the 427 page judgment.

So I repeat: How do YOU know whether testimony and exhibits were/ were not adduced at trial in respect of the position of alimentary matter???
 
Last edited:
But...But... Treehorn...If you're going to go THAT route.......There's no need for this thread. Supposition is the name of the game here....Woulda, coulda, shoulda.

You need IMAGINATION, Man.!!!!!!!!!
 
capealadin said:
..
I'm thinking of promoting a circus act. All videos of climbing the Wall, Bathroom gymnastics, would be welcome.
Click to expand...

I'd give a day's pay (at least) to see those wall climbing vids - when's your circus coming to the States? I'll be the first in line.

Funny that the 'million dollar defense team' didn't bother to produce a decent vid of their own - just to show the hypothetical "mantling move"/ window entry (devoid of traces) was humanly possible...
 
capealadin said:
But...But... Treehorn...If you're going to go THAT route.......There's no need for this thread. Supposition is the name of the game here....Woulda, coulda, shoulda.

You need IMAGINATION, Man.!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

I see! I think I'm finally getting the hang of things:

Supposition is fine except when I can find a peer-reviewed journal that supports one of my beliefs (however tangentially), at which point, I begin waxing rhapsodic about the virtues of "evidence based argument" while remaining free, at all times, to resort to rank speculation in the hope that no one notices the little 'back-slide'/ fall from grace...

It's a little like politics, yes?
 
treehorn said:
I've read that translation of the Court's judgment. Carefully.

You'll note that the translation is devoid of ANY of the expert testimony, sworn statements, reports, photographs, and other exhibits and arguments routinely referred to/ cited throughout the course of the 427 page judgment.

So I repeat: How do YOU know whether testimony and exhibits were/ were not adduced at trial in respect of the position of alimentary matter???
Click to expand...

Oh ok, so what you really meant was unless you speak Italian your opinion or observations have no weight on this forum.
I understand now, only Italian Speaking JREF members can post here.
Which also means anything I've read in english instead of italian has no weight either and can't be posted here.
Anyone that wasn't in the courtroom can't post here.
Anyone that wasn't tossed out of the courtroom can't post here.
Anyone that doesn't have exact translations can't post here.
Matter of fact if Kevin Lowe doesn't speak italian, wasn't in court and then tossed out and have translations this whole thread should be erased.

Now I understand your reasoning.

Or are you saying only I need all the above credentials to post here?
 
On The Eve Of Her APPEAL.

On the eve of the APPEAL trial, I'll provide an argument that doesn't even show up in the APPEAL document for Amanda Knox.

There's reason to believe that the jury in the first trial had a false opinion about a matter of major significance. Mixed blood supposedly found at the cottage.

As a matter of fact, there was no mixed blood found. Yes, Amanda's DNA was found in samples of Meredith's blood. And a drop of Amanda's blood was found on the faucet to the bathroom sink. But there was no sample found which was shown to contain the blood of both.

In the Massei MOTIVATIONS report--- published three months after the verdict--- there's no mention of mixed blood. And yet, when the jury convicted Amanda in December, it appears that the jury believed mixed blood had been discovered. Permit me to quote from Barbie:

"The defense's biggest mistake, according to interviews with jurors after the trial, was doing nothing to refute the mixed-blood evidence beyond noting that it is common to find mingled DNA when two people live in the same house. The jurors needed more than that. 'To have mixed blood, you have to both be bleeding,' one of them remarked to me after the verdict.' " (Angel Face, pages 152)

If the jurors---or some of the jurors--- really did believe that mixed blood had been found, and if---as Barbie illustrates---the jurors considered this to be of considerable significance, and if I were one of the defense team, I'd be interviewing those jurors. The best witnesses for Amanda during her second trial may prove to be the jurors who convicted her during her first trial.

///
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom