Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Withnail1969]

And additionally if I saw blood on the sink, I'd clean it off. Why did she just leave it there?

Perhaps I would leave it there if I knew it was connected to a crime and I wouldn't want to touch it.

How did it help her to leave the blood there? It was used against her and helped to convict her.

 

[truethat]

What did you do four nights ago--for sure? Or was it three nights ago you did that? What did you have for dinner, when did you go to bed? I couldn't tell you those things for sure. She's under a lot of stress at this point too, not really herself being as her roommate was just murdered in her own home, yards away from where she slept. You hear about people being uncomfortable in their homes and 'violated' after a burglary, it must be worse with murder, especially for a girl just out of her teens.

P.S. She was stoned on hash that night.



Meredith was killed the night of the 1st, Amanda was broken early on the 6th, about 1:45. Rudy Guede, the guy who broke in and killed Meredith leaving his physical evidence all over the crime scene including inside her has been convicted and sentenced to fifteen years in jail. That's about half the sentence meted out to Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, whose families have also been charged for protesting the injustice overmuch in the eyes of PM Mignini, a rather curious fellow himself. That is a very strange way for the Perugian court to show justice to Meredith, and to her grieving family, and outside rectifying that injustice not much more can be done.



She spent the better part of the week being interviewed and interrogated, culminating in a late night session with at least twelve cops. Cops who suspected her and their boss of being involved and who apparently wanted Amanda to have a 'repressed memory' of seeing Patrick at the scene.



Meredith's door was locked, and there wasn't much evidence in the bathroom, mainly some blood on the bathmat and a little in the sink and I guess she didn't leap to the conclusion her roommate was murdered, she figured it was something mundane like menstrual issues. Eventually not being able to reach Meredith on her cell she became more concerned, and her boyfriend called the police, but another police car returning the thrown out cell phones arrived sooner and they implored them to break down the door after Raffaele was unable to.

Here's a site that will fill you in on the basics:

I appreciate your input. Thanks!


I just want to reiterate that the reason that she became as suspect and so did RAFAELLE (sp?) is that both their stories didn't at up from the start.


I don't understand why so many people are ignoring Rafaelle in this case? I get what you are saying about AK but Rafaelle also lied and didn't know what \really happened the night before. No one is raging against his "unfair conviction" he's barely even mentioned. Look at the thread title for example.


You have a couple, they BOTH don't remember what they did the night before, they BOTH keep changing their story it's not adding up.

Most people who are gung ho innocent treat AK as if she is the only one who spoke to the police, that she was traumatized, didn't understand the language and in distress. Well how do you explain Rafaelle then?


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2824508.ece


He says this:

He added: "In my former statement I told you a load of rubbish because I believed Amanda's version of what happened and did not think about the inconsistencies."

Why do people just blow that off?

 

[RoseMontague]

Surely not worthless.

Patrick also gives his opinion about Amanda's statement today:

http://www.agi.it/news/notizie/2010...umumba_amanda_mi_ha_fatto_pena_ma_e_strategia

Amanda's statement before the court (it is 15 minutes):

http://www.umbria24.it/video/amanda-in-lacrime-parla-nellaula-del-processo-laudio-integrale/

I think Amanda did today what needed to have been done earlier - apologize to Patrick and give sympathy for the fate of Meredith and to the Kerchers. While some may say too late it still needed to occur whatever the reason behind doing so. I don't know if it is too little too late, I will leave that for others to judge. I imagine, depending on which side one is on, will be one's opinion of her statement today.

I know that there were some who didn't agree with my posting earlier that this apology and sympathy is what should have been done during the first trial and when the family of Amanda first started speaking out on her behalf. If done in the beginning, I don't think it would have hurt Amanda. In fact, I think it would possibly have helped her in both the public's opinion and maybe, even in the court's opinion.

Thanks Christiana, both for your opinion and the links.

ETA: It saddens me to hear her crying.

 

[truethat]

How did it help her to leave the blood there? It was used against her and helped to convict her.

She wouldn't have been able to anticipate that. If she knew that she didn't touch Meredith she would know there's RG's DNA on the blood if he came to wash his hands. So wouldn't touch it.

If I came home, to an apartment where my roommate had been on my case about my cleanliness and sanitary habits, if I was on my period and saw blood drops on the floor and blood on the sink that was dried, I would think that somehow I didn't notice and while changing a tampon or something had accicentally trailed blood. I would have cleaned it off if I didn't think something major was going down, which AK says she didn't at first.

How many of you women would go into the bathroom and see blood on the faucet and just leave it and walk out? At the very least I'd spray some cleaner on it.

It's little things like this that don't add up. The only way they add up is if she knew something was going down.


If she was in an innocent frame of mind, she would have just cleaned it off. Right?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

only on 5 November

truethat,

I do not concur with your evaluation. Prior to 5 November, their stories were consistent, AFAIK. The police clearly stepped up the pressure on both of them on that night. It appears to have taken several days for each of them to regain his or her equilibrium, but after that, their stories matched again.

 

[truethat]

truethat,

This injustice has always been just as much about Raffaele as it is about Amanda. Actually, Raffaele tried to break the door down but just kind of dented it, IIRC. The postal police did not want to break the door down themselves; they did not want to take the responsibility.

I cannot be 100% certain that Raffaele lied, but assuming he did, my take on it is similar to RoseMontague's. Raffaele had no reason to suspect that the forensic work on the knife was, to put it charitably, slipshod. So he answered nonsense with a lie. Not a smart thing to do, but not all that surprising from someone as inexperienced with the criminal justice system as he was.

Amanda's statement about not being able to remember making love to Raffaele on the night of the 1st was made on the 6th. Her confusion is apparent in more than one place in the document you cited. Her inability to remember it at that point is not a big deal for me.

Sorry but I'm still not buying it. I'm not saying you are wrong I'm just explaining why some people are still very very suspicious of the couple.

I would definitely remember what I did the night before if I came home and found my roommate murdered.

Maybe I'm an unusual case but I actually did experience something like this. I came to work one day and found out my boss had been the victim of a murder

http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=4&id=37533


Everything that happened the night before at the time I clearly remembered. I of course don't remember it all these years later but all of us at work were shocked and each one of us went around saying "Oh my god I just saw him last night" and it was very vivid in our minds, sort of frozen in our minds.

I guess that's why her saying that she can't remember and that she was wracking her brain trying to remember things just doesn't add up to me. THE FIRST interrogation was almost immediately after finding the body.

 

[truethat]

truethat,

I do not concur with your evaluation. Prior to 5 November, their stories were consistent, AFAIK. The police clearly stepped up the pressure on both of them on that night. It appears to have taken several days for each of them to regain his or her equilibrium, but after that, their stories matched again.

What I am saying is that saying "I can't remember what I did last night" amounts to a lie to me. That they consistently told this same lie over and over again is what made the cops suspicious and why they applied pressure.


I could of course be wrong but it seems very unlikely to me that BOTH again I keep emphasizing this and people keep ignoring it, BOTH of them say they couldn't quite remember what happened the night before.

Of course the cops are going to be suspicious, everyone would be.

 

[Withnail1969]

She wouldn't have been able to anticipate that. If she knew that she didn't touch Meredith she would know there's RG's DNA on the blood if he came to wash his hands. So wouldn't touch it.

So it's back to 'Bye Rudy, thanks for everything, yeah, don't worry, we'll take care of the cleanup - no, of course we won't forget to flush the toilet and clean the sink, and your fingerprints and footprints. You can trust us.'

 

[truethat]

So it's back to 'Bye Rudy, thanks for everything, yeah, don't worry, we'll take care of the cleanup - no, of course we won't forget to flush the toilet and clean the sink, and your fingerprints and footprints. You can trust us.'

It's not back to anything. I am new to this discussion so all the comments that have been gone over before I apologize for bringing back up again.

What I am saying is that from a logical train of thought the actions don't make sense.


I'd like an answer please:


Logical


You come home, you don't get suspicious but the door is open, you go into the bathroom and casually take a shower, you get out of the shower and see blood drops on the floor, and dried blood on the faucet. You still don't think anything is up, what do you do?

What would any normal person do? You'd clean the blood off the faucet. Especially if you were on your period, you might think it was yours. Why wouldn't you clean it off?

IS there anyone on this thread that is saying if they went into their bathroom and saw dried blood on the faucet, that you wouldn't clean it off if you didn't have any suspicions?

 

[pilot padron]

The police refused to break the door.

Really ?? sounds very authoritative, but

Please you, or one of your cohorts with a more appropriate use of the ignore option, might please share with us , this evidence based gathering, just who did break in the door (according to your knowledge of the facts and events of course)

 

[Kaosium]

<...>

Also the point I keep trying to get across is that the reason she was interrogated and Rafaelle was interrogated the way they were is because their stories didn't add up and they acted suspiciously.

Apparently according to the head policeman Giobbi, it was that she wiggled her hips once, went out and ate pizza with Raffaele, and starting sobbing at another point unexpectedly.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20000577-504083.html

If AK and R decided to be each other's alibi and then she was told Rafaelle threw her under the bus, it would make sense that she'd change her story at that moment, which is what she did.

Raffaele was also told Amanda 'threw him under the bus.' It's a variation of something called 'The Prisoner Dilemma.' It's an interrogation technique that works on hardened criminals. Unfortunately if you lie to a young man like Raffaele and say that his new girlfriend just 'gave him up' then he might just get angry and heartbroken and lie back to save himself.

At any rate, regardless, the police put the screws to Amanda and then arrest Raffaele, Patrick Lumumba (Meredith and Amanda's boss) and Amanda, drive them through town lights flashing and sirens blaring like they just captured a mafioso head according to one observer and then announce 'case closed.'

Then they find out a few days later that the evidence at the scene, and there's a lot of it, belongs to Rudy Guede, who had fled to Germany.

 

[Withnail1969]

It's not back to anything. I am new to this discussion so all the comments that have been gone over before I apologize for bringing back up again.

What I am saying is that from a logical train of thought the actions don't make sense.


I'd like an answer please:


Logical


You come home, you don't get suspicious but the door is open, you go into the bathroom and casually take a shower, you get out of the shower and see blood drops on the floor, and dried blood on the faucet. You still don't think anything is up, what do you do?

What would any normal person do? You'd clean the blood off the faucet. Especially if you were on your period, you might think it was yours. Why wouldn't you clean it off?

IS there anyone on this thread that is saying if they went into their bathroom and saw dried blood on the faucet, that you wouldn't clean it off if you didn't have any suspicions?

She sees the blood, becomes slightly uncomfortable and doesn't have any cleaning cloths to hand to remove it. She sees the unflushed toilet, feels a bit more uncomfortable, and decides to head back to Raff's rather than deal with the mess.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

not tabula rasa

truethat,

Both Amanda and Raffaele remember the broken pipe underneath Raffaele's sink that night, for example. To the best of my knowledge, both remember watching Amelie. It is not as if they are claiming that they have no memory of that night whatsoeve. Ms. Dempsey's summary of Raffaele's testimony before Judge Matteini is that they remember similar things but at different times of the evening.

Would you care to revisit your comments about the Norfolk Four?

 

[Kaosium]

I'd like an answer please:


Logical


You come home, you don't get suspicious but the door is open, you go into the bathroom and casually take a shower, you get out of the shower and see blood drops on the floor, and dried blood on the faucet. You still don't think anything is up, what do you do?

What would any normal person do? You'd clean the blood off the faucet. Especially if you were on your period, you might think it was yours. Why wouldn't you clean it off?

IS there anyone on this thread that is saying if they went into their bathroom and saw dried blood on the faucet, that you wouldn't clean it off if you didn't have any suspicions?

If she was guilty she damn well should have, shouldn't she have? It would be kinda stupid to leave it there.

 

[Kestrel]

Also the point I keep trying to get across is that the reason she was interrogated and Rafaelle was interrogated the way they were is because their stories didn't add up and they acted suspiciously.

I have heard people claim that the behavior of Amanda and Raffaele outside the cottage after Meredith's body was found was suspicious. But all I see when I look at the video is a young lady in shock and grief being comforted by her boyfriend.

As for their stories not adding up, I don't see that. The two disagree on minor details, but that should be expected by anyone familiar with the research into eyewitness accounts. In fact, two eyewitnesses giving identical accounts is a rather good indication that they have been coached.

 

[RoseMontague]

You come home, you don't get suspicious but the door is open, you go into the bathroom and casually take a shower, you get out of the shower and see blood drops on the floor, and dried blood on the faucet. You still don't think anything is up, what do you do?

What would any normal person do? You'd clean the blood off the faucet. Especially if you were on your period, you might think it was yours. Why wouldn't you clean it off?

IS there anyone on this thread that is saying if they went into their bathroom and saw dried blood on the faucet, that you wouldn't clean it off if you didn't have any suspicions?

If you got out of the shower and realized you didn't have a towel your actions might be different.

Blood drops on the faucet I would find out who left the mess and tell them to clean it. Only if I had company coming over would I clean someones else blood up behind them and then only if they were not around to do it themselves.

She was suspicious but if you see a few drops of blood your first thought is not that someone had just been murdered at least I have never had that thought upon seeing a few drops of blood in the bathroom. I would assume what she did or that someone might have cut themselves shaving.

 

[pilot padron]

If you got out of the shower and realized you didn't have a towel your actions might be different.

Blood drops on the faucet I would find out who left the mess and tell them to clean it. Only if I had company coming over would I clean someones else blood up behind them and then only if they were not around to do it themselves.

She was suspicious but if you see a few drops of blood your first thought is not that someone had just been murdered at least I have never had that thought upon seeing a few drops of blood in the bathroom. I would assume what she did or that someone might have cut themselves shaving.

And as you well know, if you suddenly then see a footprint on the mat that just might be yours, while still naked, and towel less, and with the front door still wide open, you would of course, place only one foot on the bathmat and do this self depicted 'surfing similar, skate board boogie maneuver' to get from the bathroom to your room.

Just more perspectives and perceptions, Rose, for 'the rest of the story'

 

[RoseMontague]

And as you well know, if you suddenly then see a footprint on the mat that just might be yours, while still naked, and towel less, and with the front door still wide open, you would of course, place only one foot on the bathmat and do like a 'surfing similar, skate board boogie maneuver' to get from the bathroom to your room.

Just more perspectives and perceptions, Rose, for 'the rest of the story'

You may have forgotten that I said my opinion was the bathmat boogie was made up. If it were me, I would head to nearest place I knew there was a towel.

 

[truethat]

She sees the blood, becomes slightly uncomfortable and doesn't have any cleaning cloths to hand to remove it. She sees the unflushed toilet, feels a bit more uncomfortable, and decides to head back to Raff's rather than deal with the mess.

How does "flushing a toilet" equate to dealing with that mess? I'd have flushed the turd down. Who wouldn't?

Especially if I went back in the bathroom to dry my hair. I'm not going to stand there drying my hair with a turd floating in the toilet.

Also how do people know she doesn't have any cleaning cloths?

How do people know all these things that are used to explain away logic?


Yes they remembered watching a movie, the pipes breaking etc, but Rafaelle said he doesn't remember if she was there or not. That is pretty bizarre and then isn't there a CCTV clip that shows her near her house when she said she was at home with Rafaelle?

I mean again, what kinds of things would a normal person get confused about, time lines, what time his father called, how long he was actually on the computer, who they spoke to, things they may have talked about etc.

Leaving an apartment? Who in the hell is going to get confused about whether or not they stayed in the apartment all night or left???


Again, I am not trying to say she is guilty but that it is reasonable to suspect the girl. The pro innocent people are trying to make a case that some random grifter killed MK. But Rudy was their friend, I would suspect they did drugs together or something at the house and that's part of why she's so confused. Rafaelle too.

 

[truethat]

I have heard people claim that the behavior of Amanda and Raffaele outside the cottage after Meredith's body was found was suspicious. But all I see when I look at the video is a young lady in shock and grief being comforted by her boyfriend.

As for their stories not adding up, I don't see that. The two disagree on minor details, but that should be expected by anyone familiar with the research into eyewitness accounts. In fact, two eyewitnesses giving identical accounts is a rather good indication that they have been coached.

I agree. I'm not talking about interpreting behavior. And even if her behavior was "weird" she could well be a psychopath who thinks it is sexy and hot to be involved in a murder mystery in Italy. What an adventure. That still doesn't make her guilty of the crime or involved. She could just be some ◊◊◊◊◊◊ up chick.

The details are NOT minor, not knowing whether she stayed in the apartment or left the night before is not a minor detail. It is a major detail. He was her alibi, if he's lying to cover for her then he knows something more than he's saying.