Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Kevin_Lowe]

Hi ! New poster and new to this case. My 2yr old broke her leg 2 weeks ago and I had lots of time indoors and came across this case. After reading a decent amount, I am pretty much for a not guilty vote. There are a few things I cant find good answers to though. Hoping I can get some answers here!

1. What is the prosecutions evidence that the floor was cleaned? Would it not be seen that some areas were cleaner than others?

The only "evidence" of a clean-up is the all the nonexistent damning evidence that they are sure would be there, if only there hadn't been a clean-up. It's an unfalsifiable hypothesis essentially.

2. Where is AK's or RS's "cleaned-up" bloody footprints in Meridiths room? Or did they supposedly hop or walk on towels til they got to the door or what?

They cleaned them up, duh!

3. I hear talk of mixed blood in the bathroom from AK and MK. If this really is AK's fresh blood, where did it come from? Why would Amanda be bleeding?

The prosecution story is that Amanda got injured in a fight with Meredith, however there's absolutely nothing to support that idea. It's another case of the prosecution confusing fitting a fact into a narrative on one hand, and finding evidence to incline a reasonable person to believe that narrative on the other.

Amanda's story was that she had an infected ear piercing which she cleaned in the sink, I believe.

I don't see blood in the sink being substantially more likely to be there in a guilty scenario than a non-guilty scenario.

4. Why do they think Rudy left right away? Why couldnt his footprints be from entering the room again after a period of time and then leaving?

As far as I can tell the real reasoning is "We want the blood in the bathroom to be evidence of Knox and Sollecito's guilt, so we need to make up a story where Guede was never in the bathroom at all, so we'll say he ran straight out the door after Meredith was stabbed".

That way they can claim the footprint on the bathmat was Raffaele's (because Guede ran right out, right?) and all the blood in the bathroom was put there by Raffaele and Amanda.

Once you admit the possibility that Guede went in there to wash blood off his leg after stabbing Meredith all that lovely pro-guilt evidence instantly becomes meaningless.

5. For the DNA evidence, I dont see anywhere where it is given the odds of the DNA being a particular individual. (ie 1:35,000,000 or 1:10).

I have some more but that's it for now!! Thanks!!

I don't think I've ever seen such numbers myself, but I don't actually think they are relevant in this case.

The false positive rate is important in cases where there is no obvious suspect at hand and a national DNA database is used to link someone to the crime. In such cases where the DNA could be compared to tens of thousands of potential matches the false positive rate is something you want to know about.

In a case like this one where the pool of suspects is tiny the odds of a false positive are so incredibly low they aren't relevant.

In this case what we are worried about is deliberate falsification or contamination in the laboratory, and in neither of those cases is the notional false positive rate due to coincidentally similar DNA a relevant number.

PS. Being so new to this case it was amazing to go to some of the first threads and see that almost everything reported about this case in the first weeks turned out to be false... cctv footage showing AK entering the cottage, phone calls to guede from AK, "bloody bathroom" photo, bleach receipts, etc....

Yup. If you're pro-guilt, about the only thing the police got right at all was, miraculously, the identity of the three killers (once they did a quick switcheroo to pop Lumumba out and Rudy in). Everything they claimed to base that conclusion on was wrong, but the conclusion was right... if you believe in that sort of thing.

If you're pro-innonence, of course, it's obvious that the whole investigation was a balls-up from the very beginning.

 

[Chris C]

Oh please. Go to TJMK and take a look at fawning over a much younger woman by middle aged men. PMF is obsessed with Amanda's sex life. I don't see the people who believe in her innocence being nearly so obsessed. Some of the people here are also working on other cases involving males. And for that matter Raffaele is male.

One of the last people my blog defended was Marc Driscoll, whose not exactly a young cute woman.

I think this site which supports knox didn't start as a knox supporter site.
http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2008_11_01_archive.html

Nor this woman.
http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/month.asp?blogmonth=2/1/2007&x=12&y=14

Here is the first post I believe on perugia shock. Look how quickly they already have a picture of Sollecito in a white suite and a knife. Dated Nov. 6 2007.
http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2007/11/patrick-diya-lumumba-arrested-as.html

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Oh please. Go to TJMK and take a look at fawning over a much younger woman by middle aged men.

A recurring theme in guilter rhetoric is projection.

You'll notice that almost all of the drooling over Amanda and Meredith's looks and sex life, and creepy over-familiarity with regard to Amanda, comes from the pro-guilt faction.

They have this kind of collective caricature of the pro-innocence poster as a paunchy, middle-aged shut-in with an unhealthy interest in the sex lives of university students, probably pretending to have some kind of relevant expertise they do not have, who would be enormously humiliated if their real appearance and life circumstances were revealed on the internet. I do wonder how much of this is based on their own insecurities.

 

[Chris C]

As far as I can tell the real reasoning is "We want the blood in the bathroom to be evidence of Knox and Sollecito's guilt, so we need to make up a story where Guede was never in the bathroom at all, so we'll say he ran straight out the door after Meredith was stabbed".

That way they can claim the footprint on the bathmat was Raffaele's (because Guede ran right out, right?) and all the blood in the bathroom was put there by Raffaele and Amanda.

Once you admit the possibility that Guede went in there to wash blood off his leg after stabbing Meredith all that lovely pro-guilt evidence instantly becomes meaningless.

Yeah I've never understood that rational thinking about guede running straight out of the apartment after the murder. He actually claims to go into the room, then go into the bathroom to get the towels, then go back to Meredith to try and help her. He literally admits to going from Meredith's room into the very bathroom that the bloody mat is in and then takes the towels from that bathroom back to the room which Meredith is in

Plus lets not forget he also admits to being in every room in the house and outside under Filomena's window helping Meredith search for signs of a break in for whoever stole her money. I really wish they could get this guy on the stand.

 

[Chris C]

They have this kind of collective caricature of the pro-innocence poster as a paunchy, middle-aged shut-in with an unhealthy interest in the sex lives of university students, probably pretending to have some kind of relevant expertise they do not have, who would be enormously humiliated if their real appearance and life circumstances were revealed on the internet. I do wonder how much of this is based on their own insecurities.

They also spend alot of time tracking down pro-innocense people and posting pictures of them on the internet.

 

[Sherkeu]

Thanks Kevin for answering my questions. I realize some of this stuff may have been discussed ages ago so I appreciate it. Still wonder how the hallway cleaned footprints showed up but the bedroom cleaned footprints did not! The whole scenario is just so implausible

Sher

PS. Not a middle aged man here! Just a 30 something mommy who did her own share of living abroad at 20 in Germany and Australia and has experience with being intimidated into making statements that were untrue (and then wondering why the hell I didnt stand up for myself! I was so book smart and yet so street stupid!)

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

It seems like a pretty crappy hobby to me.

I beg to differ. For me it has become a fascinating pursuit. I'm a crime buff, with boxes full of true-crime paperbacks. This is a chance to get involved in a major case. I have gotten to know Amanda's family, I have met Amanda herself, and I have gotten access to the evidence. And I have a goal in life, which is to get Amanda and Raffaele out of prison. Because of my interest in crime, I know that when someone is wrongfully convicted, the system won't fix the mistake on its own. Instead it will seek to bury the mistake. If it gets fixed, it will be the result of pressure from the media and the public. That is what us FOAKERS are doing. It's a channel for our energy and passion. It affords us a chance to do something that will make the world a better place.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

That was my point. Those woman were not in the lead. The prosecution's theory is not that Raffaele committed a rape/torture/murder with Amanda assisting but that Amanda committed a rape/torture/murder with Raffaele assisting. I'm not sure why they went this route, but IMHO this makes the prosecution's case something like 1000x less plausible.

Now I think you try people on the prosecution's case not some alternate theory so.... But even if I did reverse this, Raffaele has none of the history you would expect with a 23 year old psychopathic sexual sadist. At 20 it is just barely believable that Amanda was a deeply masochist and didn't know, but generally you would expect to have former lovers talk about how rough she liked. Using your example, most of Karla Homolka's lovers were kinda freaked out by how rough she wanted them to be.

But the reverse? Raffaele is a sexual masochist and identifies with Meredith sexually? I don't get the dynamic they were proposing, I don't understand how this went without comment in the trial.

I think a lot of people take the view that crazy things happen, and this is no crazier than a lot of other cases. That is the view of someone whose understanding of crime is limited to sensational headlines. In fact, criminal behavior is diverse, but it falls within certain limits. What the prosecutor has proposed in this case, and what the court has presented in its report, are well outside those limits.

Plus, the evidence at the crime scene tells a story, and it is not the story of an attack by multiple people that escalated. The evidence clearly depicts a swift, lethal attack by one individual who grabbed Meredith from behind and cut her throat, and then decided to commit a sexual assault as she lay dying. That kind of homicide happens very rarely, but it does happen. It is consistent with criminal behavior.

 

[christianahannah]

The bloody shoeprint on the pillow is attributed to Rudy. Even Massei conceded that one and said that Amanda was most likely barefoot in any case. There are no footprints or shoeprints in Meredith's room that were attributed to either Amanda or Raffaele.

I had thought Massei made no judgment of the attribution of the shoeprint on the pillow. He appeared to be non-committal on this item of evidence, instead recounting arguments from both sides without giving weight to either.

 

[Poppy1016]

I beg to differ. For me it has become a fascinating pursuit. I'm a crime buff, with boxes full of true-crime paperbacks. This is a chance to get involved in a major case. I have gotten to know Amanda's family, I have met Amanda herself, and I have gotten access to the evidence. And I have a goal in life, which is to get Amanda and Raffaele out of prison. Because of my interest in crime, I know that when someone is wrongfully convicted, the system won't fix the mistake on its own. Instead it will seek to bury the mistake. If it gets fixed, it will be the result of pressure from the media and the public. That is what us FOAKERS are doing. It's a channel for our energy and passion. It affords us a chance to do something that will make the world a better place.

I just wanted to say thank you for all your good work in this cause. You have helped me to gain a better understanding of this miscarriage of justice.

 

[komponisto]

Why the hell do you people care so much about this girl?

Speaking for myself:

(1) If I were in her situation, I would hope that people would care about me.

(2) Perhaps more than most victims of wrongful prosecution, I find Knox and Sollecito to be particularly sympathetic individuals, and their misfortune upsets me greatly.

Read about Amanda Knox; she isn't just some random person off the street. Nor is Raffaele Sollecito.

 

[Kaosium]

So then, I guess the prosecution wins that one according to the way most on here think. Thanks - Go Pros

Go truth. Have you seen the pictures side by side? What did you think?

 

[komponisto]

The point I am trying to make, but losing, is how easily everyone on here believes this Ron Hendry guy because he is spouting what you guys (and girls) wants to hear. To say how inept the investigators in Perugia were concerning the bra strap because 'Ron Hendry' say's something different, just isn't right because he was not there, he did not have a chance to hold or look at it under a microscope or test it any way he may have wanted to, instead he looked at pictures like the ones we can all see. His view should be worth about the same as any of ours, but sadly, it is not so.

Hendry is an expert in accident reconstruction; hence there is good reason to suppose that his view of what the photos indicate is worth more than the average person's.

 

[lionking]

Hendry is an expert in accident reconstruction

That's good. Where's the accident here?

 

[Kaosium]

As for your question dtugg, what I find intresting (translate: creepy) is how many middle-aged men are soooooo concerned that this woman is set free.

I put that through google translate and it came out:

'Harrumph! MEN!'

"Evil be to him who evil thinks."

 

[Kaosium]

The point I am trying to make, but losing, is how easily everyone on here believes this Ron Hendry guy because he is spouting what you guys (and girls) wants to hear. To say how inept the investigators in Perugia were concerning the bra strap because 'Ron Hendry' say's something different, just isn't right because he was not there, he did not have a chance to hold or look at it under a microscope or test it any way he may have wanted to, instead he looked at pictures like the ones we can all see. His view should be worth about the same as any of ours, but sadly, it is not so.

Have you noticed that not a single person with experience in forensics, even Colonel Garafano, has come to the defense of the Scientific Police in this matter? Two FBI agents with forensic experience think they Fubared it and have come to the aid of Amanda and Raffaele, Ron Hendry is yet another. People have given up jobs to pursue it, have made it their current mission in life, and put sterling reputations on the line.

The 'explanation' for that is 'PR conspiracy' or pop-psychology prattle about mid-life crises or prurient desire. What could also be considered is the possibility if those people can just look at the pictures and are willing to go to that extreme, then perhaps it might just be that the scientific police really did that embarrassing a job, being as that's what it looks like in the tapes that Charlie Wilkes posts and you can see for yourself.

 

[Beerina]

I have no idea but in America facing profound prosecutorial misconduct the judge acquits. They rightly feel that once widespread misconduct is proven it throws all evidence into doubt and creates reasonable doubt by itself.

IANAL, but isn't it more than that? That particular conviction is hopelessly queered, and the government cannot re-try someone they screwed up the first trial of because of double jeopardy.

 

[Draca]

To say how inept the investigators in Perugia were concerning the bra strap because 'Ron Hendry' say's something different, just isn't right because he was not there.

The same for Steve Moore, John Douglas, Elizabeth A. Johnson, Ph.D. and Greg Hampikian, Ph.D., Mark Waturbury.

To say how inept the investigators were has been well documented by now. Not just inept but utterly inept. Although it might be over worked, under staffed and under paid as a reason. Perhaps lazy in a government job sort of way also. No fear of reprecussions. I don't understand the complete lack of standards. Who is charge of training and compliance? Who watches the watchers in Perugia?

 

[Withnail1969]

That's good. Where's the accident here?

Ask Barbie Nadeau. Her theory is that Meredith impaled her throat on a knife blade by accident.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

I just wanted to say thank you for all your good work in this cause. You have helped me to gain a better understanding of this miscarriage of justice.

Thank you for taking an interest. The more people who do, the quicker this will get fixed.