Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Chris C]

[qimg]http://www.all-wear.gr/photos/1224593797-4.jpg[/qimg]

Hey Chris C,
You have a good eye too, what do you think is the color of the sneakers that the person walking in the garage is wearing?
Watching that video over and over again, I seem to feel that the person has white sneakers on.
What do you think?

They are definately light colored. I dont know all the colors available, but those are definately not dark shoes. You can tell by the rest of the persons clothes, that didn't turn white on the camera. So I would have to agree that the shoes that are being worn are white.

If Rudy's outbreak 2 sneakers are black or dark colored, then thats not him walking. Which also begs to differ, why no one has come forward and said that was them walking on the camera. IF thats not Rudy or Sollecito, then Rudy should be arguing that person is the killer.

 

[Danceme]

Actually not so, because Fine completely misrepresents Hendry's reconstruction.

Well in reality I only commented on the part I cut out of the quote, not Hendry's reconstruction. I found it very astute of Fine to point out how Rudy had little need to be tugging so hard on a bra strap to break it off her body when he very conveniently had a knife in the very hand he would have had to use to tug with because the other one was surely restraining Meredith somehow. So simple really.

 

[Danceme]

If someone has the link to that video handy can you post it again please.

 

[Chris C]

Well then in your opinion Chris, who didn't lie, who isn't corrupt and who isn't incompetent in regard to the prosecution?

Stefanoni, Curatolo, Knox, Sollecito, Mignini, Guede, Postal Police, Kokomani, Capezzali, (Quintavalle, the employees and Volturno), (that police commissioner that contracted the claims that knox wasn't summoned to the police station).

I'm sure i could keep going but you know all these people have lied in this case in one form or another. That includes Knox and Sollecito.

 

[Chris C]

Well in reality I only commented on the part I cut out of the quote, not Hendry's reconstruction. I found it very astute of Fine to point out how Rudy had little need to be tugging so hard on a bra strap to break it off her body when he very conveniently had a knife in the very hand he would have had to use to tug with because the other one was surely restraining Meredith somehow. So simple really.

No matter how you look at it. Cut or pulled. Neither of them add up to the prosecutions theory that the bra was cut off with a knife. Since the bra wasn't cut with a bloody knife, and some claim it was pulled off by breaking the seams, then it doesn't match the prosecutions theory of the assault. Either it was cut with a 3rd knife or it was broken lose and not cut. Matter of fact, if the seams broke loose, it could have just as easily been pulled loose while Meredith was on her back. I believe the supposed rape did occur while she was on her back. The final position of the bra would make more sense if the bra was broke free from the front. With the bra being pulled towards the attack and it breaking lose at the back seams, all the attacker would have to do is drop it next to him.

 

[Alt+F4]

Stefanoni, Curatolo, Knox, Sollecito, Mignini, Guede, Postal Police, Kokomani, Capezzali, (Quintavalle, the employees and Volturno), (that police commissioner that contracted the claims that knox wasn't summoned to the police station).

I'm sure i could keep going but you know all these people have lied in this case in one form or another. That includes Knox and Sollecito.

Perhaps you misread my post. I asked, in your opinion, who did not lie, who is not corrupt and who is not incompetent in regard to the prosectution.

 

[Chris C]

Perhaps you misread my post. I asked, in your opinion, who did not lie, who is not corrupt and who is not incompetent in regard to the prosectution.

I didn't misread your post, I thought the list would be shorter this way. I thought I was being fair by adding in Knox and Sollecito.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

So with the exception of Amanda and Raffaele everyone else involved in the case either lied, is corrupt, or incompetent. Got it.

That quite possibly is the #1 thing going against the FOAKers 'theory', if they could all get together and just write down all the people and things involved in this case where they lied, were corrupt or were incompetent, half of them would change sides once they saw how large the list was.

 

[Chris C]

That quite possibly is the #1 thing going against the FOAKers 'theory', if they could all get together and just write down all the people and things involved in this case where they lied, were corrupt or were incompetent, half of them would change sides once they saw how large the list was.

Skeptical Bystanders new theory of proof that Knox is guilty. Knox has converted to Catholicism. Its bad enough that members of PMF claim you should go to jail for life for not believing in the holocaust or for not liking jews. But now they think you should go to jail because your Catholic.

 

[Chris C]

That quite possibly is the #1 thing going against the FOAKers 'theory', if they could all get together and just write down all the people and things involved in this case where they lied, were corrupt or were incompetent, half of them would change sides once they saw how large the list was.

Here I'll help you at.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=176868

600 plus pages discussing the lies of the Prosecution.

 

[Danceme]

I found the link to the video after. Mostly because he is back on to us as he is walking we see the white sole but at 24 and 27 seconds there appears to be a dark upper showing on the sneaker. It's easy to be mistaken with that video. You can also clearly see the quilting on the jacket at around 21-22 seconds and it doesn't appear to be a very heavy jacket. He also appears to be not so dark skinned and definitely has a sort of hat on with a slight brim. He seems to have a bit of a distinctive walk too.
Doesn't Rudy deny this is him?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

no glittering generalities

That quite possibly is the #1 thing going against the FOAKers 'theory', if they could all get together and just write down all the people and things involved in this case where they lied, were corrupt or were incompetent, half of them would change sides once they saw how large the list was.

Sherlock and Alt+F4,

Do you disagree with Chris C's list? Please be specific: give the name and, if possible, the reason why you believe that this person did not lie or behave fecklessly.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Well in reality I only commented on the part I cut out of the quote, not Hendry's reconstruction. I found it very astute of Fine to point out how Rudy had little need to be tugging so hard on a bra strap to break it off her body when he very conveniently had a knife in the very hand he would have had to use to tug with because the other one was surely restraining Meredith somehow. So simple really.

Well, not so simple

What makes you sure he needed to restrain her while breaking the bra? She'd been stabbed mortally already by then.
What makes you think he had a knife in hand while undressing her? She was dying, he didn't need a knife at that moment, he needed both hands free to manipulate her body and her clothing.

 

[Kaosium]

That quite possibly is the #1 thing going against the FOAKers 'theory', if they could all get together and just write down all the people and things involved in this case where they lied, were corrupt or were incompetent, half of them would change sides once they saw how large the list was.

And the amazing thing is no one can offer a list of Amanda's 'lies' that aren't irrelevant, and hell, no one can even 'prove' Raffaele 'lied' in his diary about the pricking, even though I suspect it never happened personally. Thus that causes some to come to the conclusion...Amanda and Raffaele must be guilty! No wonder we have trouble communicating with each other!

Let's start here: What do you think was actually true about Monica Napoleoni's testimony about the interrogation?

 

[Alt+F4]

Sherlock and Alt+F4,

Do you disagree with Chris C's list? Please be specific: give the name and, if possible, the reason why you believe that this person did not lie or behave fecklessly.

That's not how it works. If someone makes a statement why would I assume they were lying, incompetent or corrupt?

In other words halides, when did you stop beating your wife?

 

[Chris C]

I found the link to the video after. Mostly because he is back on to us as he is walking we see the white sole but at 24 and 27 seconds there appears to be a dark upper showing on the sneaker. It's easy to be mistaken with that video. You can also clearly see the quilting on the jacket at around 21-22 seconds and it doesn't appear to be a very heavy jacket. He also appears to be not so dark skinned and definitely has a sort of hat on with a slight brim. He seems to have a bit of a distinctive walk too.
Doesn't Rudy deny this is him?

Between the 23 and 25 seconds you get a view of the top of the front portion of the shoe. Its white.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tH-klo4nGQ

And yes, I think Rudy did deny it was him.

 

[Chris C]

That's not how it works. If someone makes a statement why would I assume they were lying, incompetent or corrupt?

In other words halides, when did you stop beating your wife?

I was asked for names of people that didn't lie........ , Instead I said the list is shorter and supplied the ones that I could remember that did those things. I wasn't asked to give details. So why criticize me?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

no standard operating procedures

Greg Hampikian interview last night (starts about 19 minutes into the podcast).

http://www.mynorthwest.com/?nid=577&a=25064&p=10&n=Northwest

RoseMontague,

He clearly explained what is wrong with the collection of the clasp and the lack of SOPs. I was a little surprised that he focused on secondary transfer, as opposed to contamination, as a possible explanation for Meredith's DNA, but he makes a plausible case for it.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

You gave the impression you didn't think the defense 'showed,' which suggested to me to that like many you didn't hear much of the defense arguments. I agree it will be won in the courtroom, however it might be helpful if that courtroom were to know a fair number of people have already realized that last little 'trial' was little more than a stop along a railroad, and Amanda and Raffaele would like to get off now.

As for what you read on the ABC news blog, when I came back to this issue last October, after putting it away for a few months after I discovered it to wait until the Massei Report was finished translating, when I was googling around I noticed some gutter level American political campaign tactics, but oddly enough they weren't as much coming from the supporters of Amanda and Raffaele, but from the ones who thought them guilty--especially Amanda for some reason.

I read a report from a Seattle reporter, sourced to a family member, that some of the jury were crying. I read accounts by Andrea Vogt and Frank Sfarzo (or however it is spelled) that did not see that, thus I would tend to believe it did not occur, but that perhaps the (step?)father of an unjustly jailed girl saw an emotional response from some jury members probably because was looking hard for it and wanted to see it.

I expected much more from the defence teams and that was largely based on following Candace Dempsey’s blog and the armchair expert posters going through the minutia of case an error I have since corrected, I tend to get as much information as I can from different sources.

There is too much focus on trying to win over public opinion as though that will make a difference in the court room, this might be naive of me but don’t think it will, justice will prevail.

I agree with your view of Mr Mellas, I also completely understand the view of Meredith father’s recent public comments.

 

[Danceme]

No matter how you look at it. Cut or pulled. Neither of them add up to the prosecutions theory that the bra was cut off with a knife. Since the bra wasn't cut with a bloody knife, and some claim it was pulled off by breaking the seams, then it doesn't match the prosecutions theory of the assault. Either it was cut with a 3rd knife or it was broken lose and not cut. Matter of fact, if the seams broke loose, it could have just as easily been pulled loose while Meredith was on her back. I believe the supposed rape did occur while she was on her back. The final position of the bra would make more sense if the bra was broke free from the front. With the bra being pulled towards the attack and it breaking lose at the back seams, all the attacker would have to do is drop it next to him.

We know she was on her back with the bra on for at least a short while, as the aspirated blood droplets show.

So if she was on her back why try and pull the bra off from the front? Why not just slip the knife under the centre of the bra and slice through where it will then just fall open?

If it is cut from the back, or pulled apart from the back, as seems reasonable to assume given the above, he had to turn her over to do it, or perhaps she managed to turn herself somehow in a last effort to break free.

Well, not so simple

What makes you sure he needed to restrain her while breaking the bra? She'd been stabbed mortally already by then.
What makes you think he had a knife in hand while undressing her? She was dying, he didn't need a knife at that moment, he needed both hands free to manipulate her body and her clothing.

No, it's certainly not simple.

Perhaps he no longer needed to restrain her if she was laying on her back at this point. But how to explain the bra being cut or tugged apart from the back? It would have been the path of least resistance to use his knife to cut it open from the front.

How common is necrophilia I wonder? I think it takes a particularly depraved individual to be still thinking about sex while his victim is gushing blood, making who knows what kinds of sounds or faces, and or perhaps just expired.