Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[LondonJohn]

Amy Frost, Sophie Purton and Robyn Butterworth could not all agree as to what time Meredith started/ended eating (no reason for them to notice that). You have have no idea what time Meredith started eating. It could have been as late as 7:00 pm.

And yes, I do have "an idea" as to when they started eating. They all agreed that they ate the pizza before sitting down to watch the movie. The film lasted around 2 hours exactly, and Sophie and Meredith left as soon as the film was finished - which was around 8.40-8.45pm. So the film must have started at around 6.40-6.45pm (or maybe a little earlier if they paused the film to prepare the apple crumble - it's not clear whether or not the preparation took place with the film still running). So the pizza meal must have started at some point between 6pm and 6.30pm. Q.E.D.

However, I fully concede that without an accurately time-stamped video recording of the events in the English friends' house on that evening, I will never be able to be certain of the timings. So maybe we should just assume that Meredith could have started eating at..... ooh I don't know..... how about 8.30pm? After all we can't know for sure, can we?

 

[Alt+F4]

Complete and utter straw man. What's wrong with dealing with your mistake over quoting the end time of the meal? Or are you trying to pretend that you never even made that "argument"....?

Yeah, keep pretending that her friends totally knew the exact moment she took that first bite of pizza.

The range of her starting eating to ending eating goes from about 5:30 - 7:45 pm. You have no idea when she started eating. Her friends don't, why do you think you know more then them? I doubt very much she started eating what has been called "a small amount of food" at 5:30 and finished it at 7:45.

 

[RoseMontague]

Yeah, keep pretending that her friends totally knew the exact moment she took that first bite of pizza.

The range of her starting eating to ending eating goes from about 5:30 - 7:45 pm. You have no idea when she started eating. Her friends don't, why do you think you know more then them? I doubt very much she started eating what has been called "a small amount of food" at 5:30 and finished it at 7:45.

Again, the ending means nothing. The range of starting is again what counts. That range is 5:30-6:30PM.

 

[LondonJohn]

Yeah, keep pretending that her friends totally knew the exact moment she took that first bite of pizza.

The range of her starting eating to ending eating goes from about 5:30 - 7:45 pm. You have no idea when she started eating. Her friends don't, why do you think you know more then them? I doubt very much she started eating what has been called "a small amount of food" at 5:30 and finished it at 7:45.

You really should stop now: your arguments are becoming embarrassing again. Firstly you incorrectly quoted meal ending times, then you tried to change the subject back to meal start times (presumably hoping nobody would notice the sophistic switch), and now you still cling to the 7.45 time to try to support your dreadful attempt at an argument. The meal started at some time between 6pm and 6.30pm. There's nothing more to be said, other than that you're not only wrong but making it worse by trying to twist your arguments.

And quit with the "you have no idea" baloney - it's nonsense and wrong. We do have an idea - a pretty good idea. It's you that has no idea, I'm afraid.

 

[Dan O.]

I can't imagine why a burglar who has (in theory) just thrown an eight pound rock through a second story window glass and shutter beside a well lit street in the early evening (purportedly for the express purpose of making sufficient noise to alert any potential occupants) would be particularly concerned about the additional noise of a few glass fragments dropping onto damp, leaf strewn ground cover.

I'm sure you think there is a perfectly plausible reason.

I don't.

In one case you have a burglar throwing a rock through a window and hiding in the shadows where he won't be seen if someone happens to look towards the source of the noise and ready to escape should someone approach. In the other case you have a burglar perched on the side of a building where someone who's attention happens to be drawn to that spot will see a criminal activity in progress. Why is it that you are unable to comprehend the difference?

 

[LondonJohn]

Again, the ending means nothing. The range of starting is again what counts. That range is 5:30-6:30PM.

Is it just me, or are Alt+F4's attempts at arguments becoming more and more surreal? One would have thought that having been corrected and educated after an ill-judged interjection using meal end times, she might just quietly agree that she was wrong and move on. Instead, the very thought of any such concession seems to be anathema, and her "arguments" are consequently approaching the realms of the absurd. Maybe it's just me though.....

 

[platonov]

It depends wholly upon the final meal start time. And in this particular case, it's highlighted further by the fact that recognisable semi-broken-down elements of pizza were found in Meredith's stomach.

I've said it many times before, but I'll say it again: the human stomach is not simply a homogeneous "bag" - it's a complex organ which is capable of performing many complex tasks simultaneously, and it is capable of separating food in different stage of digestion. Food is processed by the stomach in a linear fashion which is related to the time of its ingestion. If a person eats a hamburger at 8pm, then has a piece of chocolate cake at 9pm, the stomach essentially deals with the two elements separately. The hamburger is processed through the stomach, and the arrival of the chocolate cake an hour into the digestion of the hamburger has little or no effect on the passage of the hamburger. In other words, the hamburger will start to transit from the lowest part of the stomach (the pylorus) into the duodenum within around 1-3 hours after its 8pm ingestion, and the chocolate cake will similarly start its transit to the duodenum between around 10pm and midnight.

I guess you missed my later edit which removed the word 'partly' and added an explanation

(and a later starred *comment)

You can say it as many times again as you wish - it doesn't alter the point.

 

[LondonJohn]

Yeah, keep pretending that her friends totally knew the exact moment she took that first bite of pizza.

The range of her starting eating to ending eating goes from about 5:30 - 7:45 pm. You have no idea when she started eating. Her friends don't, why do you think you know more then them? I doubt very much she started eating what has been called "a small amount of food" at 5:30 and finished it at 7:45.

Oh and by the way, are you not aware that the girls' meal that day consisted of two entirely separate elements, consumed at different times? The pizza was eaten before the film stated, and the apple crumble was prepared and eaten mid-way during the film. When the friends testify as to the 7.45pm end of the meal, they are referring to the end of the pudding element of the meal (the apple crumble).

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that this was one continuous meal, lasting perhaps from 5.30pm until 7.45pm. It was, in fact, two separate courses: the pizza - which was very likely consumed at some point between 6pm and 6.45pm - and then the apple crumble, which was likely consumed at some time between around 7.30pm and 7.45pm. And it's the start of the pizza meal which is the important time to start the T(lag) clock ticking.

 

[LondonJohn]

I guess you missed my later edit which removed the word 'partly' and added an explanation

(and a later starred *comment)

You can say it as many times again as you wish - it doesn't alter the point.

Well, since you edited it some 8 minutes after posting it, you should have expected some people to have replied to your original, unedited version.

And what point doesn't it alter?

 

[Alt+F4]

Oh and by the way, are you not aware that the girls' meal that day consisted of two entirely separate elements, consumed at different times? The pizza was eaten before the film stated, and the apple crumble was prepared and eaten mid-way during the film. When the friends testify as to the 7.45pm end of the meal, they are referring to the end of the pudding element of the meal (the apple crumble).

Source?

 

[Dan O.]

Just because you don't happen to like or agree with a point which is being made doesn't mean it is a straw-man argument. I suggest you do a little research and learn what a straw-man argument actually is. The definition is relatively specific. That way you won't look quite so silly by making such inane comments.

Perhaps my error is that you had gone beyond straw-man and are employing a straw-broom to make a sweeping argument.

 

[LondonJohn]

Source?

I was there in the girls' house. I not only saw it all, but I also recorded it on my HD Handycam, synchronised to the Italian atomic clock. The pizza meal started at 18:23.06 CET and finished at 18:38.42 CET, and the apple crumble meal started at 19:27.30 CET and finished at 19:40:21 CET


http://www.seattlepi.com/default/ar...f-as-character-is-assailed-1300102.php#page-2

They looked at the Halloween photos on the Internet and watched a film, pausing to chat and make an apple crumble halfway through.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...girl--arrive-to-incriminate-knox-1609172.html

"She came to our house at about 4 pm. We cooked a pizza, ate it, then looked at photos on the computer that we had taken ... the previous night. Then we watched the film but halfway through we stopped it and made apple crumble which we ate with ice cream."

Good enough for ya......?

 

[LondonJohn]

Another interesting piece of testimony from Robyn Butterworth (one of Meredith's English friends) regarding the relationship between Meredith and Amanda:

Ms Butterworth also mentioned how Ms Kercher had said that Ms Knox had asked her if she would like to go out with her that evening, "but Meredith had already arranged to have dinner with us". Ms Kercher felt bad about turning her flatmate down, she added.

So apparently Amanda had asked Meredith if she wanted to go out on the very evening of the murder, and Meredith had apparently replied with regret that she couldn't do so because of her existing plans. This doesn't sound to me (or to any objective observer) as though the two girls were not on friendly terms on the night of November 1st 2007.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...girl--arrive-to-incriminate-knox-1609172.html

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

Why is it that you are unable to comprehend the difference?

Why is it that you are unable to comprehend that I do understand the difference, and just do not interpret it the same way that you do?

In simpler language ... I disagree with you about this. What is truly incomprehensible is your apparent inability to grasp that.

 

[quadraginta]

Perhaps my error is that you had gone beyond straw-man and are employing a straw-broom to make a sweeping argument.

Edited by jhunter1163: 

Edited for Rule 0.

 

[RoseMontague]

Another interesting piece of testimony from Robyn Butterworth (one of Meredith's English friends) regarding the relationship between Meredith and Amanda:



So apparently Amanda had asked Meredith if she wanted to go out on the very evening of the murder, and Meredith had apparently replied with regret that she couldn't do so because of her existing plans. This doesn't sound to me (or to any objective observer) as though the two girls were not on friendly terms on the night of November 1st 2007.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...girl--arrive-to-incriminate-knox-1609172.html

It is pretty clear they were friends. There is no motive for Amanda to be involved.

 

[platonov]

The horror, the horror.

Well, since you edited it some 8 minutes after posting it, you should have expected some people to have replied to your original, unedited version.

And what point doesn't it alter?

Here's the edited post (with an extra 'not' struck out) in its entirety with a link added for good measure which may interest Alt+F4 (or not) ?

That is not obviously not irrelevant but doesn't directly speak to the issue of the empty duodenum which (notwithstanding variations generally and apparently in this case complications arising from the autopsy) depends on the final meal start time *


*Hence the frantic repetitive arguments which seek to push it back as early as possible on this thread despite what the defence docs and 'Massei' record.

I can see however why her argument is receiving such a hostile reception.

After countless repetitive (sometimes contradictory) posts, with much 'innovative' statistical analysis thrown in for good measure, [and a little (later rescinded) backtracking (25% etc) along the way] outlining at great length the [long ago debunked] 'Early & Precise ToD' theory she comes along ...................and casually tosses 7.45 into the mix.

The horror, the horror.

 

[Chris C]

Yeah, keep pretending that her friends totally knew the exact moment she took that first bite of pizza.

The range of her starting eating to ending eating goes from about 5:30 - 7:45 pm. You have no idea when she started eating. Her friends don't, why do you think you know more then them? I doubt very much she started eating what has been called "a small amount of food" at 5:30 and finished it at 7:45.

Considering they ate before actually watching the entire movie with a small break in the middle for some desert. Makes 7:45 way outside the range. Nice try in moving the goal posts. However, it seems you dont want to pretend on what time she left.

 

[Alt+F4]

Good enough for ya......?

No. Your links do say that the women did pause between the pizza and the apple...crumble? cake? What exatcly was that desert?

Your links make no mention as to when Meredith started eating but the second link mentioned something I hadn't known before, that Meredith arrived at her friend's house "around 4 pm." So her nice friends offered her nothing to eat until 5:30? Unlikely.

 

[Alt+F4]

Considering they ate before actually watching the entire movie with a small break in the middle for some desert. Makes 7:45 way outside the range. Nice try in moving the goal posts. However, it seems you dont want to pretend on what time she left.

So you don't believe Sophie when she said:

She did not know when they had finished eating; perhaps an hour before leaving; and she indicated that they had left the house at around 20:45 pm.

...but you do believe Sophie when she said she left Meredith at 8:50.

I believe both statements are correct.