Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[RWVBWL]

Theories...

Hi everyone,
Well, it's only a few hours until showtime, and so I just spent the last coupla hours reading up about this brutal murder case that intrigues me, as I know that it does you too...

With that said, I just wish to publicly comment on a post that I found elsewhere, but 1 that is relevant to our discussion as we each try to find out what we believe to be the truth in what happened that horrible night of Nov. 1, 2007.

I've waited for quite awhile to see a pro-guilt member give a good theory to what they believed happened the night Meredith Kercher was killed. And reading on the PMF.ganong site, well I found this one:

Amanda hears that she doesn't need to go to work that evening. She & Raf finish watching Amelie and decide to head over to the town center. Rudy's hanging there and says, "Hey guys - I've got some great ◊◊◊◊ - do you want some?" Amanda and Raf say, "Sure - let's go to the cottage." Upon arriving at the cottage, they realize they don't have enough cash on hand to pay for whatever type of drugs (cocaine? meth?) Rudy has. Amanda asks Meredith if she can borrow some money temporarily and she reluctantly agrees (this is a possibility set forth by Barbie Nadeau in her book). Amanda and Raf and Rudy proceed to drink and do drugs and get really loud and raunchy, maybe even getting into some sexual stuff in the living room. Meredith was hoping to have a quiet night - do some reading, call her mom, go to sleep early. She is really frustrated with the noise and commotion and comes to the door of her room, telling the three to quiet down and, in her anger, telling Amanda that she's a drugged-up tart (I think this phrase was mentioned by Rudy at some point?) and that she (Meredith) should never have loaned her the cash for the drugs (I think Rudy also mentioned an argument about money? - I know Rudy's words are not reliable, but they might offer some clues). Amanda gets really mad and a physical fight breaks out between the two women. Rudy and Raf are both in a state of high sexual desire for Amanda (I believe Rudy had previously expressed sexual interest in her to the guys downstairs?). In this high-hormone, drug-and-alcohol-fueled state, they come to the "aid" of Amanda and all three start restraining and attacking Meredith, with Rudy taking the opportunity to sexually assault her with his fingers. Soon a couple of knives are drawn and things escalate and the stabbing takes place in a perfect storm of hormones, resentment, rage, drugs, and alcohol.

I'm not sure how the big knife plays into this possible scenario.

Please note: This is nothing but a conjecture on my part and I do not actually know what happened, obviously. I suppose it could have been a "prank gone bad," which would possibly account for the transportation of the knife. One scenario I do find highly unlikely is a planned, premeditated murder - I don't think they would be dumb enough to do something like that right in Amanda's own house.

This poster seems to believe that Rudy, Amanda and Raffaele came over to Meredith's pad and started partying. So I'll ask a simple question, When? Right when Meredith got home and before Meredith had a chance to turn the heat on in her residence or take off her jacket? Before Meredith was able to re-try calling her ailing Mom Arline again? Gosh, from what I know, it only takes a minute or 2 or 3 to get comfy and make a phone call...

Let's have a look at page 162 of Barbie Nadeau' book 'Angel Face'. I quote:
"As for Amanda and Raf, when they were finally arrested, on November 6, only the slighest unidentifiable trace of narcotics was found through hair samples - not even enough to identify the substance".

Hmmm. Cocaine or crystal meth useage?
I doubt it. But might that have been TCH from a hash laced spinello? I wonder.

So at what time did this argument, the argument that ended up costing Meredith Kercher her life, take place?
9:30pm, 10:00pm or was it after 11:00pm?

I ask this because this poster is apparently forgetting the broken down car who was parked outside for quite a while who stated that the area near the cottage was kinda busy that night with pedestrian traffic and that they did not see anything out of the ordinary going on at Meredith's pad. No lights on, no yelling, no screaming, no loud noise. Why is that?

Over the years, I've had many friends over to my pad before to party a bit, ya know, drink a little, smoke a little, talk story, listen to music. Who knows what anyone is doin' while they are using the restroom at my pad, or heck, even yours when you too have guests over? But let's say that Rudy, Amanda and Raf were getting high on coke or meth, getting drunk and listenin' to music, partying. I'd imagine that they were not being quiet and silent, worried about the cops coming over on a Holiday night. But hey, if they were makin a lotta noise, why didn't Mez just go into her room, lock the door, put some head phones on or toilet paper in her ears so she could get a little peace and quiet, read a bit and go to sleep soon? With her beddroom door locked, that woulda been no big deal. Heck, I've lived with other guys who surfed before abd did the same, no big deal, your roomamte wants to party with their friends and you don't, you just wanna chill. So close your door and then lock it if you wanna...

If Mez was concerned about hard drugs being used, why didn't she call Filomena and complain to her that this was unbelievably going on right then and to ask Filomena to call Amanda and tell her to stop it and that everyone split? With both being kinda new to the apartment, that's what I woulda done. If Mez was worried whatsoever about these 3 doing hard drugs that night in her shared pad, why didn't she even call the police?

So let's see, the boys and Amanda are partying, Mez is mad, an argument starts at some point in time. When?

What were Rudy, Raffaele and Amanda doing in the apartment for all that time while the broken down car occupants were waiting for assistance?

With all of the lights off, surely they did not bound, tie up or restrain Meredith for an hour or so, while keeping a look out from the window, just waiting for that broken down car to be fixed so it could then leave and then Rudy, Amanda and Raffaele could finish that drug and alcohol fueled argument and then sexually assault and then stab Mez to her death at 11:40pm. Could it?

How long does it take to fight someone, assault someone genitals by finger, and stab someone? Or how long, if that was a semen stain that was never tested, would it have taken Rudy Guede or Raffaele to masturbate and then ejaculate? An hour? I wonder if this is what Truth Seeker believes was going on in Meredith's bedroom while the broken down car sat out front and just did happen to notice that all of the lights in Meredith's apartment were out. A sexual assault in the dark...

This poster, in the presented theory, also forgot about Nara C. hearing, but not seeing, everybody running away after she heard a women's scream, so blood curdling that it made her skin crawl. This being after the 11:00pm hour.

If anyone else has any comments about this theory, please chime in.
Any other pro-guilt theories or timelines out there?
How's about you, Pilot Padron? Got 1?
If so, please share it, I'd luv to read it.
Thanks in advance,
RW

 

[RandyN]

An Italian working in a legal office, not a lawyer but with daily access to them and an interest in Italian law wrote a number of long, very informative and (to me at least) highly entertaining posts on the Italian System and it's complex proceedings about a year ago. Here's one thread where he goes into what the duties of the victim's lawyer entail, and there are others written about the same time that explore it even further. According to this, one of Maresca's responsibilities is to ensure as many 'aggravating' circumstances as he can, and ensure as long a prison sentence as is possible.

My point about Maresca is that he ought to have advised them long before that action against Amanda and Raffaele was likely to be fruitless, and that actual evidence exists against Rudy Guede and if vengeance was the goal, his was the head to be seeking. Instead Rudy Guede skated away and Maresca's focus was on Amanda and Raffaele, either for reasons of vengeance or money. Lawyers, they know the law, they know how court proceedings go, or at least they like to tell people they do. They tend to advise clients who are less familiar than they about such things. What kind of advisement could Maresca be giving them if they are writing articles and letters with all sorts of nonsense in them? Why did he not tell them in the beginning, or at least some point since, that the appeal was quite likely to go poorly?

Why did he hug Mignini when the DNA results were 'confirmed' when anyone with any sense whatsoever could see that had to be bogus. Going by the crime scene videos themselves, (for which he associated the Kerchers with in the case against the Sollecitos) the whole forensic case against Amanda and Raffaele--which was weak to begin with--was a total fraud. He had the ultimate 'inside information,' he didn't have to rely on trying to puzzle it out like the rest of us from news articles and websites, and he obviously knows something about the Italian legal system, being a lawyer and all.

Something about Maresca just doesn't smell right. While the victim's lawyer might well be a fervent ally of the prosecution in court in most cases, that being the obvious move, his loyalty ought to just as obviously be his clients, and in a case like this which was ridiculous on the face of it, especially to someone on the inside like that (does anyone suppose Giulia Bongiorno decided to take on a loser?) why would an accomplished lawyer like Maresca lead his clients in the wrong direction? Why wouldn't he give them good information, at least regarding the actual evidence in the case?[/QUOTE]


SHOW ME THE MONEY!

 

[RandyN]

Maresca will question the experts...he will look foolish and Hellmann will notice this. He will cut off Maresca at some point. The defense will question the experts. Stefanoni will not be heard. Mignini will be wearing a lifejacket under his robe...he will also remain silent. The day will be anticlimactic. This case will end with a poof…a slow silent poof. Sooner rather than later.

 

[Mary_H]

1) Although I will not scour long past posts on PMF, and readily agree that you doing so may very well turn up one or two that say what you infer.
That being said, I very well recall that there was overall very definitely little if any criticism of the girls themselves that you also infer.
The younger girls obviously were unaware of basic fashion etiquette to avoid being grouped as 'ugly Americans' disrespecting the site of a brutal senseless death and cheapening themselves in the process of so doing.
The PMF criticism was almost entirely of the adults who managed this abhorable accumulation of photo ops.

Intrigued by your veiled invitation to "scour" PMF, pilot, I took a shortcut and went directly to Michael's famous "tits" remark as a jumping-off point. Look no further than this page for a brief discussion of the topic at hand.

Imagine my surprise to find myself allied with Yummi, of all people, who wrote:

Sun Jul 12, 2009 12:53 am

Bad taste on the side of the two girls, but I reckon that this was for sure an idea of the magazine's editor, this photo is the most morbid to sell more copies. The Knoxs' maybe didn't realize the kind of use of their image and the implications.....

Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:47 am

But we are not here to judge other (outsider) people's decorum, are we?
I live in a country where the elected prime minister has orgies with minor daughters of mafia representants in his imperial villa and prostitute - cocaine - based parties in his Roman apratment, maybe I just got used to pass by these little details.

Who knows, maybe it was Yummi who led me to my understanding of how the whole sisters-in-Italy campaign was being worked.

<snip>3) Your absurd opinion that Italians "dressed the girls so promiscuously for dramatic effect" not only requires a huge suspension of disbelief but is an even bigger insult to the intelligence/common sense and/or lack thereof of the Mellox parenting skills as well as their media consultant (Marriott) that you acknowledge.
Surely you realize how bad you make Mellox and Marriott appear. Don't you?<snip>

No, I don't.

And jeeze, dude, it's one thing to set up a straw man, but putting quotes around it is going a little far, don't you think?

 

[Mary_H]

I've been thinking about this a lot over the past few weeks. It seems almost certain that Hellman selected for review only those areas of the prosecution's case that have the most bearing on the question of innocence. The review of the key witnesses and the review of the DNA came out strongly in favor of the defense, with C&V's in-court presentation casting a wider net of doubt over the prosecution's entire forensic framework.

Unless the prosecution is able to resuscitate the eyewitnesses (impossible) or the forensics (very unlikely) it would be hard for the court to justify anything but an acquittal. At this point I wouldn't even want to attempt to write a motivations report that stitches together all the rips in the prosecution's case.

Hello JREF!

Hello, charlatan, and welcome!

 

[Teddy2007]

On Stephanie's letter, I think it's just a case of Maresca recommending to her that now is a good time to put out an appeal to emotion at such a critical moment, so he and Stephanie probably drafted it together, with Maresca being the lead writer. In that daily mail article, a part which I quote below, I notice how Stephanie inserts her lawyer's name in the text - that is the sort of thing a self-promoting lawyer would do; any normal person would have just written "my lawyer" and not "my Lawyer Francesco Maresca".

"We have never forgotten her and we will continue our fight with the support of our lawyer Francesco Maresca so that justice is done and we continue to back the prosecution and all those in Italy and across the world who continue to think of Mez."

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

I predict all of a sudden more documents will appear (LOL). This time from Maresca.

He will go after C&V hard at pinpointing a moment of contamination.

The judge will tell Maresca to shut up and sit down. Comodi's head will explode or her pants rip, really hard to say.

Raffaele and Amanda will wear matching colors.

OMG Rose - you were right!

 

[bri1]

Barbie's latest tweet:
"Word frm #perugia in #amandaknox appeal that prosecutors "found" missing dna records and now want experts to reconsider findings. Curious."

Sure Barbie- Curiouser and curiouser! Like going down the Rabbit Hole... (Do we think that Nadeau has read Mark Waterbury's book?)
My question is, does this put Hellman in a really difficult position, of having to either dismiss these documents now, or conduct an investigation into their veracity and why they haven't been produced before? Surely it's not possible that he'll just accept what they're saying after all their underhanded tactics so far?

 

[bri1]

This article concerning Stephanie Kercher's letter has appeared on the Guardian's website:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/04/meredith-kercher-family-questions-evidence

 

[LondonJohn]

Barbie's latest tweet:
"Word frm #perugia in #amandaknox appeal that prosecutors "found" missing dna records and now want experts to reconsider findings. Curious."

Sure Barbie- Curiouser and curiouser! Like going down the Rabbit Hole... (Do we think that Nadeau has read Mark Waterbury's book?)
My question is, does this put Hellman in a really difficult position, of having to either dismiss these documents now, or conduct an investigation into their veracity and why they haven't been produced before? Surely it's not possible that he'll just accept what they're saying after all their underhanded tactics so far?

The police and prosecutors have been the supposed custodians of this information. If they are now claiming that certain documents have only just come to light, then I'd deem that to be highly, highly suspicious.

However, I would have thought that Hellmann would have little option but to examine these "new" documents properly, rather than simply dismiss them out of hand. This is not only the most judicially proper thing to do, it's also very possibly mandated by the inquisitorial vestiges in the Italian criminal justice system (i.e. that the court's prerogative is to use all its powers to get as close as possible to the truth).

So in the absence of any specific knowledge of what these "new" documents allegedly show, I wouldn't be at all surprised if there has to now be a lengthy recess while they are examined in depth. But it's also worth pointing out that Hellmann already appears wise to prosecution games, and that therefore any investigation into the provenance and veracity of these "new" documents might start from a position of extreme scepticism. I guess we'll all have to wait to find out exactly what's going on. It all smells rather fishy to me though.

 

[RoseMontague]

Hi there Lionking....good one.

You might want to add the question as to why the sister is writing a letter to the lawyer (Maresca) about the prosecutions case. Do you think maybe she is worried Maresca doesn’t fully grasp the issues?

Excellent.

 

[RoseMontague]

OMG Rose - you were right!

I get em all right and I'm claiming that million. LOL.

 

[Wildhorses]

Barbie's latest tweet:
"Word frm #perugia in #amandaknox appeal that prosecutors "found" missing dna records and now want experts to reconsider findings. Curious."

Sure Barbie- Curiouser and curiouser! Like going down the Rabbit Hole... (Do we think that Nadeau has read Mark Waterbury's book?)
My question is, does this put Hellman in a really difficult position, of having to either dismiss these documents now, or conduct an investigation into their veracity and why they haven't been produced before? Surely it's not possible that he'll just accept what they're saying after all their underhanded tactics so far?

I knew it! Maresca and Comodi are going to stall, stall, stall. I wish I saw reason to share the optimistic view that Knox/Sollecito will soon be free. I don't. The case is too high profile and rewarding for the prosecutors. They want to keep it going -- and keep muddying the waters -- as long as possible.

The prosecution was given more than enough time to produce documents. If it's true Hellman MUST call a lengthy recess, Steffanoni and company should be charged with negligence and ordered to spend the time in jail.

 

[RoseMontague]

I knew it! Maresca and Comodi are going to stall, stall, stall. I wish I saw reason to share the optimistic view that Knox/Sollecito will soon be free. I don't. The case is too high profile and rewarding for the prosecutors. They want to keep it going -- and keep muddying the waters -- as long as possible.

The prosecution was given more than enough time to produce documents. If it's true Hellman MUST call a lengthy recess, Steffanoni and company should be charged with negligence and ordered to spend the time in jail.

Looks like the judge has decided to decide later on the additional documents, evidently also related to the negative control issues from the last hearing.

Maresca is questioning the experts.

 

[RoseMontague]

I'm betting the negative controls are now legible and have the right file numbers.

 

[Kaosium]

I'm betting the negative controls are now legible and have the right file numbers.

Why would they take such a risk, how can simply the negative controls overrule the damning C&V report on all levels? If they were going to cheat so blatantly you'd think it would be a new 'eyewitness,' maybe one of Rudy's old friends who'd testify to being at the scene and seeing them do it.

 

[Wildhorses]

The police and prosecutors have been the supposed custodians of this information. If they are now claiming that certain documents have only just come to light, then I'd deem that to be highly, highly suspicious.

However, I would have thought that Hellmann would have little option but to examine these "new" documents properly, rather than simply dismiss them out of hand. This is not only the most judicially proper thing to do, it's also very possibly mandated by the inquisitorial vestiges in the Italian criminal justice system (i.e. that the court's prerogative is to use all its powers to get as close as possible to the truth).

So in the absence of any specific knowledge of what these "new" documents allegedly show, I wouldn't be at all surprised if there has to now be a lengthy recess while they are examined in depth. But it's also worth pointing out that Hellmann already appears wise to prosecution games, and that therefore any investigation into the provenance and veracity of these "new" documents might start from a position of extreme scepticism. I guess we'll all have to wait to find out exactly what's going on. It all smells rather fishy to me though.

OTOH, because the sloppy collection procedures are so well-documented, I wonder if it's possible for Hellman to rule that the lab work is irrelevant.

The fishy new documents may get Steffanoni off the hook in terms of missing controls, but they cannot change the fact that the samples may well have been subject to contamination during the collection process.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

On Stephanie's letter, I think it's just a case of Maresca recommending to her that now is a good time to put out an appeal to emotion at such a critical moment, so he and Stephanie probably drafted it together, with Maresca being the lead writer. In that daily mail article, a part which I quote below, I notice how Stephanie inserts her lawyer's name in the text - that is the sort of thing a self-promoting lawyer would do; any normal person would have just written "my lawyer" and not "my Lawyer Francesco Maresca".

"We have never forgotten her and we will continue our fight with the support of our lawyer Francesco Maresca so that justice is done and we continue to back the prosecution and all those in Italy and across the world who continue to think of Mez."

Interesting post; is it letter really so surprising that the murder victim’s sister believes in the prosecution’s case and that Raffaele and Amanda are culpable in Meredith’s murder. Is it really that amazing that the families of murder victims speak out to remind people that their loved one was brutally murdered?

I include a recent article about the parents of a murdered UK teenager saying they want the return of the death penalty. http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16061450

By the way do you have any information that supports your view that Maresca has orchestrated Stephanie’s letter?

 

[LondonJohn]

OTOH, because the sloppy collection procedures are so well-documented, I wonder if it's possible for Hellman to rule that the lab work is irrelevant.

The fishy new documents may get Steffanoni off the hook in terms of missing controls, but they cannot change the fact that the samples may well have been subject to contamination during the collection process.

You're exactly right. The testing and interpretation of the tests are only one of the areas that Conti/Vecchiotti have exposed as incompetent. The fact that there were so many egregious procedural errors related to the identification, collection, handling and storage of the DNA evidence means that there was a very real possibility of contamination well before the samples ever reached the lab. Therefore, even if the lab work were somehow shown to be impeccable (which I doubt will be shown in any case), the GIGO principle means that the ultimate results should be inadmissible anyhow.

I see that the documents in question appear to be the negative control charts that were the subject of dispute at the previous hearing. And apparently Comodi is now suggesting that Conti/Vecchiotti could have had these charts during their investigation, if only they had asked for them! To say that I find that hard to believe - especially in the light of Ms Stefanoni's blatant obfuscation and delay tactics over the source data in general - is a massive understatement...

 

[Kaosium]

OTOH, because the sloppy collection procedures are so well-documented, I wonder if it's possible for Hellman to rule that the lab work is irrelevant.

The fishy new documents may get Steffanoni off the hook in terms of missing controls, but they cannot change the fact that the samples may well have been subject to contamination during the collection process.

Personally I think it would be funny if Judge Hellmann retired to his quarters for a little while, came back with a copy of the news report of the 'two girls one bra' theory proposed by Raffaele's father, and Raffaele's diary entry on the 'pricking' and entered them into the record and told the prosecution they had to absolutely prove they couldn't have happened or the bra-clasp and the knife go into a bag to be thrown into the Tiber, along with a dog, a chicken, a monkey and a snake....

A dog named Comodi
A snake named Maresca
A Monkey named Mignini
A Chicken named Stefanoni