Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Douglas says "The video taken on November 2nd shows the bra clasp, very clearly on the floor of the crime scene. On December 18th, after returning to the scene more than 16 times, the video shows the bra clasp, still there. It had already been kicked and shuffled around on the floor for six weeks! Secondly, the amount of DNA, supposedly, that was Sollecito’s, is highly suspect."
Does anyone know if this is true, about ILE being in the cottage 16 times between Nov 2nd and Dec 18th?
It's quite interesting from the standpoint of cross-contamination....
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
Your claim is that convicted murderer Amanda Knox doesn't speak Italian? Really?
Click to expand...

The real question is, do you understand english? It's quite clear to those of us who do, that Doug was referring to Amanda's first appearance in court nearly 4 years ago, when her Italian (having been there for only 6 weeks) was rudimentary.
Of course now she speaks fluent Italian.
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
Evidence?



I guess one of the benefits of murdering your roommate is you have lots of free time to sit and learn new things! :)
Click to expand...

If I provide such evidence, will you concede that perhaps Doug is right and that this could've been problematic for Amanda in her first court appearance?

Does evidence ever have such an effect on you? If yes, I'm happy to go and look for the cites. If not, there's no point and it would be a waste of my time.
 
bolint said:
No need for anyone to enter. The file could be accessed through internet.
It was connected to a peer-to-peer file-sharing network and Stardust was in the shared folder. So anyone in the world in that network who downloaded Stardust in that period could download some part of it from Raffaele's computer thereby changing the timestamp of Last Access.



So you seriously thought that the police entered Raffaele's house before 02:47AM on Nov 6, while the pair were being questioned, in order to modify the time stamp of Stardust?
Click to expand...

halides1 said:
(highlighting mine)
bolint,

I did not realize that the police presence in Raffaele's apartment that night was in dispute. Andrea Vogt wrote, "Specifically, a computer engineer who analyzed Sollecito's computer and Internet provider records testified that his review indicated someone navigated on Sollecito's computer while he and Knox were being questioned by police. Specifically, the computer revealed that the movie "Stardust" had been downloaded, and then a few hours later, at 1 a.m. and 2:47 a.m., someone surfed the Web twice and viewed a story about Kercher's killing on the Italian wire service news agency ANSA." Maybe someone else has an additional citation, but I don't see how the surfing was done other than by human beings interacting with the computer.

You have completely misunderstood my position. I think that they did not know what they were doing. Suppose that Raffaele said to them on the night of 5 November, "We were watching Stardust," and they went to his computer and found and played a bit of the file, not realizing that it would destroy the meta data. Without a tape of Raffaele's interrogation, this scenario is speculative, of course.
Click to expand...

I am wondering if you have a response to halides1 reply to you.
 
halides1 said:
"Specifically, a computer engineer who analyzed Sollecito's computer and Internet provider records testified that his review indicated someone navigated on Sollecito's computer while he and Knox were being questioned by police. Specifically, the computer revealed that the movie "Stardust" had been downloaded, and then a few hours later, at 1 a.m. and 2:47 a.m., someone surfed the Web twice and viewed a story about Kercher's killing on the Italian wire service news agency ANSA." Maybe someone else has an additional citation, but I don't see how the surfing was done other than by human beings interacting with the computer.
Click to expand...


Interestingly Massei says that the Stardust file is accessed at 2:47AM, and this internet access at exactly the same time is not mentioned at all, nor in the appeal, although contamination of the knife is a hot topic and police presence before the official search could be used.
How is it that the defence did not push this topic?

Also, the computer expert does not mention the 2:47 Stardust access.

It would be good to see how this web browsing conclusion was arrived at, it would be quite strange that they were searching a news site for the Kercher murder at 3AM at the suspect's place on his computer. Why?
 
Last edited:
Fine said:
November 8th, 2007, before Judge Matteini.
Amanda said she was shocked to find herself charged with murder. She thought she was being held in some sort of protective custody.
Click to expand...

This may even be true, she did not expect to be charged with murder. There was a reason that she had accused Lumumba.
 
bolint said:
Interestingly Massei says that the Stardust file is accessed at 2:47AM, and this internet access at exactly the same time is not mentioned at all, nor in the appeal, although contamination of the knife is a hot topic and police presence before the official search could be used.
How is it that the defence did not push this topic?

Also, the computer expert does not mention the 2:47 Stardust access.

It would be good to see how this web browsing conclusion was arrived at, it would be quite strange that they were searching a news site for the Kercher murder at 3AM at the suspect's place on his computer. Why?
Click to expand...

Bolint,

Where have you read it was a peer-to-peer access? I have not seen that stated before. If it was such an access do you know through what program it was accessed?

-P
 
bolint said:
Only news reports:

http://archiviostorico.corriere.it/..._alibi_sedici_testimoni__co_9_071109108.shtml
Click to expand...

Thanks for the article, bolint.

It does go on to say that Amanda's lawyers advised her to remain silent: "Amanda, invece, su consiglio degli avvocati, tace."

So that explains her failure to speak up.

I've always found it sad that the Knox family didn't reach out to the Kerchers. I think that might have helped the Kerchers keep an open mind; though maybe not, seeing as it was a crazy time with a lot of crazy accusations. I've seen others excoriate the Knox family for not reaching out. Yet I know when one seeks legal counsel in the U.S. the FIRST thing your lawyer tells you to do is avoid all communication with involved parties.

So I agree with you that it would have better if Amanda had clarified her statement when Lumumba was defending himself at the Matteini hearing. I agree with others that it would have been better if the Knox family had expressed their condolences to the Kerchers. Nevertheless, it's an unfortunate reality that lawyers essentially forbid clients to speak up on behalf of others or to engage in direct communication with other principals.
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
I don't think anyone is accusing Amanda Knox of being a serial killer, are they? As far as we know, she only killed Meredith Kercher.
Click to expand...

She has been called a serial sex killer by a number of PGP over on their sites.

Harry Machine says it all the time and gives a list including an English couple that killed women including the man's ex-wife.
 
Last edited:
bri1 said:
Does anyone know if this is true, about ILE being in the cottage 16 times between Nov 2nd and Dec 18th?
It's quite interesting from the standpoint of cross-contamination....
Click to expand...

Perhaps Douglas heard it from someone and internalised it. :D

What Massei says:
"While the Scientific Police were in the house, it was under surveillance, and after that the seals were placed. After November 7th, the last day of the search by the personnel of the Questura of Perugia, the next access to the house on via della Pergola was the entry on December 18, 2007, which has already been discussed,and no seals were broken between November 7 and December 18, 2007. So there was no illicit access to the house during this period."
Click to expand...
 
Kid Le said:
I'm with you Scrut. It is obvious that the police needed that translator as an additional force to beat up Amanda. Asserting any other role for the translator, like, ehrm, translating from and to Italian, would be plain ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Of course, the interpreter (Central Scruntiser- this is Anna Donnino, cite: http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2010/10/05/amanda-knoxs-secret-world/) was there because Amanda's italian wasn't up to scratch, but she did think she had another role, that of 'mediator' between the cops and Amanda, (in her own words), and very helpfully recounting her own experience of 'traumatic amnesia' to try and persuade Amanda that she was involved in this crime.
 
bolint said:
This may even be true, she did not expect to be charged with murder. There was a reason that she had accused Lumumba.
Click to expand...

Forgive me again for my newbie questions, but can you point me to this accusation? I found a hand written note of hers where she talks about an almost dreamlike scenario involving Lumumba, but when I read it it looks like a sleep deprived hypothetical she herself doesn't believe, not an accusation.

I assume I've missed an actual accusation somewhere?
 
Wildhorses said:
I've always found it sad that the Knox family didn't reach out to the Kerchers. I think that might have helped the Kerchers keep an open mind; though maybe not, seeing as it was a crazy time with a lot of crazy accusations. I've seen others excoriate the Knox family for not reaching out.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is a family business, they really have nothing to do with it. It should have been Amanda's.

At the preliminary trial (before Micheli) the Kerchers were sitting right behind her.
That would have been a great occasion to turn around, look into their eyes and sincerely tell them "Please, believe me, I have absolutely nothing to do with this crime".
No matter what lawyers say, no way this could have harmed her case.
 
bri1 said:
If I provide such evidence, will you concede that perhaps Doug is right and that this could've been problematic for Amanda in her first court appearance?

Does evidence ever have such an effect on you? If yes, I'm happy to go and look for the cites. If not, there's no point and it would be a waste of my time.
Click to expand...

Yes, please provide detailed evidence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom