Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Didaktylos]

Since I am banned at TJMK site, and someone has made an intelligent post, which I cannot respond to over there, I'll respond to it here and on the IIP site, in the vain hope they see it.

I list some things I reseached about burglaries which your technician friend may like to comment on.

1) The burglar would almost certainly have knocked at the door with a pretentious excuse to see if anyone was at the house.
2) They would not go ‘tooled up’ with a knife. Very serious offence, armed robbery
3) You take a large screwdriver. Handy for using as a ‘jemmy’ for locked drawers, wardrobes, boxes etc. It can be used as a weapon if need be.
Choose your entrance. Once you have accessed a room by a broken window.
4) You block the incoming door.
5) At night you would draw the curtains so that you could turn on the light. (This means that the windows and inner shutters in Filomenas room should be CLOSED and not open as the photographic evidence show).
6) Look for a sportsbag, rucksack or hold-all. Failing that a suitcase, bin bags, boxes, carrier bags.
7) ‘Jemmy’ locked furniture,
8) Bag all immediate valuable items
9) Ransack rest of room
10) Take bag(s) and leave room. Go straight to the front door. Check that you can open it from the inside for your exit. Bolt or latch it. You do not want anyone coming in. Leave the bags at the front door for your exit.
11) Survey the rest of the property.

None of these points seem to have applied to this burglary.

Quite true. Am I supposed to dispute this?

However, brace yourself, there are such things a differing M.O.'s.

In fact, some of those things could have happened - he could have had a screwdriver, could have knocked on the door, was more than likely interrupted in doing some of those "defensive measures" by MK's sudden presence, or he thought he was going to do a dash and grab with the rent money. For that matter, I never understood why the lack of stuff taken from FR's room is at all determinative here.

RG was after the rent money, and opportunistically took phones and stuff from MK's purse in a panic after the murder. He then fled the country - the only one who did do, and THIS IS FAR MORE DETERMINATIVE A CLUE TO HIS GUILT AND EVERYONE ELSE'S INNOCENCE THAT ANYTHING!

Is this the way these debates go? I describe a pitcher who is left handed and you reply, "No, pitchers are mainly right handed, so your guy couldn't have been left handed!"

Of course there are more than one M.O. depending on the opportunistic goals of the thief.

What does your post prove? That RG violated some code of burglar ethics?

Besides, you misspelled "researched" above. P.Q. bans people for misspellings. I had to learn that the hard way. I wish you better luck.

I would have thought that this kind of practice (systematic looting) would only apply in a situation where the burglar has a car or van parked nearby. If you are making a getaway, you wouldn't want to seen heavily laden in a situation where that would draw attention. Guede took items that could be easily slipped in a jacket/trouser pocket and wouldn't either weigh him down or impede his movement if he had been forced to make his exit by the same means he entered.

I live in a shared house and about 18 months ago my room and that of my fellow upper-floor housemate were both broken into - we suspect, though could not actually prove that one of the lower-floor tenants (who was a general troublemaker and has since been evicted) was at least partially responsible. My TV, digital TV converter, DVD player & CD player were not even touched. All that was taken were a small amount of cash I had (foolishly) left in the room and about half-a-dozen DVDs.

 

[smkovalinksy]

The comparison to Karla Homolka is outrageous. She was an abused woman under the total control of Paul Bernardo, her husband -- a man who already had a violent history of sexual assault before they met. She was battered repeatedly by him, had low self esteem and only went bad to please him in order to earn his "love".

Knox, a normal young woman with good self-esteem, had only began dating Sollecito just a few days prior to the murder and there's no evidence to suggest that he was abusive or controlling to her nor is there any evidence that Solleicto had a sexually violent past. Hardly the circumstances that can sometimes create a Karla Homolka. To accept the guilter position to to accept that a woman tried to cover up the sexual assault and murder of another woman for two men she barely knew. There's no ring of truth to that.

I'll say it again, Amanda's gender alone is circumstantial evidence of innocence.

Yes, agreed. It was a shallow comparison which was made on websleuths, which ran:

Karla appeared pretty and normal, but could be involved in sexual crimes; hence, Amanda can appear pretty and normal, and be involved in Kercher crime. It ignored the vast differences you point out above.

Similarly, on PMF a list was made of women in Great Britain who had knifed other women, sometimes fatally. Again, it was to show that Amanda could do the same. But it ignored that:
1. Most of these women were knifing the woman whom their husband was running off with, and was hence ruining their lives
2. The rest were lesbian couples with histories of violence.
3. There had been a long build up of many, many months; not a mere 6 days.

ETA: As far as your last sentence goes, from my reading of PMF, they would simply say, But this was no ordinary female. Knox was a malignant narcissist and sociopath who was primed for harming another female, even with 2 men she barely knew. There simply is no arguing with such a frame of mind.

 

[RoseMontague]

Since I am banned at TJMK site, and someone has made an intelligent post, which I cannot respond to over there, I'll respond to it here and on the IIP site, in the vain hope they see it.


Quite true. Am I supposed to dispute this?

However, brace yourself, there are such things a differing M.O.'s.

In fact, some of those things could have happened - he could have had a screwdriver, could have knocked on the door, was more than likely interrupted in doing some of those "defensive measures" by MK's sudden presence, or he thought he was going to do a dash and grab with the rent money. For that matter, I never understood why the lack of stuff taken from FR's room is at all determinative here.

RG was after the rent money, and opportunistically took phones and stuff from MK's purse in a panic after the murder. He then fled the country - the only one who did do, and THIS IS FAR MORE DETERMINATIVE A CLUE TO HIS GUILT AND EVERYONE ELSE'S INNOCENCE THAT ANYTHING!

Is this the way these debates go? I describe a pitcher who is left handed and you reply, "No, pitchers are mainly right handed, so your guy couldn't have been left handed!"

Of course there are more than one M.O. depending on the opportunistic goals of the thief.

What does your post prove? That RG violated some code of burglar ethics?

Besides, you misspelled "researched" above. P.Q. bans people for misspellings. I had to learn that the hard way. I wish you better luck.

An M.O. for a good burglar doesn't apply to Rudy. I am certain that a handbook's main lesson for a burglar is how not to get caught. Rudy showed a distinct lack of competence for this profession.

Maybe it included some get out of jail free cards for those bumbling idiots that could not follow simple instructions. Any comparison's saying that this is what a good burglar would do are just silly, imo.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Rudy as a burglar

Rudy had not had good luck fencing items in the recent past, so his focus might have been on cash. Also, Meredith might have returned to the girls' flat only a short time after he had started looting.

 

[Dougm]

Yes, agreed. It was a shallow comparison which was made on websleuths, which ran:

Karla appeared pretty and normal, but could be involved in sexual crimes; hence, Amanda can appear pretty and normal, and be involved in Kercher crime. It ignored the vast differences you point out above.

Similarly, on PMF a list was made of women in Great Britain who had knifed other women, sometimes fatally. Again, it was to show that Amanda could do the same. But it ignored that:
1. Most of these women were knifing the woman whom their husband was running off with, and was hence ruining their lives
2. The rest were lesbian couples with histories of violence.
3. There had been a long build up of many, many months; not a mere 6 days.

ETA: As far as your last sentence goes, from my reading of PMF, they would simply say, But this was no ordinary female. Knox was a malignant narcissist and sociopath who was primed for harming another female, even with 2 men she barely knew. There simply is no arguing with such a frame of mind.

And there is zero evidence to support the highlighted portion above.

Re: what some think is a campaign to "glorify" Amanda Knox, anyone who says that is completely missing the point. The girl/woman is a completely normal person who had her life taken away based on baseless charges, including many charges about her personality and personal life which were outrageous and completely made up. That demands to be countered, and the truth about her pointed out.

It is not so much making her out to be an angel or a saint, but to clarify the truth that she is a normal, nice, girl who did not do any of the things she is charged with, and does not exhibit the negative personality traits that some have attributed to her.

 

[smkovalinksy]

And there is zero evidence to support the highlighted portion above.

Re: what some think is a campaign to "glorify" Amanda Knox, anyone who says that is completely missing the point. The girl/woman is a completely normal person who had her life taken away based on baseless charges, including many charges about her personality and personal life which were outrageous and completely made up. That demands to be countered, and the truth about her pointed out.

It is not so much making her out to be an angel or a saint, but to clarify the truth that she is a normal, nice, girl who did not do any of the things she is charged with, and does not exhibit the negative personality traits that some have attributed to her.

Yes. Exactly. What they on PMF call some vast "PR Campaign" was in truth only a defensive countermeasure to protect Amanda against the media lies of the sex-obsessed, knife-wielding, Foxy Knoxy.

It was only to make sure the mundane truth could be known. But of course PMF will have none of this.

They keep pointing out that Marriott set all in motion "only days after Amanda was arrested". In THEIR version, the PR campaign was a shrewd move, on the part of her parents, to make certain the world did not know what a raving sociopath and walking time-bomb Amanda really was.

Now, at this late juncture, post-aquittal, how does one argue with such people? Recall, they do not care about evidence. They care only about what they are projecting onto Knox for their own, mysterious reasons.

 

[Grinder]

They keep pointing out that Marriott set all in motion "only days after Amanda was arrested". In THEIR version, the PR campaign was a shrewd move, on the part of her parents, to make certain the world did not know what a raving sociopath and walking time-bomb Amanda really was.

For quite some time the PGP argued that the PR supertanker had put the pressure on ALL of the people she knew growing up not to disclose the TRUTH about her.

This is why we never heard about the April Fool's Day prank she pulled on a roommate. For those out of the know, this is a major theory of the crime over at P** based on a post by someone signing as JOH on the Slog. The PG lead shrew actually tracked this guy down and reported that he confirm that a friend of his knew a roommate of Knox who told him that the prank had happened but refused to connect her to the guy or go public himself.

This was of course because the all powerful Marriott Knox PR enforcement division.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Thin Blue Line and Dr. Death

Now, at this late juncture, post-aquittal, how does one argue with such people? Recall, they do not care about evidence. They care only about what they are projecting onto Knox for their own, mysterious reasons.

Errol Morris made an interesting point with respect to Randall Dale Adams and David Harris. Adams was convicted of the murder of a Dallas police officer, but it is far more probable that Harris was the lone killer. A notorious psychologist, Dr. James Grigson, testified that Harris was nonviolent, but Adams was the equivalent of Charles Manson and Adolf Hitler rolled into one, or something along these lines. In other words, Grigson maintained that Adams would kill if released, and therefore the death penalty was warranted (try to find a case where Grigson said otherwise). Morris (whose film The Thin Blue Line helped to free Adams) pointed out that Grigson was wrong, twice over. Harris killed again, but Adams lived the rest of his life without killing anyone. My fingers are crossed that Rudy does not kill again. MOO.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Errol Morris made an interesting point with respect to Randall Dale Adams and David Harris. Adams was convicted of the murder of a Dallas police officer, but it is far more probable that Harris was the lone killer. A notorious psychologist, Dr. James Grigson, testified that Harris was nonviolent, but Adams was the equivalent of Charles Manson and Adolf Hitler rolled into one, or something along these lines. In other words, Grigson maintained that Adams would kill if released, and therefore the death penalty was warranted (try to find a case where Grigson said otherwise). Morris (whose film The Thin Blue Line helped to free Adams) pointed out that Grigson was wrong, twice over. Harris killed again, but Adams lived the rest of his life without killing anyone. My fingers are crossed that Rudy does not kill again. MOO.

Very interesting. I saw the film, "The Thin Blue Line" some years ago. At PMF, they are crossing their fingers that Knox does not (or maybe does???) kill again.

 

[smkovalinksy]

For quite some time the PGP argued that the PR supertanker had put the pressure on ALL of the people she knew growing up not to disclose the TRUTH about her.

This is why we never heard about the April Fool's Day prank she pulled on a roommate. For those out of the know, this is a major theory of the crime over at P** based on a post by someone signing as JOH on the Slog. The PG lead shrew actually tracked this guy down and reported that he confirm that a friend of his knew a roommate of Knox who told him that the prank had happened but refused to connect her to the guy or go public himself.

This was of course because the all powerful Marriott Knox PR enforcement division.

Yes, I recall hearing this "prank theory". I think many high school and college kids have "pranked" without this escalating to a prank of rape and throat slashing. That Marriott would be silencing all who knew "the real Amanda" sounds like the delusions of those subject to mania and paranoia.

 

[Grinder]

Yes, I recall hearing this "prank theory". I think many high school and college kids have "pranked" without this escalating to a prank of rape and throat slashing. That Marriott would be silencing all who knew "the real Amanda" sounds like the delusions of those subject to mania and paranoia.

Marriott had every household in Seattle repeatedly auto called by an ex-FBI sniper warning us not to talk about Amanda or pranks. We were told to obey or else. The curious part was that we were told that we would be banned and thanked for stopping by.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Marriott had every household in Seattle repeatedly auto called by an ex-FBI sniper warning us not to talk about Amanda or pranks. We were told to obey or else. The curious part was that we were told that we would be banned and thanked for stopping by.

 

[smkovalinksy]

I would have thought that this kind of practice (systematic looting) would only apply in a situation where the burglar has a car or van parked nearby. If you are making a getaway, you wouldn't want to seen heavily laden in a situation where that would draw attention. Guede took items that could be easily slipped in a jacket/trouser pocket and wouldn't either weigh him down or impede his movement if he had been forced to make his exit by the same means he entered.

I live in a shared house and about 18 months ago my room and that of my fellow upper-floor housemate were both broken into - we suspect, though could not actually prove that one of the lower-floor tenants (who was a general troublemaker and has since been evicted) was at least partially responsible. My TV, digital TV converter, DVD player & CD player were not even touched. All that was taken were a small amount of cash I had (foolishly) left in the room and about half-a-dozen DVDs.

Sorry to hear this, but yes - he sounds like a Guede-style burglar. Desperate for cash, and for a quick get away.

 

[bookworm]

Very interesting. I saw the film, "The Thin Blue Line" some years ago. At PMF, they are crossing their fingers that Knox does not (or maybe does???) kill again.

Oh, I think they are definitely waiting and hoping that she DOES kill again. They want to be right at all costs.

 

[Osterwelle]

Quite true. Am I supposed to dispute this?

You might state that this argument makes a staged burglary even more unlikely than an actual one. Anyone trying to stage a break-in will try to meet the alleged "expectations" others most likely have, i. e. take at least a couple of the valuable things openly lying around.
AK/RS would have had enough time to get rid of that stuff during their trip on the next day.

Additionally, Guede wasn't really a professional burglar but rather a petty crook so I guess he was more or less "improvising". I also don't think he had the nerves to calmly ransack the whole cottage after the murder...

-
Osterwelle

 

[smkovalinksy]

Oh, I think they are definitely waiting and hoping that she DOES kill again. They want to be right at all costs.

Yes. As soon as I wrote that they were crossing their fingers Knox will not kill again, it occurred to me that it is of course in their best interests that she in fact does "kill again".

Just adding a quick vent here, since pmf seems to follow all that is posted here, and comment constantly on Bruce, etc.:

One indication to me that their standards of logic and their relevance has declined in the aftermath of the acquittals: A high school student wrote and essay about how Knox "spent 4 lonely years in an Italian prison". PMFers are quick to point out that the jail was so nice, with concerts and dancing and a kitchen, etc.

But this is really beside the point. While I am surprised at how much more decent Italian jails are as compared to those in the US, it really does not matter. Who would want to be held in even a luxury prison for a crime one did not commit? Once again, facts and relevance would appear to be slipping over there.

 

[Grinder]

You might state that this argument makes a staged burglary even more unlikely than an actual one. Anyone trying to stage a break-in will try to meet the alleged "expectations" others most likely have, i. e. take at least a couple of the valuable things openly lying around.
AK/RS would have had enough time to get rid of that stuff during their trip on the next day.

Additionally, Guede wasn't really a professional burglar but rather a petty crook so I guess he was more or less "improvising". I also don't think he had the nerves to calmly ransack the whole cottage after the murder...

-
Osterwelle

Well we "know" that they disposed of their bloody clothes, bloody shoes, cleaning materials, the keys, and credit cards; therefore, they could easily have disposed of some jewelry, a laptop (or two because they should have "stolen" Amanda's) and perhaps an iPod.

This goes along with the they're really clever, no they're dumb logic applied by the PGP people.

 

[Grinder]

Just adding a quick vent here, since pmf seems to follow all that is posted here, and comment constantly on Bruce, etc.:

One indication to me that their standards of logic and their relevance has declined in the aftermath of the acquittals: A high school student wrote and essay about how Knox "spent 4 lonely years in an Italian prison". PMFers are quick to point out that the jail was so nice, with concerts and dancing and a kitchen, etc.

But this is really beside the point. While I am surprised at how much more decent Italian jails are as compared to those in the US, it really does not matter. Who would want to be held in even a luxury prison for a crime one did not commit? Once again, facts and relevance would appear to be slipping over there.

Have you noticed that that character Stunt is talking to himself over there?

The jail cell was hardly luxurious and the company not exactly the best. Once again the bizarro world logic is that she deserved to be with killers et al., so there should be no sympathy for her. They can't imagine innocence. I mean the lies, the prank, the broken pipe, the Manga, the cartwheels, the toilet flushing and all the other women that have killed - she MUST be guilty.

ETA - Have they started an email campaign to go after the student reporter and the faculty advisor?

 

[Dougm]

Well we "know" that they disposed of their bloody clothes, bloody shoes, cleaning materials, the keys, and credit cards; therefore, they could easily have disposed of some jewelry, a laptop (or two because they should have "stolen" Amanda's) and perhaps an iPod.

This goes along with the they're really clever, no they're dumb logic applied by the PGP people.

Yes! Amanda cleverly cleaned her clothes of all the blood, including the sweatshirt that was found on her bed! While they were cleaning the flat with the magic soap, Amanda went to the magic dry cleaner that was open all night, or was it the magic laundromat with the magic DNA erasing detergent? Is there a "Tide with magic DNA remover?" Or maybe they have that in Italy?

Then, she dried the sweatshirt, flew in to the flat on her broom, and left it on her bed for the police to find, all clean!! That Amanda is an amazing talent!

 

[Dougm]

Have you noticed that that character Stunt is talking to himself over there?

The jail cell was hardly luxurious and the company not exactly the best. Once again the bizarro world logic is that she deserved to be with killers et al., so there should be no sympathy for her. They can't imagine innocence. I mean the lies, the prank, the broken pipe, the Manga, the cartwheels, the toilet flushing and all the other women that have killed - she MUST be guilty.

ETA - Have they started an email campaign to go after the student reporter and the faculty advisor?

If it is so nice to be in that jail for 4 years, never knowing if you will be able to leave prior to 22 more years, maybe they would like to try it.