Continuation Part Seven: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[AmyStrange]

-

She is associating with those who may be wrongfully convicted to further her cause. I find her interviews and blog stiff and scripted. She does manage to press the Kerchers for their attention which is particularly offensive.

-

Yeah I can see why you would find that offensive. She does seem obsessed with that.

But imagine for just a minute, and forget that you think she's guilty, how horrible would that be to be hated like she is, knowing that you're innocent? Some people can deal with it and just blow that off. Amanda isn't built like that and she needs to reach out to them and they don't want anything to do with her except whatever it takes to make her pay for killing their daughter.

I'm the kind of person that would reach out also, so I can understand her dilemma. Does that affect my judgement. To be brutally honest here, I don't like Amanda. I don't like her one bit. I just can't get past that creepy look of hers, sorry.

I think that her blog is her way of dealing with this dilemma.

Amanda tends to be outspoken and that tends to get her into trouble. Should she stop? The only person who can decide that, in my opinion, is Amanda. Sometimes I cringe at some of the things she does and says, but in the end, who am I to judge that aspect of her life? I personally think, no matter what she does or say, someone's going to hate it or be offended about it.

She still looks creepy to me, but Rudy... he just looks like a nice guy to me, and he's got his own demons to deal with, that's for sure,

d

-

 

[lamasheen]

Hi, am brand new to the forum; just read Honor Bound and need to discuss the merits of this case after not paying attention to it whatsoever for the past 6+ years. It was well written and I am going to read AK's book next. I have to say the most disappointing part of the book was how little he elaborated on his own theory of how it happened. He theorizes that RG locked the door to prevent MK from escaping and does not mention the cleanup of the hallway, bathrooms, doors whatsoever. Really?? He just slashed a girl's throat, covered her with a duvet and is worried about her escaping? I honestly think that RS had nothing to do with the murder, but I think he could have come up with something a bit more compelling than that. Does anyone else really think that RG locked the room to prevent her from escaping or even locked the door himself at all? I think RS does not mention the cleanup because he really cannot fit that part into his theory. Kind of disappointed that he had 4 years to think about this everyday and this was the best he could come up with. Also, do doors in Europe lock from the outside only and cannot be opened from the inside? That seems kind of odd... and dangerous.

 

[AmyStrange]

-

Hi, am brand new to the forum; just read Honor Bound and need to discuss the merits of this case after not paying attention to it whatsoever for the past 6+ years. It was well written and I am going to read AK's book next. I have to say the most disappointing part of the book was how little he elaborated on his own theory of how it happened. He theorizes that RG locked the door to prevent MK from escaping and does not mention the cleanup of the hallway, bathrooms, doors whatsoever. Really?? He just slashed a girl's throat, covered her with a duvet and is worried about her escaping? I honestly think that RS had nothing to do with the murder, but I think he could have come up with something a bit more compelling than that. Does anyone else really think that RG locked the room to prevent her from escaping or even locked the door himself at all? I think RS does not mention the cleanup because he really cannot fit that part into his theory. Kind of disappointed that he had 4 years to think about this everyday and this was the best he could come up with. Also, do doors in Europe lock from the outside only and cannot be opened from the inside? That seems kind of odd... and dangerous.

-

I personally think he locked the door so her body wouldn't be found right away, but that's just my opinion,

d

-

 

[Bill Williams]

Hi, am brand new to the forum; just read Honor Bound and need to discuss the merits of this case after not paying attention to it whatsoever for the past 6+ years. It was well written and I am going to read AK's book next. I have to say the most disappointing part of the book was how little he elaborated on his own theory of how it happened. He theorizes that RG locked the door to prevent MK from escaping and does not mention the cleanup of the hallway, bathrooms, doors whatsoever. Really?? He just slashed a girl's throat, covered her with a duvet and is worried about her escaping? I honestly think that RS had nothing to do with the murder, but I think he could have come up with something a bit more compelling than that. Does anyone else really think that RG locked the room to prevent her from escaping or even locked the door himself at all? I think RS does not mention the cleanup because he really cannot fit that part into his theory. Kind of disappointed that he had 4 years to think about this everyday and this was the best he could come up with. Also, do doors in Europe lock from the outside only and cannot be opened from the inside? That seems kind of odd... and dangerous.

All good questions.

There really was no clean-up in the hallway. Once you've read more, incl. some of the authors who believe them guilty, you perhaps will become convinced there was no clean-up which masked AK and RS, but left a full trace of Rudy there. That really can't be done anyway.

There was one poster here a while ago who was convinced that there had to have been more than one perpetrator, simply by the way Rudy's foot-trace outside of Meredith's door points. The trouble I had with that thesis was that there were other possibilities...

Anyway, we look forward to hearing what you have to say!

 

[lamasheen]

All good questions.

There really was no clean-up in the hallway. Once you've read more, incl. some of the authors who believe them guilty, you perhaps will become convinced there was no clean-up which masked AK and RS, but left a full trace of Rudy there. That really can't be done anyway.

There was one poster here a while ago who was convinced that there had to have been more than one perpetrator, simply by the way Rudy's foot-trace outside of Meredith's door points. The trouble I had with that thesis was that there were other possibilities...

Anyway, we look forward to hearing what you have to say!

OK, perhaps not so much the hallway floor, but definitely the bathroom due to the missing half of footprint on the mat, and you can see the blood streaking down the bathroom door (hinge side). Also, the pics depict that the outside of MK's door was cleaned of blood, but not the inside. No, there was definitely some evidence of a cleanup effort that was aborted mid-flight. The cleanup job was not done thoroughly possibly due to change of plans/strategy by AK. The evidence doesn't make sense because AK is panicking. RS was not in the apartment at all, he is an innocent bystander, I think he had nothing to do with this. I think AK and RG are never in the apartment at the same time. RG killed her alone, AK goes in to cleanup/setup because she is scared and panicked.

 

[AmyStrange]

-

OK, perhaps not so much the hallway floor, but definitely the bathroom due to the missing half of footprint on the mat, and you can see the blood streaking down the bathroom door (hinge side). Also, the pics depict that the outside of MK's door was cleaned of blood, but not the inside. No, there was definitely some evidence of a cleanup effort that was aborted mid-flight. The cleanup job was not done thoroughly possibly due to change of plans/strategy by AK. The evidence doesn't make sense because AK is panicking. RS was not in the apartment at all, he is an innocent bystander, I think he had nothing to do with this. I think AK and RG are never in the apartment at the same time. RG killed her alone, AK goes in to cleanup/setup because she is scared and panicked.

-

So, you think she came home earlier, found Meredith, and was afraid she would be blamed?

Interesting, but you could say the same thing about Rudy. He only cleaned up the outside of the door so when he locked it no one would get suspicious and try to look in the room, trying to make it later rather than sooner, which ties in with him locking the door so no one would find the body right away, which is why he didn't need to clean up the inside,

d

-

 

[Strozzi]

Hi, am brand new to the forum; just read Honor Bound and need to discuss the merits of this case after not paying attention to it whatsoever for the past 6+ years. It was well written and I am going to read AK's book next. I have to say the most disappointing part of the book was how little he elaborated on his own theory of how it happened. He theorizes that RG locked the door to prevent MK from escaping and does not mention the cleanup of the hallway, bathrooms, doors whatsoever. Really?? He just slashed a girl's throat, covered her with a duvet and is worried about her escaping? I honestly think that RS had nothing to do with the murder, but I think he could have come up with something a bit more compelling than that. Does anyone else really think that RG locked the room to prevent her from escaping or even locked the door himself at all? I think RS does not mention the cleanup because he really cannot fit that part into his theory. Kind of disappointed that he had 4 years to think about this everyday and this was the best he could come up with. Also, do doors in Europe lock from the outside only and cannot be opened from the inside? That seems kind of odd... and dangerous.

Lamasheen, Honor Bound is a good starting point. Sollecito and Knox, and family members, and of course their attorneys were in almost all the hearings. RS may have a very detailed view of how the crime happened. But he may not have details that were not discussed in court or not discussed with him privately by his lawyers or their experts. For example, he may not know information that is developed independently such as on discussion boards where forensic experts have reviewed many documents or organized information, possibly beyond what RS' lawyers and experts know or have organized.

Assuming that he is innocent, as I do, what do you think the prosecution or tabloids or guilters might do to him he he lays out in great detail what he thinks occurs? Do you think the prosecution might use that to insist that he knows some detail which he could only know if he is guilty? Could the twist it? I think he could be framed further.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Hi, am brand new to the forum; just read Honor Bound and need to discuss the merits of this case after not paying attention to it whatsoever for the past 6+ years. It was well written and I am going to read AK's book next. I have to say the most disappointing part of the book was how little he elaborated on his own theory of how it happened. He theorizes that RG locked the door to prevent MK from escaping and does not mention the cleanup of the hallway, bathrooms, doors whatsoever. Really?? He just slashed a girl's throat, covered her with a duvet and is worried about her escaping? I honestly think that RS had nothing to do with the murder, but I think he could have come up with something a bit more compelling than that. Does anyone else really think that RG locked the room to prevent her from escaping or even locked the door himself at all? I think RS does not mention the cleanup because he really cannot fit that part into his theory. Kind of disappointed that he had 4 years to think about this everyday and this was the best he could come up with. Also, do doors in Europe lock from the outside only and cannot be opened from the inside? That seems kind of odd... and dangerous.

There was no cleanup! That is a fable that is not supported by any of the hundreds of crime scene photos or the video shot at the crime scene the day the body was found. Guede cleaned himself up in the bathroom, but he didn't make any effort to remove evidence from the crime scene. Nor did anyone else.

Guede probably locked the door to delay discovery of the body. He left her dead or near death, and there was no way she was going to escape.

 

[Dan O.]

Hi, am brand new to the forum

Welcome to our quiet little forum lamasheen. If you are looking for more to read there are links to the earlier parts of this thread in post 1.


[IMGL]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=597&pictureid=7840[/IMGL]

...
There was one poster here a while ago who was convinced that there had to have been more than one perpetrator, simply by the way Rudy's foot-trace outside of Meredith's door points. The trouble I had with that thesis was that there were other possibilities...

That theory was something like from the position of the first print of Rudy's in the hall it was impossible to lock the door and since the prints made a trail straight out the front door, somebody else must have locked the door afterwards.

To answer this, I first looked at the print outside Meredith's door, modeled that part in Google Sketchup and superimposed the photo of the shoes on top of the prints by carefully lining up the stain with the ridges in the shoe. The resulting image allows anyone to see the relationship between the show and the door and they can try for themselves to lock a door in that position. It could be tricky depending on your agility but not impossible.

So then I looked at the trail for the rest of the footprints. What I discovered is that this trail doesn't go out the front door but only to the front door and then comes back to marker H in front of the couch where there are multiple overlapping stains in the same series but all facing towards the hall to the back bedrooms.

My interpretation is that this trail was made before Rudy had found the keys to the front door. He was forced to turn around and stopped at the couch to ponder his next move.

 

[moije2]

I have seen nothing of Amanda Knox since the crime was committed that let's me know she is a caring sensitive girl. True I don't know anything of her past other than the last 7 years. The behaviour at the Questura the kissing joking feet in Rafs lap is in stark contrast to the others. Unaware that her behaviour was annoying to her flatmates, Story of appearing nude and not embarrassed in front of her friend's boyfriend.The interviews where she explained everyone grieved differently rang false and hollow. She appeared to want to continue to have fun and did not appear to be too upset by the murder except to say it could have been her. The book , the hot video ,more evidence of her self absorption. Her first appearance free wearing a Halloween costume.The latest round of wanting to visit the grave after she was told it was against the Kercher's wishes. Self absorbed for sure maybe you know a different girl.

This is really bizarre. Really, really bizarre. And I will presume you don't see why.

 

[lamasheen]

Lamasheen, Honor Bound is a good starting point. Sollecito and Knox, and family members, and of course their attorneys were in almost all the hearings. RS may have a very detailed view of how the crime happened. But he may not have details that were not discussed in court or not discussed with him privately by his lawyers or their experts. For example, he may not know information that is developed independently such as on discussion boards where forensic experts have reviewed many documents or organized information, possibly beyond what RS' lawyers and experts know or have organized.

Assuming that he is innocent, as I do, what do you think the prosecution or tabloids or guilters might do to him he he lays out in great detail what he thinks occurs? Do you think the prosecution might use that to insist that he knows some detail which he could only know if he is guilty? Could the twist it? I think he could be framed further.

Agreed, but he is the one writing a book and part of the book's purpose is to proclaim his innocence and change people's perception about him. RS does not have to go into his theories at all and could say that he does not want to go into detail about his theories due to pending hearings. And since he claims was not there, RS can just say that he does not know why RG locked the door and that all of this evidence is a big mystery to him just like everyone else. That RS says RG locked it so that MK couldn't escape just makes him less believable. For me, he lost all credibility with that one sentence. If he really believes that, then I have lost all respect for him.

 

[AmyStrange]

-

Agreed, but he is the one writing a book and part of the book's purpose is to proclaim his innocence and change people's perception about him. RS does not have to go into his theories at all and could say that he does not want to go into detail about his theories due to pending hearings. And since he claims was not there, RS can just say that he does not know why RG locked the door and that all of this evidence is a big mystery to him just like everyone else. That RS says RG locked it so that MK couldn't escape just makes him less believable. For me, he lost all credibility with that one sentence. If he really believes that, then I have lost all respect for him.

-

What credibility are you talking about? That he say's he's innocent? Hopefully you're not basing your theories off that? Because. honestly, that kinda makes you less credible also, no offense,

d

-

 

[Strozzi]

In belated answer to this question: Yes, I most definitely am one of those who is open to the possibility to the factual guilt of Knox and/or Sollecito. I hesitate to speak for anyone else here - but my best guess is that a significant number of other pro-acquittal/pro-innocence posters here would share that position in principle.

But, you see, it would take actual evidence - credible, reliable evidence - to make me change my position to one of guilt. Let me give you an example. If (say) sufficiently clear, reliable, time-authenticated CCTV footage emerged of Knox and Sollecito travelling in the direction of the cottage at 8.50-9.00pm and back in the direction of Sollecito's apartment at 10.30pm, then I would immediately switch to a position of pro-guilt. Likewise, if (say) a knife was found in the undergrowth that had properly-tested traces of Meredith's blood on the blade and Knox's/Sollecito's fingerprints on the handle, and if that knife matched all the wounds and the imprint on the sheet, I'd switch to pro-guilt. Or if (say) reliable, properly-tested traces of Knox's or Sollecito's DNA had been found on Meredith's body, then I'd switch to pro-guilt.

That's the problem: there is currently no credible, reliable evidence that points to the guilt of Knox and Sollecito. A sceptical, reasonable person draws conclusions based on the available evidence - but if new evidence emerges, then a sceptical, reasonable person might change his conclusions in the light of that new evidence. My current conclusion, based on the current evidence (and lack of evidence) is that Knox and Sollecito should be acquitted. If new evidence ever came to light that pointed squarely towards their guilt, I'd have no problem whatsoever in changing my conclusions. The thing is, though, I'd have to say that I don't see any such new evidence ever emerging. Therefore, I feel confident in saying that I will probably never have cause to change my conclusion.

(As a final note, you may need to draw the distinction between a belief in acquittal (non-guilt) and a belief in innocence. They are very separate constructs. For example, I personally believe very strongly in favour of acquittal (non-guilt), but my belief in innocence is not as strong. Nor need it be. Innocent people never need to prove their innocence - that would be not only a logical double-negative, but also an ethical abomination.)

I agree that I could change my view and believe that A & R are guilty but it would take forensic evidence that passes scientific validation.

I have seen enough police, scientific police, and prosecution deceit in this case that if a knife were found in the bushes that had A or R's fingerprints on it and confirmed DNA of the victim and is the appropriate size and shape, at this stage I will conclude that that knife was at one time honestly handled by A or R (thus their fingerprints) and falsely planted with the victim's DNA. The police, scientific police, and prosecution have demonstrated to me that they are dishonest and desperate to vindicate their false theories.

Raffaele's attorney put it so well. Raffaele believes (or believed) he was arrested because police misidentified a footprint on the bathmat as his. She continued that he was really arrested because he was Amanda's boyfriend and the police needed to claim the amorphous footprint is his in order to justify arresting and connecting him to the crime scene.

To try to make their claim stick, the prosecution hired a serving police forensic lab scientist (technician?) on a rewarding private consulting contract to claim a match to Raffaele by mismeasuring Raffaele's and Rudy's feet and footprints and using discredited grid measuring processes to claim falsely that the amorphous footprint on the thick, absorbent bathmat matches Raffaele's when it is not a match.

 

[Mary_H]

Hi, am brand new to the forum;<snip>

How did you choose your user ID?

 

[Dan O.]

OK, perhaps not so much the hallway floor, but definitely the bathroom due to the missing half of footprint on the mat, and you can see the blood streaking down the bathroom door (hinge side).

But what if...

Amanda had told the court of her morning bathmat boogie to her room and back. There is no reason that the mat could not have ended up rotated from where it was the night before.

Rudy states that his pants were bloody and wet when he left the cottage. If he used the shower to try to rinse the blood from the outside of the right pant leg and then stepped out to the edge of the mat, that would account for the pattern of bloody water on part of Rudy's right foot including the big toe but excluding the other toes and bloody water flowing off the pant leg before it is toweled off would account for the saturating of the right side of the stain back to the edge of the mat but no further. The blood on the edge of the door is just what one would expect if someone brushed the corner of the door with a blood soaked pant leg.

Also, the pics depict that the outside of MK's door was cleaned of blood, but not the inside. No, there was definitely some evidence of a cleanup effort that was aborted mid-flight. The cleanup job was not done thoroughly possibly due to change of plans/strategy by AK. The evidence doesn't make sense because AK is panicking. RS was not in the apartment at all, he is an innocent bystander, I think he had nothing to do with this. I think AK and RG are never in the apartment at the same time. RG killed her alone, AK goes in to cleanup/setup because she is scared and panicked.

You will have to show us what you mean by evidence of a cleanup. Blood on the inside handle is explained by the door to Meredith's room being closed when Rudy is in that room alone with Meredith when he kills her and gets his hands covered with blood. He has to open that door with his bloody hand to get out to the bathroom to clean up. There is no reason for the outside of that door to get bloodied.

 

[Mary_H]

Agreed, but he is the one writing a book and part of the book's purpose is to proclaim his innocence and change people's perception about him. RS does not have to go into his theories at all and could say that he does not want to go into detail about his theories due to pending hearings. And since he claims was not there, RS can just say that he does not know why RG locked the door and that all of this evidence is a big mystery to him just like everyone else. That RS says RG locked it so that MK couldn't escape just makes him less believable. For me, he lost all credibility with that one sentence. If he really believes that, then I have lost all respect for him.

You are welcome to lose all respect for me at the same time, if you like. I believe Rudy assumed Meredith was alive, took her phones and locked the door in order to prolong the amount of time it would take her to find help. This was based on deluded, wishful thinking on his part, of course.

I am sure that if you put your mind to it, you can come up with about a hundred and fifty other reasons you already have lost all respect for Raffaele. Don't worry, no rational explanation is necessary, because there isn't one. There is nothing he can say that will make him more believable to you.

 

[Samson]

Agreed, but he is the one writing a book and part of the book's purpose is to proclaim his innocence and change people's perception about him. RS does not have to go into his theories at all and could say that he does not want to go into detail about his theories due to pending hearings. And since he claims was not there, RS can just say that he does not know why RG locked the door and that all of this evidence is a big mystery to him just like everyone else. That RS says RG locked it so that MK couldn't escape just makes him less believable. For me, he lost all credibility with that one sentence. If he really believes that, then I have lost all respect for him.

lamasheen, you first said he had nothing to do with the murder, therefore you must believe he was wrongly imprisoned for four years on the three counts.
Then you say you have lost all respect for him because he has a theory on a non crucial detail of the crime he was wrongly imprisoned for.
Now this is supposedly a critical thinking forum where you would surely make an honest attempt at the endeavour.

 

[lamasheen]

lamasheen, you first said he had nothing to do with the murder, therefore you believe he was wrongly imprisoned for four years on three counts.
Then you say you have lost all respect for him because he has a theory on a non crucial detail of the crime he was wrongly imprisoned for.
Now this is supposedly a critical thinking forum where you would surely make an honest attempt at the endeavour.

What does murder have anything to do with credibility??? I think he is innocent of having anything to do with MK's death. He is a victim of circumstance. He was caught up in making multiple contradictory statements to the police and then had no choice but to come up with a final story to make his statement consistent with AK's. Did he not change his story multiple times? Even in his book, he claims that he FINALLY remembers after many months of fogginess, how he decided that AK could never have left his apartment - because she did not have keys and that she would have needed to be buzzed in to go in and out. And he FINALLY remembered that he never buzzed her in after many months. Both seem to blame so much of the fogginess on marijuana, this or that. It's amazing how he couldn't remember things clearly the same week but admits that it finally hit him after months in jail. Yes, he loses credibility on both points, the door locking so MK cannot escape and his incredible fogginess. Both are in his book by the way.. I think he just got caught in lies wavering on whether to protect AK or not and it just snow balled from there. Personally I like the kid, I think he just got suckered by AK, fell head over heels for her.

 

[RandyN]

How did you choose your user ID?

Can I take a guess? Perhaps not.

Hi Lama....so you read one book. RS book. Probably the guy who actually knows the least about this case (as far as book authors are concerned) but sure... he was in court every day.

If I were you I would concentrate on some pro guilt text like Barbies book...you can find a free download almost anywhere. Then move on to the Massei motivation report. If you still need more proof of a complete lack of evidence then read Darkness Descending. On the other hand read Ron Hendrys reports, Monster of Perugia, Murder in Italy, Injustice In Perugia, Fatal Gift of Beauty...etc

After those read Hellmann motivation and the Italian SC motivation and read ....no don't read anymore. By now you should easily be able to come up with a time line that fits facts and proves guilt of AK and RS beyond all doubt. If you can not then you must stop speculating about minor unsubstantiated points that are fact less and meaningless. Amanda lied or RS changed the alibi just wont cut it because we all know these are not facts but only rumors. Meanwhile, the prosecutor and police are guilty of corruption or incompetence or both and there are a multitude ...hundreds of examples actually of that questionable suspicious behavior.

Do that and then we can talk about your thoughts...right now I see that your argument is based on some pro guilt site lies....so you must be reading there besides just RS book...unless you care to cite the parts where he talks about a "cleanup" in the hall or outside the door? What page is that on? The bath mat print is explained by Guede himself. He used this bathroom and he left with wet pants leg...now how and where do you suppose that happened?

Oh...maybe read this thread in its entirety...there are some really strong posters here... Not so many anymore who are inclined to argue guilt based on evidence but they can be found in the archives...

PS try to ignore certain moderated spots...some mods still have a bee in the bonnet about this thread for some reason...those parts are ruined discussion due to delay and over-reactive censorship. Sometimes you need to check the whole weeks worth of posts or else you may be infracted for posting over a random reactionary uncalled for mod box. Watch out for those...they bruise the mods thin skin apparently or else they defy logic ...just be careful...that's all I'm saying.

BTW...welcome.

 

[RandyN]

What does murder have anything to do with credibility??? I think he is innocent of having anything to do with MK's death. He is a victim of circumstance. He was caught up in making multiple contradictory statements to the police and then had no choice but to come up with a final story to make his statement consistent with AK's. Did he not change his story multiple times? Even in his book, he claims that he FINALLY remembers after many months of fogginess, how he decided that AK could never have left his apartment - because she did not have keys and that she would have needed to be buzzed in to go in and out. And he FINALLY remembered that he never buzzed her in after many months. Both seem to blame so much of the fogginess on marijuana, this or that. It's amazing how he couldn't remember things clearly the same week but admits that it finally hit him after months in jail. Yes, he loses credibility on both points, the door locking so MK cannot escape and his incredible fogginess. Both are in his book by the way.. I think he just got caught in lies wavering on whether to protect AK or not and it just snow balled from there. Personally I like the kid, I think he just got suckered by AK, fell head over heels for her.

Mr or MS Sheen...

Try to keep in mind that the police and prosecution did not spell out their case (never) errr almost for a whole year after the murder. In fact they changed the motive three or four times, put on witnesses actually caught in court lying...Stefanoni, Quintinvale, Capazelli, Kokomaniac, Toto...et al....

But one time during a brutal, illegal, interrogation (because Italian law demands suspects have legal representation present during questioning) RS ....who asked for and was refused a calender so that he could get the dates correct stated something about Halloween night that the police confused with the next night (Nov 1st) much like Nara and Toto did even after a years worth of coaching by the prosecutor so how is it that you hold RS one off confused day against him meanwhile ignore Migninis multiple lies and liars as if they never happened or are not in the court records? Because they are. You just need to check.