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

[Samson]

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.

Fair enough, but you can nevertheless be called on this for unwittingly emulating the prosecution proclivity for finding eye and ear witnesses several months after the crime. Good luck on the forum, it's fun but challenging.
Incidentally on the other sites they are gleeful because Amanda is scared witless at the pending decision. It's no fun for her, and I am certain she was with Raf that night, not at no 7.

 

[codyjuneau]

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.

.
Why am I getting the same feeling I get when some guy with a clipboard knocks on my door and greets me with 'Hi, I'm not trying to sell anything'?
.

 

[acbytesla]

Frankly, who the hell cares? It really wouldn't matter if Knox had been a certified juvenile delinquent with a conviction for causing malicious damage, if she has an alibi for the time of this murder. Which she appears to have. Lots of people have episodes in their past where they did something a bit questionable. They didn't all kill Meredith Kercher!

I simply cannot describe how tired I am of people who are trying to accuse someone of a crime where there is no evidence at all that they committed it, running off to find some completely unrelated act to smear the person with. It's irrelevant.

Probably the most notorious example of this is Sion Jenkins, when the police unearthed the fact that some years previously he had sexed up his CV, when applying for his present job. It was pretty minor - he said he'd been to Gordonstoun (a posh school) when he'd actually been to Glasgow Academy (a very good school), and he said he'd graduated from the University of Kent when in fact he had a diploma from a college which had subsequently amalgamated with the University of Kent. His post-grad teaching qualification was entirely genuine, and he had been promoted to headmaster on his own merits.

This was spun to assert that he had got his job under false pretences, and that he had no qualifications at all. The inference was drawn that anyone who would tell the odd porkie on their CV was obviously a person who would batter their foster daughter to death with a tent peg without a second thought. It was even suggested that the motive for the absolutely motiveless murder was that Bille-Jo might be going to reveal his heinous crime!

The police also canvassed all the boys he taught or had taught, trying to find someone who would state that Mr. Jenkins had once lost his temper. Incredibly, for a teacher in a boys' school, they could find nobody. That last didn't get any publicity, but for weeks all there was on TV about the case was this falsified CV.

I couldn't make it out even at the time. It seems to me that massaging a CV a bit isn't that unusual, and hardly turns someone into a violent child murderer. It was only later that I realised they didn't have any real evidence against the man, and were trying to blacken his name instead. I think he went through more trials than Amanda Knox before he was finally acquitted.

So no, I don't care if she messed up someone's room as a prank. I once got up very early and hid three bicycles from the shed behind my friend's house as an April Fool's prank. I thought it was funny at the time but nobody else was amused. It didn't turn me into a bicycle thief. Or a murderer.

Find some way Knox could have murdered Kercher and left a corpse with all her last meal still in her stomach, and then we can discuss it. Otherwise, all you have is irrelevant distraction.

Rolfe.

ETA: Ninja-ed by Bill.

We took a buddies car from the parking lot and put in the common room. He even called the police. A prank that neither he or the cops appreciated.

The fact that anyone is discussing this as some indicator of Amanda's guilt demonstrates just how desperate and depraved they are. (Machiavelli, Briars).

Desperate, because it isn't evidence even remotely related to Meredith's murder. It doesn't place Amanda at the scene of the crime, it doesn't help pinpoint Meredith's time of death. It is totally unrelated to the crime.

Depraved, because we are talking about someone's life. A human being, not an abstract, with actual feelings and family. A person like Machiavelli's or Briar's with a brother, sister, mother, father cousin or friend. A person who should be entitled to have their case weight on the facts of the case, not unrelated incidents, innuendo and wild speculation.

Frankly, I'd be ashamed if I was Briars or Machiavelli for stooping this low. If they can't argue the actual evidence of the crime like the time of death, the DNA, fingerprints, than why even bother with a trial?

 

[codyjuneau]

We took a buddies car from the parking lot and put in the common room. He even called the police. A prank that neither he or the cops appreciated.

The fact that anyone is discussing this as some indicator of Amanda's guilt demonstrates a desperate and depraved argument.

Desperate, because it isn't evidence even remotely related to Meredith's murder. It doesn't place Amanda at the scene of the crime, it doesn't help pinpoint Meredith's time of death. It is totally unrelated to the crime.

Depraved, because we are talking about someone's life. A human being, not an abstract, with actual feelings and family. A person with a brother, sister, mother, father cousin or friend. A person who should be entitled to have their case weight on the facts of the case, not unrelated incidents, innuendo and wild speculation.

Frankly, I'd be ashamed if I was stooping this low. If guilters can't argue the actual evidence of the crime like the time of death, the DNA, fingerprints, than why even bother with a trial?

.
Hi Ac

I fixed your post so you won't get refracted or purged or whatever it is. You can delete yours now before the moderator sees it.
.

 

[RoseMontague]

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.

Perhaps you can detail the evidence of this massive cleanup that Raffaele failed to mention? Or perhaps we can now say that Crini is the guilty one here because his poop theory is even more ridiculous. I have always enjoyed Massei's large bag theory, maybe he did it? Or how about you give us your timeline and theory of the crime and fit that in with the available evidence. I would love to hear it.

 

[NancyS]

From the Massei report:

“The fact [that the] duodenum [is] empty is not [necessarily] fully reliable.” (pg 179)

As far as I know it's not usually considered the best way to predict time of death as you don't know when someone last ate - in this case there were multiple witnesses that confirm the time of Meredith's last meal.

 

[RoseMontague]

As far as I know it's not usually considered the best way to predict time of death as you don't know when someone last ate - in this case there were multiple witnesses that confirm the time of Meredith's last meal.

I have noticed a big about face on TOD lately both in the pro-guilt community and in the prosecution's TOD in this latest appeal. The fact is the earlier TOD fits with the stomach contents evidence as well as Meredith's cell phone evidence and Rudy's testimony regarding the timeline. Unfortunately, that puts both Curatolo's testimony and Nara's scream to rest. Unless you reinvent Curatolo's testimony and ignore Nara causing even more difficulties or you can just pronounce in front of the court that either an earlier or later TOD is possible (but you still think Curatolo and Nara are full stop credible and reliable, somehow, anyway). Which is the osmosis part of the theory, I guess.

It must fit together somehow because they must be guilty seems to be the latest "theory".

 

[Antony]

I don't know if any one believes the window was broken before. The money could have been though. I still think the break-in was staged to steer people towards a robbery to cover for the insider involvement.

Well, of course you do. It means that you never have to answer the question posed here earlier: "what evidence would it take to make you doubt that Knox and Sollecito are guilty?"

All such evidence can be lumped in with the staging of the break-in.

 

[NancyS]

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.

So Amanda is guilty of being annoying and self absorbed, which must be fairly common for 20-year-olds. When I was 20 I spent hours bitching about the annoying behaviour of my fellow 20-year-old friends and acquaintances and I'm sure they did the same about me - this has nothing to do with her being a murderer. She was also an American girl in Europe, where there is a stereotype of Americans being annoying, crass and loud - and this makes it hard to really know how much of her being 'annoying' was down to being American

The one thing I do know is that nearly all the young women I know could have been portrayed in a similar way - we all have embarrassing stories in our past, we've all behaved badly or inappropriately at times. I would like to know what Meredith's Italian flatmates and British friends were doing at the same time - did they drink wine, laugh, kiss their boyfriends, have sex, buy underwear, get drunk, accidentally make an inappropriate comment, laugh at the wrong time. Were they all perfect people or did some people find them annoying, drunken, flirtatious etc. etc. - we'll never know as they have not been subjected to the same scrutiny, the sort of scrutiny that can make anyone look bad.

Reading between the lines, perhaps there is some evidence that at the time Meredith was killed, Amanda was immature and a bit self absorbed - but this does not make her a murderer and how many people can say that they don't cringe at the behaviour of their 20-year-old selves. I can only imagine how many mixed up emotions she must have been experiencing. The shock of what had happened, the knowledge that it could easily have been her and the insecurity of being alone in a foreign country with no family support - as well as desperately not wanting to leave Italy and the horrific excitement of being at the centre of something so huge. I'm really not surprised her behaviour was a bit erratic. At times of great stress many people lurch from despair and grief to wanting to get drunk, have sex and act outrageously, anything to make themselves feel alive.

 

[Antony]

Do you have any comment regarding the fact that Meredith still had her last meal fully inside her stomach?

Maybe Knox and Sollecito staged it after the murder.

(There should be a "smiley" after that, but I couldn't find one grim enough.)

 

[toto]

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.

Hi
The books I have read which have given me a good insight into to the various positions of the case are:

Law and Disorder by John Douglas (ch 28-32)
A Death in Italy by John Follain
Murder in Italy by Candace Dempsey
Angel Face: The true Story of Student Killer Amanda Knox by Barbie Nadeau
(The title was changed after she was found innocent by the Hellmann court)
The fatal gift of beauty: The trials of Amanda Knox by Nina Burleigh
as well as Honor Bound by R.S. and Waiting to be Heard by A.K.
Also of some interest is The Monster of Florence by Douglas Preston in giving some background to the Italian legal system and the prosecutor Mignini

Clearly one should read both sides of the argument to get a good overall understanding.
This is the one site that is neutral so all the best arguments will probably be found here, but other more biased sites, some that will not allow a dissenting view, may have some useful primary source documents.

By the way if anyone on this forum thinks I have missed out on a useful read as published in books or kindle, relating to the case then I would be interested!

 

[Antony]

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.

You have to be aware that neither Raff nor Amanda were present when the crime took place, so they are in a not much better position to work out what happened than you or I. Indeed, they can be excused for steering clear about the gory details, because the victim was someone close to them, and they have unjustly suffered enormous personal consequences as a result.

In their place, I would find analysing details of the crime immensely painful.

 

[Antony]

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.

No he didn't. Both he and Amanda had, and have, the same story - one that only varied when they were being manipulated and threatened by police.

The people who changed their story multiple times are the ones accusing them.

 

[Paninaro]

From the Massei report:

“The fact [that the] duodenum [is] empty is not [necessarily] fully reliable.” (pg 179)

Until I can read Dr. Lalli's and Giancarlo Umani Ronchi's testimonies in English, I'll accept what I read in the Massei report on pages 177 – 179.

If you are also a human forensic pathologist who has read or written peer-reviewed papers on this topic, or has even had a great deal of experience with the topic of stomach emptying post-mortem during human autopsies, I'd be open to listening to what you have to say. If not, I'll wait until I can read the testimonies given by human forensic pathologists.

However, given your level of expertise, perhaps you were not satisfied with the medical specialist for the defense?

How about the opinion of Professor Fransesco Introna supporting what Rolfe states?

You rather prefer the opinion of Massei who quite misunderstands the argument about the empty doudenum?

 

[Briars]

So Amanda is guilty of being annoying and self absorbed, which must be fairly common for 20-year-olds. When I was 20 I spent hours bitching about the annoying behaviour of my fellow 20-year-old friends and acquaintances and I'm sure they did the same about me - this has nothing to do with her being a murderer. She was also an American girl in Europe, where there is a stereotype of Americans being annoying, crass and loud - and this makes it hard to really know how much of her being 'annoying' was down to being American

The one thing I do know is that nearly all the young women I know could have been portrayed in a similar way - we all have embarrassing stories in our past, we've all behaved badly or inappropriately at times. I would like to know what Meredith's Italian flatmates and British friends were doing at the same time - did they drink wine, laugh, kiss their boyfriends, have sex, buy underwear, get drunk, accidentally make an inappropriate comment, laugh at the wrong time. Were they all perfect people or did some people find them annoying, drunken, flirtatious etc. etc. - we'll never know as they have not been subjected to the same scrutiny, the sort of scrutiny that can make anyone look bad.

Reading between the lines, perhaps there is some evidence that at the time Meredith was killed, Amanda was immature and a bit self absorbed - but this does not make her a murderer and how many people can say that they don't cringe at the behaviour of their 20-year-old selves. I can only imagine how many mixed up emotions she must have been experiencing. The shock of what had happened, the knowledge that it could easily have been her and the insecurity of being alone in a foreign country with no family support - as well as desperately not wanting to leave Italy and the horrific excitement of being at the centre of something so huge. I'm really not surprised her behaviour was a bit erratic. At times of great stress many people lurch from despair and grief to wanting to get drunk, have sex and act outrageously, anything to make themselves feel alive.

Amanda's social immaturity and self absorption is not the reason she stands accused. I've shared my thoughts on evidence and timelines more than once on this site.

 

[Grinder]

What really destroys the credibility of the wiki project is not its editorial slant but its almost complete lack of proper citations that reference actual source documents (or reasonable facsimiles thereof). One page I looked at was festooned with testimony cites that lacked page numbers and linked not to the source docs but to "summary" pages elsewhere on the same wiki. The whole thing is hermetically sealed. It's a huge fail. The best way to trip up conspiracy theorists is to ask them to cite reliable sources in a transparent manner... it just can't be done.

The heart of my issue with true crime novels.

 

[Strozzi]

The fact that anyone is discussing this (her Seattle April fools prank) as some indicator of Amanda's guilt demonstrates just how desperate and depraved they are. (Machiavelli, Briars).

Desperate, because it isn't evidence even remotely related to Meredith's murder. It doesn't place Amanda at the scene of the crime, it doesn't help pinpoint Meredith's time of death. It is totally unrelated to the crime. /QUOTE]

What it does mean is that police/prosecution's speculation (no evidence survives critical examination) on Nov 2 2007 that the break-in was staged coincidentally resembles some aspects of an April fools prank that Amanda committed in Seattle before going to Italy.

If you think the police/prosecution's speculaton of a staged break-in survives critical examination, read "A Detailed Look at the Physical Evidence Regarding the Break-In" by forensic engineer at http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/RonHendry------2.html

 

[andreajo]

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.

You have read Honour Bound, so you are aware that Raffaele was kept in solitary confinement for about 6 months - Nov 2007 - May 2008 (approximation extracted from Honour Bound, correct me if I am wrong). Please do not underestimate the effect that this kind of incarceration following the traumatic and surreal events around Meredith's murder might have on a person's ability to think coherently.

I have been thinking a lot about the choice of solitary confinement for Raffaele after the airing of a recent CBC production on the use of solitary confinement in Canadian corrections, and its psychological effects on prisoners.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/solitary-confinement-a-growing-issue-in-canadian-u-s-prisons-1.1699487

I believe that it is a mistake to judge the actions of Raffaele without taking into account extreme psychological distress over a prolonged period of time.

From a point of view of legal fairness and human rights, take into account the fact that he was not actually charged with any crime until Oct. 29, 2008. (Wikipedia, the Murder of Meredith Kercher). He was just in preventive detention. What do you think that Italian officials were trying to accomplish by placing Raffaele in solitary confinement when he had not yet been charged with an offense?

 

[Strozzi]

Amanda's social immaturity and self absorption is not the reason she stands accused. I've shared my thoughts on evidence and timelines more than once on this site.

Her social immaturity and self-absorption were used as evidence against her in court. Italian police, Filomena, and Filomena's boyfriend testified in court on her demeanor.

One example presented in court is the allegation that she did a cartwheel in the police station. What would that have to do with whether she was or was not present at the cottage on the evening/night of the crime?

 

[NancyS]

Amanda's social immaturity and self absorption is not the reason she stands accused. I've shared my thoughts on evidence and timelines more than once on this site.

I'd love to read your timeline?