Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Amanda Knox Verdict at Midnight
Options
Comments
-
-
-
midlandsmissus wrote: »After he was convicted he did change his story and implicate the other two more, but any source I've looked at say he only said the following: He said Merdith and Amanda were arguing about money in the house, he was in the bathroom, he heard two women shouting, then he heard a scream and ran out and saw a male silhouette at the door. He said he then he fell over and when he got up he saw the outline of Amanda Knox running away from the house. He still claimed he was innocent throughout all this.
Innocent?
That drug dealer raped her and left his semen inside her. But as I said before, at least he admitted his guilt unlike the other two. But now he's claiming to be innocent? :rolleyes:0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
I wonder would a separate prosecution have been initiated for this if she had been cleared of murder? Telling any lies to police in a murder enquiry is a big no no for me (this is the reason I have no reservations about Joe O'Reilly being sent down). If you are ever a suspect in a murder enquiry, and you lie to the investigating police, you better hope I'm not on the jury.
The investigating police have played a major role in many miscarriages of justice and also produce biased evidence and will tell lies. They have gone so far as to twist facts to make a suspect look as if they have given flase evidence to them.
In one case The Ellen Reasonover story ; a woman was a witness to a robbery murder, in so far as she witnessed the perpatrators going into the shop and fleeing to their car at 8pm. She drove home not sure of what she witnessed and when she arrived home sat with her mother watching tv and saw the terrible events unfold on
the evening news.
She called the police hotline and gave a description and they called her into the police station and put a photobook in front of her and she picked out two people that looked familiar. They made her sign the back of the pictures as positive, she said she wasn't certain but they pressured her.
Then it turns out the men she picked were already in prison and they asked her to do a stress test and she did and she failed . Two weeks later a another robbery happened.. This time a woman was an accomplice.Then her boyfriend was found to have a similar shirt to the suspect in the robbery. They arrested her and a witness picked her out in a line up. ( The irony )
She ended up on trial accused of lying to police and trying to frame two men she had erroneous picked out. The police also produced one jail house snitch and a jail inmate that contradicted her statement making her appear to be a liar. She was convicted and it was 17 years before she was found to be completely innocent. She won a large settlement against the police. The truth is the police were liars and had framed her.
The jail house snitches got reduced charges and reward money for lying and later testified that they had lied.
http://forejustice.org/wc/ellen_reasonover.htm
http://forejustice.org/wc/ellen_reasonover.htm0 -
-
Surely you could say the same about any evidence presented against a defendant? i.e. it might have been massaged or even an out and out fabrication by police / prosecutors? If you were to dismiss all evidence that might be fabricated nobody would ever be convicted of anything. Isn't part of the purpose of having jury trials to make judgement calls in conflicts in testimony?The investigating police have played a major role in many miscarriages of justice and also produce biased evidence and will tell lies. They have gone so far as to twist facts to make a suspect look as if they have given flase evidence to them.
In one case The Ellen Reasonover story ; a woman was a witness to a robbery murder, in so far as she witnessed the perpatrators going into the shop and fleeing to their car at 8pm. She drove home not sure of what she witnessed and when she arrived home sat with her mother watching tv and saw the terrible events unfold on
the evening news.
She called the police hotline and gave a description and they called her into the police station and put a photobook in front of her and she picked out two people that looked familiar. They made her sign the back of the pictures as positive, she said she wasn't certain but they pressured her.
Then it turns out the men she picked were already in prison and they asked her to do a stress test and she did and she failed . Two weeks later a another robbery happened.. This time a woman was an accomplice.Then her boyfriend was found to have a similar shirt to the suspect in the robbery. They arrested her and a witness picked her out in a line up. ( The irony )
She ended up on trial accused of lying to police and trying to frame two men she had erroneous picked out. The police also produced one jail house snitch and a jail inmate that contradicted her statement making her appear to be a liar. She was convicted and it was 17 years before she was found to be completely innocent. She won a large settlement against the police. The truth is the police were liars and had framed her.
The jail house snitches got reduced charges and reward money for lying and later testified that they had lied.
http://forejustice.org/wc/ellen_reasonover.htm
http://forejustice.org/wc/ellen_reasonover.htm
And in any case, perhaps I am mixing my wife killers up but didn't Joe admit to telling porkies (or perhaps independent phone evidence suggested it? Can't recall) 0
Advertisement