Amanda Knox

A Primal Nut

ascanbe wrote: »

Just wondering: why would the Italian investigators be so desperate to implicate Knox and Sollecio if they'd already solved the crime?
For the craic?
Seriously, i don't know much about this case but that just doesn't seem to make any sense.

Its a good question. Some say the prosecution were protecting their reputation(they had implicated all 3 earlier in the investigation). It also seems that due to her strange behaviour the prosecution assumed Amanda and Raffaele were guilty so did everything to fit them into the crime.

The investigation had become very high profile and perhaps they didn't want to back down. I found this unlikely in Italy; so I am going to go with that they genuinely believed Amanda and Raffaele were guilty and did everything to match them to the crime.

Thrill

ringadingding wrote: »

What was guedes version of events in his confession ?

He changed his story a couple of times, so who knows.

I've read he even admitted to fellow prisoners that he killed her by himself.

Tayla

ascanbe wrote: »

Just wondering: why would the Italian investigators be so desperate to implicate Knox and Sollecio if they'd already solved the crime?
For the craic?
Seriously, i don't know much about this case but that just doesn't seem to make any sense.

Check out my post earlier, it gives a simple explanation of why they wanted to implicate Knox.

Yahew

Mazeire wrote: »

Which is again why I say she should have been psychologically evaluated.

Your ugly hearsay. The press rounded on Knox, she seems perfectly normal to me.

A Primal Nut

Mazeire wrote: »

Ian Huntly also provided plenty of support to the police in fact he even gave televised appeals looking for the two girls he had murdered. Police are one thing, speaking to the family is quite another.

Ok but you are saying she is a sociopath because she offered no support. I'm pointing out that as far as she and her legal team are concerned, they say they provided plenty of support.

maygitchell

Tayla wrote: »

Check out my post earlier, it gives a simple explanation of why they wanted to implicate Knox.

I cant, im banned from the conspiracy theory forum

ctrl-alt-delete

Immaculate Pasta wrote: »

Great piece of journalism from the Mail. They had already published Knox was guilty then quickly took it back down when the verdict was announced http://twitpic.com/6upmbq

A few on the Sky Twitter feed thing had the same, merely a lost in translation thing I'd say, confusing the guilty of slander thing with the main charges.

take everything

That BBC News reporter can't resist showing off her bit of Italian.

Mazeire

Yahew wrote: »

Your ugly hearsay. The press rounded on Knox, she seems perfectly normal to me.

...and how was she the last time you met her?

Mazeire

A Primal Nut wrote: »

Ok but you are saying she is a sociopath because she offered no support. I'm pointing out that as far as she and her legal team are concerned, they say they provided plenty of support.

She offered evidencial support to save her own skin. I'm saying she should have been psychologially evaluated as should have the other two defendants. Don't you think that would have been fair?

A Primal Nut

Mazeire wrote: »

...and how was she the last time you met her?

There is no reason to believe she is crazy. She didn't act like a typical murderer or murder suspect; but how many murder suspects are young women? I dont think she did anything which makes her look like a sociopath.

According to BBC there, there was first suspicions about Knox and Sollecitio because she kissed her boyfriend after the murder (the video shows them looking distraught during this and its a just a peck on the lips). For me this is inappropriate, but normal for a young couple in love who want to comfort each other.

To believe some people, you'd swear they were shifting the faces of each other and laughing around.

investment

Immaculate Pasta wrote: »

Great piece of journalism from the Mail. They had already published Knox was guilty then quickly took it back down when the verdict was announced http://twitpic.com/6upmbq

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492893/Foxy-Knoxy-girl-compete-mother-men.html

I hope she sues the daily mail after all this is over

Latchy

take everything wrote: »

That BBC News reporter can't resist showing off her bit of Italian.

She has ambition and thinking of the job offer from Sky News .

Yahew

Amanda got the British Tabloid and Italian procesctor treatment.

Imagine how much different the British Tabloid press would react if a British girl was accused of murder on the flimsy evidence of the Italian prosecutors. It would an orgy of anti-Italianism.

Yahew

Mazeire wrote: »

She offered evidencial support to save her own skin. I'm saying she should have been psychologially evaluated as should have the other two defendants. Don't you think that would have been fair?

What are you talking about. She is not guilty of murder. Get over it.

Tayla

A Primal Nut wrote: »

To believe some people, you'd swear they were shifting the faces of each other and laughing around.

I know, I read some reports earlier about them kissing passionately outside...:rolleyes: It was a couple of little pecks

ascanbe

Tayla wrote: »

Check out my post earlier, it gives a simple explanation of why they wanted to implicate Knox.

Thanks for that.
Still makes me wonder why the investigators would be so fixated on Knox and Sellecio's involvement if there was no evidence of it or no reason to think it was a real possibility.
Anyway, i haven't taken any in-depth interest in this case so am not going to start pontificating on it now.
If the defense established reasonable doubt regarding her supposed guilt then it's right she was acquitted.

enfant terrible

A Primal Nut wrote: »

There is no reason to believe she is crazy. She didn't act like a typical murderer or murder suspect; but how many murder suspects are young women? I dont think she did anything which makes her look like a sociopath.

According to BBC there, there was first suspicions about Knox and Sollecitio because she kissed her boyfriend after the murder (the video shows them looking distraught during this and its a just a peck on the lips). For me this is inappropriate, but normal for a young couple in love who want to comfort each other.

To believe some people, you'd swear they were shifting the faces of each other and laughing around.

She did falsely accuse someone of murder.

That's an unusual thing to do.

nagirrac

Contrary to what is being said here by some, the decision to overturn proves the Italian justice system works as well as any other. It is different in some ways but the reality is guilt could not be proven without a reasonable doubt so the jury had to acquit.
The original trial was a slam dunk for the prosection. Knox and Sallicido had already been found guilty by the media, totally untrue "evidence" had been leaked and reported, and the jury were exposed to all of this before the trial. Knox and Sallicido stood no chance in the first trial, luckily for them there is a second appeal trial opportunity in Italy conducted by a different judge and jury.
Delighted for both of them, there is no credible evidence they were involved in any way in this crime. Calling people witches and sex crazed should not be enough to convict someone.
The lesson for everyone here is if you are ever questioned by the police in relation to a serious crime, demand to have an attorney present and say nothing.

Mazeire

A Primal Nut wrote: »

There is no reason to believe she is crazy. She didn't act like a typical murderer or murder suspect; but how many murder suspects are young women? I dont think she did anything which makes her look like a sociopath.

According to BBC there, there was first suspicions about Knox and Sollecitio because she kissed her boyfriend after the murder (the video shows them looking distraught during this and its a just a peck on the lips). For me this is inappropriate, but normal for a young couple in love who want to comfort each other.

To believe some people, you'd swear they were shifting the faces of each other and laughing around.

You know something? You can't vilify press coverage one minure and then use it to support your point the next. My theory your theory is all based on one thing: what the media has exposed us to. No one has met her none of us ever will (unless we are willing to queue up in Easons for the book signing in five years time.) I feel there was something wrong, you don't. If she had been asessed then we would know.However due to the Italians generally making a pigs ear of things we will never know.

4leto

It was a case of supposed femme fatale, a beautiful girl, with some explicit comment on facebook. For the prosecutors and police at that time that was quiet new, so they suspected.

enfant terrible

nagirrac wrote: »

Contrary to what is being said here by some, the decision to overturn proves the Italian justice system works as well as any other. It is different in some ways but the reality is guilt could not be proven without a reasonable doubt so the jury had to acquit.
The original trial was a slam dunk for the prosection. Knox and Sallicido had already been found guilty by the media, totally untrue "evidence" had been leaked and reported, and the jury were exposed to all of this before the trial. Knox and Sallicido stood no chance in the first trial, luckily for them there is a second appeal trial opportunity in Italy conducted by a different judge and jury.
Delighted for both of them, there is no credible evidence they were involved in any way in this crime. Calling people witches and sex crazed should not be enough to convict someone.
The lesson for everyone here is if you are ever questioned by the police in relation to a serious crime, demand to have an attorney present and say nothing.

and don't falsely accuse someone of murder either makes you look guilty.

Mazeire

Yahew wrote: »

What are you talking about. She is not guilty of murder. Get over it.[/QUOTE

I sure will girlfiend!:rolleyes:

Yahew

Mazeire wrote: »

She offered evidencial support to save her own skin. I'm saying she should have been psychologially evaluated as should have the other two defendants. Don't you think that would have been fair?

She was forced into an illegal confession without a lawyer by Italian prosecutors who wanted to frame her Italian boss. Speaking in a language she didn't really understand she was asked to imagine what it would have been like if Lumumba was the killer. She answered this.

The Italian Supreme Court declared that the ‘confession’ was illegally obtained and could not be referred to in the subsequent trial. This should have been a problem for the prosecution, but Mignini ( the prosector) had it covered. Lumumba would sue Knox for slander for implicating him during the interrogation and the slander case would run concurrently with the murder trial and before the same jury; the Supreme Court was thwarted.


Its ridiculous that that slander case still stands.

Mazeire

Yahew wrote: »

She was forced into an illegal confession without a lawyer by Italian prosecutors who wanted to frame her Italian boss. Speaking in a language she didn't really understand she was asked to imagine what it would have been like if Lumumba was the killer. She answered this.

The Italian Supreme Court declared that the ‘confession’ was illegally obtained and could not be referred to in the subsequent trial. This should have been a problem for the prosecution, but Mignini ( the prosector) had it covered. Lumumba would sue Knox for slander for implicating him during the interrogation and the slander case would run concurrently with the murder trial and before the same jury; the Supreme Court was thwarted.


Its ridiculous that that slander case still stands.

Where did you hear that?

forfcksake

so is it ok to have a sex party with Amanda Knox now?

A Primal Nut

enfant terrible wrote: »

She did falsely accuse someone of murder.

That's an unusual thing to do.

I agree this is one I find difficult. According to her, the police wrote a statement implicating Lumumba and pressured her to sign it - it went on for hours and she says she was treated badly. Of course I think she shouldn't have given in - she was emotionally weak and assumed the police were telling the truth that Lumumba had committed the crime, which is why she didn't come forward in the following weeks; she thought she was helping the investigation. She was silly, naive and weak. I think there is nothing more to it than that.

Of course we don't know if she is telling the truth, but the complete lack of evidence (there is none) and the fact she was also later pressured into signing a confession; I'm gonna believe her over the police.

Of course the fact she didn't speak Italian didn't help - she didn't even know what she was signing.

ejmaztec

Yahew wrote: »

She was forced into an illegal confession without a lawyer by Italian prosecutors who wanted to frame her Italian boss. Speaking in a language she didn't really understand she was asked to imagine what it would have been like if Lumumba was the killer. She answered this.

The Italian Supreme Court declared that the ‘confession’ was illegally obtained and could not be referred to in the subsequent trial. This should have been a problem for the prosecution, but Mignini ( the prosector) had it covered. Lumumba would sue Knox for slander for implicating him during the interrogation and the slander case would run concurrently with the murder trial and before the same jury; the Supreme Court was thwarted.


Its ridiculous that that slander case still stands.

A real joke that there was a €22000 fine, yet mention of €400000 compensation payable for wrongful imprisonment(as mentioned on Sky News, so could be complete lies).

Yahew

Mazeire wrote: »

You know something? You can't vilify press coverage one minure and then use it to support your point the next. My theory your theory is all based on one thing: what the media has exposed us to. No one has met her none of us ever will (unless we are willing to queue up in Easons for the book signing in five years time.) I feel there was something wrong, you don't. If she had been asessed then we would know.However due to the Italians generally making a pigs ear of things we will never know.

Yes, but your feeling there is something wrong is largely worthless nonsense based on hearsay and tabloid reporting which you didnt bother your arse to look into.

And there is media, and media. There is tabloid nonsense about her "snogging" her boyfriend, or "doing cartwheels" and all that assorted character assassination, and the - very few - broadsheet media, mostly American which reported the truth. With big words. And references to what actually happened.

Case in point: my twitter feed - largely English - is full of sorrow towards the Kercher family because they now dont know the killer of their child. The real victim was Meredith etc.

Nobody seems to know about Guede.

charlemont

She's been cleared now.