Case Amanda Knox - why is it so unclear

Katy89

If one reads the media one can't escape the italian criminal case with amanda knox and co.:rolleyes:

Whenever I read something about it I noticed it left me in a very strange kind of mood as I couldn't figure out why this case is so difficult to solve, holding two young people for 4 years in prison and now, kind of unbelievable, they are acquit.
My main point, what makes it so weird is, that there is these third person who is obviously already convicted. so, why is there no clear description from this person???

If someone is already found guilty, and it's proven that there were more people than him involved, why is he not telling the whole story, who else was taking part in the murder??
I don't get that, tried to figure it out on our all beloved internet but can't find any explanation.
Does somebody know something more here??

jackiebaron

Katy89 wrote: »

If one reads the media one can't escape the italian criminal case with amanda knox and co.:rolleyes:

Whenever I read something about it I noticed it left me in a very strange kind of mood as I couldn't figure out why this case is so difficult to solve, holding two young people for 4 years in prison and now, kind of unbelievable, they are acquit.
My main point, what makes it so weird is, that there is these third person who is obviously already convicted. so, why is there no clear description from this person???

If someone is already found guilty, and it's proven that there were more people than him involved, why is he not telling the whole story, who else was taking part in the murder??
I don't get that, tried to figure it out on our all beloved internet but can't find any explanation.
Does somebody know something more here??

It's really hard to know. Either Amanda was responsible (in some way) or she wasn't. If she wasn't....she spent 4 years in the big house for nothing. Apparently she was a close friend of Kercher and Kercher died after being stabbed while Amanda Knox was in the house. If someone is dying from stab wounds in the next bedroom, most people would know about it (in the house).

I know fück all about the case. Was there a motive for Knox to kill Kercher? Apparently not. Was Knox involved and the Americans wanted to have one of their's back home and not under foreign sanction? Wouldn't be the first time that they pressured or bought the freedom of a US citizen held abroad. They fly rapists off base and out of Okinawa all the time, along with drunken Blackwater assholes who murder just for the craic or CIA dickheads who kill people in the street like that prick in Pakistan. They never extradite clear criminals like the ***** who murdered Nicola Calipari or the guys who abducted that bloke in Germany (or was it Kosovo) and then tortured him. So their record for respecting the rule of law when it comes to their guys is fairly shabby. Congress persons were even wailing about bombing Singapore when some rich American punk vandalised a few cars and was up for 10 lashes.

Dunno.....if Amanda is innocent then she should go free. But in the US they fight tooth and nail not to give someone an appeal no matter how questionable the evidence and they certainly want the switch to be thrown as quick as possible just so the case is irreversible no matter what. The most bloodthirsty pro-death penalty people were clamouring for this case to be annulled yet they wouldn't spare a tinker's piss for some negro on death row.

seanmacc

So far as I'm aware Ms. Knox got off on a technicality i.e the forensic evidence wasn't collected properly. If she was truly innocent the prosecution would not be appealing the decision to acquit and the Knox family would be looking for compo for the 4 years they spent running back and forth to Italy.
The US media have treated this case disgracefully. They are letting on that the Italian justice system is like some sort of kangaroo court, the prison system is like Midnight Express and that poor Ms. Knox is the victim in all of this, not the young English girl who got her throat cut.

snafuk35

seanmacc wrote: »

So far as I'm aware Ms. Knox got off on a technicality i.e the forensic evidence wasn't collected properly. If she was truly innocent the prosecution would not be appealing the decision to acquit and the Knox family would be looking for compo for the 4 years they spent running back and forth to Italy.
The US media have treated this case disgracefully. They are letting on that the Italian justice system is like some sort of kangaroo court, the prison system is like Midnight Express and that poor Ms. Knox is the victim in all of this, not the young English girl who got her throat cut.

The onus is upon the prosecution to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty.

The evidence against Knox was non-existent.

First of all the prosecution changed the alleged motive for the murder - it changed from a satanic ritual killing, to an orgy gone wrong and finally a motiveless crime.

The knife the prosecution claimed was the murder weapon could not have created the wounds in Kercher's neck. The prosecution claimed another knife was used and that this knife was never found.

The prosecution could not prove that Knox and her boyfriend were at the house at the time of the murder, they could not provide any credible evidence that they staged a burglary, they could not provide any evidence that they knew or conspired or participated with Rudy Guede to sexually assault and kill Kercher. All the DNA evidence was fragmentary, disputed, the gathering of evidence did not follow proper procedure, was most likely contaminated and therefore should have been inadmissible.

The star witness was a heroin addict who claimed to have seen Knox and her boyfriend arguing near the scene. His evidence is highly problematic to say the least.

Whole case falls apart like a house of cards once it is scrutinized in any level of detail.

Katy89

yes, the prosecution seems to be 'confused' as well.

but it still isn't answering my thoughts why this convicted guy isn't telling how it all happened and who was and who was not involved.
he has nothing to loose anymore, he's already convicted. what holds him off?? yes, he is or was a heroin addict but does that mean he lost his memory? wouldn't think so. still weird this point.
maybe he's bribed not to tell the truth but how can one bribe a person who's convicted? not really effective I would say...still confusing..:)

jackiebaron

snafuk35 wrote: »

The onus is upon the prosecution to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty.

The evidence against Knox was non-existent.

First of all the prosecution changed the alleged motive for the murder - it changed from a satanic ritual killing, to an orgy gone wrong and finally a motiveless crime.

The knife the prosecution claimed was the murder weapon could not have created the wounds in Kercher's neck. The prosecution claimed another knife was used and that this knife was never found.

The prosecution could not prove that Knox and her boyfriend were at the house at the time of the murder, they could not provide any credible evidence that they staged a burglary, they could not provide any evidence that they knew or conspired or participated with Rudy Guede to sexually assault and kill Kercher. All the DNA evidence was fragmentary, disputed, the gathering of evidence did not follow proper procedure, was most likely contaminated and therefore should have been inadmissible.

The star witness was a heroin addict who claimed to have seen Knox and her boyfriend arguing near the scene. His evidence is highly problematic to say the least.

Whole case falls apart like a house of cards once it is scrutinized in any level of detail.

snafu, as usual you are moving the goalposts. Amanda Knox was convicted beyond a reasonable doubt....BUT she had the right to appeal. And that's fair comment. It turns out that the defense appeal launched a PR campaign to sway public opinion. It's going to be very difficult to reject an appeal in Italy no matter how compelling the evidence is if there is a groundswell of public support.

I'll be the first to say that if Knox was well and truly innocent then she should be exonerrated but something tells me (from your posts in other thread) that if she was convicted on American soil in an American court, no matter how fragile and questionable the evidence, you wouldn't even want her to receive an appeal. You'd just want her "chaired" and would trot out the usual "eye for an eye" cliche.

I imagine that you are a death-penalty proponent. If Italy also practiced the death penalty would you be so enthusiastic to have her killed as soon as possible?

jill_valentine

seanmacc wrote: »

So far as I'm aware Ms. Knox got off on a technicality i.e the forensic evidence wasn't collected properly.

You're misinformed on this point. The evidence wasn't improperly collected - it was either invented or nonexistent. Knox was completely exonerated of any involvement - the jury had the option to acquit for weak evidence, and instead went on to state that Knox was innocent of the charge. It wasn't a case of somebody getting off on a technicality, it was a prosecution that should never have been pursued to start with.

It wasn't simply a matter of a case failing to meet muster and stumbling on paperwork or clumsy handiwork. It was a rotten case, against an innocent suspect of convenience, by a prosecutor who is himself a criminal and has an appetite for satanic orgy fairytales.

snafuk35

jackiebaron wrote: »

snafu, as usual you are moving the goalposts.

If a person is guilty there would be evidence. Every single piece of evidence was totally discredited. There was no way to convict.

Amanda Knox was convicted beyond a reasonable doubt

Obviously not if the appeal so completely blew the prosecution case out of the water.

....BUT she had the right to appeal.

She not only had a right to appeal but leave to appeal was granted because the evidence put forward by the prosecution was unsafe.

And that's fair comment. It turns out that the defense appeal launched a PR campaign to sway public opinion. It's going to be very difficult to reject an appeal in Italy no matter how compelling the evidence is if there is a groundswell of public support.

The defense appeal succeeded because they challenged the evidence put forward by the prosecution and exposed it as a joke. Knox won her appeal because there was no case against her.

I'll be the first to say that if Knox was well and truly innocent then she should be exonerrated but something tells me (from your posts in other thread) that if she was convicted on American soil in an American court, no matter how fragile and questionable the evidence, you wouldn't even want her to receive an appeal. You'd just want her "chaired" and would trot out the usual "eye for an eye" cliche.

If this crime was committed in America and she was convicted on the evidence put forward that was put forward by the Italian prosecutors it would be miscarriage of justice.

I imagine that you are a death-penalty proponent.

Huh???

If Italy also practiced the death penalty would you be so enthusiastic to have her killed as soon as possible?

I am opposed to the death penalty.

Where did you get the impression that I was in favour of the death penalty?

Undergod

seanmacc wrote: »

So far as I'm aware Ms. Knox got off on a technicality i.e the forensic evidence wasn't collected properly. If she was truly innocent the prosecution would not be appealing the decision to acquit and the Knox family would be looking for compo for the 4 years they spent running back and forth to Italy.
The US media have treated this case disgracefully. They are letting on that the Italian justice system is like some sort of kangaroo court, the prison system is like Midnight Express and that poor Ms. Knox is the victim in all of this, not the young English girl who got her throat cut.

Eh, the prosecution have a vested interest in keeping her in prison, it doesn't really have that much to do with whether she's actually guilty. The Italian justice system IS absurd to foreigners - there's less emphasis on "Innocent until proven guilty" than we're used to in the English-speaking world. It works for them, but for a young foreigner it would be very alien.

Obviously there needs to be punishment for the murder, but the case against Knox was absolute tripe.

profitius

Having read a bit about the case I think she is guilty. She lied to police and tried to get somebody else arrested. Her behaviour was weird and she liked to sleep around alot. The Black guy in prison over the murder said that she was there and theres little doubt that more than 1 person killed the girl. Her Italian boyfriend happened to be a knife collector too. Strange hobby.

snafuk35

She lied to police and tried to get somebody else arrested.

She was pressured into fingering Lumumba by the cops.

Her behaviour was weird and she liked to sleep around alot.

So what?

The Black guy in prison over the murder said that she was there and theres little doubt that more than 1 person killed the girl.

So what?

Her Italian boyfriend happened to be a knife collector too. Strange hobby.

Again so what?

None of that proves anything.

storker

profitius wrote: »

Having read a bit about the case I think she is guilty. She lied to police and tried to get somebody else arrested. Her behaviour was weird and she liked to sleep around alot. The Black guy in prison over the murder said that she was there and theres little doubt that more than 1 person killed the girl. Her Italian boyfriend happened to be a knife collector too. Strange hobby.

If that's all it takes for you to convict, then you would appear to be a natural for a prosecutor's job in La Bella Italia.

Stork

Undergod

profitius wrote: »

Having read a bit about the case I think she is guilty. She lied to police and tried to get somebody else arrested. Her behaviour was weird and she liked to sleep around alot. The Black guy in prison over the murder said that she was there and theres little doubt that more than 1 person killed the girl. Her Italian boyfriend happened to be a knife collector too. Strange hobby.

Oh well there we go. Case closed.

profitius

Heres some of the more serious evidence against her. None of it proves anything but a pattern certainly is emerging. It doesn't take a genius to see that.

1. Knox’s own confession.
Knox’s confession was originally that she heard a scream on the night in question, then identified a Congolese bar owner, Patrick Lumumba, as the culprit. She later claimed that the confession was false and she only confessed because of intense pressure from the Italian police. However, she later rewrote the alleged false confession again in a five-page memorandum.

2. False accusation of Lumumba.
The accused Lumumba was arrested in a dawn raid by armed police and SWAT officers and spent two weeks in jail. However, a Swiss businessman provided a rock-solid alibi for Lumumba for that night, stating that the two men were in a bar together. Lumumba was later released, but said that Knox ruined his life. He’s currently suing her for defamation, according to ABC News.

3. Knox and Sollecito’s conflicting alibis.
Knox claimed she was with Sollecito the night of Kercher’s murder, smoking marijuana, watching movies and having sex. But Sollecito told police he could not remember whether or not Knox was with him that evening. It seems strange, even though their memories could have been hazy because of admitted drug use, that a young man would not be able to remember being with his girlfriend.

4. Computer and telephone records.
Sollecito told police he used his computer to download and watch cartoons and movies. But in court, computer experts were able to prove that there was no activity on his laptop during the time frame during in which Kercher’s murder is thought to have taken place. Furthermore, Knox and Sollecito turned off their phones on the night Kercher was killed but turned them back on the next morning.

5. The staged break-in of Kercher’s flatmates.
The victim’s bedroom, which she shared with flatmates, was ransacked the night she was killed, and a window was smashed with a rock. But police on site reported that it seemed as though the break-in was staged because the broken glass from the window was found on top of clothes on the floor. This led the police to believe the window was broken after the room was ransacked in an effort to make the scene appear as though it were a burglary gone wrong. This was a key piece of evidence in the prosecution’s case against Knox and Sollecito.

6. When police arrived Knox and her boyfriend were surprised to see them. The boyfriend claimed that he called police but there were no records of this.

jill_valentine

Almost all of those have been refuted entirely or to some extent. Somebody else can go into detail, or you can look into it a bit more yourself, but seriously, we're going around and around and around in circles.

It's immensely frustrating to see that people are still trotting out stuff that was circulated early on by the Italian police and subsequently discredited.

profitius

jill_valentine wrote: »

Almost all of those have been refuted entirely or to some extent. Somebody else can go into detail, or you can look into it a bit more yourself, but seriously, we're going around and around and around in circles.

It's immensely frustrating to see that people are still trotting out stuff that was circulated early on by the Italian police and subsequently discredited.

Who would you believe. The Italian police or Knox's propaganda campaigners?

Knox herself is an interesting character. In the USA she was known as a nice girl next door type of girl. Her few weeks in Italy however paints a different picture. Multiple sexual partners, doing drugs and some strange behaviour. The murdered girl and herself were not exactly best of friends either. Kercher had a problem with her behaviour. Her knife collecting boyfriend posted a picture of himself in a white sheet holding a meat cleaver. Telling lies to police and smiling in court as well as doing cartwheels and stretches in the police station. Very odd! They claimed that the Italian police assassinated her character but she did that herself.

fontanalis

Where's the conspiracy? Why is it just high profile cases make it on to this forum?

jill_valentine

profitius wrote: »

Who would you believe. The Italian police or Knox's propaganda campaigners?

I would believe literally billions of people sooner than I'd believe the Italian police force in any context about anything ever. Amanda Knox's propaganda people, Harvey Norman employees, used car salesmen, the shouting drunk who wanders up and down the street all the time, Dana, Psychic Sally, the Rubberbandits... literally any of those people have more credibility to me than the Italian police.

They are one of the most brutal, corrupt and inept police forces on earth. Italian convictions are almost invariably dependent on confessions obtained under questionable circumstances, and up to 50% of Italian convictions are later found to be unsound. Their forensic teams seem to invent or "lose" stuff to suit themselves as a matter of course, and their computer experts seem to have a developed a remarkable habit of destroying hard drives they recover.

That's before you get into the matter of Giuliano Mignini and his colourful documented penchant for indulging in satanic fantasies, knowingly pursuing false convictions and planting evidence.

The entire Italian justice system is a laughing stock.

Knox herself is an interesting character. In the USA she was known as a nice girl next door type of girl. Her few weeks in Italy however paints a different picture. Multiple sexual partners, doing drugs and some strange behaviour.

Girl goes on holiday, in other words. I've done "worse" of a Tuesday in Fibbers.

I haven't any interest in Amanda Knox's sex life, and neither should anybody else. It is completely immaterial to the case, although curiously, it seems to be of quite undue interest to the Italian police and media.

humanji

fontanalis wrote: »

Where's the conspiracy? Why is it just high profile cases make it on to this forum?

I have to agree with this. Is there an actual conspiracy about this people want to discuss? Otherwise, there's a thread in After Hours that should be used instead.

Ash.J.Williams

profitius wrote: »

Who would you believe. The Italian police or Knox's propaganda campaigners?

Knox herself is an interesting character. In the USA she was known as a nice girl next door type of girl. Her few weeks in Italy however paints a different picture. Multiple sexual partners, doing drugs and some strange behaviour. The murdered girl and herself were not exactly best of friends either. Kercher had a problem with her behaviour. Her knife collecting boyfriend posted a picture of himself in a white sheet holding a meat cleaver. Telling lies to police and smiling in court as well as doing cartwheels and stretches in the police station. Very odd! They claimed that the Italian police assassinated her character but she did that herself.

sounds like most perfectly normal girls who move away for college?

Katy89

humanji wrote: »

I have to agree with this. Is there an actual conspiracy about this people want to discuss? Otherwise, there's a thread in After Hours that should be used instead.

I probably should have choosen my title for the post differently. but if one reads my opening post consideradetly and do the same with my following post, my main question is: why is the guy who is already convicted not telling the story as it was???
I write this now the third time but people here keep on talking about the case in general...
I imagine, nobody has an answer for this, and so it's still odd that guy is not giving the whole picture.

I think there's some big,big bribary going on and nobody except the people involved (italian police, government, american fbi, whoever..???) can imagine, what's going on.

humanji, tbh if this kind of posts here are not related to conspiracy, then I asked myself what do you consider conspiracy?...:)
does it always have to involve ufo's, aliens etc???

if it bothers you so much, feel free to close it, as I don't think I'll get a conclusive answer anyway..

humanji

Katy89 wrote: »

I probably should have choosen my title for the post differently. but if one reads my opening post consideradetly and do the same with my following post, my main question is: why is the guy who is already convicted not telling the story as it was???
I write this now the third time but people here keep on talking about the case in general...
I imagine, nobody has an answer for this, and so it's still odd that guy is not giving the whole picture.

I think there's some big,big bribary going on and nobody except the people involved (italian police, government, american fbi, whoever..???) can imagine, what's going on.

humanji, tbh if this kind of posts here are not related to conspiracy, then I asked myself what do you consider conspiracy?...:)
does it always have to involve ufo's, aliens etc???

if it bothers you so much, feel free to close it, as I don't think I'll get a conclusive answer anyway..

No worries. My post wasn't really aimed at you, but more for everyone. There's plenty to be suspicious about the case, so it is suited here. I just don't want it to be a repeat of the thread in After Hours.

jill_valentine

Katy89 wrote: »

but if one reads my opening post consideradetly and do the same with my following post, my main question is: why is the guy who is already convicted not telling the story as it was???

We only have the word of the Italian police to say that there was more than one person involved, and I'm a little unconvinced. They've stated that more than one knife was used, but there doesn't actually seem to be any real basis for that, given that the murder weapon itself is in some dispute.

As for Guede, his sentence was reduced to 16 years from 30 after he implicated Knox as the "ringleader", so it's not really in his interest to tell the truth one way or the other.

chooochooo

jill_valentine wrote: »

We only have the word of the Italian police to say that there was more than one person involved, and I'm a little unconvinced. They've stated that more than one knife was used, but there doesn't actually seem to be any real basis for that, given that the murder weapon itself is in some dispute.

As for Guede, his sentence was reduced to 16 years from 30 after he implicated Knox as the "ringleader", so it's not really in his interest to tell the truth one way or the other.

Incorrect. His sentence was reduced because he pleaded guilty.
That's your credibility vapourised.