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

1…1920222425…32

Comments

  • #632
    nagirrac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,019 ✭✭✭nagirrac


    A Primal Nut wrote: »
    Even if you do believe someone cleaned the whole apartment then why not Guede? Maybe he cleaned it?

    Nobody cleaned the apartment, there is no evidence of cleaning. Why would the police even bother looking for Knox's fingerprints elsewhere in the apartment, she lived there. They looked extensively in the bedroom where the crime was committed and found nothing credible implicating Knox or Sallicido, zilch.

    The cleaning is a red herring like many other red herrings in this case. The best red herring is the "staged break in". The verdict on this charge, and it was a separate charge on interfering with a crime scene, was "innocent because it did not happen".


  • #633
    The Left Hand Of God
    Closed Accounts Posts: 413 ✭✭The Left Hand Of God


    Funny reading this thread when you look back at an old thread on the subject before she was freed :D

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055934977


  • #634
    Lirange
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,120 ✭✭✭Lirange


    prinz wrote: »
    That's IMPOSSIBLE, but apparently it's possible to live in an apartment and leave no fingerprints anywhere?

    Eh? Amanda's fingerprints were not found in Merideth's room, the crime scene. But I do not recall any information in this case that her fingerprints/DNA were completely absent from their apartment. And yes it is simply not credible to believe they could possibly clean their own DNA from the scene of the crime and Meredith's body whilst leaving Guede's all over.


  • #635
    UnitedIrishman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,369 ✭✭✭UnitedIrishman


    Genuine question: what actually indicates that there were others involved?


  • #636
    TheyKnowMyIP
    Closed Accounts Posts: 568 ✭✭✭TheyKnowMyIP


    Just remeber. Forensics is open to fraud. The methods aren't as stringent as you are led to believe.


  • Advertisement
  • #637
    Tayla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,158 ✭✭✭Tayla


    UnitedIrishman wrote: »
    Genuine question: what actually indicates that there were others involved?

    At Rudys trial the judge concluded that there must have been others involved, due to the amount of injuries and they said she didn't have defensive wounds (which to them proved there was someone holding her down and the other(s) killed her. From the wounds they concluded a second knife was used. The prosecution also said that Meredith would have been able to defend herself because she was trained in karate, she was actually only an orange belt and she had trained in her teens.

    The prosecution would then have us believe that Amanda managed to clean all her DNA and leave Rudy's there, it's just not possible.

    There was also unidentified fingerprints found in the room but the police haven't found out who they belong to.

    There were also possible semen stains found on the pillow, they refused to test them as they said Meredith was sexually active....eh what? If they thought Raffaele was involved then that could have possibly been their proof right there but nope in the crazy world of Mignini there's no point in checking them.


  • #638
    UnitedIrishman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,369 ✭✭✭UnitedIrishman


    That's even worse police work than Frank Drebin, but at least he solved the crimes in the end.

    For one, it's pretty clear that the Police decided on one route of investigation/conviction and pursued that even when the evidence didn't fit. Just as Mignini did in the Monster of Florence case (.. harping back to it, but it shows just what they are like) in convicting a man, planting a bullet on his property (confirmed by a member of his own force) and then seeing the man walk free years later on appeal.

    Guede is guilty, that's for sure, but because of those police investigators it'll be a question that hangs over the Kerschers forever,


  • #639
    Tayla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,158 ✭✭✭Tayla


    UnitedIrishman wrote: »
    That's even worse police work than Frank Drebin, but at least he solved the crimes in the end.

    For one, it's pretty clear that the Police decided on one route of investigation/conviction and pursued that even when the evidence didn't fit. Just as Mignini did in the Monster of Florence case (.. harping back to it, but it shows just what they are like) in convicting a man, planting a bullet on his property (confirmed by a member of his own force) and then seeing the man walk free years later on appeal.

    Guede is guilty, that's for sure, but because of those police investigators it'll be a question that hangs over the Kerschers forever,

    I only read about the Monster of Florence yesterday and I was shocked.

    Mignini himself is probably the monster of Florence, he couldn't kill any more couples so he decided to destroy a couples life another way by framing them!! In the crazy world of Mignini it might just be true!!!!

    I read a reconstruction last year by a retired forensic engineer of what he thought happened to Meredith, he was convinced there was only one attacker.


  • #640
    Tayla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,158 ✭✭✭Tayla


    Thrill wrote: »
    Don't bet on it. The Italian justice system is notoriously error prone.
    If Knox is acquitted of murdering her 21-year-old British roommate Meredith Kercher - and many observers in Italy believe it's likely - she will go down in history as one of more than 4 million victims of judicial errors or unjust detention in post-war Italy


    http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/84799,people,news,amanda-knox-an-american-innocent-abroad-or-getting-away-with-murder


    I missed this the other day, wow just wow!

    Also approximately 50% of convictions are overturned or the sentences greatly reduced after their appeals in Italy.

    But none of that matters because Amanda has evil eyes apparently :rolleyes:


  • #641
    enfant terrible
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,737 ✭✭✭enfant terrible


    Tayla wrote: »
    I missed this the other day, wow just wow!

    Also approximately 50% of convictions are overturned or the sentences greatly reduced after their appeals in Italy.

    But none of that matters because Amanda has evil eyes apparently :rolleyes:

    Does anyone know the reason the Defence gave for Amanda and Raphael turing off their phones that night?

    Is it true that was the first time Amanda turned off her phonce since she was in Italy?


  • Advertisement
  • #642
    Tayla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,158 ✭✭✭Tayla


    enfant terrible wrote: »
    Does anyone know the reason the Defence gave for Amanda and Raphael turing off their phones that night?

    I think they said it was their first weekend together and they didn't want to be disturbed. Amanda was supposed to work but her boss text to say he didn't need her to go in and then Raffaele was supposed to do a favour for someone but then the person didn't need his help anymore. Maybe they were looking forward to having a nice relaxing night in then and turned off their phones in case her boss and his friend changed their minds?
    enfant terrible wrote: »
    Is it true that was the first time Amanda turned off her phonce since she was in Italy?

    No idea, I never heard that before.


  • #643
    nagirrac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,019 ✭✭✭nagirrac


    enfant terrible wrote: »
    Does anyone know the reason the Defence gave for Amanda and Raphael turing off their phones that night?

    Is it true that was the first time Amanda turned off her phonce since she was in Italy?

    There is no evidence of Raffaele turning off his phone, there was no activity on his phone for several hours.
    Amanda said she turned her phone off that night. She had got a text from Lumumba telling her not to come to work, and said she was happy about this as she got to spend the evening with Raffaele. Makes sense if she was concerned he might call back and change his mind (if the bar got busy).
    Never heard the last bit, seems implausible.


  • #644
    Tayla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,158 ✭✭✭Tayla


    enfant terrible wrote: »

    Is it true that was the first time Amanda turned off her phonce since she was in Italy?

    Just looked it up and in her testimony when asked did she usually turn her phone off she said "Not usually, because I use it as a clock, an alarm clock, so usually I don’t, but on that night I did.”

    Like I mentioned earlier, the most likely scenario is that she was didn't want to get called back in to work when she'd been given the night off.


  • #645
    Jess16
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,176 ✭✭✭Jess16


    enfant terrible wrote: »
    Does anyone know the reason the Defence gave for Amanda and Raphael turing off their phones that night?

    Because she wanted to spend time with her boyfriend rather than being called into work.

    It always amazes me that people will overlook simple, logical explanations in favour of finding flaw


  • #646
    dr.bollocko
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 35,946 Mod ✭✭✭✭dr.bollocko


    Jess16 wrote: »
    Because she wanted to spend time with her boyfriend rather than being called into work.

    It always amazes me that people will overlook simple, logical explanations in favour of finding flaw

    I'm not sure.

    The other day I called my girlfriend three times and no answer. Didn't even ring. Just straight to voicemail.

    So I called the police just in case she murdered somebody and didn't check in.


  • #647
    LH Pathe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,515 ✭✭✭LH Pathe


    Is it over then? and I won't have to see her face again?!!

    Even if her name was blame I still wouldnt lay it


  • #648
    A Primal Nut
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,949 ✭✭✭A Primal Nut


    LH Pathe wrote: »
    Is it over then? and I won't have to see her face again?!!

    Even if her name was blame I still wouldnt lay it

    I understand - you are more into this kind of woman:

    http://www.yourefatbecauseyourestupid.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/yrfat/images/image002.jpg


  • #649
    Amber Lamps
    Closed Accounts Posts: 282 ✭✭Amber Lamps


    A Primal Nut wrote: »
    http://www.yourefatbecauseyourestupid.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/yrfat/images/image002.jpg

    :eek: Is that a primal nut?


  • #650
    LH Pathe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,515 ✭✭✭LH Pathe


    A Primal Nut wrote: »
    LH Pathe wrote: »
    Is it over then? and I won't have to see her face again?!!

    Even if her name was blame I still wouldnt lay it

    I understand - you are more into this kind of woman:

    http://www.yourefatbecauseyourestupid.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/yrfat/images/image002.jpg

    maybe if the URL contained azian instead of fat, then I'd defo take a peek

    but then it'd be racist.


  • #651
    A Primal Nut
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,949 ✭✭✭A Primal Nut


    LH Pathe wrote: »
    maybe if the URL contained azian instead of fat, then I'd defo take a peek

    but then it'd be racist.

    Haha nothing wrong if its positive.

    In response to your previous post, it's all talk. If Amanda Knox came up to you in a bar and started showing an interest, ya'd be falling over yourself to bring her home.


  • Advertisement
  • #652
    enfant terrible
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,737 ✭✭✭enfant terrible


    Jess16 wrote: »
    Because she wanted to spend time with her boyfriend rather than being called into work.

    It always amazes me that people will overlook simple, logical explanations in favour of finding flaw

    Calm down I'm just asking, not calling her a murderer.


  • #653
    Tayla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,158 ✭✭✭Tayla


    Another interesting point to this whole case is the judges report of the case against Amanda, Raffaele and Patrick Lumumba when they tried to pin it on the 3 of them.

    They say Amanda arranged to bring Patrick Lumumba back to the house because he wanted her to set him up with Meredith because he wanted to have sex with her and she wasn't interested.

    Raffaele wanted to try extreme experiences.

    Amanda and Raffaele met up with him at a pizza place and then they went to Amandas and they turned their phones off

    Meredith came home and went into her room with Patrick, something went wrong which the judge guessed that Raffaele came in and 'started to try a swap' which Meredith refused.

    She was then killed with the knife.

    Evidence against Lumumba was the following.

    Amandas so called 'confession'

    Messages to and from Amanda

    This mobile phone records placed him in the vicinity of Merediths house at 8.38pm

    Lumumba changed his mobile phone the day after the murder.

    They say Lumumba said he opened his pub between 5 and 6 but the first receipts weren't until 10.29

    If Mr Lumumba did not have a rock solid alibi then they would have taken him to court and he would have been convicted by the time the police had finished distorting all the evidence and Mr Lumumbas character.


  • #654
    LH Pathe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,515 ✭✭✭LH Pathe


    A Primal Nut wrote: »
    In response to your previous post, it's all talk. If Amanda Knox came up to you in a bar and started showing an interest, ya'd be falling over yourself to bring her home.

    you know me so well..

    Guess we're all randy primates so. Personally I'd be concerned if a lady took that approach, but then ak is not that


  • #655
    previous user
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,024 ✭✭✭previous user


    sunflower27 wrote: »
    I agree Biggins. Trying to frame someone else is pretty damning in my book.

    Not to mention her behaviour the day after which is pretty chilling. If a flatmate of mine was found viciously murdered I don't think I'd be able to stand around laughing and smiling. It defies belief.

    Saw a documentary on this earlier this year and her parents seem to have her on this pedestal as this naive little girl. Knoxy has done a good job on them. Unreal.

    And doing cartwheels in the police station afterwards and sidesplits, what normal person acts like that after a murder, not a sane person thats for sure.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/4863279/Amanda-Knox-did-cartwheels-and-splits-at-police-station-after-Meredith-Kercher-murder.html


  • #656
    TheyKnowMyIP
    Closed Accounts Posts: 568 ✭✭✭TheyKnowMyIP


    previous user wrote: »
    And doing cartwheels in the police station afterwards and sidesplits, what normal person acts like that after a murder, not a sane person thats for sure.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/4863279/Amanda-Knox-did-cartwheels-and-splits-at-police-station-after-Meredith-Kercher-murder.html

    What is "normal"? I find people have their own special weirdness. Nobody is perfect.


  • #657
    parker kent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,289 ✭✭✭parker kent


    previous user wrote: »
    And doing cartwheels in the police station afterwards and sidesplits, what normal person acts like that after a murder, not a sane person thats for sure.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/4863279/Amanda-Knox-did-cartwheels-and-splits-at-police-station-after-Meredith-Kercher-murder.html

    What is a normal way to react to being questioned by police about a murder? Yeah she was a bit odd, but that is not a crime.


  • #658
    tfitzgerald
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,289 ✭✭✭tfitzgerald


    I really think she had some part in the murder. How much I don't know , but she is free now so I hope she can get on with her life and be happy


  • #659
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,327 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    It's a hard one. I've been following the case for a while and there's all sorts of confusing strands running through it.

    Her confession is odd. She said it was under duress and that's a point considering what was going on by her account, but then she repeats the confession a day later. You would think duress first time out, but second? After mature recollection and advic? Then again she's young so I dunno how I would have reacted when I was 20. Very differently to how I'd react now anyway.

    Her alibi doesn't add up. IE she was all night with her boyfriend smoking weed(and him) and watching movies they'd downloaded(which records then showed their computers didn't go online and their phones were off). Problem being he couldn't be sure she was with him. That's mad strong ganja to forget hanging out with and shagging your new girlfriend.

    The "break in" seems well dubious.

    Then her accusation of the bar owner guy. If someone independent hadn't come forward to give him a undeniable alibi he would have been screwed.

    Against all that stands the lack of DNA evidence, the lack of murder weapon(there may have been two which is of concern as it suggests a second assailant) and the well dodgy interrogation by the Italian police without lawyers or translator.

    Something happened that night and a young woman was murdered. IMHO she and her ex BF know more than they've let on so far. Did she kill her housemate? I dunno, but I'm convinced she was more involved than she claims. Even if that extends to the attempted cover up afterwards.

    Many worry about Artificial Intelligence. I worry far more about Organic Idiocy.



  • #660
    --Kaiser--
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,461 ✭✭✭--Kaiser--


    tfitzgerald wrote: »
    I really think she had some part in the murder.
    Why?


  • Advertisement
  • #661
    tiny_penguin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,090 ✭✭✭tiny_penguin


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Her alibi doesn't add up. IE she was all night with her boyfriend smoking weed(and him) and watching movies they'd downloaded(which records then showed their computers didn't go online and their phones were off). Problem being he couldn't be sure she was with him. That's mad strong ganja to forget hanging out with and shagging your new girlfriend.

    Werent the computer hard drives wiped so that there was no evidence of any use and so they werent used at all in evidence? I cant remember where but I remember reading it. Turing off your phone is not that unusual when wanting to be undisturbed for a night in with a new boyfriend, especially when she was originally meant to work, but her shift cancelled. She may have been worried her night would be interrupted if she was called back into work.

    Also as far as I recall, his statement just said that he could not confirm she stayed all night while he was asleep. Which is fairly accurate - if he was asleep he would not be able to guarantee that she never left the bed or the apartment. The question could have been posed to him that way which would mean he would have to say he couldnt confirm her alibi for the whole night.

    I do feel a bit bad for Sollecito in all of this. All the focus is on Amanda and he has been just as wronged as her. All the hype is about poor her and he is always just mentioned in a sidenote. Also if they used his statement that he was unable to confirm her wherabouts then surely that would mean that the police believed him to be home all night? So why was he implicated?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement