Third Amanda Knox Verdict Due Shortly

Parent Cafe
61

<p>I don’t bother with the girl’s PR and how she looks and acts. I’m just looking at the facts in her statements, which have changed a lot, and the facts as laid out in the case. The irrefutable ones, not the ones subject to interpretation, but the actual facts. They just don’t line up the way she says or the way Sollecito says. Ironically the most honest one of the bunch might be Guede. He admits just about everything except robbing and killing her. He went to place, she let him into the house, they had sex. He used the bathroom. He sees her dead and leaves. He has no idea who killed and how it happened. Doesn’t blame S or K either Doesn’t say he saw them do anything, just that he saw someone looking like S there and hearing K’s voice. And there really was no direct evidence that he killed Kercher either. Whether he raped her or if the sex was consensual is not provable. The court decided that he raped and killed her, but not alone. The reason for that is that the it is clear evidence that Kersher was held back/down while she was stabbed because she could not fight back. Her hands and arms were held in place. There are marks showing she was so held while stabbed. One person would not have been able to do that. Two people or more could. So the police know what happened–she was held while stabbed. The physical evidence there is irrefutable. Whoever stabbed her did so with two knives as there were two separate wound patterns there. The stabbings were done by someone who did not know how to use a knife as a weapon, again by the stab patterns. </p>

<p>I don’t think Guede was in kahoots with K and S. I think two things happened, in a very short period of time that resulted in Kersher getting held while someone stabbed her. That Guede won’t outright point his finger at K and S makes me think he doesn’t know what their part in this was. He also has not implicated anyone else. He just says he didn’t do it. </p>

<p>Do read John Kersher’s book. Knox was no sweet, naive innocent in Italy. I don’t think Kersher was either but the roommates and those who knew them seem to think that Knox was over the line. THey are not exactly out there supporting her. You have to read past all of the platitudes about Kersher, as well as the demonization of Knox (Though surprisingly not much of that there) and stick to the fact and then look them up. The Kersher took the trouble and expense to have some investigation done and some DNA testing, and they are perturbed about the results. They say they don’t know what happened, but Knox’s role in there is not explained by Knox’s story, given the evidence. There are some interpretations there presented as fact, and you do have to get past that and understand that just because something is rare doesn’t mean it didn’t happen or if it’s common, that it did, but the evidence just listed does put together a troubling picture of what the likely scenarios are, and I can’t cut Amanda Knox out of the picture as the innocent who simply discovered blood in the place so decided to call the police and then got blamed for acting goofy and got pushed into some confession. That doesn’t fit the facts at all.</p>

62

<p>She will always have this story hanging around her neck and that’s enough. </p>

<p>Maybe. But, I would not think that was enough if I was the dead roommate’s mother. </p>

63

<p>The Italian court system is different from that in the US, but when you go to a country, you are bound by their rules. That Knox was let go after the 2nd set of finding, does not mean that she was done with their system of justice. With all due respect, if extradition is requested, the process to examine the vailidity of the request and how we handle such requests should be started. . if she were some inner city,unattractive, AA guy, she’ d be extradited in a heart beat. That she is an attractive, white, girl from a well to do family who is fighting tooth and nail with PR and attorneys is probably why she is not going to be extradited and that is not fair. We would Italy to comply with our extradition requests. </p>

<p>I hope that our system will get the court transcripts and look at the evidence presented and have experts make their own decisions on whether this is an issue where we do allow extradition to another country. Not the din from publicity and all of the opinions of people who are reading and listening to stories that have circulated. If the situation is such where we should be supporting Italian law on this, she should be extradited. This is not supposed to be subject to a a public opinion poll. </p>

<p>And I say this with no idea what the process would be for something like this. Maybe the conviction does have elements that make it so that we do not have to send her back. If that 's the case, then so be it, but this should not be an exception to precedent just because she has public support and sympathy. </p>

64

<p>Did she do it? I don’t know. I do think she was somehow involved at least in the clean up of the crime. It’s going to be at least a year before this is completely decided. But if she is found guilty of murder then the US should extradite her. Otherwise why should any country allow us to extradite people for crimes they commit in the US? We can’t pick and choose which people we think are guilty. That is the role of the country that the crimes are committed in. My guess is that if she thinks she maybe extradited she will get on the first plane to a country that won’t extradite her to Italy. After all she did say she would become a fugitive if necessary.</p>

65

<p>“The attorney argued there was “no evidence” implicating his client in the murder and never had been, adding that it was “incomprehensible” that the court had found her guilty.”</p>

<p>Total lie. Check the list of evidence. Yes, there is a lot of evidence implicating Knox in the murder. . Yes, it was comprehensible that the court found her guilty. They found her guilty during the first round of the proceedings, the victim’s family want her found guilty and serving time, and the Italians and those in the town think she had a heavy hand in this. </p>

<p>Knox says she is going to fight this to the end, but…she ain’t gonna go back there. Also says the Kercher family doesn’t want her convicted. Big fat lie. They absolutely think she had something to do with the murder, something substantial, they wanted the conviction, they want her serving time. </p>

<p>So right there some lies. Not atypical though, of criminal cases. You can’t believe these sort of statements. </p>

66

<p>“The single thing that I found most compelling as to her possible guilt was her blaming the owner of the bar where she worked. If you are innocent you have no reason to lie or to blame anyone else. I could never reconcile that.”</p>

<p>Please. You have a young woman in a foreign country, kept awake for hours, not allowed a lawyer, yelled at and hit in the head by the police. She finally agreed to a story that they concocted. People will admit to anything to stop the abuse. This happens in foreign countries all the time, where people sign “confessions” to whatever the police tells them to. Most people don’t know how to act like a POW, only give name, rank and serial number until you get a lawyer, especially young people.</p>

<p>Why is it so unlikely that she would get some of the other details wrong? They admitted to spending the night smoking pot, many people are not that observant, and could conflict what they say from one moment to the next. Why anyone would believe a prosecutor with a history of nutso accusations, police who tampered with the evidence, improper handling of DNA, abuse of a young person in the police station, is beyond me. Amanda is a sweet, yet rather dingy (though not much anymore) young person, who was having the time of her life with her new boyfriend on a dream trip through Italy. A wacko sex maniac who wanted to kill, or killed because of bathroom cleaning? Ridiculous. It doesn’t even make sense. They have the murderer in jail already.</p>

<p>This could have been any of our daughters. Amanda is a sweetheart, and what an injustice to her.</p>

67

<p>Another thing, I’d wager that the vast amount of people on this forum would admit to anything they were directed to after a certain amount of time. Certainly their children would. I wouldn’t, I’ve had POW training, and am stubborn as heck. The lawyers wouldn’t, and those who are crazily stubborn wouldn’t. But most of you being sleep deprived, scared, unknowlegeable about criminal proceedings in a foreign country? You would eventually agree to whatever they told you to.</p>

68

<p>One last thing, I don’t understand why anyone believes a single thing as presented by the police, the prosecutors, and people who have supposedly examined the evidence. There has been so much incompetence, lying, misdirection, and trickery involved in this case that I wouldn’t trust a single person involved. Funny how people can overlook all of that, and only believe the presented “facts” of the case. If the police, investigators or prosecution said it, it must be true, right?</p>

69

<p>^^ What if the murder happened here and the girl is Italian and has gone back to Italy. Would you have the same conclusion, that all the presented “facts” by the police, investigators and prosecution are not correct?</p>

70

<p>Remember the kids who “confessed” to raping and beating the Central Park Jogger? It happens all the time.</p>

<p>The idea of people who have been smoking pot going into a homicidal rage is simply ludicrous, it really is. Confusion, sure.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Precisely. And this too:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Personally, I don’t find the fact that the victim’s parents and the Italian public want her locked up to be even faintly relevant.</p>

<p>As for extradition, in the absence of a confession, it would be political suicide for any administration, <em>especially</em> the current one. Think about it.</p>

71

<p>I have known people going through civil legal issues and have read the reports in the paper as compared to what I had actually seen happen, what I knew personally. The reports usually were somewhat accurate, based in many facts, but would be missing some pertinent details/facts, and/or shift the overall context and perception to fit their headline.</p>

<p>I don’t know that any of us know the real facts. We know what we have read in the paper, not what really happened. The small fact left out or mildly twisted in presentation could the very ones convincing one person she is guilty and another that she is being railroaded. Since seeing my friend’s case reported I am leery of believing fully what I read. It’s not even that the reporter chooses to change the overall story, but how they interpret what they heard and how they edit for space.</p>

72

<p>Honestly it’s like some here have never met a young person under extreme stress. </p>

<p>People do out of character things when they’re terrified. Confessing to a crime to make the pain stop is certainly one of them.</p>

73

<p>"What if the murder happened here and the girl is Italian and has gone back to Italy. Would you have the same conclusion, that all the presented “facts” by the police, investigators and prosecution are not correct? "</p>

<p>I don’t have the conclusion that ALL the facts are not correct. I just conclude that there has been so much incompetence, lying, drive to accuse someone as opposed to actually finding out the truth, that I don’t know what that has been presented, that I can believe. We have unethical behavior from prosecutors with a single minded desire to win over here too. The difference is, there are many things in the Knox case that in this country, would force the case to be dropped. Not being allowed a lawyer and being kept up for many hours under police interrogation would be a start. Having the case overturned during an appeal would be the end of it.</p>

74

<p>Well, it’s been quite a few years now and her story still doesn’t add up and her behavior is still odd and her PR efforts are still transparent. I don’t know what happened at all but I don’t believe whatever her latest version of the events is either. </p>

75

<p>

</p>

<p>With all due respect, the “evil sex kitten” theory gained traction precisely because she was attractive. It hurt her in the eyes of the Italian public and no doubt the jury. And let’s not pretend the fact she was American didn’t bias the jury against her either. </p>

76

<p>

</p>

<p>State the evidence you believe exists.</p>

<p>The prosecution’s “evidence” was largely based on its speculation. </p>

<p>Knox’s interrogation was not video recorded. She was not given an lawyer and was not free to leave. Italian police can have you put in prison if you allege they did anything improper such as hit you when you fail to provide the answer they want. Any “confession” arising out of this would never pass in America. </p>

<p>The guy who murdered the victim had his DNA all over her. Knox’s DNA was no where to be found. The prosecution said Knox must have wiped it away. Such speculation would never pass any American court. </p>

77

<p>Many things happen in American courts that have a big chunk of the public aghast. Usually, but not always because as someone upthread noted the public does not have all of the facts.</p>

78

<p>The blood evidence alone is enough to get her a conviction in some series. Footsteps and blood all over the place with Knox and Kercher’s blood together. Yes, the DNA tests were done and there was DNA of the two together on a knife that matched stab wounds found in Sollecito’s drawer. with a stupid explanation that the two could not agree about for it. That the PR machine is making wrong factual statements is really a problem, as most Americans are not getting the raw facts on the case. It’ s fine to speculate and come up with ideas and theories but to out and out say thing that are not true is bold faced lying which is happening here.</p>

<p>There are a number of things that make no sense in the story. None of the three accused have been able to come up with any consistent story. All of them have lied, but the strange thing is that they aren’t exactly wildy and consistently pointing figures at each other as what almost happens in gang crime where a group cause harm together. It’s a sporadic finger pointing, limp and with no facts or evidence. Guede, yes, after the fact when all the news came out blamed the two of them, but initially, he didn’t seem to know who Sollecito was nor know Knox very well. No reason to protect them either, and he clearly did not trust them going it a lone in a fast track trial. </p>

<p>Why the heck would Sollecito deny that Knox was with him all night that early in the whole process when it could have been an alibi for him? Because she was seen during that time period? Then when the witnesses were problematic in terms of trustworthiness, he says she was with him. Problem is his own father related the conversation saying she wasn’t at the start of all of this before anyone knew where this was going. </p>

<p>The problem with this case is that the facts make it pretty clear that Guede didn’t do this alone. The AA guy’s in jail, he basiclaly admitted he did it, DNA and blood there, so it should just end the case, right? But he didn’t implicate anyone else, can’t come up with a story of how Kercher was killled to literally save his life. Like he doesn’t even frigging know. The place was rigged like someone broke in but Guede said right off the bat that Kercher let him in the door. Took the air out of that one–didn’t even seem to know the place was set up for a break in and know DNA prints, nothing to link him with that set up. His story of walking out the door from the bathroom matches the footsteps. Then we have a bare footprint of Sollecito in the mix and all kinds of commingled blood of Knox and Kercher, and no, I do not believe for an instant, that it came from her pierced ears.</p>

<p>The problem with this case is that it is irrefuably a fact, the evidence screams it out, that Kercher was restrained and stabbed with a knife. That means at LEAST two people were involved and one had to be strong enough to render Kercher helpless while being stabbed. Think about that. The two people had to be in cahoots. One holding the girl, the other stabbing her. They would have gotten blood all over them, from what the murder scene showed. Yet the place was clearly cleaned up as the luminol showed. Traces show that both Knox, Guede and Sollecito stepped in it BEFORE it was cleaned up. </p>

<p>Knox knew the scene in the room and that the body was moved without anyone having told her and not being allowed in there. Really before the police had ascertained all of that. That’s what has spooked the roommates. Also there was a reticence to going into the room when clearly something was wrong–Sollecito was kickboxing champ, but he wasn’t going to kick the door down when things looked bad in that room and Kercher was clearly missing, cell phones tossed, and the door left opened to the place, and with Knox saying there were blood traces she noticed, when she showered there earlier? It’s really crazy. Guede had written some email that he couldn’t see how Knox could have showered there with all of that blood–he’d clearly seen it, stepped in it, but the pattern doesn’t jive for him being the one bloodsoaked. Truly, it seems to me that two separate events occurred her.</p>

<p>It is possible that Guede was there, stepped into the bathroom as he said, leaving irrefutable evidence of that move. Two OTHER people came into the place, and killed Kercher, and Guede just left thereafter stepping through the mess and hightailing it out of Italy knowing he was in trouble. Then Knox walked in there in druggy high, not noticing much until she realizes that she has blood all over her, goes into Kercher’s room, touches things, is afraid of getting blamed, maybe steals the money and credit cards, and sets up a burgularly scene, goes back to Sollecito’s, calling her mother about discomfort at the scene at her house (the 3 am phone call to her mom) which is a fact, getting Sollecito to come back to her place, and then deciding to call the police. How Sollecito’s bare foot print in all of that mess would figure, one can’t know. Why the heck Sollecito was so reluctant to give Knox an alibi through the night makes no sense. Why would Guede be protecting anyone if he did not act alone and yet whoever killed Kercher could not have done it alone due to the restraining marks and the stabbing wounds. </p>

<p>This is a dog of a case for Italy, believe me. The problem is that they cannot dump it all on Guede. They’d love, love, love to do so. But it doesn’t fit. Something else happened here. And no strange unidentified DNA in the mix, just Sollecito’s and Knox’s, they can’t keep their stories straight, they lie about all kinds of stupid things in their stories and can’t even stick together on it, she acts loopy. Makes no sense at all. </p>

<p>Kercher’s family has done a lot of work in examining all of the evidence. Yes, Knox and Sollecito have lied throughout all of this, as has Guede, but the only one’s whose story fits the evidence somewhat is Guede, and he won’t admit to the killing–but can’t say anyone else did, and has only implicated Knox and Sollecito, after the fact when he could, though he doesn’t even know S. And neither S nor K implicated G–why would they not just have thrown him to the wolves had they all done this together or if they knew he was on the scene. Yes, now they point their fingers to him, but only based on what has come out from the case, with no extra info at all. Instead of giving the name of her ex boss which Knox claims she did under police duress, why didn’t she give up Guede’s name if they were all in it together or if she had any idea he had anything to do with it? </p>

<p>So a lot here that makes no sense, both in K’s and S’s favor, as well as G’s. And yet all three are directly implicated by evidence, DNA, blood, being in the area, acting suspiciously. But who killed Meredith Kercher? </p>

79

<p>Very interesting. Thanks. All of that lying is a problem for me that I can’t just write off as scared little girl. Sorry.</p>

80

<p>@busdriver “she finally agreed to a story that they concocted.”</p>

<p>No, Amanda told THEM that she had met up with Patrick Lumumba (bar owner) at a basketball court earlier that evening. She said that they went back to the house as he was “infatuated” with Kersher. He was in Kersher’s bedroom and she heard screaming. The story goes on from there but it was not concocted by the police. Who makes up that kind of story? To me is seems like a “blame the black guy” scenario. Anyway, Lumumba spent 2 weeks in jail but was set free when patrons of the bar all testified he was at the bar the whole evening. Is it any wonder that the Italians think she is guilty? Lumumba sued her for defamation and won.</p>

<p>One theory that has been tossed around as to a motive is that Lumumba did like Kersher. She had been in the bar a few times and it was rumored he had either offered her a job or was going to. Roommates said Amanda was none too happy about that, as they were competitive with each other. When Lumumba called Amanda the evening of the murder to tell her not to come in, some say she took that as a message that she was being replaced by Kersher.</p>

<p>Guede actually did issue a statement from jail after Amanda Knox testified during the last trial. He urged her to tell the truth and admit she was present the night of the murder.</p>