Amanda Knox Is Innocent
- Thread starter phildwyer
- Start date
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
Be interesting to see the full judge's report when it's published. The Micheli report (on Guede's conviction) concluded that he didn't act alone, and the Massei report (on the original Knox/Sollecito conviction) went into great detail about the very strong evidence that the break-in was staged, something that Guede had no reason to do.
Whether or not the prosecution appeals this verdict, they have at least one unknown killer to trace - one who had a reason to stage a break-in that never happened.
I hope the Kercher's get their answers soon. Terrible not to know how or why this happened, and whether or not justice has been done.
Whether or not the prosecution appeals this verdict, they have at least one unknown killer to trace - one who had a reason to stage a break-in that never happened.
I hope the Kercher's get their answers soon. Terrible not to know how or why this happened, and whether or not justice has been done.
Miss Caphat
I want it that way
I just realized something that completely rips apart this whole theory of Knox and Sollecito being involved in any way.
Supposedly, Amanda and Rafaelle cleaned up the evidence of their part in the crime. You know, the whole bleaching the floor, the knife, their clothes, Meredith's clothes, etc theory.
But it's weird that they didn't clean up after Guerde and that he didn't clean up after himself.
The theory was that he took off, and Knox and Sollecito left his footprints etc on purpose so they could implicate him.
Okay, makes some sense...
So why the fuck didn't Amanda just say Rudy did it then ???? As we all know, she (supposedly out of nowhere) said her boss, Lumumuba did it*, knowing full well that he was at work which was a fact that could easily be proven. Had she been at the scene of the crime, she would have obviously known that Guerde was too, and that he'd make a much better person to pin the blame on.
This whole thing really has been a farce, and you will all slowly begin to realize this. (just kidding, I know most won't)
I do see how our reporting here was skewed, but yours was skewed in the other extreme, simply because the victim happened to be British.
*which might I remind you happened after 50 hours of interrogation and threats without a lawyer present.
Ok, I'm stepping away from the thread and from reading any more about this case before I turn into one of those weird court case obsessed people.
sorry for my random outbursts. 
Supposedly, Amanda and Rafaelle cleaned up the evidence of their part in the crime. You know, the whole bleaching the floor, the knife, their clothes, Meredith's clothes, etc theory.
But it's weird that they didn't clean up after Guerde and that he didn't clean up after himself.
The theory was that he took off, and Knox and Sollecito left his footprints etc on purpose so they could implicate him.
Okay, makes some sense...
So why the fuck didn't Amanda just say Rudy did it then ???? As we all know, she (supposedly out of nowhere) said her boss, Lumumuba did it*, knowing full well that he was at work which was a fact that could easily be proven. Had she been at the scene of the crime, she would have obviously known that Guerde was too, and that he'd make a much better person to pin the blame on.
This whole thing really has been a farce, and you will all slowly begin to realize this. (just kidding, I know most won't)
I do see how our reporting here was skewed, but yours was skewed in the other extreme, simply because the victim happened to be British.
*which might I remind you happened after 50 hours of interrogation and threats without a lawyer present.
Ok, I'm stepping away from the thread and from reading any more about this case before I turn into one of those weird court case obsessed people.
sorry for my random outbursts. DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
we are also still angry about the boston tea party, so that bears relevance here I feel.
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
If she'd accused the right man it would have proved she actually was there, which wouldn't have looked good given her actions afterwards. Plus, Sollecito (probably) didn't know Guede, so if Guede's story is true (big if), Knox wouldn't have known it was him anyway.I just realized something that completely rips apart this whole theory of Knox and Sollecito being involved in any way.
Supposedly, Amanda and Rafaelle cleaned up the evidence of their part in the crime. You know, the whole bleaching the floor, the knife, their clothes, Meredith's clothes, etc theory.
But it's weird that they didn't clean up after Guerde and that he didn't clean up after himself.
The theory was that he took off, and Knox and Sollecito left his footprints etc on purpose so they could implicate him.
Okay, makes some sense...
So why the fuck didn't Amanda just say Rudy did it then ???? As we all know, she (supposedly out of nowhere) said her boss, Lumumuba did it*, knowing full well that he was at work which was a fact that could easily be proven. Had she been at the scene of the crime, she would have obviously known that Guerde was too, and that he'd make a much better person to pin the blame on.
This whole thing really has been a farce, and you will all slowly begin to realize this. (just kidding, I know most won't)
I do see how our reporting here was skewed, but yours was skewed in the other extreme, simply because the victim happened to be British.
*which might I remind you happened after 50 hours of interrogation and threats without a lawyer present.
Ok, I'm stepping away from the thread and from reading any more about this case before I turn into one of those weird court case obsessed people.
The Lumumba accusation is weird. She said that she was there when he killed her and covered her ears in the kitchen to block out the screams. I don't think you can make much of it either way. Could easily be down to the circumstances of the interrogation, long hours, denial of a lawyer etc - the police were already questioning her about a text she sent Lumumba saying "see you later", and they had found Afro hair in Meredith's hands so they knew they were looking for a black guy. Her story about how and why it came about is entirely plausible if she's innocent. Equally, she could have cracked for much the same reasons if she was guilty.
I didn't get interested in this story until I saw a mention of the evidence that the break-in was staged and started following links. Beyond the overwhelming evidence that the break-in was staged (glass on top of the stuff pulled out of the wardrobe, external shutters left closed when the room occupant went away, glass up the outside edge of the windowsill but none on the ground below, no disturbance of the damp soil and foliage below, all as outlined in the Massei sentencing report), Guede knew the lads in the flat below quite well, had stayed overnight there a couple of times, and had spent an evening in their flat with Amanda and Meredith also present. It's just not very plausible that he'd choose to break into a building where virtually every single occupant would recognise him, nor that he'd choose a window in full view of the road which got hit by every passing car headlight.
Someone staged that break-in, and it wasn't Guede. Even if he had a reason to do so, his bloody trainer prints head straight from Meredith's bedroom to the exit, but Meredith's blood was in the break-in room.
How little you know me.
The truth is that Atomic and Belboid made some excellent points in fine rhetorical style. I commend them on their performances.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
That is just gloating through false praise. Still, I laughed.
And then felt a bit guilty because this whole affair isn't really grounds for internet lulz.
That is just gloating through false praise.
Where is Belboid anyway?
Apparently, OJ Simpson was also acquitted on October 3. Just a coincidence?
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Two things:
We await the Kercher family's reaction, but yesterday they said they were satisfied with the original convictions. Meredith has been a footnote in the coverage almost since the start.
Secondly, Rudy Guede was convicted of acting with Knox and Sollecito; he also appealed but his conviction was upheld. It will be interesting to see how safe this conviction now is.
We await the Kercher family's reaction, but yesterday they said they were satisfied with the original convictions. Meredith has been a footnote in the coverage almost since the start.
Secondly, Rudy Guede was convicted of acting with Knox and Sollecito; he also appealed but his conviction was upheld. It will be interesting to see how safe this conviction now is.
Divisive Cotton
Now I just have my toy soldiers
Quote from the BBC:
It seems to me that they have been totally misled by the legal representatives in Italy. This case had so many holes in it you could see it from outer space
It seems to me that they have been totally misled by the legal representatives in Italy. This case had so many holes in it you could see it from outer space
Perhaps the very reason she did so.
In exactly the same way that Gerry Conlon - to make his interrogators fuck off and leave him alone - once felt safe to put his Auntie, Annie Maguire, in the frame for the Guildford pub bombings - simply because the very notion of her being involved in any way was ridiculous as could be ascertained by a minimal amount of investigation... nobody could rationally believe it... oh, but wait...
Guede's guilty as fuck of murder... He's also a coward who was willing to destroy the lives of two other young people in order to get his own sentence halved.
The Kerchers - well. not much to say there, obv. sad their daughter was murdered - but if they can't see Knox and her bf weren't even there that night then... well. they're not that bright tbh.
dylans
overlord of all acorns
With all respect to the family of Meredith Kercher, yesterday's events were not about her. They were about the two other victims of Guede's crime. They were about correcting the wrongful conviction of two people who had no responsibility for her death and yet suffered a 4 year nightmare for something they didn't do.
The repeated claim that Meredith Kercher is forgotten in all this is somewhat dishonest especially when we remember that the man responsible for her death is convicted and imprisoned and, quite rightly, paying for that crime.
When the Birmingham 6 were released, the coverage was about them and the grave miscarriage of justice that had occurred. It wasn't about the victims or the crimes themselves except as context in which the injustice occurred. What would we have thought about those who chose that day to argue that it was a terrible thing that victims of the bombings were forgotten in all the press coverage of their release? We would have seen such claims as disingenuous because they imply that the false convictions of those men had anything to do with the victims of the bombings and that those convicted bore any responsibility for their deaths. They don't. They were innocent of those crimes and therefore also victims of them. Likewise, the case of the two people who have just been cleared has nothing to do with the tragic death of Meredith Kercher except as the context in which another crime, the crime of false imprisonment, occurred. There wasn't one victim in the killing of Meredith Kercher, there were three. Fortunately for 2 of them that has been put right.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
I was talking about the last 4 years, not yesterday. I didn't say Meredith was forgotten, I said she was a footnote to the coverage. This is a charge I level against the press. It was not a comment on whether or not I think Knox and Sollecito are guilty; they have been acquitted. Of course there should be coverage of that.
It was, however, only one of my sentences. I'm not sure why you attached your impassioned declamation to my post wondering what the Kerchers would say today. But I still wonder what they will say today. I'll bet lots of people do.
I also still wonder how this will affect Guede's conviction.
They should put his sentence back up to the 30 years he was looking at before being offered the deal he was offered.
The result pleases me greatly, just as the opposite would have depressed me.
To those of you who have been hoping she lost the appeal, I will never understand your motivation to make huge leaps of logic ("There was glass on the pillows, so it must have been staged, and why would Rudy do it - it must be Knox!") in order to find this girl guilty, but thankfully, neither did the jury.
To those of you who have been hoping she lost the appeal, I will never understand your motivation to make huge leaps of logic ("There was glass on the pillows, so it must have been staged, and why would Rudy do it - it must be Knox!") in order to find this girl guilty, but thankfully, neither did the jury.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
And that's what I'm getting at. Either he acted alone, or he acted with others. The courts now say it was not Knox and Sollecito. As things now stand, he has a reduced sentence for acting with others; others now unknown. It is my understanding that appeals in Italy can be made by the prosecution side as well, and that appeal hearings can effectively be a retrial. This surely has implications for his position.
dylans
overlord of all acorns
Because this argument, that the death of Meredith Kercher has been eclipsed by this case, that she is a footnote, that she is forgotten etc is a recurring theme in the coverage. David Cameron just said this
So on the release of the Birmingham 6, would it have been ok for the PM to to comment on their release by telling people to think of the victims of the bombing? After all their release meant the people responsible were still free No, of course it wouldn't have been ok. Because the bombing had nothing to do with them. So why is it ok here? Yesterday was not a day to be thinking of Meredith Kercher, that was done when the right person was convicted of the crime. Yesterday was a day to be thinking about 2 other innocent victims of that crime, people who were wrongly convicted for a crime they didn't do and spent the last 4 years paying for
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
I may be weird, but actually I do think it would have been appropriate to mention the victims of the bombings. The relatives would surely be thinking of their loved ones at that time. If you have lost someone in that way, and are faced with all that legal process all over again, then it is bound to affect you. Perhaps even more so if you believe there has been a miscarriage of justice.
dylans
overlord of all acorns
We can understand the families of victims not wanting their loved ones to be forgotten. We can understand Kercher family being saddened and confused by the unanswered questions that arise from this acquittal. My concern is not with their perfectly understandable reaction, my concern is the way the media (and as I posted above, politicians) are following this line. Yesterday when Solllecito made his speech the press commented that he never mentioned Kercher, and the implications were that he was somehow callous or heartless for not expressing remorse for her death. Now, while the cynic in me thinks it may have made tactical sense to mention her, he was in no way obliged morally to mention her at all. Because her death was nothing to do with him.In fact I think he is more honest for not mentioning her. Precisely because he didn't take the cynical path.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
I am unaware of the way the media is following this line. It's a bit rich if they are saying there's something wrong now, since it was they who chose how to cover the case all these years.
I didn't see any coverage of Sollecito's statement yesterday. My comment (brief as it was) was levied at the media, not at either of the acquitted people.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
A dignified response from the Kercher family: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15162243
They are quite right to say that the question remains if Guede was found as recently as last year to have not been acting alone, who is the person or people who acted with him?
They are quite right to say that the question remains if Guede was found as recently as last year to have not been acting alone, who is the person or people who acted with him?
I've lived over thirty years in Holland, and am pretty fluent in Dutch, but I would still be at a disadvantage if I was being grilled by police in a murder case.
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
He didn't get a reduced sentence because he acted with others. He got a reduced sentence because a fast-track trial is supposed to reduce the sentence by one third, yet he was given 30 years when Knox and Sollecito were originally given 24 for the murder/rape charges. His 16 years is based on 2/3 of their 24 years, and the fact that he apologised to the Kerchers (albeit only for not doing more to try and save her, he denies being involved in the killing).
Guede's version of events makes more sense than any of the prosecution fantasies. I'm not at all sure he's innocent, but I'm not at all sure he's guilty either - although his later changed statements stating that he knows it was Sollecito and Knox that he encountered there may well be false.
This verdict means that they either have to revert to the 'lone wolf' theory (which would contradict the verdict in Guede's case, but also fuck Guede completely if accepted), or they have to start looking for another killer or two (which might or might not help his case).
I genuinely hope Knox and Sollecito are innocent given that they have now been cleared. It's Guede that troubles me. The break-in didn't happen, and if you assume it did you have to believe that he chose to break into a house where every single occupant (ie person who might catch him in the act) would recognise him. It doesn't stack up.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
it wasnt really skewed in that way tho, most of the british press sided with K&S too.
Fair do's that the jury who actually had all the facts in front of them made their decision based upon that, rather than the partial info available from the media and google. There are of course still vast numbers of questions unanswered, and they’ll probably remain unanswered.
If the judges final report includes a statement along the lines of ‘Ms Knox fell victim to the foul discrimination so prevalent against ‘hot chicks’’, than I’ll owe Phil an apology.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Please elucidate how it "follows".
Similar threads
