Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
eIGHTY tHOUSAND fAILS?
Amanda Knox Is Innocent
- Thread starter phildwyer
- Start date
SaskiaJayne
Rural Guerrilla
Dunno if lifers without parole would be that much more interesting. 'The cunt pissed me off so I shot him'.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
originality not one of your sinseIGHTY tHOUSAND fAILS?
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
dILIGENCE!
Anudder Oik
heinous pointless bellend/fucking gobshite muppet
I thought these were interesting questions/ thoughts for those still hanging on to the notion that K&S had anything to do with this:
- why would Amanda and Raffaelle help a stranger to sexually assault and kill Meredith?
- Is it credible that a woman would help a stranger to sexually assault and kill another woman? In cases where women help men commit sex crimes against other women, the woman has been in a long term dysfunctional relationship with a domineering man. The scenario of a woman helping a stranger to sexually assault and kill another woman has no precedent in criminal history. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
- Amanda had only been in Italy a short period of time and only spoke basic Italian. Guede did not speak English. Is it credible to suggest that the two communicated well enough with each other to plan a brutal murder?
and to answer a question from a few pages back: the autopsy did not reveal that multiple attackers were involved
1 out of 7 experts thought this might have been the case, because:
a) Meredith was athletic, and therefore could have fought off just 1 attacker. Um, ok I guess
b) the way the bra strap was cut and her clothes were removed. sorry, but I'm wondering, have there really been no other cases where a rape/murder victim's clothing was removed?
and even still, why would the three necessarily be Guede, Knox, and Sollecito? and not Guede and two other people?
Come on, you know this is crazy and ridiculous. Admit it.
What's ridiculous? Try reading the evidence from the actual case reports.
The bra strap was cut several hours after the crime by someone who was "still" in the house.
The nature of the wounds, ie, lack of cuts on hands, arms, shows she was restrained and couldn't defend herself by raising her arms to shield.
Fez909
toilet expert
I'm not convinced either way, but your first question could be framed differently. Perhaps Amanda planned to kill Meredith and enlisted the help of Raffaelle and Rudy. Raffaelle said he was "enchanted" by her and couldn't believe someone as pretty as her would be interested in someone like him. she might have been able to wield that power over him to get him to do things he wouldn't normally do. People do crazy stuff for love (or lust).I thought these were interesting questions/ thoughts for those still hanging on to the notion that K&S had anything to do with this:
- why would Amanda and Raffaelle help a stranger to sexually assault and kill Meredith?
- Is it credible that a woman would help a stranger to sexually assault and kill another woman? In cases where women help men commit sex crimes against other women, the woman has been in a long term dysfunctional relationship with a domineering man. The scenario of a woman helping a stranger to sexually assault and kill another woman has no precedent in criminal history. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
- Amanda had only been in Italy a short period of time and only spoke basic Italian. Guede did not speak English. Is it credible to suggest that the two communicated well enough with each other to plan a brutal murder?
and to answer a question from a few pages back: the autopsy did not reveal that multiple attackers were involved
1 out of 7 experts thought this might have been the case, because:
a) Meredith was athletic, and therefore could have fought off just 1 attacker. Um, ok I guess
b) the way the bra strap was cut and her clothes were removed. sorry, but I'm wondering, have there really been no other cases where a rape/murder victim's clothing was removed?
and even still, why would the three necessarily be Guede, Knox, and Sollecito? and not Guede and two other people?
Come on, you know this is crazy and ridiculous. Admit it.
And it wasn't that she could have fought off one attacker, but that it seemed like the injuries she sustained were unlikely to be possible as she would have fought back and they would have been in different places, etc. So they said she must have been restrained by one person while the other attacked her.
Miss Caphat
I want it that way
actually, Guede's adopted(adoptive?) family is very wealthy, and in very high standing in Italian society. Probably part of the reason he got off so easily.
Miss Caphat
I want it that way
I just did read them. Most of what is out there is the judge's interpretation/ speculation of the autopsy finding
also, again, is she the first rape/ murder victim to be restrained by just one person?
Sirena
Don't monkey with the buzzsaw
He pleaded guilty before the Knox/Sollecito case, if I remember correctly, and was convicted.
Does that mean his story (and what he was alleging about the other two)would have been kept under wraps or did it form part of the prosecution case for K/S?
Fez909
toilet expert
But an armed robbery...15 years? Might be interestingDunno if lifers without parole would be that much more interesting. 'The cunt pissed me off so I shot him'.
Miss Caphat
I want it that way
except that there was no motive.
yeah, I can just see it. A loved up couple has dinner, watches Amelie, and decides "tonight's the night to go brutally attack your roommate along with someone we barely know."
eta: and as I said, I just read the reports, and it didn't really come across to me as pointing to one person. And also, the part about the 6 other experts thinking it probably was 1 person.
Last edited:
Fez909
toilet expert
He didn't plead guilty. He opted for a fast track trial, but still contested the charges. He still maintains his innocence, I think.
Fez909
toilet expert
Except, if she did kill her, then they didn't watch Amelie. That's part of her disputed alibi.
Why has she lied and been so inconsistent? Why try to frame an innocent man? Why did Sollecito say her version of events was wrong?
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Guede's lack of testimony does suggest .. well, a lot of things. He could be seen as problematic to the prosecution case, he could just be regarded as a poor witness (but yes, on the face of it, more the former). Presumably there's more information out there on that, leaks from the cops etc. Certainly the defence would have been interested to find out why he isn't being used.
Edit: ah, if he's still maintaining his innocence, that would explain it!
Edit: ah, if he's still maintaining his innocence, that would explain it!
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
just another dullard who mistakes form for content
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
BTW, because I'm an utter wanker, I'll just point out that your language use indicates a bias.
- Amanda had only been in Italy a short period of time and only spoke basic Italian. Guede did not speak English. Is it credible to suggest that the two communicated well enough with each other to plan a brutal murder?
and to answer a question from a few pages back: the autopsy did not reveal that multiple attackers were involved
1 out of 7 experts thought this might have been the case, because:
a) Meredith was athletic, and therefore could have fought off just 1 attacker. Um, ok I guess
Not "fought off", but certainly "resisted" - virtually all cases of violent assault (except against immobilised or restrained victims) result in defence wounds to the victim, due to resistance. It's pretty much basic "fight or flight" coming into play. Ms. Kercher had barely any defence wounds (some small "pricks" on one hand). Given the chronology of her wounds, a single attacker wouldn't have been able to restrain and stab/slash her. Ms. Kercher had compression bruising to her elbows, upper arms and shoulders, which indicates restraint (they're caused by persistent hard gripping), but the "sole attacker" hypothesis would require Doctor Octopus to have been the attacker, as at least two arms and hands would have been required to restrain her, and another two (given the two different blade profiles, and differences in knife wound directionality) to wield the blades.
Mechanically:
IF the victim is upright and restrained, then the clothing could be removed, but it'd be difficult for a single person to restrain an upright victim and remove their upper clothing. In a majority of cases where sexual assault takes place, single-handed criminals tend to only go for removing/partially removing the lower clothing - it's structurally simpler.
IF she were prone/on her back, reoving her bra would have been a whole heap more difficult if she were non-compliant.
It could well have been.
A question:
Wasn't Ms. Knox fluent enough in Italian to be able to manage university-level study that was given in Italian?
I don't know "whodunit", but I do know that both the "not guilty" side and the "guilty" side seem to be ignoring inconvenient bits and pieces.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
You seem to unmask so many of them don't you?
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
only the few who bring themselves to my attentionYou seem to unmask so many of them don't you?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
He "got off easily" after his original conviction because, as in many jurisdictions (including in some of your own states for non-federal crimes, I believe) an early plea is "rewarded" with an attenuated sentence.
I'm not exactly impressed that the Italian criminal justice system then decided to shorten his sentence, but that's a matter for their sentencing conventions.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
You seem to unmask so many of them don't you?
It's called the Doctrine of Signatures, and I'm sure m'learned associate Pickman's Model is aware of it.
basically, it a case of "like calls unto like", or even "dullard calls unto dullard".
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
I know, some of the bigger boys pushed me forward - I can hear them giggling round the corner.
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
He was stumped after the BBC got Nation Shall Speak Unto Nation."dullard calls unto dullard".
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
He originally got 30 years and appealed. The basis of his appeal was that while he was there 'the others' killed her. The effective halving of his sentence appears to be the reward for fingering his 'co-accused'.
Miss Caphat
I want it that way
this is elementary stuff on the case, Fezzy. The police had a black man as a suspect in mind, and steered Amanda into talking about this possibility, and demanding an answer on who that might be. She says she was scared, sleep-deprived, and very confused, and there were some language issues, and that the guards slapped and coerced her. According to Amanda, she started feeling like they were doing thought exercises, about what might have happened. She didn't think she was saying that Lumumba did the crime, just that it was a possible scenario. Almost as if someone said "use your psychic powers to see what happened that night" and she just told them what she saw. It's interesting to read about.
Sollecito was also harassed and lied to by the police, who said they had evidence that Amanda left during the night. He either started to doubt her and wanted to be freed of any connection with this, or was also led into giving the version of events the police wanted him to say.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Mr. Solecito's computer does indeed prove that an .avi of Amelie was played on it that evening. That's all it proves - that the film played. Frankly, Mr. Solecito did himself no favours claiming to have spent time in his computer later that night, though, as neither his hard drive or his ISP supported those claims.
IMO it's these prickly little details that make people doubt the veracity of the narratives of the defendants. You have to expect some inconsistency in any narrative - human memory isn't like a recorder, it's context-based - but misremembering that you've used your computer for 2 hours subsequent to watching a film is a bit of a "rum" error. What we usually misremember is stuff where we experience heightened emotion as the event plays out, not something as quotidian as computer use.
Unless he was totally of his bonce on something or other.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
He got 30 years for a crime where the maximum tariff is life without parole, which says one of two things:
1) that he got a reduction for opting for a "fast track" trial, or
2) that the prosecution weren't trying as hard as they said they were, because they could have got him life without parole.
ska invita
back on the other side
i havent read the thread or watched the news, dont even know what she's meant to have done - but does urban think she's innocent or guilty?
Johnny Vodka
The Abominable Scotsman
Urban or individual posters?
Similar threads
