Amanda Knox Is Innocent

[Miss Caphat]

By whom? According to this the luminol that showed up their bloody footprints are in the judge Massei's report.

problem is, blood that had cleaned up, which showed up with luminol would be smeary, not in the shape of a footprint. a footprint that showed up with luminol would probably mean someone had stepped in cleaning product, or various other things, which could mean anything. Maybe someone had recently cleaned the shower.
Basically it's a footprint on a bathroom floor.

 

[Miss Caphat]

luminol's not fucking magical. it's the stuff inside of a glow stick (well, I take it back, that is kind of magical). It is sprayed on surfaces, with the lights down, and shows imprints of different substances including bleach, blood, dirt, cleaning products.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

problem is, blood that had cleaned up, which showed up with luminol would be smeary, not in the shape of a footprint. a footprint that showed up with luminol would probably mean someone had stepped in cleaning product, or various other things, which could mean anything. Maybe someone had recently cleaned the shower.
Basically it's a footprint on a bathroom floor.

It wasn't in the bathroom.

It's interesting isn't it? You're speculating and explaining away things just as much as anyone else is. I've read another site that counteracts the wiki I was reading called injusticeinperugia and they're doing the same thing as the original wiki. Original wiki and anti knox/sollecito people 'Oh it's blatant they did it because of footprints, staged break in and ever changing stories' the pro innocence wiki and pro innocence people 'Oh those samples were poorly taken, it might be cleaning products, Guede broke in.' I am still completely and utterly stumped. There but the grace of god etc.

 

[Miss Caphat]

It wasn't in the bathroom.

what footprint are you talking about then?

 

[Doctor Carrot]

Footprints in luminol in the hallway between Knox's and Kercher's door that apparently contain Knox's and Kercher's blood. www.themurderofmeredithkercher.com have a look on there. http://www.injusticeinperugia.org is the more pro innocence argument that claims the pro guilt site is run by a Knox hate blogger.

Anyway the bloody foot print on the bathroom mat was there plain as day. No lumino was required to bring that up and it didn't match Guede's. It's a bit more than just a footprint on a bathroom floor. You sure you've actually read much about this?

 

[Wolveryeti]

Why were there no luminol footprints or DNA evidence in Meredith Kercher's room? Where is the proof that the accused conspired with Rudy Guede... aren't these valid questions that need to be addressed by the prosecution team before a guilty verdict can be considered safe?

 

[Miss Caphat]

Why were there no luminol footprints or DNA evidence in Meredith Kercher's room? Where is the proof that the accused conspired with Rudy Guede... aren't these valid questions that need to be addressed by the prosecution team before a guilty verdict can be considered safe?

well, exactly. the investigation seems unfinished, to say the least, regardless of which side one's on.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

Why were there no luminol footprints or DNA evidence in Meredith Kercher's room? Where is the proof that the accused conspired with Rudy Guede... aren't these valid questions that need to be addressed by the prosecution team before a guilty verdict can be considered safe?

Yep there's questions that still need answering on both sides, frankly. Loads of fucking questions.

 

[Miss Caphat]

Footprints in luminol in the hallway between Knox's and Kercher's door that apparently contain Knox's and Kercher's blood. www.themurderofmeredithkercher.com have a look on there. http://www.injusticeinperugia.org is the more pro innocence argument that claims the pro guilt site is run by a Knox hate blogger.

Anyway the bloody foot print on the bathroom mat was there plain as day. No lumino was required to bring that up and it didn't match Guede's. It's a bit more than just a footprint on a bathroom floor. You sure you've actually read much about this?

yawn. I was not remembering all the specific details. all I know is any footprints except Guede's were eventually proven inconclusive. I have found that almost without exception, the pro guilt sites have information that is out of date, in the sense that it at one time appeared in the media or official docs., but was later proven inconclusive or changed somehow

 

[Doctor Carrot]

yawn. I was not remembering all the specific details. all I know is any footprints except Guede's were eventually proven inconclusive. I have found that almost without exception, the pro guilt sites have information that is out of date, in the sense that it at one time appeared in the media or official docs., but was later proven inconclusive or changed somehow

Why bother commenting then if you can't be bothered to remember what foot print's what etc etc? All the pro guilt sites have out of date details and it's mostly inconclusive? Well apparently the Italian justice system doesn't seem to think these things are inconclusive or out of date as they've found them guilty...twice.

In the meantime:



'We support the prosecution's stance'

'They have been found guilty twice'

'We're not detectives or judges we can only go on the Italian legal system which is very thorough'

'If they've been found guilty they should be somewhere and not just free in America or Italy'

'There are still so many question marks over what happened that night - we may never know for sure'

So despite all the arm chair lawyers, judges and detectives on the Internet and all the speculation they, the victim's family, have given the most decent and honest responses I've heard from anyone, including myself. They've been extremely dignified throughout the whole thing even though they, and their poor sister, have taken a back seat.

 

[Fez909]

well, wait a minute though. apparently 7 experts looked at the autopsy report; only one claimed that it had to have been done by more than one person. Guess which expert's testimony was used during the trial.
I also just read that actually the autopsy was left far too long after the time of death. I did think it was strange that they have such a huge window of time for possible time of death.

Is four hours and five minutes really a "huge window of time"?

 

[free spirit]

To me the entire thing stinks of a police fit up, and I doubt anyone will ever get to the truth of the matter as a result.

The chances of all 3 of them being guilty of the murder seem slim to none existent, so at the very least I'd expect at least 1 of them to be innocent, probably 2, and possibly even all 3.

 

[Miss Caphat]

Why bother commenting then if you can't be bothered to remember what foot print's what etc etc? All the pro guilt sites have out of date details and it's mostly inconclusive? Well apparently the Italian justice system doesn't seem to think these things are inconclusive or out of date as they've found them guilty...twice.

'We support the prosecution's stance'

'They have been found guilty twice'

'We're not detectives or judges we can only go on the Italian legal system which is very thorough'

'If they've been found guilty they should be somewhere and not just free in America or Italy'

'There are still so many question marks over what happened that night - we may never know for sure'

So despite all the arm chair lawyers, judges and detectives on the Internet and all the speculation they, the victim's family, have given the most decent and honest responses I've heard from anyone, including myself. They've been extremely dignified throughout the whole thing even though they, and their poor sister, have taken a back seat.

why is it always w/ the pro-guilt people that it comes down to "we care about the Kerchers and poor Meredith" with the insinuation that the other side doesn't care.
I mean, come on, now. It doesn't even warrant a response, really.


I feel terrible for the Kerchers. I suppose I really relate to the agony of not knowing what happened. My stepbrother, who I was very close to, died under very suspicious circumstances when he was 19. Not going to go into details, but I do actually really understand how they might be feeling.

But tbh, I do sometimes wonder how they can be so convinced about Knox/ Sollecito's involvement?
their lawyer stands to make millions, but only if Knox and Sollecito are proven guilty. Considering that he would be the one explaining all the evidence to them, I feel like I would not know who to trust. I feel like I would want a much better investigation, that was handled in a non-shoddy way.

 

[Miss Caphat]

speaking of the Kercher's lawyer, he oddly enough just represented an Italian man who committed a hit and run on a young American woman, claiming he "fell asleep at the wheel" and got a new paint job on his car so as to avoid suspicion.
The guy got 3 years for this.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/07/driver-turns-self-in-afte_n_1000106.html

and on that note, I really need to get off the internet.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

speaking of the Kercher's lawyer, he oddly enough just represented an Italian man who committed a hit and run on a young American woman, claiming he "fell asleep at the wheel" and got a new paint job on his car so as to avoid suspicion.
The guy got 3 years for this.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/07/driver-turns-self-in-afte_n_1000106.html

and on that note, I really need to get off the internet.

Another attack on the straw man....

Just like everyone else on this thread, I have no idea whether or not Amanda Knox is guilty of anything... but why are so many people standing for and against her when none of us really know what happened?

My honest opinion... from the 'evidence' I've seen.... I don't think it sufficient to warant a guity verdict on a murder charge... but in the same breath, I don't think she's innocent, and I believe she was complicit in some way.

Was the verdict safe...? I don't think it was... Was Amanda Knox involved in some way...? I believe she was...!

I believe the truth will, eventually, rise to the surface.

 

[danny la rouge]

Another attack on the straw man....

Just like everyone else on this thread, I have no idea whether or not Amanda Knox is guilty of anything... but why are so many people standing for and against her when none of us really know what happened?

.

Exactly. Anyone who thinks it's "obvious" is just looking at evidence that backs their prejudices.

We don't know.

Now, the accent discussion was good...

 

[Treacle Toes]

speaking of the Kercher's lawyer, he oddly enough just represented an Italian man who committed a hit and run on a young American woman, claiming he "fell asleep at the wheel" and got a new paint job on his car so as to avoid suspicion.
The guy got 3 years for this.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/07/driver-turns-self-in-afte_n_1000106.html

and on that note, I really need to get off the internet.

What is your point here?

That the lawyer will happily represent people who are guilty of a crime?

That the lawyer is anti-American?

That the 3 years isn't long enough?

 

[Doctor Carrot]

why is it always w/ the pro-guilt people that it comes down to "we care about the Kerchers and poor Meredith" with the insinuation that the other side doesn't care.
I mean, come on, now. It doesn't even warrant a response, really.

I feel terrible for the Kerchers. I suppose I really relate to the agony of not knowing what happened. My stepbrother, who I was very close to, died under very suspicious circumstances when he was 19. Not going to go into details, but I do actually really understand how they might be feeling.

But tbh, I do sometimes wonder how they can be so convinced about Knox/ Sollecito's involvement?
their lawyer stands to make millions, but only if Knox and Sollecito are proven guilty. Considering that he would be the one explaining all the evidence to them, I feel like I would not know who to trust. I feel like I would want a much better investigation, that was handled in a non-shoddy way.

Please point out to me where I'm 'pro guilt?' I'm not pro anything, I haven't got a fucking clue to be honest, neither do you and neither does anyone else on here or the army of armchair twats who think they're fully knowledgeable in detective work, judging, DNA analyses, autopsy, crime scene investigation, forensic science etc etc. I put that video up not as a 'oh look at the poor Kerchers don't you care?' I put it up as an antidote to the millions of fucking idiots out there who think they know best, because quite frankly the amount of arm chair bullshit I've seen over the last few days, both here and elsewhere, makes me wanna puke.

 

[Theisticle]

One of the big problems is shoddy journalism and the way the case is reported.

Example:

In the excellent book on the case, "The Fatal Gift of Beauty; The Trials of Amanda Knox," author Nina Burleigh describes Guede's history with the law: He was previously arrested for housebreaking, and on one occasion stole a knife (Kercher was stabbed).

The answer is that the Italian prosecutor in charge of the case was an obsessed weirdo who was convicted of corruption.

Giuliano Mignini had previously prosecuted the "Monster of Florence" serial killer case and became convinced that it was a masonic conspiracy. His case came to nothing. Mignini was later convicted of illegally tapping the phones of various police and reporters connected to the Florence case, and was given a 16-month suspended sentence.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/why-amanda-knox-is-innocent-2014-1#ixzz2sG69hXqP

What a joke of an article.

 

[Anudder Oik]

yawn. I was not remembering all the specific details. all I know is any footprints except Guede's were eventually proven inconclusive. I have found that almost without exception, the pro guilt sites have information that is out of date, in the sense that it at one time appeared in the media or official docs., but was later proven inconclusive or changed somehow

Where was this information proven out of date or inconclusive? Link please.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Bloody foot prints belonging to Knox and bf have long been dismissed as an 'urban myth'.[/quote]

By whom, Joe?

 

[ViolentPanda]

It wasn't in the bathroom.

It's interesting isn't it? You're speculating and explaining away things just as much as anyone else is. I've read another site that counteracts the wiki I was reading called injusticeinperugia and they're doing the same thing as the original wiki. Original wiki and anti knox/sollecito people 'Oh it's blatant they did it because of footprints, staged break in and ever changing stories' the pro innocence wiki and pro innocence people 'Oh those samples were poorly taken, it might be cleaning products, Guede broke in.' I am still completely and utterly stumped. There but the grace of god etc.

Which is why people should look to the evidence, and weigh it, rather than emotively grasping at did/didn't arguments that favour their own instincts. I don't see a lot of this happening, just a lot of "I'll grab this idea because it fits my preconceptions about the case".
If you can't reach a conclusion from the evidence, that's not proof of innocence or guilt either, just that "all things being equal", either evidence was missed, or no evidence was missed.

 

[existentialist]

Please point out to me where I'm 'pro guilt?' I'm not pro anything, I haven't got a fucking clue to be honest, neither do you and neither does anyone else on here or the army of armchair twats who think they're fully knowledgeable in detective work, judging, DNA analyses, autopsy, crime scene investigation, forensic science etc etc. I put that video up not as a 'oh look at the poor Kerchers don't you care?' I put it up as an antidote to the millions of fucking idiots out there who think they know best, because quite frankly the amount of arm chair bullshit I've seen over the last few days, both here and elsewhere, makes me wanna puke.

I think it is really hard for people to accept that they just don't/can't know what happened. We try to fill in the gaps, and perhaps somewhere along the way we start to be persuaded of their guilt or innocence, and then without really thinking about it, attempt to assemble the "evidence" to suit that perspective. I am trying quite hard to accept that I don't know what really occurred, am not in a position to know, and that even those who might be closer to the evidence than me might never truly know.

The task of an investigation should be to try and find the truth, with the business of prosecuting those responsible being a secondary consideration, but I do get a very strong feeling that this investigation seemed to be determined to find out how to prosecute the suspects, with finding out the whole truth being the secondary consideration instead.

The tragedy is that they seem not to have found out the whole truth, and if they have, then the objectivity of that truth is somewhat tainted by all kinds of ambiguities and doubts that have been introduced by the way the investigation was carried out.

 

[existentialist]

Which is why people should look to the evidence, and weigh it, rather than emotively grasping at did/didn't arguments that favour their own instincts. I don't see a lot of this happening, just a lot of "I'll grab this idea because it fits my preconceptions about the case".
If you can't reach a conclusion from the evidence, that's not proof of innocence or guilt either, just that "all things being equal", either evidence was missed, or no evidence was missed.

Snap.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Round and round she goes. Where it stops no one knows.

 

[Joe Reilly]

Bloody foot prints belonging to Knox and bf have long been dismissed as an 'urban myth'.

By whom, Joe?[/quote]

They were tested in 2009 for blood using a different test and came up negative. However the 'bloody foot print' allegation did not go away and was even on Wiki up to 2011 when it was finally removed. If it has surfaced again that is why it qualifies as an urban myth.

 

[ViolentPanda]

They were tested in 2009 for blood using a different test and came up negative. However the 'bloody foot print' allegation did not go away and was even on Wiki up to 2011 when it was finally removed. If it has surfaced again that is why it qualifies as an urban myth.

So, categorised as an "urban myth" by you, then?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Round and round she goes. Where it stops no one knows.

It'll stop when and if new/somewhat more conclusive evidence is turned up, otherwise...well, people still whodunit over crimes decades after they happened, don't they?

 

[quiquaquo]

speaking of the Kercher's lawyer, he oddly enough just represented an Italian man who committed a hit and run on a young American woman, claiming he "fell asleep at the wheel" and got a new paint job on his car so as to avoid suspicion.
The guy got 3 years for this.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/07/driver-turns-self-in-afte_n_1000106.html

and on that note, I really need to get off the internet.

Calunnia, ingiurie e/o oltraggio a pubblico ufficiale...

Criminal offence btw. Preumably like Ms Knox you won't be visiting Italy anytime soon.

 

[Joe Reilly]

Footprints in luminol in the hallway between Knox's and Kercher's door that apparently contain Knox's and Kercher's blood. www.themurderofmeredithkercher.com have a look on there. http://www.injusticeinperugia.org is the more pro innocence argument that claims the pro guilt site is run by a Knox hate blogger.

Anyway the bloody foot print on the bathroom mat was there plain as day. No lumino was required to bring that up and it didn't match Guede's. It's a bit more than just a footprint on a bathroom floor. You sure you've actually read much about this?

Let's nail this. It's not possible to have bloody foot-prints in the hall from Knox and Sellicitto if there was no bloody foot-prints from them in the room where the killing, it is agreed by all sides, took place.