It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Amanda Knox (26 years in prison) and Sollecito (25 years) guilty of Meredith Kercher murder

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluebelle
 


so what about all the footprints belonging to knox and sollecito? The footprint on the pillow is that of a woman same size of feet as knox. Then theres the other partially cleaned footprints from the hall .

theres also 5 samples in 3 locations of knox & the victims mixed dna. Defense has no answer to this find trying to claim that the blood could have been left at diffirent times. Perhaps in 1 location but 3? But when Knox testified in her own defense in June, she conceded that there was no blood in the bathroom the day before the murder, effectively dating those blood stains to that night

about the knife dna, solliceto was told the victims dna was on the knife. He said that would be becuase he was cooking in his kitchen and accidently pricked the victims finger with the knife . Except the victim has never visited his house. More lies.

The multi-alibis testimony and the mobile-phone testimony and the eye-witness testimony and the various mixed-blood traces and the various bloody footprints are considered almost impossible to account for if the defendants are in fact not guilty.


[edit on 7-12-2009 by yeti101]




posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by yeti101
 


I understand all the DNA test came back negative as far as in the crime scene except. In the shared bathroom Amanda lthey both had DNA there because they both lived there. Just as they would find my DNA in my shower , sink and toilet if they looked.

The knife had Amanda's DNA because it's what she used to prepare meals with. The knife in question doesn't match the bloody knife prints on the sheets , so it's the wrong knife o begin with.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by thecrow001
 



90 days



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by verylowfrequency
 


the knife matches the horrific stab wound to the neck (the fatal one). More than one knife was used it was possibly 3.

Did you know sollecito was a knife enthusiast?

No not all dna came back as negative. They found knoxs blood mixed with the victims at 3 diffirent places in the house. bathroom , hall & another students bedroom which was the room the fake break in was staged. Knox herself claims she has never been in that room so we must wonder how dna got there.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101

so what about all the footprints belonging to knox and sollecito? The footprint on the pillow is that of a woman same size of feet as knox. Then theres the other partially cleaned footprints from the hall .



Yes which didnt match any shoes belonging to amanda knox or meredith kercher. And the shoe wasnt found the be the same size as knox. If I remember correctly it could have been 1 or 2 sizes either way. Which says to me it wasnt a good quality shoeprint in the first place. Oh and luminol doesnt just show blood up, it just shows substances high in iron. I could be wrong on that one though so feel free to correct me, thats just what I remember from a chemistry lesson 5/6 years ago

As for the other prints they were disputed due to sizes not matching & the way the toes were positioned.
Which could actually fit in with the crazy 4th man theory!


theres also 5 samples in 3 locations of knox & the victims mixed dna. Defense has no answer to this find trying to claim that the blood could have been left at diffirent times. Perhaps in 1 location but 3? But when Knox testified in her own defense in June, she conceded that there was no blood in the bathroom the day before the murder, effectively dating those blood stains to that night


She says she returned home for a shower and there was blood in the flat/cottage/gingerbread house.. I dont see how saying that there wasnt blood the day before is conceding anything. Its plausible that her DNA could contaminate the blood that was in there.


about the knife dna, solliceto was told the victims dna was on the knife. He said that would be becuase he was cooking in his kitchen and accidently pricked the victims finger with the knife . Except the victim has never visited his house. More lies.


I'd be slightly dubious in taking anything either of them said as the truth. With the statement patrick lumumba made regarding the police, I wouldnt want to hazard a guess as to whether claims like that were made freely.


The multi-alibis testimony and the mobile-phone testimony and the eye-witness testimony and the various mixed-blood traces and the various bloody footprints are considered almost impossible to account for if the defendants are in fact not guilty.


Eye witness testimony of whom?... Please dont say guede! And a little fact I learned before I dropped my A-level in law - eyewitness testimony is the least reliable evidence out there, but strangely enough is the most believed by a jury.
The phone thing could be because they were planning on locking themselves away for the night. Rape & murder does not require a phone to be turned off.


Originally posted by LiveForever8

As for the kebab, surely the police questioned the local takeaway? It's the classic murder plot:

Give prospective suspect a dodgy kebab.
Wait for him to leave the room to 'use the facilities'.
Of course he will listen to his iPod, of course he will.
Then commit murder while prospective suspect is distracted by some soft jazz.
Leave scene.

Done.

"The Kebab Killer" strikes again.


[edit on 05/08/2009 by LiveForever8]


Kebabs and jazz music equal a deadly combination clearly!.. if only they'd spent the last two years keeping an eye out for a suspicious looking, lone kebab merchant. He could be anywhere by now.. he may have expanded his horizons to include any number of questionable meats. Maybe even salad.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Bluebelle
 




luminol doesnt just show blood up,

correct but forensics 101 teaches that blood shows up a very bright blue and anything else like grapefruit juice much much dimmer. Its impossible to make the mistake. They have photos of bright blue material.


Its plausible that her DNA could contaminate the blood that was in there.

in 1 location maybe. But there was 3 including a room she claimed never to have been in. In court the defense never even addresed that one, they just didnt have an arguement.


Eye witness testimony of whom?...

witness that claims to have seen them at the pizza around 9:30pm. 100 yards from murder scene. dunno who it was , not guede or anyone else involved.


The phone thing could be because they were planning on locking themselves away for the night. Rape & murder does not require a phone to be turned off.

it could be but was shown in court by the phone records that this was not their normal behaviour. Both used their phones late into the night all the time. You can also tell the location of a phone when its switched on because it contacts the nearest transmitter or "cell" regularly. Looks like an attempt to conceal their location.

Sollicetos footprint in the bathroom is damning. Knox claims she was with him. Difficult for a jury to ignore.

are you ready to reach a guilty verdict?


[edit on 7-12-2009 by yeti101]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
correct but forensics 101 teaches that blood shows up a very bright blue and anything else like grapefruit juice much much dimmer. Its impossible to make the mistake. They have photos of bright blue material.


Ive just given myself a mini education on luminol, and I came across this... apparantly it can be mistaken.

'There are a few problems with using luminol, however. First, luminol is only a presumptive test. It can lead the CSIs to investigate a particular area further but it cannot positively confirm the presence of blood and will not be allowed to prove such in a criminal investigation. Luminol can be catalyzed by substances such as bleach, copper, potassium permanganate (found in many dyes), saliva, brain tissue, bone marrow, rust, and vegetable enzymes. These can make luminol glow and creates a "false positive" test for blood. Secondly, luminol can destroy some genetic markers in cell DNA. It should not be used if the evidence needs to be preserved for genetic analysis. Thirdly, it can smear bloody impressions and make prints and splatters more difficult to analyze.'

lem.ch.unito.it...



in 1 location maybe. But there was 3 including a room she claimed never to have been in. In court the defense never even addresed that one, they just didnt have an arguement.


But it was her flat.. flatmates go in eachothers rooms, you'd expect to find other peoples DNA in there. If the DNA had been sollecito's or guede's that would have been telling, but not hers. And once again, its impossible to tell whether or not she was telling the truth or not due to the changing stories.




witness that claims to have seen them at the pizza around 9:30pm. 100 yards from murder scene. dunno who it was , not guede or anyone else involved.


Oh yea I heard about that one. That doesnt really indicate anything though, they could have easily gone to sollecito's flat afterwards.



it could be but was shown in court by the phone records that this was not their normal behaviour. Both used their phones late into the night all the time. You can also tell the location of a phone when its switched on because it contacts the nearest transmitter or "cell" regularly. Looks like an attempt to conceal their location.


Whats normal behaviour.. they'd only been dating for two weeks?
If they were trying to conceal anything wouldnt it be the logical to leave the phones at sollecito's flat, turned on? It was only a short distant away.


Sollicetos footprint in the bathroom is damning. Knox claims she was with him. Difficult for a jury to ignore.

are you ready to reach a guilty verdict?



The footprints were disputed and it was demonstrated that they could have been a match for guede. Which again points to footprints that werent very clear.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Bluebelle
 


ok well i think i cant say anymore.

but just to let you know the 2 best resources for information are perugiamurderfile.org... & truejustice.org... .

Everyone whos followed the evidence presented concludes solliceto & knox are guilty. Its an overwhelming majority we're talking about. Contributers who posted translations of impromptu statements from the defendents in court & followed the proceedings day to day for the last 2 years etc. Alot of stuff not mentioned in the media especially the US media.

One moderator on perugia murder files is amanda knoxs neighbour in seattle. She is 100% convinced she's guilty. Even though she started out wanting her to be innocent.

The defense tried hard to discredit the evidence there is just too much. Sure in the abstract you can say all the evidence was contamination but in reality theres no proof or reason to believe that. You can try to ignore false statements in interviews but again theres too many. The jury reached the right decision.

heres a page that discusses most of the evidence. (9 pages total) here

[edit on 7-12-2009 by yeti101]



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Unfortunately, as beautiful as Amanda is,she isn't innocent. You all want to know what happened.Well, here it is:


Kercher was grabbed by the throat - by Knox, said Mignini - flung against the cupboard and then threatened with a kitchen knife with a 6½in blade. Sollecito, standing next to Knox, grabbed Kercher's hair.

Kercher fell between the bed and the cupboard and her jeans were pulled off. Forensic evidence indicated that Guede groped her and Sollecito produced a second knife and ripped off Kercher's bra

Realising that the violence was unstoppable, Kercher gave a desperate scream - a cry that was heard by Nara Capezzali, an elderly neighbour who said it was so chilling she felt as if she was "in a house of horrors".

Knox then stabbed Kercher, inflicting the deepest of three wounds to her neck. The American's DNA was later found on the handle of a kitchen knife which had Kercher's blood on the blade.

Not innocent

[edit on 8-12-2009 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 06:04 AM
link   
reply to post by SpeakerofTruth
 


A made up story by a non-existent witness is not the truth, nor is it evidence.

If Amanda grabbed her by the throat there would be DNA on her throat. Where is it? It doesn't exist cause the story you're spewing is a made up lie.

There are three victims here. First there's the dead girl killed by the Ivory Coast rappo. The there's her roommate victimized by the belligerent Italian prosecutor who gets his rocks off torturing little girls. The other victim is the Italian boy who was just plain unlucky.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by verylowfrequency
 


still claiming guede acted alone?. The evidence says otherwise.

Bloody footrpint on the pillow under the bed does not match guedes or solls. But it does match knoxs.

The visible bloody footprint on the bathmat is a precise match for solls. In court the procecution had the police forsensics expert illustrate this followed by 2 indpendant experts who confrimed it too.


“All the elements are compatible with Mr. Sollecito’s foot,” Rinaldi said, pointing with a red laser to a millimeter-by-millimeter analysis of Sollecito’s footprint projected onto a big-screen in the courtroom. He used similar methods to exclude that the footprint on the bath mat could possibly be Guede’s or Knox’s.

of course if someone wants to believe the knoxs PR machine ahead of 3 experts 2 of them independant theyre welcome. I'm glad the jury was smarter than that.

[edit on 9-12-2009 by yeti101]



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by SpeakerofTruth
 


That article is verging on the ridiculous. The majority of the content has zero relevance to anything.



According to friends, she grew more and more exasperated by Knox's behaviour - she failed to flush the toilet, kept strumming the same chord on her guitar


Grasping for straws anyone? Why not throw in that she used all the butter as well. What an awful person!



Knox's sexuality featured heavily in the prosecution case, illuminated by a diary entry in which she listed seven partners, three of whom she slept with after her arrival in Italy




Kercher had already remarked to her father that "Amanda arrived only a week ago and she already has a boyfriend". Later she told friends that she was shocked to see Knox leave a beauty case with a vibrator and condoms in open view in the bathroom.


These two quotes bother me because it just goes to show that the prosecution were trying to play on the italians religious beliefs & attitudes. Obviously to them that would look bad. But speaking as someone who's just spent 3 years at uni, she sounds pretty tame.



Realising that the violence was unstoppable, Kercher gave a desperate scream - a cry that was heard by Nara Capezzali, an elderly neighbour who said it was so chilling she felt as if she was "in a house of horrors".


Of course she did. One would assume if you heard such a chilling noise you would alert someone. Not saying she didnt hear anything... but whatever it was cant have been that terrifying.



The quilt, said the prosecution, was also a sign of Knox's guilt: she could not stand the sight of Kercher's wounded body, and had covered it in a gesture of female pity.


This is just beyond ridiculous.. No reason in the slightest to believe thats how the quilt came to be on her.



She then stunned many in court by wearing an oversized white T-shirt for a hearing on St Valentine's Day. On it, marked in big red letters, was a lyric by her favourite group, the Beatles: "All you need is love."


Irrelevant with a capital 'I'. Unless she was wearing a tshirt that said 'I love Charles Manson' then what she wore in court has nothing to do with the case. I seriously hope that sort of crap wasnt taken into account by the jury.

The whole case seems to be more of a pantomime than anything else. Either she's an evil she-devil, jumping on anything with a pulse type person.. or she's saint amanda who can do no wrong.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 


I saw the 48 hours show about a year ago. Part of the evidence they had against Amanda was her bloody footprint at the scene and her bizarre behavior. I personally think she is guilty from watching that program and I will bet anyone else that saw the evidence that was presented would reach that conclusion too.
I heard her testimony in court and it did nothing to convince me Amanda is innocent. She skirted around saying the words I did not commit this crime and anything else to that direct effect. She said the prosecution was just doing it's job and how much she respected them for that.
Her parents interview on Larry King also convinced me she was entirely capable of something like this... and they may not know their daughter as well as they think. Said she was a late bloomer, kept to herself and was thoroughly involved in her studies, she didn't even date. This is not normal for an attractive girl her age. When asked about her reported bizarre sexual exploits her father naturally embarrassed, said something like...she might have experimented.
Of course the girl is going to look and act like butter wouldn't melt in her mouth now. American sympathy is the only thing that will get her off.
Look at the sadistic teenage girl that killed the 9 year old. She also does not look like she would be capable of killing someone....looks can be deceiving.

[edit on 9-12-2009 by rusethorcain]



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by rusethorcain
reply to post by kiwifoot
 

Her parents interview on Larry King also convinced me she was entirely capable of something like this... and they may not know their daughter as well as they think. Said she was a late bloomer, kept to herself and was thoroughly involved in her studies, she didn't even date. This is not normal for an attractive girl her age. When asked about her reported bizarre sexual exploits her father naturally embarrassed, said something like...she might have experimented.

[edit on 9-12-2009 by rusethorcain]


Granted her parents might not have known if she liked to experiment or 'share the love' in general. But who exactly informs their parents what they're into sexually?
And why is it not normal for someone to be attractive and into their studies? She obviously managed to get some form of dating in there, and if Im not mistaken she was in a football team. None of those things seem strange in the slightest.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Bluebelle
 

I won't mention her chilling lack of apparent shock or empathy for her victim because that is purely circumstantial but how about that bloody foot print?



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by rusethorcain
reply to post by Bluebelle
 

I won't mention her chilling lack of apparent shock or empathy for her victim because that is purely circumstantial but how about that bloody foot print?


The one in the bedroom?



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 08:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluebelle
 


here's knox summing up her version of events.

"Everything I have said in regards to my involvement in Meredith's death, even though it is contrasting, are the best truth that I have been able to think."

Soll first said he wasn't with knox on the night of the murder. Later he said to police that he told them " A load of old bollocks earlier" and changed his story to match knoxs.

Are these the words of innocent people?

[edit on 10-12-2009 by yeti101]



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 03:32 PM
link   
Look at all of the evidence and there is one conclusion…Amanda orchestrated and committed the crime, and then tried to cover it up. And to make matters worse she gets off with only a slap on the wrist!

How are they giving her such a Lenient sentence? Only 25 years?



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ericblak1947
 


How is 25 years a lenient sentence?

In Italy a life sentence requires the person to spend a minimum of 21-26 years in prison. That's a lot more than some other countries.

Especially when there is still a lot of doubt in public opinion about the verdict.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Here's an embed of part one of the 48 Hours program on the case. This was done months ago:

Part 1.



I watched this quite a while ago. I came away thinking that Knox and her boyfriend were definitely guilty of being stupid and insensitive. As a matter of fact they are so stupid and insensitive, it almost counts against them as murderers.

The other young man arrested is guilty of murder, I think. He took off after the crime.

By far the most warped individual in the case though, is the Italian prosecutor.

Memo to North American girls going to Europe, particularly Italy and Spain, for the first time. It's different.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join