Amanda Knox and ex-boyfriend guilty of Kercher murder.

eletheia
What gets reported to the public (however sensational) is only a small part of the case ...

That's not true. The public gets all the information that the judge gets in Italy. And in this case, the public got a ton of anti-knox slander being passed off as 'facts'.

reply to post by Fylgje

Wow .. that's a lot of tabloid regurgitation.

And no ... the black fella wasn't 'set up'. His DNA was everywhere at the crime scene.
He admitted it and apologized to the family.

Still waiting on someone to post the 'evidence of guilt'.
I've posted a ton of information showing evidence of guilt on the part of the prosecutor.
But all these pages and no 'evidence of guilt' information has been posted.

How interesting.

FlyersFan
My guess is that she
She may or may not have
She shouldn't have
I wonder if
If I were that age
I might have cracked and blamed someone else too
I'd hope not
I can't say

There's a lot of opinion. You represent one side, and though you are a very staunch supporter of Knox, it's apparent you're calling shots from the sidelines without knowing what the jurors know. They convicted her ... and I'd need you to show me proof if you think they reached that verdict simply out of spite.

The fact of the matter remains: She' been convicted by an Italian jury.

I have just been reading some bits from a book which is a definitive account written
by John Follian based on complete case files and interviews with Meredith's friends
and other key sources.

He gives acknowledgement to a long list of people who helped him gather his facts
including the Lawyers from both sides and inc. the one of the man who has already
been convicted, friends and family of both the victim and the accused, witnesses,
and Perugia's forensic medicine institute, and other key sources.

Meredith would not have been an easy victim as by her 17th birthday she had her 3rd
belt in Karate.

The first police officer on the murder scene was a 44 year old 'female' police officer
Monica Napoleoni, head of the 'Homicide Squad' who points out the discrepancies in
all the information provided by both the suspects, and the fact that their alibi's kept
changing and didn't cross check. And to all those who have said she was
'starved and tortured' she was brought buns and camomile tea . . .

Now a bit about Amanda >>>
As Amanda waited for the trial to start she took an active part in prison social life -
and she told the prison chaplin, Father Saulo repeatedly that she was confident
she would prove her innocence at the trial.
Together with eleven other women prisoners she acted in a show, "The Last City"
staged in the hall of the women's wing. In the video of the show Amanda looks
straight at the camera and recites the soliloquy from Shakespeare's "Hamlet"

"To be or not to be - that is the question
Whether tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles
And by opposing end them" . . . .

Alessandro Riccini Ricci, the head of a Perugian Film Festival , and one of the few
people to see the film before it was withdrawn from circulation by the authorities
praised the performance of Amanda as 'a magnetic actress' She had a
magnetic personality which makes her stand out from the others, together with
'a strong stage presence' (I suppose that would account for her Oscar
winning court appearances??)

Soon it would be the turn of the court to scrutinise, not only the case against her
but also her personality and her 'stage presence' - before deciding her future .....

And to the earlier poster who said when replying to my last post that there wasn't
a jury .....He also states there was a jury

reply to post by eletheia

Actually it's not, it's a panel, NOT AN IMPARTIAL JURY. It is comprised of 2 judges and six RANDOMLY selected citizens. No weeding out of anyone that may or may not be impartial or biased, no questions asked, just selected, and then , on top of that , they are not even sequestered during the duration of the trial. So not only are they brought into a case with possible preconceived ideas, but then they are subject to influence by friends, family, and the media on the case itself. That is not a jury.

Top asll of that off with the fact that the Italian justice system is some sick bastardization of both the adversarial and the inquisitorial methods of courtroom procedure, it is fairly easy to dismiss The Italian justice system as lacking.

reply to post by eletheia

Have a look at this site as well: LINK

From the summary prepared by unpaid volunteers from Perugia Murder File to promote a better understanding of the circumstances surrounding the death of Meredith Kercher and the case against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito in the English-speaking world.

reply to post by Snarl


That's pretty damning right there. The lack of any sort of footnotes or sourcing is troubling though. Without those specifications it really is difficult to take it seriously.

reply to post by Snarl


From another page of the link you provided, complete with sourcing...

Myths debunked Jump to: navigation, search Numerous myths exist about this case, some of them deliberately created by those who wish to present a particular point of view that is not supported by the evidence. Many of them have found their way into the mainstream media: at least four of those listed here are so prevalent that they have even found their way into the Wikipedia article on Meredith's murder

themurderofmeredithkercher.com...-7


Starting to see a clearer picture that perhaps Ms. Knox aint as innnocent as she claims to be.

reply to post by azdaze

The things that were 'the tell' for me:

1. When she accused her boss ... and said they were at the murder scene together.
2. When she claimed she broke during harsh interrogation.

If I were running the investigation, and she verbally placed herself at the scene, she'd be getting booked.

Talking to a suspect, and pointing out the holes in their story, doesn't equate to 'harsh.' She complained because she wasn't getting her way, and the sympathetic bought it ... hook, line, and sinker.

There are some quite horrific evidentiary details that were suppressed to prevent this case from becoming over sensationalist. I was frankly sickened by them. If they were publicly known, Americans would be calling for the death penalty. Spade!!

reply to post by Snarl


Well here's what bothers me...It's obvious they had an immense amount of circumstantial evidence, as well as some physical evidence and some eye-witness testimony to boot. So how was the whole thing so easily overturned on appeal, and she so easily let go to another country across an ocean thousands of miles away? that really bugs me, it doesn't make sense.

I have some interesting thoughts for you....

What would the verdict have been, in the past, BEFORE DNA evidence played a critical role in court? (Say, 20, 30 or so years go).
Would you then also say "there is absolutely no evidence"....?

Is your "there is no evidence" solely based on the fact that *not enough* DNA was found, eg. on the knife and in the room?
How would your opinion about this case be..now leaving out DNA altogether?

Let me remind you that there is more evidence, for example the medical expert who testified that Meredith likely died at the hands of several people and that one person alone could not have caused the injuries. This is only ONE small piece.

And then of course the literally countless, up-to-this-day contradicting statements, the lack of alibi, given alibi/statements proven lies....S.+A. changing their story about their whereabouts in the night of the murder approx. 5 times with often contradicting statements, false accusation of someone else being the murder, the very first statement she did at the police about being there "covering her ears" and several others where she is in-fact placing herself at the scene of the murder.

Them being spotted with CLEANING SUPPLIES (no, I am not talking about a bleach receipt which was indeed never found)..but the FACT they made it to the home with cleaning supplies...and the proven fact that cleanup was attempted at the scene....add the fact that one witness said (although not verified) she was in his store at the crack of dawn buying cleaning supplies... and so forth, and so forth...

Without DNA evidence...25 years ago, so guess what the verdict would've been?

In regards to the new re-affirmation of the guilty verdict...I would be careful not to make statements about the "flawed" Italian justice system or "no evidence" before you didn't even read the entire report of the court ON WHAT exactly their ruling is based on. Because you simply don't know what the verdict is based on, this report has not been released yet. Obviously, the court came to a decision and I am pretty sure they will have reasons. We can criticize them later once we see the detailed report, THEN we can say the verdict is silly, their work shoddy or what not if it's justified to say so.

reply to post by azdaze

I don't know (see how easy it is to say that?).

There's a couple of things I'm willing to grant in Knox' favor. One: that is one goofy judicial system they're running over there. And two: as goofy as it is, I'd bet dollars to donuts it's susceptible as all get-out to corruption.

If I were the Italians ... and I knew AK was never EVER coming back to my country ... and I could get paid off, well ... WTH? Easy money! Now, on top of everything else, they develop political leverage over the US, for non-compliance with treaty. Win-Win-Win for the Italians. Maybe their system isn't as goofy as we've all been lead to believe.

How's that post for a conspiracy website? LOL

ETA: Damn shame it's way back on page 19!!

Do me a favor and read the first (I think) letter she wrote from jail. I don't want to cite since this letter can be found on almost any related website to the case.

Reading this letter, her extreme confusion becomes very apparent.

* She clearly DOES NOT KNOW whether she was at the house in that night or not. Instead she rambles on about her confused mind and actually, between the lines, says that she could've well been there...she simply doesn't remember.

* If she was there, she would also NOT KNOW whether she had any part in the murder, be it active or passive. She had "pictures in her mind" with Lumumba murdering her while she was covering her ears...just later realized those thoughts were likely not "real" and blah and blah and continues rambling on over several pages without actually saying anything.

Since she clearly is not able to remember/know what happened at that night and where exactly she was, there is also a likelihood she was involved, although not necessarily having an active part in the murder but holding her down, or possibly starting an argument which then later escalated. There ARE thinkable scenarios which can explain the lack of (or: too little) DNA by the two for proper DNA testing...but this does not mean they were not there when the murder happened or that they haven't been involved.

And as it is my understanding, this is also what the court's verdict was and is, that all THREE of them were involved, no question about Rudy but that the two also had some part there. And her actions AND what they both said are in favor of such a scenario as opposed to separating them from the murder.

azdaze
reply to post by eletheia

 

Actually it's not, it's a panel, NOT AN IMPARTIAL JURY. It is comprised of 2 judges and six RANDOMLY selected citizens. No weeding out of anyone that may or may not be impartial or biased, no questions asked, just selected, and then , on top of that , they are not even sequestered during the duration of the trial. So not only are they brought into a case with possible preconceived ideas, but then they are subject to influence by friends, family, and the media on the case itself. That is not a jury.

Top asll of that off with the fact that the Italian justice system is some sick bastardization of both the adversarial and the inquisitorial methods of courtroom procedure, it is fairly easy to dismiss The Italian justice system as lacking.

Still a 'jury' as defined by the Italian legal system .... All countries have their

own systems. The US system is also different to the one in the UK, where the jurors

are picked randomly from citizens on the electoral roll and neither the prosecution or

defence can make choices of who they want in or out of the 'jury' as long as they

do not know the people on trial.


As for preconceived ideas? surely every one in life has those? we all go into situations

with those ... they are formed by our upbringing and life experiences! It seems to me

like Every non Italian on this thread has a preconceived idea of the Italian justice

system without ever personally having experienced it!! LOL ...

Snarl
There's a lot of opinion.

I was asked my opinion ... my guess as to why she made a false statement ... so I gave it.

it's apparent you're calling shots from the sidelines without knowing what the jurors know.

Dude ... we all know exactly what the two judges and six jurors know.
There was no sequestration or withholding of 'evidence' from the public.

I'd need you to show me proof if you think they reached that verdict simply out of spite.

1 - I didn't say it was out of spite.
2 - I gave proof that the two judges and six jurors did not get all the evidence in the case because it was suppressed by the corrupt prosecutor.

The fact of the matter remains: She' been convicted by an Italian jury.

The fact of the matter remains: No one here has been able to answer my question ...
WHAT EVIDENCE PROVES HER GUILTY?

reply to post by NoRulesAllowed

'Possibly being involved' is not the same as evidence proving she committed murder. I'm asking ... what evidence is there that proves she committed the murder? Over a dozen pages of discussion ... and no one has given the evidence proving her guilty. That's all I'm asking for. But instead what I'm reading is speculation, and excuses for the broken Italian system, and regurgitation of tabloid fiction, and even a few trolling people attempting deflection by telling off topic lies about my supposed posting habits. But still .. no evidence given of Knox's guilt.

Someone post the evidence (not tabloid smear, but evidence) and convince me that she's really guilty and that the verdict was a correct one.

As others have said, nobody on this site really knows what happened.
We can only go on the evidence and reports and witness statements.
More than one person killed MK, AK and RS lied and changed their statements.
People have summed up all the points up in other posts.

As everyone else is guessing and giving their opinion, I'll give mine.
I think she's guilty. She may not have stabbed and assaulted her, but she, at the very least, knows what happened.
I personally think she did carry out the attack, based on the information over the years.

If i was accused of murder

i would tell the honest truth even if it made me look bad

I wouldn't change my story three times

All a bit suspect

if you ask me

FlyersFan
WHAT EVIDENCE PROVES HER GUILTY?

Owwwee!! Your shouting hurt my widdle eahs. LOL

I'm going with ... she (Amanda Knox herself mind you), in an official statement, to the police, placed herself at the scene of the crime, as it was occurring (Ms. Kercher screaming mind you), together with a suspect ... who happened to have an iron-clad alibi. This ... after making a different statement, where she claimed to be with her boyfriend, somewhere else, which he (himself mind you) failed to corroborate. Her footprints (in Meredith Kercher's blood) were identified at the scene of the crime, walking in a direction away from the victim. ... Tree, after tree, after tree. Seeing the forrest yet? This is what we call Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

Lots more detailed analysis in the link provided earlier, translated from court transcripts, all presented as evidence during her trial, which she opted to skip, 'cause she KNOWS she's guilty ... even if you refuse to accept it.

-Cheers