Why I think Amanda Knox is guilty
Knox and Sollecito are to get their verdict this Friday and so this blog is going to run with this post. What I say here is hardly going to affect anything.
IMHO, she’s as guilty as sin, not only on account of the circumstantial and that there has been one conviction already but because of her attitude. Whilst a person can’t be convicted for an attitude, thank goodness, it doesn’t alter how we, the general public see it.
An article yesterday summed it up for me:
A flirtatious gesture by American Amanda Knox caught an investigator’s eye and changed the course of the probe into the 2007 sex murder of her housemate, a defence lawyer said on Tuesday.
“Without the famous come-on… she wouldn’t be here today [standing trial for the slaying of Briton Meredith Kercher],” said Carlo Dalla Vedova.
There has been a steady stream of most inappropriate behaviour, given her supposed remorse at the murder of her supposed friend. The simple fact is that Meredith Kercher was murdered and this young woman’s subsequent actions were bizarre.
From her framing of Lumumba to the behaviour of the two of them standing in the grounds of the house as can be seen in a small frame in the middle of this youtube, to her reaction when the police actually arrived and according to her, she first discovered that Kercher had been murdered, the one word which keeps running through my mind as to her reactions is “inappropriate”.
There’s zero remorse. There’s something terribly wrong inside that head. It doesn’t take much delving into her history in the States to see that this is no “wholesome girl”, as the defence is trying to make out.
The Seattle Greek Row party and conviction, the sex on the train, her renting of an apartment outside the university accommodation where male footballers were, the excessive behaviour Kercher picked her up for at their shared accommodation in Peruglia, the flirting with the police and court officials during the trial, calling the murder “yukky”, the changing of her story to suit the changing circumstances alone – all of these are not good.
Worse though in the mind of your humble blogger is that after the last two decades of my working life involving character judgments on a more or less daily basis, the red flags were popping up all over the place and there was nothing in her complete lack of remorse and strange reactions to events to separate her from what I know of sociopaths. This has nothing to do with a poor little girl all alone in Italy – it has to do with a very hard person who heard screams and made nothing of that, who was cozying up in a garden while a body was inside the house, who did and said so many emotionless things before and after.
Whatever the verdict on Friday, in this blogger’s judgment, she is as guilty as sin.
Filed under: Life issues & people
Sometimes its those actions that people take, or don’t take, that trigger an investigation.
I remember sitting with a team of seasoned theft investigators watching the Soham murders. Ian Huntley was being interviewed by the news explaining how he had seen the girls hours earlier. He was not a suspect at this time.
Immediately 4 out of the 5 in the office said ‘It was him’
It was the way he was standing and responding. Not like an innocent,but like someone behaving like an innocent.
Knox is the same.
Well I didn’t follow the case in absolute detail, I may have missed some vital points.
Even so, I figure you are probably right and your reasons too.
I think even if they find her innocent I will have to be convinced of it before I would believe it.
It’s just such and awful thing that OTT behaviour actually resulted in murder and it might be that if it had been just the two of them, it might not have been murder but that the entry of the third man who clearly seems the knife man that tipped it over the edge. Knox seems to me to be like Leslie van Houten – the latter held the victim only and when dead, then started her own stabbing. I’m not sure Knox would have had the guts to have made the first knife slit – the third man seems to be the one – but even so, she was sure part of the whole scene and where she was, the Italian was too.
Great compariosn with Leslie Van Houten.Yes. A ruthless, cold blooded psychopath.’Bambi’ needs to go away for life.
There is too much circumstantial evidence to let this young lady simply “pass in the night.” The fact that her DNA in the “murder room” is scant, if not nonexistent, does not diminish her culpability as an accessory to murder. Neither she nor the boyfriend ever came up with any other person who could vouch for their whereabouts on the night of the killing. Both were caught in many small lies which, in sum, added up to a big question mark. And what of the fact that Amanda showed up early the following morning to purchase cleaning supplies–what college student in their right mind would give a hoot about cleaning their apartment at that hour in the morning??? I’m with you, James–lock her up and let her get fat on pasta.
I’m not so sure I’d be so quick to pronounce any guilt here. Your reasons for concluding she’s guilty seem unreasonable to me. I read the YouTube shot completely differently. Looks to me like a boyfriend consoling and assuring his girlfriend. She seems concerned to me.
The prosecutors have little hard evidence. It’s questionable whether the knife is actually the murder weapon… the forensics seem in doubt.
Let’s not forget that she did not know the victim for very long. It’s not as if this was a lifetime friend or a family member. It was a new roommate… This changes the dynamics of the emotions and the reactions she might have.
Seems to me like there’s a lot of doubt in all of this. The Italian authorities have an interesting story… What I’d like to know more about is the guy who has already been convicted. He seems like a shady character, indeed…
It’s very hard to believe Knox is capable of this crime given all we have learned of her.
I’ve followed this in the media. I’m still not convinced.
Correction, David – it’s far easier to believe it with what we do know of her now – before she came over as a little miss innocent but she sure ain’t that with her background – the Seattle escapades and the train to Peruglia are just two points.
I suppose it’s that much of my working life has been spent with girls of 18-22 and you learn not to fall for the innocence angle after a while. Her reactions earlier [not counting now after the duress] were decidedly strange.
You’re entitled to your opinion, James. In my view, it’s quite easy for the media and the Italian authorities to paint Knox in any way they choose. I find it quite interesting that the Italian police plan to file a suit against her for claims of bullying/abuse. Seems to me like they have it out for her any way they can get her… Oh, but they’re the authorities. They must be perfectly above board!
Are any of us perfect? No. Is Knox? No. But I find it hard to believe someone like her, who had no record of wrongdoing, would be capable of such a crime. In any case, can we say she’s guilty because of questionable behavior one or two times? I don’t think so.
As I’ve said on another blog, I don’t know if she’s guilty or not… but the prosecution hasn’t presented a compelling case here.
Fair enough, David but just one point – she does have a conviction for disorderly, just before she left for Italy:
James, yes… that’s interesting. I did some research on that and I can’t really say that this incident changes my thinking. She’s an early twenty-something in college. By all accounts, and this includes very close friends from university, she was far from a big druggie. And to go from that incident to a murder… seems like a big stretch to me.
Like I said, I really don’t know if she’s innocent or guilty, but the evidence does not definitively point to guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Guilty as sin becuase she is not showing enough remorse – that’s enough evidence for you? Really? Here’s a little tid-bit from Tim Egan and the NY Times that indicates why you have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. At all.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/02/amanda-knox-revisited/
There’s more, but, hey! All irrelevant, no? Spoiled American brat and inappropriate behaviour means she’s guilty as sin! That’s real, fine logic.
Oh that’s rich: “really fine logic”. Yes, it is rich because it does follow logic.
The NY Times writer can be dismissed immediately – Timothy Egan has been pro-little girl innocent from the word go and has tailored his arguments around that form the beginning. He says:
Yes, all except for the pesky problems of both the DNA and the CCTV showing her going into the house near the required time. As the defence said – it wasn’t very much Knox DNA on the body – that means that it’s a like being a little bit pregnant, not a lot.
Then there is the triangulation placing him not in the region of the bar but in the region including the house – again at the required time.
Then there is her changing testimony as to where she actually was.
All of them damning in themselves before the rest of the evidence is even considered.
Then comes all the circumstantial such as her manner, her previous and so on, which is what this post was about. I didn’t mention the physical evidence in this post because much of it was in the previous post and it’s so damning that simple logic dictates it nails her. CCTV is CCTV after all and put her there at 23:47. And while we’re on that, she claimed Lumumba came in with her. He didn’t and he’s been released.
She instigated the Seattle riot and was charged for it. Her own friends say she was a drug fiend, not just a user. She bought the cleaning materials at that very time, she had a steady stream of low life men through the house, left her faeces in the toilet and didn’t flush, which caused the dispute with her “friend”. She grew weed in the house in Italy, back in America, she wrote in her myspace profile stories about drugging and raping. She’s pictured with guns and her ‘boyfriend’ is pictured in robes with a meat cleaver, there were “bruises on throat consistent with the small hand of the defendant and inconsistent with the hands of the male assailants”, where were Meredith’s keys [?], she hung around in the garden after it, kissing and haivng bought the cleaning materials [dislocation], if she hadn’t been there, she would under no circumstances have said: “I covered my ears ’cause she was screaming” and then changed that later, having retracted her statement that Lumumba was there, she was asked if she’d apologized to him, at which she laughed [!] and asked, incredulously: “Who, me?”.
Once you’ve taken that on board, compare and contrast legal systems based on the Napoleonic code – mostly Latin countries – and those based on the adversarial system – mostly anglo-saxon. As a commenter on another site, examining the evidence said:
Everything points to her being a low-life and devoid of human feelings other than self-protection. This type of hard-nosed person is completely different to all reports of Meredith Kercher and let’s now turn it back to her. Nowhere in the defence of Knox is there a shred of compassion for the victim herself – already having a hard time with this housemate who broke all the rules of the house but then devised a sex game in which this girl was forced to participate. One man doesn’t hold her down at the neck and rape her at the same time.
Amanda Knox has done nothing to give the impression in this long trial [there is no "rush to judgment here"] that she is anything but a low-life. She did not have a story and stick with it. She did not establish “good relations” with her housemate, as she claimed. She was willing to frame others without remorse and laughed where she should have been devastated and not nervous little laughs either. She openly flirted with the judge, with the court officials and with the police. The police were far from impressed.
In an American court, where charges of Italian miscarriage of justice couldn’t be brought, there is more than enough to put her away for a very long time. Therefore, in an American court, as in a British court, she would be released with a fine and a warning. That’s the way we do justice these days. Than goodness she was caught by the Italian system.
One last thing – if she was old and bloated, rather than young and pretty, would she have garnered the same level of sympathy from the remaining admirers [one reader poll put this at 67%-33% against]? Would she hell.
Wow, I wouldn’t want you on my jury or any jury for that matter–everything that convinces you of this woman’s guilt is totally irrelevant.
I have no idea how the prosecuotr has tied in the guy who has already been convicted of this crime to Amanda Knox. It is certainly something that has been ignored in all volumes of mass media reports–for the type of crap you find so convincing.
That is the key to the case. If that relationship (if there was one) needs to be explained or she should walk.
Her being seen going in on CCTV and her DNA on the body is irrelevant? Becky, please …..
James! Get a life! Who do you think you are! Becky, you are absolutely right! Type of a guy like James keep putting the innocent people in jail and bunch of loosers free out there.
Becky, your point about the need for an explanation of the relationship between Knox and Guede is a good one. We haven’t seen anything about this, or at least it hasn’t been highlighted. I’d like to learn more there.
James, I’m afraid you’ve got blinders on at this stage. You’re so convinced of her guilt that I’m not sure you’re able to be objective and truly assess whether the prosecution has proved their case here. That’s the real question. Have they proven beyond REASONABLE doubt that Amanda Knox committed the crime? In my mind and many others, they haven’t. Too many questions remain.
This isn’t about whether we like Amanda Knox or approve of all her behaviors. But this is about whether we have any significant measure of reasonable doubt. The defence has certainly presented that, in my view.
I think she is guilty but based on the evidence of the crime not her past history which seems to be becoming a standard for women nowadays.
Calvin – are you American because you spell “losers’ loosers?
Calvin and David – blinkers are what you two unfortunately have on. There has been so much obfuscation from her defence’s side and yet, as one commenter said – if it has webbed feet and it quacks like a duck, it is a duck.
There is the pesky matter of evidence unfortunately and it sinks her. CCTV and DNA can not be negated. Sorry.
James, no blinkers here. Like I said, I don’t know if she’s innocent or guilty. I can’t conclude either way based on the evidence presented. The DNA is not conclusive. The mere presence of DNA does not prove anything. And, in this case, no DNA at the immediate scene of the crime is linked to Knox or her ex-boyfriend.
As you well know, there’s lots of questions about the validity of the DNA evidence. There’s even doubt that the supposed murder weapon is in fact the murder weapon! The only conclusive results we have point directly to Guede.
How Knox appears on CCTV doesn’t really weigh in here at all. A lot of experts and commentators have explanations for her behavior… I think some of this has been twisted a bit as well by the media.
I’m not saying she’s innocent. I don’t know. But the evidence doesn’t give me confidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
We need to base someone’s future, that of Knox, on hard evidence, not speculation by the prosecution, not circumstantial evidence as we have in this case, and not judgments about the behavior of the accused.
Unfortunately, the murder victim’s future was taken away. While that’s tragic, we can’t use this as reason alone to convict those who we suspect are guilty. We must convict those who we prove beyond a reasonable doubt are responsible.
I find it interesting that Kreacher’s parents had nothing substantial to say about Knox. While Kreacher did not like some of Knox’s habits as a roommate or how early she started a relationship, the parents confirmed that Meredith really didn’t have much to say about Knox at all. And this makes sense — they only knew each other for a short while. We have no witnesses who are pointing to any hostility Amanda may have had for Meredith. I believe it was the Italian authorities who came up with that story.
This whole investigation has been badly handled by the Italian authorities and the prosecution. From a contaminated crime scene, sloppy investigating, strong arm manipulative tactics in their interrogation to irresponsible speculation on the part of the prosecution. Horrible.
James, we’re not going to change each other’s minds here. I respect you have fashioned a view here… I just don’t see the evidence as hard and as convincing as you do.
James,
Spell check? Really? FYI I’m a Brit.
Everyone! Let’s just hope for a true justice!
[...] article follows on from the December 2nd post. Filed under Life issues & people Comment (RSS) | Trackback [...]
ive probably spent 4-6 hours researching the facts of this case, and i think that, at worst, amanda knox is a young, immature, horny pot-head who gets panicky under police pressure/suggestions/questioning.
there is zero dna of amanda knox at the murder scene. there is zero incentive or motive for her to murder her roommate. lets be clear, guede is obviously the murderer, not only is his dna everywhere, its in meredith kerchers body. he admits to being in the house at the time of death. he said he saw a strange man leaving. he doesnt evenknow amanda and raphael, so why would he cover up for them, let alone participate in a sex/murder with them?
smokign too much hash doesnt make you stab your roommates, it makes you want to kiss, eat too many snacks, and fall asleep.
did knox try to leave the country after the murder, like guede? no. she had no reason to. the prosecution has said the murder was a violent sex game gone wrong, yet there is no evidence of this, its just picking a motive out of thin air.
there were traces of the blood of amanda knox, and kercher, in the bidet. but not only does that not indicate how old the blood is, there were no cuts or wounds on amanda knox’s body whatsoever.
when police eavesdropped on a telephone conversation guede had, guede was telling a friend that he didnt know amanda, and amanda was not there at the crime scene.
i think this is a classic case of the italian police and prosecutors casting their net too wide. they already have their killer. Here’s an example of how the media can twist or accelerate any bit of random evidence. Say, i was in the process of reading a stephen king book, and my neighbor was murdered, the newspaper headlines would probably read, “Man with a fetish for blood and horror lives right next to murder victim!!!”
The thing first and foremost is that I have been through every site possible, some fifty hours all up and the most difficult part i sorting the wheat from the chaff. Even if the DNA is discounted, which it needn’t be because it was present despite the media blitz by the defence and supporters, in particular the Knox family, there is the CCTV and all the other evidence – 13 points were presented.
The jury are not idiots. The reason Italian justice takes so long is not only that it is inefficient but that the prosecution must go over more hurdles than in the adversarial system. Therefore, when the case is presented, it has to stick. For outsiders to try to badmouth the Italian system is necessary to release Knox but unfortunately, it’s all speculation. You and I have no way of knowing what DNA was present but the prosecutors did because they did the footwork.
As you say, they had their conviction already so why didn’t they stop? Simple. She’s guilty. Take out all the razamatazz on the defence side, their only defence and all that is left is the evidence – pesky things lie the CCTV footage placing her there, for a start.
She was not clever in covering her tracks, she shows all the signs of being guilty in addition. The evidence stands up, including the DNA. She’s guilty.
James, James, James… “all the other evidence”… 13 points. Okay, outline them here.
I’m pretty sure that if there was damning DNA evidence presented, we’d know about it by now. What is this DNA evidence that “stands up” as you say? Because from everything that we’ve seen, no DNA evidence conclusively places Amanda near the body. The knife (which isn’t conclusively the murder weapon) does not and nothing else does. But, oh yes, there’s some 200+ samples of Guede’s DNA.
She’s not guilty based on the evidence presented, James. She’s not guilty.
Thanks, Lord Nazh – it says much and saves me the job. Obviously guilty but that pretty face sways people:
Lord Nazh says:
December 12, 2009 at 19:46
Completely OT James but thought you’d enjoy this clip
http://video.foxnews.com/12407479/justice-served?test=latestnews
This was the most balanced one I’ve seen although it is old:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/216903
In 24 hours, i ive had a major change of course, on my opinion of this case, but one thing is for sure, the more i think i know, the less sense things make. in addition, it would be great if i could read amanda knox’s 5 page memorandum, and it would be great to read a clear concise account from amanda and raphael on their whereabouts of that night and morning.
Great fox news clip from james higham by the way. Although, anne coulter is the first time ive heard they have a receit of any bleach that amanda knox may have bought. the last i heard, was a shopkeeper saying that amanda knox entered his store and headed to the cleaning supplies aisle. Another statement anne coulter made was that raphael’s bloody finger print was found on the bra clasp. im pretty sure, thats not accurate, i beleive it was his dna that was foudn there, and the defense sais this could have occured by contamination in the 2 months it took to find said bra clasp.
at any rate, yesterday i claimed that amanda was a horny-pothead with a foggy memory who gets anxious under questioning, at worse. Today, i no longer feel that way. The main reason is, although i knew she named patrick lumumba as the murderer , supposedly under heavy suggestion,a nd pressure and lack of sleep, i just learned yesterday that the next day she wrote a 5 page memorandum , in which she still claimed he was the likely murderer, while she was in the kitchen. Now, do i beleive that amanda knox murdered her roommate? No. do i beleive she sanctioned the murder? No. However i do feel she is covering up for some sort of misdeed on her part, and has got caught in her own web of lies.
The best scenario that i can come up with, is that she encountered rudy guede and he let her know he had some good weed for sale. she invited him into her apartment, bought some weed, or hash. They got super high, and she dozed off on the couch. rudy’s high and horny, he creeps into merediths bedroom, tries to feel her up in her sleep, she wakes, freaks out, he panics and whips out his pen knife, and slashes at her.
amanda is in the living room in a doped up fog, she doesnt know if shes dreaming, or this is real, but she hears the screams, and covers her ears. rudy flee’s. amanda see’s the dying body.. covers it with the duvet. she doesnt want to call the police because shes high in a foreign country and just bought drugs from the murderer. she figure’s if someone sais they saw her enter her house with a black man, she’ll say its patrick lumumba, if it comes to that, because he’s the only other blackman she knows, and shes pissed off towards lumumba over some grievance.
at some point, probably that night,or the next morning, she enlist’s raphael’s help(possibly) to stage a break-in, so they can just say they were sleeping at raphael’s and dont have a clue what happened. after they stage the break in, they realize they better wipe their finger prints off the doorknob and windowsill, with bleach. perhaps they broke the window by throwing meredith kerchers cellphoen through it. and the other unidentified cellphone.
this seems to me the most plausible theory i can come up with. ijust dont buy that violent sex game gone wrong crap. it would be nice to hear the opionion of the 2 italian roommates on the dynamic between meredith and amanda. but i havnt heard boo about these women.
I feel rudy guede is the primary, if not the only murderer in this case, but unless he finds god, and come’s clean with all he knows, which he might as well do….we’ll be talking about whether amanda and raphael commited this murder 40 years from now.
They did make statements in the early days, the two Italian roommates and then seemed to either buy out of it or ran scared or were pressurized by the authorities [yes, I am saying that] or whatever.
The thing is – nothing adds up here.
I have to admit to stonewalling the extreme ad-hominem position the pro-Knoxers are taking [that's just my normal reaction] but what I’d really like to do, free from this duress, is lay it all out, every snippet, every scrap, on a giant board and then step back and just look at it.
Seriously, free from pressure by either side and with two or three other people who don’t really care all that much, go through it with a wine or three and see where it leads us.
I agree whole heartedly about the scrapboard idea. a nice big chalkboard with agreed facts, known facts, disputed facts, timelines. Just put some brainpower together and consider the practicalities and the logistics of the case. I mean, we obviously care… we just hopefully have unbiased agenda’s…we cant take anythign the defense or prosecution, or familie’s say straight up, because they will twist facts to suit their agenda’s. Also,and obviously, the media tends to distort or exaggerate certain facts. For example, i read a headline that amanda knox was flirting with police, and court officers. when i searched for examples of this, all icame up with was, she winked at raphael in the courtroom, and when she was asked to slip on some non-contamination slippers at the crime scene, she wiggled her hips suggestively as she put them on.. well COME ON!evenif it was true, it sais nothing of a capability tomurder.
additionally, i heard from one source that a trace of amanda’s blood was mixed with meredith’s in the sink. But amanda had no fresh cuts to her skin.
another source said, it was merediths blood and amanda’s dna. which would seem explainable if the murderer washed his hands of merediths blood in a sink that already contained amanda’s dna.
its a puzzler allright. i look forward to learning more pertinent facts in the future.
I didn’t realize she was caught entering the flat at 8:43pm on CCTV, as outlined here:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2855320.ece
If Amanda and Raffaele were active participants of this crime, why didn’t Rudy more aggressively finger them in plea bargain? Is it possible that all of her wacky behaviour and lies were attempts to avoid being implicated? She may be a sociopath, but she does not strike me as a calculating murderer.
No, I’m sure she wasn’t calculating – it would have been that they were just going to put the frighteners on her but that it went wrong. Maybe Meredith said some cutting things. We don’t know of course. Why Guede acted as he did is a mystery. He may have been advised that it would get him less time.
Andrea Vogt also wrote an excellent and fairly balanced piece today (Dec 15, 2009) in the Seattle PI:
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/413244_knox15.html?source=mypi
Hmmm..thats interesting stuff. seattle P.I. do good work. they also have a peice called “meredith kercher timeline: her last 12 hours.” which is good for perspective.
i also encourage you armchair detectives to seek online, the letter raphaelle wrote to his father. It sounds very very genuine and sincere. He talks about how meredith was so sweet and quiet, no one would dream of hurting her, and that although amanda lives purely for the pursuit of pleasure, he cant imagine she’d be capable of murder. which is fascinating, because it sounds as if he’s not 100% sure shes innocent.
here’s some points of interest that have popped up for me. i read that raphaelle,had a receit for bleach…but its amanda accused of buying cleaning supplies. – the prosecution sais apartment was bleached. but can they date that?-raphaelle, apparently admitted to telling the police a load of rubbish during his first interview, because he felt pressured by amanda to fit his account with hers, allegedly. there’ve been reports of amanda and raphael leaving bloody footprints, but couldnt that have occured by stepping in or near the bedroom after the doorbreakdown, or by stepping in blood on the bathroom floor?- did the lovers stage a breakin, or did guede? and why is it SO important to stage a breakin?- there were 4 guys on the lower floor who knew guede, we never hear of them. did they not see or hear nothing?, like the lovers throwing a rock at a window?-kercher’s friends insist she didnt know guede, but someone claims the 4 of them were hanging out one night-what happened when the albanian drug dealer met the threesome, what did they talk about?- if the murder wasnt premediated, then why would amanda and raphaelle leave his place when they were having a nice relaxing evening there with food, weed, and movies….does raphaelle turn to amanda and say, “hey, mandy, lets go to your place and see if we can engage your quiet, shy roommate in a violent sex game, i’ll invite that black drugdealer guy, we barely know.”
the prosecution sais ‘the lovers’ moved kerchers body to make it look as though shed been sexually assaulted. but she WAS sexually assaulted!-if knox did shower next to a huge pool of blood on the floor, thats very damning of her-when did knox admit she was wrong about lumumba, when he was freed after 2 weeks? How long did it take her to confess she only said his name to supposedly relieve police pressure? This is one of the biggest knocks against her.-
guede criticized knox and sollecito from prison, for not admitting their guilt…what the hell? he never even included them in his recreation of what happened.
why was guede so careless to leave his shit in the toilet? who would murder somone and leave such powerful evidence of presence at the scene?
amanda’s behaviour after the murder is considered so carefree, its callous…. but couldnt it also mean, she was so convinced of her innocence,that she had nothing to worry about? I mean, she went with raphaelle to the police station for his questioning. she could have easily stayed away. if she was involved in the murder, shoudnt she have been in a nervous state, terrified of the police finding out what she did?
amanda’s mother must be aware amanda was caught on cctv, because her mother is now claiming meredith was probably murdered just before amanda arrived home.
Are some of my points contradictory towards guilt or innocence? yep. imjust trying to get it all out there. Im wish the italian prosecutors,or defense, would leak more documents to the media… so we can get an even better picture.
I found this:
Wednesday 31st October 2007 (Halloween)
Evening “Amanda…sent [Meredith] numerous SMS messages.”
1900 Meredith responds to her flatmate: “I have to go to a friend’s house for dinner.” The student from Seattle persisted, “What are you doing tonight? Do you want to meet up? Have you got a costume?” She then said that she was going to Le Chic and “maybe we’ll see each other.” ”
Thursday 1st November 2007 (Day of the Dead in Italy)
1300 AK saw MK at their apartment (per AK)
1400 -1500 MK left
1530 Sophie Purton arrives at Robyn Butterworth’s flat at Via Bontempi 22
1600 Meredith arrives at Robyn Butterworth’s flat
1700 AK, RS went to his apartment (per AK)
1800 Meredith had a meal with her girlfriends “Ms Kercher was known to have eaten an early supper of pizza and ice cream with two British women friends, both fellow students, at six o’clock on the evening of her death. But Sophie Purton, one of the friends, had testified that the meal contained no mushrooms.”
1800 AK, RS left her apartment (per RS)
1836 RS at his computer, had watched ‘Amelie’ whilst also downloading the film ‘Stardust’ to watch later, would be at his computer until 0333 – (per RS & his lawyers). “He was with AK until 1800 when they had both left RS apartment to go into the centre. RS has also said that he spent the evening on his computer working on his university coursework
2018 Patrick sends text message to AK
2030 Patrick’s friend, Swiss Professor Roman Mero had a pizza and then went straight to Le Chic. (had originally claimed he was in Le Chic from 2000)
2030 – 2100 RS “Went home, smoked; had dinner.”
2030 – 2100 (AK “left him (per RS), saying to him that she would go to Le Chic, meet friends while he returned to his house”) “… left the house telling Sollecito that she was going to work, [but she], she was at the basketball court of Piazza Grimana.”
2035 AK text message to PL
2038 RG arrives at MK’s (per RG)
2038 PL’s cellphone pings in the area of MK’s house
2040** RS’s father phones him at his apartment on RS’s landline, the call went unanswered and instead went to answer phone. RS did not respond to the message and return his father’s call that night
2040** Young woman, Popovic (Polish after all (?)), arrives at RS’s house to tell him she no longer needed a lift to the station. (She spoke to Amanda via the intercom (?) )
2040** Serbian student, Jovanovic, ‘met’ (Could do with clarification as to whether he simply passed AK, or actually engaged with her in some way). AK on Corso Garibaldi. AK and RS were at RS’s flat at this time and before (per AK/RS)
2040** AK and RS cell phones turned off
2043 AK seen on CCTV entering her house (?)
2046 Meredith arrives eight minutes after RG arrives (per RG)
2050 RS chops up button mushrooms with his knife, and he and AK stir fry them (per Mignini)
2100 AK claimed to meet PL at B-Ball courts and [return] to her house. (per the Judge)
2100 Meredith leaves friend’s house with Sophie Purton to return home, Sophie walks her halfway
2105 Sophie Purton leaves Meredith on Via Roscetto, Meredith continues home alone
2110 Click on RS’s computer, no more activity on computer until following day
2115 Around this time MK arrives home
2130 Meredith commences phone call with mother (What time did it end?)
2141 – 0532 of the night of the crime “is not any human interaction.at RS apt” (per RS’ computer)
2200 – 2230 Meredith is either dead or dying. A breakdown truck arrives for a broken down car containing a family of three, man, woman and child. The Albanian ‘superwitness’, Hekuran Kokomani, arrives by car at the rubbish bins area a short way down the road from the cottage. HK punches RS, throws a phone and olives at AK, who threatens HK with knife. HK drives further down the road encountering RG who recognises HK and offers money to hire HK’s car, first 50, then offering 250 euros. HK hears banging sounding like ‘wood on wood’ from the house. RG says there is a birthday party at the cottage. HK refuses hire his car, driving off having seen RS in his wing mirror running at him with knife. RS persues him to the lights, where a motorist asks HK for directions. HK has to reverse his car to allow the breakdown truck, which is probably just arriving, to manoeuvre. HK leaves (per HK)
2215 SMS requesting account balance sent from MK’s mobile to her bank balance
2229 First recorded receipts at Le Chic
2230 – 2300 A witness heard “a man and a woman arguing in Italian” inside the cottage “at about 10.30 or 11.00 on the night of November 1,” followed by an “agonising scream”.
2230 “Alessandra Formica, a police witness, said her partner was almost knocked over by a black man running away from scene”. The couple also witness the broken down car and breakdown truck.
2300 (circa) A dark coloured car is seen parked outside the cottage (per garage mechanic witness – Gianfranco Lombardi). “It was about 11pm on the night of November 1, 2007, and I was in the area because I had been called out to fix a broken-down car…When I got to Via Sant Antonio, close to where the house where Meredith Kercher was murdered, I saw a dark-coloured car parked outside and I noticed the gate on the drive was open…I didn’t notice anyone in the car and I didn’t notice anyone coming or going during the eight or 10 minutes it took me to load the broken-down car onto my tow truck.” “The statement is significant because Sollecito has a dark-coloured car, but claims he was not at the house.”
2300 RS reveives telephone call from his father (per RS). Now known to be untrue as the unanswered call via landline was actually made at 2040 and went to answerphone
2300 (circa) Nara Capezalli, the woman who lives opposite MK’s, hears screams coming from the house after which “at least two people” emerged and fled “in different directions.”
2300 – 2330 AK and RS are seen on the baseball court by a sixty-year-old witness, ‘Toto’ (Antonio Curatolo), cuddling, behaving erratically, and looking towards the house…” “…their position of observation on the steps near via della Pergola overlooking the house.” “I saw Amanda and Raffaele around the square in 23-23,30 Grimana the first night of November. I am sure because the next morning the carabinieri were on the streets asking questions. “ AK and RS go down in the direction of the house (possibly joined by a third person (?))
2300 – 0100 RS claims he’s on Internet at his home
Friday 2nd November 2007
0100 AK at RS’s apt (?)
0200 Witnesses report seeing Rudy dancing down the Domus nightclub. Passers-by report loud voices from AK/MK home
0333 RS comes off of his computer and goes to bed, Amanda is ‘not’ there (per RS & his lawyers)
0430 Last sighting of Rudy at the Domus nightclub by witnesses.
0532 Internet activity noted at RS’s computer, (Googling ‘Bleach’ & ‘Blood’ perhaps ?). Phones turned back on?
Dawn Mobile phones switched back on (Would be great to have the actual time for this event)
0745 Witness places AK outside supermarket
0830 Bleach receipt supplied by the market (?) – RS/AK in bed (per RS/AK)
0915 Bleach receipt supplied by the market (?) – RS/AK in bed (per RS/AK)
1000 Woke up at RS’s in morning (per RS)
1030 AK returns to her house to wash; took empty plastic bag (per RS)
1100 AK was back at her house (per AK)
1130 AK back at RS’s house; worried—door open (per RS). Back to AK’s together. AK opens door with keys; went in together. Blood in bathroom. Attempted to break down Meredith’s door (per RS)
0900 – 1200 Sig.na Lana finds two phones in her garden and notify police, who ascertain that one is registered to Filomena Romanelli at via della Pergola
1226 “Today it was confirmed that the garage video recorded the car of the postal police arriving at 12.26…” and find AK and RS outside (but within the gate), who said they were waiting for the Carabinieri.”
1235 Filomena, having spent the night away with her boyfriend Marco Zaroli, whilst parking their car (with PG and LA) at the ‘Fair of the Dead’ in Perugia, receives phonecall (first of a series of three) from AK “who told me that she had slept at Raffaele’s house and that when she had gone back to our house she had found the door open and blood in her bathroom. She told me that she’d had a shower, that she was scared and that she was going to call Raffaele Sollecito. It seemed really strange to me and I asked her to check that the house was in order and to call the police or Carabinieri.” (Michael: “Going to call” RS when AK and RS claim they came back to the cottage together at 1130?)
1235 – 1245 Second phone conversation between AK and FR
1245 Third phone conversation between AK and FR “she told me that the window in my room was broken and that my room was in a mess. At this point I asked her to call the police and she told me that she already had.”
1250 RS calls his sister in the Carabinieri
1251 RS phones the Carabinieri (for the first time)
1254 RS phones the Carabinieri again
1300 (just before) Filomena Romanelli arrives at apartment with her friends PA (Paola Grande – girlfriend of Luca) and LA (Luca Altieri). M (Marco) was present and “Amanda and Raffaele were in Amanda’s room because at a certain point they came out into the corridor and we introduced ourselves.” (Michael: Evidently, RS and AK failed to notice Meredith’s keys whilst they were hidden away in her room. Why were they in AK’s room when important actions were taking place elsewhere in the cottage, leaving non-resident Marco to deal with the Postal Police? How long were they in there for? ‘What’ were they doing whilst in there – checking it was ‘clean’?)
1305 Postal Police arrive (per RS and his lawyers)
1315 (circa) After listening to Filomena’s remarks, with Postal Police present, LA breaks down door of MK’s room
Evening PG and LA take RS and AK to Perugia police station in their car. PG and LA have stated that during the trip RS was constantly asking them questions regarding the murder and investigation of a manner that caused them to become so concerned and suspicious, they thorougly checked over the interior of the car after RS and AK got out, for ‘incriminating evidence’ they were afraid the pair may have ‘planted’ there. The ‘suspicious’ behaviour of the couple continued inside the police station, which was noted and reported by multiple witnesses
**These times must be very approximate since the 20:40 time slot is ‘very’ congested.
Filomena and the other housemate were not in the vicinity of the house until the next morning following the crime. No one from the prosecutors to the defence has trouble with this testimony.
Her main significance is that it was her friend who broke down the door, even while the Postal Police were there. While the police talked to people, it seems AK and RS went into the room unattended. This seems awfully slack of the police but this comes from Filomena.
She seems to have been pro-Knox up to that point [I saw a photo of the two Italian girls and AK] but she confirms that they had to insitute a rota because AK was doing none of the hosuework. MK’s friend Robyn confirms that MK said AK would not even flush the loo after menstruating.
Filomena is either peripheral or else she’s the hidden factor that never came out.
Holy jumpins! did you write all that or paste it james?
who is PL?
there’s a lot of good new stuff in there. That’s quite a story by HK..but at the same time, drugdealers arent the most reliable witnesses, still, it seems too crazy to be true, and too specific to not be true. why did he punch raphaelle, and throw olives at amanda? His claim that raphaelle, had a knife, and amanda had a knife, and rudy was begging to rent his car…all within a short time span. Its almost too perfect to be true. for the 3 of them to rape andkill MK and to then rush out into the street, with the knives still in their hand and have a violent run in with a drug dealer? but if they were all accosting this dealer then who was making the banging wood sounds that the dealer heard? and why would rudy say there was a party in the cottage.. wouldnt that just encourage HK to go inside?
but some of the witness accounts must be true, in a city that populated, someone must have seen something. i beleive there was a dark car at the scene. i tend to beleive ak and rs were at the ballcourt, or overlook.
Its not necessarily strange that rs did not answer his fathers phone call. i ignore family calls all the time.
if this account is true, ak walked home and rs drove there. which seems odd.
is there a bleach receipt? in the possession of rs or ak? doesnt seem like it. its meaningless that the store should have a receipt like that, if the person paid cash.
rs and ak admit they turned their cellphones off, so as not to be disturbed. is that highly unusual behaviour? for young lovers to do that?
If it’s a blockquote in italics, Jeff, it’s pasted. The normal font is mine. PL is Lumumba.
I have more in the latest post, Jeff:
http://nourishingobscurity.com/2009/12/16/meredith-this-one-just-for-aficianados/
The bleach can’t be tied definitively. The manager saw a young woman of her description, receipts confirm bleach bought twice, there was a new brand of bleach RS’s housekeeper found at his house, together with a mop and bucket which hadn’t been in the apt before, there is evidence of scrubbing at the Kercher house.
When the postal police arrived, the two went and stood near the bucket and mop for some reason. They hadn’t been expecting police because they hadn’t called them – they called the carabinieri fifteen minutes later, twice. The postal police were there for the reported found mobile. Both mobiles Kercher had been using were in the garden of the person who reported it. Her daughter found the second. One was Meredith’s UK mobile, the first one found was Filomena’s, which she’d lent to Meredith.
How did those mobiles get there? They were Meredith’s. Did she throw them in the garden of a neighbour? Why? Someone threw those mobiles. Guede? Why would Knox and he talk on the phone after the murder? For what reason?
Yes, re RS, I agree that not answering the father’s phone call doesn’t place him anywhere, that he has been placed nearby with AK, checking out the house from that distance, that the computer not being used proves little – if they had been smoking and bonking, then they wouldn’t have needed the computer. They could well have gone back to RS’s apartment and I think they did.
Where else would they spend the night? Certainly not in the murder house.
HK is unreliable but other evidence placed him at the scene due to the car breakdown. Not much else can be relied on from him.
i have only 2 questions about that report, james.
it state’s that rudy guede was amanda and raphaelles dealer. i do suspect, that is the possible reason the threesome would be at the murder scene, but is it factual? did the prosecution make that claim?
your report sais that amanda called guede before and after kerchers murder. Thats like a smoking gun… but thats the first ive heard of it, and again, i dont even think the prosecution made that claim. why would knox’s team claim she didnt know guede, if there was cellphone evidence to the contrary?
Good questions. I have this from The Times:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article3067558.ece
I found this too:
On Richard Dawkins, it says, in the google blurb:
http://www.google.ru/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&newwindow=1&q=knox+guede+connection&start=10&sa=N
But when you click, the forum has gone.
Other evidence says he supplied drugs to her. The prosecution said this. An anti-Knox commenter at The Independent says:
Where he got that from I don’t know.
I have been in the legal profession for 15 years and what surprises me is the comments by Ms Knox’s supporters . For instance they state that there was no evidence that placed her at the crime scene.
There is a saying that if you repeat a lie for long enough it becomes truth.
Instead of wasting time by listing the considerable evidence that was presented during the trial, which places her at the apartment, I’ll assume that it is the logical and intelligent who will read this and move on.
Evidence has to be looked at as a whole. The selective analysis of bits of disputed evidence which takes place on various websites by Ms Knox’s supporters, is a far cry from what takes place in a court of law. The jury hears all the evidence and must deliberate on it.
I’d say the success of the well orchestrated pro- Knox PR camapign has been that in selecting some pieces of disputed evidence and ignoring others ,they gave an incomplete picture of went on in the trial and convinced media outlets & the public there was no evidence against Ms Knox. Thankfully , this had no bearing on the jury , the trial and will have none on the appeal. It merely stoked up anger, particuarly in America . I’m puzzled as to why Knox supporters tried to convince /win over those with no influence on the trial. After all, i have not hearrd of a single civil liberty organisation supporting the notion that Ms Knox had an unfair trial. There are many such high calibre organisations in the US and worldwide. If Ms Knox’s trial was so unfair , why did they not involve a group like Amnesty International wo specialise in such matters or start a petition? They would struggle to get the backing of high profile or repected figures.
Wo knows , maybe Edda Melllas will try this when her daughters appeal fails.
Mariam, thank you for that and my thanks is in two parts – one just for your comment on the Knox case but two – because in a moregeneral sense – the question of evidence, you articulate something I have been trying to for years but have never seemed to be able to put into words properly.
Mariam, I would submit to you that the forensics evidence placing AK at the scene on the night of the murder is far less straightforward than you are putting forth.
AK lived at the house where MK was murdered. Her DNA is, of course, going to be found, particularly in the bathroom, which was shared by AK and MK. It’s not surprising in the slightest that DNA would be mixed with DNA in a bathroom.
No DNA of AK’s was found in MK’s room. And yet, RG’s DNA was found in abundance. Somehow, in their drug fueled frenzy, AK and RS were able to gain their composure and wipe away any trace of their DNA in MK’s room, but leave Guede’s behind. Let me tell you: those two really knew what they were doing to wipe away invisible evidence and leave RG’s behind. Oh, and how brilliant was it of them to mop the apartment… and yet we don’t hear anything about testing of the mop and bucket for blood/DNA. That’s because there was NONE.
I could go on about other elements of the forensics and this case because for each point suggesting AK and RS were there, a counterpoint suggests they may not have been.
I actually find it quite insulting that you would say “I’ll assume that it is the logical and intelligent who will read this and move on.” I think you could have made your point without such a preface.
Presented with the counterpoints to the prosecution’s case, many rightly question the forensics and some of the arguments of the prosecution. They’re not dumb. They’re not being selective. They’re simply human, and when doubt is raised, they question. Nothing wrong with that.
I think you make a good point about looking at the evidence as a whole. For that, we need to wait until this is released with the sentencing explanation so we can better understand what the jury was thinking and why they went the way they did.
While I believe in justice for MK and her family, I along with many others are rightly concerned about the potential of sending innocent people to jail. I’m not saying AK and RS are innocent. I don’t know. But I along with others have the right to question the evidence at hand and the factors leading to the verdict in this case… because quite frankly, it could be any one of us in the place of the accused should we find ourselves in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Juries and judges have been wrong before on evidence that was much more substantial than what we have in this case.
On the PR effort, I don’t fault AK’s family in the slightest for employing this tactic. If I thought my daughter was innocent of a crime to which she was accused, I’d do whatever it took to help protect her. In this case, the bulk of the media attention in Europe and in the U.S. was quite one sided and was portraying AK in a very negative light indeed. I don’t blame AK’s family in the slightest for doing what they could to get their side of the story out there.
The DNA, as Mariam said, is only one small part of the overall, which the pro-Knox fanatics are either ignoring or playing down. There is more than enough evidence in the above and in the other posts on this site alone to convince a jury and 19 judges, which it in fact did and even AK hersef conceded the trial was conducted fairly.
This is nothing but denial to refuse to consider all evidence as presented.
I didn’t say the trial wasn’t conducted fairly. Technically, it was. And as you say, many have acknowledged that point.
That’s not to say the jury/judges weren’t unduly influenced by the initial flurry of media coverage and then coverage during the trial which painted AK and RS in a bad light. This was not a sequestered jury. Personally, if I was standing trial and was aware of what was being said about me in the media, I’d be more than a bit concerned about what effect this might have on the jury.
What we have here in this case is a masterful story put together by the prosecution, with evidence brought to bear to support the story, even though the story itself changed course about three times during the trial.
We will know more when the sentencing explanation comes out. My early view is that all of the confusion around the alibis led the jurors to their verdict, in combination with some of the other evidence that perhaps wasn’t successfully refuted by the defence. And sometimes that happens.
I stand by my words: we must not blindly accept the verdict of juries and judges or the outcomes of our judicial systems. Because they can get it wrong. They’re not flawless. This isn’t about denial for all… it’s about placing a check on our judicial system. I, for one, haven’t ruled out the possibility that AK and RS are indeed guilty. But I’m not ruling out the other possibility that they’re innocent based on the evidence that I’m aware of.
Let’s be clear about the role of the 19 judges you reference. Their role was to scrutinize the evidence brought forth by the prosecution to determine if she should stand trial. We can all acknowledge that from a big picture point of view, the prosecution presented a complex array of evidentiary elements. The judges weren’t determining guilt; they were determining whether AK and RS should stand trial.
Rudy Guede’s sentence is upheld, but reduced from 30 to 16 years.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2009-12-22-italy-conviction-upheld_N.htm
Plea bargain? Eager to learn the implications of this huge sentence reduction … and if that doesn’t fair well for AK and RS’s appeal.
This is unbelievable. The one person that we can reliably and indisputably put at the scene of the murder, the one person who clearly violated MK, gets 16 years for extinguishing a life???!!! If I was the MK family, I’d be outraged!!
Somehow, we’re supposed to believe that two college kids with clean records (yes, I know Knox had a minor infraction for noise disturbance in the U.S.) masterminded this whole murder and Guede, a drug dealer with several break and enters to his credit and notoriety for carrying around a knife, had a diminished role?
Sorry, I think it’s a stretch.
yes, I know Knox had a minor infraction for noise disturbance in the U.S.
Hardly minor – she was the ony one arrested and was seen as trouble by the police, an instigator. She hit the drugs hard but no one mentions this, she took lovers all over the place and her writings were weird and sexually violent. Hardly Bambi, one would have thought, as those blinded by her charm try to make out.
Fair enough to dispute the low levels of DNA [although that strengthens the case against her, not the other way round because of the anxious cleanup and removal of the weapon to the otehr house].
As for her character – it’s bad and no amount of bold statements to the contrary and playing down of this is going to alter the truth. As Mariam quite rightly said above:
Unfortunately, continuing to insist she is innocent on the grounds that one wants her to be innocent does not constitute proof – it constitutes denial. 19 judges and a jury considered her case, looked at all the evidence and concluded that she was guilty. End of story.
She was not arrested. She was fined. That’s how minor the infraction was. It’s like getting a fine for underage drinking or something.
A lot of what you’re saying sounds like it comes right out all those credible media sources we’ve come to know.
Let me give an example of the crazy misreporting that’s gone on. We’ve heard a lot about cartwheels in this case. But did you know that, in reality, she didn’t perform one cartwheel. Here’s what actually happened. AK was waiting in a room by herself to speak with the police. To try and relax, she started doing some yoga poses. Someone walked by the room thought it was strange and interpreted one of the poses and associated movements as cartwheels… and this was leaked out to the press. Is it still a bit kooky to do yoga while waiting? Sure. But mind you, she thought she was in the room by herself. I don’t find it that unusual really.
The writings… again, this is ridiculous. The writing you reference was a creative assignment from one of her classes. She and her fellow students were supposed to write on some kind of sexually violent crime or something like that… and apparently her version was a lot tamer than most, and not particularly well done.
I think it’s likely that she was using/abusing drugs. I don’t know to what extent. But it seems that she wasn’t the only one in her student community that was using…. apparently, it was pervasive…. and AK’s roommates at the cottage were reportedly also using. And let’s not forget that Guede was not only using, but dealing.
If this was some kind of drug fueled sex game gone wrong, why didn’t the police test AK and RS to see what they had in their systems? Even though this was some time later, you would think that they would want to know what kind of drugs they may have had in their system. Did they test? I don’t know, but I don’t recall seeing this as evidence. The question goes to capacity as well. Somehow, they were so high on drugs that they ended up killing MK with RG. BUT then they managed to come to their senses, clean up the scene to remove any incriminating trace of their DNA but leave RG’s behind and they were able to stage a break in? Oh, and why again did we not find any evidence at all on the mop/bucket?
Sigh. One can present the evidence and heaven knows there’s been so much both in the posts and via commenters but having done that, someone who doesn’t wish to heed it can’t be argued with.
Just one example. “If this was some kind of drug fueled sex game gone wrong, why didn’t the police test AK and RS to see what they had in their systems? Even though this was some time later…”
David, you just answered your own question.
The writings – quite relevant because in a creative writing class, the nature of what comes out speaks of the person. In other words, she had to have had those things in mind to write on them. If she didn’t have, they wouldn’t have appeared on paper.
And this is leaving aside the constant nature of the testimony about her and her character form close sources – not from people on other continents.
I really don’t understand this obsession with calling something obviously black white. People around her – at the bar, in the ead up, after the event, her housemates – all come out with the same things.
If there was any dispute, if it was a lesser case where there was ittle evidence, then the stance of the besotted woud be understandable. But in this case, she has no leg to stand on. It’s not even difficult.
So why does it go on?
The PR company publicity machine, that she is American and looks like a homecoming queen from a distance until one examines her.
That’s all there is.
Well, you’re thinking is flawed in my view.
If we go by the logic you’re using about the writing, then we should seek out and commit the entire creative writing class to a hospital for evaluation as they had the exact same assignment (the same subject matter).
On the detection of drugs in one’s system, marijuana can be detected for nearly a week after smoking. Blood tests are even more accurate… it can take a month before your system is clear. How long a drug stays in your system depends on how much you have smoked/taken. In the case of AK and RS, who supposedly were very high, the police should have had no trouble determining if they were indeed under the influence, even days later.
We seem to suggest some backing from a PR firm is evil. In this case though, AK’s family has rightly tried to get another side of the story out there. OR should we faithfully trust the authorities/police/prosecution/media without any fear that they may act inappropriately or make bad judgments? Sorry, but I’ll take the checks and balances any day.
Based on all of the “evidence” presented, taken in parts or taken as a whole, doubts linger for many and I get that. It is what it is, even if you and others believe you see it much more clearly.
Let’s hope clarity comes for all someday because I think the one thing we can all agree on is that none of us know exactly what happened that night.