Yes, I have read that site. A few years ago I go very interested in this case and read everything out there about it. The site you are quoting from is very fragmented, make multiple leaps of logic, and presents pages after pages of ideas that have all been disproven. In my time reading about this case the only source I ever came by that made any sense was the series of articles and videos by Steve Moore.
The sad thing about this case and what every one is overlooking is that Rudy Guede, the man that actually committed the murder will be quietly be set free as soon as this year on work release.
This isn't a complicated crime and the facts of the case are very simple.
Roger - I am not going to argue with you, it seems your mind is made up.
I have done my own research, admittedly probably not as through as yours, and I seriously question Steve Moore's motives. This guy is a former FBI agent yes, but he has had as much access to physical evidence and testimony as you and I. Yet he is unequivocal in his belief about the innocence of Amanda. Beyond that he has had no problem mudslinging anyone and everyone connected to the case. He has written a book about this, given numerous TVand print interviews, got himself fired from Pepperdine University for speaking about this case, and now definitely has something to gain from his theory. He has now staked such an extreme position that I cannot see him ever admitting anything he has said was in error.
What I read about the guilt of Amanda makes sense, she was untruthful from the start about her involvement in this case, she falsely accused her boss of the murder and has no trouble changing her story to fit any theory that suits her. She is unreliable and from what I can see guilty.
So you should throw the baby out with the bath water? No one in Italy can ever be tried and convicted of a crime because they have had some farcical trials in the past?
I didn't say I agreed with the comment, just that I didn't think the earthquake thing was legit until I looked it up.
Roger - I am not going to argue with you, it seems your mind is made up.
I have done my own research, admittedly probably not as through as yours, and I seriously question Steve Moore's motives. This guy is a former FBI agent yes, but he has had as much access to physical evidence and testimony as you and I. Yet he is unequivocal in his belief about the innocence of Amanda. Beyond that he has had no problem mudslinging anyone and everyone connected to the case. He has written a book about this, given numerous TVand print interviews, got himself fired from Pepperdine University for speaking about this case, and now definitely has something to gain from his theory. He has now staked such an extreme position that I cannot see him ever admitting anything he has said was in error.
What I read about the guilt of Amanda makes sense, she was untruthful from the start about her involvement in this case, she falsely accused her boss of the murder and has no trouble changing her story to fit any theory that suits her. She is unreliable and from what I can see guilty.
I'm pretty sure we will never agree, which is fine since in the end neither of us can do anything about it.
But I disagree with you about Steve Moore. Any person that has knowledge and sees a great injustice should be obligated to speak out.
You also need physical evidence to be guilty of a crime. In this case there simply was none. But let's not get science in the way of a good old fashioned lynching.
Last edited by RogerWilco; 01-31-2014 at 04:24 PM.
Roger - I am not going to argue with you, it seems your mind is made up.
I have done my own research, admittedly probably not as through as yours, and I seriously question Steve Moore's motives. This guy is a former FBI agent yes, but he has had as much access to physical evidence and testimony as you and I. Yet he is unequivocal in his belief about the innocence of Amanda. Beyond that he has had no problem mudslinging anyone and everyone connected to the case. He has written a book about this, given numerous TVand print interviews, got himself fired from Pepperdine University for speaking about this case, and now definitely has something to gain from his theory. He has now staked such an extreme position that I cannot see him ever admitting anything he has said was in error.
What I read about the guilt of Amanda makes sense, she was untruthful from the start about her involvement in this case, she falsely accused her boss of the murder and has no trouble changing her story to fit any theory that suits her. She is unreliable and from what I can see guilty.
She did not falsely accuse her boss either, this is more lies. They gave her the story and attacked her with it over and over until she was exhausted and said it was plausible. In Canada, under those circumstances, the entire stack of information would be in the garbage.
Amanda was truthful - she knew nothing. She was told that her boyfriend did it and confessed, along with her boss. The police created the story, Amanda's comments reflect the point that not only did she not do it, she doesn't remember doing it, and is amazed that two other people said she did it (or was there when it happened). The two witnesses to her doing it were simply a ruse by the police.
I also love how you say he has an extreme position - he has gone through the evidence and proven that it was a lie, it was botched or was a fable. There really is not another way to look at it.
Additionally, Amanada's so called statement, was taken in the period immediately after her exhausting and violent interrogation. The interrogation was recorded, the computers magically broke losing all the data (I think I am remembering that correctly).
And your explanation of Meredith having multiple knife wounds, cuts, bruises, contusions, 43 by one count, without any defensive wounds? This screams multiple attackers.
Just using a little bit if logic, even if people feel they are guilty, how is there not at least reasonable doubt after an Italian court already aquited them? To say that alone does not at least establish reasonable doubt would be disengenuois at best. The Italian legal system is a farce.
Last edited by RogerWilco; 01-31-2014 at 05:29 PM.
And your explanation of Meredith having multiple knife wounds, cuts, bruises, contusions, 43 by one count, without any defensive wounds? This screams multiple attackers.
The only physical evidence found in the murder room was of one man, that is a fact that is not even disputed by the procicuters. It is also physically impossible to remove DNA of individuals while leaving that of others. It simply is not possible. There was no physical evidence of Amanda nor Raffiel in that room, other then a small sample on the bra clasp of Raffiel after it was kicked around and moved for over a month without being processed.
Rudy's DNA was found all over the room and both on and In the victoms body. That is the guy that is getting out on work release this year.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
“I’m going to fight this to the very end. It’s not right and it’s not fair,” Knox said on ABC’s Good Morning America. She said she won’t return to Italy: “I will never go willingly back.”
Quote:
Italy’s supreme court. John Follain, author of Death in Perugia and a Rome correspondent for the Sunday Times, told Newsnight that when the supreme court ordered the retrial, “it was pointing to a conviction.” It is now up to the supreme court to finalize the guilty verdict, but Follain added, “Given that the supreme court previously trashed the acquittal, it would be quite surprising if the supreme court went back on what it’d once ruled. One could expect a definitive conviction.”
And your explanation of Meredith having multiple knife wounds, cuts, bruises, contusions, 43 by one count, without any defensive wounds? This screams multiple attackers.
This is very silly. The crime scene had evidence of one attacker, including DNA evidence and footprints. There was no evidence at all of a second attacker. The person whose DNA was found at the scene? Guede. He even confessed.
There was evidence of an attacker with footprints everywhere in blood. Not two people, or three, just one. That in itself is evidence of one attacker.
Are you now suggesting that the other multiple attackers watched from outside the room? That the attackers turned on each other (and her boss like you suggest) but never turned on some homeless guy?
Yet you also say that something 'screams multiple attackers'? How is this possible when the evidence proved otherwise? Even Guede had cuts on his hands, as always happens in these types of attacks. Yet the two innocent people had no cuts, no marks, nothing. Where are the other multiple attackers? They don't exist.
In fact, they would have had blood on their clothes and blood on their feet if they were involved, yet they only found Guede's footprints outside the room. No one else, period.
1. There is absolutely no evidence of Amanda Knox in the room at the time of the murder, nor is there evidence that she participated in any way. There was no motive. Originally, they claimed that Amanda caught a burglar in their house and decided to murder her roommate with the burglar. It is simply stupid.
a. No blood
b. No hairs
c. No fingerprints
d. No footprints
e. No saliva
f. No DNA
The best part of this which seems confusing for you, the prosecution never explained why there was no evidence and why it was absent. They just lied and created stories, and for some reason, that type of evidence was allowed. Every post you have made was a lie by the prosecution. Your assertion that something 'screams multiple attackers' is a great example of you posting based on your perception, which stands for nothing, nor should it ever. This case is a classic example of what can go wrong in a county without justice.
She first claimed to not be at the apartment the night Meredith was murdered, but then changed the story to directly accuse an innocent man of murdering the coed.
She was reportedly spotted at a store in the early morning hours before the police were alerted to Meredith's body -- accused of buying bleach.
She reportedly showered in the apartment after discovering an unsettling amount of blood, before police were aware of Meredith's body. It's odd that this would be her first action after noticing an apparent break in and potential crime, isn't it?
Amanda appeared to stage her "attempt" at contacting Meredith by calling her English phone, knowing that she used her other phone in Italy. After she is told to try contacting the woman (when telling their other roommate about the blood and apparent "break in") She finally calls both phones, but neither calls last even long enough to listen to Meredith's voicemail.
Both Amanda and Raffaele couldn't get their stories to match up during the investigation.
Amanda lied to police and told them that Meredith always kept her door locked -- when it was the contrary.
Raffaele Sollecito knew that nothing had been stolen from Meredith's bedroom before police were even able to enter it.
Amanda knew details behind Meredith's murder (such as where some of the wounds on her body were) and shared them with friends, even though the details hadn't been released and Meredith's body was found covered with a blanket.
A homeless man saw Amanda and Raff in a "heated argument" at the flat where Meredith's body was found at around 11:00 p.m., the night she was reportedly murdered.
A knife was found in Raff's possession with Meredith Kercher's DNA on one end (the blade) and Knox's DNA on the handle. The knife was scrubbed with bleach and had only trace amounts of DNA.
In Canada the Crown wouldn't even go to trial on evidence that thin.
All of that was crap made up by the corrupt procicuters any way. The DNA on the knife turned out to be sour dough bread, and the knife didn't fit the stab wounds nor the knife stain left in the room in a bed sheet. God knows what the bleach would prove if it was even true, there was no evidence of a bleach clean up at the crime scene.
The were two drops of blood in the bathroom that was it. The photo released to the press was a photo taken hours after they sprayed the entire room with a blood exposing chemical that turns completely red after a couple hours.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RogerWilco For This Useful Post:
Your evidence has all been exposed as BS, seriously. No point debating this, it is all nonsense. I can go through each item, line by line, but I just booted up steam.
She first claimed to not be at the apartment the night Meredith was murdered, but then changed the story to directly accuse an innocent man of murdering the coed.
This is evidence of what? all it proves is she had lied and given that she may have had good reason to lie (ie. corrupt interrogation) it really is evidence of nothing.
She was reportedly spotted at a store in the early morning hours before the police were alerted to Meredith's body -- accused of buying bleach.
This is kind of ridiculous, if they had used bleach to clean up the crime scene as this reasoning suggests there would have been obvious evidence of that.
She reportedly showered in the apartment after discovering an unsettling amount of blood, before police were aware of Meredith's body. It's odd that this would be her first action after noticing an apparent break in and potential crime, isn't it?
She didn't realize something major was wrong is one way of looking at this. Again, its not evidence of anything!
Amanda appeared to stage her "attempt" at contacting Meredith by calling her English phone, knowing that she used her other phone in Italy. After she is told to try contacting the woman (when telling their other roommate about the blood and apparent "break in") She finally calls both phones, but neither calls last even long enough to listen to Meredith's voicemail.
She appeared to stage her attempt? Your presenting your interpretation (or the prosecutors) of a simple set of events. This really is not evidence of anything!
Both Amanda and Raffaele couldn't get their stories to match up during the investigation.
Suspicious, sure. However its plausible that one of them got scared during the interrogations and lied, multiple times. Knox changed her stories multiple times, so of course their stories didn't match.
Amanda lied to police and told them that Meredith always kept her door locked -- when it was the contrary.
You can't even prove that she lied with this statement. A much easier logical jump is that she didn't remember the truth. She had lived with girl for two months so maybe she got this wrong?
Raffaele Sollecito knew that nothing had been stolen from Meredith's bedroom before police were even able to enter it.
Huh? Hadn't seen that but how could someone know something like that? Sounds like someones words got twisted to fit the narrative the prosecution presented.
Amanda knew details behind Meredith's murder (such as where some of the wounds on her body were) and shared them with friends, even though the details hadn't been released and Meredith's body was found covered with a blanket.
Meredith had been stabbed 47 times. What details did she really know?
A homeless man saw Amanda and Raff in a "heated argument" at the flat where Meredith's body was found at around 11:00 p.m., the night she was reportedly murdered.
People argue. I argue with my gf all the time, sometimes outside!
A knife was found in Raff's possession with Meredith Kercher's DNA on one end (the blade) and Knox's DNA on the handle. The knife was scrubbed with bleach and had only trace amounts of DNA.
This was basically the only real evidence the prosecution presented. Yet even it looked manipulated:
Italian forensic police expert Patrizia Stefanoni performed the DNA testing on the knife. When the knife was tested, Amanda's DNA was found on the handle. This was expected because Amanda often prepared meals at Raffaele's apartment. She used the knife for cooking. A sample was taken from the knife blade and was tested for blood. The result was negative. There was no blood on the knife. What was left of the sample from the blade was tested for DNA.. The results were negative.There was no DNA on the blade. This is when all guidelines for testing DNA were thrown out the window. Stefanoni used a very new, unproven technique called low copy number DNA profiling. Even with the low copy number method, Stefanoni was still not getting the desired result. The tests kept coming back "too low." She took even more drastic measures. The machine parameters were over-ridden. The machine parameters were pushed far past the level of reliability finally producing the result she needed. Keep in mind, the test was done in a lab using large amounts of Meredith's DNA. No negative controls were used. The alleged match to Meredith’s DNA is completely unreliable because the result was so infinitesimally small (less than 100 picograms, with a picogram being a trillionth of a gram, or 0.000000000001 gram). The procedures used to get the result Stefanoni needed were deeply flawed.
Umm as a scientist I can pretty much assure you that this evidence wasn't established scientifically. There is a reason why confidence intervals/statistical significance is calculated and used as a limit to evaluate the validity of experimental data. Outside of confidence intervals things such as bias can become determining factors in the outcome resulting in false positives.
My final statement is really important. Amanda Knox's defense hinges that there was a lot of bias against her. All of the "evidence" presented by the prosecution could be based on preconceived notions. Given that no real evidence was ever presented I'm not sure how anyone can be sure that she is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Last edited by CASe333; 01-31-2014 at 11:27 PM.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CASe333 For This Useful Post:
She first claimed to not be at the apartment the night Meredith was murdered, but then changed the story to directly accuse an innocent man of murdering the coed.
No, she did not do this. The police messed with her and coerced her to say what they wanted. She never wanted to accuse anyone since she knew nothing.
She was reportedly spotted at a store in the early morning hours before the police were alerted to Meredith's body -- accused of buying bleach.
This was a hoax.
She reportedly showered in the apartment after discovering an unsettling amount of blood, before police were aware of Meredith's body. It's odd that this would be her first action after noticing an apparent break in and potential crime, isn't it?
Was there blood in the bathroom? A significant amount? Where did you get the term 'unsettling' from? Let's see...if she committed murder, what should she have done? Left town? Not called the cops? Let one person in their murderous group leave town so she can blame her boyfriend? She did not of the above. She thought something was amiss and they called the cops.
Amanda appeared to stage her "attempt" at contacting Meredith by calling her English phone, knowing that she used her other phone in Italy. After she is told to try contacting the woman (when telling their other roommate about the blood and apparent "break in") She finally calls both phones, but neither calls last even long enough to listen to Meredith's voicemail.
Not sure how silly someone must be to think this equals murderer.
Both Amanda and Raffaele couldn't get their stories to match up during the investigation.
What she said would not be admissible in any court in Canada, because it was coerced, and violently.
Amanda lied to police and told them that Meredith always kept her door locked -- when it was the contrary.
Yah, big lie. She thought her door was locked.
Raffaele Sollecito knew that nothing had been stolen from Meredith's bedroom before police were even able to enter it.
More lies.
Amanda knew details behind Meredith's murder (such as where some of the wounds on her body were) and shared them with friends, even though the details hadn't been released and Meredith's body was found covered with a blanket.
More lies. The police fed her everything she knew.
A homeless man saw Amanda and Raff in a "heated argument" at the flat where Meredith's body was found at around 11:00 p.m., the night she was reportedly murdered.
Homeless junky that turned out to be confused and proved he knew nothing. Why would you even think of bringing this guy up? Even the judge, as incompetent as he was asked the police to get the guy out of the court room. And you are using his words? What you read is a lie.
A knife was found in Raff's possession with Meredith Kercher's DNA on one end (the blade) and Knox's DNA on the handle. The knife was scrubbed with bleach and had only trace amounts of DNA.
The knife was not part of the crime. There was one knife used, period, and this was not it. It was simply a knife. In fact, the police went into the apartment and only grabbed that knife. Your evidence is very silly. Consider this: They never found a scratch or blood or any damaged clothes from the two, yet they brought the knife home? And put it in their kitchen? You provide these outlandish ideas of the cover up, and they brought the murder weapon home?
There is an absence of evidence that would be unexplaineable if the two were part of the murder. In fact, there is more evidence from the murderer himself when he claimed they had nothing to do with it.
Answer this: How could they have assisted in the murder if there was only evidence in the room of one person?
How could the footprints of two other people magically disappear?
How could the prosecution do such a good job of including no evidence? Even by accident they would have found something. They found nothing, no DNA, no finger prints, nothing.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nage Waza For This Useful Post:
I don't know that she did it, but it seems to me a lot of people are going out of their way to proclaim Knox's innocence. I would agree the evidence isn't strong enough in North America to convict, but we aren't dealing with those standards. In other words, while I think she's "not guilty", I also doubt her innocence.
There's no doubt Knox is a liar. She definitely knows more about the murder than she's let on, though it would seem in part her hashish haze contributed to her actions in the interrogation immediately afterwards.
I'm no fan of the Italian justice system, nor of Knox. In many ways she has contributed to the mess she finds herself in.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Kjesse For This Useful Post:
