Amanda Knox

AMANDA KNOX MURDER TRIAL

[UPDATE: 27 MARCH 2015 -- Italy's Supreme Court found Amanda and Rafaelle Not Guilty. It comes as a shock because of the tremendous strength of circumstantial evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. I believe it was a political decision. But "the love birds" suffered and served time in jail, so they surely got some punishment already. I do feel very sorry for Meredith and believe her killers did not get the punishment they deserved. Please note all the information below are from before this ruling and no further updates will be done as of this date the case is closed.

The real reason for the acquittal, in my opinion, was idiotic support by Donald Trump calling for boycott of Italy, and the expensive professional marketing campaign of Knox to convince Americans this is a patriotic matter despite overwhelming evidence against her. The court relying solely on forensics to acquit her proves my point. There's a vast body of circumstantial evidence against her. Oh well, life goes on. I still think she was involved but have to respect the court's decision which I disagree with. They have a black man behind bars and the white so called pretty American girl is free. If she wasn't a white woman in the USA this case would have been a slam dunk guilty conviction according to a top legal scholar.

"Based on this evidence, in America, if she were not an attractive young woman, if she were an ordinary person charged, on the basis of this evidence, she would be convicted. It would be serving life imprisonment or even worse, perhaps the death penalty in the United States." Famous Civil-Rights Lawyer, Harvard Professor, Alan Dershowitz

There is a saying in America: The truth about a liar is that a liar can never remember his own lies. And that's why I'm sure Knox is guilty. She couldn't remember her own lies, so she made up new lies. That's what guilty people do. And the fact that she lied, flat-out lied, about her alibi is damning. Mike Tucker, author of 1931 - Visiting Scholar on Counterterrorism, US Naval Academy

AMANDA KNOX'S MURDER CONVICTION

DISCLAIMER: The contents of this site may include inaccuracies as some of the info waa gathered through sources which are not verified. If you do see any factual inaccuracies please write to me at the address info--at--rezamusic--dot--com and I will correct it immediately.

INTRO:

BY: notabagelmeister

The inconsistencies, lies, multiple stories, bizarre behavior go on

and on and on and on. Read unbiased sources on the evidence. According

to the defense apologists, Sollecito was such a nice, sweet, well

mannered boy. But actually he himself said that he was fascinated with

knives and carved on trees and tables with them as a habit. He was by

his own account a knife lover. His apartment was filled with violent

manga involving violence combined with sex. He had a replica of a

commando knife displayed above his bed. He said in his own words that he

wanted to seek ever greater thrills. Defense apologists say that the

victim's DNA (Kercher's) on the knife found in Sollecito's apartment was

unreliable. But then why, when confronted with the evidence did

Sollecito concoct a story that Meredith had come to his house and had

helped cook and he had accidentally pricked her with the knife? (Sorry

Solly, it was shown that Meredith Kercher had never been to your house.)

If one believes Knox and Sollecito are not guilty, then one has to

explain away numerous, repeated lies, They also showed zero empathy for

the victim. So, if they are innocent then they are remarkably prolific

liars with zero empathy. They also exhibited marked narcissistic

behavior canoodling in the police station, cartwheels, etc., smooching,

making faces and jokes when Meredith's body was practically still warm

and always emphasizing their own victimhood, promoted by their PR

machine. Knox, even at her trial, narcissistically enjoyed the attention

and the spotlight. Defense supporters say "there's no evidence" but

this pair's lies alone are remarkable. Lies on top of lies on top of

lies. Everything from Knox falsely accusing and ruining the life of her

employer (who she admitted was always decent and kind to her and treated

her very well), a decent family man (oh, yeah, she was "forced" to do

that, even though she wrote a statement confirming the same under her

own admission with no pressure at her own request), leaving him to rot

in jail for two weeks when she and her mother knew that he was innocent,

happening on that morning to have a mop in hand to come back to Solly's

place to clean up a "leak" that just happened to happen that day. Then

there are the false, multiple alibi explanations and stories, the false

claim to have been on the computer, the coinkadink that they both just

happened to have turned off their cell phones on the night of the

murder, when they had never done so before, as to which they lied, the

clearly staged break in, Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp (not so easily

explained away as the defense claims--cross contamination not possible

given the circumstances that his DNA was found in only one other place.)

Knox defenders repeatedly parrot "If Knox was in the murder room her

DNA would be every place," which is not necessarily true, but how do

they explain that only ONE fingerprint of Knox was found in the ENTIRE

apartment--on a glass. One fingerpint. Ask yourself. She lived there.

One fingerprint? (Of course the surfaces were cleaned off.) And then the

bloody bare footprint on the bath mat consistent with Solly's foot (not

Rudy's--Rudy's sneakerprints went right from the murder room out the

door). Guess what? Only one print, no prints leading into the bathroom.

Common sense. Someone cleaned off the rest, which were exposed by

Luminol showing footprints matching K and S. A person doesn't magically

jump into a bathroom with one print, leaving no others. Amanda used that

very bath mat, she claimed to slide into her room, b/c she says she

forgotten her towel. Then, having dried off, she claimed to have slid

back into the bathroom on that mat never noticing the print. She took a

shower in a cold apartment after discovering the door to the house wide

open, blood in the bathroom, and other indicators. Doesn't feel the

slightest danger or concern getting into a cold, unheated room when the

door was wide open and there are blood droplets around (another

"explanation," she'd had her ears pierced, which maybe were bleeding).

No, I don't think so. She came back there to clean up.

~~~~~

The thing is, I could write another equally lengthy "tome" of separate facts pointing to their guilt and not even have gotten started. For example, describing the overwhelming evidence of a staged burglary. Logically, who would have reason to stage a burglary? Not Rudy, whose bloody sneaker prints went right out the door in a panic.

PREFACE

I have put this page together after a number of meaningful online interactions. I didn't care about the Amanda Knox trial -- no time and interest to follow it -- until she was convicted of murder in 2014 and I took interest in the case seeing that some folks are trying to declare her innocent by either ignoring the evidence or wanting her acquitted because of the poor handling of some of the forensic evidence -- and secondly, because in her interviews sheexhibited the behavior of someone who was lying.

I kept an open mind throughout the process of my learning about the case which included watching every interview with her I could find (including trial testimonies), and reading lots of book reviews and various websites set up, both pro- and anti- the guilty verdict.

Below is a list of some of my online interactions. My posts are in black. Others' texts are in green.

It is a very complex case but having looked into it, my current conclusion is that Amanda Knox is guilty. What she did and not do exactly I do not know but she was at the murder scene and tried to cover it up. I know that she's lied so many times, and have said done so many things that do not exhibit at all the behavior of an innocent person.

I do believe the Italian investigators and police could have and should have acted more responsibly. People have criticized the Italian judicial system comparing it with that of the US which acquitted OJ Simpson of murder, who was later found guilty of the same murder in a civil trial, and is now behind bars for other criminal violations -- because of police sloppiness and how forensic evidence was handled. However, I am not sure if it is a positive or a negative, that the Italian system did not dismiss the defendants based on that notion alone. I tend to side with the Italian court's decision at this stage in time. I do believe Amanda has lied and an innocent person would have had no reason to lie and would have acted very very differently.

I started with a totally open mind and still have an open mind. I doubted arguments of both sides, and am still open to read both sides. I've come to a conclusion that the Italian court has made the right decision in convicting all three defendants including Amanda Knox to murder. I am now changing my mind and am opposed to what I wrote below about Amanda not deserving the 26 years. Unless she comes clean and confesses I believe she deserves the sentence she got.

As I have stated below, it's never too late to come clean, so if you're reading this Amanda, surrendering to truth instead of trying to cover it up is always the intelligent decision.

EVIDENCE THAT AMANDA KNOX IS GUILTY

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Evidence

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Category:Evidence

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org

http://www.perugiamurderfile.net

Does Amanda Knox's Account of the Morning of Nov 2 Sound Believable? NO!

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Does_Amanda_Knox%27s_Account_of_the_Morning_of_Nov_2_Sound_Believable%3F

Some very interesting facts there..

interesting article Aug 2014: about Amanda's PR machine:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/selene-nelson/amanda-knox-pr_b_5694432.html

EG wrote:

"There are more and more articles being published lately that are challenging the PR myth. Here's another one:

"Is the Amanda Knox PR machine misleading Americans?":

http://www.examiner.com/article/is-the-amanda-knox-pr-machine-misleading-americans

and

"Dismantling the Amanda Knox ‘Victim’ Myth; Why The Facts Just Speak For Themselves":

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1157346

Amanda Knox Documentary - Sex, Lies and the Murder of Meredith Kercher

This has been an investigation of a truly psychological nature. We were able to establish guilt by carefully observing the suspects' psychological and behavioral reactions during the interrogations. We didn't need to rely on other kinds of investigations as this method enabled us to get to the guilty parties in very quick time. Edgardo Giobbi, Serious Crime Squad

~~~~~~

About the bra clasp: "For Raffaele this is a big problem because this is high-peak DNA with a high profile. Above all it's inexplicable. It shouldn't have been there."

One theory is they cut up the bra to make it look like a rape attack. There's no evidence that Meredith was raped. The DNA found inside her could have been from finger. Rudy tells his friend in wire tapped phone they didn't do it b/c neither he nor she had a condom - and he's been consistent in saying he was in the toilette when he heard a scream.

It makes sense that when he was in the toilette the dirty bullying / sex game was finished off by Rafaelle using his knife in order to blame it on Rudy -- that makes the most sense to me -- and of course Amanda was involved and thus the whole break in staging (which she claims to have done before in the US) -- and the sick fancies of Rafaelle which is documented. But Rudy was no angel either - he put stuff on facebook about sucking blood etc. -- And the story Amanda wrote about two brothers both into drugs and rape including "the girl you raped Kyle, did you know her name?"

Amanda Knox "had to put up with the way Meredith's friends obviously disliked her. All these girls say that Amanda did not have a good relationship with Meredith. M criticised her because of the men she brought home. Not only that, she didn't clean the house, and she didn't keep to the rules about living together in a shared house."

Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were convicted of staging the burglary.

The victim had been disrobed and re-positioned in the center of the room, presumably to highlight the sexual feature of the attack, part of a tableau intended to credit the idea that a stranger had broken in and visited this violence on the victim. Micheli concluded that Guede had no interest in returning to modify the crime scene this way and this interest could only be held by someone with access to the house that night and wanted to throw suspicion onto outsiders, and who knew to point investigators to intimate areas of the victim where Guede's DNA might be discovered. In demonstrating this knowledge the alterer(s) of the scene revealed their own presence at the crime as well as Guede's.[4]

Beyond the difficulty, the point of entry is also illogical because it would have required that the hypothetical burglar have passed easier and better concealed entry points and then chosen this difficult point of entry which was also the most exposed.[17]

Beyond the difficulty of the entry this particular burglar would have had to manage the double climb entry without leaving any traces. It had rained the night before the murder[20] and Officer Brocci noted that her shoes were dirty and stained with grass from walking around the area below the window.[21] Despite an entry requiring that the burglar climb the wall twice, there was absolutely no sign that anyone had done so.

We observed both the wall...underneath the window and all of the vegetation underneath the window, and we noted that there were no traces on the wall, no traces of earth, of grass, nothing, no streaks, nothing at all, and none of the vegetation underneath the window appeared to have been trampled.[22] There was no DNA or fingerprints. No dirt in Filomena's room. Absolutely no physical evidence that anyone had been in the garden, climbed the wall, or entered the room.

And a LOT MORE VERY INTERESTING MATERIAL on: http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Staged_Burglary

including:

The items that were tossed on the floor were mostly clothing. Someone had started throwing clothing on the floor but there was no search for valuables undertaken; valuables in plain sight, such as laptop, were untouched.[27] None of the small drawers were opened nor were any of the small portable valuables disturbed.[28] All the thief seemed interested in doing was throwing clothing on the floor to make a mess. Officer Battistelli testified that in his opinion the room looked staged.[29]

Regarding the fake search of the room the court heard from both Officer Battistelli and Filomena Romanelli that the glass from the broken window was on top of the items that were disturbed.[30] One of the items that was disturbed in the simulated burglary was Filomena's laptop bag. When Filomena went to examine her room she saw the relocated laptop bag and that it had glass on top.[31] The only conclusion one can reach is that the room was ransacked before the window was broken. There is no other explanation for why so many of the disturbed items would have glass on top rather than underneath

The locking of Meredith's door causes further issues for the claim that Rudy Guede acted alone. Rudy left a series of bloody footprints leading from Meredith's room straight out the front door of the cottage. For Guede to have locked the door it would require that after closing the door he turn and face the door so that he could lock it. That would have created at least one additional bloody footprint that was not present. .

Knox Lies To Police In Effort To Delay Discovery of Body

Knox and Sollecito now inside with the two officers of the Postal Police show Officer Battistelli and Officer Marzi Filomena's room and the bathroom where the blood was found.[6] Amanda had called Filomena and told her about the burglary and raised concerns about Meredith, and Filomena had called her boyfriend Marco and dispatched him to the cottage. Marco arrives with his friend Luca.[7] With everyone present, one of the officers of Postal Police discovers that there is a locked door. Amanda explains that it is Meredith's door and that there is no reason to be concerned because she locks the door all the time, even to take a shower.[8] Based on Knox's assurance, the Postal Police ignores the door. In the meantime Filomena arrives with her friend Paola. Upon hearing that Meredith's door is locked, Filomena has a very different reaction than Knox. Filomena instantly goes into a panic explaining that Meredith never locks her door and demanding that the door be forced open.[9]

Why it is Suspicious?

The reason it is suspicious is fairly self-evident -- Amanda Knox had cold feet and lied to the police to delay the discovery of Meredith's murder. Both Filomena Romanelli and Laura Mezzetti who shared the cottage with Amanda Knox and Meredith Kercher would testify that Meredith never locked her door.

The Luminol Traces

A series of footprints in Amanda Knox's room, and in the hallway between her and Meredith's room were discovered when luminol was applied to the hallway and Knox's room. Luminol is used by crime scene investigators to detect blood that is invisible to the naked eye. This established that someone with blood on their feet walked between the two rooms. These footprints are compatible with the bare feet of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, but not with Rudy Guede's. Some of these footprints contained Amanda Knox's DNA, and one footprint contained both her and Meredith's DNA.

Click here to read about the Luminol Traces in greater detail

The Bathmat Footprint

A bathmat with a bloody, barefoot print was discovered in the bathroom shared by Amanda Knox and Meredith Kercher, adjoining Meredith's room. Police experts determined that the footprint didn't match Rudy Guede's right foot but that it was compatible with Raffaele Sollecito's.

Click here to read about the bathmat footprint in more detail.

RS admitted he called the police after the postal police arrives.

When Raffaele Sollecito was challenged by the operator the line disconnected.

RS: No, there's no theft.. they broke the window ... there is a mess ... there is also a closed door ... a mess. [how did he know nothing was stolen? because it was a staged break-in]

POLICE:

What did they take?

RS:

They didn't take anything.

Phone records show that they called the police after the Postal Police had already arrived.

There's a solid argument for this (same as what the court concluded) at the bottom of this page:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_112_Calls

From: English Summary of the Supreme Court of Cassation Motivation Report

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/English_Summary_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_Cassation_Motivation_Report

The witness Nara Capezzali said she heard, around 10:30 or 11:00, a cry so harrowing that afterward she had trouble getting back to sleep, a scream corroborated by Antonella Monacchia, who went to bed around 10:00 and after falling asleep was awakened by a loud scream coming from below her apartment (i.e. from via Della Pergola). Witness Maria Dramis had gone to bed around 10:30 and heard footsteps running along the driveway that connects her home and via Della Pergola.

The witness Antonio Curatolo, a clochard who spent much of his time at Piazza Grimana, near via Della Pergola and who recognized the defendants from previous occasions, had declared to have seen them on the evening of November 1 some time between 9:30 and 11:00 at the part of the piazza that overlooks the house. In particular he remembered them at the wall of the basketball court, and they had gone by the time he left, around midnight. He added that sometimes one would go to the railing and look down toward the house. That evening at 10:30 a tow truck was assisting a vehicle and there had been a commotion produced by the car horns. The witness also stated he remembered that the defendants were no longer present at the time the buses departed for the clubs downtown, and on the day following his sighting via Della Pergola was beset by men in white jumpsuits that made them look like aliens (identified as members of the Scientific Police, who rushed to the scene of the crime on the afternoon of November 2, 2007).

The forensic investigations had established that the poor girl had died as a result of sexual assault, the dual mechanism of asphyxiation and exsanguination caused by the wound in to the neck (the asphyxia due to inhalation of blood and further choking/suffocation, probably following the scream heard by the neighbors, a constriction of the neck which caused the victim's hyoid bone to fracture. The time of death was placed between 8:00pm Nov 1 and 4:00am Nov 2. The knife found in Sollecito's apartment (exh. 36) was found to be compatible with the larger wounds.

Experts say multiple people attacked Amanda

Expert Testimony on Multiple Attackers

Evidence of Being Restrained by Rudy Guede while Attacked by Others

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Multiple_Attackers#Evidence_of_Being_Restrained_by_Rudy_Guede_while_Attacked_by_Others

There are a lot of interesting things in the above document such as:

Nara Capezzali's testimony also adds credence to the claim that there were multiple attackers. According to Capezzali she heard a scream coming from the cottage at a time that corresponds with the estimated time of death. Capezzali lives roughly 44 yards/forty meters from the cottage. After the scream Capezzali heard at least two people running. One went toward Via del Bulagaio, which is the long but more secluded way to both Rudy and Raffaele's house, and the other footsteps were on the metal stairway that leads to Via Pinturicchio. Antonio Curatolo would testify that after 11 pm he saw Knox and Sollecito returning to Piazza Grimana from Via Pinturicchio.

Civil-rights lawyer, Harvard Professor, Alan Dershowitz:

"There is considerable evidence"

"Based on this evidence, in America, if she were not an attractive young woman, if she were an ordinary person charged, on the basis of this evidence, she would be convicted. It would be serving life imprisonment or even worse, perhaps the death penalty in the United States." Civil-rights lawyer, Harvard Professor, Alan Dershowitz

"I would say that there are thousands of Americans in jail today on the basis of far less evidence than there is against Amanda Knox"

"One, she first admitted she was at the crime scene and then denied it. Second, she falsely accused somebody who was totally innocent of committing the murder. Third, she turned off her cell phone during the relative period of time. Fourth, there was DNA found underneath the bra strap and on the knife.

"It wasn't enough to establish conclusively that it was hers, but it certainly pointed in that direction. There was a pool of blood with a footprint and the man who was convicted of the murder blamed it on her, testified against her, the court found that it couldn't have been done by one person, it had to be done by at least two people."

"I have to tell you, in 50 years of practicing law, I had never seen a more one-sided presentation by the media in the United States of the case. Everybody is saying there's no evidence against her and she's totally innocent. It's just not true."

"One word: she's pretty and she doesn't look like she did it and Americans care about what people look like. She's the all-American young woman and we don't care about the evidence."

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/26/justice/knox-extradition/

Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz: "likely will be found guilty -- because the evidence supporting a conviction is pretty strong."

Dershowitz: "But at a second trial, there's a very high likelihood that they may very well convict her."

If not extradition: "she remains a prisoner in the United States, because Interpol will put a warrant out for her and, if she travels anywhere outside the United States, she'll be immediately arrested and turned over to Italy."

"They have a right to sue her on behalf of their dead daughter"

MOTIVES / DRUGS

By Bill Naylor

The theory that Rudy Guede alone killed Meredith Kercher, is in conflict with forensic evidence. The bruising was consistent with her being held down and restrained. The autopsy report is clear about these points.

As well as the cover up involving changed alibis and framing of an innocent man

There are also a number of unanswered questions about this case.

Why did Amanda and Sollecito turn off their phones on the night of the murder.

Knox and Sollecito according to phone records obtained by police never ever turned their phones off, but on the night of the murder did just that from 8.30pm till 6.30am the next day. Why was Amanda's lamp found under Meredith’s bed?

Repeatedly the convicted pair claimed they couldn’t remember what happened, and I believe this is partly true, and the reason for lack of clear motive.

Motiveless murders are perpetrated daily by murderers under the influence of drugs. Sollecito on one of his web pages boasted he spent “80% of his waking hours high on drugs.” A marijuana leaf adorned most of web pages. He had written about his incredible highs with cocaine and heroin.

While never reported in the US media, Raffaele was obsessed with knives, had his own knife collection, and often carried a switch blade. But the dominant person in this murder mystery, Amanda Knox, who according to Rudi Guede orchestrated Meredith’s murder, has now been found guilty of that murder, together with her former boyfriend. Justice has been done, and hopefully will be seen to be doneThe theory that Rudy Guede alone killed Meredith Kercher, is in conflict with forensic evidence. The bruising was consistent with her being held down and restrained. The autopsy report is clear about these points.

As well as the cover up involving changed alibis and framing of an innocent man

There are also a number of unanswered questions about this case.

Why did Amanda and Sollecito turn off their phones on the night of the murder.

Repeatedly the convicted pair claimed they couldn’t remember what happened, and I believe this is partly true, and the reason for lack of clear motive.

Amanda using "confusion" and mixing memory and visions and illusions as a EXCUSE to cover up her lies is absolutely appalling.

"They were suggesting paths of thoughts. So the first thing I said was ok Patrick. Did you meet him at your house or near your house. Then my memory got mixed up. From other days I remembered having met Patrick at P.G. so I said ok, P.G., It wasn't as though I said oh (movement of hands)." Sounds like pure nonsense!

MOVIE: Interesting movie: murder on trial in Italy

Shows a number of interesting things -- some I'd seen and read about elsewhere as well. Some notes I took from what was said in the movie:

- staged break in

- footprints that were cleaned afterwards - typical rapist doesn't do that

- she says she goes in the house finds the door open and finds blood but takes shower anyway without calling the police.

- they don't call the police till the police gets there by chance!

- they don't go to the memorial for Meredith - instead she shops for lingerie and talks of having wild (kinky?) sex that night (Nov 3).

- bruises indicated someone held Meredith down. she was a strong sporty girl and would have fought back.

- The death occurred between 9:30 to 11:30 pm

- Several hours after death the bra was cut off and body was moved. What kind of killer returns to the crime scene - cleans up - stages a break in and moves the body ?

- Amanda says we watched movie smoked a couple of joints had sex and went to bed

when did u wake up? 10 am - and went to her house.

Rafa said the same thing - then she changed her story - and other lies and changed stories.

- If Amanda was sleeping till 10 a.m. how could she be at the grocer buying bleach at 7:45 in the morning?!?!?!?

- If they were sleeping till 10 a.m. how was it that their cell phones became on at 6 a.m.? (the phones were off from 8 pm to 6 am -- they hadn't turned off their phones before).

- whoever killed her had a key - the staged breakin was to throw off the police

- reproduced / found foot prints that fit the killers' foot sizes.

- her roommates said other friends were crying etc. but Amanda and Rafael were fooling around and laughing and totally detached.

- Amanda said of course Meredith suffered - she said Meredith's throat was slit - but before the body was taken out they had only seen her foot and hair.

- Rafa had long history with narcotics

- Rafa collects knives - carries a mean knife on his\

- They both claim they FORGOT but Rafa for example seems to remember the minutest detail such as what shes she was wearing.

- Rafa called 112 -- 10 min after postal police arrived not before (he lied)...

- Rafa's new story: around 9 pm she went out and came back at 1 a.m.

- Lying about Knox's HIV test was a way the Italians used to get a list of possible accomplices. (I think it's wrong to do that but perhaps it was the way they do it when faced with such liars/criminals).

- Fact: their stories didn't add up -- huge red flag for investigators.

- She blames Patrick saying she was there with him at her flat - later brings excuse that it was more of a vision not reality.

- Rudy says he was in bathroom and Rafa and Amanda finished Meredith -- you know, come to think of it while this is very very hard to believe I would not be surprised if A&R killed Meredith thinking they can blame it on Rudy but the court has decided that Rudy is guilty of murder and sexual assault so I'll go along with that. It makes sense that all three collaborated. I recall seeing one scene in the trial where Amanda says she's never seen Rudy before (another lie).

Amanda DNA on handle and Meredith DNA on tip of the knife (Amanda kept her under control) - Rafa held her down - while Rudy raped her - Amanda fought back - and they finished her. That's the prosecutor's line -- it's sensible.

- Amanda sloppy messy - condoms and vibrator in bathroom... - no cleaning up after herself.

- Day of murder at 12 pm Perugia time she calls her mom (3 am Seattle b/f police arrives) -- why? She says she doesn't remember but phone records show it.

NOV 2 @7:45 am Amanda went to buy cleaning supply (bleach) and later denied it despite solid witness.

She said (according to the movie) I was confused and couldn't remember - i had a flashback that patrick was murderer - i realized my imaginings were not real memories - they were just imaginations

She never told the police that Patrick is innocent and let him be behind bars even after she supposedly had clarity.

Amanda's account of police abusing her was that they tapped her behind her head a couple of times - and they threatened her and called her a liar.

NOV 1 @10 pm Amanda and Rafa went to the square - met Rudy to buy drugs

The three came in on drugs and alcohol

Amanda and Meredith got into an argument. over petty jealousies, Amanda's messiness and lack of sexual hygienes, ... ?

Amamnda started fight

They returned later

Cut off bra - undressed her - made it look like a rape - covered the body with duvee - ransack break in - bought bleach next day to clean up

Expert: In many murder cases no DNA is dropped

By malcontent:

Sollecito tries to explain each item of evidence away in his book but he gets caught in numerous contradictions. It's highly unlikely that TWO sets of judges (from both the Knox/Sollecito first trial and Guede's trial), TWO different juries, TWO different prosecutors, the TWELVE judges who had to review the case independently at different phases of the pretrial, numerous detectives, several forensic experts, Meredith's roommates, Meredith's friends, and Meredith's own family all erred in the case.

Even TWO OF SOLLECITO'S OWN LAWYERS, by his own admission, became suspicious of his guilt. This based on his and Amanda's suspicious behavior after the murder, their attempts to throw off the investigation, their changing alibis, the accusation of an innocent man, mismatched timelines, and forensic and circumstantial evidence that implicated them in the crime (all laid out in the Massei report...Google it to judge for yourself). Now, at a certain point, the preponderance of evidence becomes too big to explain away. Anyone who views the case as a whole can see that the prosecution in the original trial built a very strong case as to Sollecito's and Knox's guilt.

Which makes this book into an entertaining piece of fiction.

Knox and Sollecito didn't attend Kercher's memorial service in the days before their arrest, even though Knox claimed to be "friends" with Meredith. (They went out for pizza instead.)

By malcontent:

What is your explanation for the fact that Guede left ZERO evidence--DNA or otherwise--in the room where the break in supposedly took place? Yet Knox's DNA, mixed with Meredith's blood, was found in that room.

And if there's so little evidence against Knox and Sollecito, then why did 12 different judges who had to review the case at every step along the way (part of Italy's pro-defendant trial system) find enough evidence to not only allow the court case to proceed but also to keep the suspects in prison rather than under house arrest, as might otherwise have been done?

Also, I guess mixed DNA samples, footprints, a bra strap with Sollecito's DNA (speaking of levitating, where would this have come from?) and a knife with victim's DNA on it as well as Amanda Knox's don't constitute evidence? And what about the numerous changed alibis, an innocent man accused and timelines that don't match up? What about the numerous people involved, like Meredith's friends and Amanda's other roommates being suspicious of their involvement? Also, all evidence points to more than one attacker.

In addition, Sollecito's book is full of falsehoods and contradictions. Here are some facts about the case that contradict Sollecito's assertations and indicative of his and Knox's guilt.

FALSEHOODS IN SOLLECITO'S BOOK: http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmksollecitosbook

CONFLICTING ALIBIS:

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/our_take_on_the_case_for_the_prosecution_3_raffele_sollecitos_multiple/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/our_take_on_the_case_for_the_prosecution_4_amanda_knoxs_multiple_confl/

PROBLEMATIC & CONFLICTING TESTIMONY:

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/why_defendants_mostly_dont_testify_those_devils_that_lurk_in_the_detai/

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/06/09/when-knox-finally-talks.html

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS:

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/our_best_shot_at_making_amanda_knoxs_timeline_alibi_work/

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/10/05/amanda-knox-wins-appeal-but-questions-remain-unanswered.html

RELEVANT BOOKS: Darkness Descending - the Murder of Meredith Kercher (by Russell & Johnson), Death in Perugia: The Definitive Account of the Meredith Kercher Case (by John Follain), Meredith (by John Kercher), Angel Face (by Barbie Nadeau)

LONE WOLF THEORY DEBUNKED:

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/understanding_micheli_2_why_judge_micheli_rejected_the_lone_wolf_theor/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/trial_the_lone_wolf_theory_takes_yet_another_huge_hit/

WHY KNOX AND SOLLECITO LIKELY KNEW GUEDE:

http://www.amazon.com/review/R1KYYHT7E79FDT/ref=cm_cr_rev_detmd_pl?ie=UTF8&asin=1451695985&cdForum=Fx1YTLXNK6ZA25M&cdMsgID=Mx1AT1U06N8YF3H&cdMsgNo=199&cdPage=20&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=Tx3KS9CQZJ4BFKP&store=books#Mx1AT1U06N8YF3H

TENSIONS BETWEEN THE ROOMMATES:

http://www.amazon.com/review/R1KYYHT7E79FDT/ref=cm_cr_rev_detmd_pl?ie=UTF8&asin=1451695985&cdForum=Fx1YTLXNK6ZA25M&cdMsgID=Mx3GHU41F6DY3GU&cdMsgNo=224&cdPage=23&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=Tx3KS9CQZJ4BFKP&store=books#Mx3GHU41F6DY3GU

INCRIMINATING EMAIL:

http://adeathinperugia.wordpress.com/2011/11/16/analysis-of-the-email-written-and-sent-by-amanda-knox-before-her-arrest-in-her-own-time-and-not-when-under-any-pressure-by-the-police-being-in-her-presence/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?%2Ftjmk%2Fcomments%2Fscientific_statement_analysis_analysis_of_amanda_knoxs_email_to_seatt%2F

CRIME TIMELINE:

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/explaining_the_massei_report_the_timeline_for_events_before_during_2/

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/considering_the_sad_and_sensitive_but_also_crucial_subject_of_meredith/

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/explaining_the_massei_report_establishing_the_time_when_meredith_passe/

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C441/

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/three_more_scenarios_for_the_night_that_accord_with_the_timeline/

CRIME HYPOTHESES:

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C187/

MEDIA REPORTING LEAVES SOMETHING TO BE DESIRED:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/04/02/how-the-media-got-knox-wrong.html

JUDGE'S REPORT:

http://truejustice.org/ee/documents/perugia/TheMasseiReport.pdf

KNOX & LAWYER STATE FIRST TRIAL WAS "CORRECT":

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2009/12/09/trial-was-correct-says-knox.html

AMANDA KNOX WRITES SCREENPLAY FOR INCRIMINATING & INSENSITIVE MUSIC VIDEO WITH MEREDITH & KNOX CHARACTERS:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGFBjFUGGYw

Amanda Knox - the most sickening thing I've seen...

by Tony http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51410500

for as long as I can remember. This vile creature selling her "memoirs" and pleading "innocence" knowing full well she was there and quite possibly made the killer blow. I have some questions for Ms Knox, perhaps she could explain the following:

the DNA of Raffaele Sollecito on Meredith’s bra-clasp in her locked bedroom;

the almost-entire naked footprint of Raffaele on a bathmat that in *no way* fits that of the other male in this case – Rudy Guede;

the fact that Raffaele’s own father blew their alibi that they were together in Raffaele’s flat at the time of the killing with indisputable telephone records;

the DNA of Meredith Kercher on the knife in Raffaele’s flat which Raffaele himself sought to explain as having been from accidentally “pricking” Meredith’s hand in his written diary despite the fact Meredith had never been to his flat (confirmed by Amanda Knox);

the correlation of where Meredith’s phones were found to the location of Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guedes’s flats;

the computer records which show that no-one was at Raffaele’s computer during the time of the murder despite him claiming he was using that computer;

Amanda’s DNA mixed with Meredith Kercher’s in five different places just feet from Meredith’s body;

the utterly inexplicable computer records the morning after the murder starting at 5.32 am and including multiple file creations and interactions thereafter all during a time that Raffaele and Amanda insist they were asleep until 10.30am;

the separate witnesses who testified on oath that Amanda and Raffaele were at the square 40 metres from the girls’ cottage on the evening of the murder and the fact that Amanda was seen at a convenience store at 7.45am the next morning, again while she said she was in bed;

the accusation of a completely innocent man by Amanda Knox;

the fact that when Amanda Knox rang Meredith’s mobile telephones, ostensibly to check on the “missing” Meredith, she did so for just three seconds - registering the call but making no effort to allow the phone to be answered in the real world

the knife-fetish of Raffaele Sollecito and his formal disciplinary punishment for watching animal porn at his university – so far from the wholesome image portrayed;

the fact that claimed multi-year kick-boxer Raffaele apparently couldn’t break down a flimsy door to Meredith’s room when he and Amanda were at the flat the morning after the murder but the first people in the flat with the police who weren’t martial artists could;

the extensive hard drug use of Sollecito as told on by Amanda Knox;

the fact that Amanda knew details of the body and the wounds despite not being in line of sight of the body when it was discovered;

the lies of Knox on the witness stand in July 2009 about how their drug intake that night (“one joint”) is totally contradicted by Sollecito’s own contemporaneous diary;

the fact that after a late evening’s questioning, Knox wrote a 2,900 word email home which painstakingly details what she said happened that evening and the morning after that looks *highly* like someone committing to memory, at 3.30 in the morning, an extensive alibi;

the fact that both Amanda and Raffaele both said they would give up smoking dope for life in their prison diaries despite having apparently nothing to regret;

the fact that when Rudy Guede was arrested, Raffaele Sollecito didn’t celebrate the “true” perpetrator being arrested (which surely would have seen him released) but worried in his diary that a man whom he said he didn’t know would “make up strange things” about him despite him just being one person in a city of over 160,000 people;

the fact that both an occupant of the cottage and the police instantly recognised the cottage had not been burgled but had been the subject of a staged break-in where glass was *on top* of apparently disturbed clothes;

that Knox and Sollecito both suggested each other might have committed the crime and Sollecito TO THIS DATE does not agree Knox stayed in his flat all the night in question;

the bizarre behaviour of both of them for days after the crime;

the fact that cellphone records show Knox did not stay in Sollecito’s flat but had left the flat at a time which is completely coincidental with Guede’s corroborated presence near the girl’s flat earlier in the evening;

the fact that Amanda Knox’s table lamp was found in the locked room of Meredith Kercher in a position that suggested it had been used to examine for fine details of the murder scene in a clean up;

the unbelievable series of changing stories made up by the defendants after their versions became challenged; Knox’s inexplicable reaction to being shown the knife drawer at the girl’s cottage where she ended up physically shaking and hitting her head.

Still, as she's so keen to prove her "innocence" she can quite easily attend the retrial and prove it, how about it AK?

Reza,

Thanks. I don't mind if you reprint anything I've written, but actually I'm one of the light-weights compared to a lot of the people who write on those sites I gave you before. So you may wish to have a long look at what is written on these sites as you put together your page.

As for Amanda coming clean, I think that would be extremely difficult for her at this late stage. There are too many vested interests (not least from her own family) and too much money and resources and time tied up in the "innocent abroad" story.

There might be a greater chance of Sollecito one day forgetting how "honor bound" he is to Knox and spilling the beans.

By the way, can you imagine the reaction of her die-hard supporters should Amanda ever confess? Things might really turn ugly then.

Actually this might expose not only a weakness in the Italian judicial system in how loosely they handled evidence but also spotlight a weakness in the US where police sloppiness means getting away with murder if you have a high priced lawyer like Johnny Cochran!

Not true. My friend is good friends with Stephanie Kercher and let me tell you that there is ZERO doubt in the family's mind that Knox and Sollecito were involved. None at all - because they are party to facts of the case and the huge amount of evidence against all three. The attack itself is just one small reason why we know there was no sole killer - there is overwhelming forensic and circumstantial evidence that also supports this, and is conveniently left out of most US reports. Three different sets of footprints (containing Knox DNA and Meredith's blood) Amanda's blood all over the taps, staged burglary with only Knox's DNA found there, 5 spots of Knox and Kercher mixed blood and DNA, 2 different knives used and no defensive wounds - not to mention the fact that Guede's bloody footprints lead straight out Meredith's bedroom and out the front door - so we KNOW it was not him who cleaned up, left the bare bloody footprint, moved the body, locked the door and staged the scene. And that's not even going into the circumstantial evidence, which is the most compelling.

If people want to think Knox is innocent then fine, but I'm sick of her supporters arguing their side using downright lies and evasions. You have the Knox PR machine coming out with that "no evidence" statement that people now recite as fact. There are 10,000 pages of evidence against Knox and I urge people to actually look at it - and if they STILL think she is innocent, at least that's an informed opinion. It's ridiculous to think that two young people have convicted (twice!) all based on no evidence.

One of the biggest myths perpetuated by Gogerty Marriott, the PR company behind Amanda Knox, is the idea that her confession came after hours of hostile interrogation. The reality is that she implicated her innocent boss after less than 2 hours of being interviewed, more likely 1 hour 15 mins, with an interpreter by her side the whole time. We know this from the time of her signed confession and it is an undisputed fact. Knox supporters throw claims of '40 hour' interrogations with no food and water or sleep - utter lies!!! The truth is, as soon as Sollecito withdrew his alibi for her (another thing Gogerty Marriott try to sweep under the carpet) she threw poor innocent Patrick Lumumba under the bus and let him sit in jail for weeks knowing she had the power to free him. Who does that?? I'll tell you who - a guilty person with no qualms about ruining countless lives in order to protect her own. She still has not paid her boss the money she has been ordered to pay him; she still has not apologised.

Amanda Knox is at best a pathological liar and a terrible, terrible person. At worst she's that and a murderer also. ALL the evidence points to the latter, and anyone who says otherwise simply hasn't seen the evidence.

Excellent post Nel. Indeed it is sickening to see an organized effort by a company representing a convicted murderer to go around the country and say there's no evidence which is yet another lie from the convict's lie machine. EG, what's your take on this? It's plausible that A&R thought they can get away with it by blaming it on G because of his profile/background whereas G might not have been the one who killed Amanda. He also denies having had sex with Amanda -- didn't they find his sperm inside her? I guess that'd be hard to stage. If that's good evidence then he's guilty of participating in the attack / game / whatever you want to call it -- his story is he was using the bathroom (and that's been proven) and that's when Amanda was killed -- if that is really true, it makes sense -- that a knife / sex / kinky / horror scene could have been turned into an actual murder if those two sickos thought they can have it blamed on the African drug dealer. Just speculating. What are your thoughts?

From a article from today:

"In a letter to his lawyer Walter Biscotti, he said: ‘I want to underline that the people who committed this terrible crime are still free and that the truth has still not emerged and that it will never be found, especially if people continue to listen to false testimony and liars.

‘All I have heard is lies and a distortion of the facts especially when it comes to my character. The judiciary must seek to establish the truth because that night I did not kill anyone and the people responsible for what happened that tragic night are still free."

And another thing the Italians didn't do: they didn't hit her. Only Amanda and Amanda alone said that she was hit by an "unidentified" policewoman. Everyone in the interrogation room, including the translator, said that she was never hit and was well treated.

Her lawyers never lodged any complaint. In fact, early on one of her lawyers confirmed she had not been hit.

Her claims of being hit came later on during the first trial as a desperate ploy to gain sympathy and provide a reason for her false statements.

When asked in court to identify the person who hit her, she said that she couldn't remember who it was.

A funny thing then happened. Years later, when writing her book, she was suddenly able to remember, and she then identified the person. (No wonder she'll have to face future slander suits for her book.)

Well, what's one more lie to Amanda?

You just replied with a later post

Exactly, as they say one lie leads to another lie and she kept digging herself deeper. If this were a case of an innocent person, with this much attention and scrutiny, people including you and me would be all over the place complaining about the injustice.

By the way, you've made some very sound arguments. If you don't mind I'd like to reprint those in a page I'm putting together to reflect my thoughts on the subject.

I've maintained an open mind throughout this whole inquiry and am convinced nothing about Amanda resembles the behavior of an innocent person. It's disgusting to say the least!!

Amanda, if you're reading this, please consider coming clean. It's NEVER too late. Years behind bar is no fun. Come clean - write to the court, your fans, your PR company, your publisher, and tell them, this is finally the true story. I'm am sure you will then deserve sympathy and forgiveness because as a young person you made a stupid mistake and learned from it, and learned lying is NOT the way to live, and have decided to speak the truth and nothing but the truth from this point onwards, your entire life, about every subject. Just a trip from a fellow human.

Thomas,

Here's a question for you. Why is poor Amanda's book not sold on Amazon UK or anywhere else in Europe?

Well, I'll answer it for you: because the publishing-company lawyers knew that the lies and slander in her book would automatically result in lawsuits on a continent where the slander laws are stronger than in the US. "Thomas, Since when do you wish opposing views to be heard? You and your PR brigade systematically do all you can to supress the views of anyone who takes a pro-guilt stance. You work hard to click "no" after nearly every pro-guilt post (so that what is written becomes "hidden") and, I strongly suspect, use the "report abuse" button on reviews you disagree with. You must be proud of the many negative reviews of Amanda Knox's book that have mysteriously disappeared on Amazon. It's a very low game you are playing."

Yes, and this is one reason I became more active because it seems that a pro-Amanda brigade, possibly coordinated by her family, close friends, and highly paid PR campaign are tracking every "Amanda is guilty" opinion (which are only in line with a ruling of a court of law in a civil, developed society) and attempting to disparage those opinions, report them as abusive, rate them low, to the point that you click on many of the Amazon reviews and you see that many of the comments of people who feel Amanda is guilty -- due to the sheer volume of evidence against her -- are hidden because you give six or so "no" clicks and Amazon hides the comments.

And enough bogus abuse reports and Amazon deletes the comment altogether which may be what happened to the well articulated posting by someone which I mentioned above, which mysteriously disappeared.

They can get the Amazon posts disappear and the comments go in a hidden state, or they can think for a minute what if! What if poorly handled forensic evidence doesn't justify ignoring the circumstantial evidence and expert opinions and all the facts that point to Amanda and Rafa being there on the scene of the murder and very likely participating in it and the trying to cover it up, delay police finding of the body, blaming an innocent man for it, etc. etc.

Daniela, you are fooling yourself. You are ignoring an immense body of evidence against Amanda and protecting her on grounds of nationalism (tribalism) -- I can not figure out how an intelligent person like you would ignore things like turned off cell phones, lack of foot prints to support the killer locked Meredith's door, lie after lie after lie of Amanda and Rafa, witnesses who heard 2 people run after Meredith's scream of death, bleach clean up, 7:45 am Amanda buying bleach when she lies about being in bed, etc etc etc etc (not to mention the mixed blood of Amanda and Meredith and the bruise on Amanda's neck --- and the DNA -- and the expert opinion that this killer had to effectively be Bruce Lee if he acted alone -- and Rafa and Amanda's sketchy past (heavy drug use / knife / stone throwing anti social behavior) -- and then claiming there's no evidence or that all these are just lies.

You say Amanda called a wrong man the killer as a sign of her innocence. It's far more likely that she did that as yet one more item in her array of lies because she thought the coverup would have the police fooled but those guys are far smarter and saw both through the staged break in and Amanda and Rafa's lies, behavior, etc.

If you don't see this, I'll make a video explaining all this as soon as I get a chance. You're fighting for a loss cause. Court of law has ruled based on sound evidence. Of course some of the forensics were mishandled but there's plenty of evidence regardless that led to right, just, well deserved conviction of these criminals and liars.

Italy is a modern advanced democratic and civil society. Amanda was never tortured. Search this document for "torture" for more explanation.

"Based on this evidence, in America, if she were not an attractive young woman, if she were an ordinary person charged, on the basis of this evidence, she would be convicted. It would be serving life imprisonment or even worse, perhaps the death penalty in the United States." Famous Civil-Rights Lawyer, Harvard Professor, Alan Dershowitz

[My reply to Thomas Mininger]

I can't believe you're still pushing your "there's no evidence" drivel. Must really suck to be pushing a lie.

"Based on this evidence, in America, if she were not an attractive young woman, if she were an ordinary person charged, on the basis of this evidence, she would be convicted. It would be serving life imprisonment or even worse, perhaps the death penalty in the United States." Civil-rights lawyer, Harvard Professor, Alan Dershowitz

[My reply to Thomas Mininger]

Sounds like he might be another PR campaign's contractor?! What he's saying isn't convincing at all -- it's the same argument as your favorite FBI man -- the gist of it is around poor handling of evidence and how conveniently he refutes the massive amount of circumstantial evidence that speak so vividly about their guilt. It's an insult to the intelligence of masses for you guys to try to brain washing them into believing these murderers are guilty -- the decision has already been made by a court of law on good valid viable grounds. It is clear as day. It's not ambiguous at all. The prosecution had no reason whatsoever to make up this soap opera your PR campaign is trying to promote. The murderers handed them the scenario via their sloppy stage set up, repeated lies, etc.

"Based on this evidence, in America, if she were not an attractive young woman, if she were an ordinary person charged, on the basis of this evidence, she would be convicted. It would be serving life imprisonment or even worse, perhaps the death penalty in the United States." Famous Civil-Rights Lawyer, Harvard Professor, Alan Dershowitz

EG, can you again post the websites you mentioned please where you said some heavy weights have posted (compared to you though you sound very knowledgeable about the case).

By the way, I wonder if anyone ever heard the glass breaking. What's the theory on when that happened?

Also very interesting analysis of G's footprints and how he could not have locked the door on Meredith -- who else could have aside from his accomplices.

I was reading that the evidence tends to show Rafa called the police after the post police came -- he admitted to it apparently too. And defense tried to argue he was with the postal police the whole time.

And about the 300 Euros missing which caused a friction b/c Amanda and Meredith? I didn't read that in a reliable place.

Amanda had done a staged break-in while she was in America - she just admitted to it.

I wonder what happened. Again, I'm not that familiar with the details. It's no surprise given their history that they knew G who was probably dealing drugs. They go home - and bully Amanda? I can think of two situations:

a) they go home - drunk and drugged - and we already know their obsession with kinky sex - and they play this "game" and want Meredith involved and she refuses and A&R&G participate in G having sex with her and finish her off.

b) there was some fight before this over the 300 euros and they attack Amanda over that.

The argument on why this could not have been carried out by one person is very strong. Thomas & Amanda's expensive PR campaign which as you say has the task of spreading lies, like to deny a lot of things that we know are facts.

Daniela, the case you refer to is very dissimilar to Amanda's. "Before you know it, I had this photograph shoved in my face, and I was being threatened and slapped around, and they wanted me to sign a false confession. And I wouldn't," Yarbough said.

Search this document for "torture":

Anyway, Amanda never confessed. If she had told the truth her life would have been much better. It's never too late to tell the truth.

EG: Thomas, If you are not being paid to post, then WHO in God's name is? We know that a multi-million-dollar PR campaign exists to project the image of an innocent railroaded whimsical misunderstood Amanda Knox who would never hurt a fly. Isn't it, then, reasonable to assume that you who post on such a fanatical and frequent basis is part of the "AK internet PR team"?

No doubt some of the rabid supporters of Knox on the internet are members of her own family and friends, but it is very reasonable to assume that there are also paid posters.

Do you think any of the paid promoters of Amanda's innocence would ever admit to being paid?

Remember that their purpose is to disseminate false information: essentially, to lie. So when any of the likely candidates are asked if they are a paid promoter, they will not of course be above lying about it.

"Since you seem open to learning the facts of the case, I would just ask you to seriously read all of Thomas Mininger's replies (I think in another thread); they are so well written and referenced."

Are you kidding Daniela? Thomas' sole focus is

a) rhetoric

b) poor handling of the forensic evidence

I have no doubt that some of the forensic evidence was poorly handled but there's substantial circumstantial evidence and plenty of Amanda's lies to link these two love birds to the scene of a brutal gruesome cruel crazy inhumane murder of an innocent young woman called Meredith Kercher.

"so many people think she is a murderer, based on tabloid lies"

Are you kidding? Now blame it on tabloids. Daniela, she's on record and was even convicted by court of law for lying and slandering an innocent person and she has liar written all over her. Watch her interviews. A truthful innocent person would act and speak entirely differently throughout this process. A&R have been busy fabricating a version of reality which seems contrary to the truth.

"The reality is that Amanda's supporters are just normal law-abiding citizens looking for justice and recognizing that tremendous injustices occur."

I have no doubt her supports are good people. But so far all I've heard of Amanda supporters is complaints about how forensics were handled. And this tribal sentiment that oh "this poor American girl goes to a wild country and gets mistreated and set up" -- that is NOT SO. She was wild before she goes to Italy and nobody in Italy forced her to drink and do drugs. And there's MUCH more to the case than whether the DNA on the bra was authentic or not.

"Please recognize that the website that EG posts is just full of lies (well-documented lies)."

The website you are referring to is the best website on the case I've seen because it has actual court documents. I'm sure Amanda supporters think court documents are lies but I tend to believe court documents including expert opinions which overwhelmingly point to A&R's guilt a lot more than some fervent supporters who think a poor American girl was victimized and setup by awful foreigners. That is NOT the case.

Good wishes to you.

Thomas, my sources include very well translated versions of the Italian court documents which included expert testimony. I also read the testimony of the defense's experts and I believe the prosecution's experts far more because what they say makes sense and is far more significant than the flimsy and desperate attempts of the defense. It would have been FAR simpler if A&R had told the truth.

As for TV interviews, I first relied on Amanda's own body language and my intuition -- and also what she says in comparison with the evidence, the facts, the circumstances, and what she's said before -- and she has LIAR written all over her.

Again, like your FBI expert, your argument is essentially that since the evidence was mishandled Amanda should be innocent. NO. There's a LOT more to this case including circumstantial evidence which you are conveniently ignoring. A LOT. And it all points to these two being involved in the murder which they were rightly convicted of. Amanda Knox admits staging burglary

http://truejustice.org/ee/documents/perugia/amanda-knox-admits-staging-burglary.html

Also, interesting that it was said 300 Euros of Meredith was missing which made her and Amanda argue.

(EG:) "As a matter of fact, I was just reading the information you have on your new page related to Nara Capezzali in which she speaks of hearing a blood-curdling scream and being too disturbed to go back to sleep again for sometime, etc., and I was thinking, "Good god; why in the world didn't this woman phone the police right there and then?" "

I agree. Maybe it's cultural -- I know in many parts of Europe people are a lot more reserved than in some parts of US and calling police is not such a quick thing. I call the cops quickly but I know people who don't. In some of these older traditional countries status quo is strong and with that goes the idea that everything is alright... or maybe she thought someone was having some kinky sex!

By the way Thomas is working a couple of different threads with some hilarious denials, like zero dna, zero bruises, etc.

Thomas, oh, I see, thanks for clarifying -- so AmazonWoman is a critique of the tag team not part of it. Any critique is a "guilter" or "hater". Guilter might go in the English dictionary associated with this case. What a legacy!

"bash Amanda"

Thomas, those who call Amanda guilty are not bashing her -- they're making a statement of fact which has been established by a court of law of a civil, sovereign, modern, internationally recognized nation. No basher can do more bashing to Amanda than she's done to herself -- saying the truth would have been so much simpler.

I can't comment on the sites that apparently have tried to censor you but I can see why you wouldn't survive them if you've used the same kind of weak arguments you've used here. I read that you were there and it usually ends up in a name calling ugly situation because you use arguments that simply don't hold water against the evidence like you have here but here there's no moderator unless there's abuse of terms of service. But I can already see your frustration and resorting to harsh language. It's not necessary.

The info you keep pasting has been discussed -- I presented some of it here including comments on the FBI gentleman and why he's not convincing.

Also there is a lot of important information here:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Evidence

"Guede's bloody palm..."

Guede has already been convicted. Maybe they don't need to do further testing since they already have enough good on Goude to lock him up for a long time.

"Guede's bloody shoeprints are in the bedroom and leading out into the hallway."

But not returning to lock the door. Who locked the door? I guess you're going to argue he did it while facing the other way! And why did Amanda lie to the police in order to make them delay finding the body. Meredith didn't lock (or ever) her door.

"Guede's DNA is on Meredith's clothes, inside her. Her blood and his DNA are on her handbag."

This discussion is not about Guede! He's already behind bars. Everyone knows he killed Meredith but was he alone? Evidence suggests he wasn't unless he was a kung Fu master and he wasn't!

"Guede's knife ..." Guede is behind bars - hello Thomas. This doesn't mean Amanda wasn't involved. That's the whole point and you know it. And the evidence overwhelmingly points to A&R as having been involved. What part of that do you not get? Look here :

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Evidence

"Zero"

All your zero's I'm afraid are not quite zero. You're posting a bunch of non facts about DNA, bruises, etc. - you can't repeat non facts and hope that they become true. Look here:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Evidence

[My reply to Thomas Mininger]

This is the pot calling the kettle black. You are part of the tag team which is trying to quash anybody who posts anywhere that they agree with the verdict of the court of law which did a huge amount of due diligence -- and you're complaining about those put together this great website in which they actually site actual documents instead of rhetorics we've been seeing out of you and your tag team.

By the way, I've looked in many places on the internet and one of the reasons I became more passionate about this case was that people like you and your tag team are trying to build a version of reality based on Amanda's lies and the sloppiness of some parties in handling of the evidence which in my mind doesn't change anything because there's so much other evidence that this case is pretty straight forward.

By "tag team" I'm referring to this comment by your pal "Amazonwoman" who wrote: "Tracked by Thomas Menninger and Daniela." on a thread which is no longer there ( Rory Lion's post was removed I guess by bogus abuse reports by people like you and your tag team who are so quick in making sure Amazon hides posts that don't meet your fanatic views. The FBI gentleman you keep referring to was looking at it through the eyes of the US legal system and the core of his argument is based on mishandling of the evidence -- in other words, another OJ case -- but it's a difference justice system and the judge and jurors saw through the lies of Knox which are SO obvious regardless of whether the forensics were 100% clean.

Problem is your tag team's sentiments are based on frivolous arguments like you and team mate Daniela has made like "you rated these DVD's low therefor your opinion of Amanda's case is faulty" (LOL).

I have yet to see any mob mentality on the internet against Knox. I have seen a mob mentality to try to hide the truth and rationalize her lies. I'm new to this case and have maintained an open mind throughout - but it's pretty darn clear Knox is guilty.

Hi Daniela, you're mixing up the posts -- it was EC who mentioned the name subject. As for the evidence, I'm not relying on one thing. The more I read about this case in the court documents themselves the more I tend to think the court made the right decision. I have no intention to defend that prosecutor, however, any prosecutor would have felt, ok, "thought", that this girl is guilty based on what's out there in terms of witnesses, facts, circumstances, lies, etc., etc.

I gave her the benefit of doubt before I make my conclusion which in itself is tentative -- even right now, with everything I read I read with an open mind and am open to changing my mind but right now I am of the opinion that she's guilty.

I addressed the subject of reading her book in a previous post - you can see it here:

(search for "book").

Your comment about the DVD's is completely out of place and a desperate rationalization that since I don't like a lot of DVD's I watch (simply because Hollywood makes a lot of crap (and some good) movies) then somehow that's related to the Knox case but it is NOT -- absolutely no connection whatsoever, and your characterization of my sentiment towards DVD's is false and extreme because I'm not like that -- it's just an image you're making to somehow make a link that is simply not there.

I was not looking for anything in the Knox story but the truth and I found plenty of it in the court documents, expert opinion, and rational assessments however Knox and her PR team and fans like you like to discard all that and paint a picture of a crazed prosecutor with a team which tortured Amanda to make her lie which is something that simply didn't happen.

"you understand about coerced confessions"

I do -- I hear them every day coming out of dictatorships but what Knox went through was not even close.

(search for "torture").

I'll check out that movie. I do absolutely love about 15% of the hundreds of DVD's I watched (mostly while practicing guitar). But it's TOTALLY unrelated to the Knox case!

Look Thomas, I don't run my life based on what people think and my taste for things is not shaped by how popular they are. I write a comment on a lot of movies at certain phases in life (when I buy a lot of used DVD's which sometimes I watch as I practice guitar) and 85% of them are not that good despite being highly reviewed by others including some of the movies you mentioned. But that has NOTHING to do with my opinion on Amanda's case. NOTHING. And you bringing in that as an argument further shows how desperate you are to shoot down anybody who thinks Amanda is guilty of something!

It also has NOTHING to do with Amanda case that a lot of my comments on movies are not capitalized and are brief!!

"no substantial reasons for your opinions"

I don't need to bring a reason when I think a movie is boring, dull, with a stupid plot. But again, this has absolutely NOTHING to do with the Amanda Knox case you're trying to defend and you're hurting her case by resorting to these kinds of totally irrelevant and arbitrary arguments.

As for watching a few minutes, I watch enough of a movie to know it's trash or good. Like a song -- if the first minute is no good it gets put in the trash by A&R. I watch the beginnings -- give it a good chance -- then fast forward to next chapters and give them a chance if they deserve (that is if the previous section is not absolutely horrible).

Comparing my comments on movies with my comments on Amanda Knox case which I've spent many hours studying is a sheer attempt of desperation by your part. I NEVER start watching a movie or reviewing a legal case with prejudice. I'm a philosopher - lover of truth and wisdom and prejudice is the contrary to that spirit.

I have no idea about extradition chances or what Amanda did exactly but I know she's not clean -- I know she's lying -- and it's been proven in a court of law however much you may not like it.

Thomas, I have a very different taste than a lot of Hollywood movies -- about 15% of movies I see I think are great. The rest get low stars. People who don't agree rate it low -- I couldn't care less. Hollywood makes a lot of stupid movies (and a few good ones) and promotes values like lying which are destructive. Maybe that's where Amanda learned her ethics from.

But attacking people who think Amanda is a liar because it's clear as day she's been lying through her teeth doesn't turn her into an honest angel. Her story gets tougher and tougher to believe with proponents like you trying to feed people BS as logical arguments and then attack people who have a very good reason to believe Amanda is guilty. But it doesn't matter what you and I think. The court has already decided and I don't think neither Italian Supreme Court or the one in Hague is going to save Amanda. The only thing that will save her is to come clean - start remembering all those things she lies about not remembering - and put her cards on the table and surrender. Otherwise no amount of PR or brain washing the American public is going to help her.

"To hear what former FBI agents who manipulated suspects in the backroom, and witnessed the horror of tag-team interrogation abroad during their careers..."

Poor Amanda. Who do those foreign policemen think they are interrogating her after she attacked and tortured Meredith and left her to choke to death in her own blood, though not before she made off with her cell phones and locked her in her room so that she would have no chance to summon help?

If someone close to you, God forbid, were murdered, wouldn't you want the police to fully and vigorously interrogate suspects, Thomas? Or is it only Amanda that should be excluded from this inconvenience?

"The horror of tag-team interrogation." Well, that sounds evocative, but what does it really mean? I suppose it means that when one policeman finishes questioning poor Amanda, then a fresh one takes his place and so on. Poor Amanda. She had to answer questions from more than one policeman about murdering her housemate. She must have been very tired being the only one in the room to answer questions. Her voice would have been getting strained. Meanwhile, those evil Italian policemen had perfectly fresh voices because they took turns questioning her.

Or--ah, I see-- perhaps you're suggesting that twelve policemen all questioned Amanda in raised voices at the same time. Well, that must have been confusing for dear Amanda, because when people all talk at once, then it's hard to understand what is being said. But then in this scenario, wouldn't it be the twelve policemen who would strain their voices by speaking continuously?

"Picture one or two cops working a suspect like you see on TV. Now picture 12 working Amanda."

I am picturing it right now, and I get a picture of immensely frustrated police having to listen to Amanda's interminable lies, confused ramblings, shifting alibis, deliberate obfuscation, attempt to fit her version of events with perceived known facts, and endless "I don't remembers" and "I don't knows."

All the sort of things, not to mention her accusation of an innocent man, that led to her rightful conviction.

~~~~~~~~

Exactly EG -- it's not rocket science. Nothing about Amanda's behavior resembles that of an innocent person. And the Italians surely didn't torture her - pull her nails - electrocute her - waterboard her - rape her - threatened to kill her and her family - sleep deprive her -- etc. -- NONE of that.

Rory::

daniela, you ask, "What is so hard for you to understand about coerced confessions?" Let me answer you.

I would never confess to something I never did, especially a murder, unless I was being subjected to a Khmer-Rouge Killing Fields style unbearable torture. However if some stupid Italian cop yell is yelling at me and telling me to confess to the murder of my friend, I would answer "F*** YOU A**HOLE I did not do it!!" as many times as necessary. My signed and written statement would be "I did not kill her, she was my friend". I would NOT say as Amanda Knox said: "I saw myself cowering in the kitchen with my hands over my ears because in my head I could hear Meredith screaming." If AK did not hear Meredith being murdered, she brought all of this upon herself.

Never, never, never admit to something you did not so, it is a simple matter of honesty, integrity and self preservation. So unless brutal torture is involved, I do no believe in coerced confessions. What is so hard for you to understand that innocent people DO NOT CONFESS to murder!

~~~~~~

I fully agree Rory. Amanda has lies written all over her. I was not there to see her be involved but her language, body language, behavior, lies, story, changing stories, all the lies she tried to tell, tell me she's guilty. They can blame the Italian cops and prosecutor and culture and judge all they want but bottom line is NOTHING about Amanda comes across as it would come across an innocent person which you said so perfectly. An innocent person would NEVER act like that. Simple as that.

"She calls Meredith "my friend" as her conscience dares not name her. She has pre written phrases and she never talks about details, facts.

Innocent people insist to return to facts and details of the events over and over without a script and chronology to show you once again they are innocent.

She cannot fake tears, she has these pauses which are just a technique to allow her to think what to say next, not genuine looking at all.

She says "i was expecting better from the system" same words of the press release ... people do not talk like that ... plus as i said innocent people change words to express various situations ... she says "it hit me like a train" when it is obvious she was fully expecting it ...

She is a huge liability of her own PR. So FOA supporters are left with a complete moron arguing Guede was an informant and the Supreme Court is in the conspiracy ...

PR effort goes down down down ... just my two cents."

~~~~~~~~~

I agree. What got me interested in this case aside from the fact of being son of a man who had a stellar legal career for 50+ years including being the head of criminal courts and in the supreme court and being marked the judge of judges, as well as other roles he held, and having grown up among lawyers and judges (grandpa was a lawyer too) I was shocked to see Amanda spoke as she looked and sounded like she was lying and she's guilty -- then I dug deeper...

She's a criminal but can't hide it too well -- that's why I have hope for her -- that if she comes really clean she'll serve a much shorter sentence. In Sawyer interview she says no but she nods yes... etc etc as you point out.

You're right - she's "not genuine looking" at all. I give her the benefit of doubt but I also know how an innocent person would behave.

An innocent person wouldn't blame someone else just because his name is mentioned to her - oh it was him!!! (LOL). The theories of Thomas&Co., or the PR engine, sound increasingly ridiculous and that ridiculousness makes nobodies like me who get interested start to react to it as not being genuine which reflects badly on Amanda if that is even possible b/c as you say she's doing a heck of a job herself.

I just hope if she is guilty this massive PR campaign in US doesn't make the leaders fall for it. She needs to go back to Italy, serve a year, and then start thinking if she wants to come clean. Come clean, and behave well, and get sincere, and donate the money she made from her book to charity, and maybe serve a reduced sentence.

"I think this with the informant theory is something that Moore cooked up on his own and is just an example of him going off the deep end. I don't think that it's one of the official PR talking points. Thomas can enlighten you better than I can on this.

Anyway, Moore's theory is hogwash. It doesn't work because the timing is off. AK and RS came under suspicion BEFORE-- actually almost a week before, I believe-- anyone knew anything about Guede being involved.

Also, in order for this to work, the Milan police would have to have convinced the Perugia police to be in on the setup of Knox and Sollecito.

All in all, it's a ridiculous conspiracy theory.

So, I'll leave it for you to judge if Moore is a reliable expert that should be quoted. "

~~~~~~~~

Thanks. My impression since first time I saw him is that of a man who has a hammer and so treats everything as a nail. He is very good at what he does and is ridiculed by the way the evidence is handled and is looking at it through the eyes of the US judicial system which got OJ acquitted. Problem is, it's a different judicial system and even if the evidence was not handled well, it doesn't mean it's not credible. I think a lot of criminal defense in the US is centered around that. Different ball game and these guys just have to get used to it.

I still like to see some evidence / reference of Guede being released by Milan police -- but as you say even that theory has holes in it due to its timing.

"http://outfront.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/31/amanda-knox-i-will-never-go-willingly-back-to-italy/ "

Very interesting video -- so now they say the police got Knox involved because the real killer was a police informant and they asked him to be released from a burglary in Milan -- so local police called Milan police and said hey, the homeboy is our informant, give him back his knife and set him free -- he comes home and kills Meredith -- and police find out and say, how do we cover our butts, and they get A&R involved. Do you buy this argument ER?

I liked what the other guy said, that he's never seen a case where the other side claims EVERYTHING to be wrong including prejudice (but he pointed out they also convicted an Italian national).

It's interesting how people who think Knox is not guilty like to be so selective in their memory and reference to evidence and facts that don't support the scene they try to create which with those pieces of facts would be completely different! Just sayin!

Again, you're resorting to rhetoric and making an image of my image of someone which is simply not true. What I said was based on my research and hearing your hero for whom I have respect and and I said if this were trialed in the US Amanda would have gotten off the hook because of police sloppiness just like the OJ case. But karma caught up with OJ eventually. I don't think Amanda killed Meredith directly but she's not as innocent as you and her PR army like to portray her as. She's a liar and I don't trust anything her or her representatives say. As EC said this case is already tried in a respectable society and it's not going to get tried on the internet.

Janet - I've kept an open mind throughout my investigation. This is a no-brainer case. The amount of evidence against the criminals you're trying to protect is overwhelming. No amount of PR is going to change that. Please stop trying to cover up the truth.

"Based on this evidence, in America, if she were not an attractive young woman, if she were an ordinary person charged, on the basis of this evidence, she would be convicted. It would be serving life imprisonment or even worse, perhaps the death penalty in the United States." Civil-rights lawyer, Harvard Professor, Alan Dershowitz

You can also see this file - I added a bunch of new things:

I understand and agree with you. It's a typical case of "when you have no case make a lot of noise".

Thomas I am familiar with those things. The gist of that argument is what got OJ acquitted, i.e., police sloppiness. But look where OJ is now!

EG, I know they are calling anybody who thinks Knox is guilty a hater but I suggest you don't keep using that word - it doesn't sound good, it's not what you are, it's not what I am, and even joking about it is not good because hate is a dark force and very destructive. Like you, I am shocked at the PR effort and it keeps reminding me of the OJ case.

Look, what credibility can anyone have if they lie and falsely accuse someone of the murder, and then later try to recant?

Amanda Knox: "I saw Patrik in flashes of blurred images. I saw him near the basketball court. I saw him at my front door. I saw myself cowering in the kitchen with my hands over my ears because in my head I could hear Meredith screaming."

This is the kind of BS that any jury will just disregard. It sounds more like hallucinations and an attempt of desperation to make up lies to cover up more lies. This girl is no clairvoyant.

I agree -- that's what it boils down to -- people lie for a reason -- to cover up something. Funny how the army of Amanda's PR campaign managed to rate your post as so bad that amazon hid it. Hilarious. This case won't be tried on the internet. the verdict is already in.

Daniel and Thomas, You continue to try to put lipstick on a pig and carry on as though Amanda Knox's innocence or guilt can be established on the internet. It has already been decided, in court after due process, that she is guilty. At some point I believe that you and her other supporters should try to respect that decision and then move on from there. If your arguments and interpretation of evidence had any merit, Knox would not have been found guilty. You are fond of accusing people of being crazy and ignorant and of making false statements or lying when they believe in her guilt. Yet where is the source of their information? Rather than being from Amanda and her aggressive PR firm, that information, by and large, can be traced back to what happened in court. Which source, I wonder, would an impartial observer think is the more reliable one?

I agree with you ER. By the way, it would be a pleasure to talk with you off line if you care to email me on reza -- at -- rezamusic -- dot -- com.

I have kept an open mind (and still do) throughout this process -- I wasn't even interested in it till I saw a couple of interviews with Amanda and I thought, heck, this girl is lying. Then I looked deeper. And now my conclusion (which could change upon more info) is that she is guilty. And all I've seen from her army of fans has been weak arguments like we saw here -- that since the police mentioned her boss she lied about him and slandered him of having committed a crime. Was she desperate and under pressure and fearful that she's being charged with something she was absolutely innocent of? I tend to think an intelligent person like her if she were truly innocent would never accuse another person as a murderer -- she'd weep and maintain her innocence no matter what -- she wouldn't lie -- she'd be crushed by the murder of her roommate and wouldn't be consumed with having erotic sex -- would not have lied about having called the police -- would not have lied in so many other occasions. This is a no brainer but there's a stupidity epidemic out there and it's easy to persuade a lot of people of anything you want with a good enough of a PR firm and a couple of flimsy books that paint a scenario with massive holes in it.

I do believe the Italian justice system is very different than the US. I do believe there's some prejudice in Italy against American arrogance which I believe all started in George Bush's era -- I have been to Italy many times and am very familiar with the mindset. But I don't buy these stories that she was completely set up to sensationalize a sick prosecutor and media. The prosecutor saw more than enough cause for concern. I'm still keeping an open mind and listening to all sides. What I do know is Knox is no angel.

Hi There. I read Amanda's book by watching her in many interviews and seeing the evidence and her statements and her lies. That's her book. Anything else she gets paid $3M to do and use as a tool to acquit herself, I'm not interested because I do not trust Amanda and the stories she makes. She's very unreliable, untrustworthy, and honestly, she's hard and spooky. I wouldn't want to be in the same room with her when she's on drugs and drunk - no telling what she'll do. She's vulgar (look up the rock throwing incident in a drunk party) and seems sleazy and she thinks she's beautiful -- I don't find her attractive -- well ya, parts of her body maybe but I don't think she has a beautiful face. The case has fishy written all over it. I think she's learned a big lesson and doesn't deserve 22 more years. A couple of years maybe IF she comes clean and starts remembering everything she's remembering perfectly well but is not telling otherwise she wouldn't need to say so many lies and act so inconsistently. The police were second class for sure but blaming them for her repeated lies and inconsistencies is a no go in my mind.

“Are you serious EG? Not a single thing you said has been verified by anyone!"

I am not EG's lawyer but I can see clearly that he does state a number of facts. Therefore your statement is false.

"The guilters will say something simplistic like "Amanda accused an innocent man" but they ignore a few relevant facts: 1. the police brought up Lumumba's name"

Wait a minute -- you get accused of murder -- you're taken to the police station -- Police brings up X's name -- you accuse him. Then you get caught lying and your excuse is "police brought up his name".

You see it's these kinds of things that the fans of Amanda are saying that's working in his disfavor. You can't repeat the same false things and hope that it comes true. This case against Amanda has "fishy" written all over it. It's FULL of inconsistencies and lies said by her when nobody forced her to lie. An innocent person would act entirely differently. See Sawyer interview and watch her body language. She says no - her body says yes.

“Amanda and Raffaele smoked some pot."

How do you know they didn't do any lines or hash or consume other drugs?

Raffaele had a history of it.

"Guede was not their supplier. They did not know Guede. Amanda's older Italian law student flatmates Laura and Filomena did supply Meredith and Amanda with pot."

And who supplied Raffaele his pot and cocaine? After so many lies it's hard to believe anything Amanda says. She's ruined her credibility.

read:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com

Reza,

This about the rent money was, I think, just speculation, but it did go missing that night and was never found.

Well, whether Knox murdered that night or not, she's certainly proven to be more than a little vile in the way she's openly taunted and antagonized the Kerchers -- i.e., asking them to take her to Meredith's grave and also refusing their lawyer's request to remove highly offensive photos of Meredith on Amanda's site unless the Kerchers personally contacted her. Good God.

"All three were heavy drug users at the time. Guede was one of their drug suppliers and known to them."

Absolutely makes sense.

"Sollecito and Knox invited Guede over. Nobody knows for sure, but there may have been some attempt at a prank or attempt by Knox of getting even with Meredith for some perceived slight."

Makes sense. Have the drug dealer bug the roommate whom I read was a brilliant good girl and not a mess like Knox.

"There have been suggestions that there may have been an argument that got out of hand after Knox or one of the other two stole Meredith's rent money."

Interesting. Is there any evidence of this?

"Who can say what the motives were of three rather twisted and depraved people?"

Never rule out jealousy. That is a very common heavy one. And of course when drugs are involved people can get vicious and stupid.

"You can find better information and analysis on this by visiting this "hate site": http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php

or this one: http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/

A site, by the way, is deemed to be a "hate site" by the PR machine if it takes the view that Knox and Sollecito are guilty.

Also, if you believe in guilt, you are automatically a "hater." "

That's unfortunate - and in the stupidity epidemic I guess it doesn't take much to gather an army and have them repeat a lie in hope of it becoming true. I don't know if Amanda killed Meredith but I sense she is guilty to a certain extent -- and a convicted liar.

Extradition

http://www.scotsman.com/news/comment-us-faces-embarrassment-over-knox-case-1-3289738

Thanks for the info. If she was drugged and drunk then she could have. Every criminal starts with no criminal background.

By the way, what is your theory of what actually happened. I'd appreciate hearing your thought. How did A&R and the African man got acquainted?

Do you think these two drugged drugged youngsters (R even had history of coke use so God knows what drugs they actually used) decided to take some toys from R's knife collection and have some erotic sex fun? (I'm reminded of the comment in the lingerie shop). And that mixed with jealousy and antagonism and going went tough and it got out of hand?

"But the only reason it is a very very complex case is because people are trying so hard to make an innocent person guilty."

Daniela,

It is over. Amanda Knox has been convicted. Her appeal was rejected. Yet you continue to carry on as though that never happened. You continue to carry on as though her fate will be decided on the internet.

At this stage, it seems pointless to me to any longer debate the evidence. It has already been debated and decided on by the people who matter: that is, the jurists in a court of law. They decided that your version of events and your version of the evidence do not hold water.

The "Justice in Perugia" site was set up by people close to Knox. It is no more of a reliable source of information than Knox's slanderous book and its easily proven lies.

For anyone here who would like to know why the case against Amanda Knox was so strong, read:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Main_Page

"So they are examining ridiculous things like when A and R turned off their phones."

There's nothing ridiculous about that, especially in this case where this action was actually unusual. If Amanda was innocent everything about this case would be simpler, far simpler, she wouldn't have to lie. Nobody should be blamed for Amada's lies but herself and the only thing that'll help her is to come clean - fully clean - and not rely on a PR engine or public opinion etc. to set her free.

The LIAR review is tiresome [to you] because it points to a fact. Amanda lied about her boss. We have lies vs. Amanda's expensive PR engine with all her friends who 1* the best book out there because the author doesn't buy their sugar coated version of reality.

I'm not saying she killed Meredith. Where would they run to? How could such an easily identifiable girl become a fugitive in Italy? All I'm saying is the fact that they didn't run away doesn't mean anything, in my opinion. Plus, if the break in was a set up they could have thought in their lame minds the police is going to believe it and just charge the African guy. They never thought they could get identified as having been involved.

EG says:

As all the world by now knows, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito cannot win in court. Instead, they, Knox's family and the Knox PR machine have resorted to propagating lies and distortions with the help of PR thugs who are not above browbeating people into accepting their version of what passes for the truth.

That "truth" and Thomas Mininger's "truth" as seen above was an utter failure in court. Knox's and Sollecito's high-priced lawyers failed miserably in their efforts to have them found innocent.

It is quite easy to know when Thomas Mininger and one of the other PR thugs are lying or distorting basic facts. All a person has to do is to check his "facts" against the facts here, in this section entitled "Myths Debunked":

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Myths_debunked

A few minutes' reading will reveal that what Thomas says about Guede is conjecture and simply one of several talking points cooked up by the Marriott PR firm so as to present the illusion that Knox and Sollecito are innocent.

Nadeau outlines the details and the media interest, on both sides of the Atlantic, to this case. She explains the efforts by Knox's parents hiring a US public relations firm to help promote a positive, innocent image of their daughter, and details the top Italian defense attorneys procured for the defense of Knox and Sollecito. Despite all the strenuous efforts on behalf of the defense, after a lengthy trial lasting almost one year, Knox and Sollecito were found unanimously guilty by the Italian court.

Insightful & you can't beat the source - Nadeau is bilingual, attended the trial in person & writes for NEWSWEEK., April 28, 2010 By E. N.

This review is for book: Angel Face: Sex, Murder and the Inside Story of Amanda Knox (Paperback)

During the trial of Amanda Knox and her knife-collecting "boyfriend" of 6 days (Raffaele Sollecito), there were only 2 BILINGUAL reporters in the courtroom covering the proceedings for American readers:

1) Barbie Nadeau (of Newseek); &

2) Andrea Vogt (of the Seattle Post Intelligencer).

Unfortunately, the REST of the American media outlets (including CBS News & CNN) were content to rely on 'talking-points' (and 'talking heads') issued directly from Knox's 'million-dollar' Seattle PR firm, without ONCE bothering to challenge its claims, or send a BILINGUAL reporter to Italy to cover the proceedings first-hand.

It comes as no surprise then, that Barbie Nadeau's book is the FIRST 'fair & balanced' accounting of what really went on during the trial, and behind the scenes. She is the FIRST journalist to 'call out' the PR team hired by Amanda's parents to manipulate media coverage in the USA.

I think many Americans will be surprised by this book - not only in terms of the quantity & quality of the evidence inculpating Amanda, but in terms of the degree to which US audiences were "kept in the dark" about this evidence.

I couldn't put this book down.

http://www.amazon.com/Angel-Face-Murder-Inside-Amanda-ebook/product-reviews/B003AY9LJO/ref=cm_cr_pr_btm_link_2?ie=UTF8&filterBy=addFiveStar&pageNumber=2&showViewpoints=0&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

Mr. Taylor, you have read many books about this case but apparently you have not read one true reliable source: trial transcript, the 3 motivation reports and Aamanda's attorney's appeal documents. All these books are just silliness for written for idiots. If you read the real documents and new the real facts you would know that AK is as guilty as sin.

You would know that, based on the dynamics of the event, Guede could have NOT possibly committed the crime alone. Two or more people were present.

If you knew the facts you would know that the DNA of Raffaele on the clasp (1300 RFU's) is an enormous amount that could only be made by pressing very hard on it. It is absolutely impossible that you can get so much DNA but contamination of dust particles. Also, if you use some logic, you would understand that if no DNA of Raffaele was found in the room, even if the clasp was found 40 days later it could have not been contaminated. (I know it's hard, but try to think about what I just wrote !!!!).

AK and RS had attorneys from the moment police believed that, after so many lies, they had something to do with the murder.

And soooooo much more.

1) If you knew more than 5% of this case you would know that more than one person committed the crime and that Guede was not alone in that room. Even Amanda's attorneys agree to that and for this reason they are trying to use the silliness of Aviello and Alessi.

2) Mignini is a great prosecutor that sends crooked politicians and mafiosi to jail.

The facts of this case can be known only if you:

1) spoke and read Italian.

2) read the over 1000 pages of 3 motivation reports, trial transcripts and Ghirga's appeal report.

3) stop reading media silliness and the Knox clan's stupidities.

It is well proven that Guede did not kill alone. Not even Ghirga believes this stupidity. If you had read the Massei report you would understand that based on the dynamics of the event he could have NOT possibly have been alone in that room.

The clasp had 1300 RFU of DNA belonging to Raffaele. Such a HUGE amount cannot be the result of contamination. It is impossible that such a HUGE amount of DNA could derive from dust particles. Every student of forensic science knows that

The 1300 RFU of DNA of Raffaele Sollecito on the bra clasp OBVIOUSLY has no nucleus. Only a blood cell or the root of hair, for example, has nucleus. It was skin cell from a person that pressed really hard on the clasp with his fingers. This is very elementary forensics. If you read the motivation report you will see that this issue is perfectly explained. Over 200 pages are dedicated to the DNA.

Amanda also admitted to consuming alcohol in one of her early police interviews.

It wasn't just pot.

Alcohol alone is enough to bring out tremendous aggression in people.

And if you think Amanda and Raffaele (who has a history of cocaine abuse) were only drinking and smoking weed, I think you're being naive.

They both began lying to police from the get go - nothing they say can be taken as truthful.

If they TELL you did weed and alcohol, there's a very good chance it's not the 'whole truth.'

"armchair TV "profiling"" is just a nonsense concept, the type promoted by Amanda's massive PR engine. I have looked into the evidence and arguments on both sides. It's hard to draw any conclusions. The American public seems to want an OJ style acquittal based on bad police process. That's reasonable. But I don't think that justifies calling this a witch hunt. While Amanda may not be the direct killer -- in fact I don't think she directly killed Meredith, she is no angel either, IMO. Imagine walking to your apartment and finding your roommate killed. How would you act? Multiply that by a 10 since T.M. is not a young innocent sensitive angelic girl. Amanda's reaction was FAR different just as her reaction in many other situations than that horrible interrogation which no one should ever go through -- just IMO.

And there's a stack of factors against Amanda that her "PR engine" likes to fool American public to believe they're not there. The amount of R's DNA on the bra was not miniscule. Based on the dynamics of the event, Guede could have not possibly committed the crime alone. Two or more people were present.

There are a lot of suspicious things about this case. It's a very very complex case and it'd be a lot simpler if people just told the truth. There are experts who ferociously argue both sides. All I know from a layman's perspective is, an innocent person would have acted a lot different from the moment she found out about the murder (if she wasn't involved) onwards. There wouldn't be all this "I don't know's" and "I don't remember's" for a girl as smart as Amanda. Naivity, confusion, etc., are all secondary to untruthfulness.

Watch Diane Sawyer's interview - minutes 18 - were you there ? she says no but her head nods in a "yes" fashion. This girl has liar written all over her. She lied about her boss *accusing him of murder* -- even her "fans" can't deny the fact that she did that. An innocent person would NEVER do that. Did she feel cornered by the cops and used that as an excuse? Being naive and stupid is no excuse for that. What about the knife? What about the bleach? What about the cut on Amanda's neck? What about x y z and more? There are so many unexplained things in this murder mystery and Amanda KNOWS EXACTLY what the truth is but she doesn't seem to be saying it.

An innocent person would FREAK at the scene of her roommate having been murdered. Oh, not to mention the staged break-in. I could believe the guy was a thief. Why was nothing taken? Why was the glass on top of the mess? Why was he not convicted of robbery? The break in seemed to have been staged. It doesn't take a rocket scientists to know Amanda is not telling the whole truth.

She's a smart girl with great memory. All those "I don't remember" and changed stories and using pressure as excuse are just bogus, in my opinion. I'm not saying she killed Meredith but it seems, having looked at all the evidence and watched many interviews etc., that she was not innocent. She is guilty of something but doesn't deserve 26 years. Did 4 - give her another couple of years and monitor her behavior. Italy is not like US where OJ Simpson got away with murder. Sure the evidence was mishandled but that doesn't constitute acquittal there. Again, 26 years is too much but this girl is scary and I wouldn't want to be in the same room with her alone especially when she's on drugs. I don't like her because she's a liar.

No, poor thing, never changed her story!!

Amanda is a horrible person AT LEAST because she slandered another person by falsely accusing him of murder. She's a convicted liar by the way of evidence. You can sugar coat it all you want but it is what it is. Her body language says it too.

A person who speaks the truth would act way differently. She's not telling the whole story, IMO.

She'd be MUCH better off if she comes out and puts her REAL cards on the table, surrender, tell the whole story. She'll get an early release. Having public support behind her won't help because public is caught on not having had the system that falsely acquitted OJ of murder -- ignoring how horrible she is (imagine if someone accused YOU of murder like she accused her boss).

3 FEB 2014 - Amanda Knox is Guilty

The Amanda Knox case may be very complicated because they've lied again and again and when called out they've said it's due to confusion. Rafael said he didn't know which night police was referring to -- how many nights a person was killed in?

Amanda says she wasn't home -- the interviewer asked her again - she said no but her head nodded forward.

She would have got a much lighter sentence by going clean. She didn't. She lied.

If she wasn't home and showed up in the morning why did she rush to buy bleach and bleach the place? An innocent person who'd come home and find her roommate dead would immediately call the police. Amanda didn't. She went and bought bleached and started cleaning. Come on, it's WAY too obvious she was involved in the murder.

<snipped since I changed my mind> ... reduce their sentence ONLY if they tell the truth and stop making a fool of people by lying through their teeth. Amanda is clearly a liar -- you see her videos, it's obvious.

"I also have children, and inflicting a sentence of 25 and 28 years on two young people is emotionally very tough."

http://www.smh.com.au/world/amanda-knoxs-judge-stands-by-guilty-verdict-20140202-hvaup.html#ixzz2sDO5wtu3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lgnw9EM_qbg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7pN4uQNIaE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbgZZ5TjBNU

Raffaele Sollecito http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcGfs-eSlxY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrS3k3MvaGs

min 18 - dead give away? She says no she wasn't there but her head nods as a yes!!

documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2Rzfml3HDc

31 Jan 2014 - Amanda Knox

Perhaps an innocent person when appearing on TV would cry and say she had nothing to do with it and not plead to specialists who know the extradiction process to help her not get extradicted (which was my impression of what she said when she referred to specialists who know the process).

Also see http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Main_Page

I don't like Amanda Knox. I tried to be objective -- read lots of things about her murder case and watched her interviews. I am in the camp who thinks she's guilty. Her family is counting on a US style court system which got OJ Simpson off the hook because Johnny Cochran (now dead) was such a hotshot lawyer and the police made some mistakes. In Italy Amanda was found guilty -- a lot of Americans are "supporting" her but if you read the case details there are so many things that shout guilt -- perhaps not as the murderer per se (a guy is already imprisoned as the key murderer) but as a participant. For example she went early morning to the shop - waited till it opened and rushed to the detergent section and bought bleach!! Many changed stories - lack of sincerity - totally different behavior than you'd expect from a truly innocent person. How guilty she is I don't know but I do believe the Italian court acted properly in convicting her. Of course the prosecutor was vicious - they all are - that's their job - and the evidence collection was sloppy but there's more than enough knowns in the plot to point to her being guilty. Here are some interesting comments posted online about it:

UPDATE: Since then, based on the evidence I've read I am convinced she's guilty of murder.

OTHER MATERIAL

http://abcnews.go.com/US/amanda-knoxs-parents-angry-stunned-guilty-verdict/story?id=22305362

Zuckerberg David

The knife with DNA evidence was bleached by Amanda and Solecitto (that was in Solecittos apartment), their alibis never matched up (changed a number of times), she lied to the police and tried to frame an innocent man, witness testimony that was mistakenly ignored in acquittal (shop owner sees them buying bleach early hours, many other testimonies), cleaning up of blood and footprints with bleach before the police arrived, a bloodied footprint in rug that matches Solecitto's more than Rudy's (see evidence), .... there is enough evidence here alone to put her in jail with a lack of DNA evidence on bleached knife.

There's also the false break in, Amanda's fib about Meredith always locking her door when housemate claims she always left it unlocked, Amanda's knowledge of the crime when she joked to Meredith's friends in police custody before the crime details were released, come on America listen to the rest of the world's press too.

Really, she's innocent huh?

Amanda changed her story over 9 times throughout the questioning period.

Her fingerprints were on the murder weapon, but the evidence got thrown out because the investigators at the scene mishandled it, making it inadmissible

She stated she was in the house when Meredith was killed and had to cover her ears to block the screaming.

Her boyfriend changed his story in the second interview and claimed Amanda left his house at 9pm till 1am and he had no idea where she was, in contrast to her story in which she claimed she spent the entire night at her boyfriends house.

There was a staged break in, STILL nobody can answer why a random rogue burglar would return to the murder scene hours later and stage a break in / move Meridiths body. PLUS, if he was a burglar, why was nothing stolen?

There were two different sets of blood covered footprints found in the flat.

Both Amandas and her boyfriends phones were turned off from 9pm and turned back on at 6 am. Amanda stated they fell asleep at 11pm and awoke 10 am the next day...

The boyfriend claimed to have called the police when they found blood in the flat, phone records show this call was never made, he didn't call the police until after random police officers turned up at the house after finding Merediths phone.

Amanda falsely accused her boss of assaulting Meredith the night she was murdered. She claimed to have witnessed this.

Oh, yeah. She's as innocent as a lamb.

Watch Diane Sawyer's interview - minutes 18 - were you there ? she says no but her head nods in a "yes" fashion. This girl has liar written all over her. She's a smart girl with great memory. All those "I don't remember" and changed stories and using pressure as excuse are just bogus, in my opinion. I'm not saying she killed Meredith but it seems, having looked at all the evidence and watched many interviews etc., that she was not innocent. She is guilty of something but doesn't deserve 26 years. Did 4 - give her another couple of years and monitor her behavior. Italy is not like US where OJ Simpson got away with murder. Sure the evidence was mishandled but that doesn't constitute acquittal there. <snip> this girl is scary and I wouldn't want to be in the same room with her alone especially when she's on drugs. I don't like her because she's a liar [and a murderer].

Robert Page

Mr. Knox, the law will decide if "she's going back over there". I studied the entire case which included the witness transcripts, pictures of the physical evidence, etc., and there is no doubt Knox cleaned up the murder scene, staged a phone break-in, and is guilty of murder! The witness store owner who saw early the morning, was already familiar with seeing her before, and testified he was certain it was Knox waiting before the store opened and headed for cleaning supplies section the early morning after the murder is as powerful a piece of circumstantial evidence as one will ever see in a murder case! Standing alone, it appears innocent, but when you look at all the evidence and Knox's busted alibi about sleeping in that morning then you know that heading for cleaning supplies the early morning after the murder, showering with blood and old feces, an open door and not being overly alarmed, claiming to be fetching a mop to return and clean up a leak at Sollecito's apartment where a Knife with Knox's DNA is found on the handle with the victim's DNA which the defense obviously claimed wasn't reliable because of size, Sollecito claiming that the victim's DNA might be on that knife because he accidentally cut her cooking, the bogus alibis where Sollecito and Knox change stories numerous times incriminating one another as to time and place before during and after the murder, there is no possible way this is any coincidence!

But, if that alone doesn't convince you, study all the testimony and physical evidence and you will have zero doubt that Knox and Sollecito were so culpable of the murder of a young woman who was left to bleed to death (it's there contrary to claims "they have no evidence on Knox in the room and/or the evidence is botched or contaminated or a result of Knox living there"; see luminol barefoot print of Knox at Meredith's door, Knox's DNA and Meredith's DNA in Filomena's alleged "break-in:

Rep 176 (L1 in the inspection report) was a Luminol trace found to have the victim's DNA, located on the floor near the window..[18] Rep 177 (L2) was between the door and the window, containing a Knox/Victim mixed profile.[19]

It's all there, don't read the media brain dead opinion and sensational short snipet nonsense about "contaminated and botched and joke of Italian legal system that had it in for Knox". Just read it!

Guilty!

If the final appeal upholds this order and the original trial conviction of Knox, the United States has legal obligation to extradite Knox back to Italy to serve her time along with Sollecito and Guede. Only at that point will justice be remotely served. It would be virtually unprecedented for the United States not to extradite a murder conviction in these type of circumstances. The claims of "they don't have double jeopardy" is bugaboo. Knox has only been tried once, This case is making it's way through the 3rd level of the appeals process with the 4th and final level of the appeals process upcoming. The first appeal from the trial wasn't another trial, it was an appeal with orders to review the trial and aspects of the trial. The results of that first appeal was not another trial, it was an appeal with findings.

Read Knox's recent quote regarding her hope the United States refuses to extradite her:

"I'll technically be considered a fugitive. I'm definitely not going back to Italy willingly. They'll have to catch me and pull me back kicking and screaming into a prison that I don't deserve to be in. I will fight for my innocence."

And read this Knox statement right after the convictions vacated by the first appeal were reinstated:

"Having been found innocent before, I expected better from the Italian justice system. The evidence and accusatory theory do not justify a verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. My family and I have suffered greatly from this wrongful persecution."

Notice how she makes a legalize statement about "evidence [does] not justify a verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt".

Now, anyone who knows they are innocent isn't going to make a statement like that. They are going to say: I'm innocent, I've always been innocent, and I'll go to my grave and beyond knowing I'm innocent and wrongfully accused", and "innocent people are wrongfully accused and convicted all the time".

Instead, she's basically saying "they didn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt so as to justify my guilty verdict".

Also note that she claims "having been found innocent before", when in fact she's never been found "innocent". The first appeals court made findings of evidentiary reliability errors by the trial court to an extent where they ordered her release. Innocent means "guiltless/blameless".

In spite of all the issues around the credibility of the physical evidence, she's going to be dogged for eternity about her "confessing" that her boss did the murder. According to Amanda, her parents, and the PR firm they hired, Amanda never once waivered from the truth that she had nothing to do with it, and that she was the victim. Unfortunately, she did waiver from the truth when she confessed that her boss killed Meredith. She said (and still says) she was "confused" by all the "mean" police when she did that. After it was established her boss had a solid alibi for the time of the murder,It took her two weeks for her to get "unconfused" about it. Innocent people never fork over scapegoats. They never waiver. It's hard to believe that someone innocent of murder would "have" to lie because the police "confused" them.

There is no way this girl is innocent. Her and her boyfriend put murder fantasy pictures online before this happened. They display sick and perverted ideas for pleasure, that is not normal. Then this murder happened, no, if you truly followed this story like I have there is no way anyone in their right mind would find her innocent.

Zuckerberg David

The knife with small amount of DNA evidence was bleached (after appearing in Solecitto's apartment from Amanda's), Amanda's and Solecitto's alibis did not match, the false accusation against an innocent man by Amanda, the false break in (someone had to have let Rudy in, he could not have staged a false break in), the bloodied footprint in rug that matches Solecitto's more than Rudy's, the footprints in hallway that was bleached away and later turned up in forensics, the testimony evidence - Amanda's prior knowledge when she mentioned Meredith's cut throat to Meredith's friends whilst in police custody, the eyewitness account of Amanda and boyfriend getting bleach in the early hours, the witness testimony of the 'blood-curdling' screams, the witness account of Amanda and Solecitto outside apartment in early hours. The evidence for Amanda ... a lack of DNA evidence on a bleached knife.

Robert Page

She wasn't subjected to double jeopardy! The appeal was not a judgment of innocence, it was but one step in the appeals process which includes one final appeal from this convictions reinstatement.

Double Jeopardy requires an innocent trial court finding based and appeals acquittal based on insufficiency of the evidence to go the jury, not based on the weight of the evidence before the jury, and a break in the chain of the appeals process. You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Knox's trial court guilty verdict was vacated based on the weight of the evidence, not the sufficiency of the evidence to reach the jury or triers of fact!

U.S. Supreme Court

Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31 (1982)

Tibbs v. Florida

No. 81-5114

Argued March 2, 1982

Decided June 7, 1982

457 U.S. 31

CERTI0RARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

Syllabus

Held: Where the Florida Supreme Court's reversal of petitioner's murder and rape convictions at a jury trial was based on the weight of the evidence, a retrial is not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment

Knox is very guilty and if the final appeals court upholds the only trial court's conviction, there is no double jeopardy issue in this case because the one appeals guilty verdict vacation was based on the weight not sufficiency of the evidence. The United States is obligated by treaty to extradite Knox if the final appeal upholds her conviction. She's already been told of that possibility and talking about "I hope I'm not extradited because they'll have to hunt me down".

My good gosh; I've gone through some of these comments and am stunned. She is a murderer and has been found guilty now twice. Why did she try to frame an innocent man? Do we really believe the Italian police had a policy of beating fake infornation out of people? Why did she change stories to the police? Why her odd behaviour? Why did she or her boyfriend have no other alibis on the night of the murder? How convenient. The police found that she couldn't have been killed by just one person - so where are the real murderers if not her and her strange boyfriend? Who cares about what an American court of law would have found the verdict to be; I've got news for you guys... she was in Italy at the time. It's not the Taliban in Afghanistan there, it's a rich country with a professional police force. You guys should really stop clinging on to any hope just because she comes from America. She deserves to be forcably shipped back to Italy and have the key thrown away. Stop supporting murderers, liars, cheats!

Theories may be wrong, but facts don't lie. Kercher IS dead and Amanda Knox and her buddies ARE jointly responsible for the murder. Each participant's role may be questionable, but Italy's lack of capital punishment makes it possible to reach criminal verdict based on preponderance of evidence rather than unambiguous evidence. In other words, suspects who choose to remain silent throw the case in the hands of the prosecutors.

this woman confeses to doing drugs and living the wild life! her boyfriends dna was found on this dead woman bra strap! how many men move bras around? my belief this was a jelousy thing! amanda knox and her boyfriend stood with police present and the ambulance to take there dead friend out of the home and stood there kissing? kissing? amanda knox says i would be willing to take that lie detector test! why did you not take that lie detector test to clear you the first time? let us count the days until amanda knox takes that polygraph!

"First off, I love the title of this article. Second, I love it when I have an opinion and it turns out to be the same opinion as someone super smart like Alan Dershowitz. It was obvious from the get-go "whodunit" in this case. I lived for many years in Italy, I speak Italian fluently, I followed the case from day 1 in Italian (where they actually reported all the facts, not just those favorable to Amanda Knox), I have been to Perugia. I think to understand this crime you have to understand the context. Perugia is a vibrant, yet essentially hidebound and dull little university city. Kids drink and do drugs to convince themselves they're cool, as did Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, and to pass the time. The lack of motive has been probably the biggest stumbling block in this case, but the fact is, to two spoiled and valueless kids like Knox and Sollecito, killing Mez or not killing her amounted to the same thing. Mez took money out of the ATM that day, money that was never found, and to two kids who grew up believing the world was their oyster, that money was the only motive they needed to extinguish a human life. Rudy Guede was different. A small-time pusher, an adopted child, a compulsive liar, Guede was only at the cottage that night because he provided Knox and Sollecito with drugs. He had no link with Meredith. Raffaele Sollecito is the classic what they call in Italian, rimbambito, a dork, his head so far up his behind he has to wear his glasses on his tonsils. All he knew or cared about was getting high and getting laid. In my opinion, when he says he doesn't know what happened that night, it is partially true. Amanda Knox was born without a moral compass. It has been shown time and again that if you lie enough, and the lies are outrageous enough, people will believe you. This is what has happened in this case and it's a shame because Americans are good people. They have unfortunately succumbed to the bad habit of ignorance. If this had happened in America, all the people proclaiming Knox's innocence would be demanding her blood." [ persephone67]

STAGED BREAK IN

"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill

"The climber visited the original cottage in Perugia and scaled the wall to reach the window.

He used the bars to lift his body weight up and the experiment fails to show how he could have entered through the window with big pieces of glass still firmly fixed in the frame, without injuring himself somehow. Without the bars it would be extremely difficult to heave your body high enough to reach the latch and open the window. So this experiment raises more questions than it answers.

No matter if possible or not, this window was a bad choice to stage the break-in, because it was the least accessible point of entry and the most exposed one to the view of curious neighbours and passing cars.

There is also no explanation as to why no glass was found under Filomena's window after such an entry. The only logical explanation is that the window was smashed from the inside with the shutters closed.

I would also expect Meredith Kercher to have been alarmed by the noise the smashing of the window and the falling rock onto the floor would have caused. The struggle most likely would have started in Filomena's bedroom then, not in hers.

This whole scenario is absurd. "

BLOOD

"It was definitely not menstrual blood. First, menstrual blood contains cells from the uterine lining which fact Stefanoni, the biologist, would have noticed in connection with testing the blood and AFAIK no such testimony was heard during the trial.

Aida Colantone, one of the interpreters and translators, testified that AK told her that her period had started on the morning of Sunday, Nov 4th. She also testified about the scratch on AK's neck which is one piece of evidence pointing toward an altercation having taken place"

(Meredith Kercher, a British university exchange student from Coulsdon, London, was murdered in Perugia, Italy, on 1 November 2007)

(about EG's remark to Thomas Mininger)

I felt the same way EG. When reason and rationality run out the PR campaign resorts to name calling (LOL). Did you see the video of the Seattle judge (founding member of the friends of Amanda group) giving a speech about Amanda. It was funny -- he was like, she's our girl, my daughter has known her, she can't be guilty and among his criticisms was why was the semen not tested. I guess they didn't need to since they had enough evidence against G anyway. And he conveniently didn't say a word about all the evidence that DOES EXIST. The tribal attitude was the interesting part -- because she's one of our girls, she grew up and went to high school here, etc., she can't be guilty.

Doesn't every criminal start somewhere and have a first offense? Nobody is born with a criminal history! You're right and if you see that site it's full of generalities - like the PR brigade's statements and rhetoric like "there's no evidence". It's very sad but the more people start thinking for themselves instead of falling for the propaganda, the weaker the case of the dark side with their incessant promotion of lies.

I had a full review of the evidence again today -- it absolutely overwhelmingly points to guilt.

SELECTIVE MEMORY

He also says he knew the shoe foot prints weren't his "because those weren't the shoes I wore the night of the murder." He really says this too. He doesn't say it was - because he didn't do the murder - but just that he knew those weren't the shoes he was wearing. And it's not that he doesn't wear them ever - he was wearing them in the interrogation which is why the police took notice of them. Weanwhile he can't remember if Amanda was at his place that night - that his father did not call at 11pm - at what time and for how long he went shoping that day -- or wheather he and Amanda were seperate or together the whole night, or even exactly which night the murder took place , BUT he remembers what shoes he wasn't wearing the night Meredith was killed.

"EG says:

Janet,

Why not simply do the right thing and stop being a party to this morally bankrupt attempt to manipulate people's opinions? Knox and Sollecito are twice-convicted felons. They will, within a year, most likely have their convictions upheld by the Supreme Court, and then, for Knox, the extradition process will begin.

It's very nearly over now. What is the point of continuing with this pretence and fakery? Is it so important to sell a few more copies of their libellous blood-money books that should never have been written to begin with?

Oh. So your site above that has been put together by Knox's PR people contains only the truth, whereas the one that it is closely made to resemble (http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Main_Page) is "nothing but lies," to borrow from your rhetoric. Would it by any chance consist of the same sort of truth that the Knox PR beast has been putting out these past few years? "

~~~~~~~

If the leader of this campaign is a convicted murderer who tried to get away with murder by lying through her teeth, fabricating a false crime scene, etc., you can not expect the team to be any more truthful.

How much were they paid? I would be surprised if the expensive PR campaign didn't have a forensic expert !! And this is what he has to say:

That Rudy "was very upset that Meredith caused him to kill her". SAY WHAT??? I've heard a lot of outrageous things in this case but this is one of the worst!

Catch this: that Knox couldn't have been involved "basically it takes a very strong person to do this"!!! (or a few not so strong people)! And he's ignoring a mountain of circumstantial evidence. And that's why he's not a prosecutor, detective, investigator, but a specialist who sees only a small part of the picture.

Response to Daniela:

"She never confessed."

That was her mistake. Her life would have been better and she would have said a LOT less lies to cover up the last ones.

"Coerced confessions"

You have NO IDEA what coerced confessions are. Search this for "torture":

You have a girl who's pissing off the interrogators time and again by lies after lies and I don't remembers. It was wrong for them to tap her in the back of the head -- but nobody tortured her -- she considers calling her a liar as a form of abuse but she was and is a liar.

"poor police work"

Doesn't change the overwhelming evidence against her. There's more to evidence than DNA -- in many murders there's no DNA dropped at all. I can't believe people are falling for the powerful PR to brain wash Americans based on tribal sentiments! Anybody with half a brain who digs deep into the facts without going for the rhetoric and lies can see so clearly these people were involved.

"But the reality is that her so-called "accusation" of Lumumba just proves she is innocent. She had no idea who killed Meredith so she agreed with the police."

Are you out of your mind Daniela? An innocent person would NEVER do that. And then listen to her justification of it -- that she was confused between what was imaginary and reality? She's not schizophrenic - she's a liar. And why did she wait so long after she remembered the reality while an innocent man was behind bars? PLEASE don't try to rationalize this mess.

"It had Amanda's DNA and starch on it."

Again, more lies of the PR engine. It had Amanda's DNA and Meredith's DNA on it. But it's simpler to assume there's no DNA evidence at all. Just go by circumstantial evidence. They holler guilt.

"Aside from the evidence - it is so absurdly illogical to think that not just one person but two people"

It is believed by experts that it was very very likely that more than one person was involved. A ton of arguments for that. Unless the killer was a kung fu 8th degree black belt and Rudy wasn't. And Meredith was a tough strong girl.

"no past history of sociopathic behavior"

Are you kidding? rock throwing - drug use - narcotics - alcohol - knives - obsession with kinky sex - etc. - plus there's always a first for every criminal.

"those are all made up stories"

No they are not. I've looked them up in multiple sources. The stuff you and Thomas are saying are made up fictions -- but then lying by Amanda's team would not be surprising. I can't believe you think the overwhelming evidence against her simply doesn't exist or is just "made up stories".

"Based on this evidence, in America, if she were not an attractive young woman, if she were an ordinary person charged, on the basis of this evidence, she would be convicted. It would be serving life imprisonment or even worse, perhaps the death penalty in the United States." Famous Civil-Rights Lawyer, Harvard Professor, Alan Dershowitz

There's an overwhelming body of evidence against Amanda and Rafa which some folks in American like to ignore due to nationalistic patriotic and tribal motives that she's one of us and can't be guilty. Anybody who takes the time to look at the evidence (especially circumstantial evidence) will be able to cut through the massive expensive PR campaign of Amanda Knox to win public opinion and see the facts for themselves. I maintained an open mind but it became a no brainer and very obvious that these two love birds were involved in the murder of Meredith.

mixed blood in the bathroom

sollecito's dna in the room

the dna on the murder knife

knox confessed [she was at the house that night] and fingered lumbumba

witness saw knox buying bleach

sollecito backtracked on knox alibi

an eyewitness puts them at the place and time

staged break-in

guede testimony

bizarre behavior

knox lies about telephone timeline

bloody footprints ``compatible'' with knox and sollecito

knox desk lamp left on the floor of the murder room

in the USA they would be on death row

lucky for them they were tried by the lax italians

Repeating a non fact, the same lies, over and over again doesn't make it become true.The Amanda PR machine is obsessed with reciting this "there's no evidence" motto. It's surely not ignorance. It's a lie. Look what he says about the evidence:

"Based on this evidence, in America, if she were not an attractive young woman, if she were an ordinary person charged, on the basis of this

evidence, she would be convicted. It would be serving life imprisonment

or even worse, perhaps the death penalty in the United States." Famous Civil-Rights Lawyer, Harvard Professor, Alan Dershowitz

"And he's ignoring a mountain of circumstantial evidence. And that's why he's not a prosecutor, detective, investigator, but a specialist who sees only a small part of the picture."

Well said, Reza. You hit upon a very good point. This is the strategy of the Knox hired specialists and experts as well as the Knox PR brigade. The overall picture, the totality of the evidence is overwhelming and shows conclusive involvement of Knox and Sollecito. So, faced with this, they have to resort to chipping away at some small part of the overall picture. And often what they do chip away at is one of the minor points, without which they still would have been convicted.

And as for their PR experts and specialists that appear on TV or at rallies, some have been more than a little pathetic. For example, Steve Moore and Judge Heavy, both of whom have a poor grasp of the evidence and have said some rather stupid things or just told outright lies.

There seem to be a lot of ambulance chasers who want to make money from the PR circus wagon while they can, before it runs off the road as it eventually will. And that's what this is all about for most of them: money. There are of course exceptions, but, by and large, the pursuit of true justice is not what they are motivated by. "These rants by folks burning with witch hunt fever provide the opportunity to supply real analysis by forensic professionals with real names."

Thomas,

Yet again you write as though Amanda and her knife-loving, animal-porn connoisseur boyfriend were being tried on the internet. They've already been tried and been found guilty in a court of law. Perhaps it's time you respected that.

What a silly thing to speak of a witch hunt. You really do enjoy trying to incite people into forming a picture of poor, persecuted Saint Amanda being burned at the stake by ignorant medieval peasants brandishing pitchforks and torches.

There was never any witch hunt. The judges didn't arrive at their verdict based on what people said on the internet or wrote in tabloids, for example. "I have yet to hear any compelling evidence that Knox and Sollecito were involved."

Are you kidding? That is so because you're either deaf or are holding both ears with your hands on top of wearing ear plugs. But you can use your eyes and read the evidence. There's a massive amount of evidence against them - you can't keep repeating a lie and hope that it becomes true no matter how many thumbs up the PR engine of Amanda gives you. As the famed lawyer said:

"Based on this evidence, in America, if she were not an attractive young

woman, if she were an ordinary person charged, on the basis of this

evidence, she would be convicted. It would be serving life imprisonment

or even worse, perhaps the death penalty in the United States."

Famous Civil-Rights Lawyer, Harvard Professor, Alan Dershowitz

Facts don't matter -- there's a stupidity epidemic out there -- combine it with tribalism -- and disregard for truth and viciousness of the criminals -- and you get what we're witnessing.

I relied on my own research. I quoted Alan because he said it so well but I'm not blindly following what he said. The fact is the evidence is very strong. It's a shame how much fiction being promoted.

rudy said he was in toilette and heard scream

what if he's right?

what if they got into a fight (A&M) - then the gang tried to bully meredith and rudy raped her (?) - then he went to toilette and those evil two finished meredith thinking they will blame it on rudy

my guess is Rafa killed her - to be macho / impress his new lover / by getting rid of her enemy ... and he was the knife man - with a knife which they threw away later.

so amanda is right in saying she didn't kill her

and rudy is right in saying he didn

rafa is the man

however all three were participants and deserve the sentence they got.

do you buy this?

ALSO

- someone wrote there were other witnesses that they were in the square that night. i thought there was just one witness - that heroin addict old man - no ?

- someone wrote amanda was nervous as they flushed the toilette b/c that was her way of making them think someone else was there but she was relieved once they found the crap down in the bowl. Do you know of any references for this?

- amanda had done staged breakins before so the breakin was her idea...

what a failed plot by idiotic drugged minds...

THE FOLLOWING IS FROM AN INTERNET POSTING -- I DO NOT KNOW IF ALL THE FACTS ARE ACTUALLY FACTS. PLEASE DON'T TAKE THEM AS FACTS.