Pages

Friday, March 23, 2018

TJMK's renewed aggression against Amanda Knox - Overview

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/knoxs_war_of_aggression_against_italy_questions_for_to_nail_her_1/

Whether Raffaele Sollecito ever denied Amanda Knox an alibi is debateable. First there seems to be confusion as to what the word means. Is it someone vouching where the accused was instead of at the crime? Or is it a story that is absolutely consistent about minute details that nobody can remember anyhow?

The most important thing Raffaele has ever said about the matter is that he would not have been charged with Meredith Kercher's murder if he had not been Amanda's alibi.

In talking about his false alibis (which the Marasca-Bruno Report insisted was a failed alibi instead of a false alibi,) it mostly comes down to the statements the police had him sign on the night of November 6-7, 2007. The inconsistencies in those statement should be enough to indicate he was coerced into signing them.

That Raffaele asked the court for a half a million dollars of damages for being falsely convicted of murder had more to do with that being the limit he could ask than whether he valued his worth at that amount. His legal fees amounted to much more than half a million dollars, and those were the main damages he sought compensation for.

Also, whether TJMK thinks he never gave Amanda an alibi, he has always said she was innocent of the crimes they were charged with. That's not something TJMK can interpret away.

Amanda has spoken against the campaign of hate against Italy that she never asked for. Just the same, TJMK seems to think that defending herself aginst false accusations is the same thing as aggression against all Italy instead of those who make these false claims.

Whether TJMK likes it or not, there are a lot of questions about the treatment Amanda endured during the interrogation of the night of November 6-7, 2007. Her First Memorandum shows the confusion that interrogation left her in. Her confusion was extreme enough that she didn't realize herself the significance of the abuse she wrote about. She thought it was normal for the police to act that way.

It was the police who kept asking about Patrick Lumumba when she said she didn't meet him and go with him to her cottage. Amanda had nothing to do with a drug dealer the police claimed they got evidence on because of a phone number that was not in her phone. Where are the video recordings proving that she lied about the police and the prosecutor? The landlady of the cottage where she stayed lost value in the cottage because of the murder and because of the drug infested area where it was located. What did Amanda have to do with those things. Demonizations in her book? What about her right to express what was done to her? Why is it only that what was done unto her is used against her?

According to TJMK, the media would like to nail Amanda, but supposedly simple public relations prevents the entire media from publishing what they think of her. If the facts are there, why do the news reporters need Amanda's permission to publish them? Why does TJMK need Amanda to answer questions about these supposed facts in order for the truth to be proclaimed?

And this isn't the first time TJMK has published articles purporting to "nail" Amanda Knox for the lies they ascribe to her. See my rebuttal series at:

http://bourgoisviews.blogspot.com/search/label/Legends%20of%20Ms.%20Chimera

TJMK's renewed aggression against Amanda Knox - First Load of Rubbish

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/knoxs_war_of_aggression_against_italy_questions_for_to_nail_her_1/

SomeAlibi immediately insists on limiting analysis to what's in the Massei Report. SomeAlibi of course phrases assertions about that report as though the Massei court actually proved what was ruled on as legal facts.

The bra clasp was indeed found in Meredith's locked bedroom, but it was what happened after the door was opened that makes it unusable as evidence. The police failed to secure that bra clasp in a manner that would preclude it being contaminated with DNA from outside the room. It's ridiculous to expect the defense to prove where the contamination came from even if it weren't the responsibility of the prosecution to insure it didn't occur. The defense had no right to secure evidence of their own. The defense has to depend on the police to find the sources of contamination and the courts didn't authorize looking for it.

The analysis of the bathmat footprint was done from a photo. The measurements were estimated and not certain. It was quite possible for that to have been Guede's footprint instead of Raffaele's. In fact it could have been formed if Amanda stepped on the blood stain getting out of the shower. Amanda didn't recognize it as a footprint. It's not even a complete print of the front of a foot.

Was Raffaele's alibi for Amanda that they ate dinner together or that they were at his apartment when his father called? Do normal people have to constantly aware of the time when they do things? And do they have to be able to remember the order of things that happened days ago? Raffaele was insisting that Amanda was home with him until the police convinced him what he was saying was rubbish to them.

The police had already asserted that Raffaele's kitchen knife had Meredith's DNA on it before he tried to reason out how that could be true. It wasn't true, but Raffaele had no reason to question the word of the police. Who was he trying to deceive writing these musings in his own diary? It was the police who confiscated his diary and published to the world.

Supposedly the close proximity of Raffaele's apartment and Guede's apartment is supposed to be evidence of collusion between them even though they had never met. So what difference does the location where Meredith's phones were found make compared to the location of those two apartments?

Amanda and Raffaele didn't say they slept through until 10:30 AM. That's when they said they got up. There's nothing to say they didn't awake before then and go back to sleep. And how does it prove they killed Meredith if they didn't describe in detail what they did between 5:32 AM and 10:30 AM?

Amanda's accusation of Patrick Lumumba should be taken in context with the police treatment of her that she described in her First Memorandum. The fact that she still was regaining her memory after that confusing night when she wrote her Second Memorandum on November 7th indicates that what they had her sign was not voluntary. She was in no way capable of understanding those accusations against Patrick Lumumba.

Amanda rang Meredith's English phone for 16 minutes even before she called Filomena. She got an out-of-service message when she called Meredith's Italian phone because it was turned off which Filomena encountered also. There was no reason Amanda to let the phone ring any length of time when she called the English phone again. The English phone was the one Meredith always kept with her for talking to her family. Since she hadn't found her phone by the second attempt Amanda had called it, it was unlikely she had access to it.

Like the postal police, Raffaele may have had concerns about damaging property in trying to knock down the door. Even so, photos do indicate he did damage to the door in his attempt. Luca Altieri could not break it down in his first attempt, but he had Filomena's order to do so. Filomena was the leasee of record, but she wasn't there when Raffaele attempted it. What does Raffaele's training in kick-boxing have to do with the brunt force necessary to break the door down anyhow? It's not as though the door could dodge him.

There is no evidence that Raffaele had relapsed into his previous use of hard drugs. Is there some reason Amanda's relating this conversation is supposed to indicate something about her? The courts exposed all their private life to the public anyhow.

Raffaele didn't write in his diary that Amanda smoked more than one marijuana. He only said they started to smoke it. And Amanda only testified that they had shared one. Saying they shared one doesn't say that Raffaele only smoked that one.

The rambling email that Amanda Knox wrote to family and friend looks exactly like what a person would write at 3:30 AM. It's full of spelling mistakes. Given the factual errors and ambiguities that are in it, what kind of "alibi" could it be expected to be? It's just what a tired young woman would write home to assure everyone that she was alright.

Why would Amanda and Raffaele need something to regret in wanting to give up smoking pot when they both thought the memory problems it caused them was the reason they were arrested?

It was because Rudy Guede was the real perpetrator that Raffaele feared Guede would make up strange thing to used to put the blame on him and Amanda. That's exactly what Guede has tried to do.

It was Raffaele who first alerted the police that nothing had been taken from the cottage. He wasn't correct since he was only considering the big ticket items that Filomena and the postal police also noticed had not been removed. There was glass under the clothes also, but even the glass on top didn't prove there was a staging of the break-in. The courts refused to exam the extant window glass to prove which way it was broken. The courts also refused to test the blood found at the window because they didn't want to prove it was Guede's.

Raffaele did indeed write in his book that Amanda stayed the whole night in his apartment. He reasoned that she could not have gotten back in without a key. He has always said she is innocent, and what Amanda said in her diary about the possibilty of him committing the crime is misconstrued by TJMK. She didn't say he did it.

Even if Amanda's and Raffaele's behavior was considered bizarre, how does that prove they killed Meredith Kercher? The accusation of inappropriate behavior only demonstrates the mind set of those who make that accusation. It shows they wanted to believe them guilty.

TJMK implied that phone records show she was away from Raffaele's apartment when Guede was heading toward the cottage. It's interesting that TJMK admits that Guede got there before 9:00 PM. The problem is that Popovic saw Amanda at Raffaele's apartment after she text messaged Lumumba that she had gotten his text message not to come to work. Even if Amanda had been out of Raffaele's apartment when she replied to Lumumba, she was not meeting Guede if she went back into Raffaele's apartment in time for Popovic to see her.

Amanda and Raffaele could not have made up the contradictory stories the police had them sign as being factual. The two statements that Amanda signed have different styles altogether, and have her saying both that she heard Meredith's scream and that she didn't remember hearing it. The first statement has her apparently meeting Lumumba because she wanted to, but in the second statement it has her saying she feared Lumumba. Raffaele's statement has him saying his previous statements were rubbish although what was rubbish about them is not explained. It has him saying that Amanda convinced him or her version of things, but doesn't say what that verson was. It also has him saying that Amanda didn't return with him to his apartment and that he didn't get to his apartment until 9:00 PM but Popovic testified seeing Amanda at Raffaele's apartment twice before 9:00 PM.

What was inexplicable about Amanda have an emotional breakdown on being taken into the cottage where her friend was murdered? Even though the police wouldn't acknowledge that Luca Altieri had told her that Meredith's neck had been slashed, by that time Amanda would have found out anyhow. So what if her reaction to the murder scene seemed extreme? And yet guilt mongers also insist she never cried over her friend's death.

-------------------------------------------------------------

The Machine also claims different veriations of stories as being different alibis. It would be suspicious if Amanda and Raffaele had pat stories down to minute details that nobody is capable of remembering. Also, things that TJMK considers a lie are ridiculous. It's just the attitude of TJMK that is shown by its own accusations.

Despite what The Machine claimed, Filomena didn't testify that Amanda told her on the phone that she had already called the police. Filomena told her to call the police, and Filomena assumed that she had when she saw the police car already there when Filomena arrived.

Amanda didn't tell the postal police that Meredith always kept her door locked. It was Luca Altieri who asked her about this, and Amanda was trying to explain with Raffaele translating for her. Raffaele got the translation confused. He later decided that Amanda had said the same thing that Filomena had said.

Amanda did call both of Meredith's phone after talking to Filomena, but she had already called the English phone before talking to Filomena.

Raffaele in the coerced statement of Nov. 5-6, 2007 did not admit he had lied to police. He said that his previous statements were rubbish. That he admitted to a supposed mistake is not admitting he was lying. He also did not claim that Amanda had asked him to lie for her in that coerced statement. He only said that she had convinced him of her version of events. His coerced statement doesn't explain why his previous statements were rubbish. Considering how inaccurate the coerced statement was, it would seem that the previous statements were the truth instead of the rubbish the police forced him to sign. Those coerced statements didn't say what Amanda's version of were supposed to have been, but if they had to do with his previous statements, then she was telling him the truth.

In his book, Raffaele did confirm that Amanda stayed the entire night with him. As to the many inconsistencies that TJMK accuses him of, that has more to do with how they interpret what Raffaele says. His defense's claim that her coerced statements exonerate him because they say he wasn't there is not the same thing as his saying she did it.

Raffaele didn't decide to tell more lies. He just told the police what he thought was true. TJMK cannot prove that he was deliberately trying to deceive anyone about what he thought he had done on a night that he didn't anticipate being so important. The order of events doesn't change that he talked to his father, that he and Amanda had supper, and that he used his computer. But even so, being on the computer until 9:10 PM would prevent Guede who got to the cottage an hour before Meredith did from seeing Raffaele there. Even if Guede had known who Raffaele was which he didn't.

Again, that Raffaele didn't finally get up until 10:00 AM doesn't mean he didn't go back to sleep after whatever interruptions to that sleep. Even if he neglected to tell the police about these interruptions, how do they prove he and Amanda killed Meredith at 11:30 PM the night before?

It really doesn't matter how well Raffaele's profile matched that found in the bra clasp sample. Since the police didn't use protocols necessary to eliminate the possibility of contamination, the DNA samples cannot be used as evidence against him or Amanda.

It's not up to Amanda to explain why Raffaele's DNA was found on the bra clasp. It's for the prosecutor to prove that such results have any meaning which it could not do since the police had failed to secure the sample. Also, the courts denied the defense the investigation that would have produced the source of the contamination as that would have prejudiced the prosecutor's case. The prosecutor just convinced the judges that that evidence was not necessary for convicting the defendants. Of course it didn't fit that purpose!

Actually, DNA does fly. It flies out of the mouth of anyone who sneezes or coughs. It rides droplets of saliva until they descend onto dust that can then be brushed by dirty gloves or shoe covers that were not changed before entering Meredith's room.

Blood was not found on Raffaele's kitchen knife. Amanda's DNA could be expected on the knife that she used in Raffaele's kitchen. But Meredith's DNA was not proved to have been on that knife blade. There's no more reason for Amanda to explain the existence of that assertion of DNA than there was for Raffaele to explain it. No matter how many doctors perjured themselves claiming Meredith's DNA was there, Stefanoni cheated the test into giving her the result she wanted. "Enlarging" the sample is equivalent to enlarging a photo past its limits of definition. Minor contamination even from a single example of Meredith's DNA from previous tests could create a result that is false. Also, negative tests were not conducted to see what result would come from a test without any sample at all. The proper procedure required that Stefanoni do two tests to compare for possible contamination. Somehow even though 46 days before the bra clasp was collected was not supposed to make any difference in the validity of that DNA sample which was also LCN, the passage of only 8 days was supposed to guarantee there was no possible contamination from previous tests for Meredith's DNA. Which does TJMK advocate?

Regardless of the criminal biologists claiming Amanda's blood was mixed with Meredith's blood, how was that proved? The Marasca-Bruno Report only claimed that skin DNA was found in the sink. Other places where blood was claimed didn't test positive for blood. Where did Amanda's lawyers say that her blood was mixed with Meredith's blood. Why do they have to deny what their own experts have contested?

There is no proof that Amanda was bleeding the night of the murder. There is no proof that her blood was found anywhere in the cottage. There was proof that she was bleeding during the abusive interrogation on the night of Nov. 5-6, 2007 because the police ignored that her period had started.

Raffaele didn't proclaim anything about the possibility of having accidentally pricked Meredith with his kitchen knife. Since he was writing to himself in his own private prison diary, he wasn't trying to deceive anyone about how the police claimed Meredith's DNA was on his kitchen knife. He was merely trying to work out for himself how that could be not knowing the police were lying.

Raffaele told the police the same thing that the postal police and Filomena observed. That nothing of importance was taken. Raffaele made the same assumption that they did that if nothing of importance was taken, then nothing was taken. If he and Amanda were really trying to stage a burglary which they are accused of doing, why claim the burglar took nothing? Over analyzing the question by claiming they were overconfident just raises the question of why they needed to divert attention from themselves by staging the burglary.

Who cares what those multiple sources are since they are all police trying to pin a murder on Amanda? Even the interpreter claimed to be a mediator trying to get Amanda to remember what she supposedly forgot. How can any of this be voluntary for Amanda, and where are the video recordings proving that she did cooperate voluntarily?

Amanda did express regret that the words she was forced to agree with were used to put Diya Lumumba in prison, but she had already recanted the coerced statements with her First Memorandum. What else could it mean when she said those statements were unreal and unreliable compared to her memories of being with Raffaele at his apartment at the exact same time? What she couldn't do is declare Diya Lumumba innocent since she was not at the murder nor was she with Diya Lumumba to know who really killed Meredith or that Diya Lumumba had not been there and done it. She could only recant her accusation which she had done.

There are only the two coerced statements that have Amanda saying she was at the cottage during the murder. Her First Memorandum doesn't have her saying she was there. In contradiction she described the memory of being there unreal and unreliable compared to being with Raffaele at his apartment at the exact same time. Does The Machine expect that she was at both places at the same time?

Amanda called her mother in the middle of the night in Seattle because she was upset by what she had encountered at the cottage. Did it matter that Meredith's body had not been found yet? Why? After finding Guede's unflushed toilet, Amanda could not help from thinking only a stranger would have left it that way. Maybe that was nothing happening, but it was still disturbing.

It's very confusing which of several calls Amanda could not remember making to her mother. Maybe it was the first one, but why is it strange she could have blotted it from her memory? She was confronted with the possiblity a stranger could have still been in the cottage. At any rate, it was an intense experience, and Amanda could easily have forgotten parts of it. After all, the interpretter had assured her she had forgotten the events at the murder. Why question that she forgot events after the murder if she was supposed to have been able to forget those other events?

Amanda was not admitting any involvement in her First Memorandum that she wrote in the morning of Nov. 6, 2007. She was comparing what the police had her sign to her real memories of being with Raffaele at his apartment at the exact same time. She had to describe the false memories in order to declare them unreal and unreliable. That's not admitting anything about them being actual.

Meredith's Italian phone was turned off. Amanda didn't say she rang this phone for long since she got the same out-of-service message that Filomena got when she tried it. It was the English phone that Amanda let ring for 16 seconds before she called Filomena. It was the second time she tried calling the English phone that she only let it ring four seconds. There really wasn't any point in letting ring longer since Meredith hadn't answered the first time.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Why does James Raper ask why Amanda didn't mention calling the English phone in her email? It was a long email and what was important was that she had tried both the English and the Italian phones. Also, how clearly does Raper expect Amanda to think at 3:30 AM? The reason Amanda called Meredith's English phone was because she knew that Meredith always had it with her to take calls from her family.

Maybe she did tell Filomena she was the first she had called, but Filomena was indeed the first roommate she had talked to. Meredith had not answered the 16 second ring. The call to the Italian phone brought up an out-of-service message. Why would it ring longer than that? Why let the English phone ring a long time after Meredith had not answered it after the 16 rings of the first time?

Why wouldn't Amanda feel calmed by the presense of others? First there's strength in numbers if the intruder suddenly reappeard. But also Filomena took charge and it was no longer for Amanda to worry about what happened next. How does being relieved of responsibility equate to being unconcerned about Meredith or her safety?

Amanda told the postal police nothing. It was Luca Altieri who asked if Meredith normally locked her door, and Amanda was trying to answer him but Raffaele got confused in translating what she said.

Amanda had already tried calling Meredith's phones when she got back to the cottage. That was part of the reason she expressed anxiety about the locked door. She had not gotten an answer from Meredith.

Luca Altieri had told Raffaele and Amanda that Meredith's throat had been slashed when he drove them to the police station. Luca Altieri was the one who kicked Meredith's door in. It wouldn't have been hard for Luca to figure out that her throat had been slashed with all the blood that was there.

It's curious that guilt mongers accuse Amanda of knowing before hand the particulars of the murder scene but James Raper questions why she made the mistake of where Meredith's body was found. The location of Meredith's body probably got garbled from Locas Altieri's telling the others until Amanda overheard someone talking about it. It doesn't matter that nobody told her directly. Even if she couldn't hear what these Italians were saying, she could at least see what they were gesturing with their hands. Amanda didn't say anything about Meredith's body being moved. She just mistakenly said it was found in the wardrobe.

James Raper describes the consistency with which Amanda cannot remember the 12:47 PM call to her mother in Seattle. She can be aware that it exists because of the phone records, but how can she say if she will ever remember it if hasn't remembered until now?

The statement the police coerced Raffaele into signing doesn't say Amanda left his apartment at 9:00 PM. It says she didn't return with him when he got home at 9:00 PM. The only explanation for this story is that the police didn't know that Popovic had seen Amanda at his apartment twice that evening before 9:00 PM. That's why guilt mongers always tell the story that he told police she left after 9:00 PM.

Whether she lay awake listening to that music or told Raffaele it was 5:32 AM and to turn it off and go back to sleep, how does it prove they killed Meredith Kercher?

There was no mop in Raffaele's apartment. Why did they have to go get the mop immediately? The mess would still be there the next morning. Some guilt mongers claim the mop wasn't necessary since the water evaporated. So there was no urgency to get the mop immediately. Of course they would eventually want to mop up the residue from the sewer water that was spilled. It's totally frivolous to ask about rags, sponges, etc. that were assumed to be in the apartment. They wanted to use a mop.

It's only an hour's drive to Gubbio. They didn't have to rush to get started on that day trip. As for taking a change of clothes with her to Raffaele's apartment, they didn't go straight there. They went through the town. Why would Amanda want to lug a bundle of clothes with her while out on the town?

Since they expected to be away in Gubbio, Amanda wasn't going to get a chance to shower that day until she got back. What's the problem with her wanting to shower before leaving? Isn't it silly to ask a woman why she showers herself so much? She just likes it.

Amanda preferred the shower in the cottage because the one in Raffaele's apartment was too small. Why did the cottage have to be cold just because the weather was cold? Couldn't she just turn up the heat?

Amanda did notice the few tiny drops of blood on the faucet, but there was nothing about that to alarm her since three other women with their periods lived there. There really wasn't any reason for Amanda to look for blood elsewhere. Why was Amanda supposed to know why the blood on the bathmat was diluted and faded? She had no idea how it got there.

Amanda only wondered if the blood on the faucet was from her pierced ears, but it turned out that none of the blood was Amanda's. At any rate, she noticed that the blood on the faucet was already dried. Of course this seemed strange to her because it wasn't there the day before. What was it she was supposed to have been clear about in her email home? She hadn't been clear about it at the time she saw it. Maybe she could have said that after Meredith's body, she would wonder if it were Meredith's blood, but why state the obvious? Remember, she was tired and it was 3:30 AM when she sent that email. She couldn't have been thinking clearly with all that had happened.

Why would Amanda know why Raffaele said Filomena's door was open? Amanda saw it as closed. Even if it were not closed, why is it a certainty that Amanda would have noticed the broken window? She didn't know to look for a broken window. Why would she expect to find one? Amanda wasn't sure what to think about what she had seen before returning to Raffaele's apartment, but was looking for evidence of an intrusion when she returned with Raffaele.

Why ask what the word "also" means? Of course in addition to Meredith's door, Filomena's door was closed. Amanda could see that Laura wasn't at home since her door was open. She may have assumed Meredith was not at home since her door was closed. That was the only time Filomena claimed she closed it. But why did Filomena close her door when she was away? Sounds to me that Guede was trying to hide where he broke in. Amanda probably had a hard time expressing what her intuition was trying to tell her at 3:30 AM.

Amanda sent an already long email home. It was 3:30 AM. Why does James Raper expect more details from her tired brain? She was mostly trying to reassure friends and family that she all right. It never occurred to her she would be cross examined for what she did or did not put into that email. She certainly didn't attach as much importance to the bathmat shuffle as James Raper and the prosecutors did.

There was no reason for Amanda to know what Meredith Kercher told her English friends about Amanda Knox. James Raper is the one who needs to be honest. Amanda has never said anything about what she disliked about Meredith Kercher. Why start now?

The notebook that also contained personal observations similar to a diary was Amanda's assignment notebook. The missing pages would be the pages she did assignments on and turned them in. There's no proof there ever were any pages devoted to October thoughts.

Why does Amanda have to explain the sense of something that wouldn't have made sense to her in her right mind. She would never have believed Patrick Lumumba was capable of the crimes that were in the statements the police had her sign. If she were really guilty of Meredith's death, she would never have tried to have deflected blame to Patrick Lumumba who was sure to have had an alibi. She would have blamed someone like Guede who was rumored to have been a drug dealer or at least one of the other drug dealers that guilt mongers claim she knew. But the police admit they latched onto her reply to Patrick Lumumba insisting it said she met with him that night. Amanda wasn't fluent enough in Italian to understand how they would understand her clumbsy choice of words. Clearly it didn't matter what she said in denial. They insisted they had evidence she was at the cottage and knew who the killer was. With the aid of the interpretter mediating for them, the police convinced her she could not trust her own memory and that it would all come back to her after a while.

It's true that Amanda could not have known who the killer was since she was not at the murder. It's also true that Amanda could not know that Patrick Lumumba was not at the murder since she was not with Patrick Lumumba during the murder. So the police coerced her into believing it was possible for him to have been the murderer.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Why does Mediawatcher think Amanda Knox had to know about the murder before needing to call her mother about strange things that disturbed her? Sure, taken individually the things were insignificant, but taken altogether, the open front door, the drops of blood on the faucet, the blood stain on the bathmat, and the unflushed toilet in the front bathroom unnerved Amanda. She didn't know what to think about the possibility of an intruder or even if she was seeing the facts correctly. So she called her mother. What's so strange about a young woman doing that?

Mediawatcher omits the 16 seconds ringing of Meredith's English phone. Maybe there wasn't an answering service or maybe answering services fluster her the way they fluster me. Lots of people decline to leave messages. This is not strange. The Italian phone prompted an out-of-service message because it was turned off. Filomena got the same message when she tried it. There was no point in hanging on for a long time the second time Amanda called the English phone. This was the phone Meredith was sure to have with her because it was the one her family called. So if she hadn't called back from the first call, the second call wasn't going to get any better response.

The police had Amanda accuse a black man because they already expected a black man to be involved. The police mistakenly thought thread found in Meredith's left had were a black man's hairs. There actually were hair from a black man found in Meredith's room. It didn't matter who the black man was to tie Amanda to the murder, but they latched onto Patrick Lumumba since they found her text message reply to him in her phone. Amanda had been denying she had met Patrick Lumumba that night or that she had gone to the cottage with him, but the police would not accept what they decided were her lies about this. They kept confusing her with lies of evidence putting her there and claims that she knew who the murderer was. Eventually they convinced her that Patrick Lumumba could have been the murderer.

Within hours of signing them, Amanda did write her First Memorandum declaring the statements the police had had her sign as unreal and unreliable. She recanted the entire statements including the accusation against Patrick Lumumba. What she could not do was say that Patrick Lumumba was innocent. She had not been to the murder to know who the murderer was, and she had not been with Patrick Lumumba to know that he was not the murderer. However much she doubted his guilt, she could not say she knew he was not the murderer.

Amanda knox has already described the abusive treatment she received in her First Memorandum. She has already described this to Mignini in her interview with him. She as already described it in her testimony. Why doesn't Mediawatch not already know this?

Amanda knox was not given food or drink until 2:00 PM the afternoon after the abusive interrogation.

Amanda was not bleeding when she returned to the cottage the morning after the murder. She was not there during the murder. Bleeding is not the only way DNA could become deposited in that cottage. It was Amanda's skin DNA that was found mixed with Meredith's blood in the sink of the bathroom. There was no test results confirming blood in the hall and in Filomena's room. There is no way to prove when any of Amanda's DNA got where it was found.

Why would Amanda want to use Raffaele's towels to clean up sewer water that leaked from the drain under his kitchen sink? What difference did it make that she waited until she could get a mop to clean it up? It wasn't going anywhere.

Amanda had no relationship with Rudy Guede. He was present with the four downstairs neighbors when Amanda and Meredith came to the birthday party also. He was a customer at least once at the bar where Amanda workded. Guede may have expressed a sexual interest in Amanda, but she never expressed any interest at all in him. She didn't even know him well enough to remember his name. She thought he was from South Africa although he is not.

Amanda made no statement that Meredith always locked her bedroom door. She was trying to explain to Luca Altieri when Meredith did lock her door, but Raffaele was confused in the translation he made.

Before the postal police and Filomena arrived, Amanda did have Raffaele try to knock down Meredith's door. He was unable to do so, but he did do damage to the door before Luca Altieri succeeded in knocking it down. Even if Amanda might have thought Meredith always locked her door which she didn't say at all, she became worried because Meredith didn't answer her phones when Amanda called. Amanda didn't know what to expect behind the locked door. It was a first place to look for Meredith.

Why ask Amanda if she had read the Massei report? Of course she had. Amanda had had the naìve expectation she would be acquitted since she was innocent. Of course she would try to understand why that didn't happen.

Of course nobody asked Raffaele to testify during his original trial. It had to be his decision to do so. The prosecutor could not ask him, but Amanda didn't testify voluntarily. She was required to testify for the calunnia part of her trial. Supposedly, the questions had to do with the accusation she made against Patrick Lumumba in the coerced statements, but she was questioned about everything anyhow.

Amanda's conviction was not confirmed by the Fifth Chamber of the Supreme Court. In fact, the court refused to send the case back to the trial court for retrial since there was not expected to be any evidence that could be used against Amanda. If this acquittal had not occurred, Amanda had vowed to fight extradition with everything resource she had. There was serious doubt whether the U.S. State Department would have complied with an extradition request for this complete injust case against her. Maybe an inquisition is proper judiciary process in Italy, but it doesn't sit very well with most Americans.

______________________________________________________________

The Machine seems to think that accounts of what they did are Amanda and Raffaele's alibi. They are each the other's alibi in that they say they were together the whole time. The statements the police had them sign on the night of Nov. 6-7, 2007 do not count as lies since they display evidence of coercion.

Her statements has Amanda both saying that she heard Meredith scream and saying she doesn't remember Meredith screaming. The 1:45 AM statement has her willingly meeting Patrick Lumumba, but the 5:45 AM statement has her saying she was afraid of him. The two statements seem to have been composed by different people which is likely since they were typed in Italian for her to sign.

Raffaele's statement has him calling what he has said before rubbish but doesn't explain what that rubbish is. It claims that Amanda had convinced him of her version of events, but doesn't say what that version of events were. It claims Amanda did not return to his apartment with him although Popovic testified that she saw Amanda there twice that evening before the 9:00 PM that the statement has Raffaele just arriving there.

Amanda never claimed that Raffaele may have gone out that night. In her prison diary that was illegally confiscated, she mulled over that possibility and decided that he hadn't done it.

Amanda and Raffaele made no voluntary decision to tell the police lies. It was the police who refused to accept the truth and kept asking them why they were lying when they were telling the truth.

It was the police who kept asking about Patrick Lumumba and about what they did when the met that night which Amanda kept telling them they didn't do.

Amanda did not confirm the false accusation against Diya Lumumba in her First Memorandum of Nov. 6, 2007. She wrote that the memory of being with him that night was unreal and unreliable compared to the memory of being with Raffaele in his apartment at the exact same time.

That Amanda was convicted of slander against Diya Lumumba does not change that the lies were the result of the police who refused to accept that she and Diya Lumumba were not at the murder. They convinced her he could have been guilty. It's their lie and not hers.

That First Memorandum demonstrates how confused the police had made her during that interrogation in which they extracted the coerced statements accusing Diya Lumumba, but she did recant those coerced statements. What she couldn't do was to say Diya Lumumba was innocent since she was not at the murder to witness who the killer was and she wasn't with Diya Lumumba to witness that he was not at the murder.

Amanda had already written two Memorandum declaring the two coerced statements invalid and the police weren't interested in considering it. Even if Amanda thought Diya Lumumba was innocent and told her mother, what more could Amanda do? How would her mother be able to retract accusations her mother had not made?

Amanda did tell her lawyers that the statements were wrong, but they told her it would do no good doing anything. As it was, Amanda was sued for slander because she claimed the police had coerced her to sign those statements.

Of course Meredith's DNA was found on Raffaele's kitchen knife, but the question is whether it was there before the test. The experts in the pay of the police could verify that the profiles that resulted from the test were those of Meredith's, but the sample was over-enlarged. Even one unit of stray DNA from previous tests for Meredith's DNA could have been enlarged to create that result.

The required procedure for checking against contamination of such a low copy number sample would be to run the test twice. Stefanoni didn't do that and used up the sample in one test. She didn't even run negative tests to see what the test results would be the result of doing the test without a sample. The test result with Meredith's DNA might have had some validity if negative tests had indeed shown no results before doing the real test.

Who was Raffaele trying to deceive writing anything in his own private diary? He was only trying to understand how the police had found Meredith's DNA on his kitchen knife. He didn't ask the police to confiscate his prison diary to accuse him of deception.

It's strange that DNA on the bra clasp could last 46 days, but the DNA in the police laboratory could not last 6 days. The equipment simply remained idle. How does that eliminate the possibility that a stray strand of DNA couldn't just sit there?

It's not up to Amanda to speculate on how Meredith's DNA could have gotten on the kitchen knife. It's up to the police to prove it ever was on that knife blade. Manipulating the test to get a result is not proof it was ever there.

The abundant amount of Raffaele's DNA found on the bra clasp seems to be that the complete DNA sequence was found. It was still within the range of an LCN sample. It's not a matter of whether the lab equipment was contaminated as the police failed to use protocols to prevent contamination during the collection of the sample.

The police actually video recorded their own use of dirty gloves and dirty shoe covers. Regardless of where the sources of contamination could have been in the rest of the cottage, the police were tracking in all sorts of dust and grime that was capable of containing it. The bra clasp was kicked around for 46 days from the original location it was catalogued in to the location from which it was ultimately collected. There was even a burglary that occurred during that time during which the mattress was stolen.

It really doesn't matter which of the myriad of possible routes the contaminating DNA could have taken to arrive onto the bra clasp. What is important is that the police didn't try to prevent that contamination. Amanda doesn't have to explain how the contamination got there. The police should have explained why it couldn't get there, and they can't.

Rinaldi and Boemi were not directly measuring the bloody footprint on the bathmat. They were calculating measurements from a photograph. They got the measurements wrong. The footprint was more likely to be Guede's than Raffaele's. They misinterpreted the part they thought was just the big toe. It was actually Guede's big toe and his second to smeared together.

We know where Guede's shoe prints led to the front door, but we don't know where else he had been in that cottage before leaving. He has claimed he got towels from the bathroom to use to try stopping Meredith's bleeding. Also, for whatever reason, it's only Guede's left shoe prints leading to the front door.

Amanda's lawyers never conceded that her blood was found anywhere in that cottage. Meredith's blood was not found in the hall or Filomena's room. That only Amanda's DNA was found mixed in Meredith's blood in the bathroom sink is not remarkable since Filomena and Laura used the other bathroom. Amanda's DNA found in her own bathroom is unremarkable also.

Outside of the bathmat footprint, there are no bare footprints attributed to Raffaele. Only his shoe prints were found. Since these footprint in the hall and in Filomena's room tested negative for blood, there is no proof what made them or when. They may have been compatible with Amanda's footprints, but they would be compatible with footprints of any of her three flatmates.

There are lots of things that Luminol can react to. Bleach is one of them. If bleach had been used to clean up something in that cottage, it would have reacted with the Luminol indicating where the clean-up had occurred.

Judge Massei refused to order the test that could have indicated from which direction the window was broken. Tests for blood and DNA were not conducted on evidence from the window or the broken glass. And there was what appeared to be blood near the window. The glass shards were found under the clothes as well as on top of the clothes. Guede had a piece of glass caught in the tread of one of his shoes which left its imprint in Meredith's blood with that shoe print. That shard of glass was found in Meredith's room. It had to have come from the broken window. Filomena's computer had been moved from her desk to the floor. Guede had a wound on his hand that guilt mongers claim did not come from his knife when he was stabbing Meredith. Where did it come from if not from the broken window? Guede had been arrested before for breaking into a place through a second story window.

There was broken glass on the window sill, but why would a rock breaking in through a window throw glass the other way? Why expect glass on the ground outside unless the rock had been thrown out instead of in?

There is security camera evidence that Guede arrived over an hour before Meredith arrived. There is no such evidence that Amanda arrived at all. There is absolutely no reason to believe that Meredith would have let Guede into the apartment when she arrived. Since there is plenty of evidence that Guede was in that apartment, the only way he could have entered was by breaking in. It was not a staged break-in. It was Guede's break-in.
--------------------------------------------------------------

What the Filomena, Paola, and there boyfriends saw when the door was broken open was not any secret. Even if the postal police said nothing out loud, the four of them talked about the body, the blood, and the duvet with the foot sticking out. Amanda didn't understand correctly what they may have said about the location of Meredith's body. She thought it was in the wardrobe which was incorrect. Paola's boyfriend Luca Altieri who broke through the door told Raffaele and Amanda about Meredith's throat being slashed while he was driving them to the police station.

The statement the police coerced Amanda to sign has her both saying that she heard Meredith's scream and saying she didn't remember hearing her scream. There is no way the other witnesses could know who screamed in the middle of the night. It could have been the mortally wounded cat that somehow disappeared from the locked lower apartment after leaving most of its blood.

The police would have found all the blood traces in the bathroom since they were looking for them. Amanda wasn't expecting them and wasn't looking for them. Even the postal police said there was not a noticeable amount of blood there.

Amanda may have remembered the bathmat shuffle from an earlier event. Even so, since the stains on the bottom didn't match the stains on the top, there is the possibility that she actually did that bathmat shuffle. She didn't notice that the stain on top was a footprint, and it was diluted and vague so that she didn't notice it at all until she got out of the shower.

No policeman has ever been identified as the one who supposedly said Amanda was stinking on the morning Meredith's body was discovered. Nobody ever claimed she was stinking. This is an unproved rumor.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe Rudy Guede had been to the lower apartment of the boys twice, but Guede had never been in the upper apartment of the girls. He may have gone to the lower apartment after finding the key in the upper apartment. A lot of blood was found in the lower apartment, but the police claim it was from a cat that was not found in that locked apartment. The police had to break into that lower apartment because the key was not available.

Why would Amanda know what Guede was thinking when he broke into the upper apartment? She had only been in his presence once at a birthday part in the lower apartment and probably only served him once at the bar where she worked. She hardly knew him. She didn't remember his name and incorrectly said he was from South Africa.

Maybe it was because Guede knew the boys in the lower apartment that he didn't think they had any money to steal.

How would Guede know that Meredith and Amanda had not gone out of town for the holiday? If he had known them, he might have known that Meredith did go home to England sometimes, and that Amanda was spending her nights at Raffaele's apartment with plans of going with him to Gubbio the next day.

Security camera evidence shows that Guede arrived at the cottage over an hour before Meredith did. He had plenty of time to check for residents being present. He had experience breaking in second floor windows. Maybe he likes doing that. Maybe he needed light from the carpark to see what he was doing. Maybe he was just brazen enough as he demonstrated threatening one homeowner with a knife that he just didn't care. Why would anyone driving around the curve of the road be looking that way anyhow? The curve is out from the cottage and not inward. Cars would be pointing away from the cottage the whole time.

Guede had not been in the upper apartment. He would not have known anything about the windows. Whether breaking in the window was impractical because of the way the shutters latched is irrelevant. The outer shutters could not be latched anyhow. There was no reason Guede would not try opening them for throwing the rock.

There was no reason a basketball player like Guede could not lob the rock from the top of the retaining wall of the parking area that faced that side of the cottage. He was counting on the weight of the rock to carry it through the window once the outer shutters were open. He didn't have to throw the rock very high from the top of the retaining wall since he was already near level with the window.

Since Guede had on the Nike sneakers, he probably wiped off the dirt, mud, and grass before climbing to keep the sneakers from being too slippery. But however implausible it seems that he climbed that wall without leaving traces, the traces he left inside the cottage indicate he got in anyhow. There was a shard of glass caught in one of his shoes that left its imprint in his shoe prints inside Meredith's room. That shard of glass was found in Meredith room and had to come from that broken window. Also, the inner shutter shows bruising and embedded glass where the rock smashed into it.

Again, Guede chose the heavy rock for the momentum it would have crashing against the window. He was nearly level with the window and was strong enough to lob it high enough that it would pass through a trajectory bringing it down through the window. As a basketball player, he had skill and strength to do that. It didn't matter that the window was only a little bigger than the rock.

The rock landed in a bag that until then had held the clothes that were scattered on the floor. Maybe the bag had already fallen over anyhow, but the rock would have scatter the clothes if not. There was no reason the rock would have damaged the terrazzo flooring through the bag.

A rock smashing through a window would impart its forward momentum to the shards of glass that it broke on its way. Why would any of those shards fly backward to fall on the grass outside the cottage? Some glass did indeed land on the windowsill, but that's as far back as it could go.

Guede did have cuts to one of his hands that supposedly were not the result of his hand slipping on the knife he used to stab Meredith. If his knife was not the cause of those cuts, how is it not the broken window glass that was the cause?

How was Guede supposed to have stopped the forward momentum of that rock after he had thrown it? Of course that heavy rock would have smashed through the window and landed in the room. A demonstration of this was done showing that this was exactly what would happen when a rock was lobbed the way Guede would have thrown it from the top of the retaining wall.

Glass was also found under the clothes scattered on the floor. There should have been glass on the bed, but it would appear that Guede swept it off the bed and onto the clothes on the floor. There is no evidence that the clothes on the floor came from the closet. They came from the bag that the rock landed in.

Whether or not Guede intended to steal Filomena's laptop, he did move it from her desk to the floor. Guede was likely only looking for money. He only took Meredith's rent money, her credit cards and her phones. He probably thought the phones might give him access to her bank account. He did try calling her bank on one of those phones. But Guede was not likely to want to be caught with stolen merchandise such as the lawyer's laptop that he took from one of the places he broke into. Of course he claimed he had bought that laptop from someone else.

There's no proof that Guede rummaged through the closet. The clothes on the floor came from the bag the rock landed in. Maybe the rock scattered the clothes, or maybe the clothes were scattered when the bag had toppled over on its own.

Why would Meredith notice the break-in just walking in the front door? She would be heading for her own room well past Filomena's door. Meredith would have had to have glanced back as she passed that door to see back to where Filomena's window was. The lights were not on in Filomena's room anyhow. What could she have seen?

We do know that Guede did attack Meredith from the bloody traces left in Meredith's room. Why should it matter what crazy reason Guede had for attacking instead of leaving? He did it. There's no more reason for Amanda to know the reason than for anyone else to know it. She didn't know Guede to know why he did anything.

There is no reason to believe Meredith was already in the cottage while Guede was breaking in. Security cameras show he arrived over an hour before she did. He had plenty of time to check out the presence of anyone and to break in before she arrived. He was probably in the front bathroom when she arrived so that even if she had looked toward the door of the bathroom, she would not have seen him. She would not have seen the light in that part of the bathroom since it has its own door shutting it off from the front of the bathroom.

Since he was there so much sooner than Meredith arrived, he had plenty of time to look through the cottage. That time for rummaging through things only seems to have been limited by the time he spent in the bathroom.

There is no way to know when the Luminol revealed footprint was made in Filomena's room. There were three other women who lived there who could have made that footprint. DNA from Amanda and Meredith being found in Filomena's room is not unexpected. They lived there and nobody attempted to keep DNA from one room from being tracked into another room.

If two other people did attack Meredith with Guede, why were there so many wound on her body? Surely two people could have restrained her without resorting to hurting her to subdue her. The many wounds indicate that Guede did subdue her alone. He went too far with the wounds to her neck and she suffocated on her own blood. The medical examiner could not determine if she had been sexually assaulted. The DNA found inside her was from skin cells alone. Guede probably didn't get a chance to rape her before she died. There was what looked like semen on the pillow found underneath Meredith's buttocks, but Judge Massei refused to have it tested. It would probably prove Guede ejaculated when he failed to penetrate her.

Guede only claims Amanda and Raffaele were with him at the murder because he's trying to shift his guilt to them. He had not accomplices. There are no shoe prints, footprints, reliable DNA evidence or fingerprints to show he had any accomplices in Meredith's room with him. The evidence showing Amanda and Raffaele were in the cottage doesn't prove anything since it doesn't prove they were at the murder. She lived there and he visited her there.
------------------------------------------------------------

It will be interesting what other old talking points TJMK will dredge up against Amanda Knox. Of course it won't be surprising.

Friday, January 19, 2018

TJMK Main Posters live in a bat cave.

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/interrogation_hoax_20_illustrating_how_batshit_crazy_1/

Amanda Knox didn't make up how the police abused her during the interrogation of November 6-7, 2007. Her First Memorandum which she wrote within hours of signing the 5:45 AM statement demonstrates the confusion the interrogation left her in and mentions the abusive techniques the police used. She continues documenting her recovery from that interrogation in her Second Memorandum which she wrote the next day after the interrogation, and she told her mother about it a few days later. The next month, she went over these accusations in her interview with Mignini. She didn't just suddenly come up with the idea the interrogation was abusive when she was required to testify in the calunnia portion of the trial.

The claim that Amanda's lawyers didn't believe what she said about the abusive interrogation is misleading. That assertion is not confirmed by one of her lawyers denying that he had said it. All that denial meant was that her lawyers could not express the accusation since they would have been sued for calunnia themselves if they had. Amanda's mother was sued just for repeating what Amanda had said about it.

The police claim she was not coerced into admitting she was at the cottage during the murder or accusing Patrick Lumumba for the crime, but unlike other witness questionings, the police claim they didn't tape record this one. It is likely the police don't admit having tape recorded it since it would prove they broke the law in coercing Amanda to agree with the statements they typed in Italian for her to sign.

The TJMK Main Posters are confused about what the recording they posted in this article is about. It is not the keynote address at an internatinal conference at John Jay College. Dr. Saul Kassim did speak at that conference, but the recording is a phone interview he did on the John Churley Show.

Such an interview was never intended to be a scholarly paper to be reviewed by peers. It was just Dr. Kassim explaining things for an audience of non-scholarly people. It's worth listening to this interview since it doesn't quite match up with the criticism TJMK Main Posters make of it.

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCLgZdGUQzc&feature=youtu.be

Even if their criticism is of Dr. Kassim's speech to the Conference at John Jay College, it is still just TJMK's interpretation of facts and nothing Dr. Kassim was obligated to mention to the conference.

To say that Meredith Kercher was not raped is certainly using a narrow definition of rape. The police certainly thought Amanda was involved in the crime from day one, and TJMK Main Posters probably deny that she was a suspect because being a suspect gave her rights the police abused. Amanda's other two roommates did get lawyers, and Meredith's friends let Italy even though they were considered witnesses. A noise citation is not a criminal history no matter how TJMK Main Posters want it to be. The prosecution postulated more than one possible motive, but it never did prove any of them. First there was the sex game gone wrong (which was initially a cultish sex orgy later denied.) Then there was the dirty toilet motive, and last there was severe jealousy and hatred in retaliation for rejection it was never proved that Amanda even noticed.

Investigator Giobbi certainly did claim he knew Amanda was guilty from observations of Amanda's outburst of sobbing on returning to the cottage where her friend died and from what Giobbi considered inappropriate and childish behavior when Amanda did a twirl to model shoe covers she put on before going into the downstairs apartment at Giobbi's request. It's certainly TJMK Main Posters' opinion that Amanda's claim that she was with Raffaele at his apartment during the murder is untrue, but there is no evidence proving she was at the murder.

How can TJMK Main Posters say the police didn't already think she was guilty while they questioned her leading up to the interrogation on November 6-7, 2007? Giobbi claimed they didn't need her confession because they already knew she was guilty. Another probable cause he gave was that he found Amanda and Raffaele at a cafe eating pizza.

Maybe Dr. Kassim got the date of the last interrogation wrong in his address to the conference, but he didn't say that in the interview TJMK Main Posters linked in this article. It was still the last interrogation Dr. Kassim was talking about either way, and he may have rounded off the to whole hours the times that interrogation started and stopped, but the impact on Amanda of that long session from 10:30 PM to 5:45 AM was still severe. Even if TJMK Main Posters discount that Amanda was tag-team questioned by a dozen investigators, that many investigators were signed to the interrogation report. They only let her sleep after 5:45 AM, and Ficarra didn't get her that bun and tea until afternoon the next day. Amanda didn't have a lawyer, and there was no way she could leave that small interrogation room with the investigators blocking her way even when she needed to use the restroom.

The police were questioning Amanda even before the interpreter arrived and her beginner's Italian did not allow her to adequately defend herself. TJMK Main Posters can believe the police that Amanda was not repeated threatened and called a liar, but that doesn't prove the police weren't lying. The police claim there's no tape recording verifying their claims. Amanda was told Raffaele had withdrawn his alibi for her, and that was false since his statement was just as coerced as her statements were. Again, how do the police prove they didn't tell Amanda they had "hard evidence" that she was at the cottage during the murder when they claim they have no tape recording of the interrogation. Amanda has consistently said they did this from her First Memorandum forward.

It probably is untrue that the police didn't tape record the interrogation. They couldn't very well admit there is evidence of the abusive interrogation they claim never occurred. It is true the police did not provide Amanda with a lawyer. It is not likely that she would have refused a lawyer when they claimed they offered her one. How was Amanda not confessing to being an accessory to murder when the coerced statements have her saying she was there?

The coerced statements were later ruled inadmissible in the murder trial although the Supreme Court said they could be used in the calunnia part of the trial. How the court would whichkeep from being influenced in the murder trial by what it heard in the calunnia trial is inexplainable.

The coerced statements certainly got Amanda arrested even though they were proved wrong in tying Amanda to Patrick Lumumba for the murder. The police simply substituted Guede for Patrick Lumumba and continued to make up stories about irrelevant facts as though they proved something.


Supposedly these reconstructed scenarios of what the judges ruled happened were proved by how well they fit together in the overall story the prosecutors and judges wanted to tell about Amanda. The judges simply ruled that any facts that didn't fit into this neat fabrication were not real.

Concerning TJMK Main Posters' own speculated facts:

1. Raffaele didn't turn on Amanda. In his own coerced statement, he didn't say Amanda asked him to lie for her. That statement has him saying she didn't return to his apartment when he did at 9:00 PM even though Popavic testified she saw Amanda there twice before 9:00 PM. That discrepancy should be seen as due to coercion, but guilt mongers insist it's just another example of Raffaele lying. Even in making the false accusation against Patrick Lumumba, the 5:45 AM statement has Amanda saying she imagined the events at the cottage. This goes along with her claim the police demanded she imagine what would have happened if she were at the murder. It was the police who then insisted that her imagined account was what she really experienced. And Amanda was not allowed to testify at her trial, she was required to testify for the calunnia portion of that trial. Why many of the things she was asked had anything to do with the calunnia trial is a total mystery.

2. There is no doubt that the police did not have open minds about Amanda while they were questioning her. They only asked questions to find inconsistencies they could use against her. The other witnesses were asked questions about Amanda in order to incriminate her.

3. Amanda was willing to stay even before the police demanded she stay in Perugia. Whether or not other witnesses were asked to stay is irrelevant since many of them left anyhow. The main reason the police dragged her to an interrogation room on November 6-7, 2007 was because they had to get enough evidence on her before her mother arrived. The police decided Amanda's mother would convince her to go home. Of course Amanda complained about not being able to go home for Christmas and not being able to go to her aunt's home in Germany if not home to Seattle.

4. Regardless of how the questionings went before November 6-7, 2007, there's testimony and notes to indicate what the police thought about Amanda's guilt. Amanda also has anadoctal examples of how critical the police were of her during that period.

5. It's only the coerced 1:45 AM and 5:45 AM statements that have Amanda claiming she went out the night Meredith died. In her First Memorandum, Amanda only mentions the memory of going to the murder as being unreal and unreliable compared to being with Raffaele at his apartment during the same period of time. The courts ignoring that is a lie.

6. Amanda never said the interrogation of November 6, 2007 started at 10:00 PM. It started about 10:30 PM. It had to have gone until 5:45 AM since that was when the police had her sign the second statement, but since the prosecution used her First Memorandum as evidence, the time she was detained for questioning has to include until 2:00 PM November 7, 2007.

7. It's debateable whether Ficarra didn't plan the interrogation of Amanda on November 6-7, 2007. She had the investigators collected to do it, and there is evidence the police wanted to arrest Amanda before her mother would convince her to leave Italy. But the real question remains, what difference did it make whether the she was told to leave and she said she didn't want to? The interrogation that insued was still abusive and she was coerced into signing statements that incriminated her.

8. There is no proof that Amanda was advised not to speak any further after being coerced into signing the 1:45 AM statement. There's not even anything with her signature on it to that effect. There's still no tape recording available to prove anything the police claim. The real question is what were the police talking to Amanda about between 1:45 AM? It's hardly likely they didn't ask her anything since they had a substantially different statement typed in Italian for her to sign at 5:45 AM. And it's this statement that has Amanda saying she imagined the events at the murder. It also has her saying she heard Meredith scream but then has her say she couldn't remember hearing Meredith scream. That certainly sounds like contradictory question and answering.

9. Amanda didn't type the statements they had her sign. The interpreter admitted in testimony that Amanda couldn't understand those statements. No matter how few officers were mentioned in those coerced statements, it doesn't prove that Amanda wasn't tag team questioned by a dozen investigators as she says she was.

10. Amanda only confirmed that she was not hit while writing her First Memorandum in which she did confirm she was hit in the head during the interrogation. Amanda only confirmed that she was given a bun and tea in the afternoon after the interrogation. She was not helped to sleep at all after the interrogation. She had to pull together two chairs to sleep on herself. What difference does it make that nobody told her she couldn't have a restroom break when they blocked her leaving the room to do so?

11. Amanda didn't write her First Memorandum in Italian. Whether Amanda wrote some simple notes in Italian is irrelevant. Her interpreter during the early morning of November 7, 2007 considered herself a "mediator" rather than a neutral interpreter. The "mediator" was trying to get Amanda to remember things she never experienced in real life.

12. There is still no tape recording of the November 6-7, 2007 interrogation to prove Amanda was not threatened or called a liar for disagreeing with what the police wanted her to say. There is no way that listing a few men who knew Meredith could last from 10:30 PM until 1:45 AM. So the police had to be arguing with her about what they finally coerced her to sign. There is absolutely no reason Amanda would have expected her "See you later" text message to mean what the police claimed she spontaneously agreed it meant. It must have taken a great deal of effort for them to even explain what they intended her to mean by it.

The TJMK Main Posters' contention that Amanda's experiences that she talks about are a blood money tree is just their imagination. it should be noted that the TJMK Main Posters consider this article is a 100% rebuttal to her ability to express what happened to her. It will be interesting to note what they say when that has no effect.

Of course TJMK Main Posters defeat their own purpose. They keep the controversy about Amanda alive so that there will be plenty of organizations interested in hearing her speak.

Sunday, January 14, 2018

James Raper's disinformation

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

It of course is the right of the defense to question evidence presented in trial. Whether James Raper thinks that's disinformation is irrelevant.

The reason for Raffaele's kitchen knife being collected as the murder weapon had nothing to do with the knife inprint on the bed. The imprint is much smaller than the kitchen knife. Apparently, Mr. Raper considers the imprint of the handle to be part of the blade. The officer choosing the kitchen knife chose it because it was big and looked like it had been cleaned recently. It turned out that it still had starch on it that had not been cleaned off.

The question about the result from DNA testing of the sample taken from Raffaele's kitchen knife is not whether it matches Meredith's profile well enough, but whether that result is reliable in proving her DNA was actually on that knife.

The sample was LCN meaning it was low count. In order to test it, the number of DNA units had to be amplified meaning that the number of units had to be increased. This is done with some sort of chemical manipulation that nobody ever explains but just seems to be a given.

Mr. Raper even admits that Stefanoni didn't do biological or blood tests. So we don't know for sure if there really was anything there to be applified to begin with. He admits that international guidelines recommend a repetition of the amplification be done to detect stutter land allele drop out (distortions,) but he discounts such considerations as being merely a defense argument.

But what he cannot get around is that a minute amount of Meredith's DNA surviving from tests previously done with the same equipment could have been enlarged to become a false result from the sample taken from Raffaele's kitchen knife.

Without the second enlargement to be tested, there is no way to compare results to see if the confirm each other. And there is also no confirmation that the result came from biological or blood sources.

So Mr. Raper falls back on Article 360 of the Criminal Procedure Code as though a legal permission to use the results of an LCN sample amplified only once gives credance to its reliability. How does a law determine scientific acceptability?

So how could Stefanoni have proved there was no contamination in that enlargement? She could have first done an enlargement without any sample present. Mr. Raper claims these "negative controls" had been done, but there was no documentation of the result for this. Mr. Raper wants us to believe it just wasn't attached to Stefanoni's report. So why couldn't she produce it when it was requested?

That the independent expert Carla Vecciotti testified that 6 days was sufficient time to avoid lab contamination doesn't prove it didn't happen anyhow. Afterall, supposedly DNA can last 46 days without disappearing.

However convincing Mr. Raper finds the arguments that Raffaele's kitchen knife produced the wounds on Meredith's neck, the arguments that Stefanoni's contrived results that Meredith's DNA were found on that knife are equally unconvincing. And Mr. Raper cannot claim that blood was found on that knife since Stefanoni didn't do that test.

Again with the bra clasp sample, the match of the profile is not what is in question. What's questionable is whether handling of the bra clasp caused the sample to be contaminated.

Regardless of where the bra clasp was found, it was collected 46 days later after being kicked about a yard away under a rug. The investigators used dirty gloves and shoe covers when collecting it and passed it from one to another before putting it into the evidence bag. This handling is documented in a video the police themselves made of the handling.

For no particularly good reason, Mr. Raper claims it's the burden of the defense to explain where the contamination came from and got on the bra clasp. It's the prosecution's burden to prove the evidence it uses is reliable. If the prosecution cannot prove contamination did not occur, the evidence is not reliable.

It's ridiculous for Mr. Raper to expect the defense to identify the exact invisible deposit of Raffaele's DNA outside Meredith's room and show the exact process by which that DNA was transferred from there into Meredith's room and onto the bra clasp.

The police didn't swab every single bit of surface in that cottage. However small the possibility that a deposit of Raffaele's DNA they didn't recover could have adhered to a dirty glove or shoe cover and have been transferred into Meredith's room to re-adhere to the bra clasp, the police cannot prove it didn't happen.

And Raffaele had been in that cottage visiting Amanda before the murder and when he came with her after the murder. So there was indeed the possibility of his DNA depositing there outside Meredith's room.

It's true that the smaller the LCN sample is, the more a problem contamination becomes. But there is no reason contamination can only be a LCN sample. There is no reason contamination cannot contain a full profile. And there is no reason touch contamination is necessary when it's dust that carries it. Dust adheres to plenty of things.

Friday, December 22, 2017

KrissyG's Cracked Fairytales, Part 1

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

KrissyG starts out with a lie about what Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollectio said to each other while waiting at the cottage for the police to come. KrissyG has no way to know they were discussing what to say to the police, but she asserts it anyhow.

By cracks and fissures KrissyG must mean differences between what Amanda and Raffaele said. Just why those differences have any significance is a mystery she makes up explanations for.

And yet she claims that Raffaele claimed after three days that Amanda made him lie. That's not what the statement the police coerced him to sign on November 6, 2007 actually said. He only claimed that she had convinced him of "her version" of what happened. Even so, coerced statement doesn't explain what it was about his earlier statements that were rubbish. The police forgot to tell him that.

Like so many guilt mongers, KrissyG wants to be able to label things about Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito as lies regardless of content. While there are interesting correlations in the guide to liars that she links to, those correlations could also indicate an exasperated person trying to express replies so that they cannot be manipulated by cyber bullies.

It doesn't matter that Amanda said they left the cottage at AROUND 5:00 PM nad Raffaele said they left AROUND 5:30 PM. Neither time was exact, but they left the cottage anyhow. It doesn't matter that Amanda didn't mention going to Raffaele's apartment by way of the center of town as Raffaele said. They still ended up at his apartment.

Amanda was not writing according to a set script as KrissyG wants to believe. Amanda was writing according to how she remembered things. Contrary to KrissyG, Amanda sometimes remembered things differently as in her email to her friends and family. This is normal for most people since things they remember change significance from one time to another.

KrissyG wants to use the statement Raffaele was coerced by the police to sign as his true expression of what happened instead of what Amanda told him, but the timeline of that coerced statement is in violation of Jovana Popovic's testimony about seeing Amanda at Raffaele's apartment at 6:00 PM and 8:40 PM. According to the coerced statement, Raffaele doesn't get to his apartment until 9:00 PM and Amanda doesn't get there until 1:00 AM the next morning.

KrissyG claimed that Raffaele saying he didn't remember what they did in town before going on to his apartment raises a big flag because he didn't simply say he didn't know. Why does it matter what they did in town? The important thing is that they got to his apartment where Jovana Popovic saw Amanda.

In spite of Raffaele changing the time leaving the cottage from AROUND 5:30 PM in his November 2nd questioning to between 5:30 PM to 6:00 PM in his first written statement, KrissyG insists that Raffaele has a script he's sticking to. What important thing could he be hiding about going home?

And also, if Raffaele were sticking to a script in his November 7th diary entry as KrissyG says, it must be the script the police typed for him to sign on November 6th. He wrote in his diary the same mistaken 8 to 8:30 PM for when he and Amanda got back to his apartment.

Of course KrissyG wants it to be fact that Raffaele saying he had not intention of going back outside that night was a lie. She gives as her reason that he is lying his saying the reason he didn't want to go out that night was that it was cold. Calling that reason an "embellishment" doesn't make it false. It was cold that night.

Why would Raffaele know the police would confiscate his diary to read it? KrissyG assumes he wrote his diary entries to lie to the police because she wants to say he's guilty. As he is innocent, he would have no expectation the police would behave that way.

KrissyG wants to believe that Amanda's letter to her lawyers would include lies. Why would she do that? KrissyG "proves" Amanda to be a liar because she wrote that she took off her shoes. It is a fact irrelevant to a lot of things,but maybe not to Amanda's story. Besides, it is the same irrelevant facts that mentioned in one place the absense of which in another place guilt mongers call lies.

KrissyG wants to prove Amanda a liar by the list in her diary of things Amanda and Raffaele did on November 1st. KrissyG suggests that Amanda was faking amnesia back on November 6th because she could remember these things on November 27th. It wasn't amnesia that Amanda was suffering from, but the confusion caused by the brainwashing the police used on her.

This confusion is evident in Amanda's First and Second Memorandum which demonstrated her struggle to regain true memories. That she could remember things well by November 27th is still an accomplishment, but hardly a reason to call her a liar. And of course KrissyG still criticized her for her consistency in leaving out what Raffaele said about going through the center of town on the way to his apartment.

KrissyG makes a big deal about Amanda finishing that list with the statement "It's that simple." KrissyG claims that's an indicator that Amanda I a liar, but that statement really led to her wondering why her lawyers didn't want her to express this simple list of activities. What KrissyG cannot explain is who Amanda is lying to writing in her own diary. And of course there was nothing false about that list anyhow.

It's terribly confusing that the reason Amanda never mentioned the trip through the center of town on their way to Raffaele's apartment was that Raffaele had not remembered why they went that way when he mentioned it to the police. Obviously the police were searching for things to trip Raffaele in his account, and it was totally irrelevant why they went through the center of town. Of course, KrissyG likes bizarre and irrelevant things if they can be used to call Amanda a liar. Just look at her opinion about Amanda saying she took off her shoes.

KrissyG gives no possible deceptive purpose for Amanda to leave out of her account the route by which she had Raffaele returned to his apartment, but KrissyG still calls it a lie.

Amélie In her book Amanda very definitely used a conversation with Raffaele about the movie Amélie as an introduction to their seeing it the night of November 1st. Maybe they really had that conversation on October 28th, but it would only have made her book difficult to understand separating the two events just for the sake of a timeline. There was absolutely no deceptive purpose in Amanda writing it this way.

Since Jovana Popovic saw Amanda at Raffaele's apartment at 6:00 PM, there is no way the walk from the cottage to his apartment took two to five hours as KrissyG claims. KrissyG just wants to speculate something awful.

That Amanda and Raffaele turned off their phones is no more proof either of them left his apartment than Amanda's not mentioning the route they took to his apartment proves she didn't go there with him. How does KrissyG explain Jovana Popovic's testimony that Amanda was there at 6:00 PM?

KrissyG has not demonstrated any serious anomolies in Amanda's and Raffaele's stories that would justAmélie ify the treatment they got on the night of November 5-6th. She cannot explain why the police focused on Amanda from the very first day. Raffaele is right that the only reason the police focused on him was because he is Amanda's alibi. They had to cause that alibi to fail.

How did KrissyG expect Amanda to be stalking Meredith when Jovana Popovic saw Amanda at Raffaele's apartment at 6 PM and again at 8:40 PM when Meredith got home? So KrissyG is skeptical about Popovic's testimony? What possible reason would Popovic have for lying?

Why would KrissyG doubt that Amanda and Raffaele ate before the murder? Or that the kitchen sink pipes leaked before the murder? What is it about the murder that would have delayed their hunger or the pipe's weakness?

I've never seen the movie Amélie as an alibi. Amanda and Raffaele were each other's alibi. It never occurred to either of them that the movie they watched would be needed as an alibi.

KrissyG's Cracked Fairytales, Part 2

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/knox_sollecito_how_from_their_very_first_questionings_the_cracks_2/

In this Part 2 of KrissyG's Cracked Fairytales she analyzes Amanda Knox's deposition to the police taken on November 2, 2007. KrissyG continues to use the guide to liars that she used in Part 1. She still focuses on showing existentially that AmandaKnox is a liar.

KrissyG does a remarkable slight of word in talking about how the police investigated Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. She claims the police didn't "zoom in" on Amanda and Raffaele because they were interviewing many other witnesses.

What's deceptive about that claim is that the police were asking those other witnesses about Amanda and Raffaele, and the police were quite frank in their immediate assumption that Amanda in particular was involved with the murder. And while KrissyG denies that the police focused their investigation on Raffaele, she referenced unproved ties to the mafia as being the reason.

So certainly, the police pretended that Amanda and Raffaele were merely witnesses, but they harbored suspicion of them all along. Investigator Edgardo Giobbi had his ridiculous three reasons to believe her guilt even before the interrogation of November 5-6th.

The only reason the police looked beyond Amanda and Raffaele for a suspect was because they had mistaken threads found in Meredith's left hand for hair from a black man. The police didn't even wait for the forensic report before looking for a black man to use for tying Amanda to the murder.

Of course KrissyG wants to use this deposition of November 2nd to limit what Amanda can claim later. The hypocrisy of that is that KrissyG wants to hold Amanda responsible for the November 5-6th statements that contradict everything that came before. Those contradictions should indicate the November 5-6th statements were coerced, but guilt mongers want to consider them truth.

KrissyG jumps to a lot of conclusions about what Amanda would or would not think at the time events unfolded. And KrissyG makes big distinctions about how Amanda worded things without acknowledging that Amanda was expressing these things after the events.

KrissyG claims we only have Amanda's word for it that the front door was open when she arrived at the cottage. That's to emphasize that KrissyG has already decided Amanda was lying. KrissyG reinforces her assertion by asking the reader to imagine that Amanda's real purpose of coming home was to "tidy up." And from this flimsy start, she concludes that Amanda had to leave the door unlocked to distance herself from the murder. Of course it takes a key to lock the door, and Guede must have found Meredith's key in order to leave by that door. But would Guede know the door had to be locked to keep it shut? Would Guede care about locking it on his way out? He would lock Meredith's room door to delay discovery of the body while he was escaping, but why would he take time to lock the front door? Meredith's key was never found.

The police asked Amanda for this statement because Meredith had just been found murdered behind a lock door. It's not as though she still didn't know the door was locked. So that's why she mentioned that she hadn't checked to see if doors were locked. It wouldn't have occurred to her at the time to check, but it would occur to her that the police would wonder if she had checked.

The trip to Gubbio turned into a non-event when the circumstances at the cottage took precedent. KrissyG can hardly expect Amanda and Raffaele to continue with their plans for the day trip to Gubbio when there was a break-in at the cottage and Meredith turns up murdered. But KrissyG wants to consider plans not fulfilled as an indicator Amanda is a liar.

KrissyG assumes that Amanda is merely acting innocent in her account of what happened. KrissyG pretends that Amanda claims what she did from what Amanda would imagine an innocent person would do. Actually, Amanda reacted to what she discovered at the cottage according to her own expectations instead KrissyG's expectation. If she had been guilty, she would have taken a change of clothes with her to Raffaele's apartment, and they would have gone straight to Gubbio leaving someone else to find Meredith's body.

KrissyG sees something nefarious in the open front door. Amanda saw that someone had neglected to lock it to keep it from opening on its own. KrissyG sees Meredith's locked door as a compelling mystery. Amanda only saw that the door was shut and refrained from invading her roommate's privacy. KrissyG just imagines that Amanda was delaying the acknowledgement of Meredith's dead body, but of course KrissyG has already decided that Amanda killed Meredith.

Amanda didn't make any claims about knowing or not knowing where her roommates would be that weekend. She just wrote in her book that Filomena told her on the phone after Amanda had been to the cottage. Even if Amanda had thought all of her roommates had left for the weekend, why wouldn't she wonder if one of them had come back on finding the front door open. It was natural for her to call out to them on entering since they were not expecting her, but there was no reason for her to suspect anything when there was absolute quiet that followed. There was no reason to go knocking on Meredith's door if she didn't answer. And seriously, what difference does it make that Amanda called to each roommate by name rather than just calling, "Hello! Anyone home?" as KrissyG preferred?

The truth is that KrissyG wants to believe that Amanda didn't want to admit knowing Meredith had been the only one there. KrissyG wants to assert that Amanda already knew what to expect at the cottage. KrissyG wants to portray Amanda as guilty for not knocking on Meredith's door and trying to open it, but Amanda had no reason to think Meredith was home. Amanda is not sure what to think about what she found at the cottage even after she left to go back to Raffaele's apartment. She had no reason to phone him from the cottage.

KrissyG of course is still pretending that Amanda is only imagining herself innocent. KrissyG wants to believe Amanda made up an excuse that a roommate had left the front door unlocked (thereby allowing it to open.) It would never occur to Amanda that someone other than her roommates had been there to leave the front door that way, but to KrissyG, Amanda has to explain why that door was allowed to open. KrissyG thinks Amanda's speculation as to that reason is a "precluding." What does Amanda's assumption one of her roommates went on a quick errand nearby "preclude?" KrissyG must be trying to say Amanda lied.

KrissyG is only speculating that Amanda was really declaring Meredith's life blood disgusting instead of the menstrual blood Amanda thought it was. Of course KrissyG has already decided that anything Amanda says is a lie. And of course Amanda didn't know whose menstrual blood it might have been. Did krissyG expect Amanda to use list the names of all three of her roommates instead of saying "some girl?" KrissyG is being ridiculous in her attempt to imply Amanda lied.

KrissyG thinks the bathmat shuffle was a story that Amanda made up later  when talking to her lawyers, but it doesn't appear in her book. So whenever Amanda said something about it, she must have realized she was remembering it from an earlier time. Why would privileged communication between Amanda and her lawyers be a lie? Who was she trying to deceive and for what purpose?

Also, since the footprints in the hall were only "compatible" with her footprints, the police didn't prove that those footprints were hers rather that those of one of her roommates whose footprint were likely just as compatible. But it's still no lie that if they were Amanda's footprints, they could have gotten there after she showered that morning.

KrissyG calling Amanda a liar doesn't make her lying when she said she didn't flush the toilet because it was disgusting. Amanda would indeed have a complex reaction to finding the unflushed toilet since she had been lectured to about cleaning the toilet after using it. Whether it was cleaning or flushing it, it was strange that this had not been done, and she would have had reason to leave it as it was. Whoever had used that toilet was responsible for it since they had held her responsible for when she used a toilet.

It would occur to her that it could be someone other than her roommates who left the toilet that way, but that was probably after she left the cottage and started thinking about it some more. But whenever she thought it was an intruder's, she would have wondered what it meant. Of course KrissyG has to over-analyze Amanda's impulsive reaction to make it seem a lie. Indeed, KrissyG latches on to Amanda calling it "disgusting" as proof that she is a liar. The same as with calling the possible minstrual blood "disgusting." KrissyG's conclusion is strange since seen the way Amanda saw them, they would be disgusting.

Why does KrissyG think it was sarcastic of Amanda to reply that she didn't know what time things happened? What kind of obsession with time does KrissyG have? KrissyG is just implying lies where there are not lies. Not everyone is constantly looking at the clock, and not many are going to remember later what time it was when they did look. That she doesn't remember exactly what time the pipe of the kitchen sink broke would not keep her from knowing it was the next morning that she brought the mop back to Raffaele's apartment. Of course KrissyG wants it to seem that Amanda had to have gone to the cottage during the murder to get the mop.

KrissyG wants to imply a lie with Amanda's use of the word "immediately." Whether Amanda meant immediately after breakfast or was clarifying that she told Raffaele when she first got to his apartment, she still told him. It's true that Amanda was unsure of what she saw at the cottage meant, but that doesn't make her "ditzy." KrissyG has the advantage of perfect hindsight that Amanda didn't have. Amanda had not discovered the broken-in window yet. That Amanda wanted to see what Raffaele thought doesn't make her a liar.

The assumption that one of her roommates went on a quick errand somewhere close was reason enough to leave the front door unlocked in case that roommate didn't have her key. The accumulation of strange things at the cottage may have been disturbing, but there was no reason for her to think there had been a crime until she came back with Raffaele and saw the broken-in window. Amanda didn't have the advantage of perfect hindsight that KrissyG has.


It is true that Filomena and Laura usually used the bathroom closest to their room. But if one of them were already using that bathroom, wouldn't the other use the small bathroom if needed? Whose-ever menstrual blood would still be disturbing since that's what Amanda thought it was.

Amanda does seem to emphasize that she called Filomena. She mentions calling Filomena before saying how many times she called Meredith's phones. Amanda actually did call Meredith's English phone letting it ring 16 seconds before she called Filomena. Then after calling Filomena, she called Meredith's Italian phone getting an out of service message and then she called Meredith's English phone again in case Meredith was able to answer it at that time. She didn't wait as long that time because she had already tried it before.

KrissyG wants to see lies in Amanda saying first called Filomena and then called Meredith after calling Filomena. There was no possible purpose for such a deception. Amanda gained nothing by these mistakes. Probably Amanda only meant that she called Filomena as the lessee of record before trying to call Laura. And Amanda did try each of Meredith's phones after talking to Filomena whether "dutifully" or not. Nobody told her to call Meredith the first time before calling Filomena. Raffaele only suggested she call one of her roommates and not Meredith in particular.

How does KrissyG know Amanda and Raffaele didn't get to the cottage until 12:35 PM? However long it took them to get from Raffaele's apartment to the cottage, they checked the cottage discovering the broken-in window and the locked door. Amanda went to the apartment below to see if the boys there knew anything. She tried to look in Meredith's window from the bathroom terrace. Raffaele tried to break down Meredith's door. Raffaele called his sister. Raffaele called the Carabinieri, and he and Amanda went outside to wait for the Carabinieri where the Postal Police found them. How could they do all of that in 10 minutes?

Of course it has been proved that the Postal Police arrived later than they originally claimed. The time-stamp of the parking lot security camera showed when they arrived. The time-stamp was slow, and the Postal Police had to walk back from where they eventually parked.

See: http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/raffaele-sollecito-112-call/

KrissyG is mistaken that Amanda called both of Meredith's phones before calling Filomena, but Amanda did call Meredith's English phone before calling Filomena. Yet, KrissyG claims Filomena had to tell her to make the call Amanda had already done. Whose clear lie is that? And Filomena said that she got the same out of service message when trying to call Meredith's Italian phone that Amanda got. So what difference does the short ring time make on that attempt. Also, there was no reason to continue waiting on the second attempt at calling Meredith's English phone. if Meredith was still unable to answer the phone after 16 seconds of its ringing the first time, she certainly could have figured out Amanda had called her twice in order to call her back.

KrissyG seems mystified that Amanda would choose to check Filomena's and Laura's room before checking Meredith's. Amanda was merely checking the rooms nearest the front door through which she entered before going further into the apartment to reach Meredith's door. Of course with perfect hindsight KrissyG is able to see that checking Meredith's door would be a priority, but all Amanda knew was that Meredith hadn't answered her phones.

KrissyG got wrong what Raffaele said about Filomena's door. He found Filomena's door slightly ajar and pushed it open. Of course KrissyG is very eager to claim Amanda lied about something although what purpose such a deception could serve is a mystery.

KrissyG claims that Amanda must have dressed in the dark as there was little natural light in her room. But there was a window, and it was almost noon. So what was the problem? KrissyG just wants to imply that Amanda had something to hide about her lamp. That it was found in Meredith's room doesn't prove that Amanda or Raffaele put it there.

KrissyG makes a big deal out of how Amanda wouldn't enter Filomena's and Laura's room as though not wanting to disturb a crime scene were an incriminating thing. Amanda had seen Filomena's broken-in window. So she would consider the cottage a crime scene. It's perfectly understandable that Amanda would expect the police to want to know if she went into those rooms.

KrissyG is manipulating the meaning of the verb "to contact." All it means is to make a connection. When Amanda answered Filomena's phone call, Amanda made contact with Filomena. Of course KrissyG wants to find another lie to attribute to Amanda, but what difference does it make who called whom since what was important was that Amanda told Filomena about the broken window.

KrissyG wants to stick Amanda with a lie that she said Raffaele called his sister before Amanda called Filomena. Amanda didn't say that. She said that after she returned from trying to find the guys downstairs, Raffaele decided to call his sister. Amanda didn't say when he called his sister, and Amanda only claimed that in the meantime, she called Filomena. That's not saying anything definite, but KrissyG wants to accuse Amanda of lying even if the timing doesn't make any difference.

KrissyG manipulates quotes from Amanda's statement to make it look like Raffaele called his sister after the Postal Police arrived. She splits a paragraph to put the previous paragraph in between the two parts of the split paragraph. Even if KrissyG alleges that Amanda was lying, that's a false quote of what Amanda said to the police.

KrissyG thinks it's interesting that Amanda forgot to mention in her statement that she called her mother just before Luca Altieri kicked open the door at 1:05 PM. Is this the reason guilter mongers claim Amanda was lying when she later told her mother she couldn't remember that phone call? Amanda called her mother many times that morning. Why purpose would that omission serve? KrissyG can imply that it a deliberate omission, but how does she prove it? Besides the omission makes no difference.

It's not clear at all what KrissyG was trying to imply with the "Additionallys" she quoted. The deposition labeled them as "When asked she responds." Maybe KrissyG was implying that police interest in asking her about these things was incriminating. As in any answer can and will be used against her.

Of course Amanda tried to "consolidate" into her email to family and friends what she had told the police. She said in that email that it was her account and it would be natural that she would be trying to bring into focus what she knew in case it was of any use to the police. It's already apparent KrissyG wants to portray Amanda as a liar, and whether liars do commonly work out a "script" for keeping track of their lies is not proof that that was what Amanda was doing.