Pages

Monday, September 18, 2017

Dispicable shakedown of Amanda Knox

https://audioboom.com/posts/6310010-despicable-the-shakedown-of-amanda-knox-episode-2-no-evidence?playlist_direction=reversed&t=0

There are other "episodes" in this "series," but this one should be a good representation of how biased these bloggers are.

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

What good is evidence if it would have been there whether the crime were committed or not. Amanda Knox saying her DNA would have been in the cottage whether or not she were there during the murder doesn't contradict that her DNA was not found in Meredith's room.

Examples of how all evidence was cleaned from other crime scenes does not explain how evidence specific to Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito were identified and cleaned up without disturbing evidence of Rudy Guede. Even if they had done that, where is the evidence of a clean up? Bleach and other cleansers that could have remeved DNA would have left residue that would have been detected by Luminol.

It was thread and not a hair that was found in Meredith's hand. Originally, the police thought that thread was hair from a black man. So they didn't even mistake it for a blond hair. The evidence list doesn't show that blond hair was found in Meredith's room.

Where is the evidence that Amanda Knox and nobody else rearranged Meredith's body after her death if that's what happened? It's an opinion that Amanda Knox did that to throw suspicion on a man. That opinion depends on the assumption she killed Meredith and cannot be used to prove she killed Meredith.

Since the police originally thought a black man was involved with the murder because of the thread they mistook for hair of a black man found in Meredith's hand, the police were the ones who put Patrick into Amanda Knox's mind in order to have a black man to connect her to the murder.

The assumption that it was not a burglary because big items like a computer were not taken doesn't prove it wasn't a burglary until it became a murder. Guede probably threw away the cell phones when he realized he couldn't hide them as easily as the cash and credit cards. But why would he want to carry away anything that could link him to the murder?

There was evidence of semen on the pillow found under Meredith's posterior portion, but the judge refused to have it tested to prove it.

It's a bit ridiculous to downplay Guede's DNA being found inside Meredith's body because it was from skin cells. There is no evidence proving which part of his body those skin cells came from, and regardless of that, his skin cell DNA had no business being inside her anyhow.

Raffaele would have known from Amanda's experience with the investigators that the police were obsessed with Meredith's bottle of Vaseline. Of course he would think the police found Vaseline on Meredith's body.

Where did this idea that Vasiline could destroy DNA come from? Never heard that before. The police were obsessed with Vaseline because of its use in sex.

Why would Raffaele's DNA be expected on the bra clasp when the bra strap was cut instead of unfastened? He wouldn't have touched it. Where is the evidence that Amanda's DNA was found on the bra clasp? Regardless of this myth of a defense expert being fired for refusing to leave that information out, the judge had control of what evidence was tested and reported. The defense were not permitted to conduct their own testing.

If Amanda's DNA were found on the bra clasp, the prosecution would have knowledge of it and would certainly have presented it as evidence whether the defense liked it or not.

The notion of a clean up involves ignoring the hallway and all but the doorway of Meredith's room, but supposedly a complete scrubbing of the rest of the cottage that eliminated all of Amanda's fingerprints. Why would Amanda and Raffaele clean parts of the cottage that had nothing to do with the murder?

The blood in the footprint on the bathmat was diluted, but the pictures of the rest of the blood doesn't show it being diluted at all. There are no blurred edges of the blood stains to indicate that anyone tried to wash them away.

What does it mean to call Raffaele's apartment a crime scene? The police investigated his apartment, but what crime did they find there? The same is true of his car and the downstairs apartment at the cottage although perhaps the police were lying about the blood in that downstairs apartment being from a cat.

Meredith's room is certainly the prime crime scene since that was were Meredith was murdered. Evidence found there has more significance than Amanda's and Raffaele's DNA found elsewhere in the cottage since there is no way to prove when Amanda's and Raffaele's DNA got into the rest of the cottage. Even though the rest of the cottage was investigated as the crime scene, evidence of Amanda and Raffaele being in the rest of the cottage has no significance since it would have been found there anyhow.

Amanda did have Raffaele try to break in Meredith's door before the police arrived. The Postal Police said there was evidence of Raffaele's attempt. Amanda's emotional breakdown concerning the cottage didn't occur until the police brought her back to the cottage during the investigation. Her grief over her friend's death was mistaken as guilt for the murder.

What's confusing about Meredith's murder? Guede broke through a window as he had done in the past for a robbery when decided to use the toilet. He surprised Meredith coming home since she couldn't see him in the front bathroom. He wanted to rape her but fatally stabbed her while trying to subdue her. She smothered on her own blood while he tried to violate her. He ejaculated on the pillow below her posterior portion, but of course the prosecutor didn't want that semen to be proved to be his since he was trying to link Amanda to the crime. Guede realized Meredith was dying and got towels out of the bathroom to try to stop her bleeding. Afterward, he locked her door to prevent the discovery of her body while he decided what to do, and he left by the front door.

The bare footprints found in the hall, Filomena's room, and Amanda's room were not in blood. Not all of the footprints had both Meredith's and Amanda's DNA or any DNA at all. There is no proof these footprints were Amanda's, and there is no proof as to when they got where they are. The footprints could very well be of either Filomena or Laura left behind in the bleach used in a spot-cleaning.

This had to be a spot-cleaning use of bleach since wherever the bleach was used would have been illuminated by the Luminol used to find the bare footprint.

What is the value of delaying the discovery of the body? Guede would have had a reason to delay discovery of the body while he was fleeing the country, but Amanda and Raffaele went nowhere. In fact Amanda went to the cottage for personal reasons and then brought Raffaele back with her when she was disturbed by what she found.

Massei argued that Amanda and Raffaele decided they were going to be interviewed by the police anyhow so that they may as well be at the cottage when the police showed up. But that makes no sense if they also wanted to delay discovery of the body.

If Amanda and Raffaele cleaned up most of Guede's shoe prints leaving the cottage, why wouldn't the Luminol have shown those shoe prints overlaid by the bleach or other cleanser that would also have reacted with Luminol? And why would Amanda and Raffaele only clean the heel of the footprint on the bathmat, but leave the footprint on the bathmat without even trying to rinse it out?

And since the bathmat was not a smooth sheet of paper, how can anyone be sure how big the foot was that left that print? The blood that formed that print probably spread out beyond the foot that pressed it into the fabric.

If Amanda's alleged PR to influence the public should be investigated, then so too should the negative PR put out by those advocating her guilt should be investigated for how it influences the public. There was an awful lot of fake news put out to discredit Amanda.

It would have been more instructive for the bloggers to identify and explain the deficiencies of the law enforcement experts they claimed should not have commented on the case against Amanda and Raffaele. Simply making accusations that these experts didn't know this case only calls into question the reliability of what the bloggers are saying.

There is no proof that two knives were used in killing Meredith. The assertion that there were two knives was brought in by the prosecution to create the possibility that Amanda was holding one of them. Originally the medical examiner specified only one knife was used and it was a small knife like the imprint on the sheet showed. The medical examiner also admitted that any pointed knife with one blade was compatible with the wounds, but the heft marks left beside the neck wounds precludes a knife as long as the kitchen knife could have made wounds with less depth than its length.

If there really were three conspirators perpetrating the attack on Meredith, why were so many wounds necessary? Meredith would have been quickly subdued without her having a chance to resist as the blood smears in her room indicate. There would have been no necessity to intimidate her with knife cuts. The abundance of wounds point to a single attacker who relied on pain to subdue Meredith rather than brute force.

Prof. Durshowitz seems to think that anything entered as evidence must prove something. That's just not true. The prosecution under the inquisitorial form of justice that Italy entered anything and everything it wants including the kitchen sink. But under that same inquisitorial system, the defense can enter nothing. In particular, the defense could not get a puddle of semen found directly under Meredith's posterier portion analyzed to prove it was semen and whose it was.

And even though the Supreme Court said the 1:45 and 5:45 statements could not be used as evidence in the murder trial, Prof. Durshowitz cites them as evidence that Amanda participated in the murder.

Regardless of salacious examples of how alleged PR campaigns have created havoc elsewhere, the mere suspicion of available money does not prove that malicious PR activity occurred to support Amanda and Raffaele in the Italian courts or the court of public opinion. The assumption that justice has been perverted is not proof of PR mischief either.

It should be noted that if Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito can be proved to have achieved acquittal through breaking the law, their acquittals could be overturned and they could be retried as though there had been no trial to make it double jeopardy. However, such action cannot be expected simply because some people think their acquittal had to be illegal.

However astronomical the bloggers think the DNA result of Meredith's DNA on the kitchen knife blade being false is, the fact still remains that Stefanoni cheated to get that result. The chance of a false result went up astronomically with the over-enlargement of the sample she did. The result is legally and scientifically unreliable as evidence.
-
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following is the exchange of comments between me and the participants of the podcast starting with my initial comment below the podcast.





































Lisa Wilson and Nick van der Leek didn't really respond to my challenge of their facts. They instead focused on attacking me for my sincerity and professionalism. I never expected them to take me seriously anyhow, but it is interesting how they evaded admitting they were wrong.





Thursday, June 8, 2017

First Memorandum Description of Abusive Interrogation

Amanda Knox started her First Memorandum expressing confusion.

She said the police told her they had hard evidence that she was at the villa when Meredith was killed. The police lied.

She was confused being told that Raffaele Sollecito denied she was with him the night of the murder. Raffaele had not said this to the police during his interrogation. Raffaele recanted his statement when he learned of the lies the police put in it.

She stated in her First Memorandum that she was "very doubtful of the verity of my statements because they
were made under the pressures of stress, shock and extreme exhaustion."

She claimed she was hit in the head when she didn't respond the way the police wanter her to.

The police threatened to arrest her and put her in jail for 30 years if she continued to remember incorrectly.

She again stated that it was due to pressure and confusion that images they encouraged came to her mind. But she said those things were unreal to her and like a dream.

She expressed confusion at the contrasting ideas of being at the murder with Patrick, but with Raffaele at his apartment during the same period of time. How could this be unless the police forced her to believe the part about being at the murder with Patrick?

She emphasized that her statements that night were what could have happened, but that being at the murder with Patrick was unreal compared to being with Raffaele at his apartment.

She asked the police not to yell at her because it only confused her.

Wednesday, June 7, 2017

Responding to Free_RudyGuede

https://twitter.com/Free_RudyGuede/status/872528290644451328

Amanda Knox did a little modeling with a "Ta-Dah" only when Giobbi had her put on protective gear before entering the downstairs apartment of the guys. It was not the apartment where her friend Meredith was killed.

Amanda Knox did burst into tears when brought into the apartment where her friend Meredith was killed. It matters not one little bit that it was a day after Giobbi had her go into the apartment downstairs.

There is absolutely nothing unusual about a young woman like Amanda Knox to do a little "Ta-Dah" on modeling articles of clothing they have just put on as Amanda Knox had when Giobbi had her put protective clothing on before entering the apartment downstairs.

There is absolutely no reason for Amanda Knox to have the same reaction on entering the apartment downstairs as on entering the apartment where her friend was killed.

Saturday, June 3, 2017

Disbelief in Guede as a Loner

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/evidenceoverview/comments/area_23_problems_with_guede_as_single_attacker/

A big problem with guilter analysis of Guede's activities on the night of November 1-2, 2007 is that they emphasize what they think Guede would or would not do instead of what they know he was capable of doing. Guilters make these speculations of what Guede would or would not have done from criteria they cannot prove Guede even thought about.

23-01 Yes, Guede had been in the downstairs apartment of the guys he played basketball with. He would know what was in that apartment and may not have been interested in what he could steal there. He had never been in the upstairs apartment where the girls lived, and he could have been curious what they had that was worth stealing. He had not been worried about being caught the other times he was arrested for breaking and entering. There was no reason to expect him to be any more cautious this time.

23-02 Actually, Guede was seen on CCTV at the entrance of the parking deck accross the street from the villa at 7:41 PM. We know he's that man because he said there was a white car with its lights on standing near the driveway of the villa, and that car can be seen in the CCTV. Why he chose this time to case the villa for a possible burglary is a total mystery, but it would have been dark.

23-03 Maybe walking out of the parking deck gave Guede time to consider how exposed the front door was to the street. Still, there's no way to guess what criteria he considered.

23-04 Guilters question why Amanda Knox didn't notice Filomena's window when she went to the villa the next morning to take a shower and get a change of clothes. If they think she should have noticed that window because it was broken, then Guede who would have been looking for a weakness would have noticed the shutters were not completely closed. Since guilters claim that Guede was familiar with this type of window, he could have decided he had a chance of opening the shutters in order to break the window.

23-05 It's debateable that the parking lot lights would have illuminated Filomena's windows very much. Typically, parking lot lights are focused where the light is needed. That's where the cars are. Maybe Guede should have knowledge of easier access routes to breaking into the upper apartment, but there's no proof that he remembered them. According to guilters, Filomena's window was obvious when walking toward the villa. So Guede would have to been aware of that possibility.

23-06 The shutters would not have been completely closed because they didn't fit right. Why would Guede limit himself to a window he knew beforehand that he could break through? He wouldn't know for sure if he could break through until he tried. Why couldn't he have gone to another window if he failed with the first one?

23-07 Since he knew how this window worked, he could have preferred it to another he was not familiar with. He could easily go to another window if he found he couldn't get in through Filomena's window.

23-08 Probably because Guede was wearing sneakers instead of hiking boots, he didn't leave any scratches on the wall he climbed to Filomena's window. Since he was wearing sneakers, he probably made sure there was no slippery grass or mud on the soles of those sneakers that would have made it harder to climb.

As it is, there is a scuffed mark on the corner of the window below where Guede would have stepped on his way up to Filomena's window.

23-09 How do we know Guede didn't use a stick or other extension to knock the shutters open before reaching for the window sill?

23-10 How do we know that nobody saw Guede climbing to Filomena's window? Did the police locate anyone who walked by between 7:42 PM and 9:00 PM to see what they saw? I doubt the police wanted proof that he was climbing the wall. Assuming anyone saw him, would that othe person call police? Given how much drug activity went on in that neighborhood, witnesses might not want to get involved.

23-11 A smaller rock would have made a smaller hole in the window. Guede wanted to break through the window enough that he could climb through afterwards.

23-12 Guede was a basketball player. The rock was heavier than a basketball, but he could still lob it the same way. How do we know Guede had not practiced with other rocks before coming to the villa. Of course if he hadn't managed to hit the window right in one shot, he could have tried a second shot. Hitting exactly right in one shot could have been extreme luck. How does anyone know he did it in one shot anyhow?

23-13 The rock hit the inner shutter bruising and scratching it and embedding broken glass into it. The inner shutter absorbed the momentum of the rock allowing it to drop to the floor under the window.

23-14 Yes, there was a bag of clothes already on the floor below the window. For the rock to be found in the bag, the clothes in that bag must have already spilled onto the floor.

23-15 Again, Guede would have made sure there was no slippery grass nor mud on his sneakers to hamper his climbing the wall.

23-16 Why would the force of the rock have to be light for the broken glass to stay on the sill? The direction of the force was toward the interior of the room. That's the direction the broken glass would have taken except a few pieces that broke with lesser force than the rest. They would have come straight down but would fall from the force of gravity which would have been the same no matter how hard the rock was thrown.

It is worth noting that if the rock had been thrown through the window from the inside, a great deal of glass would have fallen to the ground outside. If the window had been pulled in to keep that from happening, the resulting broken glass deposit would have been totally different than was found.

23-17 There was no reason glass would have fallen to the ground outside when Guede pulled himself onto the window sill. However, an imperfection in the shoe prints he left in the villa was probably from a piece of the broken glass that wedged into the sole of that shoe.

23-18 When Guede was arrested, his right hand did have cuts in it. Guilters claim it was not from the knife slipping in his hand while he was stabbing Meredith. So do they claim the cuts were also not from cutting himself on the broken glass from the window?

23-19 Since Guede had made sure there was no slippery grass or mud on his sneakers before climbing the wall, why would he leave any of that when he got into the villa?

23-20 Guede probably did pull the shutter together to obscure that the window had been broken. Keeping Filomena's room dark would provide another reason Geude was able to surprise Meredith when she came into the villa. Of course it may just have been habit to turn off the light when he left the room.

23-21 No clothes were taken out of a closet or the cabinets. All of the clothes on the floor had been scattered there when the bag under the window fell over. Probably the bag toppled over on its own before the rock hit it, but since the rock was found inside the bag, the force of its impact may have scattered more clothes that had not already come out.

23-22 That the rock may have scattered some of the clothes is demonstrated in that some of the glass was found under the scattered clothes as well as on top of them. That there was broken glass found on top of the scattered clothes does not prove how the clothes were scattered on the floor.

23-23 Would jewelry, designer purses, or glasses be things that Guede would be interested in stealing? He would have no ready market for selling them. They would just be identifiable evidence tying him to his burglary. What he would want was cash. He may have thought there was a way of using the credit cards without getting caught, and he would have expected information from Meredith's cellphones that he could get money for.

23-24 Using the front bathroom was another reason Guede was able to surprise Meredith. Since he was on the commode, he probably didn't expect anyone to come home that early. He probably thought all the girls would be out partying until much later as they usually did when he observed them.

23-25 Guede must have closed Filomena's door since Meredith didn't notice anything to alert her to danger when she came home. This may have been a habit since he closed Meredith's door later. He probably closed the front door on leaving, but since he didn't lock the front door, it came open again because of the faulty latch.

23-26 We only have Guede's word for it that he was playing loud music on his ipod. Meredith would not have been able to see Guede on the toilet even if the connecting doors were open. It was more like a hall with three sections.

The shutters of Filomena's window were only partially open. Even if the lights were on, it would not have been obvious that the window had been broken. Likely, Meredith didn't look to one side or the other but just walked toward her room in the back of the villa.

23-27 Even if Guede had not closed the door to Filomena's room, why would Meredith notice the mess from the break-in? Meredith was heading to her own room. She wouldn't have had a view of the mess until she was past Filomena's door. There was no reason for Meredith to have looked back that way.

23-28 Even if Meredith had looked toward the door of the front bathroom, she could not have seen into the second section where the toilet was.

23-29 Yes, Guede has claimed that in spite of the music on his iPod, he heard commotion from the rest of the villa. We only have his word for it that he was listening to his iPod. He may have said this to make seem unlikely that Meredith was unaware of his presence. Of course he may very well have noticed her presence when she turned on a light.

23-30 There is plenty of evidence that Guede attacked Meredith in her room. What his thinking was leading up to this attack is speculation.

23-31 It's purely speculative to think that Guede made an instant decision about anything. He may have only wanted to intimidate and subdue her at first. Maybe achieving these things inspired him to try and rape her, and that decision led to her death.

23-32 Guede probably sneaked up behind Meredith while she went to her room. He did have on his sneakers at the time. Since Meredith wasn't expecting anyone to be in the villa, she may not have been alert to hear him coming until he had one hand holding her from behind while the other hand held his knife to her neck. Maybe he originally intended to push her into her room closing the door for a good enough head start escaping without being recognized, but taking her into the room would indicate he was in no hurry to leave.

23-33 The medical examiner first indicated that only a small knife was used to make the wounds to Meredith's neck. The large wound was made by repeated stabs to the same area. That large wound was ragged as the result of the multiple stabs that created it. Bruise marks beside the wounds were made by the hilt of the knife handle. Since the wounds were all the same shallow depth, these hilt marks indicate all the wounds were made by the same small knife. There is only the bloody imprint of one small knife left on the sheet.

23-34 Yes, we know that Meredith put up a fight when Guede attacked her in her room.

23-35 The bra clasp had been cut from the bra. Guilters also claim the disrobing of Meredith was a staging after her death to make it seem she was sexually assaulted. Whatever the truth is about the disrobing, Guede did leave his skin DNA inside Meredith.

23-36 Whatever the sexual assault was, it did not include rape since the medical examiner said it didn't happen. How, TJMK knows the struggle before the stabbing was prolonged is not explained. All we know is that Guede had surprised Meredith and gotten her into her room.

23-37 The majority of the struggle is documented in blood coming from Meredith's neck. There were Guede's bloody footprints and smears from Meredith's body as she continued fighting.

23-38 It's ridiculous to say there were no defensive wounds when there were those awful wounds to Meredith's neck. Guede tried to subdue her by holding his knife to her neck, but she fought on anyhow. He may not have meant to kill her, but he did stab her to try to get her to stop fighting him.

23-39 It would have been impossible for Meredith to scream while suffocating on her own blood. It's only speculation that the three ladies trying to sleep in nearby apartments actually heard Meredith scream. Most likely Meredith was already dead anyhow. The medical examiner had initially estimated the time of death to be around 9:30 PM. Guede claimed he left the villa around that time. It was only because Mignini couldn't place Amanda and Raffaele at the villa at that time that he decided it had to have been later.

23-40 The only reason Mignini theorized a second knife was because he wanted to put it into Amanda's hand to claim she delivered the fatal stab. The medical examiner originally said there was just one knife, but Mignini had to have that changed to fit his scenario.

23-41 Now why would Guede be concerned that the police would soon arrive? Who was going to call them? Meredith's scream would not be heard for another two hours according to Mignini and Massei. Besides, how can TJMK claim Guede immediately ran away when he said that he got towels out of the small bathroom and tried to stop Meredith's bleeding? TJMK believe many things Guede said if it implicates Amanda and Raffaele. Part of what he said that implicates them is that they left him trying to save Meredith's life.

23-42 It's not clear whose footprint was on the bathmat. Supposedly, it measured to be Raffaele's footprint, but the measurement was inaccurate because it was estimated from a photo. More than likely, Guede only dropped a spot of blood onto the bathmat, and Amanda stepped onto that spot of blood when she got out of the shower the next morning. That's why there is only half a footprint. Also, unless TJMK accepts that Guede did take his right shoe off in order to wash blood off of it, then Amanda was the only one who had been barefoot in the villa.

23-43 Guede did claim he got towels out of the small bathroom to try to stop Meredith's bleeding. So it would have been Guede who went into that bathroom with Meredith's blood on his hands. We do know that someone got that towel and tried to use it on Meredith. Why does Guede have to have a purpose for leaving blood in the places it was found in the bathroom?

23-44 Amanda's and Raffaele's Luminol indicated footprints outside of Meredith's room were not confirmed to have been in blood when the additional test was done. However, even if those footprints had been in blood, there was certainly the spot of blood Guede left on the bathmat that Amanda stepped on to provide the small amount needed to make those footprints, and Raffaele could have stepped on her footprints and made his own footprint. It still could have been something innocent that the Luminol reacted with. Even pond scum can react with Luminol. The possibilities are extensive which is why the additional test is necessary.

23-45 It's more likely that Guede got Meredith's blood on the front of his pants. It that's the source of the spot of blood on the bathmat, it may not have dripped off his pants until he got to the small bathroom. It would have been exceedingly awkward to get his leg into the sink to wash it. He probably cleaned the dripping blood from his pants using a towel.

23-46 Guede did leave his bloody hand print on the pillow. What does TJMK think this has to do with his bloody right foot?

23-47 Why does TJMK think Guede re-entered Filomena's room?

23-48 How did TJMK determine that anyone cleaned up the floor in Filomena's room, but left Amanda's footprints? There were no smudges or cleanser residue, and Amanda didn't leave those footprint until the next morning.

23-49 So how could anyone have known where the blood traces where when they could only be found with Luminol?

23-50 What Guede may have thought about Filomena's floor is purely speculative even if he said anything about it.

23-51 There is no evidence that Guede used towels to clean anything in Meredith's room. The towels were positioned close to her neck. Maybe he did try to stop her bleeding as he said he did. But that's all those towels were used for except maybe to clean away the dripping blood from his pants.

23-52 Again, why would Guede be worried about a scream that was not heard for two more hours? He probably didn't notice Meredith was suffocating to death while he was trying to rape her.

23-53 Maybe Guede put Meredith on the sheet and the pillowcase because he was squimish about raping her on top of all the blood that was on the floor.

23-54 There's nothing but speculation in the notion that Guede even thought about his footprints in Meredith's room to decide anything about cleaning them up.

23-55 Meredith could have borrowed Amanda's night stand lamp, but it could be that Guede was the one who put it there for whatever reason he had.

23-56 That he put the duvet over Meredith's body does indicate he may not have intended to kill her. He was probably subconsciously covering up his crime.

23-57 It was Guede's DNA that was found on the purse. So it follows that he stole the wallet, but wouldn't want to keep the receipts.

23-58 Nothing that Guede did about Meredith was smart. DNA didn't necessarily have to be left on the purse straps. Maybe it took more pressure on his fingers to get the zipper open.

23-59 Guede also took two credit cards. It was the presumption that Amanda and Raffaele took the cell phones to delay discovery of the body. It applies more to Guede than to Amanda and Raffaele who know how to turn cell phones off as the simpler solution. It would have been Guede who would have wanted the door shut and locked on his crime. Amanda and Raffaele could have just gone on their day trip as planned.

23-60 Again, why would Guede be concerned about the police coming? The scream attributed to Meredith would not be heard until after 11:30 PM. Guede wasn't concerned about Meredith showing up. Why would he be concerned about Amanda showing up?

23-61 Amanda and Raffaele were accused of all sorts of ridiculous things to mislead the police. Why wouldn't Guede contrive to close and lock the door without turning in his footprints to do so in order to make it seem the door had to have been locked later? It still remains that there simply was no evidence of anyone being in that villa but Guede and Meredith. Meredith couldn't have closed and locked her door. So Guede must have been the one who did it no matter how he managed it.

23-62 Or it may be that Guede deliberately left bloody footprints through the hall and livingroom and out the front door to mislead the investigators. Maybe he returned in socks only to close and lock Meredith's door. Her keys were never recovered.

23-63 Even if he had intended to take Filomena's camera and computer, he would have realized that those items would identify him with the murder. As it was, he threw away the cell phones before returning home, and the keys, wallet, and credit cards were never found.

23-64 Probably Guede initially refrained from flushing the toilet to avoid alerting Meredith of his presence. Likely, he simply forgot about the unflushed toilet. He had forgotten his unflushed toilet while visiting the guys downstairs.

23-65 How does TJMK know that Guede left the front door of the villa open? All we know for sure is that he didn't lock it. The front door would come open on its own if not locked. So there's no way to be sure Guede hadn't closed it when he left. Guede had a reason to want Meredith's door locked. He wanted to be shut of the crime he had done. That reason didn't extend to the front door.

23-66 If Guede was supposed to have been in such a hurry to leave the villa, why would he want to wait long enough to re-lock the driveway gate? Actually, he would have less reason to want to be seen at the driveway gate than to be in the villa out of sight.

23-67 Nara Capezzali didn't see whoever ran up the metal stairs of the parking lot. She couldn't have known if it were Guede or not. Guede claims to have left the villa at 9:30 PM. And his dialing of one of Meredith's cell phones at 10:13 PM would indicate that this was so. Even if he took a whole hour attacking Meredith, he would have left an hour before Mrs. Capezzali thought she heard a scream and footsteps going up the metal stairs.

23-68 It would make sense that Guede would go out of his way to throw away Meredith's cell phones. That would distance him from the phones which he only wanted for whatever usable information like bank accounts and passwords they might contain.

Thursday, June 1, 2017

General Excuses Asserted For Multiple Attackers

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/evidenceoverview/comments/area_22_problems_with_single_attacker_hypothesis/

22-01 There is no real confirmation that Meredith ever got a chance to scream. The people who claimed to have heard a scream sometime around 11:30 PM would not have known who screamed. It is only by fiat ruling concerning Curatolo's unreliable evidence that placed the time of death at that time, and Curatolo was only testifying about when he thought he last saw a couple he thought were Amanda and Raffaele.

There was no need for Guede to cover Meredith's mouth after he stabbed her in the neck many times. Meredith would have been struggling to breathe and could not have screamed.

22-02 Again, Monacchia like the other witnesses did not see that it was Meredith who screamed, and didn't identify who was arguing from their voices.

22-03 Capezzali claims she heard footsteps running after the scream she claimed she heard, but Capezzali was mostly deaf, and her daughter sleeping in the same room was not awakened by whatever Capezzali thought she heard.

22-04 There is no evidence that Meredith's martial arts training was sufficient to do her much good when surprised by Guede had his own strength superior to hers.

22-05 Why would Guede inflict wounds that would have been interpreted as defensive wounds when the multiple knife stabs to her neck show he had an intimidating advantage over her? Those knife stabs are probably defensive wounds since she struggled anyhow. Guede probably over-reacted to her continued struggle stabbing her more severely than he intended to get control over her.

22-06 What difference does the period of the attack make since the stabs to her neck caused Meredith to suffocate on her own blood. Once the blood started seeping into her windpipe, her struggle was over.

22-07 How could Meredith continue resisting the sexual attack when she was fighting for her breath?

22-08 Again, how would Meredith struggle against removal of her clothes when she was struggling to breathe? Also, supposedly part of the staging was removal of her lower clothes after she died.

22-09 That Guede didn't leave shoe prints until he went through the livingroom to leave doesn't mean he didn't go elsewhere in the villa without leaving shoe prints. Since nobody else left shoe prints in Meredith's room, why is it significant that Guede left no shoe prints while removing Meredith’s bra, moving her body onto the pillow, covering her with the duvet, going through her purse, throwing receipts from her purse onto the duvet, placing the purse on her bed, closing the door, and locking the door. For one thing, it was Guede's DNA that was found on the purse. If the claim is that Guede couldn't have locked Meredith's door because his bloody footprints don't turn to face the door before leaving the villa, how do we know he actually left after making those bloody footprints. If staging is a possibility for thinking Amanda and Raffaele were there, then staging the incomprehensible footprints could have been Guede's way to distance himself from the murder.

22-10 How do we know there ever was a complete bloody footprint extending off the bathmat onto the floor of the bathroom? We don't even know for sure the real measurments of that footprint since the measurements were calculated from a photograph. What probably happened is that Amanda discovered the bloody spot on the bathmat when she stepped on it from the shower. That's why there is only half a footprint and is a good reason for how she got the blood on her bare feet for leaving the tracks in the hall. None of her footprints lead from Meredith's room. That's why the alleged clean-up was theorized to begin with. The police and prosecutors wanted a reason to connect Amanda to Meredith's room.

Framing Falls Apart

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/powerpoints_17_why_the_totality_of_evidence_suggests_knox_and_sollecit/

The big picture approach to evidence that James Raper and Kermit allege is that individual assertions prove the validity of other individual assertions by how well they fit together even if none of them can be a fact proven on its own merits.

Guilters always claim that without whatever assertion posed without proof there is still plenty of evidence to convict even though each of the other pieces of evidence cannot be proved either.

It is certainly a whack-a-mole game instead of justice, and no matter how reasonable an alternative big picture the defense may find, guilters claim it is invalid because the courts rejected the possibility of any other view. And of course whenever a different possibility for what happened comes to light, guiltes claim it's a new alibi. If there's multiple innocent reasons that Amanda and Raffaele were not involved in Guede's crimes against Meredith, why does that make the allegations against them more valid?

Of course when it becomes obvious that the guilters' big picture is not a whack-a-mole game at all, it can be seen to be a weird IQ test where the courts distorted the facts to make them fit where they don't fit. The whole framing of Amanda and Raffaele falls apart when it's examined too closely.

Alleged Confirmations Rejected

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

TJMK's Machiavelli points to court rulings to prove that Amanda Knox and Sollecito were at the murder. It's also just a court ruling that Guede had accomplices, and it's by this fiat that Guede had accomplices that guilters turn the fiat that Amanda and Raffaele were at the murder into claiming they were Guede's accomplices. Guede's sentencing only convicted him with unknown accomplices.

Machiavelli also claims that the Fifth Chamber was an incorrect part of the Italian Supreme Court to review a murder case and that it was forbidden to judge evidence. Guilters think that only the trial court can judge evidence. So how can there be justice when the trial court makes up evidence as it did in the case against Amanda and Raffaele?

Machiavelli bizarrely claims there is a long list of proofs that Amanda and Raffaele were at the murder, although the quotes from Marasca and Bruno fail to show this. Even assuming Machiavelli's quotes from Chapter 4 of the motivation report are confirmation that Guede had accomplices, they don't mention Amanda and Raffaele. The motivation report didn't take up whether the ruling from Guede's trial was valid.

Section 9.4.1 gives Amanda's First Memorandum as the reason for concluding her presence in the kitchen of the villa during the murder, but in that First Memorandum, Amanda claims that that story in her coerced statements is unreal. How could the Fifth Chamber have used that as proof that Amanda was present at the murder?

If in that same section, the Marasca and Bruno referred to Amanda's stating in the 1:45 AM and 5:45 AM statements that Amanda knew before the police did that Meredith had been in sexuial intercourse, why wouldn't this just indicate to the judges that those statements were coerced? Why would they ignore the medical examiner's findings that Meredith had not had sexual intercourse? And is it the judges' logic that Amanda had to be present at the murder in order to falsely accuse Patrick Lumumba of the crime?

What did Marasca and Bruno find compelling about the speculation that Amanda had Meredith's blood on her hands while washing them? That Amanda's DNA in the sink was "the consequence of epithelial rubbing" doesn't prove what Amanda was washing off her hands. Did Marasca and Bruno think the blood in the sink would be less diluted since it was already there when Amanda washed her hands?

Supposedly Marasca and Bruno concluded that Amanda accused Patrick to protect Guede even though they had just declared that Amanda would have to have known that an accusation against Patrick would not be validated by evidence.

The judges mentioned the alleged staged break-in, but then call it ambiguous. Did Marasca and Bruno think Amanda and Raffaele staged the break-in in Filomena's room in anticipation of the postal police arriving in search of Filomena? Doesn't that destroy the motive for stealing the cell phones to keep the murder from being discovered too soon? Not that there was ever any rationale as to what discovery too soon was supposed to mean.

Machiavelli insists that the final verdict is merely a dropping of charges that can be appealed. Maybe the reason there has been no appeal is because of the ruling that no proof would be found to justify returning the case to the trial court. It would hardly make sense that the Fifth Chamber acquitted without recourse to retrial if the confirmation of lower court rulings actually existed that Machiavelli asserts was done. By acquitting Amanda and Raffaele, the Fifth Chamber rejected these rulings the guilters love so much.

Wednesday, May 31, 2017

Quenching the Media Leaks

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

1. Peter Quennell seems to think that the coerced statements of November 6, 2007 were the beginning of detrimental leaks Amanda Knox created against herself. He also includes as admission of presence at the murder her First Memorandum in which she calls the other two statements unreal and unreliable.

Amanda's First Memorandum was not her only attempt to recant the false impression those coerced statements created. She had an interview with Mignini in December 2007, and appeared at numerous hearings trying to explain that her 1:45 AM and 5:45 AM statements on November 6, 2007 were not voluntary.

None of this explains the media frenzy that occurred during the investigation and the trial. Inflammatory information was regularly appearing in the media that had to be coming from someone familiar with the investigation.

2. So what does Peter Quennell say about this? He says that there are rules that prevent Italian police and prosecutors from leaking information. And he claims there were no proven examples of police and prosecutors giving reporters information. So where did all the bootleg information come from? One example is Amanda's prison diary. The police confiscated it at the end of November 2007. Yet in June 2008, Amanda's prison diary was leaked to the media. Since it was the police or the prosecutors who had it, who else but the police or prosecutors could have leaked it?

3. So who does Peter Quennell say leaked the prison diary that only the police or prosecutors had possession of? Peter Quennell says it was Amanda's defense lawyers who leaked it. Peter Quennell says her defense lawyers leaked her prison diary to hurt the police and prosecution in the case. Never mind that information about Amanda's sex life was in that leaked prison diary. Peter Quennell doesn't explain how the leaked information was supposed to have hurt the police and prosecutors instead of hurting Amanda.

4. Peter Quennell seems to imply that leaks he attributes to Amanda and her defense lawyers are responsible for the frenzy of accounts "making things up for profit and fame." He even quotes Guede's lawyer Walte Biscotti complaining about the leaks as though that makes it official. Peter Quennell claims pro-Amanda books of writers Dempsey, Burleigh, Moore, Preston, Hendry, Waterbury, and Fischer include false information due to the leaked information frenzy. Of course Peter Quennell doesn't mention any of the guilter books that took up this leaked information.

Tuesday, May 30, 2017

Seriously Sick Individuals

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

How was Amanda Knox encouraging West Seattle to adulate seriously sick individuals by questioning how society handles sexual crimes? That's what TJMK's Hopeful wanted people to believe.

http://www.westseattleherald.com/2016/06/13/opinion/amandas-view-stanford-rape-case-redirecting

Amanda didn't doubt the sentence that Judge Aaron Persky handed down to Brock Allen Turner was lenient. She was analyzing what Judge Persky was trying to achieve with his leniency.

Of course, even though the jail time was only six months and the probation time was only three years, the real punishment was the lifetime registration as a sex offender.

What Amanda pointed out is that extremes in either severity or  leniency will be detrimental toward the combined goals of retribution and prevention. If the punishment is too severe, the convicted will acquire the attitude of being the victim instead of seeing the severity of the crime done. If the punishment is too lenient, there is little incentive to improve behavior to avoid punishment for a repeat offense.

What TJMK's Hopeful did was to ignore Amanda's thorough analysis of crime and punishment, and make the controversy all about Amanda. Hopeful thinks that Amanda is "seething with jealousy." Hopeful assumed Amanda's envy that Turner got off so light whereas she didn't dodge the bullet since she didn't leave Meredith alive.

Amanda didn't write that punishment does no good but that vengeance does no good. She did write that there should be education to encourage awareness of sex crimes and to help victims to overcome the psychological problems they face. Hopeful had the audacity to claim the non-stop accusations against Amanda that TJMK and Perugia Murder File were doing just that.

Since TJMK's Hopeful claimed that Amanda was Brock Turner's best apologist, Hopeful needs to read Amanda's article again for what she really said.

Monday, May 29, 2017

Documentary cherry-picked

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

Swansea Jack claims that impressionable people seeing the Netflix Amanda Knox Documentary can be prejudiced in favor of her beyond reasoning about her guilt. Twitter comments from people claiming to have seen the documentary do not demonstrate that the documentary changes anyone's mind who have already decided whether that person believes she is guilty or innocent.

Swansea Jack doesn't explain what the clever and sneaky method is that Blackhurst and McGinn used to disguise their bias in favor of Amanda. Presumably what they did that upsets Swansea Jack was to present the participants in the documentary speak for themselves.

Not everyone who was involved in the investigation and trial was presented, but Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini was. This documentary was never intended to be a re-trial of Amanda Knox as Swansea Jack would have preferred. It was only intended to present people in their own words.

Of course since the documentary was about Amanda Knox, more of her words were presented than anyone else's, but the directors did not try to explain anything about what the participants' words meant. This is the only neutrality Blackhurst and McGinn intended. Blackhurst and McGinn did not express their own opinions in the documentary, but why is that supposed to be hiding anything?

Guilters are indignant over tweets made about Amanda being innocent, but Blackhurst and McGinn were initially interested in the case because of media manipulation of tragedy. They could not understand how Meredith's death had become entertainment.

http://www.businessinsider.com/amanda-knox-documentary-netflix-directors-2016-9

They never claimed that they did not come to see Amanda's innocence, but it's not really that which upsets guilters about the Netflix documentary. What they don't like is that the film doesn't present the reasons guilters claim prove Amanda's guilt.

It's really the guilter opinion that Marasca and Bruno confirmed Amanda's presence at Meredith's murder. Marasca and Bruno acknowledged the lower court ruling, but offered nothing to confirm that it was valid.

Why was Amanda the first person to think that Meredith had been raped when it was common knowledge Meredith was found nude. The autopsy actually found that she had not been raped. So what difference does it make that Amanda thought so?

The coerced 5:45 AM statement has Amanda both saying she heard the scream and that she didn't remember hearing it. What does that mean? Also, three elderly ladies including Nara Capezzali and Antonella Monacchia said they heard a scream, but they didn't identify the scream as coming from Meredith. The prosecutor did. It was only because Judge Massei interpretted the time of death as being sometime around 11:30 PM that the sleeping ladies had supposedly heard Meredith's scream. However, the medical examiner had estimated the time of death as being around 9:30 PM.

Luca Altieri was the one who broke down Meredith's door. He certainly saw all the blood and saw that Meredith must have been nude under the duvet. The police later told Luca about Meredith's neck being slashed. Amanda overheard Luca telling this to Raffaele in Luca's car on the way to the police station.

Amanda didn't get the details of the murder correct after all. She thought Meredith was pushed into the wardrobe, but she was not. Amanda also thought Meredith had bled to death, but Meredith had suffocated on her own blood.

What difference does it make that Amanda and/or Raffaele woke up at various times and went back to sleep until they finally got out of bed after 10:00 AM? How does Swansea Jack even know that Amanda woke up just because Raffaele put music on? Some people have to have music or the radio on in order to sleep.

Of course Amanda cannot understand why Meredith's DNA would have been on Raffaele's kitchen knife. Meredith had never been near that knife.

There were lots of wire taps that were not mentioned on the 90 minute documentary. What of it? Why waste time explaining the police were lying about Meredith's DNA being found on that kitchen knife. We know the police did lie about it.

What's the point of mentioning Raffaele's speculation in his own diary that should never have used against him? Raffaele didn't know the police were lying about Meredith's DNA being on his kitchen knife, and he was trying to remember how it could have gotten there.

Raffaele should never have had to correct the false impression he really believed his speculation of how impossible Meredith DNA could have gotten on his kitchen knife. It was his own diary he wrote the speculation in. So who was he trying to deceive?

First off, it was not Amanda who swapped Guede for Lumumba. It was the police after they found that Lumumba could not have done the crime who swapped Guede for Lumumba. Now, the police had been questioning Amanda from 10:30 PM until 1:45 AM before they coerced her into signing the statement. That is hours. And asking who the men were who knew Meredith is indeed questioning.

The investigators testified it was the text message in reply to Lumumba that immediately trigger her to accuse him. They don't even seem to know when or how Amanda learned that Raffaele has supposedly withdrawn his alibi for her.

Ficarra didn't ask Amanda for a list of suspects or persons of interest. Ficarra only asked Amanda for a list of men who knew Meredith. And what version of events did Raffaele decided to reject? The coerced statement he was forced to sign doesn't detail that.

Also, the coerced statement Raffaele was forced to sign doesn't say Amanda had asked Raffaele to lie for him as guilters love to assert.

There was no sample of Amanda's blood recovered from the faucet of the sink of the small bathroom. There was only Amanda's DNA that was proved to have come from skin cells when Amanda washed her hands.

Amanda's DNA would be expected in the villa where she had lived. That would include Filomena's room she entered when she discovered the break-in throught Filomena's window. Even assuming the Luminol discovered trace was Meredith's blood which it was not confirmed with the necessary additional test, there is no evidence that Amanda tracked Meredith's blood from Meredith's room. The footprints Amanda left the morning after the murder originate in the small bathroom instead. If there was a sourse of Meredith's blood that Amanda stepped into, it was probably the spot of blood on the bathmat when Amanda stepped out of the shower. It's probably her footprint that was on that bathmat since she was the one who was barefoot and not Raffaele or Guede.

It is worth noting that there was no biological trace of Amanda in Meredith's room

Addressing the bra clasp, what type of DNA testing was Prosecutor Comodi talking about when asking Carla Vecchiotti if sex days was a sufficient interval to rule out contamination? What decomtamination method was used to prepare the equipment for re-use?

If six days is all the time for DNA material to break down on its own, then the DNA on the bra clasp would have had to have been contrived anyhow. What is more important is whether decomtamination for regular testing of DNA would be sufficient for the LCN sample collected from the kitchen knife?

There's nothing magic about the DNA that comes from primary and secondary contamination. Guilters love to talk about how terciary touch contamination is not proved, but they dismiss other contamination as though there's no first and second after which the third would come.

Saliva carried DNA. Raffaele sneezed or coughed. The droplets of DNA carrying saliva falls on dust on the floor or furniture. The DNA carrying saliva saturated dust is picked up by dirty gloves and dirty shoe covers that it was video-recorded that the investigators didn't change before entering Meredith's room. The DNA either transfer directly to the bra clasp from the saliva saturated dust or is carried along with that dust when the dust adheres to the bra clasp.

DNA can only be found where investigators swab for it. That the investigators didn't find Raffaele's DNA other than on a cigarette butt and on the bra clasp doesn't mean that his DNA would not be expected elsewhere in the villa. It could just be that it was in locations that were not swabbed.

Of course no DNA from Guede should have been expected in the villa since he had never visited there before like Raffaele had. However, Guede's DNA would have been expected in the small bathroom since Guede has said he went into that bathroom to get towels for trying to stop Meredith's bleeding.

Now, the swabbing for DNA evidence in Filomena's room was limited to only four or five places: the rock and fragments and several Luminol indicated traces. There's no report of finding anyone's DNA on the rock. Certainly we would have heard about it if Amanda's or Raffaele's DNA were found there. It was just the DNA found with what was assumed to have been blood that was reported. Were was an attempt to find DNA evidence of someone coming through the window?

Guede originally claimed it was an Italian not fitting Raffaele's description who killed Meredith. Guede couldn't blame Raffaele until he learned who he was. It wasn't until his appeal that Guede started talking about Amanda and Raffaele killing Meredith. However, Guede refused to testify at their trial. Did he refuse to appear in this documentary also?

As said before, the documentary presented those involved talking about it in their own words. Not everyone agreed to appear.

Sunday, May 28, 2017

Raper's Unruly Thread

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

Why is Raffaele Sollecito's claim to compensation dependent on what he is accused of lying about instead of the injustice done to him?

Whatever claim that he lied about anything, how was he acquitted of murder, but not elegible for compensation for the incarceration associated with the false accusation of murder?

How can the coerced statement extracted from Raffaele be used as an excuse for claiming he lied to much to be compenstated for the wrongful conviction and wrongful incarceration he endured?

If Dr. Maresca really did represent the interests of the Mereith family in questioning the good cause of Raffaele's claim to compensation, what does that say about the neutrality of the Kercher family in the legal proceedings?

2. James Raper seems to think that the quantity of facts put forward as evidence makes more difference than what those facts prove. He thinks he can thread together his own logic.

However inappropriate, implausible, inconsistent, contradictory, evasive, or obfuscating he thinks Amanda and Raffaele are, what does this alleged behavior prove? How does this body of alleged assertions concerning character portend culpability?

================================================================
The facts James Raper put forward as physical evidence are already controversial.

1) It's just an opinion that the break-in was staged.

2) There is no evidence of a clean-up, and James Raper only gives missing footprints as proof of that. These footprint are meaningless anyhow since they left them when they were in the villa the morning after the murder and they had nothing to do with the blood in Meredith's room.

3) There is no significance to Amanda's lamp being in Meredith's room, and testifying to her ownership of the lamp is not conceding anything. She never denied that it was her lamp.

4) Amanda's blood was not found on the bidet of the small bathroom. Meredith's blood was found there, but there was no reason to expect Amanda's blood to be there, and her DNA found there was attributed to her washing he hands at that sink.

5) The footprint found on the bathmat was only attributed to Raffaele by measurements made from a picture. That is no an accurate determination, and it makes more sense that Amanda left that footprint when she stepped on the spot of blood that was there after taking a shower the morning after the murder. That would explain why her footprints were found in the hall. Also, there was no reason for Raffaele to have removed his shoes which were what left prints of his steps in the hall.

6) There is nothing significant about finding Amanda's or Meredith's DNA in the villa were they lived. Finding Amanda's DNA mixed with Meredith's DNA outside Meredith's room doesn't prove Amanda was at the murder.

7) Regardless of whether traces illuminated by Luminol were found in the hall and Filomena's room were actually blood with mixed Amanda's and Meredith's DNA, Amanda left those traces the morning after the murder. None of her footprint lead out of Meredith's room, and their DNA would have been expected in that villa were they both lived.

8) Amanda and Raffaele left the footprints found outside of Meredith's room the morning after Meredith's death. Their footprint were not found inside Meredith's room. So there is no connection between Amanda and Raffaele with Meredith's murder.

9) Stefanoni had to cheat on the test she used to indicate Meredith's DNA was found on Raffaele's kitchen knife. Stefanoni enlarged the sample attributed to Meredith so much the minute residue from other tests confirming Meredith's DNA would have showed Meredith's DNA even though it had not been there. The test results had no meaning.

10. Dust contamination of the LCN trace of Raffaele's DNA on the bra clasp cannot be ruled out since dirty gloves and dirty shoe covers were used for collecting the bra clasp. The fact that the bra clasp was recovered a yard away from where it was originally discovered shows that it had been kicked around, and the presence of the DNA of men other than Raffaele cannot be explained except by contamination.
================================================================

James Raper is unconvincing in claiming that Amanda's behavior on the morning after the murder is implausible and that her account is unreliable.

a) Why would Amanda be focusing on the shutters to the side of the villa when the destination of her approach was the door that was conspicuous by being open? The open door would have attracted her attention, but it wouldn't be upsetting since the door came open by itself if not locked properly. Also, the apartment is small so that Amanda would have expected to hear anyone who was in it if they were there.

b) Eye witnesses are often mistaken, and Raffaele's account of the door being open cannot prove that Amanda was not correct in saying it was closed. And maybe Amanda simply didn't notice the door was open. People think they see what they expect to see. So how would that be a lie instead of a mistake?

c) Amanda noticed the tiny bit of blood on the faucet. She didn't notice the blood on the bathmat until after her shower. Stepping on that blood on the bathmat was probably what brought it to her attention why also making the footprint which was only a partial footprint anyhow. There was no proof that it was either Raffaele's or Guede's footprint. The measurements being taken from a photo could not have been accurate enough to rule out it was hers instead.

d) Assuming Amanda noticed Meredith's door being closed, why would she even check at that point to see that it was locked? If Meredith were sleeping in there, why would Amanda disturb her to see that she was there?

e) There was no police report of Amanda having body odor. Nor did this come out in trial. Barbie Nadeau wrote in her book that police had told journalist Carmignani that Amanda had body odor, but there is no confirmation of this. Amanda had no reason to suspect an intruder in the villa until she went to use the hair dryer in the front bathroom. It's unclear that she noticed the unflushed toilet before she drying her hair, since she may not have seen the toilet until she was putting the hair dryer away. There's no way to know from the pictures of her later if she had wet or dry hair. Having seen the unflushed toilet, she knew the last person using it could not be any of her flatmates. She left in a hurry.

f) It's not that Amanda was uncomfortable with the toilet being unflushed that made her leave. It was the realization that there had to have been an intruder in the villa. Why would James Raper expect her to go further into the long bathroom to flush the toilet? She could grab the mop and bucket on her way out.
================================================================
Does James Raper expect us to believe Curatolo instead of Amanda or Raffaele?

a) Even if Amanda and Raffaele didn't remember the exact order things happened, Curatolo couldn't remember the same day that things happened. Curatolo confused Halloween with the night Meredith was murdered. Judge Massei had to rule that Curatolo saw the two on November 1st because Raffaele could not have been there on Halloween. How did Judge Massei prove that the couple Curatolo saw were Amanda and Raffaele? Whomever Curatolo saw, he claimed that they were in the Piazza Grimana until nearly midnight. Judge Massei ruled that Curatolo meant a little after 11:00 PM.

b) Using Raffaele's coerced statement of when he talked to his father the night of the murder doesn't prove anything. The police were pressuring him to say things they could use against him.

c) Yes, Raffaele did turn off his phone to watch the movie, Emelie, with Amanda. That would be why he didn't find the text message from his father until the next morning. Amanda said she turned her phone off to keep her boss from changing his mind and calling her to work after saying not to come in.

d) How does lack of phone activity during the night prove Amanda and Raffaele were not together that night. Even lack of GPS location doesn't prove they were somewhere else.

e) Again, using the statement the police coerced Raffaele to sign proves nothing about when he used his computer the night of the murder.

f) Amanda and Raffaele didn't look exhausted in the video of them waiting outside the villa when the police were investigating. Where did James Raper get that idea?
================================================================

Amanda talked to her mother several times the day Meredith's body was discovered. It's a little strange that Amanda had not anticipated the furor James Raper and other guilters would make over getting the order wrong in her book. It's totally incomprehensible what Amanda could have been hiding in this. What difference does it make that she wrote that she called her mother before she called Filomena? None.

Was there any significance in how Amanda told her friends and family she couldn't get an answer to her calls to Meredith's phones? She still didn't get an answer. Of course if Amanda had thought she would be a suspect in the murder, she would have been more exact, or avoided sending the email at all.

It was probably the Italian phone for which there was an out of order notice since it was the one that was turned off. Amanda seems to have misunderstood that it was also the one that went to voice mail because the phone itself was turned off.

It wouldn't be strange that Amanda didn't leave a message on the voice mail of the Italian phone since she would want to try the other phone again. Since she had already let the English phone ring for 16 seconds, 4 seconds was plenty of time to see if Meredith had located her phone to answer it.

If Amanda were trying to delay the discovery of Meredith's body, why did she return to the villa and eventually call attention to the strange things she observed there? Why wouldn't she and Raffaele have just gone on their day trip to Gubbio like they had planned and let the guys downstairs make the discovery?

Amanda's going back to the villa the morning after Meredith's murder makes no sense if she did it.

Saturday, May 27, 2017

TJMK's Inqusition for Amanda Knox 01--Chimera's dirty dozen

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C785/
(Search for: "Questons For Knox: Adding A Dozen More To The Several Hundred Knox So Far Avoided")

1. The interrogation on November 5-6th did not continue being voluntary. Amanda Knox did not give the text message reply to the police. They insisted she give them her phone and they examined her text messages one at a time asking questions about them. Amanda did not claim it as proof that she left Raffaele's apartment. The police insisted that that was what it meant even though she told them she was only saying "Goodbye." Amanda wasn't fluent enough in Italian to know how the police would understand the words she used. Why would she have to have a reason to neglect to erase it? Even if she knew how to erase outgoing text messages, expecting her to do it is ridiculous. If she had erased it, you would probably be acusing her of destroying evidence.

2. Why would the police ask permission to videotape or audio record the interrogation? They never asked permission for bugs they had out in the waiting room. So it's ridiculous to ask why Amanda would refuse. Since the police recorded other witness interviews, they probably recorded this one also. They may very well deny doing it because it would expose their illegal abusive interrogation practices. Of course, since the police already suspected Amanda before November 5th, it makes no sense that they didn't record this crucial interrogation unless they didn't want their behavior exposed.

3. Despite assurances from Stefanoni, the results of Meredith's DNA on Raffaele's kitchen knife cannot be reliable. The sample was enlarged too much to mean anything. So where is the proof that Amanda carried that knife to and from the villa? The kitchen knife could not have made the wounds to Meredith's neck since it's too long for the shallow wounds with hilt marks beside them. Amanda's bag did not have the tears and blood stains that would have been in it if she had used it to carry the kitchen knife.

4. When did Amanda deny the April Fools Prank? She only denied that it had anything to do with Guede's breaking into the villa through Filomena's window. Amanda broke nothing in the prank, but Guede broke the window and killed Meredith. Chimera exaggerated how disturbed Amanda's UW housemate or anyone else were. The alleged staging of the break-in was only ruled by fiat. The facts given do not prove what happened. Assuming Amanda had to have thought of staging such a break-in before or after the murder doesn't prove there was a staging or that Amanda had anything to do with the murder.

5. That Amanda researched a lot of information about Guede for her book doesn't prove that she knew anything about him at the time of the murder. Amanda had met Guede, but didn't even remember his name or anything about him when she was questioned by the police. It's an idiot's question to ask whether she knew about his arrest for breaking and entering at the time of the murder.

6. Amanda has never denied she turned off her phone to keep Patrick from contacting her again to call her to work that night. Raffaele has already said he turned his off to avoid interruption while watching a movie. Chimera can suspect they didn't want the phones to record their movements, but all they had to do was leave the phones behind. They could have said the volume of the ring got turned down accidentally.

7. There is absolutely no proof that Amanda or Raffaele took Meredith's cell phones. If Chimera thinks Amanda or Raffaele would get rid of the phones because they are evidence that would tie them to the murder, so would Guede have come to that conclusion. So why did the disposal of the phones lead to Amanda and Raffaele when the dump site was on the route Guede would have taken to leave the villa?

8. It's only an assertion that the police found Frederico Martin's phone number in Amanda's phone. The phone number the police claim was his number was not in her phone. If the police had found a real connection between Amanda and a cocaine dealer, it would have been entered as evidence. They entered all sorts of other irrelevant things but they didn't enter this.

9. Why does it have to be either Amanda or the killer who took Amanda's lamp into Meredith's room? Why couldn't Meredith have borrowed it? Guede said he did get towels from the small bathroom to try to stop Meredith's bleeding. Since guilters don't agree that the bloody footprint on the bath mat is Guede's, that's at least one place they have to agree he went without leaving tracks. So why couldn't he have also gotten the lamp out of Amanda's room.

10. It's a ridiculous assumption that Amanda could have cleaned up all her fingerprints but leave those of others. And why would Amanda clean up her own fingerprints in her own room or in the livingroom or kitchen? The kind of clean-up Chimera asserts would have been beyond the ability of someone guilters as slovenly as guilters claim Amanda was. So asking if Amanda bought or stole gloves is assuming she ever had occasion to use them. Chimera even admitted in the next question that Amanda is not much of a cleaner.

11. Quintavalle saw some woman, but he took a whole year pondering on what he saw to claim it were Amanda. He only claimed that this woman he saw went toward the back of his store where the cleaning section was, but Quintavalle never claimed she bought any cleaning supplies. Maybe Quintavalle is not a liar, but he did decide to come forward when there was favorable publicity to do so. We know that Amanda had to buy more clothes after she was locked out the villa where all her clothes were. The police never found bloody clothes of hers supposedly worn at a murder. If she had indeed bought cleanser anywhere, the police would have found that evidence, but it didn't exist. Chimera is fishing again.

12. What does Chimera mean by a trip a day after Meredith was killed was out of place? It was the same day Meredith died. Amanda and Raffaele had already planned this trip before Meredith died, and why would they need to pack for a trip that took less than an hour? This was likely a day trip and they would have been coming back the same day. If the trip to Gubbio was a cover, Amanda and Raffaele would have been on their way there instead of alerting everyone to the possible intruder at the villa. Of course the trip was real, but did Chimera expect them to leave once they discovered Meredith had been murdered?

TJMK's Inquisition for Amanda Knox 02--Overboard and hypercritical

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C785/
(Search for: Questons For Knox: Adding A Dozen More To The Several Hundred Knox So Far Avoided )

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

Peter Quennell did post this before it was popular among guilters to claim Amanda Knox was rich off of Meredith's death, but it still seems strange for Peter Quennell to admit that Amanda's legal defense gave her financial woes.

Of course Peter Quennell did use a familiar refrain among guilters. He called Amanda's and Raffaele's defense a cover-up but Peter Quennell implied that Guede got a good deal by plea bargaining. Guede has never shown remorse for what he did to Meredith. He didn't always blame the murder on Amanda and Raffaele, but he never admitted he did it.

Guede requested a fast-track trial to separate his trial from that of Amanda and Raffaele. In return, nearly half of his sentence was cut. He never admitted responsibility in order to get this deal.

There's nothing smart about accepting guilt that doesn't belong to you. You don't just unjustly pay for someone else's crime, but you pay for the mistake of agreeing to the easier deal the rest of your life.

And with Italian justice, it's illegal to plea deal anyhow. So Amanda would have no way to do what Peter Quennell demands of her. It is not at all certain that Amanda would have gotten any shorter sentence for agreeing to guilt Peter Quennell wanted her to take in Guede's place.

And even if Amanda could get a deal for a shorter sentence, how would that end the terrible agony of Meredith's family? After getting the shorter sentence, Amanda could have gone back to protesting her innocence just as Guede never stopped claiming his innocence. Added to the original injustice of being charged with the crime Amanda didn't commit would be the coercion to confess for leniency.

> Remember that the case against Amanda was totally arbitrary. Crucial points in convicting her are not facts but are fiat rulings that are not proved by facts.

> Remember that the only explanation for the ridiculous case against Amanda is collective bias, but guilters claim it's the defense that is corrupt.

How does Peter Quennnell know the judicial appointments to the 2011 appeal court were corrupt and hijacked? That Judge Chiari who was by-passed for the appointment expressed this opinion does not prove anything. Of course Prosecutor Comodi was unhappy with the decision handed down by the Hellmann Court, and Dr. Galati would say Cassation would reverse it since he appealed the Helmman decision. If Judge Hellmann was forced to retire because of the decision he reached, doesn't that demonstrate the bias against Amanda?

Peter Quennell already admitted in the title of this article that Amanda has financial problems. So how could she have bribed her way to an accommodating court? Where is the collusion that Peter Quennell complains is the corruption of the Hellmann Court?

Peter Quennell only presented the ever present guilter assertion of Amanda's "serial lying" as proof of this corruption in her defense. Somehow, being wrongfully convicted of the lie against Patrick Lumumba which police made Amanda believe was true long enough to coerce her to sign false statements is supposed to validate all the other lies guilters attribute to her.

Is Peter Quennell's image of a flashmob supposed to be a reference to Amanda's supporters on social media? How was that organized? Peter Quennell dismissed the analysis of psychologist Saul Kassin, and experienced law enforcement professionals John Douglas and Jim Clemente with ridicule instead of facts.

If Peter Quennell asserts Steve Moore, Bruce Fischer, and Ted Simon are saddled with legal and financial liabilities for being mentioned in Amanda book, what is he talking about?

How does a quote from Amanda's book become public domain just because Peter Quennell puts it in his article? Carlo Dalla Vedova didn't say in court what Amanda quoted him as saying to her about the detectives who investigated her, but isn't that because the bullies he mentioned would have sued him for slander? It doesn't matter that what she quoted him saying is true. All that mattered is if they could prove he said it.

Sure, the police were careful and respectful when they testified before the judges, but were they honest? Some of them had to know that what they said was false.

It's strange that in Italian courts, they don't have defendants testify under oath since it's assumed they're lying anyhow, but it's illegal for a defendant to protest abusive treatment that results in coerced statements. A defense lawyer cannot be honest with a client if what the lawyer says would upset the police or prosecutors.

TJMK's Inquisition for Amanda Knox 03--Malignant Book Review

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C785/
(Search for: Questons For Knox: Adding A Dozen More To The Several Hundred Knox So Far Avoided )

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

1. The police did not confirm the assertion that Amanda had been sleeping with a dangerous drug-ring leader. They never confirmed that Amanda bought any drugs through whoever they were talking about. The phone number given in the order to tap his phone was not found in Amanda phone as claimed.

Assuming this was the Cristiano that Amanda had met on the train, how could this connection have helped the police to capture him and put him in prison? Was it that the police wanted to find a drug dealer for Amanda that led their attention to this person? That assumption doesn't prove he sold her drugs or had sex with her in payment for those drugs.

2. What fact-checking was required of Amanda to write about her own experiences? Did Peter Quennell expect her to have legal documents for all of what she remembered happening? That's ridiculous. Guilters were happy to use the book as proof of the most outlandish claims about Amanda. Did they ever do any fact-checking about their claims?

Amanda didn't admit to sleeping with Federico Martini. She never said what the last name of the Frederico she met on the train to Florence (not Perugia.) There is no evidence that she had Federico Martini's phone number in her phone. There is no evidence that she called a drug dealer before or after Meredith's death.

The police report only made assertions that were never confirmed with evidence. Of course the police was leaked to the Italian media anyhow.

These alleged police wire-tap transcripts of conversations between Amanda and the "drug kingpin" don't exist. If they had existed, why did Mignini say this issue wasn't part of the trial. He originally tried to make the case a drug-fueled sex game gone bad, but there was no evidence to support this.

If Peter Quennell was still waiting for the police wire-tap transcript of the conversation between Amanda and the drug kingpin to be release on 08/02/2014, why haven't they been released by now?

Amanda got a lot of trouble for lying that there was no use of marijuana in the apartment where she lived. And then her roommates testified about their drug use even though it was Laura who put Amanda up to lying that there was none.

There are many claims that Amanda used cocaine in addition to the marijuana she claimed to have used, but when the police did drug tests on samples of her hair when arresting her, they only found a trace of the marijuana. Where did all of this cocaine go?

As said before, guilters love to use Amanda's book to claim she's lying, but how does Peter Quennell prove the assertions of the lies he said her book was hiding about drug use?

3. 

a) Amanda admitted using marijuana in Seattle. What's she hiding here?

b) Amanda admitted helping to pay for the marijuana used in the apartment. Where is the proof that she's hiding knowledge of where to buy it?

c) Why would Amanda be aware of the high trafficing of drugs in Perugia? It's not something the chamber of commerce would brag about.

d) What was Amanda hiding in saying she shared marijuana with Raffaele? Is it that she expressed the need to be careful who she did that with that's supposed to be the lie?

e) Was it supposed to have been a lie that Laura asked her to lie about their smoking marijuana. In testimony Filomena would only admit to doing it once. Was that supposed to have been tuth?

f) Why wouldn't Amanda feel anxious lying about the marijuana use in the apartment? She had nothing to lose by telling the truth about that, but she lost a lot of credibility from that one lie that didn't benefit her at all.

g) Why would Amanda know the guys downstairs were growing marijuana? It was Meredith they asked to water their plants when they were away.

h) Why would Meredith or Amanda need to know where to buy marijuana when Filomena and Laura were the ones buying it?

i) Raffaele didn't use regular marijuana. He used hashish which is stronger than the marijuana Amanda usually used. What's the lie is saying it had this effect on her?

j) There have already been many people coming to all kinds of opinions because what Amanda wrote that Raffaele told her about his drug use was common knowledge. Was it supposed to have been a lie that she wrote about it, or was it supposed to have been a further invasion of privacy already lost?

k) Was it supposed to have been a lie that Amanda said Raffaele was sad for his friends still addicted to drugs? Or was it supposed to have been an invasion of those unnamed friends of Raffaele?

l) The full quote is:
"That night I smoked a lot of marijuana and I fell asleep at my boyfriend’s house. I don’t remember anything. But I think it’s possible that Raffaele went to Meredith’s house, raped her and then killed her. And then when he got home, while I was sleeping, he put my fingerprints on the knife. But I don’t understand why Raffaele would do that."

Amanda never said Raffaele actually did this.

m) The prosecution did claim that Guede was Amanda's drug dealer.
"During the first Amanda Knox trial in 2009, prosecutors claimed that Knox and Sollecito, along with a small-time drug dealer Rudy Guede, murdered Kercher 'under the fumes of drugs and alcohol.'”
http://www.inquisitr.com/1333248/amanda-knox-cocaine/

n) The prosecution did elaborate a whole scheme of hostility between Amanda and Meredith based on the supposition that Amanda could not compete with Meredith.

o) Filomena put it that just one time she sinned by smoking marijuana. The implication was that Amanda put her up to it.

p) Laura did testify that everyone in the villa smoked marijuana. Does Peter Quennell think that Amanda should have specified that Mignini was asking about hashish, the stronger form of marijuana?

q) Carlo Dalla Vedova's explanation that Amanda quoted makes sense of what happened. The case against Amanda was that ridiculous that all that kept it going would have to have been the investigators refusing to lose face over it.

r) Is Peter Quennell complaining that Amanda was invading the privacy of the inmate whose name Amanda changed to Laura? Or is he suggesting that Amanda didn't check to see if this inmate told the truth? Why does it matter. Events like this do happen. Likely, this inmate had been betrayed by her boyfriend.

s) What's the issue in writing that Curatolo had gone to prison on drug charges by the time he testified before the Hellmann Court? He confirmed it when Judge Massimo Zanetti asked him. He also testified to being homeless at the time of the murder, and taking heroin. He did claim herion does not cause people to hallucinate. Some guilters have needed to make the ridiculous claim that heroin is non-hallucinary because of what Curatolo testified.

t) It's strange that Peter Quennell doesn't notice that Amanda doesn't like Curatolo's lethal heroin addiction as the reason his testimony is meaningless. Judge Massei had to make rulings to straighten out what Mignini wanted Curatolo's testimony to mean, but Curatolo's total confusion seeps through anyhow. Judge Massei had to declare that Curatolo didn't see the two people he said were Amanda and Raffaele on Halloween because Raffaele could not have been there on Halloween. How does that prove that Amanda and Raffaele were the couple whom Curatolo saw? Also, when Curatolo was sure that he saw whomever he saw until nearly midnight, Judge Massei decided that meant until a little after 11:00 PM. If it took nearly an hour for Curatolo to notice the couple he said he saw, how can he be sure nearly an hour later who they were?