Comments

1
Rudy being black and not fitting with the initial cockamamie prosecution theory doesn't mean he is merely "another guy" or that he will have "paid his debt" by the end of this year.
2
Vogt is delusional if she thinks the investigation has been "professionally managed". If the Perugia magisterium is a mockery, they did it to themselves.
3
So the man who actually committed these crimes is getting out and Americans are the one's that are wrong? That's fucking rich.
4
The fact that a violent murderer is getting released isn't exactly something to celebrate.
5
"and another man, Rudy Guede"

Seriously? That's what passes for journalism? jfc
6
Charles still can't believe the black man did it.
7
Vogt is full of shit.

Quoting her, you are full of shit.

Guede's debt to society can never be repaid. He robbed, raped and murdered Kircher, and he has never stepped forward to clear Knox and Sollecito of involvement, because his silence shortens his sentence. He'll be out this summer, free to rape and kill again.

America's history of racial injustice has fuck all to do with this case. That's just some real talk, too.
8
And if I were an attractive white woman accused of murder, I would much rather be tried in the U.S. where medieval notions of female sexuality are less likely to influence the outcome. That's real talk.
9
The Italian legal system is a corrupt circus, not unlike its government.

Is Silvio Berlusconi in jail yet? Exactly.
10
Haven't followed your every word on this Charles, but what, exactly, do you think Amanda's role in this was? Is she guilty? One of the killers?
11
Charles,
I just read in the NYT that Sollecito is in a car at some European border. He may be fleeing Italy.
12
So you don't give a shit if some guy who raped and murdered a kid gets out and does it again? Well no surprises there considering the case against Knox was based on misogynist crap. Also do remember that black guys get reduced sentences in this country for implicating others all the time. It's just the others implicated are sometimes other completely innocent black guys. Also, Italy, where brave magistrates battle the Mafia, is the same place where brave magistrates just threw six scientists in prison for failing to predict an earthquake. They have out done Texas on that one.
13
@10 - It doesn't matter what Charles thinks about Amanda Knox. As I said yesterday, she was convicted by a court in a sovereign country that has amicable relations with the US. Their opinion is what matters most in this case, just as the U.S. court's opinion would be most important in a U.S. prosecution of an Italian citizen accused of murder in America.

To all of you asserting that the Italian prosecution is somehow flawed - where's your evidence? Have you followed the investigators as they worked the case? Were you in the courtroom to hear every word? You are entitled to your opinion, but to embarrass the rest of us on the world stage with your fanciful posturing is inexcusable.
15
@13 the prosecution changed the case against Amanda from a sex game gone wrong to a tiff over a messy room - sounds pretty flawed to me.
16
@7, im only stating the reality. really, this is how things are now.
17
#13 Actually there is a lot of evidence. Italy has embarrassed itself many times before, during and after this case. It's justice system has been considered a joke for years. Kind of like Texas for poor people. And if a US court were to subject an Italian to the kind of treatment Knox got they would not be quite about it. They would be demanding justice. And don't tell me I could not possibly know. I spent three years there. This case does not surprise me in the least. Neither does the fact that they just threw six scientists in prison for failing to predict an earthquake.
18
People whose lives have been thrown back into anxious turmoil by this verdict: Raffaele Sollecito, Amanda Knox, Charles Mudede.
19
Let's also not forget that if the tables were turned and Knox was the murder victim the British press would be making a mockery of the Italian justice system. There is no way that they would tolerate a young English women being the victim of a miscarriage of justice. We don't need to give a shit what the foreign press is saying about us. They slam the US justice system on a regular basis. Stop expecting people to be so impressed by the "sophisticated Europeans". They are really not that impressive when you get to know them.
20
From ABC news "Public Prosecutor Alessandro Crini has called for Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito to be each sentenced to 26 years in prison. Mr. Crini said the violence that led to Ms. Kercher's death erupted from an argument between the two roommates about cleanliness in the apartment. He dropped the argument prosecutors used in the previous trials that the killing was the result of a sex game gone wrong". - If this isnt fucked I dont know what is - the prosecutors went from saying this was a drug fueled demon temptress to a bitch that couldnt handle a minor argument so she and her BF killed her roommate? WTF
21
#20 While some psycho raped her and stabbed her. Knox must have walked out onto the street grabbed the guy and said "My roommate is giving me shit about the messy apartment. Come in and rape her while I stab her". Because that is how crimes happen.
22
@16: oh so coy.

can you at least refer to guede as "the black African rapist/murderer"? he's convicted and didn't contest his sentence.

23
I thought Knox had been aquitted. Isn't this double jeopardy, being tried for the same crime twice? I don't think that is even allowed in the US, is it?
24
@23,

It is not, which why the U.S. has grounds not to extradite her.
25
@23, 24: in italy, it is not double jeopardy.

they convicted her, it was overturned, the supreme court overturned that overturning, and ordered a new trial.

she's been found guilty in that new trial. assuming her appeal to the supreme court is rejected, then italy could request extradition.

the shit would hit the fan then, because as our treaty now stands, we'd be obligated to extradite.
26
@25,

So what if Italy doesn't consider it double jeopardy. We do.

What does our treaty say about the Italians refusing to extradite due to the death penalty?
27
@25

The U.S. government would not be obligated to extradite.

Treaties with foreign governments do not supersede the constitutional rights of the sovereign people of America in their own land.

The government and the courts have no compelling reason to risk a breach of the constitution or the faith of the governed to placate the Italians. Italy has nothing to offer of prevailing value, and the U.S. government has no need of them.

Amanda will never see the inside of another Italian prison unless she is foolish enough to return to Italy or travel to a nation more sympathetic to Italy's demands.
28
Rudy Guede's DNA and bloody fingerprints were all over the crime scene. Whether Amanda Knox was involved or not, Guede clearly WAS. He's not just some random black guy serving time -- he's a guy who at best, was present at a violent murder but more likely WAS the murderer. Inserting his race into it as though he's some innocent victim of the system is just dumb.
29
@28: I'll go you one further. Guede's DNA was all over the crime scene. Kirchner's DNA was all over the crime scene (obviously). Knox and Sollecito's DNA was not all over the crime scene. To believe that either of them were involved would mean that they were able to clean up their own, but only their own, DNA and leave the rest there where it was found by police. It's simply not possible.

Add to that the ridiculous (and ever changing) theories of the case offered by the prosecution and the only conclusion is that they convicted two innocent people. Twice.
30
Your pullout quote from the Oregonian story was, in turn, a quote from ANOTHER story. Nothing Kimberly Wilson wrote at all.
31
There was a proven clean up. (how did a PARTIAL bloody foot print get to on the bath mat with none leading up to it?). How did Rudy's bloody sneaker prints disappear?

All the people who have been fed misinformation and think she is innocent FINE. Just give me a plausible scenario where Rudy stays and cleans up. WHO CLEANED UP?

There is SO MUCH evidence against these two.
32
@31,

I have no idea where you're getting your information, but there were several of Guede's bloody footprints in the house. Most damning, there were several of Guede's bloody footprints in Kercher's room and *none* (not even of the bullshit, non-bloody footprints) of Knox's and Sollecito's footprints in Kercher's room. How is it that they cleaned up only their footprints and not Guede's? How could they tell the difference?

There is so little evidence against those two.
33
@32 still doesn't answer who clean up the the BARE foot prints leading to the print on the bath mat.

ALL of the prints for Rudy Guede are shoe prints. The SHOE prints leading out of the house that match those in blood leading out of the house WHERE cleaned up to. There were no VISIBLE foot/shoe prints outside of merediths room with the exception of the bath mat.

You didn't answer the ONE question I asked but nice try detracting from what I said.

I have read BOTH of the documents produced by both the first court and the court that acquitted her IN FULL so unless you have done the same, you really have no where close to the understanding of the case I do.
34
Were* I meant were, multitasking, I can't JUST spend my time arguing on the internet.
35
@ ppixie24 spelling would help your argument. (WHERE = were)

oh, wait, no it wouldn't 'cause your argument isn't supported by the evidence at hand.
36
The she prints in the room match those leading out of the house that weren't visible before luminol. NO OTHER BARE PRINTS WERE FOUND besides the bath mat. How did it get there when it is CLEAR that rudy never went to that bathroom but STRAIGHT out the door.
37
@ ppixie24

grammar might help you as well. . .
38
I do apologize, I forgot I cannot edit these post and I was typing and talking on the phone while trying to make a point. Fail me.

People are just so misinformed it gets me heated, hence the rush to post. I rarely bother....
39
@ ppixie24

also stop shouting.
40
@ ppixie24

"People are just so misinformed"

yes, you are
41
Oh? did I hurt your poor ears? No one can answer my very simple question so I take that as a win for me. You can tell me my grammar/spelling/shouting is bad but can't answer the question, who cleaned up? Cause it is Beyond a reasonable doubt that someone did.

And as someone who has followed this case since the very beginning with original belief in her innocence, who has read everything I could get my hands on, I assure you I am very, very informed.
42
Fact: Rudy Guede left his SHIT in the toilet.

Fact: There was a partial bloody foot print on the bathroom mat along with drops of Merediths blood (mixed with Amanda Knoxs dna) but lets leave that for argument sake.

Fact: There were Rudy Guedes sneaker prints in Merediths room and leading out the front door (the ones leading out were not visible without luminol)

Fact: There WAS a womens bloody sneaker print in the room. This was not attributed to the victim.

Fact: Rudy's DNA was not ALL over the room. It was in the victim. On her sweatshirt cuff and on her purse.

Fact. Raffaels DNA was found on the bra clasp. There is NO proof of contamination and his dna was only else where found on a cigarette butt in the kitchen.

Fact: The entire cottage is the murder scene not just the bedroom.

For Rudy to have acted alone, he would have had to take his sneaker off, gone into the bathroom and left the print on the bath mat, cleaned it up put his bloody shoes back on and left the house cleaning up his prints behind him. All while leaving his sh*t in the toilet. MAKES PERFECT SENSE.

Someone else was there. if not A&S who?
43
"Oh? did I hurt your poor ears?"

no, just my English.

"Fact: Rudy Guede left his SHIT in the toilet."

yep. DNA.

"Fact: There was a partial bloody foot print on the bathroom mat along with drops of Merediths blood (mixed with Amanda Knoxs dna) but lets leave that for argument sake."

good.

"Fact: There were Rudy Guedes sneaker prints in Merediths room and leading out the front door (the ones leading out were not visible without luminol)"

yep. because, he killed her.

"Fact: There WAS a womens bloody sneaker print in the room. This was not attributed to the victim."

first time i've heard of it.

"Fact: Rudy's DNA was not ALL over the room. It was in the victim. On her sweatshirt cuff and on her purse."

yep. because, he killed her.

"Fact. Raffaels DNA was found on the bra clasp. There is NO proof of contamination and his dna was only else where found on a cigarette butt in the kitchen."

nope. there is proof of contamination and mishandling, plus the amount of DNA found was so small it coulsn't be retested. and how can you kill some one and leave your DNA only a cigarette in the kitchen?

"Fact: The entire cottage is the murder scene not just the bedroom."

wrong. she was killed in the bedroom, that makes it the murder scene.

"For Rudy to have acted alone, he would have had to take his sneaker off, gone into the bathroom and left the print on the bath mat, cleaned it up put his bloody shoes back on and left the house cleaning up his prints behind him. All while leaving his sh*t in the toilet. MAKES PERFECT SENSE."

Rudy didn't clean up after himself that's why he was easy to catch and convict (in a fast track trial where he pled guilty.)

"Someone else was there. if not A&S who?"

no one else was there. except maybe jesus. . .
44
@42,

I see. So Guede took a shit in the toilet, but, according to your post @36 he was never in the bathroom? Care to be consistent? What is your personal stake in this matter that you're making shit up as you go along?

Also, the "female footprint" in Kercher's room is very much in dispute. The defense provided proof that that was also Guede's footprint. Did you even read the defense's side, or do you take the incompetent Italian authorities at their word?

According to the defense, the bra clasp wasn't found until more than a month after the murder. Do you have evidence to dispute that?

All while leaving his sh*t in the toilet. MAKES PERFECT SENSE.


What in the hell makes you think criminals behave rationally? Nothing that has been attributed to Knox's supposed implication in this crime makes any rational sense either, but you have no problem believing that.
45
"According to the defense, the bra clasp wasn't found until more than a month after the murder. Do you have evidence to dispute that?"

Yes I do. What you wrote is a PR claim, not a defense claim.

FACT : the bra clasp was found under the body and catalogued on day one, but erroneously not taken out of the room.

FACT : The defense team filed many motions and stuff, to prevent the scientific police from reentering the room and recover the bra clasp. When all those time-taking futile pursuits were exhausted, scientific police did enter the room and recover the bra clasp. That took a month.

The defense team is the only reason why the bra clasp was not recovered as soon as it was found missing from the inventory of objects taken out of the room. The defense never claimed that "finding" the bra clasp took one month - they were sorry that DNA was still readable out of it, and claimed contamination of the bra clasp, although there was no other Sollecito DNA in the room where it lay unrecovered for one month.
46
As for the Guede feces.

FACT : Knox had been leaving her own shit unflushed in the toilets of the flat for one month.

FACT : Knox has given three unreconciliable accounts of where and with whom she was on the crime scene.

Pro-innocence supporters have told us it's allright, she was spaced out of her mind that night, can't remember where she was or what she done. Okay.

Then how come she did this :

FACT : Knox was eager for the police to find the shit in the toilets that morning, so eager that she had a mini meltdown when she saw it gone : she panicked at the thought of it having been flushed by accident. In fact, it had just slipped out of view and was recovered, thanks to her.

FACT : Shit can't be tested for DNA.

FACT : Guede admitted that this specific shit was his after he was arrested. That happened a fortnight after Knox had led police to an unnoticeable turd.

Let's be real. Girl can't remember anything about the night before. She never flushes. She sees a turd in a toilet in her flat. But ! she knows this peculiar turd is unusual. How come ?

Answer 1 : Amanda is innocent, wasn't there, and it's Ceiling Cat who told her this turd warranted police attention.

Answer 2 : Amanda was there, she knows that the guy who raped her murdered roommate took that specific dump, she thinks police better recover it and indict him, so that he takes the fall for the three of them. He's black ! In the US, it would have worked.

Knox's interest in Guede's shit proves she was there at the same time as Guede. That peculiar fact proves she's at least complicit of murder.

Other facts have led the Italian court to find that she was the one who cut Meredith's throat. Then all three went away, letting Meredith drown in her own blood, her windpipe having been severed by that blow.
47
Has anyone come up with a name for the mental disorder that convinces people the "evidence" against Knox and Sollecito is "iron-clad"?
48
Yeah. It's called : logic.
49
The only iron clad evidence in the Kercher case is that Rudy Guede is guilty.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_M…

Even the Italians admit there's no evidence against Knox and Sollecito!

http://www.penale.it/page.asp?mode=1&IDP…

50
Actually, @48, it's called privileging the hypothesis, though that neutral description of your fallacious logical process doesn't come close to capturing the witchhunty psychosis that drives your bloodlust.
51
Bloodlust is rich,

coming from the mouth of someone who's defending a twice condemned murderess,

who cut open with a kitchen knife, the throat of the already raped 20-years-old English flatmate she hated,

while her 1-week bestiality porn obessed boyfriend and her drug dealer rapist friend were restraining her,

then locked her in her room, threw away her phones, and left her alone, voiceless, airpipe severed, to drown in her own blood.

As in Knox's words to Meredith's friends, before police had told anybody how Meredith had died - and nobody, including Knox, had seen the corpse, hidden under a duvet - when they wished in the police station that Meredith hadn't suffered much :

"What do you think ? She fucking bled to death !"
52
while her 1-week bestiality porn obessed boyfriend and her drug dealer rapist friend were restraining her...

Yup. There's the mental illness to which I refer.

http://lesswrong.com/lw/1j7/the_amanda_k…

If you steep yourself in fanciful prosecutorial bullshit for years on end, you can wind up convinced of things that quite simply don't pass the most basic standards of proof and logic.

Your kind terrifies me. You convicted entire innocent families of Satanic ritual child abuse in the 80's. You sent "witches" by the dozen to their deaths in the 17th century.

To you, Knox is guilty because she didn't respond to stressful circumstances in the precise manner that you think people are "supposed" to, and that you imagine you would if you were in a similar situation. Which you haven't been. Ever.

And so you contort the timeline, and pinpoint "behavior" upon it where it best suits your manufactured establishment of guilt. You convince yourself to your core, such that you cannot be dissuaded by inconvenient facts like every piece of verifiable physical evidence pointing to a disturbed youth and multiple unlawful-entry offender -- and virtual stranger to the other accused and to the victim -- as the sole perpetrator.

Again, http://lesswrong.com/lw/1j7/the_amanda_k…

Be less wrong. Because the consequence of your wrongness is evil.
53
The criticism that americans have been widely critical of the Italian justice system while mostly ignoring the travesties of our own justice system is valid. Of course that just means americans and american journalists are guilty of selective outrage and perhaps hypocrisy (and being more sensitive to travesties commited against pretty young white women). But it is in no way a defense of the verdict, the prosecutors, or the process--it is just a deflection.
54
@53 -- Exactly.

The reaction to this case has been so strange. It's as if corruption and prejudice against black people in the American justice system has distorted many people's perception of Knox. Like, "Hey, maybe there's no strong evidence against her, and there's a bunch of DNA evidence against Guede, but plenty of innocent black men in America go to jail, so throw Knox in jail too. And let's celebrate the fact that Guede's getting out of jail within a year."
55
@44 There were TWO bathrooms. One where the bloody shoe print was found and then a second one where the sh*t was found. If you had ANY knowledge of the case I wouldn't have to explain that.

Still no takers for HOW the bloody bare foot print got on the bath mat without any foot prints leading up to it? Any one? Bueller?

There is much more evidence then the clean up but once you except the facts of a clean up you cannot reconcile that Guede cleaned up, once you realize there was at least one other person involved who DID clean up you can't NOT look at Knox. Once you look at Knox and the rest of the evidence it is pretty hard to come to any other conclusion but that bother her and Raffael are guilty as fuck.
56
Bloody Foot print not shoe print*
57
To all of those convinced of Knox's guilt:

When Knox was being grilled by Italian investigators without a proper translator and pressed to name any black men she knew, why would she have named and implicated Patrick Lumumba instead of Guede, whose DNA turned up all over the apartment?
58
Well, I can't pretend to KNOW for sure why any one does anything but I would venture to guess that Amanda might not be to desperate to turn in someone who could turn on her. Pretty simple and obvious in my mind.

So, my question to you is who cleaned up?
59
I can't pretend to know for sure who cleaned up. The murderer?

And if Knox was trying to protect herself by naming Lumumba instead of Guede, why would she have also "confessed" to being in the apartment at the time of the murder? Doesn't seem like something a person who's "desperate" not to incriminate herself would do. Seems like it would have been WAY easier for her to just pin the whole thing on Guede rather than implicating Lumumba AND herself.

Also, why would Guede have admitted to being in the apartment, but not mentioned anything about Knox until he learned about her much later?
60

Well Guede didn't clean up so there had to be more then him present, yes?

So who helped Guede? Do you at least acknowledge that he couldn't have been the one to clean up?

Look, you want to talk about things that can't be proven but only assumed. I don't need to know what Knox was thinking. I do not think that her naming Patrick or confessing to being there as evidence that is so great it matters either way. There is plenty of factual evidence that has convinced me, beyond a shadow of doubt that she is guilty.

The questions you are asking are not questions that can be definitively answered. They are conjecture only.

My opinion is that Guede was equally afraid of being turned on. But my opinion doesn't mean sh*t. Neither does yours.

Those things are only the icing on the evidence filled cake
61
Also. Guede did not leave DNA all over the apartment.

Besides his sh*t in the second bathroom toilet and 3 places in Merediths room (her purse, the cuff of her sweater and inside her) it was found NO PLACE ELSE.

The crime scene inculdes the entire cottage. There are multiple places where Amandas DNA and Kerchers DNA was found mixed. Raffaels DNA on the bra clasp (it is undeniably his and there is no proof of contamination, which if you can't prove it, it didn't happen otherwise no dna evidence would count any place).

Do your research the information is there in black and white if you choose to look for it and not just listen to whatever talking head you are listening to.
62
There's DNA evidence proving that Guede was there the night of the murder. Proving where Knox was is much more complicated. Things are further complicated by the fact that Guede, who had nothing more to lose and maybe even something to gain, said nothing about Knox until very late in the game.
63
@62 Before being arrested, when he was still in Germany, Guede wrote in his diary about blood and Knox, calling her Amanda. I don't call that very late in the game.

"I am asking myself how is it possible that Amanda could have slept in all that mess, and took a shower with all that blood in the bathroom and corridor? (Guede, Germany Diary, P21)"

The recovery of this diary prompted the luminol tests. Which gave the shoe prints of Guede going straight out (1 shoe only) and some footprints of Sollecito and Knox.

As for dimwits asking "Why is there a partial Sollecito bloody footprint on the mat and not on the tiles" : ever heard of bleach ? The cottage was being cleaned up by Knox and Sollecito, dummy, who were found hands on a mop, in a cottage reeking of bleach, when postal police arrived unexpectedly, to give Meredith back her recovered stolen phones !

Their almost completed cleanup also explains the "1-shoe only" track of Guede : he sure didn't hop out of the place !

But I expect you'll advert your eyes from this evidence too. Had Knox been ugly, how less uninformed you'd have permitted yourself to become !

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.