Amanda Knox Guilt Reinstated.

[Barb]

1. She was not acquitted for lack of evidence...but what those judges questioned was current evidence in DNA testing. That decision was not ratified by the Court of Constancy as required in Italian law. The Supreme Court agreed. In other words, there was no double jeopardy as is against American law, for the decision was never finalized. The Supreme Court thus ruled to the original decision of quilt.

2. The perpetrator now in jail could not name his accomplice in court, though he was allowed to say it was two other people who he did not know very well, but lived there. I do not know the particulars of Italian law as to why this is, though it is taken everyone by now knew who he was inferring to.

The young British girl's death deserves justice. We should not let jingoism and personal senses of nationalism get in the way of justice. The justices that ruled here are just as smart and diligent as those in the states. It is wrong to wish they are not. The case was well prepared, and resolved, and most likely she will be sent back to serve her sentence.

I can't imagine the American government sending back a pretty young white girl to serve a sentence in a foreign country that can't get it right.

The perp in Jail would probably have implicated Santa Claus if he though he could get away with it.

Why couldn't you have just said a pretty young girl? I know she is, in this instance white, but still...

 

[House]

So many compared to your one....think she is innocent.....that says a lot.

No, it doesn't. Extradition hearings are not based on guilt or innocence. It's a cost:benefit ratio analysis.

"What are the potential benefits of extraditing the citizen?"
"What are the potential consequences of not extraditing the citizen?"

Those are the questions that are asked. Since the US wants to preserve their extradition treaty with Italy, don't bank on Knox getting a pass from Uncle Sam.

Any notion that the government gives a damn about the citizens when doing so does not serve the government's interests is a naive one. idk why people keep drinking the "government is benevolent" kool-aid.

 

[SayMyName]

So many compared to your one....think she is innocent.....that says a lot.

No, it doesn't. Extradition hearings are not based on guilt or innocence. It's a cost:benefit ratio analysis.

"What are the potential benefits of extraditing the citizen?"
"What are the potential consequences of not extraditing the citizen?"

Those are the questions that are asked. Since the US wants to preserve their extradition treaty with Italy, don't bank on Knox getting a pass from Uncle Sam.

Any notion that the government gives a damn about the citizens when doing so does not serve the government's interests is a naive one. idk why people keep drinking the "government is benevolent" kool-aid.

I would rather have someone sent back because I actually believe that justice has been served....but, you seem to be familiar enough as I am with how this will actually work out.

The US has a lot of wounds to heal with Italy if we are to keep her a reliable and willing partner of the US in the future. A great many instances going back a couple of decades has eroded our relationship with them. On the surface, everything looks pleasant, but underneath there is a growing dislike of us. Thus, if Italy asks for her back, and the US State Department has to make a decision (which because of politics I am sure will at least be given to the President for his opinion, who will in turn ask what we know of this...meaning the intelligence that the CIA most likely would provide), then the matter could just boil down to if they believe just 51 percent that she was indeed involved, she will be sent back. And, when it comes to the CIA, with 23 of their agents now felons according to Italian law, and a safe house villa of the agency confiscated and sold off as reparations to families of our intelligence operation abductions, I guess you will just have to hope they will say good things in Amanda's favor about why she shouldn't be extradited.

Good observation on the political aspects of extradition.

 

[Mertex]

Sadly, it seems jingoism dominates much of the attitudes among those Americans so vehemently defending Amanda Knox. No matter what Americans do overseas, if you are white, pretty, and of priviledge and look good for a gig on Maxim and Oprah, you should be able to do whatever you want overseas. The norms, values, and mores of other nations are of no importance, for those overseas should be lucky to have them there. Or so they believe.

There is also what amounts to Hybristophilia, or the fascination with those that commit murder to the point of falling in love, writing, or following them into court as if groupies for a rock band. This is widely documented in other cases such as Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, and Richard Ramirez.

And then there are those who have "confirmation bias" - once they've made up their minds about something, being confronted with "facts" tearing down their false beliefs, they will not accept them, but continue to believe the debunked stories, in an effort to save face.

......once people have their mind locked on something, it's very hard to change.

"It's a thing called confirmation bias. It's a thing that we all have when we believe something, it's very hard to shake it. It doesn't matter how many facts that you tell them," says Heavey.

"Unfortunately for Amanda, a lot of the world and especially the people in the Kercher family, believe that she's guilty and that's all they've been told over and over. They cannot see the truth of the matter."

As for the recent Italian court decision to overturn Knox and Sollecito's acquittals, Heavey says that shouldn't cast doubt on their innocence; it's just an attempt to save face.

"If you listen to the commentators in Italy, they said 'Perhaps Judge Hellman went too far, with 'They did not commit the crime.'" If he'd just said 'There's insufficient evidence,' everybody could have saved face, but what he was really saying to people who understand it is, 'this four-year Italian opera is a farce. It's a fiction. It's an insult.'"

Heavey says the real criminals are the prosecutors and cops who told lies about Knox and Sollecito, and unfortunately some people still believe them.

"I can tell them [those who doubt Knox's innocence] that two judges and six popular judges looked at this case for 10 months and said there's a substantive non-existence of evidence, our system will not tolerate the wrongful conviction of the innocent. I could tell that to you, and I could tell that to your listeners, and you're still going to think Amanda Knox might have been involved. And that's the crying shame of this."http://mynorthwest.com/108/2265837/Why-some-people-will-never-believe-Amanda-Knox-is-innocent

In the end, it will play out as it will. The US State Department will order her extradited per our treaty with Italy. They will do so, if for no other reason, than that the Italians have pending arrest warrants for 23 CIA agents and other US personnel that entered Italy during the War on Terror and abducted people on their territory, and we would like that to go away. Also, the CIA has no doubt already looked into this matter, knowing full well that their opinion will be asked for in the future prior to any decision being made on the matter of extradition. They have every reason to send her back, regardless of whether they believe the charges or not, which I suspect they do and will.

It is amazing that you, supposedly an American, are okay with the fact that the confessed murderer, Rudy Guede, at one time stated that Amanda and her boyfriend were not present at the time of the murder, and although he has confessed to being the killer, that his sentence was reduced to 16 years in prison, while Knox and her boyfriend, who you consider accomplices, since the murderer has already confessed to having done it, are being given 28 and 25 years. And of top of that, Guede is up for parole this year, having served a total of 7 years. It is amazing that you don't find any of that questionable. Why do you hate Amanda Knox so much that in spite of these inconsistencies, you are adamant that she be sent back and pay for a crime she didn't commit, and serve 28 years, while the actual murderer get away with only doing 7 years? His English was minimal and Meredith didn't speak Italian, yet he claims his newly met Meredith and he, had deep conversations? That you don't find that questionable is another clue that you are definitely "confirmation biased."

As for Amanda, Rudy stresses in the German statement that “She was not in the house.” Then he smears the U.S. student with a voice from the grave. He claims that Meredith made all sorts of complaints about Amanda. Indeed, he’s able to have deep conversations with the newly met Meredith, even though they share no common language. His English is minimal and Meredith was new to Italian.
Rudy Guede: Amanda Knox was not there - Let's Talk About True Crime


Experts disagree with your linked "so called expert" that claims she will be extradited.

A U.S. court or the State Department would be unlikely to take up any extradition request from Italy, said Sean Casey, a former prosecutor who is now a partner at Kobre & Kim in New York.

He cited an extradition treaty between the United States and Italy that states: "Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the Requested Party for the same acts for which extradition is requested."

"Under U.S. law, she was once put in jeopardy and later acquitted," Casey said. "Under the treaty, extradition should not be granted."
KNEWS - Experts Disagree Over Extradition For Amanda Knox

Within the next two months, Alessandro Nencini, the judge in the Amanda Knox case will deliver the written report detailing the reasoning for his verdict. Because of this own words at the conclusion of the case ( “Had Amanda gone to work that evening, I don’t believe we would be here now.”), reveals much about what he will report.

1. Lies. From the beginning, whether in police custody or not, Amanda and her boyfriend repeatedly changed their story on so many facets of the investigation, from falsely accusing her African employer of the crime, saying she was asleep at home the morning after the murder when she was not, to even telling the police that Meredith always locked her door when she did not, will weigh heavily in this report. The boyfriend is already on record as saying he has lied for Amanda several times.

2. The botched burglary scene. Telephone records reveal that Amanda and her boyfriend called police to report a burglary at the home. When police arrived, they saw immediately that it was staged, with clothes and possessions on the floor here and there, but the glass on top of the disarray. In other words, the burglar broke in after making a mess of the room. In the same investigation when police arrived, Amanda barred police from going to Meredith’s room, saying she always locked it. When the other roommate, Filomena Roselinni came home as police were on the scene, she contradicted Amanda before police, saying she did not know her room had been burglarized and that Meredith never locked her door.

3. Behavior. They act quilty. Their actions immediately before, during, and after the discovery of Meredith’s body in the apartment. As Filomena Roselinni reported to police that Meredith never locked her door, and the decision was made to open it, Amanda and her boyfriend retreated to the far side of the room, holding each other. This is just one of the many actions that will be in the mind of the judge when writing his decision.

4. DNA. Despite some questions of validity, it is only in technique. Both Amanda and Meredith’s DNA are mixed together in blood drops on the floor of the room of Filomena Rossellini where the fake burglary was staged. That peace of evidence is not in dispute. It should not even be there.

5. Proximnity. Amanda and her boyfriend were seen where they said they were not. She says she was sleeping that morning until 10 am, yet their cell phone records, eye witnesses, and shop receipts show they were up and actively about doing something as early as 6am.

6. Bleach. It was bought the morning after the crime by Amanda. The knife found in her boyfriends apartment had been cleaned, just not enough to erase that one small bit of Meredith’s DNA originally detected. Amanda’s DNA did remain, as one would expect from someone handling the knife after cleaning.

7. Her own words. Even in her prison diary, Amanda says, “I don’t want to remember.”

There is more, but I suspect these items will no doubt play into his looking even more closely at the rest of the evidence as indeed pointing to the guilt of Amanda and her boyfriend.

The officials in this case are wise and educated people who are seeking justice for a murdered young woman, despite attempts by some Americans to paint the Italians as primitives. Those Americans locked into a sense of fascination with Amanda Knox need to understand that we send many of our own citizens to jail every year for a lot less evidence.

All these have been debunked, but you are stuck in your "confirmation bias" and didn't even bother to consider it......as for your expert Dershowitz, who claims the evidence points to her guilt, how funny that two judges and six popular judges looked at this case for 10 months and said there's a substantive non-existence of evidence, our system will not tolerate the wrongful conviction of the innocent.

Don't bother to respond....you are now just regurgitating the same crap that Coulter spewed that have been seriously debunked. If you want to believe lies, that is your choice, but you will be disappointed that your wishes will not materialize.

 

[JoeB131]

1. She was not acquitted for lack of evidence...but what those judges questioned was current evidence in DNA testing. That decision was not ratified by the Court of Constancy as required in Italian law. The Supreme Court agreed. In other words, there was no double jeopardy as is against American law, for the decision was never finalized. The Supreme Court thus ruled to the original decision of quilt.

2. The perpetrator now in jail could not name his accomplice in court, though he was allowed to say it was two other people who he did not know very well, but lived there. I do not know the particulars of Italian law as to why this is, though it is taken everyone by now knew who he was inferring to.

The young British girl's death deserves justice. We should not let jingoism and personal senses of nationalism get in the way of justice. The justices that ruled here are just as smart and diligent as those in the states. It is wrong to wish they are not. The case was well prepared, and resolved, and most likely she will be sent back to serve her sentence.

I can't imagine the American government sending back a pretty young white girl to serve a sentence in a foreign country that can't get it right.

The perp in Jail would probably have implicated Santa Claus if he though he could get away with it.

Why couldn't you have just said a pretty young girl? I know she is, in this instance white, but still...

I think if she were any kind of minority, the government would probably have less qualms about extraditing her.

For the record, with the evidence they have, it would be wrong to send her back. This was a kangaroo court from start to finish.

 

[sarahgop]

knox needs to accept her punishment.

 

[Dr Grump]

The whole conviction is dodgy to say the least. There is so much reasonable doubt it isn't funny. Not saying Knox didn't do it (although am 95% sure she didn't), but the evidence is so negligible she has to be given the benefit of the doubt....

 

[Mertex]

knox needs to accept her punishment.

Maybe they should send you in her place......would be just as asinine, wouldn't it.

 

[CaféAuLait]

Sadly, it seems jingoism dominates much of the attitudes among those Americans so vehemently defending Amanda Knox. No matter what Americans do overseas, if you are white, pretty, and of priviledge and look good for a gig on Maxim and Oprah, you should be able to do whatever you want overseas. The norms, values, and mores of other nations are of no importance, for those overseas should be lucky to have them there. Or so they believe.

There is also what amounts to Hybristophilia, or the fascination with those that commit murder to the point of falling in love, writing, or following them into court as if groupies for a rock band. This is widely documented in other cases such as Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, and Richard Ramirez.

In the end, it will play out as it will. The US State Department will order her extradited per our treaty with Italy. They will do so, if for no other reason, than that the Italians have pending arrest warrants for 23 CIA agents and other US personnel that entered Italy during the War on Terror and abducted people on their territory, and we would like that to go away. Also, the CIA has no doubt already looked into this matter, knowing full well that their opinion will be asked for in the future prior to any decision being made on the matter of extradition. They have every reason to send her back, regardless of whether they believe the charges or not, which I suspect they do and will.

Within the next two months, Alessandro Nencini, the judge in the Amanda Knox case will deliver the written report detailing the reasoning for his verdict. Because of this own words at the conclusion of the case ( “Had Amanda gone to work that evening, I don’t believe we would be here now.”), reveals much about what he will report.

Total baloney, you spout non facts to support your claim Knox and her boyfriend killed someone and then have the gall to say people support her because she is cute and white and or people believe American’s can do whatever they want?

No one is fascinated with someone who committed murder in Knox’s case, because Knox did not commit murder. In fact, I'd have to say when reading about Knox, the person she was, she probably would have irritated the hell out of me and I would not have liked her as an individual because of her personality.

Within the next two months, Alessandro Nencini, the judge in the Amanda Knox case will deliver the written report detailing the reasoning for his verdict. Because of this own words at the conclusion of the case ( “Had Amanda gone to work that evening, I don’t believe we would be here now.”), reveals much about what he will report.

Of course he said that, because that would have given her an alibi.

1. Lies. From the beginning, whether in police custody or not, Amanda and her boyfriend repeatedly changed their story on so many facets of the investigation, from falsely accusing her African employer of the crime, saying she was asleep at home the morning after the murder when she was not, to even telling the police that Meredith always locked her door when she did not, will weigh heavily in this report. The boyfriend is already on record as saying he has lied for Amanda several times.

The police accused her employer, Amanda agreed with them after 5 days of interrogation. Amanda was asleep. As far as the door being locked, Knox told police she believed she was out or sleeping because the door was locked.

The boyfriend NEVER said he lied for Knox. Where are you getting your facts? Some place that decided on Knox’s guilt?

I find it strange you say she accused her “African” employer, again she did not, the police did. Why didn’t she just accuse the "African" man whose DNA/semen was in and on Kercher? The "African" man whose bloody hand prints, foot prints, fingerprints were all over the Kercher’s bedroom and all over the flat? Why not accuse that "African" man who was caught no less than THREE times in the weeks BEFORE Kercher was murdered breaking into second story flats robbing and attacking people with knives?

The prosecution argued that Knox and Sollecito's DNA and Fingerprints WERE NOT in Kercher’s bedroom because they cleaned up all traces of themselves leaving only Guede’s DNA, fingerprints, and blood. So why in the heck would they have to accuse anyone but Guede? How would they be able to pull of that feat? Cleaning all traces of themselves except for the supposed scant evidence of Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp collected months after being lost and trampled on and moved throughout the house?

2. The botched burglary scene. Telephone records reveal that Amanda and her boyfriend called police to report a burglary at the home. When police arrived, they saw immediately that it was staged, with clothes and possessions on the floor here and there, but the glass on top of the disarray. In other words, the burglar broke in after making a mess of the room. In the same investigation when police arrived, Amanda barred police from going to Meredith’s room, saying she always locked it. When the other roommate, Filomena Roselinni came home as police were on the scene, she contradicted Amanda before police, saying she did not know her room had been burglarized and that Meredith never locked her door.

The burglary scene is far from botched as you claim. Look at the photos which show the rock and where it hit the shutter, the rock that broke and left dents in the flooring where it landed. There was no glass strewn all over Filomena’s belonging. The crime scene photos show that, period.

Secondly, Knox never said she always locked her door, she said she locked it sometimes. The problem is the language barrier; police and Filomena were speaking Italian while Amanda was speaking English and little Italian. Why would Knox and Sollecito try to force her door open BEFORE police arrived and why did they call police? They called police because they noted the broken window and because Kercher did not answer her locked door. If they were trying to HIDE the body why the heck did they call the police? Hummmm? Not to mention Filomeina testified Kercher DID lock her door sometimes at Amanda's trial.

3. Behavior. They act quilty. Their actions immediately before, during, and after the discovery of Meredith’s body in the apartment. As Filomena Roselinni reported to police that Meredith never locked her door, and the decision was made to open it, Amanda and her boyfriend retreated to the far side of the room, holding each other. This is just one of the many actions that will be in the mind of the judge when writing his decision.

Moved to the far side of what room? It was a flipping tiny hallway. Only a few people could get into the hallway. The police (the postal police not the carabinieri (military police, as they had yet to arrive) REFUSED To break the door down. That is when other friends tried to break the door down AFTER Sollecito (Knox’s boyfriend) failed.

4. DNA. Despite some questions of validity, it is only in technique. Both Amanda and Meredith’s DNA are mixed together in blood drops on the floor of the room of Filomena Rossellini where the fake burglary was staged. That peace of evidence is not in dispute. It should not even be there.

It is not just "technique" in question it is contamination. Yes there is a contention that the burglary was staged and that is proven false, it was not staged. As far as the mixed DNA it was NOT blood. Mixed DNA ( organic) was found all over the house because 4 women lived there. You had better start accusing Filomina because her DNA was found mixed with Kercher's in Fimomina's bedroom, the same place Knox's was. This is what happenes when people live together. Mixed DNA does not mean blood. You pick up a phone and I pick up a phone and someone swabs the phone, the sample will produce mixed DNA. Knox and Kercher shared the same bathroom their DNA will be all over that bathroom.

Now onto the blood evidence video. The technician uses the SAME swab many areas within a single structure. The light switch, she swabs it everywhere and you expect there not to be mixed samples. If you keep watching the video you will see she does not even bother to change gloves after collecting the bath mat then she continues to swab in a ridiculous manner! Of course there will be mixed sample's of DNA.




Note how her gloves are rolled at the wrist, the same way throughout the video as she moved from the toilet to walls to sinks.

5. Proximnity. Amanda and her boyfriend were seen where they said they were not. She says she was sleeping that morning until 10 am, yet their cell phone records, eye witnesses, and shop receipts show they were up and actively about doing something as early as 6am.

Again you have misinformation. There were NEVER any shop receipts, ever. Produce them. You can’t because there were NONE! An often repeated lie.

6. Bleach. It was bought the morning after the crime by Amanda. The knife found in her boyfriends apartment had been cleaned, just not enough to erase that one small bit of Meredith’s DNA originally detected. Amanda’s DNA did remain, as one would expect from someone handling the knife after cleaning.

There was no bleach brought that morning at all, there are no receipts for bleach either. Another oft repeated lie. In fact the shop owner, Marco Quintavalle whose FIRST statement to police was Amanda and her boyfriend WERE NOT in the store that morning days after the murder. He knew both Knox and Sollecito. He then changed his story 7 months later after being PAID for a story by the media. and his employee, Marina Chiriboga who was actually working testified AGAINST the shop owner and stayed with the original statement made by the both of them the morning police first interviewed them Facinating fact is Marina Chiriboga was never paid for a story and never changed her story as her boss did who was paid by Italian media 7 months later. The employee who was working that morning says the SHOP owner is LYING and Amanda was NEVER THERE.Strange that.

She was able to refute Quintavalle's new version of events because she was also in the shop on the morning of November 2, 2007, and did not see Sollecito or Knox.

Read more: Amanda Knox: The troubling doubts over Foxy Knoxy's role in Meredith Kercher's murder | Mail Online


There was no DNA of Meredith found on the knife.


Knox Trial: No Trace Of Kercher's DNA On Knife

Forensic testing on a knife allegedly used to kill Meredith Kercher has found Amanda Knox's DNA but none of the victim's genetic material, Italian news reports say.

Knox Trial: No Trace Of Kercher's DNA On Knife

7. Her own words. Even in her prison diary, Amanda says, “I don’t want to remember.”

Baloney ,here are her words for why she wrote her prison diary:

'I'm writing this because I want to remember. I want to remember because this is an experience not many people will ever have.

 

[CaféAuLait]

1. She was not acquitted for lack of evidence...but what those judges questioned was current evidence in DNA testing. That decision was not ratified by the Court of Constancy as required in Italian law. The Supreme Court agreed. In other words, there was no double jeopardy as is against American law, for the decision was never finalized. The Supreme Court thus ruled to the original decision of quilt.

2. The perpetrator now in jail could not name his accomplice in court, though he was allowed to say it was two other people who he did not know very well, but lived there. I do not know the particulars of Italian law as to why this is, though it is taken everyone by now knew who he was inferring to.

The young British girl's death deserves justice. We should not let jingoism and personal senses of nationalism get in the way of justice. The justices that ruled here are just as smart and diligent as those in the states. It is wrong to wish they are not. The case was well prepared, and resolved, and most likely she will be sent back to serve her sentence.

Rude Guede changed his story many times. In his first account, there was one person, a large male, while he was supposedly using the bathroom AFTER he had tried and failed to have consensual sex with Kercher. ( yet evidence shows that his semen was inside and on Meredith) He said this person called him names and he in turn called the person names back.

His sentence has since been reduced to 16 years in jail and Guede now says he is innocent.

According to all parties involved in the incident, including Guede, he was present at Knox and Kercher’s apartment shortly before, and in some versions of the story, during, the murder. There is also strong DNA evidence tying him to the crime itself, including his bloody hand prints and DNA found all over the crime scene and inside Kercher’s body. His bloody fingerprints were also found at the scene.

Guede was already a known criminal and had several burglary convictions under his belt by the time he met Kercher. He has changed his story so many times about whether or not Knox is the real killer, it’s difficult to keep all the versions straight. He has said he saw Knox and her then-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder. He has also said that Knox and Sollecito were not present at the murder. He later said that they are guilty of the murder. More than one of his fellow prisoners has come forward to say he told them the real story is that Knox and Sollicito were not at the crime scene at all and that he is the real killer.

Amanda Knox Found Guilty but Rudy Guede Was Convicted Then Confessed


The evidence against Rudy Guede:





Rudy admitted he was in the room.





Rudy's DNA was found in and on Meredith's body.





Rudy's DNA along with Meredith’s blood, was found on Meredith's purse. ( Meredith's money, cell phones were stolen)





Rudy's excrement was found in the toilet.





Rudy's shoe prints, set in Meredith’s blood, were found in the bedroom and hallway.





Rudy's handprints, in Meredith’s blood, were found on a pillow case in Meredith's room and on her wall.





Rudy had a cut on his right hand that was still visible when he was arrested.





Rudy fled the country.



Have you read any of Guede's statements?


R. I was in the bathroom, in the bathroom maybe five minutes. So, I really had to take this shit, but then I heard a scream, but let me tell you, a really loud scream, so loud that according to me, if anyone was passing by, nearby, they would have heard this scream, because she screamed so loud...and then, then, I got a bit worried and I got out of the bathroom right away, without even putting my pants back on, they were practically falling down, I was wearing just my underwear and my pants were falling around my...
G. But if I understand, I mean like where was this...I mean, what time do you think this happened, I don't know...
R. Around nine, nine twenty or so, because in the meantime we had gotten to talking and all.
G. I see.
R. I think nine‐twenty, nine‐thirty, around then, and then, when I heard the scream, let me tell you she screamed so loud that you could hear it even in the street, Giacomo, she screamed really loud. When I came out, it was in semi‐darkness, I came out and I saw him.
G. But who?
R. His back was turned, and then I said “what the hell is going on?”.
G. Masked? What the hell was this guy like?
R. Well, firstly this person wasn't bigger than me, I mean taller, physically, in height, he wasn't taller than
me. His back was turned, and I saw there...Meredith...I saw Meredith who was bleeding already, she had a slash in her throat, and this guy took a knife and I've got wounds on my hands because I grabbed his hand, he tried to stab me and I still have the wounds on my hands, the signs, that are healing now, but I still have them on my hand...
Page 8:
R. I tried to help her, Giacomo, it's not that...my blood, no, I don't know if there is any or not, because I didn't bleed, I didn't actually bleed, my wounds that I had, the guy just wounded me lightly, it didn't bleed, now I can't tell you...


http://www.truejustice.org/ee/documents/perugia/guedeskypeconversationtranslation.pdf




He received a reduced sentence after changing his story and maybe be released this year!

 

[CaféAuLait]

I know....it defies reason.....

So, you have no argument, other than that she is innocent. Let us then take the words of preeminent Harvard professor and defense attorney Alan Dershowitz, who many claim to be liberal, as well as the lawyer and columnist Ann Coulter, both of whom state that if she were ugly and not wealthy, she would not even come to the attention of her current supporters. They continue with key points on why she and her boyfriend are guilty, including what they say is one of the key factors in the case many do not note, that earlier in the day they reported the burglary of another roommates room. Police now know it was them that reported it because of phone records. But Filomina Rosselinni was not even home at the time, and they had never seen her. How did they know her room, and only her room had been burglarized? Furthermore, police said it was staged, but did not know why? Amanda would not let them check Meredith's room. She barred their way. It was only when Filomena Rosselinni came home that she said she did not call about her room being burglarized, and that Meredith never locked her door, contrary to Amanda's story. According to all witness there at the time, Amanda and her boyfriend retreated to the other side of the apartment at that time and hugged one another as everyone else stood around with the police to bust down Meredith's door.

The evidence points to not only her quilt, but that they did it with such sheer unconcern. They did not care, and really believed that they would get away with it. But, what makes this case so especially disturbing, is the number of people who will give shelter and support to not only criminals, but those that are absolutely evil.

Dershowitz: I Wouldn't Want My Son Going Out With Amanda Knox

Ann Coulter - September 7, 2011 - AMANDA KNOX: THE NEW MUMIA!

Here is the FIRST and SECOND phone call to the police, ( seconds apart) they said they THINK the flat has been burgled and decided such because of the blood and they think the person cut themselves while entering the window. These are the ONLY two calls to the police made within seconds of one another because the first was cut off. And what do you mean Amanda would not let them check the room? They mention the locked room in the 112 ( 911 in the US) phone call! Why do you think they were concerned?

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Audio/112-1.mp3

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Audio/112-2.mp3

English translation:

First call


POLICE:

Carabinieri Perugia


RS:

Hello good morning, listen ... someone has entered our house breaking the window and he made a big mess...there is a locked door. The street is…


AK:

[Background] Via della Pergola.


RS:

Via della pergola 7.


POLICE:

Via..


RS:

Della Pergola 7, in Perugia.


POLICE:

Residence of mister...?


RS:

Ehmm... .. Amanda ..


POLICE:

Eh??


RS:

The...people...who live in ..ehmm .. they are a group of students.


POLICE:

Give me name and mobile number of one of the tenants.


RS:

Amanda.


POLICE:

Yes..


RS:

The last name K, N...


POLICE:

Yes...


RS:

O, X.


POLICE:

Yes


RS:

The mobile number ... ehhh.


POLICE:

Hello?


RS:

Yes, yes. I'm taking the number.

[Long pause]


RS:

348


POLICE:

Yes.


RS:

46


POLICE:

Yes.


RS:

73


POLICE:

Yes.


RS:

590


POLICE:

590?


RS:

Yes.


POLICE:

Theft [burglary] in the house eh?


RS:

No, there's no theft.. they broke the window ... there is a mess ... there is also a closed door ... a mess.


POLICE:

Just a moment please.

[Music plays for 5 seconds]


POLICE:

Hello?


RS:

Yes.


POLICE:

So listen, they entered .. they broke the window .. and how do you know they entered?


RS:

It can be seen by signs... that there are drops .... that there are blood stains in the bathroom.


POLICE:

So they entered. .. because the window's broken ... did they cut themselves breaking the window?


RS:

Ehmm...this ...

[The call is cut off.]


POLICE:

Hello??





Second call


POLICE:

Carabinieri, Perugia.


RS:

Yes hello, I called two seconds ago.


POLICE:

Someone's been in the house and broke the window?


RS:

Yes.


POLICE:

Then they went into the bathroom.


RS:

I don't know, if you come here perhaps ...


POLICE:

What did they take?


RS:

They didn't take anything, the problem is one of the doors is closed, there are bloodstains.


POLICE:

A door's closed? Which door's closed?


RS:

The door of one of the flatmates who isn't here. We don't know where she is.


POLICE:

Were these blood stains outside the door of this flatmate who's not there?


RS:

The blood stains are in the bathroom.


POLICE:

Oh in the bathroom. And there's this closed door. And this girl, do you have her mobile number, her ...?


RS:

Yes, yes, we tried to call her but she's not answering.


POLICE:

OK, I'll send you a patrol car now and we'll check the situation out.


RS:

OK.


POLICE:

OK?


RS:

OK.


POLICE:

Goodbye.


RS:

Goodbye

 

[CaféAuLait]

According to all witness there at the time, Amanda and her boyfriend retreated to the other side of the apartment at that time and hugged one another as everyone else stood around with the police to bust down Meredith's door.


Dershowitz: I Wouldn't Want My Son Going Out With Amanda Knox

Ann Coulter - September 7, 2011 - AMANDA KNOX: THE NEW MUMIA!

The police did not break down Meredith's door. In fact the postal police ( who arrived before the Carabinieri) refused to break the door down. It was a friend of theirs, Luca Altieri, (who testified "it took him six hard kicks and a shoulder" to break the door and was quite a bit larger than Sollecito) This was after Sollecito tried to do the same.

Luca bent down to look through the keyhole but all he could glimpse was part of a bed and a wall. He first tried ramming his shoulder against the door. He tried again, several times. It didn't budge. He then started kicking it, aiming at the door handle, again and again, half a dozen kicks in all."

And the reason they became even more upset before the door was broken down was due to the arrival of the postal police not the Carabinieri. The postal police told them they were looking for the owner of the phones which happened to be Meredith's which were found by a lady in her garden. The postal police were trying to find out who owned the phones. The Carabinieri arrived a few minutes later since Sollecito called them BEFORE the postal police arrived.

Why did they call 112 ( 911) and mention the door being locked, thusly bring attention to it if they did not want police coming and or looking in that room?

 

[SayMyName]

What has been established as fact by the court, and upheld after appeal by the Supreme Court of Italy, called the Court of Cessation, is perhaps what is best to stay to in considering Amanda’s guilt or innocent, the English transcript of the trial readily available online. The court in its summary ruled the following to be fact, all of which and more can be found from pages 357 to 397 of the trial transcript.

1. Amanda and her boyfriend Raffaele were indeed at the house at the time of the murder. One example used is the cigarette butt shown to have been smoked the evening of the crime and containing Amanda’s DNA.

2. Amanda’s DNA and that of the murder victim Meredith Kersher were mixed together in the room of Filomena Rossallini, where the burglary scene had been staged. Meredith’s blood should not have been there.

3. Attempts to clean the scene after the crime were made.

4. Once the door to Meredith’s room was broken down by one of Meredith’s friends, Luca Altieri, in the presence of the postal police, and her body found, the police investigators Michele Battisttelli and Fabio Marzi immediately ordered everyone out of the house.

5. Amanda and Raffaele were nowhere near the door showing any interest in what was transpiring, as were everyone else, but instead across the room and in the hallway.

6. Amanda Knox and Raffaele did not spend the evening on the night of 1 November in his house uninterrupted until 10.30 am the next morning as she says.

7. Contrary to Amanda’s statement, the other roommate when arriving on the scene told police that Meredith never locked her door and demanded the door be opened.

8. The murder victim Meredith Kersher did not know the third person involved in the crime, Rudy Guede. Amanda did. Meredith would have no reason to open the door to him.

9. Amanda and Raffaele were seen in the plaza to the front of the university earlier in the evening prior to the murder. This was a place often frequented by Rudy Guede. The court accepted the hypothesis that they had met there prior to the crime being committed.

10. The court stressed that it does not believe that the crime was planned, but one of unfortunate circumstance, though this did not change the conclusion that a crime was committed by the three.

11. The court confirmed that the behavior of Amanda and Raffaele seemed inconsistent to that of what would be expected. They were in police headquarters with all of Meredith’s friends, the two reportedly kissing, playing, hugging, and laughing. Amanda even made light of the situation by saying, "Meredith is in a wardrobe with a blanket over her head."

12. They had been smoking hashish, and this overcame normal inhibitions, leading them to assist Rudy in his advances upon Meredith.

13. Amanda admitted to watching with Raffaele as early as the night before films and reading comic books where sex is accompanied by the use of violence.

14. The wounds on the murder victim Meredith Kersher are consistent with multiple attackers, not one, since different knives were used and with varying degrees of strength. This was also established as fact because Meredith was described as physically strong and had taken classes in the martial arts. She would have put up a fight.

15. The court established as fact that DNA from Amanda’s boyfriend Raffaele was on the clasps of the murder victim Meredith Kersher.

16. The court accepted as fact that Amanda was not subjected to unreasonable and lengthy inquiry when first reporting to the police station that day when even Meredith's friends were in attendance.

17. Again, the court reflected also on testimony that of the door to Meredith and Amanda’s room. It was locked. When Meredith was in her room, her friends testified that she always kept the door open. Amanda had the key to lock it from the outside.

18. Merediths cell phones were missing, but later found. The court accepted the hypothesis that Amanda and Raffaele took the cell phones and threw them further down the street so that if anyone called, her boyfriend downstairs would not hear it and wonder why she was not picking up.

19. The court accepted the findings that Amanda’s footprints were revealed in three areas, despite attempts at cleaning the apartment.

There is much more than this that they said influenced their decision, but I addressed these points since these issues have been brought up here in this thread that possess opinions that go against what the court says it found to be fact.

The decision was reached by Dr Giancarlo Massei, assisted by a second professional judge, Dr Beatrice Cristiani, and six lay judges. They are educated, trained professionals in their fields. It is evident they in their conclusions that a great deal of thought went into their reaching this verdict. It must be remembered, that in America we send countless people to prison for crimes with a lot less evidence than was gathered and considered here.

Many sites have the English transcript from the trial for you to choose and read for yourself the conclusions of the court from the page numbers noted above.