Ho Hum,

Re: “I had a squint at those, but there are other websites, and reputable experts, that say the opposite is true. It’s a long time ago now, but I took the trouble to read the whole original judgement too, and the level of supposition contained in it was bizarre – at least from a UK perspective – and certainly a long way from what I would have expected my criminal law lecturer would have accepted as proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt. I didn’t think any court’s primary objective was to guess why people had done bad things and how they had done them, but rather judge guilt on the proveable facts, and my recollection was that they were pretty short of those in their explanation”

I understand what you are saying, but it has not been proven beyond reasonable doubt which of ANY of the three suspects actually was the one to kill Meredith. What I think IS obvious beyond reasonable doubt is Amanda Knox and Raffalle’s participation in the crime e.g staging a break in, it is obvious that that brake in was staged and ALL the evidence (DNA and otherwise) points to Amanda Knox doing it, moving the body, removing her clothes and putting them in the washing machine (who the hell would do that when they discovered a dead body? Raffalle’s DNA was found on the bra clasp, Rudy’s was found on the side of her bra – but then Rudy is the one who claimed to have been intimate with her consensually earlier that evening – could be a pack of lies, but it is not implausible either), locking Meredith’s door and wiping the handle of finger prints, when the postal police arrived because Meredith’s phones had been found tossed in the neighbours garden Amanda said there had been a break in, but not to worry that Meredith’s door has been locked for hours, she locks it all the time, even to go for a shower, when her other flat mate arrived she said that she never locked her door, flew into a panic and had the door booted open – why would Amanda want to lie to delay opening of that door, if there had been a break in, her friend had been gone for several hours without her phones would she not be curious to find out if she’s alright? Not surprisingly she lied later in an email to her mum saying she had worried about the locked door and tried to knock it down herself before the postal police came (doesn’t tally with what she told them does it?). When, obviously, the postal police asked if they had called the carabinieri about the supposed break in, they said they had, though if they had it would have had to have been just as the postal police were arriving due to timing, though phone records and accounts from others suggest it was while the postal police where there i.e they snuck off at some point to phone then while the postal police were distracted or talking to someone else, anyway, Raffalle tells them there has been a break in but nothing has been taken, how could HE have known that? Especially with one of the doors still locked.

Amanda’s DNA has been found mixed with Meredith’s blood in her footprints in the room of the staged break in (she was obviously there when it happened – why was Amanda bleeding at the same time as Meredith?), the fact that there was a bloody foot print on the bathroom mat, blood in the bathroom and Rudy Guede has claimed that when he left there was so much blood in the corridor, the fact prints, footprints in blood could be detected later with lumiol, demonstrates that there had been a clean up, with an obvious effort to leave behind as much trace of Rudy as they could i.e his bloody foot prints to the door, his faeces in the toilet, though there is still – inspite of this – no more linking him to the actual act of killing than there is Raffalle or Amanda and nothing to suggest he was part of the big clean up/cover up, obviously they focused on surfaces they had known, or thought, THEY had (or might have) touched, and left ones they thought Rudy may have touched (but not THEM), and still never left much trace of Rudy in the actual room, just on the side of her bra (Raffalle’s DNA was found on the bra clasp in her room too) and her hand bag. Indeed a shop owner claimed to have witnessed Amanda waiting outside his shop at 7:45 in the morning for it to open and when it did she went in and went straight to the cleaning product section.

Neither Raffalle or Amanda Knox have alibis or can account for their whereabouts that evening to this day, their original story, that they were in Raffalle’s all night watching films on his computer and slept in until 10:30 am has been debunked by computer records, phone records and even some witness testimonies (one neighbour claimed to have seen them hanging about that evening arguing and pointing over to the house). When challenged about this Raffaelle quickly changed his story and when Amanda was informed about this she quickly changed her story to one where she was had indeed BEEN AT THE CRIME SCENE and she had ‘heard’ her boss Patrick Lumumba, kill Meredith – thank heavens the poor man had an alibi for that evening. Not only does this woman NOT have an alibi for this evening that can be verified, she cannot even account for where the hell she was at all that evening, everyone else connected or questioned over this has been able to do that bar her and Raffaelle and their stories have changed and changed dramatically several times since, why should it be so hard for them to just give a reasonable account of where they were that night and what they were doing? Because *where they were* was at the crime scene and what they were doing can be proven, at the VERY VERY least, to be staging a burglary, cleaning up after and trying to cover up a murder.

When a knife was taken from Raffalle’s flat and found to have traces of both Meredith’s blood and Amanda’s DNA on it was Raffalle’s response that of a perfectly innocent man e.g something along the lines of ‘don’t be ridiculous that’s impossible’, NO he came out with a cock and bull story about Meredith having been over at his house one night for dinner and him accidentally pricking her with it – he’d only known Amanda for 9 days and there is no one else who had any knowledge of Meredith ever having been over to his flat (i’m sure her friends and flat mates could account for the last 9 days), are these the actions of an innocent man with nothing to hide? NO.

AND, even worse, at the police station just after the discovery of Meredith’s body, despite acting like she knew nothing about it and leaving others to break the door down and discover it at the the flat, Meredith’s uni friends testified that Amanda was claiming to them that it was HER that had ‘discovered’ her, she seen her body first (people there at the time the door was broken down weren’t even sure Amanda and Raffaelle had been in a position to view the body at that time) AND claimed to know that Meredith had been killed by the wardrobe – INVESTIGATORS DIDN’T EVEN NO THAT AT THAT TIME, but it was later found out to be true. How much more damning can you get? People have been convicted, infact Rudy Guede was convicted, on less than this.

Even if they can not tell for sure which one of them committed the actual act of *murder*, there is more than enough proof that they *were* involved in the clean up and attempted cover up of the murder, who on earth would do that after a crime they had no involvement in for a man they barely even knew? Not very many that’s for sure. And even *if* they *were* just responsible for the clean up and cover up (which frankly makes very little sense), that is still a crime and makes them accomplises or accessories to murder, both of which are criminal acts punishable by jail.

Amanda Knox is a convicted, proven and obvious liar, her ex boyfriend is an obvious liar, lawyers lie all the time to try and get their clients off. There was an incident during their appeal I think where several of Rudy Guede’s fellow in mates were called as witnesses to claim that he had ‘confessed’ to them that it was only he who had been involved in the murder and that Amanda and Raffaelle were innocent, unfortunately for them most of them bottled it and one even claimed they had been bribed by Raffalle’s lawyer to make such claims – claims which Rudy Guede himself denied (of course). Not only that both this pairs books that they have had published are basically works of fiction that at times contradict either what they told the police and others at the time, what they told others on different occasions, what they said in court, the police findings and what others witnessed. And Amanda Knox’s parents have hired a PR company to spread lies and propaganda, tell her how to behave in public etc to try and get the public on her side and drum up support for her in the hope that they can be pressured into not extraditing her by the sheer weight off public opinion and pressure.

When your backs up against the wall and all the evidence is stacked against you what other possible ‘defence’ can you come up with than call the police and legal system into question and accuse them of corruption, foul play and incompetence? But this is coming from a woman who is a known repeated liar and slanderer, why should anyone believe what she says? She’ll be relying on public support and pressure not to extradite her and the hope that no one will scratch below the surface – because I do not think that the evidence is on her side or will support her claims at all.

I think her, Raffaelle and their families think they can somehow buy their way out of a murder conviction. I think the only real mistake was releasing her in the first place (probably due to public pressure), but the appeal process had not been finalised, they a have realised their mistake and are setting to put it right – that’s the way I see it anyway….

Reply