Me too. And in true DS Armchair Detective style, I've read a lot of transcripts etc. It was a staged break in. Why would someone who didn't live there need to do that?
I believe that Knox and Sollecito (?) were very much involved. The evidence was bungled and apparently contaminated, but putting all that aside, all the other aspects of that evening lead me to the conclusion that they are guilty.
Most of all I want the Kerchers to finally be able to put this to rest and mourn their daughter without all this hanging over them.
Ironically, if she'd kept to her first story and only approximation to the truth IMO - spaced out on drugs, there at the time, but couldn't remember if she'd cut Meredith's throat or not - she'd probably be out on licence by now and more of less free to put it behind her.
Ironically, if she'd kept to her first story and only approximation to the truth IMO - spaced out on drugs, there at the time, but couldn't remember if she'd cut Meredith's throat or not - she'd probably be out on licence by now and more of less free to put it behind her.
Or she goaded Sollecito, a loner with violent fantasies and an obsession with knives into the murder, then returned later to stage the break-in.
I hate to fall into the cliche of "she looks dodgy therefore she's guilty"... but I've always felt that something about her demeanor seems off. Maybe she has flat affect due to a disorder. Whatever. She just doesn't strike me as 'normal'.
Which is why the Yanks will never let their Golden Girl be extradited. At least she can't travel abroad any more. But I guess that's compensated for by the thrill of the kill still fresh in Lil' Mandy's memory.
I hate to fall into the cliche of "she looks dodgy therefore she's guilty"... but I've always felt that something about her demeanor seems off. Maybe she has flat affect due to a disorder. Whatever. She just doesn't strike me as 'normal'.
Funny, I recall many people saying the same thing about Christopher Jefferies when he was in the frame for Joanna Yeates' murder. I guess judging books by their covers isn't the best yardstick for asserting innocence.
Could you highlight some points as to why you are convinced of her guilt?
Sorry I don't have time to get into it all right now.
There was another large thread about the case on here not that long ago - you should be able to search for it. I remember making a few, long detailed posts on there.
Sorry I don't have time to get into it all right now.
There was another large thread about the case on here not that long ago - you should be able to search for it. I remember making a few, long detailed posts on there.
Just a summary. Just a one-liner. You are convinced of her guilt and have read a great deal on the case, so it should be easy, no?
Funny, I recall many people saying the same thing about Christopher Jefferies when he was in the frame for Joanna Yeates' murder. I guess judging books by their covers isn't the best yardstick for asserting innocence.
There are also people who act like that who are guilty of heinous acts
I hate to fall into the cliche of "she looks dodgy therefore she's guilty"... but I've always felt that something about her demeanor seems off. Maybe she has flat affect due to a disorder. Whatever. She just doesn't strike me as 'normal'.
Though Knox came across as an unpleasant, attention-seeking weirdo, there's still s stretch to be made to make her a suspect, not least that there was absolutely no evidence of anything abnormal or criminal in her upbringing, other then a few silly photos, that in these days of selfies and social media wouldn't raise an eyebrow.
I think even without the contested forensic evidence (the attempted discrediting of which has been mendacious to put it mildly), it's the old fashioned stuff, circumstantial and based on the palpable lying by all three convicted murderers throughout, that convinces me that the Italians have got this one right.
Though Knox came across as an unpleasant, attention-seeking weirdo, there's still s stretch to be made to make her a suspect, not least that there was absolutely no evidence of anything abnormal or criminal in her upbringing, other then a few silly photos, that in these days of selfies and social media wouldn't raise an eyebrow.
I think even without the contested forensic evidence (the attempted discrediting of which has been mendacious to put it mildly), it's the old fashioned stuff, circumstantial and based on the palpable lying by all three convicted murderers throughout, that convinces me that the Italians have got this one right.
She is an odd girl and that's a fact.
Sollecito was an odd boy and that is also a fact.
Did their personalities collide to create a monster?
I think there is a chance that this happened.
Saying the Italians messed it all up is wrong really, it's been a very thorough investigation. Yes mistakes were made, but just look at the Claudia Lawrence case. It happens.
Funny, I recall many people saying the same thing about Christopher Jefferies when he was in the frame for Joanna Yeates' murder. I guess judging books by their covers isn't the best yardstick for asserting innocence.
Just because Jeffries was wrongly accused it does not mean that every single instinct that every human has had about another is wrong.
It's right to be cautious but our instincts tell us a lot about others. It is the way we evolved to survive.
Funny, I recall many people saying the same thing about Christopher Jefferies when he was in the frame for Joanna Yeates' murder. I guess judging books by their covers isn't the best yardstick for asserting innocence.
And some think she is innocent based on her looks didn't she get the nickname Foxy Knoxy based on her looks.
If she was ugly not as many would think she was innocent or even care about her.
Just responding to an equally 'superior' and patronising post.
Sorry, where was the patronisation?
Me:
"... many people takes sides in cases like this without knowing detailed facts."
You:
"I read the detailed facts and am convinced she is guilty."
Me:
"Please tell me what convinces you."
You:
"No time."
Me:
"Just bullet points then."
You:
*stroppy statements anyone could make from reading tabloid press*
You responded to me directly and made a pretty definitive statement that you were convinced of her guilt. Don't throw the toys out of the pram when someone asks why.
And the search function isn't working brilliantly before you tell me to read another thread.
Comments
I believe that Knox and Sollecito (?) were very much involved. The evidence was bungled and apparently contaminated, but putting all that aside, all the other aspects of that evening lead me to the conclusion that they are guilty.
Most of all I want the Kerchers to finally be able to put this to rest and mourn their daughter without all this hanging over them.
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Rudy_Guede%27s_Skype_Conversation
Stating something as a fact does not make it a fact
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Rudy_Guede%27s_Skype_Conversation
Or she goaded Sollecito, a loner with violent fantasies and an obsession with knives into the murder, then returned later to stage the break-in.
This is very possible IMO.
they're both twisted imo.
Which is why the Yanks will never let their Golden Girl be extradited. At least she can't travel abroad any more. But I guess that's compensated for by the thrill of the kill still fresh in Lil' Mandy's memory.
There was another large thread about the case on here not that long ago - you should be able to search for it. I remember making a few, long detailed posts on there.
I've seen a transcript of it.
I'll try and find it tomorrow
There are also people who act like that who are guilty of heinous acts
Though Knox came across as an unpleasant, attention-seeking weirdo, there's still s stretch to be made to make her a suspect, not least that there was absolutely no evidence of anything abnormal or criminal in her upbringing, other then a few silly photos, that in these days of selfies and social media wouldn't raise an eyebrow.
I think even without the contested forensic evidence (the attempted discrediting of which has been mendacious to put it mildly), it's the old fashioned stuff, circumstantial and based on the palpable lying by all three convicted murderers throughout, that convinces me that the Italians have got this one right.
Ok then.
Staged break-in, DNA evidence, constantly changing stories, implicating an innocent man. Etc.
You're welcome.
Superior much? If you don't have time, why are you here?
She is an odd girl and that's a fact.
Sollecito was an odd boy and that is also a fact.
Did their personalities collide to create a monster?
I think there is a chance that this happened.
Saying the Italians messed it all up is wrong really, it's been a very thorough investigation. Yes mistakes were made, but just look at the Claudia Lawrence case. It happens.
I agree.
Just because Jeffries was wrongly accused it does not mean that every single instinct that every human has had about another is wrong.
It's right to be cautious but our instincts tell us a lot about others. It is the way we evolved to survive.
If she was ugly not as many would think she was innocent or even care about her.
Me:
"... many people takes sides in cases like this without knowing detailed facts."
You:
"I read the detailed facts and am convinced she is guilty."
Me:
"Please tell me what convinces you."
You:
"No time."
Me:
"Just bullet points then."
You:
*stroppy statements anyone could make from reading tabloid press*
You responded to me directly and made a pretty definitive statement that you were convinced of her guilt. Don't throw the toys out of the pram when someone asks why.
And the search function isn't working brilliantly before you tell me to read another thread.
Thankfully the justice system in most countries doesn't convict based on dodgy haircuts or subhuman facial features.
Yeah, I suspect quite a few out there would base their decision of if she's guilty on her looks.