To ask if you think that Knox is guilty?

[superstarheartbreaker]

I have no idea but it seems that her kissing her boyfriend at the time was seen as suspicious whereas I don't think that this is suspicious at all. DNA is...kissing one's lover.no. It's not even that inappropriate to kiss ones lover in the face of tragedy.
Didn't she do cartwheels though?

Which programme was that? Sounds interesting (more interesting than speculating about AK really, who appears to be not necessarily telling the truth but not necessarily a murderer).

To those who think AK is guilty can I just ask what evidence persuades you to lean that way?

I don't know either way.

But she made a confession that she was actually there that night and heard Meredith scream. Later retracted. (It is quite common for people to admit to things under pressure)

She accused a completely innocent man. This however is not common.

She came back to the shared apartment, found blood in the bathroom and signs of a break in and also that Meredith's door was locked - apparently she would never lock the door. She then calmly had a shower and went back out to her boyfriends.

The DNA of RG inside Meredith was either from a finger or saliva - it was not rape. Yet her body was moved and her bra removed after she had died. The bra could have potentially been removed to make this look like the crime was sexually motivated. The bra had RS's DNA on it.

None of this makes her a murderer but it doesn't scream completely innocent either.

Kubrickian, the police suggested the name of the man to her and she wanted to retract the statement and wasn't allowed. She has been tried, found guilty and punished for defaming him.

So if she came back and found blood doesn't that indicate MK was already dead?

tallest will go try to find out for you, 2 mins...

HERE 5 days left to watch it

I think it's implied that it was not RG, given that he was busy leaving bloody handprints and footprints everywhere, and there none in the room where the breakin was staged.

phr47 - could you expand on the injuries to Meredith which could have arisen other than from being restrained by another party?

It's so heartbreaking to look at the photos accompanying recent news articles which show knox and sollecito having aged whereas Meredith is still a beautiful 21 year old with all the hope and potential that comes with being that age.

Sorry my reply was to aquashiv

People keep repeating what was in the papers, vs what was put forward as evidence.

Thanks giraffes looks really interesting, always something ghoulishly intriguing about people who front it out when they know they are guilty. However, criminologists can get it wrong. I knew some people who worked with them around the time of the Rachel Nickell case and I heard they were utterly convinced it was Colin Stagg.

I have no idea if she is guilty or not. I do however think she may have had more sympathy of she had shown some empathy towards the victim, and stopped talking about contacting the family and visiting the grave. It seems she has no feelings towards this family. As long as she is heard she will carry on.

well someone murdered her and it could only have been one 2 people

wellthatsdoneit - There was bruising on the elbows consistent with being restrained from behind. There were only 3 wounds that may be defensive, fewer than would be expected. The prosecution believe Meredith Kercher was restrained from behind by Guede while Knox and Sollecito attacked her, accounting for both the bruising on the elbows and the lack of defensive wounds. That is one possible interpretation of the evidence. It is equally possible that Guede restrained her from behind during the struggle but also inflicted all the knife wounds (not at the same time, obviously). There is no way of proving the precise timing of the various wounds. Equally the lack of defensive wounds may simply suggest that she was quickly overpowered by a strong attacker. The prosecution suggest that Kercher was killed slowly with gradual escalation of violence, in which case the lack of defensive wounds would be a problem. It is, however, equally possible that some of the more significant non-fatal wounds to her neck were inflicted early in the attack leaving her partially incapacitated and trying to stem the blood loss while the attack continued.

Overall the wounds suggest that there may have been multiple attackers but they are not conclusive. There is also a witness statement suggesting multiple attackers - a neighbour who saw two people running shortly after hearing a scream. All of this led the judges to conclude that there were multiple attackers. However, the big problem with multiple attacker theories is that one person, Rudy Guede, left forensic evidence of his presence all over the murder scene but there is no solid forensic evidence proving the presence of anyone else. The idea that there were three attackers and two of them were able to remove every trace of their presence whilst leaving the evidence of Guede's presence untouched is, to say the least, stretching credibility.

People keep repeating what was in the papers, vs what was put forward as evidence

Very true.

well someone murdered her and it could only have been one 2 people

The prosecution suggest it was 3 people. We know from the forensic evidence that Guede was present at the time of the murder and took part in the attack. So we have 3 possible scenarios:

• Guede killed Meredith Kercher alone and unaided
• Guede participated in the attack along with Knox and/or Sollecito
• Guede participated in the attack with one or more unknown persons

Unless you know something we don't there is nothing to rule out the unknown third party scenario other than the fact that the forensic evidence suggests that Guede was the only person present at the time of the murder. Which, of course, also tends to rule out the participation of Knox and Sollecito.

There;s also nothing to rule out the obvious suspects

Ot's almost as if people fo ' oh it can't have been amanda she is young and pretty

I am leaning towards believing AK and RS are guilty.
I just cannot reconcile her reactions with innocence. If you look at the Diane Sawyer interview part 2, Diane refers to her pulling faces and laughing with RS at the police station immediately after the murder, while MK's other friends are all crying, and says the horrible thing about Meredith dying slowly and painfully (which I read elsewhere was snapped out in response to one of Meredith's friends saying she hoped she hadn't suffered too much) - I feel that comment was so lacking in compassion, for Meredith, for her friends.. The sheer inhumanity of that reaction has stayed with me. I was also struck in interviews (both Sawyer interviews and the one from the Guardian filmed last week where she cheerfully refers to Meredith in passing and then gets choked up about 'being a child wanting her mom' when being held at the police station) by the fact that AK only ever gets upset about herself, self pity seems to be her only emotion.

It's such a bizarre crime, it doesn't make sense any of it. And there's so much conflicting evidence..

I find it interesting that those who think she's innocent assert that others only think she's guilty because she's attractive, and those who think she's guilty think other people think she's innocent for the same reason.

Porto is there any official source for what was put forward for evidence? Every website or article I read seems to be very biased one way or the other, including that last one you I think you anyway linked to?

Kubrickian, the police suggested the name of the man to her and she wanted to retract the statement and wasn't allowed. She has been tried, found guilty and punished for defaming him.

So if she came back and found blood doesn't that indicate MK was already dead?

Oh please just get off my case.

I stated right at the start that I don't know either way. I have no opinion on if she is guilty or not.

I was simply listing a couple of reasons why someone might think she was guilty.

that Mirror article is horrendous - cold-hearted killer? do they know something we don't? wankers.

also, agree with whoever said that it's likely she would put on a show of distress if she was guilty. I believe she's self-obsessed and 'look at me' but obviously, that doesn't make her a murderer.

Some of these comments have elements of a witch hunt. How can any of you know that AK is an unpleasant person? She's not overly smiley and ingratiating but that doesn't make anyone a nasty person, far less a murderer.
The whole premise of the motivation, the sex game thing, was clearly some overheated fantasy cooked up in the brain of a perverse prosecuter with a deeply unhealthy view of women.
The Italians have made an utter debacle of the case and spectacularly let Meredith and her family down.

back IMO you've summed Mignini up perfectly.

Personally I don't believe AK had any physical part in killing MK. I don't believe she was in the room at the time of the attack. If she was there would have to be DNA evidence of her. Whether she knew MK was in trouble is not known but I get the feeling she had her suspicions and chose for whatever reason to ignore it. I don't know if drugs were involved or simply immaturity that lead to her doing nothing.

What I can't find is whether RG has said anything. I don't think he has and I don't understand is why he hasn't when its clear he was heavily involved.

If RS had nothing to do with it way was his DNA on MKs bra? I'm not saying he murdered her but he obviously had physical contact with her.

I'm not on your case, Kubrickian, I responded to a couple of items on your list, as people have been responding to each other throughout the thread.

I've read two accounts of mignini and it was fascinating. Both were as sort of asides to a bigger story - the monster of Florence and him accusing a journalist of being the monster - from what I recall this portrayed him as incompetent and out to get someone and there was a trial of him involved. The second was the book about Meredith which made him out to be super fantastic and the trial was mentioned as an irritating aside.
Who knows?

It doesnt matter what you or I think. But as you asked, yes. I think she is psychopathic, and has convinced herself she didn't do it. I never for a moment believed that African guy they pinned it on was wholly responsible. Not a bar of it.