The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Page 9 of 12 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by Hobs on 11.02.14 20:27

I AM NOT A PSYCHOPATH
There is no short list to the malicious and unfounded slanders I have suffered over the course of this legal process.
In trial I have been called no less than: ‘Conniving; manipulating; man-eater; narcissist; enchantress; duplicitous; adulterer; drug addict; an explosive mix of drugs, sex  and alcohol; dirty; witch; murderer; slanderer; demon; depraved; imposter; promiscuous; succubus; evil; dead inside; pervert; dissolute; psychopath; a wolf in sheep’s clothing; rapist; thief; reeking of sex; Judas; she-devil; Luciferina...’
I have never demonstrated anti-social, aggressive, violent, or psychotic behaviour. I am not addicted to sex or drugs

I am not a murderer. I am not a  rapist. I am not a thief or a plotter or an instigator. I did not kill Meredith or take part in her murder or have any prior knowledge of what occurred that night. I was not there and had nothing to do with it.

Oh dear.

Anything in the negative is sensitive 

She starts off by telling us what she isn't rather than what she is.
She then provides a list of all the things she has been called.

Never does not mean didn't or did not, never is only applicable if you have been asked have you ever...?
She tells us she has NEVER DEMONSTRATED anti-social, aggressive, violent or psychotic behavior.
She doesn't tell us she isn't any of the above and if she can't say it i can't say it for her.
She only tells us she has not demonstrated it.
What does she define as demonstated?
Most people exhibit some of the listed traits yet will deny them when confronted.


Note she  separates aggressive behavior  from violent behavior.
What is the difference in her mind?

She denies being addicted to drugs or drugs.
What is her definiton of addicted?

We know she used drugs as she has admitted so in her statements including her handwritten statement which she blamed the drugs on her memory.

In lists, order is important, it tells us what thr priority is in the subjects mind, what is important to them.
I would expect  the strong denials to be  the most damaging first such as murderer,
rapist, psychopath , drug addict etc going down the line from most severe to the least insulting, yet she doesn't.
The first thing, the most important thing to her is conniving, followed by manipulative, man-eater etc.

Out of the 30 inames she has been called, murder comes in at #12, psychopath at #23, rapist  at #25 and thief at #26.
Her priority is not the names she has been called based on the charges, rather her priority is to the aspersions on her character.
Being called coniving is far worse than calling her a murderer, calling her manipulative is more insulting to her than being called a rapist, a man-eater is more insulting than being called a thief.
Basically it boils down to calling her a slut is worse than being called a murderer.
Making comments about her sexual behavior is worse than being called a rapist or thief.

She is aware her sexual behavior says much about her character and also explains the motive for the murder.

Her family claimed and portayed her as the sweet, innocent all-american girl and then it was revealed she was the opposite, loose with her morals,  drinking and use of illegal drugs. (I suspect she has used other drugs as seems to be the norm for the young these days)

It was likely a real eye opener for her family, especially since to mount an effective defence and get postive spin and the public on side she would have had to be fully honest with her attornies so it could be minimised or explained away, the old everyone does it these days, drugs and sex is the norm ( the bible belt would be having a meltdown at her 'sins')


Mext we come to what she isn't, note where the pronouns are and where they aren't



I am not a murderer.
I am not a  rapist.
I am not a thief


or a plotter
or an instigator.
I did not kill Meredith or take part in her murder or have any prior knowledge of what occurred that night.
I was not there and had nothing to do with it.



I am not a murderer. - She may not have struck the final killing blow it doesn't mean she was not present.
What is her definition of murder?
If it was an accidental death caused by a game or assault that went wrong she may not see it as murder which generally is taken to mean premeditated.
She may view it as an accidental homicide thus manslaughter

What is her definition of rapist, she may not have had sexual contact with Meredith, it does not mean she did not restain or encourage.

Was anything taken,  had she been accused by others of theft?
If it relates to money did she take it because she felt it was owed to her?
Stronger would be i did not take the money/item.

In the statements above she takes ownership with the pronoun I, making them strong

Now In the next 2 we see dropped pronouns meaning she doesn't take ownership of them and if she can't take ownership i can't do it for her.
She doesn't say she isn't a plotter or instigator so i can't do it for her.
It is likely she initiated the event and it went wrong or went too far.
She tells us she did not kill Meredith where above she says she is not a murderer.
Why the change in language?
Is there a change in reality?
I am not a murderer, i did not murder Meredith, I am not a killer, i did not kill Meredith.
Murder and kill are different in her mind.

Additional words weaken the statement and she goes outside the boundries.


I did not kill Meredith or take part in her murder or have any prior knowledge of what occurred that night.
I was not there and had nothing to do with it.


I did not kill Meredith would be strong.
She then adds or take part in her murder, again we have kill and murder in the same sentence.
Note the dropped pronouns though
She doesn't say i did not take part in her murder, she does not say i did not have any prior knowledge of what occured that night.
if she can't take ownership  i can't say it for her.
The pronoun comes back with the I was not there before it poofs again with the had nothing to do with it.
What is the it she had nothing to do with?
She doesn't say i had nothing to do with her murder/killing.

Note the qualifier PRIOR, she doesn't say she diid not have any knowledge of what happened that night, only that she had no prior knowledge.

____________________
The little unremembered acts of kindness and love are the best parts of a person's life.

Hobs

Posts : 711
Reputation : 282
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 52
Location : uk

View user profile http://tania-cadogan.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by aiyoyo on 11.02.14 23:55


@ Hobs
Was anything taken, had she been accused by others of theft?
If it relates to money did she take it because she felt it was owed to her?
Stronger would be i did not take the money/item.

Apparently story was floating around that relationship between Kercher and Knox was strained.
That Kercher was irritated by Knox's sloppiness and apathy attitude.
That Kercher suspected Knox of stealing money from her.
Their strained relationship did not go unnoticed by flat mates who told Police about it.

The initial motive of sex-game-gone-wrong in first trial was replaced by Knox being bitter about the strained relationship in the latest trial, though the full reports have yet to be written up for release. Judge hinted their last minute change in schedule was a feature in the motive.







aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by ultimaThule on 12.02.14 4:01

Duplicate post - please delete

ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by Lance De Boils on 17.02.14 22:53

Anyone watch BBC3 tonight? "Is Amanda Knox Guilty?"

It was worth a watch and gave a brief overview of the evidence and the arguments of the prosecution and defence. (Brief in the sense that there is only so much they could fit into a 1 hr programme.)

I thought it was a fair summary (from what I know of the case.) 

Meredith's poor family. I can't imagine what they've been through and continue to go through.

Lance De Boils

Posts : 805
Reputation : 14
Join date : 2011-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by Hobs on 17.02.14 23:50

It was interesting that bloody footprints that matched knox and sollecito were found and would also explain knox's written statement about sollecito carefully washing her ears in the shower ( they would both have been covered in blood)  Knox never makes a strong reliable denial regarding the murder and instead blames every man and their pet rock for finding her guilty.

I wonder, if she was asked to take an FBI administered poly (rather than being allowed to poly shop a la ramseys) and if she passed the States would support her claims of innocence,  would she take a poly as she said she would do anything to clear her name.
If she failed the States would stick her on the next plane to Italy as she is officially a fugitive on the run.

Questons asked would be along the lines of:

Were you present in the room when Meredith was killed?
Were you present in the property when Meredith was killed?
Did you kill Meredith?
Did you harm Meredith?
Did you have sexual contact with Meredith?
If you had sexual contact with Meredith was it with her consent?
Did you use a knife on Meredith?
Did you restrain Meredith at any time during the crime?
Do you Know who killed Meredith?
Was sollecito present when Meredith was killed?
Did Sollecito kill Meredith?
Did sollecito restrain Meredith?
Did you stage the break in?
Did you cover Meredith's body with the cover?
Did you lie to the police about your involvement in Meredith's death?
Have you told the truth about your involvement in the case of Meredith Kercher?
Did you take money from Meredith?
Did you take money from the flatmates?
Are you telling the truth now?
Have you lied about your involvement in the death of Meredith?

If she refused to take a poly it would lead to questions as to why?
If she was innocent as claimed, she would pass the poly and would reap public support
Claiming a fail would only show poly's are unreliable, doesn't work again depending on where she failed.
Claiming she was scared,etc again doesn't work since she would know all the questions in advance and be asked them off the poly so no  surprises.
if she was innocent she would either pass or perhaps show an inconclusive and depending what she failed on could show unrelated guilt (sensitivity)
failing that would she be willing to be interviewed by a qualified statement analyst?
Again a refusal would be telling.

I was surprised how big the stone actually was, as it was pointed out it would not have fitted through the slats on the window and would have been too heavy to easily throw from ground level into the bedroom.
Also glass was on top rather than underneath and valuables were left in situ ruling out burglary.

I wonder if sollecito will roll on her in order to get a reduced sentence since it has yet to be ratified?

He owes her nothing and already has shown distancing between her and him.
His attornies will be spelling out his options given that the next appeal will only look at the legal side of the case and not the facts, ie looking for legal loopholes such as ineffective counsel etc. The facts of the case having already been proven.

Since there is little chance of winning the appeal, the only real option left is admit the crime and plea bargain who did what and when in order to get a sentence reduction.
minimising his own role and throwing knox under the bus as instigator and the  striker of the fatal blow, he may get a few years off.

Since they were only togeather as a couple for days rather than months, his family will, along with his attornies tell him to cover his own butt.
Since knox will refuse to return to italy willingly, she is screwed if she wants to beat him to the prize.
If she wants to do a deal first and blame him ( which her attornies will be telling her to do if he looks like doing his own deal) she will have to return to Italy to plead her case.
Staying in the States will do her no favors and will likely mean no deal.

Either way she has to pay a huge number of euro's on fines and compensation (40,000 euros i think it was to Patrick) I also wonder what the publisher will do regarding her book since she claimed she was innocent and is now proven to have lied.

Will they sue for return of the money and if so how will they recover it?
What about her family who paid out a bucket load of cash for attornies and spin doctors, will they risk bankruptcy to protect knox?
Will they start an appeal fund?
If knox gave them money from her book to repay what they spent will they have to pay it back?

____________________
The little unremembered acts of kindness and love are the best parts of a person's life.

Hobs

Posts : 711
Reputation : 282
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 52
Location : uk

View user profile http://tania-cadogan.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by Lance De Boils on 18.02.14 15:31

Indeed. The case against Knox and Sollecito is compelling. If they were innocent, then their actions, words, lies and the forensic evidence would make no sense whatsoever.

I thought the experts interviewed in the programme, speaking in defence of Amanda - particularly the lady who was trying to explain away the forensics and DNA, was clutching at very thin, slippery straws. Her arguments were laughable and made her sound ridiculous. In fact, the arguments she put forward only made the case against Knox even stronger.

What I fail to understand is why Knox and Sollecito have stuck together in their stories as much as they have. Although their stories have changed - especially with them providing each other an alibi - why has one not backed out on the other? They hadn't known each other very long, so it's not as though they could have been very close. The only reason I can think of is that if one spilled the beans on the other, their knowledge would implicate themself and would, in essence, be an admission of lying all along. And why would they do that to save someone they barely knew? They wouldn't, in my opinion. They are both acting in their own, selfish interests.

Lance De Boils

Posts : 805
Reputation : 14
Join date : 2011-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by mysterion on 18.02.14 16:14

@Lance De Boils wrote:Anyone watch BBC3 tonight? "Is Amanda Knox Guilty?"

It was worth a watch and gave a brief overview of the evidence and the arguments of the prosecution and defence. (Brief in the sense that there is only so much they could fit into a 1 hr programme.)

I thought it was a fair summary (from what I know of the case.) 

Meredith's poor family. I can't imagine what they've been through and continue to go through.
I saw that advertised but decided not to watch because I thought it disrespectful towards the Kerchers and a further example of the MSMs disrespect for foreign judiciaries. The very thing that has plagued the Madeleine case.

mysterion

Posts : 358
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2013-11-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by aiyoyo on 18.02.14 19:47


@ Hobs
I wonder if sollecito will roll on her in order to get a reduced sentence since it has yet to be ratified?

Personally I don’t think he will roll on her nor her on him.
Had he wanted to do that it would have been done by now.
They are a smart, well education pair who know that staying united is their best bet of fooling the Court and people into believing their claim that they are innocent as they are each other’s alibi.
They'd very likely discussed this thoroughly and decided to stick together come what may.
Rolling on the other one to beget a lighter sentence is not really worth it given the situation as that want redeem them back their good name.
I believe their intention here is not to acquire a criminal record and not to sullen family good name and their own good name of course.
Making a deal to earn a lighter sentence isn't going to change the fact that the notoriety of the crime will remain a stigma on family name.

If the verdict is upheld by Court of Cassation and Solliceto ends up back in jail while Amanda remains a free fugitive in America, then over time he might become bitter then who knows what jail time will do to his resolve.

There is no way Knox will return without fighting tooth and nail. She is one hell of a very determined and manipulated woman who happens to be very eloquent and articulate in addition to having looks on her side, well able to use all these in PR campaigns packaged by expensive and reputable PR company to help her cause.
In the very unlikely event that she gets sent back to jail I don’t see her rolling on Solliceto either. The stage of throwing the other one under the bus is gone as that would not change anything for them now, too late for that. In fact doing so coming at this belated stage would make either of them look worst, proving her/him to be liar turned evil selfish being out to save their own skin at the expense of the other one. That might also endanger them in jail as fellow prisoners might attack him/her for grassing on their partner in crime.

Extradition and Escape......both factors still being work on by both sides doubtless, and there is more drama to be had on this case.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by Lance De Boils on 18.02.14 19:53

@mysterion wrote:
@Lance De Boils wrote:Anyone watch BBC3 tonight? "Is Amanda Knox Guilty?"

It was worth a watch and gave a brief overview of the evidence and the arguments of the prosecution and defence. (Brief in the sense that there is only so much they could fit into a 1 hr programme.)

I thought it was a fair summary (from what I know of the case.) 

Meredith's poor family. I can't imagine what they've been through and continue to go through.
I saw that advertised but decided not to watch because I thought it disrespectful towards the Kerchers and a further example of the MSMs disrespect for foreign judiciaries. The very thing that has plagued the Madeleine case.

I understand your sentiments.
However, the programme makers did, imo, present the case in a manner which was entirely respectful to Meredith and the Kercher family and, indeed, the Italian police and prosecuters. That's how it came across to me, anyway.

Lance De Boils

Posts : 805
Reputation : 14
Join date : 2011-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by Hobs on 19.02.14 0:23

Since the sentences have yet to be formalised which would then mean sollecito being taken to prison and knox facing extradition proceedings there is still time for them to roll on each other.

The next appeal is based not on the facts of the case, that has been ratified and they are guilty as charged, the next appeal will focus solely on the technicalities of the law with the defence looking for any loophole to free their client or reduce the sentence.

This to me means that both have an incentive to roll on the other in oorder to try and get a reduced sentence.

By admitting their role in the crimes, what exactly happened when why and how, they could  get mercy from the judge and a reduced sentence.

Staying silent to cover their own butt and that of their lover is not  a logical response since they knew each other for days rather than weeks months or years..

Their own attornies will be doing what is best for their client and if it means adnmitting what happened in order to do less time, that is what they will advise. their clients have been found guilty twice of murder and that verdict is not open to appeal. All they have left is the points of law and they will be checking everything looking for a an excuse to get their client off.

If it means 26 years for murder or maybe 16 if sollecito confesses  they will advise go for the 16, why advise their client not to confess when they know he is guilty and facing 26 yrs, 16 yrs is way better.

The same applies for knox.

As a fugitive she is unemployable, she cannot travel, she likely will not be able to complete her studies since she is legally on the run, it is in her best interests to return to italy and do her time, perhaps if she goes willingly it would count in her favor xome sentencing  ratification.

The states are not going to risk diplomatic ties by refusing to extradite a convicted murderess especially if they want mafia criminals extradited to the states.

If they refuse to extradite knox then every country with traties with the States can and will get pissy about extraditing people back to the states.

I doubt even obama is that dumb

____________________
The little unremembered acts of kindness and love are the best parts of a person's life.

Hobs

Posts : 711
Reputation : 282
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 52
Location : uk

View user profile http://tania-cadogan.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by Tony Bennett on 30.04.14 10:41

Amanda Knox struck the fatal blow on Meredith Kercher with a knife, in a drugs-fuelled argument over money:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27215680

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13957
Reputation : 2141
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by aiyoyo on 30.04.14 15:42

Wonder why it took 3 trials before Prosecutor came up with this violent quarrel theory; and that Amanda Knox was the one who struck the fatal blow.

What had changed between first and third trial that caused this change ?

The quarrel over theft of money (knox stealing Kercher's money) was not new evidence IIRC since the Police heard about it from Rudy Guede from the outset.

I wonder what new evidence led them to revise their theory?

Or would it be from retrospect they knew the 'sex game gone wrong' theory was implausible but couldn't change original basis once submitted for prosecution ?

I remember Prosecutor's original basis in OP case for pre-med murder was that OP had his prosthetics legs on when he shot through the door, but during trial unfolding expert witnesses evidence did not support that, and regardless of one misplaced minutae detail, Prosecutor's case is not affected.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by aiyoyo on 01.05.14 19:40

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/01/amanda-knox-retrial-new-report-italian-court

The Guardian standing by Amanda Knox .

Will Kercher's family take them to task ?

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by Tony Bennett on 01.05.14 21:11

@aiyoyo wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/01/amanda-knox-retrial-new-report-italian-court

The Guardian standing by Amanda Knox .

Will Kercher's family take them to task ?
This is an opinion piece by Andrew Gumbel.

Who admits:

QUOTE

(Disclosure: I am the co-author, with Sollecito, on his memoir about the case.)

UNQUOTE


Both Sollecito and Knox have lied, lied and lied again about what happened that night, 7 years back in 2007.

It must be very difficult to piece together what really happened that evening seven years ago when the forensic evidence is lacking and those involved are telling lies.

It is certainly possible that the latest prosecutor's report may contain a handful of errors.

But nothing yet has convincecd me other than to believe that those two should serve long jail sentences for covering up what they did to Meredith that night.

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13957
Reputation : 2141
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by aiyoyo on 02.05.14 0:07

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/01/amanda-knox-retrial-new-report-italian-court

The Guardian standing by Amanda Knox .

Will Kercher's family take them to task ?
This is an opinion piece by Andrew Gumbel.

Who admits:

QUOTE

(Disclosure: I am the co-author, with Sollecito, on his memoir about the case.)

UNQUOTE


Both Sollecito and Knox have lied, lied and lied again about what happened that night, 7 years back in 2007.

It must be very difficult to piece together what really happened that evening seven years ago when the forensic evidence is lacking and those involved are telling lies.  What prompted them to take side with foreigners over Kercher is an enigma as they could just as easily have approached Kercher's family to co-write her story.  In fact it makes better money sense to follow the story from Kercher's perspective than other way round.

It is certainly possible that the latest prosecutor's report may contain a handful of errors.

But nothing yet has convincecd me other than to believe that those two should serve long jail sentences for covering up what they did to Meredith that night.

Ah, no wonder The Guardian supports the pair because they'd bet on the wrong horse and had to stick to that to protect their vested interest.

I'm inclined to believe the Prosecutor's latest version to be a more accurate reflection of the motive than the previous theory.
 
It is very probable the Prosecutor's Final Report may contain some errors as there is no possible way to draw up an accurate conclusion when all three involved lied through their teeth.  It goes without saying that the errors will be used by the Defence to argue/support their appeal.  
Even if the appeal fails, which it probably will, extradition is going to be an arduous and protracted process because Amanda Knox's PR has been rather effective at swaying public opinion to her favour.  

All depends whether Solliceto will break his silence as he is disadvantaged by geographical location.
Should the appeal fail he will find himself  hauled back to prison, something that Amanda Knox can avoid for as long as the request to  extradite her is not met.  

I don't get it why Rudy Guede won't confess now that he's served his jail term and has nothing more to lose.
In fact if he were to pen a reveal all book he will be raking in millions.

Nothing has changed my view those two should be in jail for lying and covering up what they did to Kercher.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by lj on 02.05.14 1:06

Agree, aiyoyo

____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

lj

Posts : 3274
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by lj on 07.05.14 14:26

Funny her argument "Ihad no reason to kill her" .

Yes dope, indeed, that's why it is murder.

Another narcissist from the caliber of Kate and Gerry.

____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

lj

Posts : 3274
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by aiyoyo on 10.05.14 2:15

@lj wrote:Funny her argument "Ihad no reason to kill her" .

Yes dope, indeed, that's why it is murder.

Another narcissist from the caliber of Kate and Gerry.

Exactly!

By protesting too much she'd put her foot in mouth.


aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by ultimaThule on 01.07.14 15:56


ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by Newintown on 01.07.14 16:36


I watched the interview with Sollecito on Sky News a little while ago.

Wow, that is a HUGE turn around, I wonder what brought that about.  For him to say that Knox spent the night with him and now to say that she wasn't even in his apartment and he didn't know where she was on the night in question, that is a MAJOR admission, and one open to "perverting the course of justice" after all these years, so he must have had good reason to change his defence.

I did also hear on Sky that Knox now as she is liiving in the USA will not be carrying out her jail term.  Perhaps that's why Sollecito is sick of the whole charade and she's left him in the "sh*t" while she lives a cosy life in the USA getting paid for umpteen TV interviews and carrying on her life as if nothing has happened and as if a young girl (her room mate) didn't get murdered.

____________________
Laurie Levenson, Quoted in the Guardian ........

"Never trust an eyewitness whose memory gets better over time"


Newintown

Posts : 1597
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2011-07-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by PeterMac on 01.07.14 17:49

I wonder whether some other people are getting fed up with a couple writing books, making a fortune, jetting round the world and being feted on TV shows and Charity events
and are prepared to put an end to the whole thing by telling the truth.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Amanda Knox Retrial? * UPDATE* Trial to go ahead, acquittal overturned

Post by ultimaThule on 01.07.14 18:03

As "likeable' is not a word I would use in connection with any of the McCanns,  I wouldn't be at all surprised if their antics have got up more than a few noses which once sniffed in perfect accord with the wee one's disdainful hooter,  PeterM.  yes

ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 9 of 12 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum