The Gooner Forum

Something doesn't sit well in this case. The arrogant American presumption that the Italian judiciary is not capable of providing a fair trial.

A fair trial and media witchhunt like the Americans gave to Louise Woodward The Washington senator Maria Cantwell co-ordinated massive influence and public relation propaganda. So much USA funded legal scrutiny has its inevitable consequence and these two walk away from a murder. This doesn't sit comfortably at all with me.

Do you think Cantwell will be as keen to campaign for David Headley, the American Pakistani charged in India with involvement in the Mumbai terrorist attacks? India's judiciary is reportedly more open to corruption than the Italian. She might have more justification in getting that powerful legal scrutiny going again. Perhaps she will keep her involvement with the voter friendly campaign for the middle class pretty white girl.

Poor Kercher family.

Bergkamp-Genius wrote:

QuartzGooner wrote:I too think something odd about the pair and something odd and unsettling about the whole trial, not sure the bloke found guilty was involved.

Oh he was definitely involved...he hasn't admitted to involvement in the murder as someone suggested, but there is no doubt he is one of the culprits if not the culprit...
There was a multitude of evidence putting him at the scene, his dna was on her and he left a shit in the toilet..so he couldn't deny he was there..So he made up a story that she invited him back, he had some sexual contact with her, went to the toilet and when he was in the toilet she was murdered by an unknown assailant ...

The only question is did he break in to the house on his own and do it all himself or did Knox and Sollecito bring him back there...

I think they brought him back there and were involved with what happened, for me it's the only thing that explains all the lies that were told by knox and Sollecito from the very start, and of course the strange behaviour didn't exactly make them look innocent...

It could be that is what happened.
But if Knox and her boyfriend's only involvement was to bring the Black bloke back to the apartment they were not guilty of anything, so then why did Knox try to blame another guy (her former boss) who was proven to be elsewhere on the night of the crime?

What loyalty does she have to the guy in prison that she has to cover up for him?

Something is being hidden, not sure we will ever find out what.

I smell a conspiracy going on here

QuartzGooner wrote:

Bergkamp-Genius wrote:

QuartzGooner wrote:I too think something odd about the pair and something odd and unsettling about the whole trial, not sure the bloke found guilty was involved.

Oh he was definitely involved...he hasn't admitted to involvement in the murder as someone suggested, but there is no doubt he is one of the culprits if not the culprit...
There was a multitude of evidence putting him at the scene, his dna was on her and he left a shit in the toilet..so he couldn't deny he was there..So he made up a story that she invited him back, he had some sexual contact with her, went to the toilet and when he was in the toilet she was murdered by an unknown assailant ...

The only question is did he break in to the house on his own and do it all himself or did Knox and Sollecito bring him back there...

I think they brought him back there and were involved with what happened, for me it's the only thing that explains all the lies that were told by knox and Sollecito from the very start, and of course the strange behaviour didn't exactly make them look innocent...

It could be that is what happened.
But if Knox and her boyfriend's only involvement was to bring the Black bloke back to the apartment they were not guilty of anything, so then why did Knox try to blame another guy (her former boss) who was proven to be elsewhere on the night of the crime?

What loyalty does she have to the guy in prison that she has to cover up for him?

Something is being hidden, not sure we will ever find out what.

Yes it 'could' be what happened but highly highly unlikely...When they picked the guy up, after he fled the country, he denied having ever been there or having any involvement..He changed his story numerous times as the evidence was thrown at him and as he became aware of the full extent of the evidence he eventually came up with a story that attempted to explain it all away...

Hence the story about her taking him back there and having consensual sexual activity, this was to explain away his fingerprints at the murder scene and his Dna all over the place and on the victim...
The story about being in the toilet while she was being murdered in the next room explains away all the evidence of him being in the bathroom and his involvement in the murder, and why there was evidence that he was there after blood had been spilt...If you really think there is any chance he wasn't the murderer or one of them, if i ever go up on trial for a serious crime i want you on my jury for sure, i'll use the martians did it defence..

And the whole story from Guede is made to look all the more ridiculous when you add in that she had just been out with friends and then left to go home alone...So we are supposed to believe strolling home she picked up this ugly f*cker she didn't know to take home for sex...i think not...

As for my suggestion Knox brought Guede back there, i wasn't suggesting they brought him back and let him wander around the house alone and he just happened to murder her room mate, unbeknown to Knox...I was suggesting they brought him back there and instigated and were a part of whatever happened...

There are two reasons why she wouldn't implicate Guede..one is that she didn't have anything to do with it and knew nothing about it, and the other is if she implicates him she is as good as admitting she was there and knew exactly what happened...
The implicating the bar owner was to distract the police from the true killers and possibly to divert attention from Guede should anyone have seen a black guy entering or leaving the property with her and Sollecito...She knew if they picked up the the bar owner he couldn't implicate her because he wasn't there...

So if Guede's DNA was on her, and in the toilet, it places him there, I do not disagree that he was there according to the evidence.

But why would Knox take such steps to cover for Guede?

Perhaps Knox knew Guede did it, but she was afraid to grass on him because if the charges did not stick Guede would come after her in revenge?

I cannot figure the involvement of Knox and her boyfriend in the murder?
Did they encourage it? If so why?
Did Guede try it on with Kercher, get refused, then rape her, and subsequently murder her to cover his tracks?
Seems the likely story.
But were Knox and her boyfriend present at the time, and panicked?

And 40 knife wounds? That is weird. Most murders have one or two wounds.

I do not know the truth, how can I?

But I guess that something is being covered up, the way that Knox and her boyfriend conducted themselves is weird.

QuartzGooner wrote:

So if Guede's DNA was on her, and in the toilet, it places him there, I do not disagree that he was there according to the evidence.

But why would Knox take such steps to cover for Guede?

Perhaps Knox knew Guede did it, but she was afraid to grass on him because if the charges did not stick Guede would come after her in revenge?

I doubt in a case like this if she were innocent and about to get convicted she would be worried about grassing up the local petty criminal, if she new it to be him and she had no involvement...
As i said already if she was a part of what happened she can't deny being there or knowing anything about it and then implicate him without implicating herself...she's not covering for him she is covering for herself..

because I cannot figure the involvement of Knox and her boyfriend in the murder?
Did they encourage it? If so why?

According to the other two flat mates Kercher and they had had to have words with Knox about not pulling her weight around the house and bringing lots of strange guys back...Apparently Kercher had a lot to say to her about it and by all accounts there was a lot of friction between them over this...
When Knox's propaganda team talk about no motive they conveniently forget to mention what the other flat mates had said about Knoxs relationship with Kercher and why there was friction...

As petty as it may seem, to a spoilt brat like Knox doped up and with Guede and Sollecito in tow..maybe she thought she'd teach Kercher a lesson and it got out of control and ended up as a murder...

Did Guede try it on with Kercher, get refused, then rape her, and subsequently murder her to cover his tracks?
Seems the likely story.

If Knox and Sollecito had no part in it and truely were not there then i don't think there is much doubt what happened... she came home and stumbled on Guede robbing the place and was sexually assaulted and murdered by him...That was what the evidence pointed to... a breaking and entering/robbery, which the police think was staged after the murder by Knox to cover up her involvement....

But were Knox and her boyfriend present at the time, and panicked?

Its possible that at first that could be the case... but once the seriousness of their position became apparent i doubt very much if they had no part in the murder they would continue to stay quiet on what actually happened..

And 40 knife wounds? That is weird. Most murders have one or two wounds.

I do not know the truth, how can I?

But I guess that something is being covered up, the way that Knox and her boyfriend conducted themselves is weird.[/

quote]

We'll never know the truth because if Knox is guilty she will never admit so...
It will be interesting now to see what Guede says...will the fact that Knox and Sollecito are free and he is doing 16 years prompt him to come clean about what happened and either fully implicate them or exhonnerate them... he might as well cos either way he is doing 16 years...if he says nothing i'd be inclined to think that maybe it was all down to him...

It does appear as if Knox had little time for Kercher and was not overly upset about her death.

Horrible business.

rodders999 wrote:Foxy knoxy???.....I would :sodomite:

But would you live to tell anyone about it

Some women are just fucked in the head though. I once (how to politely put this...?) I once "dated" a young lady and first night back in her place and half way through a pretty good porno re-enactment she asked me to cut her with a scissors. Not Manson-style, but she wanted blood drawn. Truth. Have to say, it put me off my stride just a tad and no, she did not get cut that night. Nor did she ever see me again. The crazy bee-hatch.

as someone said to me yesterday

did you fancy foxy when you thought she ws a murderer or now she has been cleared ?

goonersid wrote:

rodders999 wrote:Foxy knoxy???.....I would :sodomite:

But would you live to tell anyone about it

Who cares, what a way to go!!

good old america!!

amanda knox was fairly convicted, but being an american she must be innocent, and she is now a hero (heroine?) in the usa and the yanks are happy.
al merenghi was almost certainly innocent of the lockerbie bombing, but was convicted of it anyway on bullshit evidence because he is lybian and therefore guilty. EVEN AFTER being wrongly convicted, serving his time and being released because he's about to die anyway, america want him tried AGAIN for the same crime he's already being convicted, and served his time for! (did i mention he's innocent)
oh and all this while the american fighter pilot who shot down an iranian passenger jet which almost certainly sparked lockerbie has never even stood trial.
justice eh?