Page 37 of 50 FirstFirst ... 2733343536373839404147 ... LastLast
Results 541 to 555 of 738
Like Tree1141Likes

Thread: "Foxy Knoxy" Amanda Knox gets $4m book deal from HarperCollins

  1. #541
    Elite Member MmeVertigina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Your inner ear
    Posts
    3,545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by effie2 View Post
    But they already had a suspect,why should they frame they pair?
    Does anyone know if Rafaele and Amanda were in custody before Rude Guede?

  2. #542
    Elite Member southernbelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    9,578

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by effie2 View Post
    But they already had a suspect,why should they frame they pair?
    Because before they had Guede, the police prematurely tried to convince everyone that they'd already solved the crime and that Amanda and Rafaelle were responsible. Once Guede entered the picture and blew the police's story to pieces, threatening their credibility and the integrity of their investigation, they weren't willing to acknowledge that they'd been wrong.

  3. #543
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Back of Beyond
    Posts
    11,081

    Default

    Actually, there is evidence that evidence was selectively removed. There is strong indication of more than one attacker:

    Multiple Attackers


    The assault of Meredith involved more than one assailant. While the various experts were unable to definitively rule out a single attacker, Massei concluded that, based on Meredith's wounds and injuries there were two or more assailants. While this by itself does not directly implicate Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, it does exclude the possibility that Rudy Guede acted alone.

    For additional details of why there was Multiple Attackers
    Other Evidence That Indicates the Presence of Others

    There are several items of evidence that indicate that Rudy Guede was not alone.

    • The door to Meredith's room was locked. This would have required that Rudy turn and face the door to lock it. Rudy had blood on his shoes but his tracks lead directly out of the cottage, and there is no evidence of any footprints compatible with him having locked the door. These missing footprints indicate that someone other than Rudy locked Meredith's door.[24]


    • A witness saw the three accused together on the night of the murder, meters from the cottage where the murder happened.


    • A witness testified that she heard a scream at a time compatible with Meredith being attacked. This scream was followed by the sound of footsteps running in different directions.


    • There are indications that there was an attempt to selectively remove evidence. Some bloody footprints were cleaned while others were left untouched, and the bathroom was cleaned fairly thoroughly. Rudy Guede had no reason, nor the time, to do any of this.


    • Some time after she died, Meredith's body was moved and arranged to make it more obvious that she had been sexually assaulted. Rudy, who had sexually assaulted her, had no reason to do this. Someone else must have moved and rearranged Meredith's body. Furthermore, all this happened a considerable time after her death, which precludes the possibility that Guede was responsible for it. The evidence shows that Rudy left the cottage soon after the attack and never returned.


    In addition:

    Tetramethylbenzidine (TMB) is only able to detect blood to a sensitivity of 1 in 10,000 parts.[28] Luminol on the other hand is extremely sensitive and is capable of detecting blood to a sensitivity of 1 in 1,000,000 parts on the low end and 1 in 100,000,000 parts on the high end.[29] That means that luminol is at a minimum 100 times the sensitivity of TMB and can be as high as 10,000 times the sensitivity. Attempting to compare the sensitivity of these two tests it is clear that luminol is by far the more sensitive test. Using a considerably less sensitive test to argue that the positive result of the test with a much greater sensitivity is a false positive is illogical and incorrect. [30] Conclusion

    The luminol traces are very strong evidence of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito's involvement in the murder of Meredith Kercher. The footprints establish that someone other than Rudy Guede was present and that these individuals had feet that are compatible with Knox and Sollecito. Attempts to explain the evidence by making reference to DNA in dust and to luminol false positives are at best misinformed and most likely intentionally deceptive. The argument that because TMB was used and the result was negative we should exclude the luminol results is wrong. The footprints are made in blood, they belong to Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, and they establish without a doubt that the couple was involved with the murder.

  4. #544
    Elite Member MmeVertigina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Your inner ear
    Posts
    3,545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasha View Post

    There are several items of evidence that indicate that Rudy Guede was not alone.

    • The door to Meredith's room was locked. This would have required that Rudy turn and face the door to lock it. Rudy had blood on his shoes but his tracks lead directly out of the cottage, and there is no evidence of any footprints compatible with him having locked the door. These missing footprints indicate that someone other than Rudy locked Meredith's door.[24]


    • A witness saw the three accused together on the night of the murder, meters from the cottage where the murder happened.


    • A witness testified that she heard a scream at a time compatible with Meredith being attacked. This scream was followed by the sound of footsteps running in different directions.


    • There are indications that there was an attempt to selectively remove evidence. Some bloody footprints were cleaned while others were left untouched, and the bathroom was cleaned fairly thoroughly. Rudy Guede had no reason, nor the time, to do any of this.


    • Some time after she died, Meredith's body was moved and arranged to make it more obvious that she had been sexually assaulted. Rudy, who had sexually assaulted her, had no reason to do this. Someone else must have moved and rearranged Meredith's body. Furthermore, all this happened a considerable time after her death, which precludes the possibility that Guede was responsible for it. The evidence shows that Rudy left the cottage soon after the attack and never returned.


    All of this seems like speculation, to me. How do we know that Guede didn't lock the door before exiting, while still inside the room and facing the door? Who are these witnesses? Are they credible enough to have definitively identified these 3 suspects? None of it is solid proof. Who says Guede didn't have time to try and clean up a bit? Based upon what time frame? I am not saying that I have a definite opinion on what did happen, however there is not enough actual, tactile evidence to support Knox and Sollecito helping to commit the murder.
    Butterfly and DirtyGossip01 like this.

  5. #545
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    34,679

    Default

    I'm curious as to why we're asked to not listen to any of the 'PR' that is pro Knox, but are expected to take for gospel the version that comes from a clearly anti Knox slant, run by an anonymous wiki blogger.



    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  6. #546
    Elite Member Novice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Beyond Caring, then hang a left.
    Posts
    47,096

    Default

    Meredith Kercher's family still on 'journey to truth'

    The family of murdered British student Meredith Kercher have said they are still on a "journey for the truth" after judges reinstated the convictions of Amanda Knox and Rafaele Sollecito

    10:44AM GMT 31 Jan 2014



    Speaking at a press conference in Florence today, Meredith Kercher's brother Lyle and sister Stephanie said they could not draw a line under her death while the process was going on.

    They called for Knox to be extradited from the US and declined to comment on reports that Sollecito had been arrested by Italian police close to the Austrian border.

    "I think we are still on a journey for the truth and it may be the fact that we don't ever really know what happened that night, which is obviously something we'll have to come to terms with," Stephanie said.


    Meredith Kercher was found dead in Perugia, Italy in 2007 (PA)


    "But the verdict has been upheld this time so we hope that ... we are nearer the end so that we can just start to remember Meredith for who she was and draw a line under it, as it were."

    Miss Kercher, a Leeds University exchange student from Coulsdon, south London, was found with her throat slashed in the bedroom of the house she shared with Knox in Perugia, central Italy, in November 2007.
    Video: Meredith Kercher's family still on 'journey to truth' - Telegraph


    Raffaele Sollectio makes break for it after guilty verdict

    Italian former boyfriend was caught trying to cross over into Austria

    Centre, Amanda Knox's boyfriend at the time, Raffaele Sollecito (EPA)










    By Nick Squires, Florence

    6:14PM GMT 31 Jan 2014


    Amanda Knox’s ex-boyfriend made an audacious bid to escape Italian justice just as the verdict in his retrial for the murder of Meredith Kercher was about to be delivered, driving hundreds of miles north and crossing over the border into Austria.

    Raffaele Sollecito had vowed to be in court on Thursday to hear the verdict but at the last minute his lawyers said he was “too stressed” to attend and that he was suffering from panic attacks.

    It was assumed that he was either resting in his hotel in Florence or had returned to Bari, the Adriatic port in the southern region of Puglia where his family live.

    In fact the 29-year-old computer studies graduate was up to something very different.

    At some point on Thursday afternoon he and his new girlfriend, student and part-time model Greta Menegaldo, slipped away from Florence in a brand-new Mini Cooper and drove around 250 miles north to the border with Austria.


    They crossed the frontier and headed to the nearby town of Villach. As short time later they drove back into Italy and checked into a hotel in the mountain village of Venzone at about 1am.
    There they had to hand over their identity documents, as is customary for guests when they check into hotels in Italy.
    The night porter at the Hotel Carnia immediately realised who Sollecito was and called the police, who arrived at around 6am, as it was still pitch-black outside.
    They knocked on the door of Sollecito’s room and woke up him and his girlfriend.
    The couple was then taken to a police station in the city of Udine, where Sollecito was made to surrender his passport.

    His Italian identity card was stamped to show that he is now prohibited from leaving the country.
    Sollecito, whose brief, week-long fling with Knox was cut short when they were both arrested on suspicion of murdering 21-year-old Miss Kercher, told police that he had “just done a little trip” into Austria but did not explain why.
    “I never thought of fleeing the country for good," he reportedly told detectives when questioned.
    But there was intense speculation in Italy he left the country in the hours before the verdict was delivered, in order to wait to see whether his guilty verdict would be reinstated, and if so whether the court would order him to be sent back to prison or placed under house arrest.
    When the verdict came in at around 9.30pm and he learned that the court had decreed only that his passport should be confiscated, he returned to Italy.
    "I think it's somewhat significant that, before the sentence was handed down, he left Florence where he had been and travelled many kilometres to get close to two frontiers, Slovenia and Austria," Massimiliano Ortolan, a senior police officer in Udine, told the Associated Press. "It is a bit perplexing."
    Sollecito’s lawyers insisted that he had simply travelled to the far north-east of Italy because Ms Menegaldo’s family comes from there.
    But she is in fact from the city of Treviso, near Venice, whereas the area in which the couple spent the night was in an entirely different region to the north and just 25 miles from the Austrian border.
    Despite the fleeting bid to flee Italian justice, Sollecito was not arrested by police.
    He was released on Friday afternoon and was last seen driving away with Miss Menegaldo.
    For the next year or more he will be confined to Italy, as the Supreme Court in Rome decides whether to make the reinstated guilty verdicts definitive.
    Only then would he be arrested and made to start serving the 25-year jail sentence handed down by the appeals court in Florence.
    Sollecito reportedly met Miss Menegaldo at the University of Verona, where he has been studying software engineering.
    Since then they have become "inseparable", according to reports in the Italian press, spending time in Sollecito's apartment in Verona.
    In a Facebook post recently, he wrote that he had "given my heart" to the part-time model. The couple recently went on holiday to South America, where her parents reportedly have a house.
    There had long been speculation that Sollecito might try to flee Italy before the sentence.
    Last year he spent a lot of time in the Dominican Republic in the Caribbean and was photographed swimming in a bay and lounging on the beach.
    He made several trips to the country at the invitation of “a very kind friend”, he told The Telegraph at a court appearance in November.
    He also tried to move to Lugano in the Italian-speaking part of Switzerland to set up an internet security firm, but had to leave after Swiss authorities realised that he was still the subject of an Italian judicial inquiry.
    Sollecito continues to insist that he had nothing to do with the murder of Miss Kercher.
    In an impassioned speech he made to the jury during the trial he said he had been unjustly portrayed as “a ruthless assassin” and that his life had turned into a “nightmare” ever since he and Miss Knox were arrested after Miss Kercher was found dead in Nov 2007.
    The only fault that he and Miss Knox could be accused of was failing to comprehend the seriousness of the situation they found themselves in, before and after they were arrested six years ago, he said
    Raffaele Sollectio makes break for it after guilty verdict - Telegraph

    Amanda Knox case judge lambasted by Raffaele Sollecito's lawyers for remarks

    Alessandro Nencini, who reinstated murder convictions of American and former boyfriend, could face disciplinary action






    Meredith Kercher, the 21-year-old British student who was murdered in 2007 while on a year abroad in Perugia, Italy. Photograph: Kercher family/PA

    The judge who reinstated Amanda Knox's conviction for the murder of Meredith Kercher has been criticised by her co-accused's defence lawyers after he commented publicly on the case in a way they claimed was "unacceptable" and could lead to disciplinary action.
    Alessandro Nencini, who on Thursday sentenced Knox to 28-and-a-half years and her ex-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito to 25 years in prison for the British student's killing, gave an interview to three Italian newspapers on Saturday in which he touched on Sollecito's defence strategy and the case itself.
    The remarks, which are unusual in a country where courts do not generally comment on cases before publishing their written reasoning, were reportedly described as "inopportune" by the chairman of the judges' governing body, the CSM.
    But Sollecito's lawyers went further, saying they were appalled by the judge's words, with one saying the CSM should not only consider bringing disciplinary action against him but also question the legitimacy of the verdict itself.
    "The conviction is the result of a clear bias on the part of the judges against the defendants, and in particular against Raffaele Sollecito, and that interview proves it," defence lawyer Luca Maori told Corriere della Sera.
    Maori said Sollecito's legal team would consult him on Monday about what action to take. They and Knox's lawyers have said they will appeal against the verdict, which will take the case once again before Italy's highest court, the court of cassation.
    It is able to quash a lower court's verdict if it finds errors of law were made, as it did last March when it annulled the pair's 2011 acquittals and ordered the Florence appeals court to retry the appeal.
    Giulia Bongiorno, Sollecito's chief defence lawyer, criticised Nencini for commenting on the circumstances of the 2007 murder of Kercher, a 21-year-old Leeds University student on a year in Perugia, claiming his remarks pre-empted his written reasoning.
    Knox and Sollecito deny any involvement in the crime, for which they were convicted by a first-grade court in 2009.
    While not making any direct reference to a motive for the crime, Nencini emphasised the chance nature of the evening and reportedly stated: "If Amanda had gone to work, we probably wouldn't be here."
    Bongiorno also faulted Nencini for hinting that the fact that Sollecito had not officially testified – and had not been cross-examined – during the second appeal had possibly not worked in his favour. The computer science graduate had spoken to the court only in statements.
    The option"is a right, but it deprives the subject of a voice", , Nencini was quoted by one newspaper as saying.
    Bongiorno said this was unfair as her client had not been asked to submit to cross-examination. Moreover, she claimed, there was an ambiguity in Nencini's words that stunned her more.
    "I would not like the judge to be implying something else: that perhaps Raffaele, in order to have his innocence recognised, should have accused Amanda of the killing of Meredith Kercher," she told La Stampa.
    But that' outrage was not shared by all. The chairman of the Florence appeals court, Fabio Massimo Drago, was quoted as saying his colleague's remarks were "within the boundaries of propriety"
    Amanda Knox case judge lambasted by Raffaele Sollecito's lawyers for remarks | World news | The Guardian

    What next for Amanda Knox?

    The second conviction of Amanda Knox for the murder of Meredith Kercher could create a complicated diplomatic dispute between Italy and the US

    Miss Knox and her ex-boyfriend were found guilty of the sexual assault and murder of Miss Kercher, 21, from Coulsdon, Surrey, in 2009 but then acquitted by an appeals court in Perugia in 2011. Photo: AP









    By Jon Swaine, New York

    4:54PM GMT 30 Jan 2014



    Amanda Knox could effectively be trapped in the US for the rest of her life if President Barack Obama’s government decides to protect her from extradition to Italy.

    If Ms Knox’s new conviction stands after further appeals, Italian authorities must decide whether to ask the US to hand her over under the 1983 extradition treaty between the two countries.

    John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, would ultimately be responsible for either approving a request and forwarding it to the US justice department for processing in the courts – or rejecting it.

    Ms Knox would also then be under threat of arrest and deportation to Italy if she travelled to any other country that holds an extradition treaty with Rome. They include Canada, several major Latin American states, Australia, New Zealand, most of Europe and many other countries.



    Asked at a briefing in March last year what the State Department would do, Patrick Ventrell, a spokesman, merely noted that the final verdict had not yet been released. “We can’t really comment beyond that,” Mr Ventrell told reporters. “We never talk about extradition from this podium in terms of individual cases.”
    Some lawyers and supporters of Ms Knox have argued that having been acquitted in 2011, she would be protected under the US Constitution from “double jeopardy” – being tried twice for the same charge.



    Yet the US-Italy extradition treaty only protects Americans from extradition to face prosecution again in Italy for an offence that has already been dealt with by the US legal system. “This is not applicable in this situation,” said Professor Julian Ku, who teaches transnational law at Hofstra University.

    For extradition candidates like Ms Knox who have already been convicted, the treaty states that Italy must merely produce “a brief statement of the facts of the case,” as well as the text of the laws governing the crime committed, the punishment it would receive, and its statute of limitations.

    Her conviction would “easily satisfy the conditions of the treaty,” said Prof Ku. “So it would be hard for the US to explain why she should not be handed over”.
    Under considerable pressure from Ms Knox’s supporters, the Obama administration could find some other reason to decline a request for her from Italy. However, it would need to weigh this against the potential blow to co-operation on organised crime and other problems between the two governments.
    On the other hand, Italy might not want to upset a major ally that is still the world’s sole superpower.
    “All this comes in the context of very good relations between the two countries in historical terms, and a close relationship between their leaders” said Michael Calingaert, a Brookings Institution scholar and former diplomat focusing on Italy. “Neither side would be very eager to have to wade into this”.
    The US has been accused of failing to fulfill its side of extradition treaties by several allies. In 2009, 23 Americans, most of them CIA officers, were convicted in Italy on charges of illegally kidnapping a terrorist suspect in Milan.

    Most of the officers, who had already left the country, were given prison sentences, yet none has ever been extradited to Italy.
    An updated extradition treaty with Britain, signed in 2003 by Tony Blair's government, made it easier for the US to extradite suspects from Britain than vice-versa by reducing the obligation for Washington to produce evidence that a crime was committed. Last year the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee urged ministers to “rebalance” the legislation.

    The last reported extradition from the US to Italy was in February 2012. Giuliano Matei, a 34-year-old Romanian man, was deported to face charges of rape and the trafficking of a minor. He was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona, having fled from Italy
    What next for Amanda Knox? - Telegraph

  7. #547
    Elite Member southernbelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    9,578

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasha View Post
    Actually, there is evidence that evidence was selectively removed. There is strong indication of more than one attacker:

    Multiple Attackers


    The assault of Meredith involved more than one assailant. While the various experts were unable to definitively rule out a single attacker, Massei concluded that, based on Meredith's wounds and injuries there were two or more assailants. While this by itself does not directly implicate Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, it does exclude the possibility that Rudy Guede acted alone.
    I've seen autopsy photos of Meredith, and I'd have to disagree. It was a brutal crime, but not something that one person couldn't have done alone.


    The door to Meredith's room was locked. This would have required that Rudy turn and face the door to lock it. Rudy had blood on his shoes but his tracks lead directly out of the cottage, and there is no evidence of any footprints compatible with him having locked the door. These missing footprints indicate that someone other than Rudy locked Meredith's door.
    Couldn't he have locked it from the inside and just shut the door on his way out? Even if he couldn't, you can easily lock a door from the outside without having to turn around and face it. Turning your torso with your feet in place doesn't make forward-facing footprints.

    A witness saw the three accused together on the night of the murder, meters from the cottage where the murder happened.
    This has been disproven.

    A witness testified that she heard a scream at a time compatible with Meredith being attacked. This scream was followed by the sound of footsteps running in different directions.
    So what? I'd run like hell, too, if I heard a bloodcurdling scream in the general vicinity of the area I was in. How does she know these footsteps didn't come from uninvolved pedestrians or passersby? Furthermore, how does she know with absolute certainty that the running was even in response to the scream that she heard?

    There are indications that there was an attempt to selectively remove evidence. Some bloody footprints were cleaned while others were left untouched, and the bathroom was cleaned fairly thoroughly. Rudy Guede had no reason, nor the time, to do any of this.
    The "Selectively removing DNA evidence" argument is absurd. It's impossible to do that. Literally. Impossible. And the bathroom was cleaned "fairly thoroughly?" I should hope so. It is, you know, a bathroom, which is typically cleaned every few days with bleach based products. And it's also not the scene of the crime; Meredith's room is. So whether or not it had been recently cleaned is irrelevant. How do they know with certainty that it was cleaned AFTER the murder? Why would someone clean the bathroom but leave blood and DNA evidence smeared all over the actual crime scene?


    Some time after she died, Meredith's body was moved and arranged to make it more obvious that she had been sexually assaulted. Rudy, who had sexually assaulted her, had no reason to do this. Someone else must have moved and rearranged Meredith's body. Furthermore, all this happened a considerable time after her death, which precludes the possibility that Guede was responsible for it. The evidence shows that Rudy left the cottage soon after the attack and never returned.
    Lots of killers get off on moving or arranging the body of a victim. That proves nothing. And how do they know that Rudy left the cottage soon after the attack and never returned? What evidence do they have to prove that with absolute certainty?

    The "bloody footprints belonging to Amanda and Rafaelle" thing has also been disproven.

  8. #548
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Back of Beyond
    Posts
    11,081

    Default

    I've seen autopsy photos of Meredith, and I'd have to disagree. It was a brutal crime, but not something that one person couldn't have done alone.
    The judge disagreed.
    garysgirl1999 likes this.

  9. #549
    Super Moderator twitchy2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Milliways
    Posts
    59,818

    Default

    Then other judges disagreed with him. Why is the one judge right?
    "But I am very poorly today & very stupid & I hate everybody & everything." -- Charles Darwin

  10. #550
    Silver Member ZabriskiePoint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    within myself
    Posts
    418

    Default

    The question is : why are people getting their panties in a twist over who's right or wrong when we might never know for sure anyway?
    ex-LaFolie
    "I hear Chris Hemsworth's Oscar nominee announcements were dubbed by Marni Nixon" - Witchcurlgirl

  11. #551
    Elite Member MmeVertigina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Your inner ear
    Posts
    3,545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZabriskiePoint View Post
    The question is : why are people getting their panties in a twist over who's right or wrong when we might never know for sure anyway?
    Personally, I find this case fascinating and like hearing any and all educated opinions on it. I enjoy bouncing ideas back and forth hoping to get a clearer picture of what might have happened. I can also relate to being a young girl alone in a foreign country (years ago, of course) and the thought of being falsely accused, or convicted with a lack of solid evidence, is terrifying.
    Butterfly and southernbelle like this.

  12. #552
    Elite Member rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    48,780

    Default

    A young girl alone in a foreign country getting her throat slit and taking two hours to die is undoubtedly worse.
    Sasha, Sarzy, nana51 and 3 others like this.

  13. #553
    Silver Member ZabriskiePoint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    within myself
    Posts
    418

    Default

    Oh no, I'm not talking about developing an interest in this case, but the battling it out over "I know who's guilty and you're not taking my evidence into account" thing.
    ex-LaFolie
    "I hear Chris Hemsworth's Oscar nominee announcements were dubbed by Marni Nixon" - Witchcurlgirl

  14. #554
    Elite Member MmeVertigina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Your inner ear
    Posts
    3,545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rollo View Post
    A young girl alone in a foreign country getting her throat slit and taking two hours to die is undoubtedly worse.
    Than being falsely accused? Of course, no one is arguing that it isn't. The only justice for the victim's family can be in finding a solid truth.
    DirtyGossip01 likes this.

  15. #555
    Elite Member rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    48,780

    Default

    Well three people have been convicted once and two of those people have been convicted twice. I don't see how picking over such evidence as you can glean from the two court cases, given that the deliberations of the judges were private, is going to provide a definitive answer. It seems that picking over the evidence is a red herring now that Knox is going on a PR jamboree to get public opinion on her side. She herself is NOT picking over the evidence since she changed her story so many times and didn't even attend the second court case. Her broad brush approach is that "It is not fair!" and "Why me?"

    So there don't seem to be any comments on her second PR junket and the fact that it was pre-planned to get her onto national tv as soon as the verdict was announced. It remains pretty distasteful that the presenter was holding the hand of a convicted criminal while she looked forlorn and defiant. It is repulsive that she sent a last minute letter to the family of the deceased. And the book (and any further books or paid-for articles she writes) remain controversial. She also managed to give a shout-out to 'poor Rafaelle' (her boyfriend of one week) when she heard that he has been caught trying to escape justice. She wouldn't want him to spill the beans now that he has nothing to lose.
    Sasha, nana51, chocolate and 2 others like this.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 54
    Last Post: August 23rd, 2011, 07:24 PM
  2. "Joe the Plumber" book deal details emerge
    By bychance in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: November 17th, 2008, 12:21 PM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: October 8th, 2008, 06:51 PM
  4. Replies: 13
    Last Post: November 13th, 2007, 05:44 PM
  5. Replies: 14
    Last Post: August 23rd, 2006, 07:38 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •