Amanda Knox guilty of Meredith Kercher murder
- Thread starter Bender
- Start date
I think in the US court system, it would be hard to prove she's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
However, I tend to look it more practically with common sense. She lied about her alibi? WHY? If she was in the room while the murder took place, she's an accessory. Why didn't she stop it or leave and report it? Why implicate ANOTHER guy if, as you say, that Rudy guy did it? Don't tell me she follows a "snitches get ditches" code lol.
It's foolish to think she confused the names when the Lumumba guy is famous around those parts and she WORKED for him. If she didn't kill the woman nor was a willing accessory, why didn't she tell the truth at any point during the trial? Why risk 25 years of her life? Come on.
Anyway, my opinion isn't meant to imply that the Italian court system functions well or that there wasn't bias in the trial. However, when it comes to me deciding for myself personally if she's guilty, I decided she is. You on the other hand, are resting your beliefs completely with the lack of forensic evidence and that is completely fine. But I don't know why you don't find her erratic statements and lack of alibi suspicious.
However, I tend to look it more practically with common sense. She lied about her alibi? WHY? If she was in the room while the murder took place, she's an accessory. Why didn't she stop it or leave and report it? Why implicate ANOTHER guy if, as you say, that Rudy guy did it? Don't tell me she follows a "snitches get ditches" code lol.
It's foolish to think she confused the names when the Lumumba guy is famous around those parts and she WORKED for him. If she didn't kill the woman nor was a willing accessory, why didn't she tell the truth at any point during the trial? Why risk 25 years of her life? Come on.
Anyway, my opinion isn't meant to imply that the Italian court system functions well or that there wasn't bias in the trial. However, when it comes to me deciding for myself personally if she's guilty, I decided she is. You on the other hand, are resting your beliefs completely with the lack of forensic evidence and that is completely fine. But I don't know why you don't find her erratic statements and lack of alibi suspicious.
I didn't have much to say, but OK.
Her lack of alibi and erratic statements don't really mean much. She was scared, under pressure, being abused by the Italian police, etc.
Not having an alibi and making erratic statements are not indications of guilt. The fact still remains that the evidence does not point towards her being involved.
Her lack of alibi and erratic statements don't really mean much. She was scared, under pressure, being abused by the Italian police, etc.
Not having an alibi and making erratic statements are not indications of guilt. The fact still remains that the evidence does not point towards her being involved.
Sorry to bring up old stuff... but I thought you mother passed away when you were really young?
I think it's awesome that whenever someone questions your view on something you always have strong links to that industry or cause.. whether its the music biz, PETA and now law.. some guys have all the luck
I think it's awesome that whenever someone questions your view on something you always have strong links to that industry or cause.. whether its the music biz, PETA and now law.. some guys have all the luck
Sorry to bring up old stuff... but I thought you mother passed away when you were really young?
I think it's awesome that whenever someone questions your view on something you always have strong links to that industry or cause.. whether its the music biz, PETA and now law.. some guys have all the luck
I think it's awesome that whenever someone questions your view on something you always have strong links to that industry or cause.. whether its the music biz, PETA and now law.. some guys have all the luck
I have a large family mostly made up of professional musicians, doctors, and lawyers.
What do you mean her lack of alibi doesn't mean much? If you weren't present during the crime/did the crime, where were you? Simple as that. A strong alibi means you don't go to prison. What about conflicting stories of their whereabouts by Knox and her former boyfriend? What about their cell-phones being turned off the night of the crime and turned on the next morning at the same time? During questioning, she said she was present in the house during the murder and that Lumumba was the assailant and she even described the screams she heard. Pressure from the police? Fine. Then, the next day, she writes a 5-PAGE MEMORANDUM affirming everything she said the night before.
I mean that the lack of an alibi isn't a strong indicator of guilt. Maybe she did have an alibi but couldn't prove it. There's all sorts of reasons why she might not have an alibi. I don't have an alibi for not being present at a party in which two girls were shot and killed, because I was there. That doesn't mean I did it.
I think she was co-erced into writing that memorandum.
I think she was co-erced into writing that memorandum.
I understand if people say there wasn't enough evidence to convict her beyond a reasonable doubt. But I don't understand how people can claim she's innocent when all her actions show otherwise.
If she was coerced into writing the memorandum, her lawyers should have been able to throw it out IF they threw out the verbal confession. Why did the memorandum hold?
If she was coerced into writing the memorandum, her lawyers should have been able to throw it out IF they threw out the verbal confession. Why did the memorandum hold?
Donate
Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.
Members online
No members online now.