MovieChat Forums > Amanda Knox (2011) Discussion > A 100 reasons why Amanda Knox could be Q...

A 100 reasons why Amanda Knox could be QUILTY !!


We won't know for sure if she's guilty or not. People claiming she is 100% innocent are just full of BS. They were not in the room when it happened. Amanda knows, but she can't be trusted. This is the same thing as the OJ Simpson trial. You have as many innocent-arguments as guilty arguments.

For what it's worth, my gut tells me she did not tell the entire truth and she is probably an accomplice or accessory after the fact. I have read a lot of arguments from people believing in her innocence, so let me try to group some arguments who believe that behind that angel smile lies a twisted truth:

1. I don't believe Rudy Guede did it (or certainly not alone), unless he's a total moron. It seems he was a potential scapegoat (foreign, black, had an affair with the victim, ...). Why would you try to cover up with the fake break-in but leave a bloody handprint and footprint.

2. Why would Amanda go shopping for sexy lingerie on the memorial day of Meredith, and still say she was her friend. You really have to be a very cold bitch or very stupid one.

3. It seems very plausible their cover up was interrupted by postal officers, and so their story got very confused.

4. Amanda seems very manipulative and egocentric. Everything is about her. "Why is everybody against me?" She hardly ever talks about her so-called friend who is the only true victim here. She loves attention, she loves television, she loves to look as an innocent girl fighting the evil and corrupt stupid Italian justice. If her name was Damien Echols and loved satan, she would never have been acquitted. It wouldn't be a stretch to see her as a very jealous human being, and maybe she couldn't stand Meredith was a better person, maybe even more intelligent. Maybe Meredith called her a sluth and things got for the worse.

reply

[deleted]

"You don't call your parents for no reason in the middle of the night"

I really don't want to bet get into whether or not she's guilty but you do realize that "the middle of the night " in Italy means it was only mid to late afternoon in the Pacific Northwest US? Most Americans living in Europe wait until midnight or later to call loved ones in the States around the time they are leaving work.
The is surmountable reasonable doubt in this case that, guilty or not, a jury would not be able to convict her. The evidence was tainted, the interrogations were not done properly, neither side was very knowledgeable about cultural differences.

Don't read into my post and think that I'm sympathetic towards her. She made far too many stupid mistakes that ultimately landed in mess she will have to spend her entire life paying off despite her guilt or innocence in committing the actual murder. I have very little sympathy for her, but, along with the victim, I feel really sorry for the pain she has caused her parents.

reply

Knox called her mother at 3am Seattle time, not Italian time. She'd never done that before. Then she lied on the stand that she didn't remember making the call.

"Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!"

reply

3 am Seattle time is like 11am in Italy.

reply

Yeah and Knox had never rang her family at 3am Seattle time before and she rang her mother just before Meredith's body was discovered and then insisted in court that she didn't remember making the call, despite phone records proving otherwise and despite her mother expressing surprise that she'd called at that time to Knox in a recorded prison convo and testifying in court that yes it was strange that Amanda had called her at that time. Knox knew at the time that Meredith's body was about to be discovered and called her mother in a state of panic.
I've worked abroad before and I always made sure to call my family at odd hours in the country I was working in, to ensure I wouldn't be calling them at 3am.
Both these scummy deviants are guilty as sin and will soon be joining the third scummy deviant in prison where they belong. I expect Cassation to uphold the verdict later on today. We'll see what happens.

"Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!"

reply

I agree Powerbreak! Read my reply to the post below yours!

reply

She obviously is ,the court ruled.

Burn the b^%$%

reply

7. Stabbing somebody 40 times is not your typical murder, it's an emotional crime. Why would a strong African man use a knife to kill a girl. Doesn't make any sense. This was not premeditated, so if he killed her in a stage of blinde hate, I would believe he would strangle her or at least hit her.

8. It takes a lot of a time to kill somebody with 40 stabbings. But the killer(s) still took his time to (probably, cf.the bloody footprint) wash his hands in the sink, to come back to cover the body, get out to buy bleach and finally try to stage a break-in. If I was the killer and I was NOT living in that house, I would make sure I got the f@"k out of there, pronto, after the first hit/stab. Cause you never know who could come in. On the other hand, if you are living in that place, you could take you time.

9. A man wouldn't cover her up. When I first read about it, I thought it would be (1) a person who knows her, and the list is short (2) a female (3) somebody who cares about how things look (somebody who would smile an wear a special t-shirt in court to convey an image of innocence)

10. Pot erases memory, according to Amanda and Raffaele. They don't know what they did the night of the murder, sex no sex, a shower no shower,... In college I smoked now and then pot. One evening I ate an entire space cake (I didn't feel anything in the beginning so I ate more cake). Suddenly I was stoned like never before. I couldn't stand straight. Strangely, in all my pot consuming years I NEVER LOST MY MEMORY.

11. Stabbing somebody more than 40 times and cartwheeling in a police station just days after your friend got brutally murdered and the killer is still on the loose, has something in common: BOTH ACTIONS ARE DONE BY SOMEBODY WITH A FEW SCREWS LOOSE.

reply

12. Amanda has lied more than once, accused an innocent guy who was send to prison, and told the investigators they were watching a movie and were on the computer the night of the murder. There was no internet activity on the computer.

13. The shopkeeper fingered her as being in his store looking for cleaning products.

14. The footprint in the bathroom was more likely to have come from Raffaele than from Rudy. Amanda claimed she was with Raffaele the day of the murder.

15. Raffaele claimed nothing was stolen in the room, before the room was actually checked for robbery.

16. Meredith had no defensive wounds, apart from 3 tiny cuts on her hands,
what would point to more than one aggressor. Raffaele and Amanda are prime suspects.

17. Raffaele DNA was on the bra of the victim. The body was moved after she was stabbed, and so was the bra.

18. The knife recovered at Sollecito's apartment contained the victim and Amanda Knox's DNA.

19.Knox's DNA was found mixed with the victim's blood in the room where the burglary was staged, and in the bathroom they shared; some of this blood was Amanda's. Amanda testified that the bathroom was clean the day before the murder.

20. Footprints compatible with Knox and Sollecito's, and made in the victim's blood, were discovered when the forensic investigators tested the crime scene with luminol.

21. The burglary was staged, and there is no one other than Knox and Sollecito who would have any motivation to alter the crime scene that way.

22. Raffaele withdrew support for Knox's alibi, claiming that he lied at her request. He elected to not testify, and he refused to confirm that Knox was with him the night of the murder, for the entire trial. Confronted with the news that Raffaele had ceased to support her alibi, Knox quickly changed her story, placing herself at the cottage and falsely accusing an innocent man of committing the deed.

23. Amanda Knox's false accusation of her boss Patrick Lumumba. The appeals court has been directed by the Supreme Court to seriously consider this as yet more evidence of her guilt.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

She was locked out of house after the cops declared it a crime scene. She only had the clothes on her back. If youre locked out of the house for an indefinate time, wouldnt you buy underwear?

Didnt the cops check the register tape of the store and find no one sold bleach on the day after?

reply

Counter-arguments make a mockery of Italian investigations as if they don't know how to conduct one. Amanda was lying her ass off and yet some people don't believe any evidence. There is no smoking gun and that is what the poster of the threat said. But there is a strong feeling she did not tell the truth.

So saying that "There was also no evidence that Knox and Sollecito restrained her." is just not a valid counter-argument. The reason why she did not have defensive wounds is just an indication that SHE COULD HAVER BEEN restraint. And that is the whole point of the threat, it's making a list of things that show that SHE COULD HAVE DONE IT.

reply

The evidence that the burglary was staged cannot be disputed by anyone with a modicum of common sense! Broken glass was found on TOP of items strewn around the floor below the broken window..indicating the apartment was trashed BEFORE someone went outside to break the glass to create the impression of a break in! That's NOT my opinion, that is a proven fact! The only other explaination is that an extraordinarily clever burglar was working that night..he'd have to be, since he'd have to have searched the apartment BEFORE he'd broken in! Ignoring FACTS in order to mount a defence is no defence at all, is it?
While we're on about facts, NO computer activity was uncovered when Knox reckon they were online, and she was at a store at opening time when she said she slept till 10.30am! Now unless she does her shopping while sleepwalking...she's inventing a scenario that simply DID NOT OCCUR! You cannot simply expain away all of the above as simply conjecture, they are proven as indisputable facts no matter how they're presented! Then we have Knox falsely accusing a totally innocent man..something that supporters of this little madam tend to gloss over too! Had he not been fortunate enough to be able to prove he was elsewhere that night, he'd be rotting in an Italian gaol for a couple of decades! That was an absolutely DISGUSTING thing to do!! Knox could have only one motive for implicating a blameless person, to shift the focus of the investigation away from herself!
Why would she have decided to do that? It's not the actions of a disinterested bystander, is it? This case stinks to high heaven, and has done from the first day. The media had tried and convicted people within a month, the police didn't exactly cover themselves in glory either, but Amanda Knox? Words fail me! Anyone believing her version of events presumably also believe Elvis is happily flipping burgers in Portland, Oregon!

reply

Could it be that Filomena was a college student too and kept her room like a typical messy college student ie clothes strewn about and not put away as if she was an italian mom.

Also, the so called confession that lead to Lumumba's arrest. Didnt the cops steer the confession that way and thats why a video record of that particular interrogation didnt show up but the cops have one for every other witness. Suprising that..

reply

She told her roomies Meredith had her throat cut, now how would she know that ? She knew cause she saw it or did it.

Also there was a mop job done on the house, cops found the blood with luminol. Rafelle id there was nothing stolen from the roomie's room that was staged, so how would he know that she was even home to see what was taken? He knows cause he was the one that staged the room. I could go on and on and you notice Foxy Knoxy does not ever finish her sentences watch her look down and get stumped at questions asked of her. I have no doubt she knows more than she is saying, whether she was just there or actively committed a crime she is not innocent.

reply

My PERSONAL view is that this lady has a case to answer...but her trial was a joke! We need a retrial with Scotland Yard, the F.B.I. (or both!) to sort this mess out! Refusing to attend proceedings is only hurting her defence! I'm English...but we all deserve a fair hearing, don't we?

reply

I think you have a point, garyedgecombe, that we should have a retrail, but maybe not in the States and certainly not in Italy. There is something not right with this case.

On the other hand, if there is a reasonable doubt - even if Amanda can be perceived as a terrible and manipulative human being - she needs to be set free once and for all.

reply

Like it or not she already had a couple of trial and found guilty, she needs to go back.

reply

I agree...but Knox setting foot in Italy again is about as likely as Elvis playing Madison Square Gardens next 4th of July!
It aint gonna happen pal!!

reply