Wednesday, April 30, 2014

Amanda Knox: Italian Court States Stabbed Victim

Knox, roommate argued over money before stabbing: court


Amanda Knox and her tragic roommate bitterly argued over money before “Foxy Knoxy” finished her off with a kitchen knife, according to Italian court documents unsealed Tuesday.
There was ample physical evidence to convict the Seattle co-ed and two others of murdering Meredith Kercher on Nov. 2, 2007, a court in Florence said in a 337-page ruling from January that declared Knox guilty in a retrial.
Kercher, 21, was killed “by multiple aggressors” who forcibly restrained her while stabbing her, the court ruled.
The British co-ed had no defensive wounds, which the court reasoned, showed she was overpowered and didn’t have a chance against knife-wielding killers.
Knox’s co-defendant and then-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito used a small knife to stab the right side of Kercher’s neck and cut off her bra, according to the court.
Co-defendant Rudy Hermann Guede sexually assaulted Kercher before Knox “delivered the only mortal blow,” by butchering her roommate with a kitchen knife, the court said.
Knox, now 26, was originally convicted of Kercher’s murder in Perugia, where both women were exchange students, and spent four years behind bars, before Italy’s high court vacated verdicts against her and Sollecito in 2011.
Knox rushed home to Seattle after she was released and has vowed never to return to Italy.
She was retried in absentia and found guilty again by an appellate court in Florence in January. The court documents released Tuesday detailed that second guilty verdict.
“It is a matter of fact that at a certain point in the evening events accelerated; the English girl was attacked by Amanda Marie Knox, by Raffaele Sollecito, who was backing up his girlfriend, and by Rudy Hermann Guede, and constrained within her own room,” according to the court.
This appellate court backed away from the prosecution’s earlier assertion that Kercher was killed when she declined to have kinky sex with Knox and her boyfriend.
Modal Trigger
An undated photo of British student Meredith Kercher.Photo: AP
It was an earlier argument over money that prompted Knox’s “desire to abuse and humiliate the . . . girl,” according to the court.
Knox was sentenced to 28¹/₂ years in prison in January. She still has avenues to appeal January’s ruling and could string out the process for months, if not years.
And even if Knox loses and runs out of appeals, there’s still no guarantee that US authorities would honor an extradition request by Italy.
Sollecito’s lawyer, Giulia Bongiorno, ridiculed the court’s reasoning.
“Honestly the verdict is so full of errors, illogical elements and contradictions, that I strongly believe it will be overturned [on appeal],” Bongiorno said
.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Why use the unflattering picture of Meredith always used by the Knox PR team and pro-Knox American media? It looks nothing like all her other pictures and disparages the victim. In all her other pictures Meredith does not wear any makeup or black clothes, and looks sweet, fun-loving, beautiful - and heartbreakingly young. This picture looks nothing like her and she is dressed in Halloween fancy dress - as a vampire. Team knox have portrayed Amanda Knox looking sweet and innocent, even with childhood pictures of her in plaits. Peter please check this out. Pictures as well as words can disparage a victim, can't they?

Deejay said...

US gets mad when criminals in other countries are protected. Yet here we are going to do the same to Italy. I believe that Amanda was doing so many drugs, she is not aware of the whole story. But she knows she cleaned up and hid the evidence.

~mj said...

I work in the mental health field and I have seen many forms of crazy. (I say that with respect for mental illness) And in the many odd things I have seen and experienced, I have yet to see a person make up a possible memory like Amanda did and there not be a nugget of truth to it. Sometimes that nugget is very small and sometimes that nugget is bigger than the person would like it to be. No matter what though, by law, Amanda's nugget is enough to convict. As Mr. Hyatt has pointed out many times, Words do not come from a vacuum.

Hobnob said...

Sollecito’s lawyer, Giulia Bongiorno, ridiculed the court’s reasoning.
“Honestly the verdict is so full of errors, illogical elements and contradictions, that I strongly believe it will be overturned [on appeal],” Bongiorno said


Really? Is that the best you can do?

honestly is the same as saying to be honest etc it means the subject has not been honest earlier or even that they are being honestly now>
Why the need to say honestly...

it sounds like a strong statement,it isn't.
he uses the qualifier strongly, which weakens the statement.
he strongly believes, leaving it open for others to believe otherwise.

the verdict is so full of errors, illogical elements and contradictions
This would the perfect place to say his client did not commit the crime, yet he doesn't, and, if he can't say his client didn't do it, i can't say it for him.
He doesn't tell us who made the errors, illogical elements or contradictions and, again if he can't tell us ,i can't say it for him.
He doesn't tell us there are no elements pointing to his client, only that elements of it are.
This must mean there are elements of the case that are logical and thus incriminating and proof of his client's involvement.

What are the contradictions?
who made the contradictions?
If there are contradictions as claimed then his client should be able to refute them completely or come up with an explanation as to why the court is wrong.

Clearly during his appeal the court did not believe his explanations, he could not explain away all the elements pointing to his guilt, nor could he explain away any contradictions.

Do the contradictions refer to the version of events from knox, guede or both?
has his client contradicted himself?

the facts of the case have been decided, they cannot be appealed.
Knox, sollecito and guede murdered Meredith Kercher.

Under italian law, the attornies can only appeal on the rules of law (basically look for a technicality to get their client off or a reduced sentence)

His attorney doesn't seem to be holding out much hope on the appeal, i wonder then, since the sentence hasn't yet been ratified (the defence could only appeal once the reasoning has been published) if he will try and come to some sort of deal for his client?
If he comes clean and says who did what, when and why Meredith was murdered, then he might be able to get a reduced sentence for his co-operation.

knox is also facing the same option.

Guede got 30 years reduced to 16 years after his fast track trial because he admitted his guilt and involvement.

Given knox faces 28.5 years and sollecito i think 26, their attorneies, if they think confession will get them a reduced sentence, will advise them 'fess up and get out sooner.

Sollecito is already stuck in Italy, he is not going to be too happy counting bars knowing knox is running around in the States.
Knox and her PR and attornies and supporters think Obama will stop her extraditionif asked for.
Nope he isn't going to protect a convicted murdereress, especially if he wants people extradited back to the States to face trial. If he refuses, other countries will refuse to co-operate and may also use sanctions and PR.
Obama will have no choice but to acede to the request.
I think if it looks like they will extradite her, knox will try to get to a country with no extradition treaty with Italy and avoid travelling through countries where she could be arrested as a fugitive.

Anonymous said...

knox had 300 in her posessions while in prison in Italy but refused to spend a dime of it -- according to her own book. trophy??

shmi said...

Was Rudy Guede a witness at the trial? Why doesn't he tell everything he knows? He could probably get a better deal from prosecutors if he would tell what Amanda's role was. Also, Raphael could use a deal. Why would both of these men help Amanda Knox?

Kellie said...

Has Amanda Knox ever said, "I did not kill Meredith." or anything even close to that?

Anonymous said...

Even if the justice department was interested in extradition they wouldn't get it.

"Words do not come from a vacuum."

They do when they're not supported by the evidence.

Karen T said...

I do not understand this. In the first trial the prosecution said Meredith was killed in a drug & kinky sex-fest gone wrong. They said Amanda was jealous of Meredith. NOW they suddenly come up with an argument over money & that is why Meredith was killed. Neither of these theories have been supported by any facts. Amanda MAY have guilty knowledge of something but I will never, ever believe she killed Meredith.

foodnerd said...

When this next page first loaded I didn't recognize Knox but instinctively recoiled from the screen for a second, she looks so obviously like she's in the middle of an outrageous lie! The first photo that circulated of her in Sollecito's arms was taken before this happened. Even then her eyes are just dead blank like there is no soul in there whatsoever.
This sociopath will kill again if they don't manage to get her locked up, and maybe even if they do.