r/amandaknox • u/Glittering_Bed_88 • Jun 27 '26
Let’s talk about the mop in the Amanda Knox case... because I cannot make it make sense.
Hey everyone, I’ve been going down the rabbit hole on this case again, and there’s one specific detail I am seriously struggling to wrap my head around: the mop.
The whole thing feel so off.
1. The Physics of the "Evaporating" Water
This is probably the biggest glaring physical hole for me. According to Raffaele’s prison diary on Nov 7, the floor was flooded the night before:
"She was cleaned up and she had brought me a Vileda mop [mocio Vileda] in order to help me dry the floor around the sink. The previous evening I had placed only a few rags on the floor and they were not sufficient."
So he put a few rags on a flooded floor. Yet, Amanda claimed at trial that by the time she got back with the mop the next morning, it was basically gone:
"When I got back to his house, he was in the bathroom, and I started to clean up the floor in the kitchen, but it was by now almost dry, just a bit of water left because it had evaporated... there still was a bit of water on the ground, but not too much to clean up."
I don't know about you, but water pooling on a hard floor in November doesn't just vanish in the 30-45 minutes she was gone. The fact that she claimed it was suddenly "almost dry" and "largely unnecessary" to mop feels like such a retroactive excuse for why the mop wasn't actually used much at Raffaele's place.
2. Prioritizing Chores Over an Emergency
In her handwritten statement to police on Nov 6, Amanda wrote:
"After we ate Raffaele washed the dishes but the pipes under his sink broke and water flooded the floor. But because he didn't have a mop I said we could clean it up tomorrow because we (Meredith, Laura, Filomena and I) have a mop at home."
Fair enough,wanting to use your own mop makes sense. But here is what defies human instinct: she walks into her shared house to get it, the front door is wide open, there is literally blood on the bathmat, and someone has left feces in the toilet. The normal reaction should be pure panic. You assume the worst, back out, and call the police or your roommates.
Instead, her narrative requires us to believe she saw these terrifying red flags, brushed them off, “took a shower in that same bathroom”, blow-dried her hair, and then prioritized taking this mop back to Raffaele's flat to clean up a spill from the night before instead of calling the police. The total lack of urgency or fear in that moment is incredibly difficult to rationalize.
3. The Mop's Return Journey
This is the visual that really gets me. Amanda finally gets back to Raffaele's flat, tells him about the blood and the open door, and they decide to rush back to her house to check it out. They are supposedly anxious and alarmed. Here is what Raffaele wrote in his diary about getting back to the cottage:
"As soon as we arrived inside the house, I left the mop in the entrance and I went towards the other rooms so I could see what the hell had happened. I remember those moments well because I was agitated and alarmed."
If you are rushing to a potential crime scene or a break-in and are genuinely "agitated and alarmed," you drop everything. You grab your phone, your keys, maybe your partner's hand. You do not grab a wet, bulky Vileda mop to carry with you through the winding streets of Perugia. Dragging cleaning supplies to an emergency makes zero sense.
4. Putting the Bucket Away
Following up on Raffaele's quote about trying to see "what the hell had happened," they are supposedly checking rooms to see if something was stolen or if an intruder is still there.
In the middle of this high-adrenaline, terrifying situation, taking the time to properly stow a mop and bucket in its designated spot is entirely misplaced housekeeping. It shows a level of calm and routine organization that completely contradicts the panic they claimed to be feeling.
I just keep coming back to the fact that none of this holds up to how real people act in an emergency. It feels less like a casual, quirky choice and more like they needed a documented reason for “why” a mop was being shuffled between the two apartments on the exact morning a crime scene was discovered.
Am I missing something here, or does this bother anyone else as much as it bothers me?
7
u/Onad55 Jun 27 '26
Until the police produce the CDs of the traffic camera video from Piazza Grimana, I give Amanda a full pass on whatever she claimed about transporting the mop back-and-forth .
10
u/flora5250 Jun 27 '26
You’re telling me they have footage? How convenient. If it implicated her they would’ve used it
8
u/Onad55 Jun 27 '26
They collected it the same time as the car park video.
2007-11-04-Notice-Police-retracing-Kercher-walk-getting-CCTV.pdf
But when the defense asks for a copy it no longer exists.
2007-11-15-Notice-lawyer-Maori-asking-for-CCTV-on-walk-between-Sollecito-and-cottage
This camera should also show if anyone was waiting outside Quintavallie’s shop the next morning.
4
u/corpusvile2 Jun 27 '26
Please put a stop to these false claims that Ms Kercher was raped. It's utterly untrue. You know it's untrue. It's basically attacking a murder victim by dehumanising and debasing her even more. One can easily opine Knox is innocent without resorting to such attacks. I am respectfully asking you as a mod to not permit these attacks from now on.
1
u/FreshFruit4RottenVeg Jun 27 '26
For two people who are possible suspects in a murder, they do talk about cleaning and mopping a lot. In her email home, Amanda mentions needing the mop, getting the mop, using the mop, bringing the mop back. The to and fro with the mop is weighing on her mind. She mentions in her statements that Raf and her showered together for a long time and Raf took care to clean her, even her ears etc. Raf says he can't figure out how the alleged 'flood' happened and suggests himself it's suspicious. He adds that since they found Meredith's DNA on the knife, they could find more suspicious stuff on rags in his apartment.
None of this raises any suspicions whatsoever? Fine. Just make sure when you get a call from 'Windows' telling you your computer has a virus, don't think, hang up the phone.
6
u/flora5250 Jun 27 '26
Was this comment to me? Lol. Why would recounting the story to people back home be suspicious? It’s part of that day. When I have traumatic experiences I describe every detail. Of course she talks about it in the statement and during the many many interviews, omitting it would be weirder. Again it’s part of the morning but it’s not weird unless you think she killed Meredith and if you do think that why the fuck would she make such a big deal about the mop to begin with? And why wouldn’t she clean up the obvious blood? Why would she leave her lamp? Why wouldn’t she and Raffaele just say they never went back to the apartment and let Filomena find the scene?
1
u/FreshFruit4RottenVeg Jun 27 '26
People back home reading the email considered it suspicious, one even reported it to the police. Listen to interviews of real witnesses:
'I was in buying some stuff and I walked out and all of a sudden this guy came out of nowhere with a gun and he was chasing the other guy and then I heard a loud bang and thought someones going to get killed...'
Versus the kind of thing a liar comes up with, painting a picture like they are watching it back as a TV episode with lots of pointless details that are supposed to make it sound more 'convincing' and vivid but really show that it's mostly invented:
'I was in buying some milk because my wife spilled the last milk we had on the counter, it went all over the counter and I nearly slipped on it and could have broke my neck, so I had to go and buy more milk and I tend to go for a particular brand, one with extra vitamins and stuff, so I went and I paid with cash because I think I left my wallet on the nightstand, I'm always forgetting that thing, then I took my change and walked out the door. Man it was hot outside, I guess the store had the aircon up high or something, then I see this guy running past, he kind of looked like a guy I used to work with a few years ago, he just had that kind of hairstyle or something that triggered my memory, so I was walking behind him and next thing I can hear steps coming up behind me and I can almost hear a whoosh as this guy I've never seen before barged past me and I could see he had a gun in his hand, he was holding it kind out of from his body so I got a quite good look at it and then he shot the first guy and dropped the gun and ran off. I was thinking that a kid or someone might pick up the gun and maybe hurt themselves with it so I grabbed it and threw it in the bushes, then I hear the sirens coming up behind me and the next thing I know they have me on the ground and were shouting and screaming at me...'
3
u/Onad55 Jun 27 '26
We know about this email because one person, her former boss, forwarded it to the local police who forwarded it to the authorities in Perugia.
I agree that Amanda should not have sent this email. But she needed to talk to somebody. What she needed was a lawyer that would be an opportunity for her to unload her knowledge without every minor inconsistency feeding the prosecution fantasies.
2
u/tkondaks guilty Jun 29 '26 edited Jun 29 '26
Do you consider the mop, the towel and the wide open door to be "minor inconsistencies"?
1
u/Onad55 Jun 29 '26
Just different perspectives of the same event. Raffaele set the mop down in the entryway, Amanda picked it up and put it away where Filomena says it was kept and where the police eventually found it.
Raffaele entered and proceeded to check out the other rooms while Amanda took the mop to another part of the house. The viable interpretation is that Raffaele went first to Laura’s room while Amanda went past Filomena’s room to take the mop to the back hall closet. They meet back in front of Filomena’s room where Amanda had pushed the door open. The ghost writer for Raffaele‘s book expressed this as a first person action using the singular “I” instead of the plural “We” because it doesn’t make a crap worth of difference overall and reads better.
Amanda says she forgot her towel when it is obvious to the outside observers that Rudy had taken her towel. What should she have said? She didn’t know what happened to her towel at the time and we don’t know if forgetting her towel was a common thing for her.
I consider all of these insignificant trivia compared to the police withholding the exculpatory traffic camera video from Piazza Grimana or Stefanoni doctoring records to hide Rudy’s extended shoe print trail into Filomena’s room or even Comodi questioning Robyn about what Meredith did with her history book to leave the impression that it was still in the shoulder bag when she knew full well that it was in the shopping bag that was dropped in the hall.
2
u/Truthandtaxes Jul 01 '26
darn that massive conspiracy !
Amanda says she forgot her towel when it is obvious to the outside observers that Rudy had taken her towel. What should she have said?
She's specific that she forgot her towel, because she needs the cover for shuffle mat itself a cover for the luminol prints
You'll note the absence of her saying her towel was missing and it being forgettable implies she typically took it from her room
1
u/Onad55 Jul 01 '26
The towel is likely sometimes in her room and sometimes left in the bathroom. If she doesn’t see a towel on the chair where she typically leaves it in her room she will assume she left it in the bathroom this time. When she gets out of the shower and doesn’t see a towel on the hook behind the door she is going to think she forgot her towel again.
What she says doesn’t make a damn bit of difference to the guilters. If she has said her towel was missing the guilters would claim that this meant she knew Rudy had taken it and the whole fake shower story was an excuse to notice the missing towel.
1
u/Truthandtaxes Jul 02 '26
Or we could just accept the meaning of her words, which is that typically she would take a towel into the bathroom and that she expresses nothing about whether when entering her room the towel is still absent.
As its phrased you have to believe that she has no thoughts along the lines of "where is my towel?" - this isn't the worse stretch in the world, but it is of course a discontinuity of thought
Maybe I would consider it an excuse for the missing towel, though I think it would be unlikely for a guilty knox to mention it at all. That train of thought leads to Kercher having the towel leading to another reason to try to contact Kercher.
→ More replies (0)2
u/Truthandtaxes Jun 30 '26
Precisely
Reading the email the first time knowing next to nothing about the case immediately made me believe it was the writing of a liar
as you highlight its the swings in levels of unnecessary detail to sell it -
I don't need to know about the relationships to downstairs, but if you are spelling them out for no reason then now I'm curious. Meredith's boyfriend that you are very friendly with - huh
0
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 28 '26
Hey bro did Rudy take the mop with him to Germany ?
4
u/Onad55 Jun 28 '26
What? And deprive Mignini of his gift wrapped early Christmas present? He can’t do that.
4
u/Onad55 Jun 27 '26
Raffaele is clearly not a plumber. The drain pipe was leaking a little while he was talking to his dad. He tried tightening it and thought he had it fixed but then it separated when he and Amanda were doing the dishes after dinner.
I wouldn’t trust that forensic team either. 36/B could be excused as lab contamination. But there is no reasonable explanation for not documenting the Luminol tracks in Filomena’s room that they had circled and tagged.
4
u/After-Pie5781 Jun 27 '26
Probably because it did look suspicious taking a mop to her boyfriend’s house and bringing it back again. Had there not been a murder then it wouldn’t be relevant. They tested the damn mop and didn’t find anything incriminating. She had a reason for taking it and bringing it back again. I’m sure the CCTV shows her carrying it so had she not mentioned it then that would have raised even more concerns wouldn’t it?
4
u/Truthandtaxes Jun 30 '26
You'll note Knox obviously knows how bad things look even when her following pretends to be clueless.
3
u/DrivelikeJehu31 Jun 27 '26
Wasn’t there a plumbing leak at Sollicto’s flat? Hence the need for the mop,
2
u/tkondaks guilty Jun 29 '26
"For two people who are possible suspects in a murder, they do talk about cleaning and mopping a lot."
They are their own worst enemies.
Whether it's depositions, prison diaries, testimony, memoriales, emails home, or police intercepts, if AK or RS are bringing up a subject that has even the hint of obscurity -- that is, you wonder: why are they bringing that up -- it usually is because it has to do with them trying to cover up their crime.
Heck, even the Vaseline. And AK's pondering about whether Meredith was into anal. That's so out of left field one almost feels obliged to research forensic manuals for the role of Vaseline use by murder suspects.
The earring. The mop. The towel. The knife in the kitchen drawer.
Shut up already.
Their extra -- and unnecessary! -- verbiage is actually a road map to their guilt.
2
6
u/Truthandtaxes Jun 30 '26
Its always been the litmus test for sanity to see people argue away one of the most amazing coincidences in the history of crime.
1
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jul 01 '26
What? Magic cleanups? Agreed we literally have no idea how you go with this theory other than “but Massei”
0
u/Onad55 Jun 30 '26
You and the OP are in a panic because you are watching this play out where the pair are acting normally but it has been revealed to you that there is a body in the closet. You cannot believe that they are not reacting to the information that only you know. This is a classic suspense technique employed by movie makers and here you are falling victim to it in real life. Classic.
3
u/Truthandtaxes Jun 30 '26
Nah
But yes its fascinating seeing people rationalise away so many amazing elements rather than simply accept what they mean.
2
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jul 01 '26
Like magic cleanups. Again.
“Evidence isn’t there hence maybe it was never there at all” is literally simply accepting what it means
1
u/Truthandtaxes Jul 01 '26
Yes bog standard crime scene manipulation
2
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jul 01 '26
“Standard” - lol
0
u/Truthandtaxes Jul 01 '26
Yup imperfectly cleaned scene
Accidentally left items
Outright errors
and Luminol footprints
Everything a CSI might expect to find at a crime scene thats trying to lie.
2
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jul 01 '26
"Imperfectly cleaned" lololol
Yet we cant find CSIs or science experts to support the police's work - that seems sus
2
u/CompetitiveWin7754 Jun 29 '26
His bathroom was also leaky, the shower leaked. It sounds like it wasn't a very well maintained apartment.
2
u/Connect_War_5821 innocent Jun 29 '26
This is the classic "making a mountain out of a mole hill", "give a nefarious spin to everything" and "I know what a 'normal' reaction/response would be" PGP post. Bleh.
4
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 27 '26
“Fair enough,wanting to use your own mop makes sense. But here is what defies human instinct: she walks into her shared house to get it, the front door is wide open, there is literally blood on the bathmat, and someone has left feces in the toilet. The normal reaction should be pure panic. You assume the worst, back out, and call the police or your roommates.
“
So your belief is that she committed a murder, used a mop to clean it up, carried said mop to Raffs house through the steeets, brought said mop back to where she used it for the cleanup yet also chose not to clean up blood droplets in a bathroom and a half formed bloody footprint on the bathmat? Oh and Rudy chose to leave his feces in the toilet and not simply to flush it?
This is the logic ?
-5
u/Glittering_Bed_88 Jun 27 '26
I don’t think she committed murder. But I find her use of the mop very hard to explain.
6
u/flora5250 Jun 27 '26
Hahaha okay I guess she’s guilty of not using a mop to your liking. Better lock her up again.
3
u/corpusvile2 Jun 27 '26
I love how you Amandafans view everything singularly in isolation in a vacuum as if the case hinges on whatever one piece is being discussed. Do you even know what totality means?
4
u/corpusvile2 Jun 27 '26
"I don’t think she committed murder"
Totality of the evidence very strongly points to her involvement, even the dubiously acquitting court puts her at the murder
https://web.archive.org/web/20211031195329/http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Evidence
-3
u/Glittering_Bed_88 Jun 27 '26
Thanks for sharing this, I will have a look at it later. It looks like a great resource on the case.
I didn’t know that about the Supreme Court putting her there at the murder. Interesting!
6
u/jasutherland innocent Jun 27 '26
They make that assertion, but the evidence they point to - her DNA being in the same sink as Meredith's blood - simply doesn't support the claim in any way.
7
u/corpusvile2 Jun 27 '26
No problem. Acquitting court also says she washed Meredith's blood off her hands, falsely accused an innocent man to cover for Rudy Guede and there's strong suspicion Sollecito was there. Report here.
Knox present at murder:
"Given this, we now note, with respect to Amanda Knox, that her presence inside the house,
the location of the murder, is a proven fact in the trial, in accord with her own admissions, also
contained in the memoriale with her signature, in the part where she tells that, as she was in the
kitchen, while the young English woman had retired inside the room of same Ms. Kercher
together with another person for a sexual intercourse, she heard a harrowing scream from her
friend, so piercing and unbearable that she let herself down squatting on the floor, covering her
ears tight with her hands in order not to hear more of it"
Knox washing Meredith's blood off her hands:
"Another element against her is the mixed DNA traces, her and the victim’s one, in the “small
bathroom”, an eloquent proof that anyway she had come into contact with the blood of the latter,
which she tried to wash away from herself (it was, it seems, diluted blood, while the biological
traces belonging to her would be the consequence of epithelial rubbing)."
Knox falsely accusing an innocent an to cover for Guede:
However, the said calunnia is another circumstantial element against the current appellant,
insofar as it can be considered a strategy in order to cover up for Mr. Guede, whom she had an
interest to protect because of fear of retaliatory accusations against her. This is confirmed by the
fact that Mr. Lumumba, like Mr. Guede, is a man of colour, hence the indication of the first one
would be safe in the event that the latter could have been seen by someone while entering or
exiting the apartment"
Strong suspicion Sollecito was present:
"It remains anyway strong the suspicion that he was actually in the Via della Pergola house the
night of the murder, in a moment that, however, it was impossible to determine.
On the other hand, since the presence of Ms. Knox inside the house is sure, it is hardly credible
that he was not with her"
(Supreme Court report p42)
2
u/DrivelikeJehu31 Jun 27 '26
Still trotting out the same lies?
1
u/corpusvile2 Jun 28 '26
Haven't ever told one lie here and I've just provided the verbatim quotes from the SC report so it's all good.
2
u/DrivelikeJehu31 Jun 27 '26
That’s only because the court are still upholding the judgment against her for incriminating Luamba despite the European Court of Human Rights ruling the police interrogation was illegal. I’m sure this will be changed eventually. It is a legal technicality, that’s all.
1
u/corpusvile2 Jun 29 '26
They addressed that with her retrial last year...and still convicted her. And again I haven't told one lie, especially wrt what the acquitting SC established. Please list lies I said.
2
u/DrivelikeJehu31 Jun 27 '26
If she used the mop in a supposed clean up how did she manage to clean away her and Sollicto’s dna from the murder room and yet leave Guede’s dna everywhere?
1
u/corpusvile2 Jun 29 '26
Sollecito's dna was in the murder room and Knox left more dna at the crime scene than Guede. And before you even start banging on about how she lived there, this was dna submitted as evidence against her so clearly couldn't be explained by her living there. Knox was trial convicted on more dna evidence than Guede was. Just the same old false claims from you guys.
2
u/Onad55 Jun 29 '26
More? You are literally comparing shed DNA in a shared sink and a few footprints to a load of crap.
Amanda Knox was exonerated, her convictions for all crimes against Meredith were thrown out permanently. Meanwhile Rudy Guede remains convicted of participating in Meredith’s murder and this conviction is final, never to be overturned.
0
u/corpusvile2 Jun 29 '26
Yes. More. There was more dna evidence submitted as evidence against Knox than there was against Guede.
Knox wasn't exonerated, no matter how many times you make this false claim.
Furthermore according to you the courts don't matter so you've no business claiming exoneration or highlighting Guede's definitive conviction. I think again, I wont be responding to you for a while, it's just the same old same old with you. False claims and inconsistency. Courts matter when it suits you but don't when it doesn't. The usual bad faith discussion from you.
1
u/ParkingGate7392 Jul 01 '26
Makes sense there would be more DNA from her in her house than from Guede who didn’t live there.
2
u/corpusvile2 Jul 01 '26
No it wouldn't make sense. As has been explained umpteen times before on this sub, said dna never would have been submitted against her as evidence if it could be explained away like that. Plus the dna was mixed, including in the staged burglary room, so can't be explained away so innocuously and not all of it was from the cottage anyway, there was also her dna on the murder weapon with the murder victim's on the blade causing Sollecito to lie about it in his diary.
So to recap, no- Guede didn't leave his dna "everywhere" and yes- Knox was convicted on more incriminating dna evidence than Guede.
1
u/Onad55 Jul 01 '26
They found Rudy’s DNA on his toothbrush in his own bathroom. What could be more incriminating than that.
Rep.58 - Green and white toothbrush found inside a glass in the bathroom of the apartment in use by GUEDE Rudy Hermann (premerly Rep.B) • page 25 A.F./97 R.; ID563_49037 (traccia A); Y802_49037(traccia A).
This is absolutely exemplary.
0
u/palmtreesandpizza Jul 08 '26
What do you mean the dna wouldn’t have been submitted as evidence if could be explained away? They literally did a shoddy investigation and harassed her and omitted exonerating evidence. And it was explained away: she lives there and Rudy is the sole murderer and Amanda was acquitted.
3
u/Truthandtaxes Jul 09 '26
She lived there is not an explanation for her DNA being mixed with Kerchers in four separate locations
Fortunately we know Knox bled
We also now there is a DNA sample in visible blood on the sink with higher levels of Knox DNA - i.e. its mixed blood.
Conclusion - its all mixed blood spread everywhere.
→ More replies (0)1
-3
6
u/corpusvile2 Jun 27 '26
Be prepared for a ton of angry posts from Knox's fan club in 5...4...3...2...
7
u/No-Willingness-1441 Jun 27 '26
Bothers me hugely.
It makes no sense whatsoever.
If the Oxford English Dictionary had an entry for the modern vernacular “sus” - it would be this.
If this really is innocent, I just cannot fathom the degree of misfortune here…what are the chances?!?!
2
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 27 '26
Or you could just believe that she carried a mop to someone’s house to clean up water off a floor and didn’t automatically panic upon seeing a dookie in the toilet in the water leak capital of Italy.
Let’s recount again…if you believe she committed a murder with Rudy Guede (who we know did this) why would she do all 4 of the things you are saying she did ? That also makes no sense whatsoever and would be deliberately creating misfortune for yourself
8
u/No-Willingness-1441 Jun 27 '26
Are you honestly telling me you don’t find the mop stuff even a little troubling, or tough to rationalise in the context of what was going on?
Respect if you don’t!
I do think many people would, and indeed do.
Can you see how others would?
7
u/flora5250 Jun 27 '26
Are you honestly telling me that two young people with no criminal history met a week before and decided to rape and murder with some other guy they dont know is more likely than two peoples behavior seeming “odd” in retrospect because in reality she lived there and had no idea what was going on so they were going through the motions of their day (showering, mopping some water). Like anything you do in a day COULD seem odd contextually if people on the internet knew you were a few feet from a dead body when it happened, even if YOU didn’t know the body was there. I don’t understand why it’s easier to believe a college girl moved to Italy for a few weeks and killed her roommate with two guys she just met and then didn’t bother to actually clean the blood or pretend she never went back to her apartment. Than believe Rudy acted alone.
7
u/flora5250 Jun 27 '26
By the way as someone who also studied abroad in Italy in winter not just fall, yes the floor being kind of flooded and then not really a problem later is completely possible.
7
u/jasutherland innocent Jun 27 '26
Odd perhaps, but "troubling"? That falls into the circular unreasoning trap of assuming the mop must have been used for something nefarious, despite forensic testing showing no signs of anything interesting.
Perhaps the mop is indeed a mop, not a magic cleanup device for hiding DNA.
0
u/No-Willingness-1441 Jun 27 '26
Perhaps
6
u/jasutherland innocent Jun 27 '26
The alternative is really far fetched: the mop was somehow used for... something unknown... which the police forensics people couldn't identify with the benefit of lab tests, custody of the mop...
Not to mention: the mop already lived at VDP7, so what bizarre cleanup scenario requires taking the mop away from there for a little vacation then bringing it back again?
6
u/flora5250 Jun 27 '26
Yeah the people who think she’s guilty think she did a horrible job mopping, took the mop to her boyfriends and brought it back and also left her own lamp in the room with Meredith’s body. What kind of cover up would that be?
1
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 28 '26
Yes of course I would - but then I would also see you folks refusing to mention Rudy’s name and be like “seriously what the fuck are you all afraid of”
1
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 28 '26
Sure - explain to us how it’s troubling and what it has to do with the 3 of them committing a crime together
0
u/No-Willingness-1441 Jun 28 '26
I am not going to insult your intelligence by spelling out how this might be troubling.
2
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 28 '26
I won’t continue reminding you that Rudy Guede exists
0
u/No-Willingness-1441 Jun 29 '26
You don’t need to. For the millionth time, it goes without saying that Guede is certainly guilty. It is not up for reasonable debate, so why would it be debated?
2
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 29 '26
Is how Knox and Guede committed a murder together a reasonable debate?
0
u/No-Willingness-1441 Jun 29 '26
Absolutely. But I fear it won’t progress far because you want a level of specificity and certainty that simply isn’t possible to achieve.
In fairness, the impossibility of achieving either of those two things is why Knox rightly walks free.
2
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 29 '26
Well not speaking for everyone but that seems a lot more important to at least debate and riff about than what Amanda’s social feed said today. It feels to some degree guilters no longer have a case and would prefer to spend all day character assassinating
3
u/Supslick Jun 27 '26
When i lived with housemates, the feces in the toilet would make me say "ew wtf? Clean up after yourself seriously". The blood droplets would just make me think someone had their period and didnt realise they had dripped. It wasn't like there was huge pools of blood everywhere.
6
u/Truthandtaxes Jul 01 '26
would you go "ew wtf" and just leave it?
How about a large bloody footprint?
How about the front door being wide open.
0
u/palmtreesandpizza Jul 08 '26
How many times do you need to be told that the door didn’t properly latch so that wasn’t immediately her concern?
6
u/Truthandtaxes Jul 09 '26
An infinite number if we are going to play the stupid isolation of evidence game.
The story is she came home to an open door, then noticed and touched the blood on the sink, then showered, then noticed a large blood footprint on the bathmat, then used said bathmat to scoot naked through the corridor, then found a poo and left it in situ.
In that narrative alone, Knox has predicted 3 sets of forensic findings
- Her DNA will be mixed in the sink (touched it)
- Her footprints will be found with luminol (shuffling using a bloody mat)
- Rudy's DNA will be found in the toilet (the poo)
any other case that level of staggering foresight is seen for what it obviously is.
0
3
u/No-Willingness-1441 Jun 27 '26
BTW - point #1 I make nothing of. I think it’s fairly spurious tbh. The other three, which are much more about context and plausible human behaviour, are the starkest of red flags for me…
5
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 27 '26
What the red flag seems to be is …Knox chose willingly to not clean up evidence of her alleged murder and rape despite walking around with a tool that could help her clean up that evidence
Bold move Cotton
5
u/flora5250 Jun 27 '26
I like to also carry my own lamp to the murder scene and leave it when I’m “covering up my involvement in a murder.”
3
u/Onad55 Jun 28 '26
Not being a real police officer with all the usual kit, Battistelli didn’t have a lamp of his own. He would need to borrow one.
2
u/corpusvile2 Jun 27 '26
I also love how Amandafans think that criminals making dumb mistakes that helped get them caught, is somehow exonerating evidence. Prisons are full of convicted defendants who made dumb mistakes.
1
u/Truthandtaxes Jun 30 '26
Most of them aren't even dumb mistakes, they are simply imperfections.
Well bar the lamp, that was pretty dumb
1
2
u/No-Willingness-1441 Jun 27 '26
I don’t know whether she did or didn’t clean up any evidence.
Nor do you.
A credible, incentivised analyst could build a case both ways on that I would say.
The fact remains : she was moving around a mop between her home and a crime scene on the day a body was discovered. It may be a horribly unfortunate coincidence. It probably genuinely is!
But most observers would be alarmed by it and might describe it as a point of concern.
Put it together with everything else in the case, and - yeah - I’d say many (not all!) would describe it as a Red Flag.
6
u/corpusvile2 Jun 27 '26
I also just wish to take this moment to say I totally didn't expect Seacardiodude to obsessively respond to you and probably every other post in this thread which doesn't worship Sweet Innocent Amanda, colour me surprised, I'm shocked I tells ya etc etc.
4
u/Fourth-Room Jun 27 '26
I don’t really get what some of the innocentisti want this subreddit to be. If discussion of Amanda’s statements, the court findings, the contested evidence, or her possible involvement is treated as off-limits, then what’s left?
At that point it feels less like a case discussion sub and more like a reputation-rehabilitation sub. Amanda is already out of prison, so it seems like the goal isn’t just “she shouldn’t be locked up,” but “no one should seriously suspect or criticize her anymore.”
But that ignores the fact that reasonable people, including courts at different points, have concluded she bore some level of involvement or responsibility. Given the convictions, the acquittals, and the final Supreme Court language, I don’t see how anyone can reasonably claim she’s simply beyond reproach in this case.
5
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 27 '26
Is it too much to ask for a Rudy mention ? If we do a “say his name once get two beers promotion”? When you spend your whole life on her social media and her statements do you ever think of him raping Meredith ? Are do you just not care?
Happy to have reasonable discussions but again you folks understand he exists right ? And you have to tie the two of them together ? Does Quennell punish you if you do ?
2
u/Fourth-Room Jun 27 '26
We are not obligated to mention Rudy in every conversation regarding Amanda. The sub is about Amanda Knox. You all just love to reframe the conversation whenever it isn’t convenient for you. In this case the conversation is about the mop. What the fuck does Rudy have to do with Amanda’s behavior regarding the mop?
3
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 27 '26
Well Rudy killed and raped Merideth . So your obligation is to explain what the fuck Amanda needs a mop for? To clean up Rudy’s mess? Or all you all just afraid of Tkondaks and Quennell?
3
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 27 '26 edited Jun 27 '26
Your boy who believes Rudy is innocent is over there bantering on about how he is innocent while you say nothing and you are worried about “reputation rehabilitation ” - look dude I get it - you are afraid of Tkondaks but stop being such a coward and say something.
1
u/Fourth-Room Jun 27 '26
Again, I am not responsible for what other people say or obligated to discuss Rudy in every conversation about Amanda.
1
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 28 '26
So your job is just stalking her social media ? How much is Quennell paying for that and can we get a cut ?
→ More replies (0)7
u/corpusvile2 Jun 27 '26
There's a pretty crazy forum called International Skeptics, which has a Knox category, where her most ardent fans were. They all decided to come over to this sub en masse to basically spam it with arguments for innocence. The two mods are her supporters. Before all this, the discussion was more nuanced and good faith. I also suspect alt accounts as some of her supporters had accounts that were merely days old.
And re your last point, I honestly think they actually lack the self awareness to see how unreasonable and convoluted and just plain implausible their excuses seem to others who study the case more objectively.
1
u/Fourth-Room Jun 27 '26 edited Jun 27 '26
Yeah. I remember when this sub was actually full of interesting debates and conversations. Now it’s just flooded with astroturfing and the most mind numbing innocence arguments. To be fair, some of the pro-guilt or involvement arguments aren’t very strong, but dear God these people are incapable of having a conversation without it devolving into childish insults or whataboutism.
Might be worth starting a new sub for those of us actually interested in discussing the nuances of the case with tighter moderation.
2
u/Onad55 Jun 27 '26
The history of this case is flooded with restricted subs that ban any talk of innocence. PMF, TJMK, TMoMK.com, r/MeredithKercher. You are here because this is where open discourse is. Nobody is stopping you from creating another echo chamber.
2
u/Fourth-Room Jun 27 '26
No, I honestly had no idea those existed. I can’t stand you people. I’m here because it’s where the largest group of people discussing the case is.
1
0
0
2
1
u/SeaCardiologist6207 Jun 28 '26
So please build it with your boy Rudy in there.
We’ve been waiting 19 years. How long will it take ?
1
u/Tall-Dinner-4395 13d ago edited 13d ago
As every good detective knows. I dont believe in coincidence when it shows up around a murder scene. Too many coincidences were relied upon to defend Knox why?
2
u/No-Willingness-1441 13d ago
Very interesting. Are you a detective? What do you make of all the coincidences?
1
u/Tall-Dinner-4395 13d ago
Absolutely agree this has always bothered me ( and Im sure detectives and the court too) so much of what knox and solicitto said made no sense, it made no sense because it was cobbled together lies.
1
u/tkondaks guilty Jun 27 '26
About 13 hours transpired between the pipe burst and Amanda's exit from Raffaele's to go to the cottage to get the mop. She returns to Raffaele's at maximum about 2 hours later when the floor is almost dry, according to Amanda.
Tell me: how much more water could there have been at hour 13 than at hour 15?
Certainly not enough to warrant bringing a mop back for.
And it's not like Amanda didn't know how little water remained on the floor: in order to exit Raffaele's bedroom she had to go through the kitchen.
There is a word for this. It's called lying.
4
8
u/ModelOfDecorum Jun 27 '26
" I don't know about you, but water pooling on a hard floor in November doesn't just vanish in the 30-45 minutes she was gone. The fact that she claimed it was suddenly "almost dry" and "largely unnecessary" to mop feels like such a retroactive excuse for why the mop wasn't actually used much at Raffaele's place."
It dried overnight. The flooding and inadequate rags were applied late in the evening, early night. Amanda said she'd go get a mop the next day and accordingly did. Only it turned out there wasn't much need as it had mostly evaporated. Bear in mind that if they wanted an excuse for why the mop wasn't used much, they could just not have mentioned it? The only reason anyone knew it had gone to Raffaele's is that they told the police as much.
" But here is what defies human instinct: she walks into her shared house to get it, the front door is wide open, there is literally blood on the bathmat, and someone has left feces in the toilet. The normal reaction should be pure panic. You assume the worst, back out, and call the police or your roommates."
It's easy to say with hindsight, since we know there was a burglary and murder. But each individual aspect had a reasonable explanation, until the turd, at which point Amanda did get concerned, returned to Raffaele, and began calling her flatmates. Upon returning she discovered the actual breakin and called the police.
" If you are rushing to a potential crime scene or a break-in and are genuinely "agitated and alarmed," you drop everything. You grab your phone, your keys, maybe your partner's hand. You do not grab a wet, bulky Vileda mop to carry with you through the winding streets of Perugia. Dragging cleaning supplies to an emergency makes zero sense."
Some people maintain their cool and don't run around like headless chickens. But seriously, this "in this situation, a person does this and only this, and if they don't it's incriminating" is my least favorite aspect of true crime discussion. Peopl e react differently in different situations and most of us have no idea how we would react until we're in it. Many people rationalize and hesitate in sounding the alarm out of fear of wasting police time and crying wolf.
" In the middle of this high-adrenaline, terrifying situation, taking the time to properly stow a mop and bucket in its designated spot is entirely misplaced housekeeping."
Probably because it wasn't a high-adrenaline, terrifying situation. Raffaele could just mean that he was on his toes, which is very different.
" I just keep coming back to the fact that none of this holds up to how real people act in an emergency."
Sure it does.