Oh Lisahiku WILL answer the question about how Amanda could have been involved in such a physical and violent attack because Amanda’s DNA WAS found at the apartment and on a knife. Why is amanda K’'s DNA deemed contaminated but Rudy’s deemed NOT contaminated? Same handlers.
And who is to say injustice(name removed by moderator)erugia is more reliable than true justice dot org?
Amanda’s DNA was not found anywhere in Meredith’s room (the crime scene) or on Meredith herself. There is no way that she could have had a violent, physical encounter with Meredith and leave no trace. Her DNA wasn’t “contaminated”, it wasn’t in Meredith’s room or on Meredith at all. Rudy’s DNA is all over the room, in bloody prints on Meredith’s purse on her bed, his bloody handprint is on Meredith’s pillow, his bloody shoe print is in the room. Where are Amanda’s and Raffaele’s footprints in the room? There is no way that Amanda could have committed this crime and then cleaned up every trace of her DNA in the room and on Meredith but left Rudy’s. Rudy said he was there on the night that Meredith was murdered and that he was with her as she lay dying, yet he never called for help. Instead, he stole her money, went out to a disco and then fled to Germany.
His landlady was looking for him for the rent. He had a motive to steal Meredith’s money. He was found at a Milan nursery school, having broken in and stole a knife around a week before the crime in Perugia. Amanda had no motive to steal from Meredith because she had, I think, $4,000 in her bank account and $9,000 in reserve with her parents.
Rudy originally said that Amanda and Raffaele were not there the night of the murder and that an unknown man came in and killed Meredith while Rudy was on the toilet. He later changed the story to include Amanda and Raffaele.
The knife that was randomly chosen out of Raffaele’s kitchen drawer was used by Amanda to cut bread for dinner. So, her DNA is on the handle. The tip does not have Meredith’s DNA. It actually has rye bread on it. It was determined that that knife could not have been used in at least two of the knife wounds on Meredith. It’s the wrong size. Also, the murderer (Rudy) left the imprint of the actual knife that he used in blood on the pillow.
The injustice(name removed by moderator)
erugia.com site is more credible than yours because it refutes all of the lies and myths that sites like the one you refer to continue to spread, despite the fact that they were proven false and were not used by the prosecution in the original trial for just that reason. If the prosecution did not use that “evidence” because it was false, why would you believe that a website that continues to promote false information was credible? Take for instance the washing machine that you refer to:
Lie- Amanda and Raffaele used the washing machine to destroy evidence.
Truth - This is another case where the police misinformed the media. In Richard Owen’s November 25 report mentioned above, he says police heard the washing machine spinning to the end of its cycle when they arrived at the cottage. Other media reports repeated this claim. The stories varied from article to article. As it turned out, there was nothing incriminating at all in the washing machine. Meredith had clothes in the washer. Nothing in the washer had been worn at the time of her murder. Meredith had simply been doing laundry. There was never any mention of the washing machine running when the Postal Police arrived, at the trial. This was another myth that spread throughout the media.
Source: [injustice(name removed by moderator)
erugia.com/myths.html](
http://www.injustice(name removed by moderator)
erugia.com/myths.html)
The reason that Amanda gave Patrick’s name is that the police were looking for an African suspect because Meredith had African hairs in her hand. So, they knew someone of African heritage was at the crime scene. They misunderstood her text on the night of the crime, when he texted her that there was no need to come into work that night because it was slow and she texted back, OK and “See you later”. This idiomatic expression in American English simply means “goodbye” but to the Italians, it does not mean “goodbye” to say see you later. It means you have plans to get together. This misunderstanding, coupled with hours of interrogations led to Amanda finally agreeing with the story that the police had already concocted. They put into her mind that her boss was going to “see her later” and that he committed the crime. After over 50 hours of questioning, sleep deprivation, no legal representation (and being treated as a suspect when she was there as a witness), she was tired, hungry and confused and started to believe the suggestions that the investigators had placed in her mind. She quickly corrected that mistake and told the police she thought it was wrong, but they ignored her correction and arrested Patrick Lumumba.
This was a miscarriage of justice. Amanda and Raffaele are innocent. The evidence shows that’s true. Thankfully, you were not on the jury. They are free and they should be.
disgraceful; no civilized country should be working under it in the 21st C…
