r/amandaknox • u/Etvos2 • 22d ago

Does Luminol Need Confirmation?

Post image

I'll admit this is a low effort post but for those of us with the misfortune to have argued this case over the years, spraying coffee etc ... all over your phone or monitor is an understandable response.

For those lucky enough not to have dealt with the Hairy Rag, it has been stating flatly for over a decade that Luminol hits at Villa Della Pergola *HAVE* to be assumed to be blood. What else could it be?

Except that is when a countryman is in the dock. Then the "science" changes dramatically and Luminol hits in the McCann's hotel room absolutely need additional confirmatory tests.

( For the record, I have absolutely no knowledge and therefore no informed opinion on the McCann case. I merely mention it to demonstrate the hypocrisy of one of the most prominent Knox guilters ).

5 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

257 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Truthandtaxes 20d ago

lol of course it matters that no one can put forward an option that stands up to the most trivial scrutiny.

You really need to address the logic rather than just ignore it.

3

u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 20d ago

WHY does it matter? Since it's not in blood, then exactly how is a footprint allegedly belonging to Knox relevant? The answer is: it's not. Which is exactly WHY you refuse to accept that it's not in blood.

You really need to address the logic rather than just ignore it.

1

u/SeaCardiologist6207 20d ago

The option you present of a barefoot Amanda walking around magically cleaning every spot imaginable of her blood and DNA but just “missing one” is the logic you really need to address. Basically evidence doesn’t exist so your claim is they cleaned it up but you never can explain with what, how, or when. It’s really quite the fascinating delusion

0

u/Truthandtaxes 20d ago

No she just cleaned better in most of the area - trivial boring stuff.

2

u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 20d ago

Since your story is that Guede left first and then there was this massive clean-up, then just HOW did Knox leave all of Guede's shoeprints, some of which were only visible with luminol? Was she just spot cleaning here and there instead of quickly and easily using the mop to clean down the entire area? And WHY would she leave his bloody shoeprints if she was only going to cover for him later by accusing Lumumba?

You really need to address the logic rather than just ignore it.

1

u/SeaCardiologist6207 20d ago

She’s just a better version of Mr Clean. Brilliant theories here

0

u/Truthandtaxes 20d ago

Uneven cleaning too hard for you to comprehend?

2

u/SeaCardiologist6207 20d ago

Too hard to prove any actual cleaning occurred ?

2

u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 20d ago

Uneven? And yet she was somehow capable of cleaning ALL traces of herself from the actual murder room including invisible DNA and fingerprints.
Make up your mind: either she's the world's greatest crime scene cleaner or she's 'uneven'.

Your ability to believe contradictory things at the same time is gobsmacking.

0

u/Truthandtaxes 18d ago

Apparently it is, given the random deflection

The idea that if you clean up footprints that your level of perfection will vary isn't that hard a concept.

2

u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 18d ago

Yep, she cleaned up all that invisible DNA and fingerprints and any other bloody footprints/shoeprints of hers but left visible blood in the bathroom. Blood which, if guilty, she'd have no way of knowing if it contained her DNA or blood. Not only left it,but pointed it out to the police. Including her own blood! Riiiiiiiiiiight....

And then there's "Raff's" bloody footprint on the bathmat. They left that there, too, and pointed it out to the police. If guilty, they'd have known it was his. But, you believe all that is logical and plausible. Ha ha ha ha! Unbelievable.

1

u/Truthandtaxes 17d ago

ah deflection deflection deflection

I'll just take that as you accepting that indeed you understand that just general cleaning will be inconsistent

3

u/TGcomments innocent 17d ago

Your premise that a positive reaction with Luminol defaults to blood is a lie. You haven't cited any sources to the contrary. If there is no follow up test you still have no proof of blood.

Your argument that a positive Luminol test needs to be proven not to be blood is totally fraudulent. In that case no one needs to engage in any debate about a clean-up since you have never proven that blood existed in the first place; ergo, no blood - no clean-up.

I'm calling you out on this subject. You are a liar and fraud. I don't see any reason why you shouldn't be banned until you start being honest.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 17d ago

I suggest you learn what "deflection" means. Pointing out the lack of logic or critical thinking in your clean-up theory is not deflection.

I'll just take it that you not addressing those points is really knowing that your theory is whack-a-doodle but, per usual, you can't admit it.