Continuation Part Eight: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[acbytesla]

Perfectly natural and reasonable theory. Very difficult to think of a similarly plausible one involving Raf and Amanda. If he didn't want the phones ringing he could have turned them off. He stole her money and phones (cards too?) and then, as you say, thought twice about the phones.

Does Nencini really say Amanda stole the money because how else could Rudy know the amount?

I haven't read the motivation yet. Somehow I just can't get myself to read this nonsense. I'm sure I will, but not yet. I just don't get this. You really have to put logic aside to come up with these crazy theories. They really seem to not care about any evidence that proves their theories. I've been catching bits and pieces of the motivation and it makes me sick. The part that they found a Woman's size 35 footprint in the bedroom flabbergasts me. This is something that I had never heard before. I remember someone arguing that some very unidentifiable smudge was her shoe print, but I find it hard to believe that one would believe that. It looked like a fuzzy smudge to me.

 

[Planigale]

I can imagine that once this has resolved itself that a drama (or an opera) of this case will be written. As I imagine it the voices from PMF and TJMK will be the chorus of the kindly ones, I imagine myself as playing the role of Athene descending in the final act to deliver a judgement based on scientific justice, freeing the doomed lovers from their fate at the hands of irrationality.

 

[GWCarver]

Though my extensive research leads me to believe that he was only 10 when he allegedly killed Jon-Benet Ramsey, so I may have to reconsider this whole accusation.

Yeah, clearly JonBenet's killer wasn't Rudy Guede, but it probably was someone who shared his passion for burglary and also felt comfortable in other peoples' homes. He also probably panicked when she screamed, then hit her over the head so hard it cracked her skull almost in half. An exercise in overkill, just like what happened to poor Meredith in Perugia. Like Guede, the killer left his DNA behind, but he has yet to be identified.

 

[Desert Fox]

Yeah, clearly JonBenet's killer wasn't Rudy Guede, but it probably was someone who shared his passion for burglary and also felt comfortable in other peoples' homes. He also probably panicked when she screamed, then hit her over the head so hard it cracked her skull almost in half. An exercise in overkill, just like what happened to poor Meredith in Perugia. Like Guede, the killer left his DNA behind, but he has yet to be identified.

Her parents were also fried by the court of public opinion in a similar manner to Amanda and Raffaele.

 

[moodstream]

hmm, how is all this. K/S turned off their own phones, but instead of turning off Kercher's phones, k/s carried Kercher's phones away from the cottage and threw them over a wall.

Strange decision.

If the murder was spontaneous, then the turning off of the phones must have been irrelevant to the murder. Why else would a young couple turn off their phones? Privacy? Whatever the reason was, there was a reason, and it had nothing to do with the murder, according to Nencini's logic anyway, and therefore K/S must have had a purpose in mind for their evening that had nothing to do Kercher, harming Kercher, or even leaving the cottage ( for which they would need/want their cell phones). If they had a purpose for their evening that did not involve leaving their home, and they were seen at home, why is that not an alibi for being at home, given that homes are not monitored with interior cameras?

 

[GWCarver]

Her parents were also fried by the court of public opinion in a similar manner to Amanda and Raffaele.

True, it's same stuff, different day.

 

[Grinder]

I find it very easy to believe that a violent scene could quickly escalate, if a lone man was trapped in an enclosed space with a terrified and struggling woman. Guede was known to carry a knife - and many knife crimes happen as a result of too much adrenaline and not being able to control your emotions and actions at times of great stress. It's a fairly logical outcome for someone from a chaotic background, who is known to break into houses whilst carrying a knife.

Actually he wasn't known to carry a knife. He took a knife from the nursery presisely because he didn't carry one and wanted the protection. He did carry a little hammer but people called him Baron not Maxwell

His background wasn't that chaotic at least not for number of years. I don't believe that Massei would have found any psychopathy in him either.

So under this scenario the motive would be...?

 

[Grinder]

I think Guede killed Meredith to shut her up because she started screaming. The same thing probably happened to JonBenet Ramsey.

But if screaming was the motive then that could be the motive for anyone including the kids.

 

[Grinder]

I haven't read the motivation yet. Somehow I just can't get myself to read this nonsense. I'm sure I will, but not yet. I just don't get this. You really have to put logic aside to come up with these crazy theories. They really seem to not care about any evidence that proves their theories. I've been catching bits and pieces of the motivation and it makes me sick. The part that they found a Woman's size 35 footprint in the bedroom flabbergasts me. This is something that I had never heard before. I remember someone arguing that some very unidentifiable smudge was her shoe print, but I find it hard to believe that one would believe that. It looked like a fuzzy smudge to me.

The report names are proper please capitalize. Nonsense Report

Is it available in English from a proper translation somewhere.

I can imagine that once this has resolved itself that a drama (or an opera) of this case will be written. As I imagine it the voices from PMF and TJMK will be the chorus of the kindly ones, I imagine myself as playing the role of Athene descending in the final act to deliver a judgement based on scientific justice, freeing the doomed lovers from their fate at the hands of irrationality.

I while back I was speculating that they do write operas when doing their motivation reports. The more I see of their culture the more different from others it seems. It's as if they believe those british plays written about them.

 

[Desert Fox]

But if screaming was the motive then that could be the motive for anyone including the kids.

If there was real evidence of AK/RS committing the murder, I would not worry too much about motivation. Motivation / personality is really just a cherry on the top of the physical evidence.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

I have no faith in the ISC. You forgot to comment on the fact that issues from the Perugia appeal were part of the Florence appeal so Hellmann does still exist in some way. They tested the material C&V found so C&V were part of this latest trial.

The context for Perugia and Florence appeals was the 1st level trial. However, the Italian Supreme Court annulled or set aside the Perugia appeal. Let’s wait and see if the Perugia motivations are actually used.

Yes, I believe that C&V should be used if the Italian system allows it and if not, I would make it a major PR effort.

Not sure why but C & V conclusions didn’t seem to figure much in the Florence appeal, again it will be interesting to see whether any of their conclusions make their way into the Florence motivations.

If I were working for the defense I would put equal money and energy into a short video showing the "impossible" climb, the collection video, a summary of what top Italian scientists independently found, show what they call footprints etc.

Of course I could be wrong, I believe proceedings are past the phase were video or summaries can be used, that should have happened in the 1st or 2nd level trials, although it will be interesting to see what line either defence team take.

Have you ever followed a case that you found the court ruled incorrectly?

OJ Simpson is the most recent that I have followed.

Does it bother you if the claimed mistakes in this report turn out to be true mistakes?

I have no idea how typical or unusual the alleged mistakes are in motivations, I have a feeling it is the former. Have you read any other motivations from other murder cases?

 

[Bill Williams]

Actually he wasn't known to carry a knife. He took a knife from the nursery presisely because he didn't carry one and wanted the protection. He did carry a little hammer but people called him Baron not Maxwell

His background wasn't that chaotic at least not for number of years. I don't believe that Massei would have found any psychopathy in him either.

So under this scenario the motive would be...?

Psychopathology.

Massei found Rudy's motive for initiating the crime to be lust.

 

[Desert Fox]

OJ Simpson is the most recent that I have followed.

Have to be real cautious with that trial. . . .
I believe the jurors though that he was probably guilty but that the prosecution both badly bungled the evidence and that they did not prove their case.
Horrid as a murderer being on the street, it indicates a jury doing the best they can.

 

[kwill]

Actually he wasn't known to carry a knife. He took a knife from the nursery presisely because he didn't carry one and wanted the protection. He did carry a little hammer but people called him Baron not Maxwell

His background wasn't that chaotic at least not for number of years. I don't believe that Massei would have found any psychopathy in him either.

So under this scenario the motive would be...?

I know, I know!

He broke in for the rent money. He may not have been suffering from a chaotic background, but he certainly had rent due just like all the other young people in Perugia. He also had no job. He had also recently alienated himself from his benefactors by screwing up the opportunities they'd given him in both education and employment.

He took a knife from the upstairs flat kitchen for protection, just as you say he did at the nursery.

He'd recently had success at talking his way out of trouble (this is assuming he wasn't actually working for the police), and his friends had described him as one of those men who thinks the ladies are going to be impressed with his, uh, style.

So.

He breaks in to get the rent $$, he makes himself at home with the fridge and the toilet, he hears Meredith let herself in. Like many another overly confident guy, he approaches her. She's terrified. She's trapped. He's got the knife (for protection, as you say) and he's no way intending to use it . . . but she tries to get past him. Maybe she kicks him where it hurts. She hasn't seen the knife yet.

He's angry & trying to get her to calm down, and this is where the knife enters the picture. He doesn't start out intending to really hurt her, but once he's drawn blood things escalate. I think that deep knife wound is 100% rage, as are the hair plugs he pulled right out of her head. He stripped her in that same state of fury and left her choking under the quilt.

There.

 

[GWCarver]

But if screaming was the motive then that could be the motive for anyone including the kids.

The problem with this is there is zero credible evidence Amanda and Raffaele were at the cottage that night, so that leaves Guede there by himself or Guede with one or more accomplices.

I've eliminated Amanda and Raffaele as suspects because of the lack of evidence suggesting they were not at Raffaele's apartment as they stated, something I could never do with John and Patsy Ramsey, because they were in the house when JonBenet was murdered. Clearly I think they are innocent, though.

 

[carbonjam72]

Notes on the ridiculous...

So they respond to looking ridiculous by making themselves look more ridiculous?

Not quite. They haven't actually been called out, not yet, not publicly, not in the same way that they can assert their nonsense.

 

[Desert Fox]

Not quite. They haven't actually been called out, not yet, not publicly, not in the same way that they can assert their nonsense.

I was amazed when I was arguing and brought up the Italian trial of geologists and the other person supported the Italian court

 

[carbonjam72]

The nature of comedy

I was amazed when I was arguing and brought up the Italian trial of geologists and the other person supported the Italian court

Aristotle wrote that one of the 'rules of comedy' is that nobody really gets hurt. The absurdities of the claims that seem to gush out of the courts in Italy seem quaint and laughable, until you realize there are actual people truly suffering on the other side of it.

The Italians have a natural endearing gift for comedy, which becomes a curse in the context of criminal justice.

I do believe though, that comedy and ridicule are the most powerful weapons available to the disenfranchised against the powerful. First of all, its free. And, once people see them as ridiculous, they lose the perception of power and invincibility.

 

[RandyN]

So they respond to looking ridiculous by making themselves look more ridiculous?

Bingo! Everything one needs to understand about the Italian judicial system.


In fact we can see that same idea here when we read Yummi arguments/statements. Same exact principle and style. Back up one ridiculous statement with ten more equally absurd ideas.

Soon...if you allow yourself to be tricked into interacting, you will be mush and the original idea is left way back in the dust. I see no benefit in interacting with nonsense like that...unless one needs to understand the psychology of what's going on in these arguments.

Its silly...like Necenini reasoning, or Massei or Mignini or Comodi etc....stupidity so obvious and gross that it has to be a joke...a put on...but it is not! And that is extremely hard to wrap ones mind around.

It all should be treated as the joke it is. Called out as absurd... so insulting and corrupt and wrong and yet...look how far the world has let them get. Sad and sinful really.

 

[RWVBWL]

No jail?

I have been researching and it is ilk not elk, sorry. I just edited accordingly. Yes CoulsdonUK, I of course see it in those terms. Sollecito's assets will be transferred to the Kercher family when the conviction is finally confirmed, and they will immediately pay Maresca all he bills them without question, which is the common experience of those who are tendered a legal bill which they are able to pay.

I wonder why Raffaele Sollecito is not back in jail already?
Bail?

I bet PM Mignini,
who had Raffaele 1st placed in solitary confinement and then incarcerated for a whole year before trial, is pissed about this.

Any ideas why Raff is not behind bars as we debate?
RW