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

[katy_did]

My theory which I have posted before is that the investigators used Luminol on December 18 specifically to find bare footprints which Amanda told them would likely be there on December 17 when she recounted the story of using the bloodied bathmat to scoot from the bathroom to her room the morning after Meredith's murder. This theory is backed by the fact that known locations that should have been Luminol positive such as the shoeprint at marker 3, the unmarked shoeprint near the pink bag and the rusty area under the radiator were not photographed with Luminol.

The process of collecting a dry stain involves swabbing it with a moistened blotter paper. This was done at marker 2 where we have before photos and after photos in both normal light and highlighted with Luminol.

The way to tell if DNA is associated with a suspected stain is to take a substrate sample nearby but outside the stain area using the same method. such controls were never done because it is almost certain that DNA would be found and a positive hit on a negative control is much more difficult to hand wave away.

I agree about why they did it and that they already knew what they would find, based on what Amanda had said. What I don't understand, though, is why didn't the cleaned up shoe print react to luminol? Or are you saying it might have but they didn't photograph it?

Agreed on the negative controls; the closest thing we have to those is the DNA findings at Raffaele's place, which prove it isn't unusual to find DNA on the floor of an apartment from the people who live there.

 

[GWCarver]

You can't say their motive couldn't have been the scream because they were innocent. Sort of a tautology that if they didn't do it they didn't have a motive.

Motive is a bonus for the prosecution but there are lots of crimes that motive is a best a guess.

ETA - what motive did Rudi's trial give him? Bill do you have that?

Actually I said they weren't there. I guess I could add they were too far away to hear the scream, so it couldn't be a motive for them to do anything.

You know, motive can be more important than all the actual evidence combined. Just ask a guy who was having a hot affair with a younger woman and took out a large life insurance policy on his wife the week before she was found murdered. If he didn't have a 100% ironclad alibi, you'll have to talk to him during visiting hours, though...

 

[Bill Williams]

Believing Rudy at convenient times

I did not think of this, it was someone else's observation.

Why does Nencini believe Rudy Guede when Guede says that he overheard Meredith and Amanda arguing over money.....

.... but not believe Guede when he says it was Meredith who had let him in? Why have Amanda there at all, if Meredith and Rudy were on such good terms so that they could even (acc. to Rudy) discuss intimacies?

Look how the case against Knox/Sollecito has evolved, all in the direction of eventually absolving Rudy:

- Knox alone in kitchen covering her ears while Lumumba is killing Meredith
- Lumumba, Knox, Sollecito killing Meredith in a ritualistic rite
- Guede, Knox, Sollecito killing in a sex-game gone wrong - at first it was consensual
- Guede initiating lust-fueled attack on Meredith, in which Knox/Sollecito uncharacteristically join in, in a "choice for evil" (Massei)
- We don't know what happened, except that it happened with Knox directing things from the hall (Mignini at Hellmann trial, to explain no presence of Knox in bedroom)
- Hellmann is quashed by ISC because sex-game gone wrong is not properly examined or discounted
- Guede now passively takes a dump, tension escalates between Knox and Meredith (Crini)
- Guede uninvolved, on toilet while argument over rent money causes Knox to weld a knife.
​

Nencini finally gets around to believing Rudy Guede.

 

[acbytesla]

.
Absolutely, either reason, or both, for taking the phones works for me too AC.

As for his actions after leaving the cottage, another possibility is that Rudy went back to his place through the unlocked city gate with everything before 10 pm. Later, after 10 pm, he decided to get rid of the phones, so he went out the city wall passageway and chucked them into Lana's yard. He must have known the area and that he was chucking them into the yard of a residence. There might have been an extra purpose to this, or not. I would sure like to know which phone number made that bomb threat phone call to Lana's house 'around 10 pm' and when exactly it was made. Maybe it will show up with the missing DNA files one day.
.

That's always possible too. The question is, how long was he inside the cottage after Meredith arrived home? It seems to me that Rudy probably wasn't there for very long. I've seen enough of that room to believe that the murder didn't take very long and I really doubt Rudy wanted to spend much time in the cottage after it took place. If he was surprised by Meredith arriving home, the possibility of someone else surprising him too had to be in the back of his mind. Rudy says Meredith was murdered around 9:30, but that is an estimate, she could have easily been murdered by 9:05 and Rudy gone by 9:10...we'll never know. I would imagine Rudy was in a panic....which could have caused him to do many irrational illogical things.

Rudy having killed Meredith...probably the first person he had ever killed almost surely wasn't thinking very clearly as well. There is a reason the term is "panic" stricken. We've all either experienced or seen someone in that sort of state of mind where they are freaked out. That is how I imagine Rudy's thought process. "What did I do".. Why???. Oh God, What do I do now? etc...etc...etc..etc.
Does time go quickly or does it draw on slowly?

 

[Poppy1016]

Manson also regularly refuses to attend his own appeals to the court.

Stilicho posted this on PMF. Since he is a member here, I for one would be interested for him to elaborate on the parallels between Charles Manson and Amanda Knox, and their respective criminal histories, and to what degree of certainty they are proven or unproven.

Giuiters are not required to legitimately debate here. Drive by comments with no substance or basis in fact or evidence is their method.

 

[carbonjam72]

Yes, Rudy is a Monster, also digestion & TOD from John Douglas

Here's what bothers me a lot. Rudy's DNA was found *inside* Meredith. If we try to determine how and when that could happen I can only come to one conclusion. Please help me out and prove me wrong because the really disturbs me.

Meredith was stabbed on one side of the room then dragged to her final resting place. It was then where her clothes were partially removed right? That means Rudy's DNA must have been deposited when she was dead or dying. Add to that the untested possible semen stain...

Someone compared AK to Charles Manson for not going to her appeals? Well how about Rudy. Who else sexually gratifies themselves while killing their victims? BTK and Ted Bundy are a couple of examples. Release Rudy?? I hope not. Until you can prove his DNA entered the victim in a consensual manner.

Who can do that? Become sexually aroused while a person is dying in a horribly bloody scene before them? That's one of the most disturbing things that I can imagine.

(seriously, I'd love to have someone tell me that this is not the case because this thought is keeping me up at night...)

Haven't been able to find the exact citation, but the analysis in "Rudy Guede: The Forgotten Killer" - says the blood on the bra means It was worn when the mortal blow to the left side of the neck was inflicted. The bra came off after that, so yes, Rudy inflicted a mortal wound, then took advantage of a dying girl to sexually position her so he could gratify himself. Skin cells in the vagina were attributed to either digital or oral interaction (Guede claimed in the recorded skype call with his friend when he fled to Germany that he had had oral sex with Meredith.

Another interesting quote from this book, since TOD and digestion has been a big subject on these pages recently, is this finding that TOD from digestion was around 10pm.

"Since the victim's core temperature was not taken by the medical examiner upon arrival at the scene, it is impossible at this remove to pinpoint the time of death. Kercher was last seen alive shortly before 9 p.m. Undigested food in her stomach would suggest the attack to have taken place around 10 p.m. " ("The Forgotten Suspect", at pg (says 'location 31%" closest I can find).

 

[katy_did]

Here's what bothers me a lot. Rudy's DNA was found *inside* Meredith. If we try to determine how and when that could happen I can only come to one conclusion. Please help me out and prove me wrong because the really disturbs me.

Meredith was stabbed on one side of the room then dragged to her final resting place. It was then where her clothes were partially removed right? That means Rudy's DNA must have been deposited when she was dead or dying. Add to that the untested possible semen stain...

Someone compared AK to Charles Manson for not going to her appeals? Well how about Rudy. Who else sexually gratifies themselves while killing their victims? BTK and Ted Bundy are a couple of examples. Release Rudy?? I hope not. Until you can prove his DNA entered the victim in a consensual manner.

Who can do that? Become sexually aroused while a person is dying in a horribly bloody scene before them? That's one of the most disturbing things that I can imagine.

(seriously, I'd love to have someone tell me that this is not the case because this thought is keeping me up at night...)

I've never thought this was the most likely scenario, based on a few things: first, the time that Guede spent in the apartment seems too long if Meredith was stabbed pretty well as soon as she got home. At least some of that time might be explained if there was a more protracted struggle between them, one where Guede threatened her and forced her to comply. Forcing her to undress would be one obvious way of doing that.

I don't think there's any real indication she was wearing any clothing except her bra when she was stabbed, nor any definite answer as to when her clothing was removed. Her bra had blood spatter on it (either expirated blood droplets or impact spatter from the stabbing) but none of her other items of clothing did. Obviously if her clothing was removed earlier, Guede could've left his DNA any time, before or after he stabbed her.

So to me at least, what you describe above is one possible scenario, but not the only one (and perhaps not the most probable one, simply because rape followed by murder is likely more common than the reverse).

 

[Bill Williams]

Another blog on the block

There's another blog on the block from someone I have never hear of.

http://amandaknoxauguriesofinnocence.wordpress.com/

All along Amanda Knox and her supporters have suffered from the touching but ultimately debilitating belief that if the facts along with logic, science, technology and common sense were on the side of the defense, the defense should then prevail. We know differently now. We know that the case is not about evidence or a search for the truth–if, indeed, it ever was about such things. It is about a will to power. It is about protecting the reputation of powerful institutions and persons. It is about a young person having to be guilty because important people in Italy find it preferable to condemn the innocent than admit to grave, foolish errors.​

Why has the effort to railroad Amanda Knox been harnessed to an equally forceful attempt to protect Guede?​

 

[Desert Fox]

I feel like saying "Yes, blacks are often unfairly discriminated against by law enforcement but sometimes they really committed the crime. This is one of those cases."

 

[carbonjam72]

Stefanoni; Tampering vs Contamination - Calling all DNA whiz's

It is immaterial what crime theories are advanced, if the heliocentric solution involves planting of evidence by Stefanoni to replace a theory of irrational choice of evil, and epicycles, then that is precisely what happened.

ETA

This is my understanding too. My head is way below the surface on the DNA science, especially regarding the bra clasp interpretation, but my understanding is that Raffaele's is prominent among the mixed profiles and that C-V obscured that fact. My hunch remains that both the clasp and the knife evidence result from deliberate tampering, not contamination, probably involving Stefanoni. There is very strong circumstantial evidence in both cases, including her lies, suppression of data and the improbable selection/recovery of each item. No one on the prosecution side is trying to uphold her work.

I will not attribute, but I agree.

I am convinced Stefanoni has gamed the lab results, such that she is sure she can get the results she needs at any time, and in a way that can't be repeated - preventing a conflicting result.

The DNA experts here can better speak to this issue, but my understanding is that there are only the tiniest trace amounts of Kercher DNA found on the Blade, and an unceratain identification of RF's DNA on the bra clasp - meaning a small amount, creatively interpreted results with the aid of RS DNA profile for reference, mixed with other 2-4 (?) other males which suggests environmental contamination.

What we haven't seen anyone do yet, is actually plant evidence. That seems to be a line no one has crossed yet in this case. They have actively destroyed exculpatory evidence like the computer drives; suppressed DNA data; misinterpreted evidence; invented crazy scenarios - but so far we haven't actually scene a direct planting of evidence, yet.

The DNA of Meredith on the blade is exceedingly small. The DNA of Raf of the bra clasp is also, less than a solid finding for a variety of reasons. Deliberate planting doesn't seem plausible, because how do you deliberately plant only a few skin cells on a knife blade?

More likely I think, is induced environmental contamination. Exposing the air to DNA of the desired target, and then testing the sample without controls to eliminate environmental contamination. Getting the result only once, rather than in a repeatable manner, makes stefanoni look like she did a great feat of science that only a great investigator like herself could do. It can't be repeated, because; "there's too little left", or "there wasn't enough to do two tests", and "no, I can't show you my full DNA data set to prove the legitimacy of my work. I'm professional, so just accept my results, and deal with it."

So yes, I agree Stefanoni is cheating, I just really want to know how and where she pulled her fast one.

 

[Dan O.]

Here's what bothers me a lot. Rudy's DNA was found *inside* Meredith. If we try to determine how and when that could happen I can only come to one conclusion. Please help me out and prove me wrong because the really disturbs me.

Meredith was stabbed on one side of the room then dragged to her final resting place. It was then where her clothes were partially removed right? That means Rudy's DNA must have been deposited when she was dead or dying. Add to that the untested possible semen stain...

Someone compared AK to Charles Manson for not going to her appeals? Well how about Rudy. Who else sexually gratifies themselves while killing their victims? BTK and Ted Bundy are a couple of examples. Release Rudy?? I hope not. Until you can prove his DNA entered the victim in a consensual manner.

Who can do that? Become sexually aroused while a person is dying in a horribly bloody scene before them? That's one of the most disturbing things that I can imagine.

(seriously, I'd love to have someone tell me that this is not the case because this thought is keeping me up at night...)

There are two possibilities. One is that Rudy is a normal young male burglar. He broke in to the cottage and finding himself alone in the girls room he fantasized having sex with the girls. He got aroused, masturbated and then went to cleanup in the bathroom where he also took care of other business. Meredith unexpectedly came home and he killed her then accidentally or inquisitively digitally probed Meredith leaving DNA but not semen behind. Under this scenario, the murder was an accident which Rudy will take steps to avoid in the future. Perhaps he will avoid returning to a life of crime or perhaps he will leave the knife behind choosing to allow capture rather than kill again.

The other possibility is that Rudy became aroused at the sight of a girl dying in front of him. He rapped Meredith as she was dying. These urges in Rudy will be suppressed while he is in prison and he may choose to stay in prison rather than risk being free to explore this part of his sexuality. But he will eventually be kicked out and those thoughts and feelings will again invade his consciousness. In time, Rudy will again attempt to recreate the conditions that he experienced.

Under scenario 1, there is no benefit for Rudy not to tell the truth. His punishment for this crime cannot be increased and to tell the truth would release two innocence from suspicion of being involved in the crime. Under scenario 2, Rudy cannot even hint to his shrink what happened. But even under 2, Rudy could try to lie and say it was 1. If that semen stain is ever tested and found to belong to Rudy, there is a good chance that some other prisoner will come to the conclusion of 2 and do his part in improving society by removing the deviant genes from the pool. Why does Rudy take the risk? Why isn't Rudy singing before he is forced to sing in a higher octave? I think it has to be Mignini who is somehow forcing Rudy to maintain his silence.

 

[carbonjam72]

Dano, are these references to the Nov 3 crime scene tapes?

They erased most of the footprints to collect the DNA. This can be seen in the November 3 crime scene video. In that video the markers by the prints are also visible so we know which prints they are.

00:20:40 .. 00:21:08 - Collecting biological evidence at #3 TG 01-04-2008 02:00 00:26:57 .. 00:27:02 - Collecting sample at #2 DateLine Police 1:20​

We also know that they scrubbed away the prints in the bedroom because in the December 18 video they spend a lot of time searching for those prints using the photographs taken earlier, bringing the lights closer and even consulting a laptop.

The prints are all well documented and they form an unbroken trail in Meredith's blood by the same shoe from the bedroom to the front door and back into the living room. The pattern is compatible with the shoes from the box that was found in Rudy's appartment.

DANO- Are these both references to the Nov 3 crimes scene tapes?

 

[Poppy1016]

My theory which I have posted before is that the investigators used Luminol on December 18 specifically to find bare footprints which Amanda told them would likely be there on December 17 when she recounted the story of using the bloodied bathmat to scoot from the bathroom to her room the morning after Meredith's murder. This theory is backed by the fact that known locations that should have been Luminol positive such as the shoeprint at marker 3, the unmarked shoeprint near the pink bag and the rusty area under the radiator were not photographed with Luminol.

The process of collecting a dry stain involves swabbing it with a moistened blotter paper. This was done at marker 2 where we have before photos and after photos in both normal light and highlighted with Luminol.

The way to tell if DNA is associated with a suspected stain is to take a substrate sample nearby but outside the stain area using the same method. such controls were never done because it is almost certain that DNA would be found and a positive hit on a negative control is much more difficult to hand wave away.

The thing I have never understood is why it took so long to do the luminal testing. Wouldn't test results be skewed after that much time passed?

 

[carbonjam72]

Prosecutors in US do it too -

Not to protect Guede, but to protect the original theory of the crime. They would rather send a couple of innocents to prison than admit to a mistake.

This isn't unique to Italy. Here in the US, prosecutors often fight requests for DNA testing that could exonerate a convict.

Thanks for bringing this up. We see this all the time. Prosecutors HATE to admit they put innocent people behind bars, or worse.

It's amazing that "actual innocence" isn't necessarily a recognized reason to reverse a conviction in the US. (Pretty sure that's Scalia's view, not sure if the whole US supreme court agrees).

 

[carbonjam72]

"Confession tossed", so how can it be used?

It certainly has bothered me a great deal. The interrogation got in through the back door.

Also bothered me, I don't understand it.

If it's inadmissible in criminal, why is it usable in civil? And in any event, how is it ok to let the jury hear it? Much less have a judge rely on it in the 'criminal conviction'?

Over to the ECHR, one supposes.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Perth and Perugia

The thing I have never understood is why it took so long to do the luminal testing. Wouldn't test results be skewed after that much time passed?

I would exclude all results gathered on 18 December. I told a former police officer whose job it was to secure crime scenes about this case. His first words were, "contaminated, contaminated." Reporting on the Patrick Waring case Estelle Blackburn wrote, “In court, police conceded they had not followed best practice in the case. Various officers said that the Central Park scene was left unguarded from 1.25am on the night, it was a week before it was searched, and the same officers had visited the homes of the girl and the accused which allowed for contamination of evidence.” What is not best practice in Perth is not best practice in Perugia.

 

[Dan O.]

I agree about why they did it and that they already knew what they would find, based on what Amanda had said. What I don't understand, though, is why didn't the cleaned up shoe print react to luminol? Or are you saying it might have but they didn't photograph it?

They would have tested that area and it would have lit up just like the others. But it wouldn't look like a bare foot print so they would have ignored it and moved on. The shoe print at marker 2 was accidentally included because that one was overlapping a bare foot shape. This is fortuitous because it shows that the TMB is working when there is a recent stain in blood even when that stain is not visible and it shows that the known blood print is no brighter than the unknown bare print.

Agreed on the negative controls; the closest thing we have to those is the DNA findings at Raffaele's place, which prove it isn't unusual to find DNA on the floor of an apartment from the people who live there.

But, but, the whole basis if DNA forensics is that DNA is left behind by criminals. If they hadn't just committed a crime there is no reason for them to be leaving a trail of DNA

 

[Desert Fox]

I would exclude all results gathered on 18 December. I told a former police officer whose job it was to secure crime scenes about this case. His first words were, "contaminated, contaminated." Reporting on the Patrick Waring case Estelle Blackburn wrote, “In court, police conceded they had not followed best practice in the case. Various officers said that the Central Park scene was left unguarded from 1.25am on the night, it was a week before it was searched, and the same officers had visited the homes of the girl and the accused which allowed for contamination of evidence.” What is not best practice in Perth is not best practice in Perugia.

This seems to be pretty self evident to me. . . .
Problem is that I have discussed the case with intelligent people who seemed unable to understand.
Of course, one issue seemed to be that the person was German and thought I was specifically attacking the inquisitorial system.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

A man for all seasons

This seems to be pretty self evident to me. . . .
Problem is that I have discussed the case with intelligent people who seemed unable to understand.
Of course, one issue seemed to be that the person was German and thought I was specifically attacking the inquisitorial system.

It is not self-evident to someone who is emotionally or intellectually invested in finding someone guilty. However, even if one is certain that Amanda and Raffaele are guilty, he or she should still ultimately check an impulse to disregard legal or forensic precedent.

William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law
to get after the Devil?
"William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned
'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This
country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not
God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you
really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?
Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!"

From the movie "A Man for All Seasons," courtesy of the IMDB.

 

[Desert Fox]

It is not self-evident to someone who is emotionally or intellectually invested in finding someone guilty. However, even if one is certain that Amanda and Raffaele are guilty, he or she should still ultimately check an impulse to disregard legal or forensic precedent.

If I thought they got the right people, I would still feel queasy about the case but not be quite as bad. Just like I am against the Death Penalty but don't feel too bad about John Wayne Gacey being executed.