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

[Desert Fox]

I am sure too that it wasn't Amanda. I was more interested in what the real time was and whether it supported Raffaele's defence re calls.

My big thing is that the image is just too blurry to know who the hell it is.

 

[Strozzi]

Great job, RW. But I need a little help. Carbonjam is challenging my writing about how Rudy, sitting on the toilet, hears someone enter the front door, goes silent, heart pounding, knife at the ready!

Please keep your eyes open for anything like that in Rudy's confession to Mignini. If you find anything like that, Carbonjam is going to nominate me for a non-fiction award - maybe the Samuel Johnson Prize for Non-Fiction. Otherwise, I will forever be known for my imagination and I will rank up there in the Italian pantheon of fiction writers along with Andrea Vogt and Judge Nencini. I will be doomed!

 

[RWVBWL]

Oceania8

Great job, RW. But I need a little help. Carbonjam is challenging my writing about how Rudy, sitting on the toilet, hears someone enter the front door, goes silent, heart pounding, knife at the ready!

Please keep your eyes open for anything like that in Rudy's confession to Mignini. If you find anything like that, Carbonjam is going to nominate me for a non-fiction award - maybe the Samuel Johnson Prize for Non-Fiction. Otherwise, I will forever be known for my imagination and I will rank up there in the Italian pantheon of fiction writers along with Andrea Vogt and Judge Nencini. I will be doomed!

Hi Strozzi,
Myself, I understand what you are doing,
for it is the minute details that will demolish the prosecutions case.
BUT most people have no stomach for this...


Anyways,
Perugia is a college town.
Lots of foreigners, tourists, students, etc.
Much like DogTown, err, make that Santa Monica, California!
Esh Santa Monica College has a very high foreign student crew every year...

I've been rackin' my brain while at the beach over the last few dayz,
a bit bothered because I could not recall details of the New Zealand woman whose son was studyin' in Perugia at the time of Meredith' murder. What was it? Her son knew of Rudy and a scary friend of his? Come on, RW, remember!

I knew I even read and wrote of this on The Old Perugia Shock.
Hmmmm.

YEA!
diggin' around,
I just found a quote from years back,
from cool cat Malkmus, a fellow JREF Los Angeleno!
Read on:
Malkmus:
I've been reading through the old True Crime Weblog threads and found some interesting postings from a woman named Oceania8, who was posting back in early '08. Her son lived in Perugia at the time of the murder. She offered some wonderful insight. But TCWB being the predecessor to PMF that it was, there was little tolerance for her skeptical view of the case and was basically scared off. Here are some excerpts from her posts:


Quote from Oceania8::
The main reason I have followed this case is that I have a son currently studying Italian at the Perugia UOF and playing professional soccer and also our Italian family live near Perugia.
My son met Meredith on a few occassions, watching World Cup rugby games in bars etc.
My son and his friends, like the rest of the students in Perugia, felt shocked, scared and very sad about the terrible events that happened in their midst.
My son and friends also came into contact with Guede who was very active on the social scene there.
Unfortunately Guede attended a party in their apartments within one or two days of the murder and before he disappeared and they were subsequently interviewed by the Perugia police about him. I posted that the police were looking for'RG' at SeattlePI blog before it became public because of what happened to my son and friends.
My son later told me about a very strange and creepy character, a young Italian guy who used to hang out with Guede. None of the soccer guys liked this Italian guy, they told me he was the one that dealt the drugs and was always on the scam and he seemed to be using Guede as an 'in' into the Perugian student scene as Guede was very social and active in this scene but they were never sure exactly what their relationship was.
This guy disappeared from Perugia around the time of the murder and my son and friends feel strongly he, along with Guede, has something to do with the murder,they have told the police about him. They also theorise that this guy has threatened someone close to Guede if he talks.

Quote from Oceania8:
I am posting this from Perugia, I havn't had much time here yet but what I have learnt from a relative who
is the assistant to the Chancellor of the University of Perugia (not the Foreigners one) was the huge impact the murder had on the Universities with many students pulling out of their courses and leaving Perugia, the Universities were thrown into turmoil and were demanding someone(anyone?) be caught for this asap. The intense pressure from the Universities was behind that premature 'case closed' statement from Mignini and his anxiety to solve the crime quickly and make that false announcement. They rushed many things and made many assumptions, they botched up the control of the crime scene and environs quite badly right from day one.
The Perugian police now have zero tolerance for any fringe people such a Guede and the relatively open drug culture and a clean up campaign is currently underway.
The general opinion in Perugia is that regardless of whether you think Sollecito is involved or not he has the best defence lawyer in Italy and many are positive he will walk from this a free man, his 'truth' will now only be heard in court

Quote from Oceania8::
I posted shortly after I got back from Perugia in February about the feelings of some local people that I had spoken to about this case. One couple who live in an apartment building that can see part of the cottage told me that there was no door knocking by the police to them or any of their neighbours at any time after crime. Maybe this would have been hard for the ILE to do after it was announced publicly that the case was closed. We can only sepculate why they didn't do this. They said many neighbours commented amoungst themselves about why they wern't canvassed to see if anyone had seen or heard anything. Although there was plenty of media around asking locals questions.
They told me how they watched the rubbish truck arrive and clean the dumpsters near the house as usual a few days after the murder. And how the environs of the house did not appear to be sealed off and seen to be searched systematically. Like the marjority of things written here it is hearsay so make of it what you will
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Because we are discussing different aspects of this brutal case and to keep an open mind, I believe that folks interested should re-read this, and the full original post from Kaosium that Malkmus was responding to:
http://67.228.115.45/showpost.php?p=8033162&postcount=1806

Especially since there were unidentified fingerprints found in Meredith's flat.
And that the Italian SC believes that more than 1 attacker helped murder Miss Kercher...

 

[MichaelB]

Tesla you make up stuff or pass on unsubstantiated items all the time. when asked for proof to move on to create a straw man.

How much rent did Rudi owe? You say his rent was due, right? How do you know that?

You speak of a burglary wave near Rudi's but you have no idea what the average number of these type of crimes occur there.

You talk about a break-in, fire and gold watch as if it is a proven fact because a true crime writer emailed you and said Diaz had a police report, but ole Nina didn't get a copy. I can't find another account of this that doesn't stem from Nina. You even cite the kids' books as if they did special research. I've looked for any mention in the trial but can't find it. Don't you think the defense would bring it forward?

The people Rudi was selling to most likely weren't that particular about the quality of the laptops. If they worked for what they needed they bought.

Anglo is going to let you have it for that lawyer remark

He was caught at the nursery with a womans gold watch.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/2008-10-28_EngG.pdf

the next control maintained by staff of the Commissioner PS "Garibaldi Venice "emerged that the young man was in possession of a laptop complete with accessories (result stolen at a law firm in Perugia), as well as a woman's watch, a hammer and a large kitchen knife, the latter of school property and, therefore, had been stolen from GUEDE immediately before.

 

[Bill Williams]

David Anderson's Ground Report article on the Nencini motivations. David lives in Italy and speaks fluent Italian.

http://groundreport.com/a-nonsensical-pile-from-nencini-viz-a-nonsencini/

A nonsensical pile from Nencini (viz a Nonsencini)

(T)he whole castle of cards is built on the simulated break-in, and it runs something like this. Guede, a known breaker-in, would be the last person in the world to simulate a break-in in a way that he had used before and that would therefore immediately point the finger of suspicion at himself. So he must have been let in by someone. That wouldn’t have been Meredith as he himself claimed, and the only other person in Perugia that weekend with an available key was Amanda. Raffaele was her alibi, (it is immediately suspicious and very foolish for lovers to be alone with each other and not to make sure they always have another back-up alibi in bed with them), so it was necessary for him to have been there too, since he refused to change his story. But then Sollecito is not a public prosecutor, (he is not even a solicitor come to that), and so therefore free to change his story at will. As for example, in fabricating a motive, which has gone from diabolic sex game gone wrong, to nothing, back to sex game, to failure to use a loo brush, then to letting Guede **** inconsiderately, and finally to none of the above!

 

[Planigale]

Yes I think this is correct.

OTOH I like RG with Kokomaniac since a car to haul off the lode would be extremely valuable. In 2007 I feel quite certain that a laptop would have a far bigger street value since prices have come down now on even the super models...(except for Apple)...

Koko fled the country and only returned after the case was well settled in Migninis messed up mind. Also he didn't just return but he was a "super-witness" right up there in the quality level of a Toto, Nara, or a Quintinvale.

Guede was not sitting on the toilet listening to music....Id bet dollars to donuts on that. He may have been fairly casual but I bet he was listening for someone to approach at least...even if in no apparent hurry. By 9 PM and inside the empty cottage he likely felt confident that everyone was gone for the night.

I agree with Grinder that the law office break-in is troubling because of the deactivated alarm. This seems above Guedes skill level although he got into the Milan school somehow without breaking anything...which is actually often quite easy for even an amateur...I would like to know more about style and type of locks and why was the director bringing repairmen to fix those locks??? Lots of places are easily accessed even today with a simple credit card. And picking a lock is a rather simple task with common and easily procured tools.

I would say that RG made his living as a burglar. That he was caught up or at least described in three...no four highly likely burglaries indicates that he was also as likely involved in at least ten times that many in which no clues indicated Guede at all.

Why does no judge in Italy even question the relevance or questionable nature of these flaky witnesses Mignini drags in off the streets? Kokomaniac was particularly squirrely...with his olive tossing defense story against a knife attack. Even crazier than Toto or Nara...and as for Quintinvale...he should have been arrested...either for lying in court during the trial or for lying to police in the days following the murder. He contradicts himself and the police confirm his lies and yet...nothing bad happens to him. Mignini?

This case is bad and absurd and yet they are getting away with most of this corruption. even this latest re-run at the CCTV and its Knox story reeks of Perugia police and prosecutor misdeeds. This is exactly the MO they used for years...also the Kercher well timed statements (this time at the motivation release) is something they have done at every juncture...I think it is all Maresca but still...they are speaking the words...and they have never had a public doubt. That I find as odd and disingenuous.

So anyone come up with RG phone log data yet? Computer activity data? Number of computers?
What does Nencini say about the additional time he added to the defendants jail sentence? How about his reasoning for listing Knox as the most likely thief of the money in light of the facts about RG DNA evidence on the purse zipper...not inside BTW...just on the zipper.
A fence in Milan...huh? And yet caught in a burglary in progress while armed with a deadly weapon and in possession of tools of the crime and several stolen items from his home town.

But released on his own recognizance... where are these details? There was apparently a trial...how did no one know of this "secret trial"? Once again the smell of corruption is reeking up into all my senses. Or am I just some sort of savant crime solver and everyone else is logical but yet fooled by these apparent obvious logical pieces of the puzzle that takes a genius to comprehend maybe? Or no?

The Italians are very bad liars. But no one calls them out for these grossly simple minded lies...why is that?

One thing he does say is that Guede was found not guilty so that is a judicial fact. He does comment that no evidence was really considered against Guede so he has to assume there is none. "one understands that the judge evaluated the circumstance as totally devoid of proof, because in the entire body of the sentence there is no evaluation on the subject." This is very similar to a comment from the ISC about the fact that Guede was not convicted of sexual assault, evidence against him was not presented in his trial. I think both imply that the prosecution went easy on him and I think the fact they specifically comment implies they disapprove.

He also comments that the court of the first instance found Sollecito and Knox not guilty of the theft of the cash and credit cards, this was never appealed by the prosecution, so is a judicial fact. This may cause some logic issues if he relies on the theft as motivation although he partly covers himself by saying no motivation necessary. They were found guilty of theft of the phones.

 

[anglolawyer]

Exactly! Why would he want to share the money? Why involve an accomplice? Especially if this is a spur of the moment, unplanned break-in.

He throws the rock through the window, walks away, watches the house from a distance for 20 or so minutes, and sees that nobody approaches or comes home to the dark cottage.

It's now 8:50 pm or so. He thinks the occupants are out of town or out until late, and he climbs up the lower grate and in the window. He steps through Filomena's dark room without turning on the light or searching for vlauables because he can do that later and he wants first to see the layout of the place, including the location of the front door. While checking out the kitchen in the dark, he bumps into a chair, opens the refrigerator and grabs the juice container, drinks some, and soon goes to the toilet. He's in no hurry because it's only 9 pm and he figures he has plenty if time.

He's sitting on the toilet listening to his ipod, just as he did leisurely did when visiting the guys diwnstairs a few weeks earlier. Then he hears the door open. He becomes quiet and scared. He can hear himself breath and his heart pound. He doesn't know who just came in, how many people are there, and if there is a man with them. He immediately pulls out his knife and holds it in front of himself, ready to stab it forwards if anyone walks in on him. He listens, and thinks he only hears the noise of one person. There is no sound of people talking.

This is close to how I see it but I feel the 20 minutes is too long. One minute is enough. And Rudy himself tells us in his account that she called out when she entered, asking if anybody was home. This is another telling detail that goes with the keys. My guess is he had left the kitchen light on or something like that. He may have cut the light in the bathroom as he heard the key in the lock. Hearing no answer she went to her room and he followed right away.

 

[RWVBWL]

Hi AngloLawyer!
I know that it's early for you,
so I wish you a swell day!

For me, well it's late, I'm still up,
and I gotta get some shut-eye as the surf should be building' overnight
and my eyes and everythin' else are shuttin' down.

But I need some help, once again,
trying to understand the bruising on the decedent in this brutal murder we discuss.

Here are links to 2 different postings which show the bruises in question:
From Oct. 21, 2008:
http://web.archive.org/web/20100807000133/http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2008_10_01_archive.html

and

Oct. 14, 2008:
http://web.archive.org/web/20110504...logspot.com/2008/10/pointing-at-murderer.html


This old surfer wants to know why there is such a large bruise, as shown in the diagram from Oct. 21, 2008, on Miss Kercher's left leg, her upper thigh?

And how does the apparent bruise on the back of her head fit into anyones theory?

Keep in mind,
I do know, from personal past courtroom experience which cost me $$,$$$.$$
that it is indeed the minute details that will set a person free from horrible, wrongful allegations!!!

That large bruise on the decedents left thigh does not fit into my sequence of events.

It almost looks like someone might have kicked her hard as she lay sideways on the floor of her bedroom.

What about the bruising on the back of the decedents head?
Thoughts?
See ya ,
RW

 

[codyjuneau]

.
Re the dark car in the driveway:

As I recall, Frank Sfarzo who attended the trial, reported that the driver of the broken down car did not even notice the dark car that was parked in the cottage driveway. Only the tow truck driver did.

There is another version that indicates the car in the driveway was with the broken down car.

Cody (aka Codi)
.

 

[carbonjam72]

Glass shards in Meredith's Room

That nails a lot of this on the head. Nencini writes a motivation that is a narration that virtually none of the evidence actually supports in any way. I think it is impossible to actually write a moment by moment narrative based on the evidence. I think we can say that Rudy was in that bedroom and that he sexually assaulted Meredith Kercher definitely, that he was involved and probably did kill Meredith probably alone but that isn't definitive. We can say that the murder probably took place before 10 PM.

I think we can say that Rudy probably either threw the rock through the window and then he saw Meredith coming up and knocked on the door and she let him in or at least opened the door or more likely he climbed the wall and was in the cottage before Meredith came home and attacked Meredith after she shut the door behind her. Some people have done a reconstruction of the murder itself....(Ron Hendry, for example, I think John Douglass) But this is beyond my scope. I don't think there was anyone else in that bedroom other than Meredith because there are no obvious other shoe/foot prints but that of Meredith and Rudy

Everything else is a good story that may or not be right...by a lot .

Am I in the ball park??

Sounds pretty close to me, but I do have one issue.

The defense made arguments, I believe, pointing to Glass shards in Meredith's Room beside Guede's footprints. Suggests that the break-in occurred first, and the perpetrator Guede climbed through the window as his method of entry. So in all fairness, I'd say we can cross out the idea that Rudy broke the window, then 'talked his way inside'. (Otherwise, how does the glass get in the murder room - without going off on another groundless crazy wholly invented tangent to explain it?)

Also, for crime reconstruction, people like Ron Hendry and John Douglas, are not just people expressing opinions. They're subject matter experts with decades of experience. I think one needs to have a really good reason for disputing their reconstructions. I read through Hendry's analysis of the break-in and blood spatter, and its damn well convincing to me, I didn't see a single false note. Douglas I read in his book 'Guede; the forgotten suspet', but he doesn't provide the in depth reasoning that Hendry does, more summary conclusion than the actual particulars. He doesn't give you a chance to evaluate his data, so its awkward. But still, It's John ***** Douglas, so what are you gonna say?

But I think we're on the same page in recognizing the reasonable limits of our ability to infer facts from evidence.

 

[carbonjam72]

A word on perspectives...

Great job, RW. But I need a little help. Carbonjam is challenging my writing about how Rudy, sitting on the toilet, hears someone enter the front door, goes silent, heart pounding, knife at the ready!

Please keep your eyes open for anything like that in Rudy's confession to Mignini. If you find anything like that, Carbonjam is going to nominate me for a non-fiction award - maybe the Samuel Johnson Prize for Non-Fiction. Otherwise, I will forever be known for my imagination and I will rank up there in the Italian pantheon of fiction writers along with Andrea Vogt and Judge Nencini. I will be doomed!

Please, don't neglect my numerical moniker; CJ72 or CarbonJam72 if you please. (I'm reluctant to be confused with another CJ model).

Sadly though, even if Rudy says it happened, his word isn't necessarily credible. In fact, one of the most interesting aspects of this case, and in general, that I've learned in reading different people's books on this subject, is that not everyone or even anyone, knows the whole story.

Amanda knows what she knows, Raf knows what he knows, Candice Dempsey and Nina Burleigh know what they know and bring yet another perspective. The forensic guys and the police experts still more perspectives. The lawyers still more, the judges yet again.

The trick for people in our position is to form a coherent picture from as many sources as we can, always confident that there is only one true truth, and that cannot be changed. Concealed, hidden, lied about, twisted, distorted, etc - but never changed.

No kidding though, your writing is thrilling. I hope you put it to good use.

 

[acbytesla]

Sounds pretty close to me, but I do have one issue.

The defense made arguments, I believe, pointing to Glass shards in Meredith's Room beside Guede's footprints. Suggests that the break-in occurred first, and the perpetrator Guede climbed through the window as his method of entry. So in all fairness, I'd say we can cross out the idea that Rudy broke the window, then 'talked his way inside'. (Otherwise, how does the glass get in the murder room - without going off on another groundless crazy wholly invented tangent to explain it?)

Fair enough. I'll drop that idea...which I never consider that great in the first place. I've always believed that Rudy was inside the cottage BEFORE Meredith and Meredith was probably in her bedroom while Rudy was on the toilet and Rudy surprised her in her room. (My reasoning for that has been the fact that nothing is really disturbed outside of Filomena's room and Meredith's room. The struggle seems limited to Meredith's room.

Also, for crime reconstruction, people like Ron Hendry and John Douglas, are not just people expressing opinions. They're subject matter experts with decades of experience. I think one needs to have a really good reason for disputing their reconstructions. I read through Hendry's analysis of the break-in and blood spatter, and its damn well convincing to me, I didn't see a single false note. Douglas I read in his book 'Guede; the forgotten suspet', but he doesn't provide the in depth reasoning that Hendry does, more summary conclusion than the actual particulars. He doesn't give you a chance to evaluate his data, so its awkward. But still, It's John ***** Douglas, so what are you gonna say?

But I think we're on the same page in recognizing the reasonable limits of our ability to infer facts from evidence.

I have no doubt that both of Hendry and Douglass are top notch and true experts in their field. I get a little squeamish about how the cutting of Meredith's neck and her last moments...so I admit not paying as close attention to that part of crime as others. From my perspective, it is the lack of other people's footprints in Meredith's blood that makes me believe that there was single attacker. And I think no kind of cleanup took place in that bedroom.

I don't discount either of their opinions, but I don't like to substitute even an expert's opinion for my own. They have to show to me in detail something that I find conclusive. While I find both of them very persuasive, I can't come to the opinion that their reconstructions are totally conclusive. I'd rate their opinion's higher than pretty much everyone's. That said, I just don't see how they can really know as much detail as they describe.

 

[carbonjam72]

Anglo's Micro-analysis; Thinking Inside the box.

This is close to how I see it but I feel the 20 minutes is too long. One minute is enough. And Rudy himself tells us in his account that she called out when she entered, asking if anybody was home. This is another telling detail that goes with the keys. My guess is he had left the kitchen light on or something like that. He may have cut the light in the bathroom as he heard the key in the lock. Hearing no answer she went to her room and he followed right away.

(The delay of 20 minutes or whatever, is an issue that can be largely resolved by going to the Car park video and retrieving the time of Guede's movements, there's no reason to speculate on this point if its in the video with a time stamp).

I love your insight into the keys being another Rudy lie, triggered by the truth. But disentangling the lies of an inveterate liar like Rudy is a dicey business.

The idea of Rudy having left the lights on, causing Meredith to call out when she first comes home, seeding yet another lie, just great insight. I love it. But I have no way of measuring its specific accuracy.

We do know that Rudy was on the toilet. We know Meredith came home.We know Rudy was in the room when Meredith died. That he was inside her at some point. And so on.

These speculations carry more credibility to me than those that reach outside of the known parameters of evidence, for example, "Meredith may have let Rudy inside".

But it's still highly speculative. Detective Giobi thought he could tell Amanda was guilty because she was eating pizza. Does he really believe that crap, I don't know. But I think we need to distinguish between assertions of fact solidly founded in evidence, and the speculative 'icing on the cake' that makes the narrative come to life in between the facts, but has a status somewhat less than provable fact.

Hugely valuable and insightful skill. I can well imagine this type of judgement helping to guide an inquiry, as to what evidence to look for. But not a substitute for, nor equivalent of, actual evidence and provable facts.

 

[Samson]

Allright!
How are ya' all?!?
Good, I hope!!!

I'm a bit perplexed after reading here,
and watching the CCTV footage last night thru PMF.nutz,
that Amanda still does not know that the CCTV camera time is wrong!

Anyways,
as you and I have spent many hours readin' up and debatin' this brutal murder case,
let's keep trying to help her and Raff!!

So check this out,
from Rudy Guede's 2nd Interrogation with PM Mignini,
http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/RG-Transcript.pdf
Rudy basically confirms what I posted the other from finding and translating that article by NACHO AZPARREN,
1 of The Spanish Eramus students.

Link again, for anyone curious:
http://www.lne.es/sucesos/2011/10/05/copas-asesino-perugia/1138272.html

The translated post here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10009313&postcount=6032

Nacho Azparren,
nowadays a journalist, reports in a newspaper article that he wrote,
that he met Rudy Guede 10 days earlier and with other Spanish Eramus students
had drinks with him on the Halloween night before Meredith Kercher was raped and murdered.

Nacho Azparren reports that he did not have Rudy's phone #,
but a fellow Spanish guy did, a guy named Carlos.

Check this out!
Rudy himself states that he did indeed meet up with Carlos that Halloween Day,
and that he even says that he called Carlos,
(Per Rudy: via 1 of the Spanish girls above - (Carolina?)
for directions that day!

Somehow PM Mignini overlooked this!

Have a read, pages 23-24:
Pros. Mignini - And then did you have plans for that evening
Guede - So for that evening I had had plans for some time, yes… there was a
plan already organized for some time and not decided there in that
moment
Pros. Mignini - Right, with who?
Guede - Basically that evening I was to go to the house of the two Spanish
guys, of two Spanish guys that have the names Carlos and Thomas
Pros. Mignini - Where do they live?
Guede - The street, this is another thing I have difficulty in remembering the
exact name.. the area basically is where there are those steps that
lead to, where the Greek Consulate is, I don’t know if you know the
area… in via Oberdan, you go down the steps and as soon as you
start going down you take a turn before getting to the bottom that
leads to Corso Cavour you take a turn and they live in that street.
Pros. Mignini - Via Campo di Battaglia
Guede - However this… and I was to go and be with these guys Carlos and Thomas
this because the days before I got to know them and when I say I got to know them I mean in a very real way because I’ve met a lots of people in a superficial way however.
Pros. Mignini - Were there Spanish girls
Guede - Yes, when I arrived in that house I then came to know that they lived
with others, with other Spanish guys and other Spanish girls, with some Spanish girls who were friends,
the friends of the two Spanish girls that lived above me in Via del Canerino…
Pros. Mignini - So then that evening where were you?
Guede - That evening after leaving my house around eight thirty, around eight thirty after leaving my house I called Carlos and Thomas to find out exactly the area where they lived
via one of the girls that lives above me and after that I went to their house and it was in the plan
Pros. Mignini - Via Campo di Battaglia
Guede - Via Campo di Battaglia and it was in the plan that we would watch
the football match, we were to celebrate Halloween… ah before all
that we were to watch the football match Real Madrid Valencia that
was played that evening, together with the guys. I arrived at their
house, we ate, pizza and various things, we watched the match and
when the match finished we were there…
Pros. Mignini - Were all these guys Spanish?

Guede - All Spanish… and in the meantime other people arrived, other
Spanish guys, when the match finished we spoke, chatted and while
the girls prepared their outfits and I remember the outfits they
prepared were all a bit like cats…
Pros. Mignini - The Spanish girls
Guede - The Spanish girls yes…
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What?!?
Rudy tells PM Mignini he does not have a cell phone,
it was taken from him just days prior when he was busted after payin' 20 Euro to sleep in a youth hostel, err, nursery school and the school owner,principal did not like the idea and called the cops Rudy asked her to call the cops?

But a few days later,
he calls Carlos to meet up with him and the chicks on Halloween?!?

And then this call was used by ILE to call Carlos and Carolina,
(after Meredith Kercher was murdered),
who now in Switzeralnd, to have them return to Perugia for interrogation!
Hmmmm....

Me thinks that the article that Nacho Azparren wrote is totally legit!
Do you agree?



But check this out also:
Rudy also knows of The New Zealand guys,
Read pages 9-10 of the Rudy's 2nd Interrogation linked above:

Guede - Yes because he was, he was part of a group of boys that had come
through a football school there were those who were from the United
States and those who were from New Zealand and I got to know
them and I also spent time at their house however the address I
wouldn’t be able to tell you
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I bet 1 of those New Zealand boyz was the 1 who was probably Oceania's son
that I'd read of years ago on Perugia Shock.
Samson, start diggin'' around for info!
RW

Hmmm like John Kerry I will do my duty.

 

[anglolawyer]

Hi AngloLawyer!
I know that it's early for you,
so I wish you a swell day!

For me, well it's late, I'm still up,
and I gotta get some shut-eye as the surf should be building' overnight
and my eyes and everythin' else are shuttin' down.

But I need some help, once again,
trying to understand the bruising on the decedent in this brutal murder we discuss.

Here are links to 2 different postings which show the bruises in question:
From Oct. 21, 2008:
http://web.archive.org/web/20100807000133/http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2008_10_01_archive.html

and

Oct. 14, 2008:
http://web.archive.org/web/20110504...logspot.com/2008/10/pointing-at-murderer.html


This old surfer wants to know why there is such a large bruise, as shown in the diagram from Oct. 21, 2008, on Miss Kercher's left leg, her upper thigh?

And how does the apparent bruise on the back of her head fit into anyones theory?

Keep in mind,
I do know, from personal past courtroom experience which cost me $$,$$$.$$
that it is indeed the minute details that will set a person free from horrible, wrongful allegations!!!

That large bruise on the decedents left thigh does not fit into my sequence of events.

It almost looks like someone might have kicked her hard as she lay sideways on the floor of her bedroom.

What about the bruising on the back of the decedents head?
Thoughts?
See ya ,
RW

You are dead right about drilling into micro-details. That's why I obsess about the lamp and the deleted text. Some of these things will bear fruit and some not. I am not the person to ask about the strange bruising though because I lack relevant expertise. The majority of the forensic guys who testified to Massei saw nothing to rule out a single attacker. Steve Moore agrees. Ron Hendry agrees too. More than good enough for me. I am pretty much wedded to the lone attacker theory so all the stuff about Koko, cat blood, mystery cars, hairs and bruises tends to pass me by. But follow your nose and keep digging because you already found new and interesting stuff.

Joanne Yeates was murderd in Bristol a couple of years ago. Single attacker, no knife. She somehow acquired 43 injuries or something like that. It can be hard to imagine the reality of such a desperate thing. The bruise on the thigh could have happened in many ways without there being more than one attacker, is what I think but I am no authority and attach little weight to my own opinion.

 

[anglolawyer]

(The delay of 20 minutes or whatever, is an issue that can be largely resolved by going to the Car park video and retrieving the time of Guede's movements, there's no reason to speculate on this point if its in the video with a time stamp).

I love your insight into the keys being another Rudy lie, triggered by the truth. But disentangling the lies of an inveterate liar like Rudy is a dicey business.

The idea of Rudy having left the lights on, causing Meredith to call out when she first comes home, seeding yet another lie, just great insight. I love it. But I have no way of measuring its specific accuracy.

We do know that Rudy was on the toilet. We know Meredith came home.We know Rudy was in the room when Meredith died. That he was inside her at some point. And so on.

These speculations carry more credibility to me than those that reach outside of the known parameters of evidence, for example, "Meredith may have let Rudy inside".

But it's still highly speculative. Detective Giobi thought he could tell Amanda was guilty because she was eating pizza. Does he really believe that crap, I don't know. But I think we need to distinguish between assertions of fact solidly founded in evidence, and the speculative 'icing on the cake' that makes the narrative come to life in between the facts, but has a status somewhat less than provable fact.

Hugely valuable and insightful skill. I can well imagine this type of judgement helping to guide an inquiry, as to what evidence to look for. But not a substitute for, nor equivalent of, actual evidence and provable facts.

True, If I were writing an Italian-style motivation in which the whole story has to be set out, evidence or not, then I would include the jangling keys and calling out ideas but I agree they are just speculations about something we can never know unless Rudy squeals on himself.

It will be interesting if/when he gets out to see if anyone can prod something out of him. Truth will out after all

 

[Samson]

You are dead right about drilling into micro-details. That's why I obsess about the lamp and the deleted text. Some of these things will bear fruit and some not. I am not the person to ask about the strange bruising though because I lack relevant expertise. The majority of the forensic guys who testified to Massei saw nothing to rule out a single attacker. Steve Moore agrees. Ron Hendry agrees too. More than good enough for me. I am pretty much wedded to the lone attacker theory so all the stuff about Koko, cat blood, mystery cars, hairs and bruises tends to pass me by. But follow your nose and keep digging because you already found new and interesting stuff.

Joanne Yeates was murderd in Bristol a couple of years ago. Single attacker, no knife. She somehow acquired 43 injuries or something like that. It can be hard to imagine the reality of such a desperate thing. The bruise on the thigh could have happened in many ways without there being more than one attacker, is what I think but I am no authority and attach little weight to my own opinion.

Unlikely neck of the woods, but does this measure up?

Two wounds pierced her heart and one lung, with other wounds to her neck and throat severing the main artery and the major vein. In total she received 216 separate injuries, mostly stab wounds from a knife blade, with some inflicted by scissors. Additionally there were seven blunt force injuries. The pathologist found some defensive wounds, and that the attack targeted aspects of beauty and was intended to disfigure.

This happened in Dunedin, population 120,000. University town. Not a first date, no humour intended.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Sophie_Elliott

 

[Dan O.]

Great job, RW. But I need a little help. Carbonjam is challenging my writing about how Rudy, sitting on the toilet, hears someone enter the front door, goes silent, heart pounding, knife at the ready!

Please keep your eyes open for anything like that in Rudy's confession to Mignini. If you find anything like that, Carbonjam is going to nominate me for a non-fiction award - maybe the Samuel Johnson Prize for Non-Fiction. Otherwise, I will forever be known for my imagination and I will rank up there in the Italian pantheon of fiction writers along with Andrea Vogt and Judge Nencini. I will be doomed!

I think it is usefull to present these possible naratives. There are of course infinite variations of possibilities and all but one is wrong. By analyzing these naratives we can spot inconsistancies or errors that help us eliminate groups of them and get closer to the one narative that is the truth.

In your narative you have Rudy passing through Filomena's room and going straight to the kitchen/fridge then the bathroom. There is however evidence that Rudy visited Laura's and Meredith's rooms first. Laura's sock drawer is open which is compleatly out of character for the rest of the room. And Rudy talks of hearing Meredith scream about somebody stealing her rent money.

Does Meredith go through the house searching the other girls rooms looking for her money? Rudy says she did that (with him). But was that just part of Rudy's tail to account for any disturbances he might have left in his burglaring or did he hear Meredith searching the cottage while he sat on the toilet with his heart pounding?

 

[carbonjam72]

Rudy is a loner in his burglaries, AFAWK -

Why do you think he was a loner? He hung out with the guys in the cottage. He went out the two nights before with the Spanish girls. His "friend" called him by Skype and offered to send money, which Rudi didn't find odd. He played on a semi-pro basketball team. He had had a girl friend in Milan.

Did the video catch Koko? Do you think it was Koko's car that fired off the CCTV?

He was a 'loner' in his burglaries, so far as we know. But if you don't believe he can be pegged for those prior burglaries, then this point probably won't be convincing to you.

If one believes Rudy is a burglar, I don't think we seen any evidence he ever worked with accomplices. (Arguments that he's a fence, or worked with accomplices, or spotters, seem unsupported, INO).

 

[Grinder]

Exactly! Why would he want to share the money? Why involve an accomplice? Especially if this is a spur of the moment, unplanned break-in.

It was well planned out and this was the first of several places the gang planned to hit that night when so many Italians go home for the holiday.

What percentage of burglars work with accomplices?

He's sitting on the toilet listening to his ipod, just as he did leisurely did when visiting the guys diwnstairs a few weeks earlier. Then he hears the door open. He becomes quiet and scared. He can hear himself breath and his heart pound. He doesn't know who just came in, how many people are there, and if there is a man with them. He immediately pulls out his knife and holds it in front of himself, ready to stab it forwards if anyone walks in on him. He listens, and thinks he only hears the noise of one person. There is no sound of people talking.

Rudi was in Milan without a knife until he borrowed one from the nursery kitchen for protection that night. The only mention that he had a knife was the CT story. There is no report he had a knife at any other time.

He fell asleep downstairs late at night and after drinking IIRC.

My bet is the knife came from the cottage.