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

[Grinder]

More from Cheli - Nencini think's Guede's Break-in style would have been familiar to police - hence he would not have faked a break-in in a manner that would have identified him -

"At this point Nencini asks three rhetorical questions he is going to answer himself:
1) who had interest to operate a cleanup?
2) who was sure to have available all the time needed to operate a systematic alteration of the crime scene?
3) what was the aim of that activity?
The answer to the first question is certainly not Guede because he barely knew Meredith and his only interest was that of quickly leaving the place. Moreover why would Guede have cleaned “everywhere” except the place where he had committed the crime (but that room was deemed impossible to clean according to Nencini himself) and where he had defecated?
“Rudi Hermann Guede was absolutely not linkable by the investigators to the apartment of the cottage at Via della Pergola used by the victim, nor to the victim herself”. (page 84)
Really? Stefano Bonassi (one of the boys downstairs) named him to the investigators and if it were true that Knox knew him “rather well” as stated by the ruling on page 92, then an innocent Knox could have as well named him to the investigators (as indeed she did, but without even remembering his name).
Not just that, Nencini states at page 84 that Guede “had perpetrated before thefts using the same technique” and that hence for him faking a break-in would have just meant calling upon himself the attention of the investigators. Now, besides admitting that our highly skilled burglar had used the same “uselessly complex” technique before, Nencini also implies that he was known to the investigators because of his activities (and he reiterates on page 92 that the police would have quickly arrived at him) and if so, clearly just his name made by Bonassi or Knox would have raised their interest.So a very cursory cleanup by Guede is not outside the realm of possibilities, a short cleanup operated in a state of excited frenzy, a state in which he could have forgotten or considered immaterial his “gift” in the small bathroom. Of course to accept this one should also drop Nencini’s conception of Guede as a cold-blooded professional."

Well, well, well must make those that think Napoleoni recognized his MO proud to be in league with the brilliance of Nonsecini.

Maybe later the big N will mention Comodi and her brother-in-law's video

Maybe N will give more details of the MOs of known burglars in Perugia.

While Hellmann was criticized for the C&V report making footnotes from the US it appears N is reading discussion boards and using their worst theories. Really.

 

[Samson]

I don't believe that anyone doubts that.



While I believe it remains a possibility your refusal is so hard to resist. I believe that there is a certain prejudice and bias against Rudi. certainly his involvement in the murder and refusal to tell all is justification for part of that it isn't the whole story. Rudi was a young athletic man that wasn't bad looking and if the guy downstairs is an example of her taste, looks weren't important. The initial reports were of consensual sex and a sex game. There was a very odd turn in the police leaks about the third day when stories made the case explicitly that she had no fault. It seemed very strange at the time



I propose that the british girls were probably so drunk they wouldn't have noticed or remembered. That's all. I think it is another possibility and adds a connection which as we all know reduces the gravity of the evidence

It is illogical to countenance the date theory, unless the standard innocence reconstruction is abandoned. How can a date be consistent with Rudi throwing a rock through her window?

 

[Dan O.]

Were her prints on the hair dryer or her cupboard door or any of the other places

There was a print of one of the roommates found on Amanda's cupboard door. This could only have been left after the cleanup so that makes her a co-conspirator in staging the crime.

 

[Planigale]

Were her prints on the hair dryer or her cupboard door or any of the other places (hairbrush) she might have touched when taking a shower? After all, the guilters (and the judge) don't believe her shower story so there should be no prints on those things.

Luca Cheli is just an observer like you, Vibio, and me. Funny that your first reaction is to demand to know his credentials (which he gives at the beginning of the article). He makes some great points, and funny ones too. If all this is so obvious it should be easy to pick holes in what he says. One of them is to point out the contradictions in Nencini's reasoning about the shower. Briefly, where the shower is concerned, the two apartments are miles apart and it's just insane that she would travel from one to the other just to shower, so she's obviously lying, but when it comes to switching cutlery, they are practically next door with a hole cut through to go back and forth instantly. Please reconcile.

Don't think this was meant for me? I know nothing of this Cheli!

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Luca Cheli on the CSC's motivations document

Planigale,

I think the message in question was addressed to Vibio. However Luca Cheli's response to the Court of Supreme Cassation's motivations report is well worth one's time.

 

[Dan O.]

It is illogical to countenance the date theory, unless the standard innocence reconstruction is abandoned. How can a date be consistent with Rudi throwing a rock through her window?

In a well known N-L documentary on campus life, Larry Kroger calls on Clorette for a date by tossing pebbles at her window until he finds one that is large enough to break the glass. This is a standard practice for first dates.

 

[Grinder]

In a well known N-L documentary on campus life, Larry Kroger calls on Clorette for a date by tossing pebbles at her window until he finds one that is large enough to break the glass. This is a standard practice for first dates.

In Italy large boulders are preferred.

Most likely Rudi called Napoleoni up after he killed Meredith and she told him to return and stage a burglary so she would recognize it and frame the kids.

 

[Dan O.]

Maybe later the big N will mention Comodi and her brother-in-law's video

You've found that the producer has a brother that works in the prosecutor's office. That does not preclude the producer being Comodi's brother-in-law.

Perhaps if you were to list all of Comodi's brother-in-laws we could exclude them and prove your claim.


Our lady of the toilet has been busy. Seems to be some interesting stuff outside of this case: (google it)

 

[Grinder]

You've found that the producer has a brother that works in the prosecutor's office. That does not preclude the producer being Comodi's brother-in-law.

Perhaps if you were to list all of Comodi's brother-in-laws we could exclude them and prove your claim.


Our lady of the toilet has been busy. Seems to be some interesting stuff outside of this case: (google it)

It would seem she is prosecuting not being prosecuted, but ole Google always makes it a bit unclear.

And it doesn't preclude the director being Anglo's long lost brother. Someone threw out an accusation that Comodi gave a contract to her brother in-law and has not been able to verify it. I don't feel the need to prove that Comodi doesn't have such a brother in-law.

 

[Bill Williams]

I'm pretty sure that if Vibeo can find something negative to say about Luca Cheli, that will mean that all of a sudden women will shed Y-haplotypes.

 

[Samson]

In a well known N-L documentary on campus life, Larry Kroger calls on Clorette for a date by tossing pebbles at her window until he finds one that is large enough to break the glass. This is a standard practice for first dates.

I see this was forty odd years ago. I suspect we need at least three instances to elevate it to standard practice, including Rudy's romantic venture.

 

[carbonjam72]

Grinder, don't be a sourpuss.

Well, well, well must make those that think Napoleoni recognized his MO proud to be in league with the brilliance of Nonsecini.

Maybe later the big N will mention Comodi and her brother-in-law's video

Maybe N will give more details of the MOs of known burglars in Perugia.

While Hellmann was criticized for the C&V report making footnotes from the US it appears N is reading discussion boards and using their worst theories. Really.

Grinder, your post made me smile. I can't believe you won't help me celebrate my petit triumph.

Nobody in the world had any idea what kind of cockamamie motivation Nencini would come up with to justify the inexplicable, and I somehow manage to score a small sideways inadvertent bulls eye on a point of contention between us, and you want to take that away from me?

Geez! Can't I tilt one beer in momentary glory?

Concerning Commodie's Brother in law, someone raised the issue of the cartoon. Thought I remembered some funky baloney and spit out what I had. Other people knew more and filled in the detail. That's wrong?

When life deals you lemons, make lemonade, don't suck on them!

 

[Bill Williams]

Grinder, your post made me smile. I can't believe you won't help me celebrate my petit triumph.

Nobody in the world had any idea what kind of cockamamie motivation Nencini would come up with to justify the inexplicable, and I somehow manage to score a small sideways inadvertent bulls eye on a point of contention between us, and you want to take that away from me?

Geez! Can't I tilt one beer in momentary glory?

Concerning Commodie's Brother in law, someone raised the issue of the cartoon. Thought I remembered some funky baloney and spit out what I had. Other people knew more and filled in the detail. That's wrong?

When life deals you lemons, make lemonade, don't suck on them!

You're asking Grinder not to be Grinder...... good luck!!!

 

[Samson]

I really don't know which video this is

http://www.video.mediaset.it/video/quarto_grado/clip/459579/omicidio-di-meredith-kercher.html

The title to this video google translates to this perfect English

Murder of Meredith Kercher

Among the different frames there is one that could decide the breakdown between Amanda and Raffaele.


However, what the story is I have no idea.

I suggest going to 4:0 and hovering over the pause button, till the montage of 6 different pictures of AK with bags, all to the right, then follows a smooth exit from a car and the habitual casting the bag over the right shoulder.

Are they saying this disproves the CCTV woman?
Anyone here with Italian may elucidate.

 

[JREF2010]

I have no idea, but if someone believes in the CCTV that could be all Raffaele needs to be let go.

He is not there, never seen and surely they could find some blurry black/white video in a car park garage to blame on Raffaele if they wanted to.

Can the ISC make his decision to acquit Raffaele and find Amanda guilty?
Maybe write a report based off blurry media news and ignore science, but like the other Judges make something up and let Raffaele go. If it was Raffaeles defense ploy to start separating the two, they started very late in the game.

I dont know much about women and their purses, some say the purses would always be worn on the same side, I notice in that film Amandas is 100% on the same side, which doesnt match the cctv. And where is the video of this person arriving from the garage? what time did the person arrive? and why would Amanda be going to a car garage when she doesnt have a car?

I dont know, maybe the Prosecution should have found a heroin lsd bum who lives in the garage to say it was definately Amanda, and that Raffaele was in the dark corner wearing a halloween mask.

 

[acbytesla]

I have no idea, but if someone believes in the CCTV that could be all Raffaele needs to be let go.

He is not there, never seen and surely they could find some blurry black/white video in a car park garage to blame on Raffaele if they wanted to.

Can the ISC make his decision to acquit Raffaele and find Amanda guilty?
Maybe write a report based off blurry media news and ignore science, but like the other Judges make something up and let Raffaele go. If it was Raffaeles defense ploy to start separating the two, they started very late in the game.

I dont know much about women and their purses, some say the purses would always be worn on the same side, I notice in that film Amandas is 100% on the same side, which doesnt match the cctv. And where is the video of this person arriving from the garage? what time did the person arrive? and why would Amanda be going to a car garage when she doesnt have a car?

I dont know, maybe the Prosecution should have found a heroin lsd bum who lives in the garage to say it was definately Amanda, and that Raffaele was in the dark corner wearing a halloween mask.

Clearly the actual facts don't matter to the Italian authorities so they could do anything that they wanted. I mean this motivation strains all credibility. But then they would have to come to the conclusion that was Rudy's bare foot print on the fuzzy mat and that there was something wrong with the DNA test on the bra clasp. And accept that there is NO SIGN of Amanda Knox at the crime scene.

 

[Anode]

Originally Posted by JREF2010 View Post
I have no idea, but if someone believes in the CCTV that could be all Raffaele needs to be let go.

He is not there, never seen and surely they could find some blurry black/white video in a car park garage to blame on Raffaele if they wanted to.

Can the ISC make his decision to acquit Raffaele and find Amanda guilty?
Maybe write a report based off blurry media news and ignore science, but like the other Judges make something up and let Raffaele go. If it was Raffaeles defense ploy to start separating the two, they started very late in the game.

I dont know much about women and their purses, some say the purses would always be worn on the same side, I notice in that film Amandas is 100% on the same side, which doesnt match the cctv. And where is the video of this person arriving from the garage? what time did the person arrive? and why would Amanda be going to a car garage when she doesnt have a car?

I dont know, maybe the Prosecution should have found a heroin lsd bum who lives in the garage to say it was definately Amanda, and that Raffaele was in the dark corner wearing a halloween mask.

Clearly the actual facts don't matter to the Italian authorities so they could do anything that they wanted. I mean this motivation strains all credibility. But then they would have to come to the conclusion that was Rudy's bare foot print on the fuzzy mat and that there was something wrong with the DNA test on the bra clasp. And accept that there is NO SIGN of Amanda Knox at the crime scene.

It might be what they want.

1) removes blame from their citizen RS
2) Gives the Kerchers what they want. Amanda's guilt.
3) Validates (in their minds) all or most of their police, prosecutors, and judges.
4) USA probably won't extradite so they won't have to do anything else except bitch about it and say "what more can we do? Blame the USA now!"

Just MHO.

 

[Desert Fox]

It might be what they want.

1) removes blame from their citizen RS
2) Gives the Kerchers what they want. Amanda's guilt.
3) Validates (in their minds) all or most of their police, prosecutors, and judges.
4) USA probably won't extradite so they won't have to do anything else except bitch about it and say "what more can we do? Blame the USA now!"

Just MHO.

The easiest solution to make the case go away though would have been to mumble something about reasonable doubt while implying that AK is actually guilty. Ties up everything neatly and the case is done.

 

[acbytesla]

It might be what they want.

1) removes blame from their citizen RS
2) Gives the Kerchers what they want. Amanda's guilt.
3) Validates (in their minds) all or most of their police, prosecutors, and judges.
4) USA probably won't extradite so they won't have to do anything else except bitch about it and say "what more can we do? Blame the USA now!"

Just MHO.

I understand, and I think to a certain degree,it is what they want. Never the less, it really stretches credibility. Not this has ever mattered to them.

I can just see it now. They get Raffaele to say that "Amanda might have left while he was sleeping, opening the hole for this kind of decision.


But does Raffaele have narcolepsy? The CCTV image was taken about 15 minutes after Raffaele is seen by his neighbor and Raffaele is on the phone with his dad. It also doesn't explain the download of Naruto at 9:25. From a logical stand point of view this would be as crazy a decision as possible. But I wouldn't put anything past the Italian judiciary. Nencini's decision is downright STUPID in its application of logic.

 

[carbonjam72]

Bets anyone?

The easiest solution to make the case go away though would have been to mumble something about reasonable doubt while implying that AK is actually guilty. Ties up everything neatly and the case is done.

That's actually my prediction. I don't think we can expect any better.

It's a shame though, but better than the alternatives; new trial or affirmation of the convictions.