Continuation Part Nine: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Desert Fox]

Serious question. . . .Assume that this forum dies, where would people here recommend I go to look at this case?

 

[codyjuneau]

Greetings all, [snip]
PS-Hey Cody Juneau, According to this really, really good article by KP, http://groundreport.com/meredith-kercher-crime-scene-instigation/ the crank calls to E. Lana's house had been happening for weeks before, and her house robbed, before Miss Kercher was horribly murdered:Alessandro Biscarini found one of Meredith’s cell phones in his mother’s garden; it was the Italian phone that Filomena had lent to her. Meredith carried two phones, one for England and one for Italy, as cell coverage in the EU sometimes required.

Alessandro had spent the night with his parents after they had received a bomb threat about 10pm the night before. Elisabetta Lana and her husband had received several prank calls in the past weeks and were robbed as well, but this call had upset them because the prankster had instructed them to “not to sit on the toilet because it would explode.” Mrs. Lana called the police and asked Alessandro to come over. The police had arrived by 10:30pm to investigate but couldn’t find anything, so it was deemed another prank call, and they left about 11pm.

Think about it for a moment, a bomb scare about an hour after Meredith’s murder at the very house where her phones would be found some twelve hours later, such an odd coincidence even if it was a prank call.

Elisabetta Lana would testify in the trial of the First Instance that she and her husband were on their way to give a statement to the Postal Police (who deal with phones and mail related crime) when Alessandro found the cellphone at the edge of the lawn. Mrs. Lana checked with police before leaving, thinking that the phone had been “lost by one of the officers who had come the evening before,” she was advised to bring it along and the arrived at the police station about 10:15am.
<snip>
Just after Noon
While Amanda and Raffaele are discovering the break-in, Elisabetta Lana’s daughter, Fiametta Biscarini, called to say that she had found a second cellphone in the same garden a short distance from where the first phone had been found, she had heard it ringing and a call from “Amanda” was noted. The British cellphone is turned into the Postal Police at 12:46pm and the Lana family is later shocked to find out that both cellphones belong to a murder victim.
.

.
First, thanks to the JREF people that fixed the performance and login problems with the forum. Nice job!

And a big thanks to you for the above link RW. That is the first time I have seen that article by Karen Pruett. If it is accurate then:

• The 'boy's prank' explanation for the bomb threat phone call WAS ASSUMED by the police, rather than determined (I will update my JREF signature accordingly).
• Lana was burglarized in the time period that Rudy was active as a burglar.

For those who do not know, Lana received a bomb threat phone call the night of Meredith's murder about an hour or so after Meredith was murdered. She telephoned the police and the police investigated that night. The next morning, Lana found both of Meredith's cell phones in the bushes of her yard. Lana lived outside the city walls very close to a path that leads to the inner city through a passageway in the wall. Rudy lived inside the city walls, not very far from the same passageway.

Many will say it was probably just another prank, so why bother investigating. Lana's instincts told her differently. That particular telephone call really scared her and prompted her to call the police. It also prompted her son to come over and stay the night. Some prank! Some instincts!

Besides, was it a bother for the TV station to test the climb up to Filomena's window, or to perform a test to determine if Nara could hear running on the metal steps? Was it a bother for independent experts to test the knife and bra clasp? I suppose so, but then spending life in prison for a crime one did not commit is a bit of a bother also.

I am glad to see that this event is being researched. It seems to me there are two fundamental questions that still need answering.

1. Is there any connection, direct or indirect, between the phone number that made that call and Rudy?
2. Is there any connection, direct or implied, between the burglary and Rudy?

For the bomb threat phone call:

• Did the caller sound like a child or a man?
• Did the caller have a recognizable accent?
• What were the EXACT words that Lana thought she heard? Were they repeated?
• Did the police obtain the telephone records for that phone call? If not, why not? If they simply did not bother, then someone should now search the public telephone service archives and find it.
• Who owns the caller's telephone number? Does the owner have any connection with Rudy? Did the owner admit to making the prank call? If not, then why? Was it made with a cell phone that was stolen from him? If so what were the details of the theft?
• Or, if the call was from a VOIP service like Skype. Was the IP obtained? Who was using that IP? Did the owner admit to making the prank call? If not, then why? Was his computer stolen recently? If so, what were the details of the theft?

For the burglary at Lana's residence:

• What day did it occur?
• What was the method of entry?
• What was taken from Lana's place during the robbery?
• What other notable things did the burglar do during the burglary?
• Was a police report made for the burglary?
• Was anybody charged for this burglary?

Just some of the questions that should be answered regarding the incredibly improbable coincidence of a bomb threat phone call, within an hour of Meredith's murder, to the exact residence where her cell phones were discarded, in my unrelenting opinion.

So thanks again RW.

Cody
.

 

[Bill Williams]

I remember Machiavelli arguing that the bloody knife stain on Meredith's bedsheet matches the dimensions of Raffaele's much larger knife. That was a stretch!

The odd thing was that Machiavelli announced that here in this forum one week last fall, and then Prosecutor Crini the next week suggests this in the Florence courtroom.

Once again, without a stick of evidence other than a surmise - but it is telling that Machiavelli knew about it a week previous.

And then, we hear nothing about it again. Nencini, as far as I know, doesn't even cover it. One knife, two knives, what difference does it make - sex-gone-wrong theory, pooh-in-the-toilet theory, or argument over rent money - as long as his court finds them guilty.

Machiavelli - why have you never called Wladimiro De Nunzio a criminal?

 

[carbonjam72]

Nice conjecture cody, I'm intrigued

.
First, thanks to the JREF people that fixed the performance and login problems with the forum. Nice job!

And a big thanks to you for the above link RW. That is the first time I have seen that article by Karen Pruett. If it is accurate then:

• The 'boy's prank' explanation for the bomb threat phone call WAS ASSUMED by the police, rather than determined (I will update my JREF signature accordingly).
• Lana was burglarized in the time period that Rudy was active as a burglar.

For those who do not know, Lana received a bomb threat phone call the night of Meredith's murder about an hour or so after Meredith was murdered. She telephoned the police and the police investigated that night. The next morning, Lana found both of Meredith's cell phones in the bushes of her yard. Lana lived outside the city walls very close to a path that leads to the inner city through a passageway in the wall. Rudy lived inside the city walls, not very far from the same passageway.

Many will say it was probably just another prank, so why bother investigating. Lana's instincts told her differently. That particular telephone call really scared her and prompted her to call the police. It also prompted her son to come over and stay the night. Some prank! Some instincts!

Besides, was it a bother for the TV station to test the climb up to Filomena's window, or to perform a test to determine if Nara could hear running on the metal steps? Was it a bother for independent experts to test the knife and bra clasp? I suppose so, but then spending life in prison for a crime one did not commit is a bit of a bother also.

I am glad to see that this event is being researched. It seems to me there are two fundamental questions that still need answering.

1. Is there any connection, direct or indirect, between the phone number that made that call and Rudy?
2. Is there any connection, direct or implied, between the burglary and Rudy?

For the bomb threat phone call:

• Did the caller sound like a child or a man?
• Did the caller have a recognizable accent?
• What were the EXACT words that Lana thought she heard? Were they repeated?
• Did the police obtain the telephone records for that phone call? If not, why not? If they simply did not bother, then someone should now search the public telephone service archives and find it.
• Who owns the caller's telephone number? Does the owner have any connection with Rudy? Did the owner admit to making the prank call? If not, then why? Was it made with a cell phone that was stolen from him? If so what were the details of the theft?
• Or, if the call was from a VOIP service like Skype. Was the IP obtained? Who was using that IP? Did the owner admit to making the prank call? If not, then why? Was his computer stolen recently? If so, what were the details of the theft?

For the burglary at Lana's residence:

• What day did it occur?
• What was the method of entry?
• What was taken from Lana's place during the robbery?
• What other notable things did the burglar do during the burglary?
• Was a police report made for the burglary?
• Was anybody charged for this burglary?

Just some of the questions that should be answered regarding the incredibly improbable coincidence of a bomb threat phone call, within an hour of Meredith's murder, to the exact residence where her cell phones were discarded, in my unrelenting opinion.

So thanks again RW.

Cody
.

Well 10:15pm puts Rudy in the downstairs apt by my reckoning, since he was spotted by the couple on the stairs running away at (1030pm?). So maybe relaxing on a chair or bed, and catching his breadth after the murder, maybe washing his pants of blood?

So, Meredith's tel records are known. Did the guys downstairs have a landline, or other cel phones Rudy could have used? Or traced to another phone stolen by Rudy?

Evidence of Rudy in a prior theft at that house, could indicate Rudy testing the waters for a second robbery in the same night, even after the first one went bad. (Rudy went double dipping at the Milan nursery as well, right?).

And the phrase, "bomb in the toilet" could be a reference to the up stairs toilet where Rudy left a crap - if they hadn't answered the phone, Rudy might conclude they weren't home. Similar 'test-the-waters' technique as the rock through the window; if they're home, leave them alone.

I like the idea of a tie-in, but I agree those phone records are the place to start.

Or, it could just be a bad coincidence. The previous cottage's owners swear its haunted. It has a really creepy history, including a random knife slashing, and more.

 

[platonov]

Serious question. . . .Assume that this forum dies, where would people here recommend I go to look at this case?

The new improved version of JREFF of course !

Failing that there is a site that LJ is always going on about - he doesn't like it (as far as I can gather) but they seem to have done much of the translations of the original court docs.

And there is another site Injustice something or somethingFront but we are not supposed to talk about it here, I think.

Hope this helps.

 

[Vibio]

My wife - fluent in Italian, a banker for ABN AMRO in Milan for five years - just watched twice, and said she had great difficulty understanding what Mignini's erstwhile super-witness was saying. Elsewhere, the nut Yummi has compared Curatolo's diction to Sollecito's and found Raffaele the one coming up wanting.

Right.

Mach's comparison was between the diction of Guede and Sollecito. And Mach is correct about that.

-----------------------

Re: That film clip of Curatolo.

The clip was shot in 2011. Years after the first trial.

At the first trial, I can find no evidence that drug use concerning Curatolo was an issue.

The defense does not bring up the issue of drugs in their questioning of him at the trial.

There is no mention of drug use in Raffaele Sollecito's Appeal from Massei.

No mention of drug use in Amanda Knox's Appeal from Massei.

Nothing about Curatolo and drug use in Maria Del Grosso's Massei Trial Rebuttal in Defense of Amanda Knox.

Nothing in Luca Maori's Massei Trial Closing Arguments for Raffaele Sollecito.

Nothing in Giulia Bongiorno's Massei Trial Closing Arguments for Raffaele Sollecito.

Nothing in Carlo Dalla Vedova's Massei Trial Closing Arguments in Defense of Amanda Knox.

Nothing in Luciano Ghirga's Massei Trial Rebuttal in Defense of Amanda Knox.

Nothing in Donatella Donati's Massei Trial Rebuttal for Raffaele Sollecito.

So, I kinda have a feeling it was not an issue.

 

[Kaosium]

Mach's comparison was between the diction of Guede and Sollecito. And Mach is correct about that.

-----------------------

Re: That film clip of Curatolo.

The clip was shot in 2011. Years after the first trial.

At the first trial, I can find no evidence that drug use concerning Curatolo was an issue.

The defense does not bring up the issue of drugs in their questioning of him at the trial.

There is no mention of drug use in Raffaele Sollecito's Appeal from Massei.

No mention of drug use in Amanda Knox's Appeal from Massei.

Nothing about Curatolo and drug use in Maria Del Grosso's Massei Trial Rebuttal in Defense of Amanda Knox.

Nothing in Luca Maori's Massei Trial Closing Arguments for Raffaele Sollecito.

Nothing in Giulia Bongiorno's Massei Trial Closing Arguments for Raffaele Sollecito.

Nothing in Carlo Dalla Vedova's Massei Trial Closing Arguments in Defense of Amanda Knox.

Nothing in Luciano Ghirga's Massei Trial Rebuttal in Defense of Amanda Knox.

Nothing in Donatella Donati's Massei Trial Rebuttal for Raffaele Sollecito.

So, I kinda have a feeling it was not an issue.

Which means...what...to you?

 

[Bill Williams]

Mach's comparison was between the diction of Guede and Sollecito. And Mach is correct about that.

-----------------------

Re: That film clip of Curatolo.

The clip was shot in 2011. Years after the first trial.

At the first trial, I can find no evidence that drug use concerning Curatolo was an issue.

The defense does not bring up the issue of drugs in their questioning of him at the trial.

There is no mention of drug use in Raffaele Sollecito's Appeal from Massei.

No mention of drug use in Amanda Knox's Appeal from Massei.

Nothing about Curatolo and drug use in Maria Del Grosso's Massei Trial Rebuttal in Defense of Amanda Knox.

Nothing in Luca Maori's Massei Trial Closing Arguments for Raffaele Sollecito.

Nothing in Giulia Bongiorno's Massei Trial Closing Arguments for Raffaele Sollecito.

Nothing in Carlo Dalla Vedova's Massei Trial Closing Arguments in Defense of Amanda Knox.

Nothing in Luciano Ghirga's Massei Trial Rebuttal in Defense of Amanda Knox.

Nothing in Donatella Donati's Massei Trial Rebuttal for Raffaele Sollecito.

So, I kinda have a feeling it was not an issue.

This is a confusing post. Are you criticizing Machiavelli for making an issue out of it?

 

[RWVBWL]

Hi Cody Juneau,
Nice post,
it makes me more curious about the bomb threat phone call to Elisabetta Lana that night.
I wonder, was whomever calling E. Lana doing so by calling her landline phone or her cell phone? And how did the person get her phone #?

I found some interesting tidbits on pages 51-54 of Murder in Italy, written by C. Dempsey.
Let's add these to our knowledge of the case:

There was a burglary at the residence of Elisabetta Lana in 2003, 2004,
and an attempted robbery in Dec. 2006.

E. Lana had been receiving crank calls in the middle of the night,
the caller either hung up or breathed into the phone.

After receiving the latest crank call at about 10:00pm on a holiday evening,
1 where a male caller had said "There is a bomb in your toilet-do not piss,
do not flush, and get out of the house because it may explode!"
she simply put the phone down, thinking it was a practical joke.
But she became uneasy, for the caller seemed to be a mind reader,
as she had been on the verge of using her toilet.

After calling the police on 113, the cops told her they would send out a squad car. She then called her son Alessandro around 10:30 pm and asked him to come over that Thursday night of 1 Nov, 2007. At a friends house, he jumped in his car and rushed to his Mom's villa and arrived after the police had already pulled into the driveway. When a sweep of the house and garden found no threat of bombs, the cops split and Alessandro spent the night there. In the morning his girlfriend called, interrupting his breakfast and so he went outside for a bit of privacy, where strolling around the half-acre garden, he found a light colored Motorola cell phone, flipped over, its keyboard facing the ground, at about 9:00am, out in the open in the middle of the lawn

This was found some 60 feet away from the wooded road above the cottage.

About 12:00pm,
Alessandro's sister Fiammetta and the house maid were also searching for signs of any intruders and they heard a phone ring in some bushes. Using a spade, she found another cell phone, a gray+black Sony Ericsson, later determined to be British, under dead leaves and brambles, less than 20 feet from the roadway Via Andrea da Perugia. It stopped ringing by the time she reached for it.

She grabbed it and took it to the house and asked her brother to look at it.
It rang again. He checked the display.
"Amanda", it said...



A few questions.
I've stated that I thought it possible that Rudy Guede might have thrown the cell phones from a moving car before.

BUT re-reading these passage in Murder in Italy,
it appears possible that Rudy Guede might have tried to discard and personally hide Meredith Kercher's cell phone by burying it under some dead leaves in some bushes, less than 20 feet from the side of the road, which is near his own residence.

Didn't Meredith's cell phone ring that night?

If so,
I'll speculate that it was after the police searched the house and garden, and had probably left when Rudy Guede buried the British Ericsson cell phone under the leaves in the bushes and threw the other phone,
which was found in the middle of the lawn, out in the open.

Was this roadway part of the route he took to head home that night after leaving Miss Kercher to die?
Was he almost home when Meredith's cell phone rang, which panicked him and so he walked thataway towards Elisabetta Lana's villa after the phone rang to get ride of both of the cell phones?

After burying the British cell phone that rang,
did Guede simply heave the other cell phone as far as he could, some 60 feet from the roadway?

Though I find CarbonJam72's toilet bomb theory, (Guede left a bomb, err, floater) interesting, I am now adjusting my own theory about the cell phones, the crank call and any connection with Rudy Guede or Hekuran Kokomani doing a drive-by discarding of the cell phones, unless it can be shown that it was 1 of these 2 who called Elisabetta's residence and warned her: "C'e una bomba nel vostro water-non fate pipi, non tirate l'acqua, e uscite di casa perche puo esplode!"

 

[Desert Fox]

The odd thing was that Machiavelli announced that here in this forum one week last fall, and then Prosecutor Crini the next week suggests this in the Florence courtroom.

Once again, without a stick of evidence other than a surmise - but it is telling that Machiavelli knew about it a week previous.

And then, we hear nothing about it again. Nencini, as far as I know, doesn't even cover it. One knife, two knives, what difference does it make - sex-gone-wrong theory, pooh-in-the-toilet theory, or argument over rent money - as long as his court finds them guilty.
Machiavelli - why have you never called Wladimiro De Nunzio a criminal?

I wonder if it would have helped if somebody had dropped an Italian Translation of "The Wrong Guys" on the desk of the Italian Prosecutors.

 

[Annella]

Mach's comparison was between the diction of Guede and Sollecito. And Mach is correct about that.

Wrong. I tweeted the video of Curatolo on 3rd August and Machiavelli and I had a 'conversation' about how we each interpreted what we saw in that video. Mach stated that Curatolo's diction was much better than that of Raffaele.
Always good to get your facts right Sal Vibio.

 

[Samson]

Wrong. I tweeted the video of Curatolo on 3rd August and Machiavelli and I had a 'conversation' about how we each interpreted what we saw in that video. Mach stated that Curatolo's diction was much better than that of Raffaele.
Always good to get your facts right Sal Vibio.

Someone called Sal**** posted main content on TJMK about the computers, which by definition escalates the intention of the commenter.

 

[Draca]

Let us assume that you are pro guilt. . . . .
You should be incensed about just how badly the police screwed up.
I never however read pro guilt arguments that argue that they think they are guilty but that the prosecution badly hosed the case.

<Dr Patrizia Stefanoni was in charge of the crime scene. She completely botched overseeing the collection of evidence. She was a slob herself and the video of her gift wrapping a mop, as well as her storing bloody evidence in the cottage freezer is direct evidence that she didn't only botch it, she didn't even know she was doing everything wrong! How are they going to criticize the obvious incompetence and sloppy job she did in the cottage and then turn around and declare her lab work pristine? They can not, and they know that. They cling to her knife lab work and can not afford to lose that evidence by admitting what they can see with their own eyes. To do so would be to admit the knife and bra clasp were contamination at best. It is a blatant case of uber selective confirmation bias. They hold a completely unethical and dishonest view of the case.

 

[bolint]

Let us assume that you are pro guilt. . . . .
You should be incensed about just how badly the police screwed up.
I never however read pro guilt arguments that argue that they think they are guilty but that the prosecution badly hosed the case.

I am one who thinks that the police and the prosecution committed a lot of faults and yet I am still pro guilt.

 

[Samson]

I am one who thinks that the police and the prosecution committed a lot of faults and yet I am still pro guilt.

Bolint, currently being discussed on sites are the transcripts of Amanda's texts.

On the 3rd November, after the murder and before her arrest, she sent a text which said

'what kind of burgler' would not steal anything (and says) the window entry point is wierd.

Can you explain why she sent this specific text?

 

[Draca]

I am one who thinks that the police and the prosecution committed a lot of faults and yet I am still pro guilt.

Do you still accept the bra clasp and knife as legitimate evidence after watching the video?

 

[Draca]

Calling it.

The most disingenuous moment of the case happened when the prosecution claimed they missed collecting the bra clasp by accident because it was so very SMALL, never mentioning all the other rather LARGE items they also left behind.

 

[acbytesla]

One of the memes about the murder is that Amanda and Meredith didn't get along. ....All I can say to that is have these people seen the text messages between Meredith and Amanda?

10/20/2007 : "Hey sorry i had 2 go home n get changed do u still need saving xx"

10/20/2007: "Hey they're not whowing it in tanna we're going to shamrock xx"

10/19/2007: "Hey us still out x"

10/18/2007 "Ill meet u at the fountain in 5 x"

10/18/2007 "Why's he waiting? I'm in a diff bar. I'm gonna come down later n c u at wk tho xx"

10/18/2007 Ur pretty boy or mary poppins? do u ned help xx

Notice the "xx" at the end of the message. That's an abbreviation for affection in case you didn't know. It means kisses. xo means kiss and a hug.

Amazing.

 

[NancyS]

Mach's comparison was between the diction of Guede and Sollecito. And Mach is correct about that.

-----------------------

Re: That film clip of Curatolo.

The clip was shot in 2011. Years after the first trial.

At the first trial, I can find no evidence that drug use concerning Curatolo was an issue.

The defense does not bring up the issue of drugs in their questioning of him at the trial.

There is no mention of drug use in Raffaele Sollecito's Appeal from Massei.

No mention of drug use in Amanda Knox's Appeal from Massei.

Nothing about Curatolo and drug use in Maria Del Grosso's Massei Trial Rebuttal in Defense of Amanda Knox.

Nothing in Luca Maori's Massei Trial Closing Arguments for Raffaele Sollecito.

Nothing in Giulia Bongiorno's Massei Trial Closing Arguments for Raffaele Sollecito.

Nothing in Carlo Dalla Vedova's Massei Trial Closing Arguments in Defense of Amanda Knox.

Nothing in Luciano Ghirga's Massei Trial Rebuttal in Defense of Amanda Knox.

Nothing in Donatella Donati's Massei Trial Rebuttal for Raffaele Sollecito.

So, I kinda have a feeling it was not an issue.

So are you trying to say that at the initial trial the defence were not aware of Curatolo's heroin addiction and that this only came to light in the Hellman trial? Had the prosecution therefore suppressed this information?

I would definitely agree that the defence have never done a particularly good job, but heroin addiction and using heroin is always going to be an issue.

 

[Dan O.]

If Amanda and Meredith weren't close, Meredith would never have called Amanda back at noon before anything happened.

http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/AK_Phone_Traffic.pdf

02.11.2007|12:07:12|3484673590|447841131571|outgoing call|Meredith Kercher (E)|0 : 16
02.11.2007|12:08:44|3484673590|3471073006|outgoing call|Filomena Romanelli|1 : 08
02.11.2007|12:11:02|3484673590|3484673711|incoming call|Meredith Kercher (I)|0 : 03