Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Desert Fox]

This isn't a list of evidence that I think is good but rather evidence used.

The bloody footprint on the bathmat.

The false alibi as per Curatolo.

The knife of Raf's found with Meredith's DNA on it.

Calling the Carabinier after the PP arrived. (Massei passed on this)

Saying he pricked Meredith with the knife.

Turning off his phone.

I'm sure there is more but the above should do.

So you are largely arguing evidence that most here would not consider really evidence?

 

[RWVBWL]

Not for all the videos that are available
Nov 2, 2007: 19.44 min
Nov 3, 2007 pt.1: 20.14 min
Nov 3, 2007 pt.2: 22.44 min
Nov 16, 2007: 52.00 min
Dec 18, 2007 pt.1: 54.12 min
Dec 18, 2007 pt.2: 118.22 min

Hiya Metho's,
Thanks again for ALL the links to these vid'z!
I was able to download and save to my computer,
while using a very fast landline connection,
ALL but the 1st vid, even though I tried to about 5 times,
it kept sayin' Temporary Error...

Maybe too many are tryin' to download it right now,
who knows, but I'll try download it latter, after I go grab some fast food Mexican
at Del Taco here, near the beaches of Los Angeles...

Appreciate the links!
RW

 

[Grinder]

So you are largely arguing evidence that most here would not consider really evidence?

No I'm saying that the only evidence wasn't the bra clasp. Since MOST HERE including me wouldn't accept the clasp why would someone claim it was the only evidence.

As Anglo laid out recently a bunch of seemingly weak evidence can add up to something.

Clearly the prosecution didn't rely only on the clasp.

 

[Desert Fox]

No I'm saying that the only evidence wasn't the bra clasp. Since MOST HERE including me wouldn't accept the clasp why would someone claim it was the only evidence.

As Anglo laid out recently a bunch of seemingly weak evidence can add up to something.

Clearly the prosecution didn't rely only on the clasp.

I tend to operate by the Mark Crislip motto,
"If you mix cow pie with apple pie, it does not make the cow pie taste better; it makes the apple pie worse."

Basically, garbage evidence does not help things. I see everything presented on your list as garbage evidence.

There is a case in Missouri I have been looking at, where an ex girlfriend accused her boyfriend of murdering another woman with a shotgun. What I have been able to tell, the wound was consistent with a 9 mm. Doesn't matter what other evidence there might be, if that is the case, he did not murder the woman the way his former girlfriend suggested.

 

[Samson]

Nencini even says, straight out of the blue, that Raffaele's DNA is on that knife.

Maybe the proof reading budget is related to the Questura recording budget but not the phone tapping transcripts budget.
The greater difficulty is understanding the priorities of these people. I would like to see evidence of the exhaustive forensic study that made the conclusion the window vandalism was conducted from INSIDE the scrupulously clean chain smoking Filomena's room.

 

[Methos]

Hiya Metho's,
Thanks again for ALL the links to these vid'z!
I was able to download and save to my computer,
while using a very fast landline connection,
ALL but the 1st vid, even though I tried to about 5 times,
it kept sayin' Temporary Error...

Maybe too many are tryin' to download it right now,
who knows, but I'll try download it latter, after I go grab some fast food Mexican
at Del Taco here, near the beaches of Los Angeles...

Appreciate the links!
RW

Hi RW,
looks like the server is busy at the moment, last time I looked the file was there
Someone on a German forum suggested a "worst of" from that videos dubbed with the music fom the Benny Hill Show...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MK6TXMsvgQg

But there are a few "highlights" available on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWWH42mzurM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnttR-fS7Hs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Omhw0MAumGo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2wOymd_LgM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW2u84z-xJg

Enjoy your Taco @ "Del Taco"

 

[Grinder]

I tend to operate by the Mark Crislip motto,
"If you mix cow pie with apple pie, it does not make the cow pie taste better; it makes the apple pie worse."

Basically, garbage evidence does not help things. I see everything presented on your list as garbage evidence.

There is a case in Missouri I have been looking at, where an ex girlfriend accused her boyfriend of murdering another woman with a shotgun. What I have been able to tell, the wound was consistent with a 9 mm. Doesn't matter what other evidence there might be, if that is the case, he did not murder the woman the way his former girlfriend suggested.

Jesus, did the prosecution put more than the clasp into evidence against Raf? Yes or no.

You may call it garbage, but you call it evidence which was my point, so thank you for confirming it.

It is not the same thing to claim the clasp is the only evidence as claiming the other evidence is bogus. further since the poster claimed the clasp was the only evidence and it is also bogus that makes his assertion even more ludicrous.

I imagine that you experimented with the pies to verify another ridiculous analogy.

 

[Desert Fox]

Jesus, did the prosecution put more than the clasp into evidence against Raf? Yes or no.

You may call it garbage, but you call it evidence which was my point, so thank you for confirming it.

It is not the same thing to claim the clasp is the only evidence as claiming the other evidence is bogus. further since the poster claimed the clasp was the only evidence and it is also bogus that makes his assertion even more ludicrous.

I imagine that you experimented with the pies to verify another ridiculous analogy.

You do know what Cow Pies are?

I would argue that just because somebody claims something is evidence does not really make it evidence. Now, if you want to argue that the Italian prosecutors claim it is evidence, fine, I will agree with that statement.

 

[Desert Fox]

Hi RW,
looks like the server is busy at the moment, last time I looked the file was there
Someone on a German forum suggested a "worst of" from that videos dubbed with the music fom the Benny Hill Show...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MK6TXMsvgQg

But there are a few "highlights" available on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWWH42mzurM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnttR-fS7Hs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Omhw0MAumGo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2wOymd_LgM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW2u84z-xJg

Enjoy your Taco @ "Del Taco"

Since I believe you watched the whole video, did they handle every single piece of evidence without once changing their gloves? If so, I think I am going to be sick. . . .

 

[Methos]

Since I believe you watched the whole video, did they handle every single piece of evidence without once changing their gloves? If so, I think I am going to be sick. . . .

Well, they just didn't mind documenting the glove changing...
But take a look at the pictures at the bottom of this page it's the usual procedure...

 

[Desert Fox]

Well, they just didn't mind documenting the glove changing...
But take a look at the pictures at the bottom of this page it's the usual procedure...

One of my thoughts is if the handler went from Meredeth's jacket to the bra clasp without changing gloves, Meredeth and Raff did have contact.
Raff DNA:
Him > Meredeth's Jacket > Crime Scene person > Meredeth's Bra.
Having to be honest though, you don't really even need the tech in there
Meredeth could have transferred his DNA to her bra herself.
Their hands touch, she later adjusts her bra, DNA transferred.

 

[Bill Williams]

Since I believe you watched the whole video, did they handle every single piece of evidence without once changing their gloves? If so, I think I am going to be sick. . . .

But you don't understand. At trial Stefanoni assured the court that she regularly changed gloves. Even when Stefanoni admitted that a second tech that day had also handled the clasp before bagging, her assurances were good enough for Judge Massei.

Even in the face of Stefanoni admitting under cross examination that she could neither confirm nor deny actually touching the hasps with obviously dirty gloves.....

Her word about her general practice was enough for Massei, despite what was obvious on her own film.

He convicted.

 

[Desert Fox]

But you don't understand. At trial Stefanoni assured the court that she regularly changed gloves. Even when Stefanoni admitted that a second tech that day had also handled the clasp before bagging, her assurances were good enough for Judge Massei.

Even in the face of Stefanoni admitting under cross examination that she could neither confirm nor deny actually touching the hasps with obviously dirty gloves.....

Her word about her general practice was enough for Massei, despite what was obvious on her own film.

He convicted.

Too bad that there is not a EU investigating body which could address these practices.
I think if this was seen on video, you could bring this up in the US to the DOJ. This just seems too obvious stupidity.

 

[Grinder]

You do know what Cow Pies are?

I would argue that just because somebody claims something is evidence does not really make it evidence. Now, if you want to argue that the Italian prosecutors claim it is evidence, fine, I will agree with that statement.

It is sort of a shepherd's pie. Carrots, peas, well you know.

We usually find these pies in fields where cows have been eating and pooping.

One last try. If someone says the only evidence against someone was A , then that means there was nothing else. Period.

In this case someone here argued that the clasp was the only evidence against Raf but as I demonstrated that isn't true. Now that person doesn't believe the clasp was good evidence so they aren't talking about good evidence when they call the clasp the only evidence. Therefore the other evidence is just the same as the clasp. You and I may well agree that none of the evidence presented was good or good enough to convict but there certainly was other evidence as good as the clasp.

 

[acbytesla]

It is sort of a shepherd's pie. Carrots, peas, well you know.

We usually find these pies in fields where cows have been eating and pooping.

One last try. If someone says the only evidence against someone was A , then that means there was nothing else. Period.

In this case someone here argued that the clasp was the only evidence against Raf but as I demonstrated that isn't true. Now that person doesn't believe the clasp was good evidence so they aren't talking about good evidence when they call the clasp the only evidence. Therefore the other evidence is just the same as the clasp. You and I may well agree that none of the evidence presented was good or good enough to convict but there certainly was other evidence as good as the clasp.

Well Grinder, it depends on what you consider evidence. The footprint in fact does not match Raffaele, although that didn't stop the prosecution from arguing that it did. Curatolo, wasn't actually dependable. And if anything, he provides the couple with an alibi. The Knife of course was discredited. It doesn't match the wounds or the knife stain. Saying he pricked Meredith with the knife. That is more a sign of desperation than it is evidence. Turning off the phone is not evidence of anything.

 

[Desert Fox]

Well Grinder, it depends on what you consider evidence. The footprint in fact does not match Raffaele, although that didn't stop the prosecution from arguing that it did. Curatolo, wasn't actually dependable. And if anything, he provides the couple with an alibi. The Knife of course was discredited. It doesn't match the wounds or the knife stain. Saying he pricked Meredith with the knife. That is more a sign of desperation than it is evidence. Turning off the phone is not evidence of anything.

Or how I thinking I would put it. . . .
"Just because you could hoodwink a jury with an item of evidence does not mean it is really evidence of guilt."

Edit: Usually I can at least understand where Grinder is coming from. I can in this case but consider him to be just chasing rabbit holes.

 

[Dan O.]

I'm still curious of this possible gum found on the left side of Meredith's wardrobe that Fine mentioned years ago.

http://www.duckbrand.com/products/invisible-tapes/poster-putty

 

[Bill Williams]

Well Grinder, it depends on what you consider evidence. The footprint in fact does not match Raffaele, although that didn't stop the prosecution from arguing that it did. Curatolo, wasn't actually dependable. And if anything, he provides the couple with an alibi. The Knife of course was discredited. It doesn't match the wounds or the knife stain. Saying he pricked Meredith with the knife. That is more a sign of desperation than it is evidence. Turning off the phone is not evidence of anything.

The footprint. The discussion Massei goes through is good enough for me, albeit the good judge proceeds to ignore the discussion in the finding of guilt. For the 100th time, it is not a footprint - forensicly it is, as explained in Massei, a foot-track, which even Massei concedes makes a difference. And because of the nature of the material on which the track was left, there is little way a positive I.D. can be achieved - and certainly not from photographs.

Raffaele saying that maybe Meredith got pricked with the knife. This was a private, diary-like comment Raffaele wrote to himself; never meaning for it to become part of the record. It's being played as if Raffaele said this as a bald-faced lie in open court. It is meaningless.

Turning off the phone is, as you say, evidence of nothing. Curatolo, as you say, virtually provides them an alibi.

At the end of the day all there is to cast suspicion on Raffaele is the DNA on the clasp. And despite the ISC in March 2013 saying that a route of contamination must be demonstrated, not just asserted by the defence - no less than Stefanoni herself at the Massei trial outlines four, count 'em, four possible routes herself; which Massei discounts one by one, using strained supposition for each. (Eg. The clasp couldn't have been contaminated by the 118 Medical people who came in on Nov 2 without protective gear, because the clasp was "probably" under the pillow.)

Folks - this is the seventh year in which people alleging involvement of AK and RS have had to present their case. IMO this has not been about the evidence since March 2013, it's been about the backroom war going on, that even Machiavelli admits to, when he says that Wladimiro De Nunzio manipulated the appeals section of Perugia to get Hellmann appointed as the presiding judge.

That's the only thing that everyone can agree on. You, me, Machiavelli. That the Perugian system is corrupt.

 

[Strozzi]

Being that the crime scene was not really actually secure, how would you know that they did not go through house to pilfer the house?

Good question, Desert Fox. Suppose the scientific police in a search 47 days later had come up with items which showed Curatolo's fingerprints. Curatolo "lived" in the square across the road. It is reasonable that he could have entered the unmonitored cottage to find warmth or dry shelter during inclement weather or to pilfer. A blanket or heated-up canned food might have been welcome as winter set in. Curatolo's prints were presumably already on file since he had probably been arrested previously. How would the authorities know if he had trespassed after the crime or if he was there with Guede?

Or maybe he had high standards of personal conduct and would never have considered trespassing, being a Christian anarchist and all.

 

[Desert Fox]

At the end of the day all there is to cast suspicion on Raffaele is the DNA on the clasp. And despite the ISC in March 2013 saying that a route of contamination must be demonstrated, not just asserted by the defence - no less than Stefanoni herself at the Massei trial outlines four, count 'em, four possible routes herself; which Massei discounts one by one, using strained supposition for each. (Eg. The clasp couldn't have been contaminated by the 118 Medical people who came in on Nov 2 without protective gear, because the clasp was "probably" under the pillow.)

The trouble is that there is about a thousand possibilities of contamination and figuring out which one is impossible.

Curious, do you think the defense should present the Lukis Anderson case in Italian court?