Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[anglolawyer]

What does lack of information about missing clothes mean? They weren't missing, or the investigation sucked?

His missing clothes are with the knife. Probably threw them in the nearest bin, which I'm sure the cops didn't check.

The timing issue is interesting. What makes you think that they didn't decide on nov 6 to abandon the downstairs crime scene?

The burden is on you to make out the case that there was activity downstairs amd it's a heavy one. Blood on a lightswitch is about it. Got any pictures?

Guede could get home in his bloody clothes the back way and there is no reason to think he was covered in blood anyway. He washed one pants leg. Unless he had everybody's itinerary for the weekend he risked someone else coming home and discovering the scene. Spending half an hour downstairs (doing what?) doesn't seem a good idea. He did not work going downstairs into his story either, like he did everything else.

 

[MichaelB]

The burden is on you to make out the case that there was activity downstairs amd it's a heavy one. Blood on a lightswitch is about it. Got any pictures?

Guede could get home in his bloody clothes the back way and there is no reason to think he was covered in blood anyway. He washed one pants leg. Unless he had everybody's itinerary for the weekend he risked someone else coming home and discovering the scene. Spending half an hour downstairs (doing what?) doesn't seem a good idea. He did not work going downstairs into his story either, like he did everything else.

Pics and testimony here: http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/blood-evidence-downstairs-apartment/

 

[acbytesla]

I don't have made up my mind on the point yet, as for what concerns Guede's reliability on the 300 euros cash, frankly. I would need to re-read Nencini and pay attention to the specific point. But I can say preliminary that your two questions have two answers:
1) "because the testimony had not been given in their trial giving no opportunity to examine Guede", the answer to this question is: No. I disagree with you, this is not a valid reason, in my opinion, as for the law. A piece of information or a finding can be used in a trial whenever there are reasons to believe it truthful, also when it comes from somewhere else, like from some other venue or from some other trial. Judicial findings from other trials specifically can be used in cases different from the original ones. No, there is no requirement that the original source of the evidence is "examined" in a cross questioning as if he were a witness.

2) the second reason instead, that is "because Guede should be regarded as unreliable in all he says" is much more serious. Though I am not sure this can be considered universally valid; there might be some circumstances in which there is reason to believe that some information from an unreliable person is relevant, if such information happens to be crossed and corroborated. For example, this happens if it's about a detail which the witness was not supposed to know about.

On this particular point, I am not sure, but I acknowledge that Guede's telling the story of Meredith argueing over missing cash is a bit peculiar on the part of Rudy Guede, since there is no reason why he should know about a specific 300 sum and there is no reason why he should put this unnecessary element into his story. The fact that he puts it costantly into each one of his stories despite their changes and mutual cotnradictions, it's peculiar and suggests that maybe there a reason for this.

However I don't know the reason. It might have to do with Knox's 300 euros allegedly missing from her drawer. This money happens to be a much peculiar element of the story also in Amanda Knox's acount of facts, because she says she forgot to check about them. Which is intrinsically not credible and contradictory with other parts of her story.
The 300 € in Guede's story might also tehoretically be explained by other reasons, for example maybe it was Guede himself who stole the money and this is why he knows about them.
So the element exists, it is true that it has some peculiarity because it is present in all Guede's stories, it is unnecessary and he is not supposed to be aware about it, but it is also ambiguous, in my opinion, if taken by itself in isolation, at least until not crossed with Knox's testimony. Taken by itself it could be pointing in opposite directions. However if you cross it with the oddity of Knox contradicting herself about the money in her drawer, well, it casts a peculiar light; I'm not sure but I think once you assume Knox is guilty (and you also observe her unacounted for cash flow and her frequentation of drug dealers), the missing 300€ can be used as part of the picture to understand something of the motives in play in the murder, to build an explanatory conjecture.

I don't think I hate many things more than these kind of posts by Machiavelli. It is beyond dishonest. It is sleazy and despicable. If Machiavelli was close to me and I was a little younger, he and I would be having more than words. He and I would be throwing down and it wouldn't be pretty.

It would be one thing if Machiavelli was to believe Stefanoni, it would be another if he just believed the liar Rudy. He would be wrong and mistaken, but at least Machiavelli would be honest in his disagreement with us. But this is different. It is a total 100 percent fabrication of the worst kind. Machiavelli has NOT a shred of evidence that backs up his bald face lies, so he "speculates" that these could be possible and since "anything is possible" we are left with his sleazy accusation hanging in the air.

I guess this is what it has come down to. They can't prove their case with the evidence, so they are left trying to win through sleazy tabloid lies.

Really, really sad.

 

[anglolawyer]

Knox contradicts herself all over, her story - as you can see from her testimonies statements and interrogation - gets entangled in a growing and swelling tapestry of inconsistences. Her not checking for her 300 euros, her contradictory account about her concerns that maybe a burglar had entered the house, it's among the inconsistences. We notice that she tries to pin the "contact" with drug dealers on her flatmates nonchalantly. But five euros is quite ridiculous since Hashish was around 40 euros per smallest piece in Perugia, and there was a lot of other substances, and in fact it was Knox exchanging phone calls with drug dealers, not her flatmates. Knox was the one who knew Rudy Guede and had sexual intercourses with dealer Federico Martini, not her flatmates.
I point out that I am not the person screaming here.

I don't believe that. You are gripped by galloping confirmation bias, Mach. 'A growing tapestry'. LOL

 

[anglolawyer]

Pics and testimony here: http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/blood-evidence-downstairs-apartment/

Adding up to what? I mean, is there a coherent (or any) theory of what happened downstairs and how it impacts on the case against Knox and Sollecito? Maybe they faked a burglary down there as well. Or maybe all you are seeing is the activity of the cat and the bungling cops, who also moved stuff around upstairs.

 

[NancyS]

Knox contradicts herself all over, her story - as you can see from her testimonies statements and interrogation - gets entangled in a growing and swelling tapestry of inconsistences. Her not checking for her 300 euros, her contradictory account about her concerns that maybe a burglar had entered the house, it's among the inconsistences. We notice that she tries to pin the "contact" with drug dealers on her flatmates nonchalantly. But five euros is quite ridiculous since Hashish was around 40 euros per smallest piece in Perugia, and there was a lot of other substances, and in fact it was Knox exchanging phone calls with drug dealers, not her flatmates. Knox was the one who knew Rudy Guede and had sexual intercourses with dealer Federico Martini, not her flatmates.
I point out that I am not the person screaming here.

And yet absolutely no evidence exists for this, except in the slightly depraved minds of Mignini and Co. I'm just surprised they haven't also invented a naked pillow fight.

And you really do know nothing about how young people take drugs? Although that doesn't surprise me when you also think the messed up brain and pin point pupils of a heroin addict, can lead to superhuman night vision and powers of recall

 

[Samson]

I don't believe that. You are gripped by galloping confirmation bias, Mach. 'A growing tapestry'. LOL

Actually Mach is disturbed by Nencini and Meredith's euros. He is reminding me of the black knight

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eMkth8FWno

 

[codyjuneau]

Pics and testimony here: http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/blood-evidence-downstairs-apartment/

Adding up to what? I mean, is there a coherent (or any) theory of what happened downstairs and how it impacts on the case against Knox and Sollecito? Maybe they faked a burglary down there as well. Or maybe all you are seeing is the activity of the cat and the bungling cops, who also moved stuff around upstairs.

.
That is what we are trying to determine Anglo.

From the video it looks like the curtain thing was already on the floor in front of the table before the door was kicked in.

Cody
.

 

[MichaelB]

Adding up to what? I mean, is there a coherent (or any) theory of what happened downstairs and how it impacts on the case against Knox and Sollecito? Maybe they faked a burglary down there as well. Or maybe all you are seeing is the activity of the cat and the bungling cops, who also moved stuff around upstairs.

I think Guede went downstairs for a change of pants. That's what the evidence leads me to believe. Guede made changing pants and hearing noises downstairs part of his story and I think the cops covered it up so it was one less thing they'd have to explain as part of their murder sex orgy theory. I didn't come across a single witness saying they saw a dead or injured cat after November 2. For me it's preposterous a cat bled from the ear and left all that blood.

It can't be proven unless Guede confesses or Steffi coughs up the lab work showing Guede or Meredith's blood was found so it's not worth arguing over. Both sides lawyers brought up the so called 'cats blood' and downstairs all the time trying to find out more about it. The Sollecito's are convinced he broke-in downstairs and I think John Douglas does as well.

From Law & Disorder:

It is clear from the crime scene that Meredith did not submit meekly. There is blood all over the place, which indicates she bravely fought like hell. Once she was rendered helpless, he could have had his sexual way with her, or even masturbated on or over her body as she was dying. The scene also tells me that he didn’t even leave right away then. He probably continued to look around for anything he might want to take, and threw the blanket haphazardly over her body so he wouldn’t have to look at her and confront what he had done. He was sophisticated enough to lock Meredith’s bedroom door, delaying discovery of the body. He went home through a circuitous route so as not to be spotted, and along the way ditched the two mobile phones he had stolen. When he got to his room he cleaned up and changed clothes. Anyone involved with this scene would have been covered with blood. Perhaps he even broke into the downstairs and took clothing belonging to one of the men. Then from home, he went out to the clubs to dance the night away.

Douglas, John; Olshaker, Mark (2013-02-26). Law & Disorder (pp. 369-370). Kensington. Kindle Edition.

Make of it what you will.

 

[RWVBWL]

.
That thing lying on the floor in front of the table looks to me like a shower curtain, complete with the rod (the white tube beside it).
.

.
Or, it could also be a window curtain, from the front door perhaps?
Cody
.

I'm kinda likin' this theory,
makes sense it'd be covering the kitchen window.

But that said,
I'd like to see the vid where Officer Z broke in the window again,
time to check if it's online still...
L8's, RW

Whoa, whoa, whoa,
hang on a sec...

I found this clip,
of Officer Lorena Zugarini,
kickin' open the door window in 1 of the Crime Scene vids that Methos linked previously.

Check out the screen grab:

No curtain on that window,
I can see back into the kitchen, do you agree?
Download and watch the vid if ya want:
https://mega.co.nz/#!O4Zh3QxY!MLLxQsnTnxYs-zyAwlsjoak4-yw9QIPILsefu8ZDq08


But check this out, it's kinda odd:
That Crime Scene vid linked above, from Nov 2, 2007,
covers alotta the upstairs happenings.

At 15:32:19 it leaves Meredith's bedroom,
restarts at 16:28:14, and heads outside and downstairs.

At 16:28:42 Officer Z starts the B+E,
seen with results above.

At 16:40:40, what do I see: a clip from the Main bathroom:

In the other bathroom the window was open, the cat could jump in+out,
and the cat had apparently lost real blood drops in it, blood that weren't splattered,
but a buncha solid tight drops, near each other.
As seen here:

These blood drops pictured above differ a lot from the 1's that Diocletus writes of being watered-down.
They seemingly fell from much closer to the ground, hence they did not splatter so much, (my opinion only)
This bathroom also has a shower in it and had sandals in it too,
like the black 1's seen behind Giacomo's locked door,
near a bloody outline...

But the Main bathroom, pictured up above,
didn't have, from what I can tell, blood drops in it,
it also has a shower above the bathtub,
but, get this, no shower curtain hangin' around that I could see.

Makes ya wonder why that chair is facing the bathtub, right?
The cops video'd this minutes after breakin' in downstairs.

The next day, Nov. 3, 2007, the chair, still in the bathroom, was moved.
It does not face the bath tub anymore.

Did someone yank down the shower curtain to ah,
maybe wrap up Miss Kercher's body and dispose of it somewhere else?
Is that a shower curtain, with a white rod, that CodyJuneau pointed out,
lying near the kitchen table on the floor by the door?

I seem to recall reading on old Perugia Shock that a black car was spotted in the driveway,
no not just the night before , BUT in the next morning, by another witness.

Interesting, eh?
RW


PS - No more pix for awhile,
thanks for lettin' me post 'em mods!

PSS - Thanks for the discussion everyone!

 

[MichaelB]

Steffi says on November 2 the blood wasn't there and the cat injured itself at some point between when they left on the 2nd and returned the next day. In other words they're completely stupid and not one of them realized saying "hey, this blood wasn't here yesterday".

 

[Samson]

Steffi says on November 2 the blood wasn't there and the cat injured itself at some point between when they left on the 2nd and returned the next day. In other words they're completely stupid and not one of them realized saying "hey, this blood wasn't here yesterday".

Hmm No one I know has ever seen a cat bleed, quick poll of a few people.
Rolfe might know more.

 

[RWVBWL]

Hmm No one I know has ever seen a cat bleed, quick poll of a few people.
Rolfe might know more.

Maybe Rolfe can come give us some input.

Myself,
I only remember seeing blood when Goldie + Dotie gave birth, and when my beloved cat Duke died after getting hit by a car 1 week after my 1st surf trip to Hawaii many years ago. He made it back to my window, which I had closed because I was cold after spending a month in the tropics, and died on my window sill, tryin' to get inside to be with me. I can still remember some small drops of blood there, it was internal...

But nothing like this cat.
That downstairs cat seems to have dripped alotta blood
in the bathroom video screen grab clip that I posted above.

There is an outside blood drop,
found and video'd on Nov. 3, 2007 on the bathroom window sill,
near the bottom of the stairs, similar to those inside the bathroom also,
which I now have to post, it is not watered-down, as you can see:

As I type kinda slowly, I missed some recent debate.
I'm curious if these blood drops were there on Nov. 2, 2007
when the cops 1st started shooting video.

The video I have shows the cops outside+downstairs from 16:28:14 until 16:41:26,
where it ends when checkin' the pot plants, and then re-starts at 18:37:30,
when they are working back upstairs.

I wonder what is missing from downstairs in almost 2 hours of footage?
RW

 

[anglolawyer]

OK, I guess the idea is that Rudy downstairs blows his entire story which would make him useless in convicting A and R by falsifying his account and prematurely revealing him as the professional burglar we were allowed to know about only 7 years later. That's a good enough underlying theory I guess. But there are problems when you drill down, such as nobody complaining about a lost pair of trousers, excess activity for such an operation, the problem of transferring blood downstairs without leaving a similar pattern upstairs (from the only blood source to the door) etc

 

[carbonjam72]

OK, I guess the idea is that Rudy downstairs blows his entire story which would make him useless in convicting A and R by falsifying his account and prematurely revealing him as the professional burglar we were allowed to know about only 7 years later. That's a good enough underlying theory I guess. But there are problems when you drill down, such as nobody complaining about a lost pair of trousers, excess activity for such an operation, the problem of transferring blood downstairs without leaving a similar pattern upstairs (from the only blood source to the door) etc

There certainly are elements of evidence that can be hypothesized to be part of the real actions undertaken by Mr Guede after killing Meredith. But it seems like the first step ought to be confirming that the blood is in fact human, and whose DNA the profiles found therein actually matches.

As the police refuse to turn over that data, as well as the DNA data from the upstairs as well, we speculate at a disadvantage.

But Rudy's setting out little bowls of pasta at the Milan nursery, and otherwise making a mess at crimes scenes, even setting them up to burn down as others have suggested, that's not part of a well thought out criminal plan designed to evade capture either. Rudy had/has severe mental problems, including black out fugue states, and his behavior may not adhere to our rational expectations of what "a burglar would do".

 

[Samson]

Sleep Walking to Defeat

It takes Jar, who is a kind of PMF Grinder to point out.

Firstly, it is Amanda Marie Knox who, on the evening of 6 November 2007, indicated a sexual motive for the murder of Meredith Kercher. At this time, no autopsy results were available to the investigators, only an external examination of the body. In essence, if we read the court papers, the whole subsequent development of the defense cases, until the end, has focused on giving credibility to the version according to which the murder was committed by a burglar (later identified as Rudy Hermann Guede) who entered the window of the flat and was subsequently caught in flagrante delicto by the unfortunate victim. Why, then, in the early hours of the morning of 6 November 2007, should Amanda Marie Knox introduce a sexual “motive” to the murder?



As to the bit underlined a full autopsy was carried out on the 4th. According to Darkness Descending Lalli briefed Mignini in person the following day and was hounded outside Mignini's office by reporters wanting to know if the victim had been raped. Lalli indiscreetly told them that there were certainly signs of sexual violence. I don't know whether any of this found it's way into the papers the next day but speculation was certainly rife.

 

[Samson]

There are issues of scholarship, and how they should be attributed to the Italian authorities.
PMF are promoting an exchange of this sort to bolster their case.
But this is ridiculous.
In fact it is somehow condemnatory of the prosecution.
Mignini is being revered for this illumination of what is obvious to a guilter, yet risible to an innocenti,


"Knox: They were telling me “why did you send this message to Patrick, this message to Patrick!”

Interpreter: Because they were always insisting about this message to Patrick and because…

PM Mignini: Well because there’s the message so [it’s] the message but it’s just that, it’s not that there was an attitude, I mean it’s not like there was any reference to a message according to what emerges from the statements. In fact there was a message that you… since there had been an exchange of messages right before the time of the murder between you and this person it’s normal that the police would want to know why, what this message meant, this… therefore it’s not something… why did you threw yourself in this kind of… ? While you had, you had the possibility to…?"

With that said, I join others in noting that I found this series particularly interesting and helpful. Thank you, Yummi, Catnip, and Kristeva

 

[Dan O.]

.
Thanks Danno. Is that your opinion for why he was being careful, or do you know it as a fact?

I wonder because if you are correct, then Marco is giving information from the interrogation. It is only the source of the information he is not giving.

I also wonder why he would trust her word on the shower, but not trust her word on so many other things.

Cody
.

What I say is my opinion but it is based on facts. Marco Chiacchiera is one of the plaintiffs charging Amanda Knox with slander, as a result of Knox's claims as to what happened in the Nov 5/6 interrogation. That places him in those interrogations. He is not permitted to testify to what he learned in the interrogation so he has to be careful with each thing he says that there is a source outside the interrogation for that thing.


Where Amanda contradicts Mignini, Marco will have no choice in what he is allowed to believe.

 

[anglolawyer]

Sleep Walking to Defeat

It takes Jar, who is a kind of PMF Grinder to point out.

Firstly, it is Amanda Marie Knox who, on the evening of 6 November 2007, indicated a sexual motive for the murder of Meredith Kercher. At this time, no autopsy results were available to the investigators, only an external examination of the body. In essence, if we read the court papers, the whole subsequent development of the defense cases, until the end, has focused on giving credibility to the version according to which the murder was committed by a burglar (later identified as Rudy Hermann Guede) who entered the window of the flat and was subsequently caught in flagrante delicto by the unfortunate victim. Why, then, in the early hours of the morning of 6 November 2007, should Amanda Marie Knox introduce a sexual “motive” to the murder?



As to the bit underlined a full autopsy was carried out on the 4th. According to Darkness Descending Lalli briefed Mignini in person the following day and was hounded outside Mignini's office by reporters wanting to know if the victim had been raped. Lalli indiscreetly told them that there were certainly signs of sexual violence. I don't know whether any of this found it's way into the papers the next day but speculation was certainly rife.

First, we don't have a tape, so we don't know what was put to her in the interrogation which oddly produced an account the cops already knew to be true. Second, she was found naked in her bedroom, so duh. Third, is Jar sure there were no reports or leaks about sexual assault in the period before 5th-6th Nov?

 

[Samson]

First, we don't have a tape, so we don't know what was put to her in the interrogation which oddly produced an account the cops already knew to be true. Second, she was found naked in her bedroom, so duh. Third, is Jar sure there were no reports or leaks about sexual assault in the period before 5th-6th Nov?

Anglo, my point is Jar is calling these people on false statements, hence the Grinder allusion.

Jar and thoughtful are the egnimas to me from PMF.