Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Grinder]

That line from Christopher Reeve in Superman gets a huge laugh from UK audiences.

BTW there are 67m of us here in the UK, so the odds of CoulsdonUK and me being one and the same, are...?

Coulsdon is not you or vice versa.

Why did the police take a big interest in the bleach under his sink?

Well because everyone knows bleach destroys DNA which raises the question that if they had TWO bottles, why didn't they lay the knife in a little bleach for 15 minutes after a thorough washing and then letting the bleach down the drain to wipe out any DNA there?

The police claimed 4 days later they smelled bleach or after cross maybe clean which begs the question what were they cleaning 4 days later and why was there no evidence of bleach being used to clean the knife or shoes or anything.

 

[Grinder]

Wrong again, Vixen. Their lab did not fail. It seems your presence here is simply to spread falsehood.

The point being, that C&V did not do any new testing. Stefanoni is partly responsible for that, destroying most of the evidence. C&V evaluated Stefanoni's work, and found it substandard, wrong, and perhaps even criminal.

You do know that the Supreme Court of Italy has exonerated AK and RS? I'm just checking....

ETA - Cite!?

Bill they did examine the knife and found something that they didn't test because it was so tiny IIRC. Then the ISC told Nencini to test it and it turned out to be Amanda's DNA shockingly on a knife in her then current domicile.

The oddest thing is that Raf's isn't on it which would mean he didn't use it since the last washing and that the scrub somehow left Mez' and not his, weird.

 

[Grinder]

So the defense did not cross examine him. Why is that, then?

Yes they did. I believe one of their questions was about the time and he pointed at his watch as evidence he knew the time of arrival was 9:27.

Had he been allowed to remain free the press could have interviewed him and with his minders there we may well have been given quite an impression.

 

[LondonJohn]

Legally, Amanda and Raf are innocent.

My view is the murder was a vampire fantasy, perhaps based on Blood:The Last Vampire, or similar, based on Manga, and which takes place at Halloween. The perps decided Mez was a vampire who needed to be slayed, with the female taking on the role of Saya, the vampire slayer.

It was a good idea at the time, whilst high on illegal class A drugs.

Come morning light - oh-oh! - it was clear deflection was needed, hence the staged burglary.

Amanda brags how she's staged burglaries before.

Raf brags in _Honor [sic] Bound_ he deflected cops away before in his possession of drugs charge.

As the pair are innocent, clearly there are dopfelgangers out there pretending to be them, to fit them up. Rudy is so incredibly clever, by a double bluff, he managed to do all this and cunningly make the crime look like Amanda and Raf were involved.


Thank goodness for ppl like Hellmann or Bruno, who were not fooled by this dastardly plot, masterminded by Mignini and Curatalo, with the moron Rudy as the fall guy.

Ah good, at least a point of view such as this is something to work with (shame about the facetious stuff at the end though.....).

So, your general belief is that Knox and Sollecito participated in the murder of Meredith Kercher. Correct?

And you believe the murder was motivated by a drug-fuelled wish to enact a vampire fantasy. Correct?

Now, it's hard to tell from your post whether you believe Guede was also directly involved in this group act. Was he one of the the three, in your belief? Or was he unconnected to Knox and Sollecito, but just happened to be there (as per Guede's own version)?

And you believe that Knox and Sollecito, once they'd sobered up the following morning, decided to create the staged break-in (and presumably also to attempt to choreograph the discovery of the body). Correct?


So....... the question would be this: what is your reasoning for holding this set of beliefs? What evidence (i.e. credible, reliable evidence) would support each element of your beliefs? I hope you'll engage in this: it would be truly interesting and informative to see just how you've arrived at your beliefs, how you support them, and how you defend them.

Thanks in advance (that's a famous phrase in relation to the internet debate about this case - but maybe you knew that already )

 

[Kauffer]

That's even worse...?

Why? You can see the dirt on the gloves. Why isn't that a credible, possible mechanism of contamination?

You got your citation wrong. Let's not attempt to disguise that, shall we?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Peter Gill wrote a book, and chapter 5 is about this case

That's what Professor Peter Green said, in the BBC 4 radio from last year (producer Ruth Alexander). Perhaps he thought he was refuting a prosecution argument.

Vixen,

I think you mean Professor Peter Gill, and I found a quote from him a few days ago and posted it on this thread here ("Peter Gill on the putative semen stains").

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill they did examine the knife and found something that they didn't test because it was so tiny IIRC. Then the ISC told Nencini to test it and it turned out to be Amanda's DNA shockingly on a knife in her then current domicile.

The oddest thing is that Raf's isn't on it which would mean he didn't use it since the last washing and that the scrub somehow left Mez' and not his, weird.

My mistake.

 

[Bill Williams]

Why? You can see the dirt on the gloves. Why isn't that a credible, possible mechanism of contamination?

You got your citation wrong. Let's not attempt to disguise that, shall we?

This....................

 

[LondonJohn]

Yes they did. I believe one of their questions was about the time and he pointed at his watch as evidence he knew the time of arrival was 9:27.

Had he been allowed to remain free the press could have interviewed him and with his minders there we may well have been given quite an impression.

It's interesting that Vixen appears unwilling to consider just why Curatolo might have been caught red-handed (with cast-iron convicting evidence) dealing heroin in 2003, yet the police/PM sat on those charges for SEVEN YEARS (SEVEN YEARS!), during which time Curatolo just happened to be of some use to the police and PM - including his notorious (and utterly discredited) witness testimony against Knox and Sollecito.

I'll give Vixen a helping hand by suggesting the first question she might ask herself: why would the police gather all the evidence to prove Curatolo's heroin dealing in 2003, yet leave him at large until 2010, at which point they decided to haul him in, charge him (using nothing more than the evidence gathered back in 2003), and ultimately convict him and send him to prison?

(That's just Question 1 out of many.....)

 

[acbytesla]

Let's start with the question, why do you think the police showed so much interest in the two bottles of ACE bleach under Raf's sink?

Because they were morons. Let's say that Rudy used bleach to clean his bathroom, what would that prove?

 

[Vixen]

Welcome back, Vixen.

However, true to guilter-form, your comment ignores the context. Amanda's flat-mate had just been brutally murdered. Amanda had not slept since, and was questioned every day about the general circumstances around Meredith's life, for clues as to who might be involved.

The young woman was stressed. She was innocent, and obviously innocent and unlike everyone else neither lawyered-up nor fled and hopelessly naive. She didn't speak the language - most certainly not the Italian-legalese that ended up on the "confessions".

Is all you have these days "drive by" guilt-like snippets?

Are you EVER going to address the issues about Hellmann you've been asked about?

I will get back to you about Hellmann. Patience.

 

[RWVBWL]

Judge Massei: Show me the watch...

Yes they did. I believe one of their questions was about the time and he pointed at his watch as evidence he knew the time of arrival was 9:27.

Had he been allowed to remain free the press could have interviewed him and with his minders there we may well have been given quite an impression.

What watch?

Who wears a watch everyday but not to Court?


From Old Perugia Shock:
Sunday, March 29, 2009
The Day of Foolery
SUPER FAKE WITNESS

What was needed? Elements setting Amanda and Raffaele out of his house during the crime time? Well, they arrived. Antonio Curatolo, the homeless guy, the first and main Superwitness, the one who was supposed to nail Amanda and Raffaele saw them at the basketball court from 21:30 to 23:30. So, they were not at his place. But, if he's right, they were not even assailing Meredith.

Curatolo knew he had to study his part well, that he couldn't afford to to screw-up. Apparently he was aware of what not to say. The masks and the witches are wrong. So he eliminated them. The buses to the discotheque are fine. So he inserted them. Then he needed to show details, and how he could fix the presence of Amanda and Raffaele to exact times. Who knows how many times he repeated to himself this concept and so he tried. But he tried too much, he added too many details, imaginary details, wrong details.

Today he repeated that as soon as he arrives to the square, at 21:30-22:00, he starts to read a newspaper and while reading he's looking around and sees Amanda and Raffaele. The difference from his previous deposition(*) is that now he sees them as soon as he starts reading, at 21:30-22:00, or just at 21:30, as it will emerge later.
They were Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, no doubt, he pointed at them in the courtroom.
So he sees them from the beginning, from 21:30, and he keeps seeing them, talking, arguing, going to the rail to watch below... until at least 23:30, when the discotheque buses start to leave.
It seems that he's been working hard to remember, but probably he forgot that Amanda and Raffaele had to be there only after 22:30-23:00.
He maybe thought that having seen the lovebirds only for a few minutes wasn't enough and in an effort to be credible he extended their presence to the whole period, providing them, in this way, an alibi for the crime. Or proving that his testimony was a fake.

No surprise, that's what happens when you rely on lunatics. People who can learn the same lesson a hundred times and still getting it wrong.
Curatolo was so worried about fixing the time that besides recalling that he goes to check it to the electronic board --on the other side of the square-- he added, today, that he also checks it on his own watch. But he had always stated not to have a watch. So Massei asked him to show his watch. And he didn't have it. Massei asked him if he could be more precise about his arrival time because 21:30-22:00 was a bit vague. And he did get more precise, much more precise: 21:27-21:28!
This is Antonio Curatolo, he can tell you exactly what you want to hear, he can tell you anything and the opposite of anything. He, as I always said, is simply a psychiatric case.
Now everyone realizes it. Even those who went to interview him and found him totally rational and credible. Even the judge Micheli, probably, while reading about today's hearing. Everyone was laughing at him in the courtroom. At him and at the heroes who discovered the Superwitness in that hard to reach place, the street.

It's really annoying having to speak about a local newspaper. But we have to, since they wanted to enter the case rather than being just journalists, since Curatolo and Quintavalle are their finding. This is the great investigative journalism of the director of Giornale dell'Umbria and his pupil. You go onto the street, you pick up the first tramp you meet, you bring him to the Pm, and you go out with your scoop.

ETC...

Link:
http://web.archive.org/web/20101015182429/http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2009_03_01_archive.html


ETA:
(*)Previous Deposition???

Gosh,
I'd really like to read an English translation of Curatolo's previous deposition.

Better yet,
how about an English translation of Rudy Guede's 7 hour interrogation
with PM Mignini, Judge Claudia, and others from Dec. 7, 2007?

I wonder why this interrogation of Rudy has not been released yet,
Guede did have his lawyer present, right?
Sure he did indeed...


The Interrogation where that Perugia Shock writes
in a blog post titled:
Friday, December 7, 2007
Rudy's "Uncomfortable Truth"

This morning Pm Mignini and Gip Matteini met at the Capanne Prison to have a joined interrogation of Rudy Guede. SCO people and Squadra Mobile were present as well.

Rudy Guede's attorney, Walter Biscotti, came out of the interrogation (which lasted more than 7 hours) and said that Rudy claims to be innocent, he admits his presence, admits contacts with Meredith but he says he didn't kill her.
Biscotti specifies that "He didn't name anyone because there's no one to be named".

http://web.archive.org/web/20080117...t.com/2007/12/theres-non-name-to-be-done.html

 

[Vixen]

Hello. Have you been away reading up on the case?

10 til 1 eh? How much reading?

I'll look at it tonight.

 

[Vixen]

Yeah, 1:45 AM is the middle of the night. She spent about 53 of the 89 hours between the arrival of the Postales and her arrest with police, some 17-19 of those hours being actively interviewed/interrogated and she'd gotten up to go to class the morning of the fifth. This was the culmination of less than a week where she'd been up until dawn twice, it all caught up to her.



He didn't know they were going to call that night, they called late in the evening and asked him to come in ~9:30 PM, he asked to be able to finish his dinner and got there at 10:15 PM.

Bloody b&stards! Calling someone into the cop shop, when they're stoned out of their box.

 

[charlatan]

Someone help us out here. Was there not some additional information, perhaps (Luca's?) phone records, perhaps testimony, that came to light in the last few months that bears on the question of when the postal police arrived?

Sure. Marco and Luca's phone call ended about 12:46, after which Luca drove to Marco's and then to the cottage. Trip takes about 15-20 minutes, ergo Luca and Marco definitely arrived after 1pm, ergo Filomena and Paola definitely arrived after 1pm, ergo Amanda and Raffa would have had to have been alone with the officers if they had called after the Postals arrived. This demolishes Nencini's theory that the pair used the others as cover to surreptitiously make the calls. Since the Postals didn't witness any of the six calls (lasting a total of ten minutes) made between 12:34 and 12:56, we know they must have arrived afterwards.

 

[Vixen]

We've seen enough true crime shows to know there is no exact predictions how Rudy would act upon his possible first murder/rape. It wasnt his first burglary obviously. The fact of him pulling a knife on the Bartender does show Rudys weapon of choice.

Why would Rudy add the details of listening to songs on the toilet? One article I read suggested when the details and truth dont effect the outcome, the perp will often give more details.

Extraordinary risk? maybe more of a way to get money without working, the murder a sloppy ignorant action of a loser named Rudy Guede. Maybe more his stupidity than extraordinary...

To account for the 20 minute timeline he claims he was away from the murder?

 

[Kaosium]

Someone help us out here. Was there not some additional information, perhaps (Luca's?) phone records, perhaps testimony, that came to light in the last few months that bears on the question of when the postal police arrived?

Yes, there is, but there's no need to call in the artillery until the target has completely cornered themselves and can be splattered all over perdition with one volley.

(Vixen doesn't know enough about the case or this particular logic puzzle--that she's failing--to realize what that call means)

 

[Vixen]

Actually it was two people, not one person ...

Interesting how we toss away a normal persons words, and a local known persons words can be deemed non-existent yet we go on and on with for example a Toto heroin bum, supported by a police squad whose been found to be less than respectable and definitely sloppy at their job.

And being open minded I ask what motivation would Christian T. have to get involved? He has no past record of being a flake and creating lies that I know of. He didnt get paid to talk, he wasnt getting a deal cut.

In this case I would probably trust a bar owner over the Polizia like Napoleoni.

So what disqualifies these Christian T. reports? The fact the goofball squad didnt investigate it more and frequently showed poor skills in this case.


The documented in Micheli pg 35? right...(edit)

And also below-
as reported by Frank Sfarzo:

"Meet the "monster"
I just finished speaking in some way with Christian T., who I reached in his hometown. It was a difficult way to speak, with someone in the middle. But that's what Christian said. It was a warm night in September, he was sleeping with his Polish girlfriend Monika in his elevated loft bed. Some noise woke him up. He looked down and he saw a black boy searching in their drawers. The guest had entered through a window they had left open and he wasn't aware that someone was sleeping in the room, since the bed was elevated.

Christian realized it was his neighbor, Rudy, who he knew only by sight. He told him to go away. Rudy thought it would be better to leave the house like a gentleman, through the door and not through the window. But the door was defective and he had trouble opening it.
Christian wasn't very hospitable. He even didn't ask him if he needed to use the toilet. He rushed Rudy and yelled at him to go, which was exactly what Rudy was trying to do. At this point, since Christian was insisting, Rudy pulled out a knife and showed it to him.
Christian just told him not to be stupid because he knew who he was and he could tell the police. Rudy said, "But if the door is blocked, how can I go away?"

So, Christian helped him open the door and Rudy went away. Like this. Without raping his girlfriend, without even killing the both of them, even though he was recognized.

Then Christian says he called the police, and they arrived immediately, in just 2 hours. The police said he could come to the station the next day and report the intruder. But Christian let it go. It must not have been a very frightening experience for him and his girlfriend if they didn't even have the time to file a suit.
Naturally, when three months later he saw that the same uninvited guest was the main suspect in the murder of Meredith Kercher, he took the time to go to the police station and testify.
Is this another megalomaniac or a reliable witness? History will tell us. But this is not a psychiatric case, not a pusher payed by a pre-professional local newspaper, this time. It's just a normal person. Actually, two normal people.

By the way, this episode as confirmed could appear very compromising for Rudy. But if we analyze it, we don't really see the expression of a dangerous nature.
He steals, yes. But who wouldn't steal if abandoned by family and by society? He enters people's houses, he carries a knife, yes. Just like he allegedly did that night at the cottage.
But he didn't use the knife except to leave the place.
Actually he should have used it. He should have stabbed Christian and Monika, because they caught him stealing and they recognized him. He should have eliminated these witnesses. But he didn't.
Why, in the same situation, should he have eliminated the witness, Meredith, who caught him stealing from her drawers?
Christian and Monika saw a thief that night, for sure. But not a murderer."

It doesn't logically follow that because A = B, therefore, A = C.

 

[charlatan]

Yes, there is, but there's no need to call in the artillery until the target has completely cornered themselves and can be splattered all over perdition with one volley.

(Vixen doesn't know enough about the case or this particular logic puzzle--that she's failing--to realize what that call means)

Heh. I ruined the trap!

 

[Vixen]

But the fact that all this was in fact just a simulation, a staging, can be deduced from further circumstances. From the photos taken by the personnel of the Questura (photos 47 to 54 and 65 to 66) one can perceive an activity which appears to have been performed with the goal of creating a situation of obvious disorder in Romanelli's room, but does not appear to be the result of actual ransacking, true searching for the kind of valuable objects that might tempt a burglar. The drawers of the little dresser next to the bed were not even opened (photo 51 and declarations of Battistelli who noted that Romanelli was the one who opened the drawers, having found them closed and with no sign of having been rifled: see p. 66 of Battistelli's declarations, hearing of Feb. 6, 2009). The objects on the shelves in photo 52 appear not to have been touched at all; piles of clothes seem to have been thrown down from the closet (photo 54) but it does not seem that there was any serious search in the closet, in which some clothes and some boxes remained in place without showing any signs of an actual search for valuable items that might have been there (photo 54). It does not appear that the boxes on the table were opened (photo 65) in a search for valuable items. And indeed, no valuable item (cf. declarations of Romanelli) was taken, or even set aside to be taken, by the - at this point we can say phantom - burglar. One last aspect which bears repeating is the presence, noted and checked by several witnesses, of pieces of glass on top of the objects and clothing in Romanelli's room. This circumstance, which also reveals an activity of simulation, although it is not decisive because it does not actually exclude that the phantom burglar first broke the window and then made the mess in the room, was rejected by the Defence of the accused, which showed photographs that did not show glass on top of the clothes and objects scattered around Romanelli's room, and observed that the documentary and crystallisation value of a specific situation as realised [42] through a photo should prevail over witness statements sworn into the record.
This claim is not held to be sustainable, since it does not take into account the events and their succession and chronology. On the subject of the contrast between the testimony and the documents (photographs of Filomena's room that do not show pieces of glass on top of the clothes and objects scattered around), Romanelli's own declarations are significant and decisive. In her questioning of Feb. 7, 2009, she recalled having left her computer in its case "standing up, not lying down" (p. 269), and then, when she returned to the house, she saw that in her own room, the window was broken and "everything was all over the place..." (p. 40) She checked that her jewellery was there, which it was, and she looked for her computer which she saw "from underneath" (p. 40), and continuing to explain, she declared that "I picked up the computer and perceived that in lifting it, I was picking up pieces of glass, in the sense that there was actually glass on top of it" (p. 41), and she noticed this circumstance so particularly that she added the following comment: "It was really a stupid burglar; not only did he not take anything, the broken glass was actually on top of the things" (p. 41). As she is usually very orderly, the witness also stated that she entered into her own room and searched around to see if anything was missing, and during that search she moved objects, thus changing the position of some pieces of glass. At that moment, however, only the Postal Police officers were present, and they were there to understand why two mobile phones had been

ISTM if Amanda had properly expressed her grave concerns about Mez' safety, as set out in her email home to 25 recipients, the postale police could have immediately closed off the entire house and sealed it off, until such time the flying squad arrived.

Things were touched and items moved.