Continuation Part 15: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Grinder]

Vixen do you believe Rudi should have a retrial and if so he should somehow be forced to testify?

 

[acbytesla]

People WHO refuse to learn..... just saying.

I can always count on grammar lessons. Thanks.

 

[RoseMontague]

And the point you are making is..?

There was a question about combo washer/dryers (not from you). This one was just a washer.

 

[Grinder]

There was a question about combo washer/dryers (not from you). This one was just a washer.

I think I remember that the type of washer they had took an extra long time to work compared to ours here.

While it is totally obvious that it wasn't running or warm, I'm just curious.

 

[RoseMontague]

I do not know about photo shopping or what else, however, there are two luminol photos placed in the map diagram that look like luminol hits. If they are documented photos they will be documented somewhere else.

There is a large police book of photos which are numbered and correspond to the first trial documentation but I didn't see these luminol photos in there nor in Rinaldi's report (that could be because the hits in Filomena's room could not be compared to feet prints). Rose do you have the photo page numbers for the two luminol hits?

IIRC it's 176 and 177.

The photo page number (allegato fotografico A.F.) is 171

Rep.176 – Sample of presumed blood substance, revealed by luminol, carried out on the floor situated in the room in use by Filomena ROMANELLI (sample L1) – page 171 A.F./218 R.;
Rep.177 – Sample of presumed blood substance, revealed by luminol, present on the floor situated in the room in use by Filomena ROMANELLI (sample L2) – page 171 A.F./218 R.;

 

[RoseMontague]

I think I remember that the type of washer they had took an extra long time to work compared to ours here.

While it is totally obvious that it wasn't running or warm, I'm just curious.

Pretty good pics of the washer here

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/crime-scene-photographs-november-2-3-2007/

 

[js202]

Pretty good pics of the washer here

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/crime-scene-photographs-november-2-3-2007/

Is it just me, or, in image dsc_0046, do there appear to be heat waves rather languidly emanating from that washing machine?!

 

[Bill Williams]

I can always count on grammar lessons. Thanks.

There are definition Nazis on this thread, so why shouldn't there be grammar Nazis!? You soothe a grammar Nazi's nerves by saying, "There, their, they're."

 

[Bill Williams]

Is it just me, or, in image dsc_0046, do there appear to be heat waves rather languidly emanating from that washing machine?!

I see Meredith and Amanda's prints on the machine. I'm now registering at TJMK and begging Peter Quennell for forgiveness....

 

[js202]

I see Meredith and Amanda's prints on the machine. I'm now registering at TJMK and begging Peter Quennell for forgiveness....

Beware of his noted BS detector, won't you?

A master of psychotic BS himself, Quennell lives in a Bizarro world where what is actually sensible and accurate is deeply strange. Those who enter and then return from his site come back ineluctably... changed.

 

[Grinder]

Pretty good pics of the washer here

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/crime-scene-photographs-november-2-3-2007/

Thanks Rose. That machine looks well used and has a lot of rust. The longest time seems to be 2 1/2 hours. Had it actually been warm or running at 1 pm that would mean a start time of 10:30 so clearly Amanda started it then and forgot to put the bathmat in while washing Meredith's clothing she wasn't wearing the murder night.

It is fun to watch the PGP squirm trying to explain why the blood spots in the bathroom clearly noticed by Amanda well before the PP arrived and yet left instead of being wiped with a wet tissue and flushed. But, she started up the washer on it's longest cycle, weird.

 

[Bill Williams]

Thanks Rose. That machine looks well used and has a lot of rust. The longest time seems to be 2 1/2 hours. Had it actually been warm or running at 1 pm that would mean a start time of 10:30 so clearly Amanda started it then and forgot to put the bathmat in while washing Meredith's clothing she wasn't wearing the murder night.

It is fun to watch the PGP squirm trying to explain why the blood spots in the bathroom clearly noticed by Amanda well before the PP arrived and yet left instead of being wiped with a wet tissue and flushed. But, she started up the washer on it's longest cycle, weird.

..... and, as you point out, neglected to put Meredith's clothes in the washer, the clothes Meredith was found in.

Add to this: Amanda's own clothes as found on her bed in the middle bedroom, the clothes Amanda wore on the night of Nov 1 at Raffaele's, and for which she returned to the cottage to change from, for the trip to Gubbio.

If those were the clothes Amanda wore, acc. to the fine-thinkers at TJMK, why then are they on Amanda's bed and not in the laundry?

Of course, as you say, there's the bathmat.... a clean to the molecular level, and Amanda leaves a visibly stained bathmat. At least the guilters/crazies are consistent - Amanda as Sherlock Holmes one minute, Inspector Clouseau the next.

Like the lamp - what exactly was the lamp used for!!!??? - what was the washing for if not to clean up the crime-scene, with all the forensics from the crime left in situ!

 

[acbytesla]

If we take the safe premise Mez' blood comes directly from her murder, then other then wet fluid mixed in with it, to produce a mixed DNA result, shows that both parties had been in contact - or at least their bodily fluids - within apx 20" of each other.

100 percent total fabrication. Not a damn thing to corroborate such an assertion. Not a technical citation, just an ignorant person making it up as she drones on.

 

[acbytesla]

All I said was it was informative to read the earliest reports of incidents, before details got airbrushed out. It is an objective fact newspapers reported the washing machine.

You may believe history can be rewritten. That's your prerogative.

This may just be the dumbest post I've ever read on this forum and that is saying a lot. (To the mods, I'm attacking the post and not the poster)

Why would the prosecution "airbrush" or remove the most incriminating evidence from their case? Sheessh..... The answer is they wouldnt. Isn't it far more likely that what is in the media reports were wrong in the first place?

FYI: Courts do not consider media accounts as evidence in a case. So why would you?

 

[acbytesla]

Peter Quennell has a brilliant mind and ********* detector. I haven't found him to be untruthful. Of course anybody can make an error.

LMAO. Peter Quennel has a brilliant mind? You can't be serious. The man is a MORON. Please tell us about his degrees in criminal forensics. You're hypnotized by that charlatan? Yet you ignore experts like Dr. Peter Gill, and FBI profiler John Douglass.

 

[Bill Williams]

Has it been airbrushed out of court transcripts? As you saw, it hasn't. We were talking about newspapers, here.

Then show in the court transcripts where Filomena stated that the washing machine was warm.

If we take the safe premise Mez' blood comes directly from her murder, then other then wet fluid mixed in with it, to produce a mixed DNA result, shows that both parties had been in contact - or at least their bodily fluids - within apx 20" of each other.

100 percent total fabrication. Not a damn thing to corroborate such an assertion. Not a technical citation, just an ignorant person making it up as she drones on.

All I said was it was informative to read the earliest reports of incidents, before details got airbrushed out. It is an objective fact newspapers reported the washing machine.

You may believe history can be rewritten. That's your prerogative.

This may just be the dumbest post I've ever read on this forum and that is saying a lot. (To the mods, I'm attacking the post and not the poster)

Why would the prosecution "airbrush" or remove the most incriminating evidence from their case? Sheessh..... The answer is they wouldnt. Isn't it far more likely that what is in the media reports were wrong in the first place?

FYI: Courts do nothat consider media accounts as evidence in a case. So why would you?

It is contributions from Vixen which now cause serious consideration that she could be a innocence-believer who is faking a guilt position. I mean, where-else would an innocenter go for info in trying to portray that side of the fence, than Peter Quennell.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

DNA in mortuaries

If we take the safe premise Mez' blood comes directly from her murder, then other then wet fluid mixed in with it, to produce a mixed DNA result, shows that both parties had been in contact - or at least their bodily fluids - within apx 20" of each other.

Amanda testified to Mignini, there had been no blood there the day before.

Please declare your conflict of interest, Chris, that prevents you giving any support to the prosecution, as a paid up member of the defense team.

Your opinion needs to be seen in context, of someone who has a vested interest in denying mixed DNA is relevant.

Vixen,

DNA does not come with a time stamp. Moreover, DNA without an associated body fluid is just sub-source evidence. Please show a citation to a textbook or journal article that supports your position. I won't hold my breath; we both know you are talking through your hat. It has been explained to you several times (sometimes with citations) that mixed DNA does not mean mixed blood and that the depositions of DNA in a mixed profile need not be contemporaneous. For example:

"Abstract
DNA evidence frequently plays an important role in criminal investigations and in some cases may be the only means of convicting a suspect. The constant improvement of DNA analysis techniques affords the individualization of minute amounts of DNA, aggravating the risk of contamination artifacts.

In our study, we investigated the prevalence of DNA contamination in the autopsy facilities of the Institutes of Legal Medicine in Essen and Kiel (Germany). Using DNA-free swabs, we took samples from instruments used during autopsy and autopsy tables. Surfaces and instruments were routinely cleaned before sampling. Swabs were subjected to different PCRs to quantify the total amount of DNA and to amplify individual specific STR-markers. In most samples, alleles that could be linked to bodies that had been autopsied before were found. Furthermore, we could show that a DNA transfer from the autopsy table to a body was detectable in four out of six cases investigated. The interpretation of DNA typing results may thus be severely complicated. To avoid DNA contamination, we tried out different cleaning methods, of which only a bleach containing cleaner showed sufficient results." link

Please quote Amanda's testimony itself; you have made several...extrapolations...that diminish to zero my confidence that you are an accurate summarizer of what someone actually said.

Your assertion that I am a paid member of the defense team is totally false. I was never paid by anybody for anything related to this case. The fact that you have to make up some rubbish like this is evidence that your position has no merit. If your position had any merit whatsoever, you would be arguing those points.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Is it just me, or, in image dsc_0046, do there appear to be heat waves rather languidly emanating from that washing machine?!

Forget the Washing Machine.

You all should be discussing the Mop instead.

Someday, the Mop will speak!

 

[Numbers]

In the Observer article recently cited by Vixen, there is a reference to glass on top of clothes, but the only direct quote from FR is that the glass was on top of the computer, not the clothes.

ETA: where does the claim of "glass on top of the clothes" come from, originally?

Filomena had left the computer in its case standing up at the foot of her bed. She found it on its side in the same location which is under the window. If what Filomena says about the glass being on top of the computer is true it means only that the computer had fallen over before the glass finished falling out of the window. With the broken window swinging freely on the inside, additional glass may have fallen out any time during the night and morning. It is also possible that the laptop fell over as a result of the inner shutter suddenly swinging open creating a strong air vortex.


ETA: have a look at the foot of Filomena's bed in dsc_0077.jpg. The cupboard door is swung open against the bed and the pile of clothes are on the floor in front of that door. There is no room for the laptop case to be on its side on the floor at that location.

There is also the curious testimony from one of the postal police that say they saw Filomena's computer on her table. Rafael also mentions this which I had earlier attributed to Raffaele confusing Laura's and Filomena's rooms but now I am not so sure.

I too had understood that F's computer was on her table, across the room from the broken window. Do the photos really show the computer in its case by the window, or just the case?

The question of how the police decided that the break-in was staged is particularly interesting. Giobbi's testimony included a reference to glass fragment on top of clothes, but was I believe primarily based on his intuition (or experience) that Filomena's window was not an entry point a burglar would choose; rather, the entry point should be the balcony.

My pet hypothesis, as I have stated, is that police selected Amanda as a suspect of convenience (meaning, in part, that they did not have to search to find her, and more importantly, that they could easily defeat her alibi, she had a key, and that she did not have a lawyer or sense the danger the police posed to her). In that hypothesis, the reasons the police give for believing the break-in is staged are actually a cover-up, as are the "behavioral" reasons for suspecting Amanda.

Is there any objective evidence that would tend to contradict the suspect of convenience hypothesis, such as objective evidence that could have led the police to believe that the break-in was "staged"? The police AFAIK did not do forensic work to establish this staging - am I missing some information on this? (One would think a "staged" break-in being unusual, it would be necessary for police to demonstrate forensically that it had indeed been staged.)

 

[Planigale]

I see. The ear piercings Amanda had done a few days before the murder, were still dripping blood. Ah, that explains why her blood was mixed with Mez'.

So you accept you are wrong to say ear lobes do not drip blood if cut.

Now show the evidence for mixed blood. I assert there is none. If there were visible blood drops typing would demonstrate mixed blood. This was never shown.