Continuation Part 15: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[RoseMontague]

Have you seen every window?

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.478...ata=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sf2Uqde5z9oWKuX6r-Vdg7g!2e0

via Plinio 16, Milan

If that's the correct addy.

ETA: The sign says The Kinder Garden, Canadian Pre-School www.kindergarden.it

 

[davefoc]

Have you seen every window?

At least in CA, and I assume the rest of the US, bars on windows that can't be opened are illegal. This might be true in Perugia, so let's throw in the possibility that the bars could have been left unlatched or that the latching mechanism didn't work on some of the bars.

ETA: Or as per RoseMontague link Grinder was wrong about the bars?

 

[Numbers]

There were no signs of a forced entry. There was an unauthorized entry aka trespass.

Mind-readers among the posters will explain what Guede's intent was: 1) to steal, or 2) to rape the first unaccompanied woman who entered, or 3) to merely enjoy the facilities of the nursery.

ETA: Guede was apparently armed with a knife taken from the nursery. What is the relevance of having the knife on his person, or in his back-pack?

Yes he slept there waiting for someone to come in when the business was closed for the weekend. There is no doubt it was an unauthorized entry. It just isn't worth anything in the alleged crime wave of burglaries.

Pretty clear he was just sleeping rough.

No. The point is that he had committed a trespass, and was apparently armed. In fact, the nursery incident appears to have the elements of an interrupted burglary, of the kind where the burglar settles into the residence or building for a period of time (overnight, for example). This is not a pattern of professional burglars who concentrate on potential financial gain and avoid contact with residents or others. Thus, it may have those similarities to the burglary of the cottage flat. It obviously differs by the method of entry.

However, Guede can be presumed to have burglarized the Perugian lawyers' office by breaking in. His possession of a laptop and other items from their office is evidence. In the US, such possession without evidence to the contrary (such as a pawn shop receipt, or a sound alibi) would be taken to indicate commission of the burglary by the possessor of the stolen goods.

 

[acbytesla]

To Grinder,

You keep suggesting that we are unfairly suggesting that Rudy had been committing burglaries leading up to the murder.

So allow me to ask you the following questions.

Do you believe that Rudy killed Meredith?
Do you believe that he had a date with Meredith?
Do you believe that Rudy broke into the cottage?
If so, what was his motive for breaking into the cottage? Rape and murder?
Do you think that this was his first time breaking and entering?
Or committing burglary?

 

[RoseMontague]

At least in CA, and I assume the rest of the US, bars on windows that can't be opened are illegal. This might be true in Perugia, so let's throw in the possibility that the bars could have been left unlatched or that the latching mechanism didn't work on some of the bars.

ETA: Or as per RoseMontague link Grinder was wrong about the bars?

Beats me, no bars on those windows that I can see, but the street view is from 2014. However, I can't imagine they would put bars on the windows of a preschool nursery, if they had a fire how would the kids get out if the path to the door was blocked and how would the fire fighters get in? Again, I just googled for the address, so I am not certain this is the correct one.

 

[acbytesla]

At least in CA, and I assume the rest of the US, bars on windows that can't be opened are illegal. This might be true in Perugia, so let's throw in the possibility that the bars could have been left unlatched or that the latching mechanism didn't work on some of the bars.

ETA: Or as per RoseMontague link Grinder was wrong about the bars?

I'm not sure they have the same laws in Italy. Especially when you consider that there was no way to get out the front door at the cottage without a key which would violate laws in the US for a residence.

 

[bagels]

The main point with the nursery anyway is that's where Rudy Guede was caught with the goods he stole from the law office. The law office was regarded as a "difficult climb" the window was shattered with a "large rock" and "clothes were strewn on the floor." I don't see how any reasonable person could conclude anything but the most likely reason Rudy Guede is connected by criminal evidence to two remarkably similar crime scenes in the span of two weeks is because he is responsible for the state of both scenes. Alternative scenarios are possible but not probable IMO.

 

[Numbers]

I'm not sure they have the same laws in Italy. Especially when you consider that there was no way to get out the front door at the cottage without a key which would violate laws in the US for a residence.

This may have been only because the spring lock was broken. One can leave a key in the deadbolt lock on the inside for emergency use (but this may make it impossible for a key to be used from outside).

We don't know the Italian laws about residential fire codes and exits, not do we know how well such laws would be enforced.

ETA: US laws on fire codes and exits are based on horrible experiences from fires prior to such codes. Examples include the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire (New York, 1911) and the Our Lady of the Angels school fire (Chicago, 1958). There are probably too many others.

 

[acbytesla]

The main point with the nursery anyway is that's where Rudy Guede was caught with the goods he stole from the law office. The law office was regarded as a "difficult climb" the window was shattered with a "large rock" and "clothes were strewn on the floor." I don't see how any reasonable person could conclude anything but the most likely reason Rudy Guede is connected by criminal evidence to two remarkably similar crime scenes in the span of two weeks is because he is responsible for the state of both scenes. Alternative scenarios are possible but not probable IMO.

I see a huge difference in looking at Rudy and Amanda/Raffaele. The evidence is very strong that Rudy killed Meredith and pretty much non-existent that Knox and Sollecito were involved.

Then we have to look at why Rudy killed Meredith. I see 2 potential scenarios. One that Grinder has suggested. That is that it was a date rape that turned into murder. And that Rudy smashed the window as a diversion. I think this is unlikely and without any evidence to support it.

The second, which is that Rudy broke into the cottage to steal and was interupted. His arrest in Milan for trespassing and possessing stolen goods from another burglary committed only days before is highly suggestive of a burglar. Is it enough to convict him of burglary in either event. I don't think so. But that doesn't mean that it isn't probable. It's like the difference between a civil trial and a criminal trial. One requires a preponderance of evidence and one requires beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[Numbers]

I see a huge difference in looking at Rudy and Amanda/Raffaele. The evidence is very strong that Rudy killed Meredith and pretty much non-existent that Knox and Sollecito were involved.

Then we have to look at why Rudy killed Meredith. I see 2 potential scenarios. One that Grinder has suggested. That is that it was a date rape that turned into murder. And that Rudy smashed the window as a diversion. I think this is unlikely and without any evidence to support it.

The second, which is that Rudy broke into the cottage to steal and was interupted. His arrest in Milan for trespassing and possessing stolen goods from another burglary committed only days before is highly suggestive of a burglar. Is it enough to convict him of burglary in either event. I don't think so. But that doesn't mean that it isn't probable. It's like the difference between a civil trial and a criminal trial. One requires a preponderance of evidence and one requires beyond a reasonable doubt.

Now a difference that deserves some discussion is being put forward.

Why would Guede have attacked Meredith Kercher if she had merely interrupted another episode of "sleeping rough" as Grinder called Guede's trespass into the nursery in Milan?

Some (perhaps including myself) have speculated that the female nursery owner who discovered Guede in her nursery school was not attacked because she was accompanied by two males. The odds of a successful attack on her may not have seemed good to Rudy Guede.

Meredith entered her apartment alone, and may not even had been aware the Guede was there (if he was in the larger bathroom at the time). He may have surprised her in her bedroom. Or he may have heard her entry and surprised her before she reached her room.

If one followed Grinder's ideas (about the Milan nursery) of Guede seeking to peacefully trespass to perhaps sleep rough (and why would he do that in Perugia), why the attack on Meredith? Why didn't Guede simply explain to Meredith that he had entered her flat - to use the toilet, perhaps - and ask to be let out, or allow Meredith to call the police?

If a date rape with murder (which I would guess is rare), did Guede take Meredith's money to further the appearance of a break-in? It's noteworthy that Meredith had apparently not even taken off her jacket when attacked. And there is no indication independent of Guede that there was anything voluntary on Meredith's part in their encounter; his claims of consent seem typical of those of the apprehended rapist.

I propose, as others have concluded, that a burglary interrupted by Meredith's entry to the flat led to Guede deciding to attack and kill Meredith.

 

[Grinder]

Yeah, Koko is credible. But where is there a connection to Rudy or Koko EVER? Remember, until 8:23 that evening Amanda was supposed to work. And at 8:40 Amanda is talking to Rudy's neighbor.

Diaz?

You say they interacted. But what proof do you have? The burden is on the accuser.

This is a fantasy of yours. Not a shred of proof.

Proof you're asking for proof. Hahahahaha

 

[Grinder]

Have you seen every window?

Yes Some Alibi and I went there and filmed.

I understand it is common in Italy to bar one window but leave others open for break ins.

You're the one saying in came in through a window - didn't you just make the case the contender needs to prove?

 

[Grinder]

At least in CA, and I assume the rest of the US, bars on windows that can't be opened are illegal. This might be true in Perugia, so let's throw in the possibility that the bars could have been left unlatched or that the latching mechanism didn't work on some of the bars.

ETA: Or as per RoseMontague link Grinder was wrong about the bars?

The kindergarten is on the inside or of the building with an entrance through a courtyard. The windows are barred.

In the picture the windows have roll down security.

Maybe Vixen and you can work out Italian customs by Cali and English customs

I prefer the theory he used laser to cut them and then welded them back and flushed the laser and welder down the toilet. Do you think the bars on the bars are fixed?

 

[Bill Williams]

Yes Some Alibi and I went there and filmed.

I understand it is common in Italy to bar one window but leave others open for break ins.

You're the one saying in came in through a window - didn't you just make the case the contender needs to prove?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkdjMxTdrU8

 

[acbytesla]

Yes Some Alibi and I went there and filmed.

I understand it is common in Italy to bar one window but leave others open for break ins.
You're the one saying in came in through a window - didn't you just make the case the contender needs to prove?

Let's see, this was true of the cottage. I'm NOT saying that Rudy broke in through another window. He could have picked a lock. A door may have been unlocked as well.. I dont know. That said, Rudy's story about how he got in is not believable. It's like the stories that the guys who steal the cars on the TV show "Bait Car" tell. Over and over, they tell a version of the same story. always some "anonymous guy told them to drive or take the car. Never someone they could identify.
An anonymous guy came and killed Meredith while I took a crap.

There is a certain consistency to the stories Rudy tells.

 

[Vixen]

How did they arrange to meet up on the night of the murder? When did they meet? Where did they meet? Supply evidence in support of each answer.

Rudy lived very nearby Raf's, Amanda and Rudy's paths crossed. Amanda's phone pinged from the same kebab house as Rudy's. Rudy hung around Plaza Grimana to play basketball.

 

[Bill Williams]

Let's see, this was true of the cottage. I'm NOT saying that Rudy broke in through another window. He could have picked a lock. A door may have been unlocked as well.. I dont know. That said, Rudy's story about how he got in is not believable. It's like the stories that the guys who steal the cars on the TV show "Bait Car" tell. Over and over, they tell a version of the same story. always some "anonymous guy told them to drive or take the car. Never someone they could identify.
An anonymous guy came and killed Meredith while I took a crap.

There is a certain consistency to the stories Rudy tells.

In contrast to the Italian judiciary, you believe things Rudy says.

 

[Vixen]

Dave - the fact that there is no evidence of a break in doesn't preclude a break in. Okay.

Do you think Tesla is talking about turning the knob and walking in? No in fact he tried to use the old open window ruse but the windows are barred.

I wasn't the one that said there was no sign of a break in. It was Prato.

In any discussion about this event no one would think anything except he was let in or had a key given to him. Certain people here wish to make Rudi into a great burglar but the evidence is a best skimpy.

Rudi was also sleeping on barges in Germany. I'm surprised that hasn't been added to the list.

Note that Tesla hasn't produced proof of Diaz or admitted the windows at the nursery have bars. CT could say for sure it was Rudi and since his girl friend and the bouncer at Domus (?) didn't testify (AFAIK) that adds to doubts.

There were rocks on the street so clearly Amanda threw them or used her wiles to make some boys do it. There is as much proof of the accusations against Rudi as the rock throwing party, actually less.

1. As Rudy seems to have had unrestricted travel to Germany, it suggests he had as a minimum Italian residence rights and rights as an EU Citizen. The claims therefore he would get no state support is imaginary.

2. Police found a knife and bloodstained tissues in the bushes, so perhaps they were staged, too, together with the outsize rock.

 

[Vixen]

No. The question was how did the hook up? , Not why.
At least with Patrick there would have been a trail. With Rudy, you have NOTHING.

He waited for her outside the cottage. CCTV camera catches him hanging around several times. It ties in with his claim, he got tired of waiting, so went for a kebab.

Simples.

 

[Grinder]

The main point with the nursery anyway is that's where Rudy Guede was caught with the goods he stole from the law office. The law office was regarded as a "difficult climb" the window was shattered with a "large rock" and "clothes were strewn on the floor." I don't see how any reasonable person could conclude anything but the most likely reason Rudy Guede is connected by criminal evidence to two remarkably similar crime scenes in the span of two weeks is because he is responsible for the state of both scenes. Alternative scenarios are possible but not probable IMO.

subtle difference - The witnesses Paolo Brocchi and Matteo Palazzoli, lawyers, testified on the subject of the burglary of their legal office, located in via del Roscetto 3, Perugia, on the night between Saturday October 13 and Sunday October 14, 2007. The thief or thieves had entered through a window whose panes had been smashed with a rather large stone; the glass was scattered around, and they had found some of their clothing on top of the glass (p. 10, hearing June 6, 2009). From the first inventory they did, they found that a computer, a cell phone, USB keys and a portable printer were missing. On October 29, a colleague in the law office had called the lawyer Paolo Brocchi to tell him that in the corridor was a person who said that he had been found with some goods in Milan, goods that had been declared stolen by the lawyer Brocchi, but which he claimed to have purchased legitimately in Milan. Later, the lawyer Paolo Brocchi recognised this person as Rudy Guede (p. 20, hearing of June 6, 2009).


The climb looked way easier than the cottage to me. Ideally would be a two man job. Hard to see how one guy could remove a printer in addition to the laptop.

http://amandaknoxcase.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/law_office_window.jpg

The most likely occurrence is that Rudi, with or without an accomplice was involved, in the burglary. Possibly not the main thief but was assigned the task of selling some of the loot in Milan a city he was familiar with.

Just like I don't accept the Italian 3 comparables equals a match changing a high probability into a one brick that can't be challenged then adding a lower probability and then an obscure link and then even more obscure and then "see it's obvious that he was on a crime wave. Many have even suggested Rudi stole the 2000 Euro.

And Tesla how can let someone get away with saying burglars often just spend the night?