Continuation Part 15: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[carbonjam72]

I wonder if they're expecting any guilter hooligans?

Yes. I am.

Any chance you can video it, on the sly if necessary? Be our man in Havana? Do interviews with any promising looking guilters that show up, but don't argue, just play along?

Lastly, if you are allowed to ask, could you ask these people what they thought about the "psychologist"? Sophie Collington? or something like that, who claimed she thought Amanda was a psychopath in one of the tabloids.

Or the lady on the BBC during the night of the Hellman acquittals, who suggested Amanda might have been involved in the murder because she "lied and accused an innocent man?".

Seems the witch hunt in both Italy and the UK went way, way, way beyond the tabloid press and the less well thought out readers.

You could also asked them when they first became convinced that Amanda and Raf were innocent? And why are they only now speaking out, or have they spoken out sooner?

Come to think of it, maybe I'll go and ask them myself. But if you're already there....

eta - this should be right around the time the cassation report comes out, more or less...

 

[acbytesla]

Tesla the legit computer biz is not the black market. In the black market people sell what they have for what they can get for it. It is not a boiler room operation and as little trail of transaction is the objective. Rudi did have phones as was recently shown here and we all know he had the lawyer's phone in Milan. When the item was stolen there isn't a profit margin per se. The fence sells for what he can get. Sometimes it a percentage split or a fixed price. At the lowest levels product is often advanced without payment.

Comparing your work experience to the underworld is not worthwhile.

Not many 512s left. We all understand that here. Do you think that small time fences take a sales course? People like Rudi will buddy up in a bar or cafe and after sussing the person ask if they know anybody that needs (fill in the blank) because he just bought a new one or needs money for (fill in the blank). This is not the same skill as burglar.

For a period of time car stereos were stolen from me when my car was parked on the driveway. Turned out an apartment nearby was a carck sales facility and the thieves were trading in the stereos. My guess is that the drug dealers sold or fronted them to their fences as their business was selling drugs.

Your Aunt most likely didn't use Internet cafes in 2007 to Skype but it was only an example. He also had his pic up on the laptop to prove it was his. He knew plenty enough to be a fence.

One doesn't "collect" stolen merchandise. Burglars offload it ASAP because they want to get the cash and they don't want to be caught with it because they may have left evidence behind that will get them a burglary charge.

Certainly there are thieves that pile up merch and when caught the police find large amounts of it.

I find it strange that you believe he just kept stealing stuff and kept it in his apartment as per the Spanish students. You meme is that he was broke and was desperate for money but didn't get rid of the loot.

Ask your cop friend about possession versus burglary and what they need to prove burglary. Ask him if small time burglars steal and then sell to end users or if they go through a loose network of friends to fence the loot.

Yeah, the market for stolen laptops is WORSE. It doesn't matter if it's just used or if its stolen, the problems with buying and selling them are similar.You have to find a seller and a buyer for your equipment. What thieves are going to Rudy to sell their wares? He doesn't have a phone, he doesn't have transportation. He doesn't have Internet. And who the hell is he going to sell them to to make his profit? I have no doubt that Rudy sells stolen goods, I just don't see him buying them. You keep ignoring the essential elements. A fence of stolen laptops has to know the value of what he's buying and selling and most important he has to find BUYERS! How the hell does he sell his purchased stolen laptops?

If Rudy was carrying 3 phones with him all the time and a big wallet of cash to pay burglars, then maybe. But that doesn't describe Rudy as far as I know. Try for example to sell a year old laptop at your local pawn shop. You would be lucky to get 20 percent of what you paid for it. And that isn't even stolen. My guess is there aren't many "fences" that are even remotely interested in buying stolen laptops. Not unless they are the latest MacBook.

The business you describe sucks even if it's legitimate. And it's 10 times worse if it's stolen goods.

I have no idea how much money that Rudy has, but my guess it's not much. He doesn't even have the basics. How many computers he has in a way is irrelevant if he can't sell them. It piles up, believe me. I had a warehouse full of IT equipment that I wrote off. (you try not to do this, but inevitably you make a few bad buys.)

Did Rudy have 5 computers? 3? 10? I heard he he had many. I have 6 at my house right now and I'd be lucky to get $50 for 4 of them. The fifth though might fetch a couple a hundred on Craigslist even though I bought it for a grand.

Of course he isn't stealing them to hold on to them, but what does he do if he can't find a buyer who'll give him a decent price? Think about it.

 

[Antony]

Yes even though Curatolo is "certain" his testimony was worthless. Also many here believe that Curatolo's testimony is diminished by the fact that he didn't ID them until after seeing their pics in the paper.

But people here have accepted CT even though he isn't sure and only came forward with the Rudi ID after seeing the pics.

Goose Gander.

Not entirely. Curatolo allegedly saw 2 young people hanging around in the piazza. He had no particular reason to notice or remember them (particularly many months later when he first spoke about it), it was dark and they were 30 metres away. It's extremely unlikely that he would be able to pick the same people out at a later date.

Tremontoni's story is quite different - he had a direct encounter with an intruder in his house who threatened him with a knife. It's much more credible that Tremontoni could recognise and identify this individual later, than Curatolo.

Added to that, Curatolo's junk evidence was used to convict Amanda and Raff. Guede is not on trial for the Tremontoni incident; CT's story only casts doubt on the case against them, by suggesting that Guede, convicted of the Kercher murder, was likely to have carried it out on his own. The burden of proof is not the same.

 

[Grinder]

Tesla why do you keep trying to say laptops in 2007 were basically worthless? The one laptop was definitely stolen. Are you saying that thieves only steals thing reselling for over a certain price? What is that price?

You continue a prejudicial approach to Rudi and make it seem he was dumb as a stump. I don't think he would keep stealing computers he couldn't sell AND keep them at his flat exposing himself to possession and burglary.

If the computers are so worthless why did he keep stealing them?

Since he was a drug salesman why don't you see him as a salesman and not a procurer. In most computer sales the salesman isn't the guy that buys the inventory unless it is a nickle dime Ma and Pa basement operation.

 

[Kauffer]

Ace, I'd like to go, but no dice.

Unfortunately we won't have the motivations report beforehand.

 

[Grinder]

Tremontoni's story is quite different - he had a direct encounter with an intruder in his house who threatened him with a knife. It's much more credible that Tremontoni could recognise and identify this individual later, than Curatolo.

Added to that, Curatolo's junk evidence was used to convict Amanda and Raff. Guede is not on trial for the Tremontoni incident; CT's story only casts doubt on the case against them, by suggesting that Guede, convicted of the Kercher murder, was likely to have carried it out on his own. The burden of proof is not the same.

CT should have been able to positively ID Rudi if you believe his whole story but he couldn't. I don't see why his lackings aren't as significant as Curatolo's regardless of the greater impact of Curatolo on the kids' trial.

 

[acbytesla]

This is more of the Rudi is an idiot meme. First of all most of his computers would come from ones that were being used no matter who stole them so they mostly wouldn't be that out of date.

I doubt it is different in Italy as to the fact that possession is a not the same as burglary. Maybe Numbers will give us the sentences for them.

I know that having Rudi is an important meme to PIP but the evidence of his stash of computers and his business trip to Milan make it much more likely that he sold the equipment and for others as well.

And no, there need not be many burglars for a fence. It just depends on how prolific the burglary team is.

Why would you make the assumption he had contacts that told them they were junk? Who do you think you are, Follain?

No offense Grinder but you do not know what you're talking about when it comes to buying and selling used electronics, stolen or not. Some people will use their computers for 10 years or more. They'll run XP and Excel, Chrome and Word and their accounting software. I went into an auto parts store the other day and they were using Okidata 390 ml printers. Those are 24 pin dot matrix printers that haven't been made since the 80s.

Rudy is not smart. He is uneducated, spends his days playing basketball. Maybe he's not a moron, but he's living day to day without direction. Maybe he's not much of a burglar, but he's not the fence.

 

[Kauffer]

Any chance you can video it, on the sly if necessary? Be our man in Havana? Do interviews with any promising looking guilters that show up, but don't argue, just play along?

Lastly, if you are allowed to ask, could you ask these people what they thought about the "psychologist"? Sophie Collington? or something like that, who claimed she thought Amanda was a psychopath in one of the tabloids.

Or the lady on the BBC during the night of the Hellman acquittals, who suggested Amanda might have been involved in the murder because she "lied and accused an innocent man?".

Seems the witch hunt in both Italy and the UK went way, way, way beyond the tabloid press and the less well thought out readers.

You could also asked them when they first became convinced that Amanda and Raf were innocent? And why are they only now speaking out, or have they spoken out sooner?

Come to think of it, maybe I'll go and ask them myself. But if you're already there....

eta - this should be right around the time the cassation report comes out, more or less...

It will be before the report, almost certainly and before a meaningful translation in any case. And sure, I think we should try to get as much as we can from the evening. We have nearly a month to think about it. Some others here may come too, I hope.

 

[lonepinealex]

Any chance you can video it, on the sly if necessary? Be our man in Havana? Do interviews with any promising looking guilters that show up, but don't argue, just play along?

Lastly, if you are allowed to ask, could you ask these people what they thought about the "psychologist"? Sophie Collington? or something like that, who claimed she thought Amanda was a psychopath in one of the tabloids.

Or the lady on the BBC during the night of the Hellman acquittals, who suggested Amanda might have been involved in the murder because she "lied and accused an innocent man?".

Seems the witch hunt in both Italy and the UK went way, way, way beyond the tabloid press and the less well thought out readers.

You could also asked them when they first became convinced that Amanda and Raf were innocent? And why are they only now speaking out, or have they spoken out sooner?

Come to think of it, maybe I'll go and ask them myself. But if you're already there....

eta - this should be right around the time the cassation report comes out, more or less...

Are you sure that they do think A & R are innocent? I thought the precis (what is the plural of precis?) were rather ambiguous, no doubt deliberately.

 

[Desert Fox]

Tesla why do you keep trying to say laptops in 2007 were basically worthless? The one laptop was definitely stolen. Are you saying that thieves only steals thing reselling for over a certain price? What is that price?

You continue a prejudicial approach to Rudi and make it seem he was dumb as a stump. I don't think he would keep stealing computers he couldn't sell AND keep them at his flat exposing himself to possession and burglary.

If the computers are so worthless why did he keep stealing them?
Since he was a drug salesman why don't you see him as a salesman and not a procurer. In most computer sales the salesman isn't the guy that buys the inventory unless it is a nickle dime Ma and Pa basement operation.

he is getting something for some of them. Why he kept the rest, who knows.

The thing is that we are trying to only come up with what he was probably doing. No matter what, his DNA was all over her, his hand prints were in her blood, his shoe prints were in her blood, and he money was missing. Edit: He also fled the country immediately.

As such, we could be completely wrong about why he was there and he would still be guilty of murder. There is no real evidence of anybody else so his strange tales are not credible in any manner.

Part of the reason why I speculate about what exactly he was ding is to determine the risk he poses once released.

 

[acbytesla]

Tesla why do you keep trying to say laptops in 2007 were basically worthless? The one laptop was definitely stolen. Are you saying that thieves only steals thing reselling for over a certain price? What is that price?

You continue a prejudicial approach to Rudi and make it seem he was dumb as a stump. I don't think he would keep stealing computers he couldn't sell AND keep them at his flat exposing himself to possession and burglary.

If the computers are so worthless why did he keep stealing them?

Since he was a drug salesman why don't you see him as a salesman and not a procurer. In most computer sales the salesman isn't the guy that buys the inventory unless it is a nickle dime Ma and Pa basement operation.

You just don't get it. Some laptops in 2007 were worthless. Some weren't. And you can't tell by glancing at them. You have to fire them up and see what CPU, RAM, disk space and OS is running on them. They can look close to identical but one could easily fetch 10 times what the other is worth. A burglar could spend the time to do this or steal them and figure that out later.

 

[Vixen]

Massei's and Nencini's convictions were annulled, cancelled, blocked, spiked, shredded, ripped up, thrown in the garbage, flushed down the john, is no more, is non-extant, extinct, dead.

There are no more levels. It's over except for the ECHR.

Clear now?

We don't know that until we get the ISC motivations report.

 

[Grinder]

No offense Grinder but you do not know what you're talking about when it comes to buying and selling used electronics, stolen or not. Some people will use their computers for 10 years or more. They'll run XP and Excel, Chrome and Word and their accounting software. I went into an auto parts store the other day and they were using Okidata 390 ml printers. Those are 24 pin dot matrix printers that haven't been made since the 80s.

Rudy is not smart. He is uneducated, spends his days playing basketball. Maybe he's not a moron, but he's living day to day without direction. Maybe he's not much of a burglar, but he's not the fence.

I probably made ten times what you made selling new and used electronic equipment and frankly you seem unable to understand anything about the reality of low level thieves and how they sell their goods. We supplied one of the largest video game companies with used laser disc players back in the day - we made the most money after Pioneer stopped making them and we located used ones.

Discussions of communications and making buying decisions show you have no concept. While legit biz likes to document no so much with the black market. They don't measure IRR or ROI. One similarity is that sellers give credit to move their merch.

Rudi would use the "hey man you want a cheap laptop I need to sell to pay my rent" style of selling. The overcoat full of watches style not an electronic marketing campaign.

The fact that some people use computers for ten years proves what? Let me tell you. Nothing.

If it proves anything, is that old computers have value to some people. Windows 7 machines usually sell at a premium over the 8 system.

 

[Desert Fox]

No offense Grinder but you do not know what you're talking about when it comes to buying and selling used electronics, stolen or not. Some people will use their computers for 10 years or more. They'll run XP and Excel, Chrome and Word and their accounting software. I went into an auto parts store the other day and they were using Okidata 390 ml printers. Those are 24 pin dot matrix printers that haven't been made since the 80s.

Rudy is not smart. He is uneducated, spends his days playing basketball. Maybe he's not a moron, but he's living day to day without direction. Maybe he's not much of a burglar, but he's not the fence.

I bought for my roommate's father an older quad core desktop for $150 just recently. Got it at New Egg. Many of the computer stores were selling new but lower performance desktops for far more money.

It is a very specialized skill to know the capabilities combined with value of computers. As such, he does not have to be stupid to not know what he is stealing.

 

[Antony]

CT should have been able to positively ID Rudi if you believe his whole story but he couldn't. I don't see why his lackings aren't as significant as Curatolo's regardless of the greater impact of Curatolo on the kids' trial.

You missed the point of what I was saying. CT's story doesn't need to be rock solid to be of value in undermining the "multiple killers" scenario, which is part of the case against A&R. It's enough to say that the intruder was probably Guede. If the CT incident was being used in a trial against Guede himself, then things would be different - but it isn't.

Curatolo, on the other hand, is a mainstay of the prosecution case, and as such his testimony needs to be BARD to be of any value.

 

[Vixen]

What's the difference between acquitted and exonerated, according to you?

Acquitted:
Definition

At the end of a criminal trial, a finding by a judge or jury that a defendant is not guilty. An acquittal signifies that a prosecutor failed to prove his or her case beyond a reasonable doubt, not that a defendant is innocent. Thus, a person may be acquitted of a crime but found civilly liable in a civil case regarding that same crime, e.g. O.J. Simpson, because civil cases have a lower burden of proof than criminal cases.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/acquittal


Exoneration—A person has been exonerated if he or she was convicted of a crime and later was either: (1) declared to be factually innocent by a government official or agency with the authority to make that declaration; or (2) relieved of all the consequences of the criminal conviction by a government official or body with the authority to take that action. The official action may be: (i) a complete pardon by a governor or other competent authority, whether or not the pardon is designated as based on innocence; (ii) an acquittal of all charges factually related to the crime for which the person was originally convicted; or (iii) a dismissal of all charges related to the crime for which the person was originally convicted, by a court or by a prosecutor with the authority to enter that dismissal. The pardon, acquittal, or dismissal must have been the result, at least in part, of evidence of innocence that either (i) was not presented at the trial at which the person was convicted; or (ii) if the person pled guilty, was not known to the defendant, the defense attorney and the court at the time the plea was entered. The evidence of innocence need not be an explicit basis for the official action that exonerated the person.

https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/glossary.aspx

As no new evidence was presented at the appeal, it is an acquittal, not an exoneration.

 

[Kauffer]

We don't know that until we get the ISC motivations report.

What are you suggesting? That Marasca might change his mind and convict them?? Of course Nencini and Massei are history!

 

[carbonjam72]

Are you sure that they do think A & R are innocent? I thought the precis (what is the plural of precis?) were rather ambiguous, no doubt deliberately.

Who knows what darkness lurks in the hearts of men?

I got the impression they were ready to call a spade a spade. But maybe I misread them.

Either way, I would be fascinated to see. I'm thinking of going. It's a haul for me, but I'm thinking on it.

 

[Grinder]

You just don't get it. Some laptops in 2007 were worthless. Some weren't. And you can't tell by glancing at them. You have to fire them up and see what CPU, RAM, disk space and OS is running on them. They can look close to identical but one could easily fetch 10 times what the other is worth. A burglar could spend the time to do this or steal them and figure that out later.

Yes that's how Rudi would have marketed his product, not. Perhaps if you thought of these as phones or some other product you could grasp the reality.

You do know that 18 YO sell computers at Best Buy et al. Sorry to tell you but many if not most computers are sold online without any salesman.

Some buyers on the street might go to the control panel and check details some would just make sure it fired up and allowed them to surf the web and comment at ISF.

Computer buying isn't that difficult. Basically a chimp can do it.

 

[Grinder]

Acquitted:
Definition

At the end of a criminal trial, a finding by a judge or jury that a defendant is not guilty. An acquittal signifies that a prosecutor failed to prove his or her case beyond a reasonable doubt, not that a defendant is innocent. Thus, a person may be acquitted of a crime but found civilly liable in a civil case regarding that same crime, e.g. O.J. Simpson, because civil cases have a lower burden of proof than criminal cases.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/acquittal


Exoneration—A person has been exonerated if he or she was convicted of a crime and later was either: (1) declared to be factually innocent by a government official or agency with the authority to make that declaration; or (2) relieved of all the consequences of the criminal conviction by a government official or body with the authority to take that action. The official action may be: (i) a complete pardon by a governor or other competent authority, whether or not the pardon is designated as based on innocence; (ii) an acquittal of all charges factually related to the crime for which the person was originally convicted; or (iii) a dismissal of all charges related to the crime for which the person was originally convicted, by a court or by a prosecutor with the authority to enter that dismissal. The pardon, acquittal, or dismissal must have been the result, at least in part, of evidence of innocence that either (i) was not presented at the trial at which the person was convicted; or (ii) if the person pled guilty, was not known to the defendant, the defense attorney and the court at the time the plea was entered. The evidence of innocence need not be an explicit basis for the official action that exonerated the person.
https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/glossary.aspx

As no new evidence was presented at the appeal, it is an acquittal, not an exoneration.

Better reread your definition of exoneration.