Continuation Part 15: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[davefoc]

From wiki:
In geology, a boulder is a rock with grain size of usually no less than 30 centimetres (1 ft) diameter.

----

It says nothing about minimum weight.

Excellent point. The rock found in the cottage that has been described here as about nine pound might have been a boulder by a technical definition if its density was low enough so that if it was one foot in diameter it would have weighed nine pounds.

The density of rock is typically about 150 pounds per cubic foot
A rock that is one foot in diameter made from typical rock (~150 pounds per cubic foot) would weigh about 78 pounds. So if the rock that was found in the cottage had a density of about 9/78 of normal rock (~17 pounds per cubic foot) then the rock might have been about 1 foot in diameter and met the definition from Wikipedia of a boulder. It seems unlikely from the photographs that the rock was actually one foot in diameter but if it had been then you would certainly be right that as per the Wikipedia definition it would have been a boulder.

I'm not sure what rock that might have been, but pumice weighs about 40 pounds per cubic foot, so it must have been an unusual kind of rock. Or maybe it was hollow.

On the other hand maybe you were just using a bit of hyperbole to emphasize the point that you think that throwing a nine pound rock (about 6 inches in diameter assuming typical rock density) through a window was some sort of feat requiring abnormal human skills and strength.

I continue to be surprised that you think this. I am a fat old man and I just went out in to the yard, found a concrete block that was about 15 pounds and heaved it about 15 feet with far less than all my strength. I think I'd have a pretty good shot at more than 30 feet with a nine pound rock.

 

[Kauffer]

The trainer prints were originally considered to be Raf's as they had a unique deformed star pattern on the heel, which matched the print on the floor. Massei bent over backwards for Raf's dad and upheld it was after all, Rudy's print because of the matching box in his room. The addidas print is completely different to Raf's Nike 2 Outbreaks (?). So what was Massei thinking, anyway?

Especially as Raf had immediately soaked his Nikes in bleach after the murder and police recorded witnessing a strong smell of bleach at his abode even five days later.

Did Italian cops try to frame Italian Raf, whose sister was a carabinieri policewoman - one of their own.

Please explain why and how police framed Raf.

You've made this claim numerous times. Where's the citation for it?

 

[LondonJohn]

His footprints were covered in blood and there was no trace at all of Rudy in Filomena's room, despite Rudy's profligracy in scattering his ID.

Ummmm..... could that possibly be because Guede only spent time in Romanelli's room prior to the murder - at which point obviously there was no blood on his shoe soles? Someone breaking and entering through a window, wearing a decent jacket and gloves, would probably leave few or no forensic traces linked to their identity in the room.

And then, after Guede confronted and killed Kercher, is it possible that he spent time exclusively in Kercher's room, the small bathroom, and the hallway through to the kitchen/lounge and out of the front door?

 

[Vixen]

He found as a fact they murdered Meredith. It would be pointless appealing in your system, Vixen.

You can theoretically appeal against the fact found your DNA was there by paying some quack to claim you failed to consider the fact pleaded at the trial this DNA was planted by the corrupt police.

AFAIAA No evidence was accepted that this was so. Where is the new evidence not known as of the time of the trial that it was indeed planted?

Dr Gill's pontifications cannot count, as the prosecution and judges were not given their legal right to challenge him by cross examination and providing a counter expert.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen, please note the info above. Do you still claim that Dr. Gill provided an appendix for the defense?

Raf's 306(?) page appeal is all in Italian, but Dr Gill's profferings are there AFAICS. Can any kind Italian speaker look at this and report back?

 

[Kauffer]

We do not know that the facts found by Massei will be binned. Facts are facts, after all. I am not aware of an new facts presented that overrode facts found at the First Instance merits hearing made the convictions unsafe enough to say, "exonerated". For example, the "real murderers were found".

Why don't you post a list of Massei's facts and we'll tell you which ones have been binned in advance of Marasca telling you which ones have been binned. We're clever like that here, don't you know?

 

[Vixen]

I was under the impression that Guede was carrying a type of emergency hammer, as can be found on most trains and buses. They often look like this:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_40237555e634fc9c55.jpg[/qimg]


They are specifically designed to break tempered glass, as used in bus and train windows, and they can also be more effective than ordinary hammers in breaking double-glazed windows. Maybe Guede got hold of (i.e. stole) it from the train he took to Milan

The alarm would have automatically gone off.

 

[LondonJohn]

Hellmann's report is as dead as a dodo, extinguished, rescinded, mullahed, massacred, repudiated, reversed, removed, blotted out, cut into pieces, trampled over, ditched, scrubbed, dashed.

Please note.

Toto was an eye witness.

No he wasn't. Even under the most generous (and misguided) interpretation of Curatolo's testimony, he was at most an eyewitness to Knox's and Sollecito's whereabouts and demeanour in an area near to the cottage between the hours of around 9.30pm and 11.30pm (depending on which version of his pack of lies story you choose to take as the "correct" one....). This is weak circumstantial evidence of Knox's/Sollecito's participation in the murder - indeed, its primary evidential value is that it contradicts Knox's/Sollecito's claims to have stayed in Sollecito's apartment all night.

But of course the only reasonable interpretation of Curatolo's testimony is that he was simply wrong. Whether he was wrong out of confusion or on purpose is somewhat moot. But there's virtually no doubt that one way or another, his testimony was wrong and inherently unreliable. One factor alone - his claim to have seen the buses for the out of town discos and lots of students wearing masks and costumes on the same night that he claims to have observed Knox and Sollecito at the basketball court - is sufficient to discredit his entire testimony. But there are plenty of other factors that also point to the inexorable conclusion that Curatolo was a fundamentally unreliable and non-credible witness.

 

[LondonJohn]

The alarm would have automatically gone off.

Ah right - you've been on those trains between Perugia and Milan in around 2007 and checked that the emergency hammers are all alarmed, have you? I'm impressed! Do you have any photos from your trips.....?

 

[RoseMontague]

The trainer prints were originally considered to be Raf's as they had a unique deformed star pattern on the heel, which matched the print on the floor. Massei bent over backwards for Raf's dad and upheld it was after all, Rudy's print because of the matching box in his room. The addidas print is completely different to Raf's Nike 2 Outbreaks (?). So what was Massei thinking, anyway?

Especially as Raf had immediately soaked his Nikes in bleach after the murder and police recorded witnessing a strong smell of bleach at his abode even five days later.

Did Italian cops try to frame Italian Raf, whose sister was a carabinieri policewoman - one of their own.

Please explain why and how police framed Raf.

You have no idea what you are talking about. The comparison was made between Rafs Nike Air Force One Lows and Guede's Nike Outbreak 2's. Neither has a star pattern and none of the shoe prints in blood have a star pattern. Raf had a pair of addidas shoes, none of these prints were found.

 

[Vixen]

You have it wrong, Bongiornio was not pregnant at the time of the first trial and when she missed a few of the trial dates in the first trial it was due to her parliamentary duties. The trial continued without her on those occasions.

We agree it was the defense who unreasonably strung the case out.

 

[LondonJohn]

You can theoretically appeal against the fact found your DNA was there by paying some quack to claim you failed to consider the fact pleaded at the trial this DNA was planted by the corrupt police.

AFAIAA No evidence was accepted that this was so. Where is the new evidence not known as of the time of the trial that it was indeed planted?

Dr Gill's pontifications cannot count, as the prosecution and judges were not given their legal right to challenge him by cross examination and providing a counter expert.

You clearly do not know (or understand) the difference between a) evidence or testimony deposited with a court, b) findings of fact made by that court, based on the evidence and testimony, and c) findings of law made by the court. There are undoubtedly some good books that you can find which could articulate and differentiate these things.

 

[Vixen]

So, might I ask how Lukis Anderson's DNA ended up under the fingernails of murder victim Raveesh "Ravi" Kumra? Must have a really good answer?

Scraped off layers of live skin, possibly down to the capillaries to draw blood. Skin contains moisture and under a murder victim's fingernails, there is likely to be copious amounts of it.

That none were found under Mez' nails further indicates she was forcibly restrained whilst A N Other butchered her.

 

[Vixen]

You do understand that no witness credibly saw them at any time between 8:45 pm and 1 pm the next day. Curatolo when asked the next day didn't remember anything notable nor did Quintavalle tell the detective the same week he had seen Amanda even though he was shown pictures of her.

I don't think CT's testimony should have had weight if considered at all. But then I try to be consistent.

It was thanks to a persistent hack, turned sleuth.

 

[davefoc]

Please expand on how a computer dealers experience in the legit world has anything to do with selling laptops "under" the table. People sell stuff on Craigslist all the time without being schooled in the field of the stuff they are selling.

Stolen merch is sold below market and for cash. The fence knows from the street what a computer will go for or at least a range. It's not like they are selling to a corporation and talking with the IT dept.

I agreed with acbytesla and I don't have much to add. If you mean by fence somebody that occasionally buys something that he occasionally sells and the transactions involve stolen items then Guede might on occasion have done something that would mean that he functioned on occasion as a fence. If you mean that Guede was routinely making money by buying stolen items, (especially stolen electronic items) and selling them I doubt very much if Guede was a fence. I agree with acbytesla that would imply that Guede had some significant skills, knowledge and contacts of which there is little or no evidence. There is certainly more evidence that he was a thief.

[Davefoc commented that Grinder had an apparent ability to limit the effect of his confirmation biases more than most]

Thanks

Mostly,

I meant it as a complement, ...mostly. You have both a very detailed knowledge of this case and an unwillingness to accept the consensus view even when it supports your general view point if you don't think the consensus view is correct. I don't know enough to decide whether what's going on is that you're just right or you're just over correcting what your biases will reward you for believing.

 

[Bill Williams]

You can theoretically appeal against the fact found your DNA was there by paying some quack to claim you failed to consider the fact pleaded at the trial this DNA was planted by the corrupt police.

AFAIAA No evidence was accepted that this was so. Where is the new evidence not known as of the time of the trial that it was indeed planted?

Dr Gill's pontifications cannot count, as the prosecution and judges were not given their legal right to challenge him by cross examination and providing a counter expert.

Dr. Gill is now a "quack"?

Can your posts here get any more ridiculous?

 

[Kauffer]

Ummmm..... could that possibly be because Guede only spent time in Romanelli's room prior to the murder - at which point obviously there was no blood on his shoe soles? Someone breaking and entering through a window, wearing a decent jacket and gloves, would probably leave few or no forensic traces linked to their identity in the room.

And then, after Guede confronted and killed Kercher, is it possible that he spent time exclusively in Kercher's room, the small bathroom, and the hallway through to the kitchen/lounge and out of the front door?

One of the giveaways in this case is the shard of glass from Romanelli's room found in Kercher's room. It is posited that either a) Burglar breaks in through the window and takes the shard with him, eventually into Kercher's room in his shoe where it dislodges, or b) Stager exits Kercher's room post murder, enters Romanelli's room, collects the shard, re-enters Kercher's room and deposits it, later exiting the room for a second time.

Yet the necessary evidence in the form of trails of bloody prints supporting hypothesis b) does not exist. Therefore, it is reasonable to infer that either the breakin was a real attempted burglary or else we must conceive of c) There was a staging, but it MUST have occurred BEFORE the murder - which is rather silly.

 

[Vixen]

I suggest you read your passport. We are no longer classified as subjects. We are citizens of the UK. There still is technically such thing as a British Subject, but it is applicable to a vanishingly low number of people who were previously in India under the Empire and in Ireland before 1949. So you're wrong. As so often.

As indeed you are wrong in your witterings about gazillions of Africans, Asians etc having the same right to maraud around the Schengen zone as you. The point is that all these people have to gain lawful entry into the Schengen zone in the first place. At every border between a Schengen country and a non-Schengen country, there are full border controls. You and I are totally free to enter the Schengen zone since we have EU passports and thus have automatic right of passage across the EU.

If I flew from Nairobi to Frankfurt, I'd enter Germany automatically on account of my EU passport. From there, I could travel freely around the Schengen zone without even needing a passport. If a Kenyan national was on the same flight, however, (s)he would have to go through a rigorous immigration check before being allowed to enter Germany. If (s)he were ultimately granted entry to Germany, (s)he would also then be able to move freely around the Schengen zone without a passport.

So you reckon someone of Ivory Coast nationality can simply swan around Europe without needing to have residency rights?

 

[carbonjam72]

A stone is a pebble. Have you seen the size of the theatrical break-in tool? As large as a man's head.

I seem to remember a picture of someone picking it up in one hand quite easily. It's just a handful of rock, no where near as big as a bowling ball or a human head (bowling is a sport we play in the US, that doesn't involve cheese).

 

[carbonjam72]

Hellmann's report is as dead as a dodo, extinguished, rescinded, mullahed, massacred, repudiated, reversed, removed, blotted out, cut into pieces, trampled over, ditched, scrubbed, dashed.
Please note.


Toto was an eye witness.

Toto, ironically, is also, "as dead as a dodo, extinguished, rescinded, mullahed, massacred, repudiated, reversed, removed, blotted out, cut into pieces, trampled over, ditched, scrubbed, dashed."