Continuation Part 18: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Grinder]

No indeed. It 'goes without saying' that the fewer tedious or superfluous documents the better I like it! None of the true crime books is documented in the sense I take you to mean. I assume Burleigh put some effort into making sure there was a basis for her writing.

I have no doubt that she put some effort into her book. It is also possible therefore probable that she exaggerated and made conclusions to support he Guede was on a crime wave theory.

As you know she says he broke into the nursery but the owner is on record as saying there were no signs of a break-in and the door was faulty. She uses Cristian even though he couldn't say for sure he had ever seen Rudi before. She knew the owner of Merlin, the club CT claimed he had Rudi thrown out of, but she doesn't have him verifying it was Rudi, hmmmm. She tells the story of Manu Diaz having her house so damaged by fire it took three years (when translated to a modern society probably 3 months) to repair (but the fireman could tell it started from a scarf on a lamp) and yet not one independent corroboration even though people have directly asked her for some. And she all but names Rudi as the arsonist (or does she?) because he lived nearby.

 

[Samson]

He's a compassionate human being.

He may well have believed her. After all, an innocent in jail is not particularly common, and her behaviour was very different to others around her from what I have gathered.

 

[acbytesla]

Just as a thought experiment: Could she disappear if she wanted to? Not that she should, but if she changed her name and left the country, would she be able to live a non-celebrity life? Or will she always be "Amanda Knox?" Conversely, now that she has been fully and finally acquitted, if she updated her book and went on every talk show to tell and re-tell her story (after getting some desperately needed media coaching) would people get so sick of hearing about her that they'd leave her alone if she decided to become an English teacher, a real estate lawyer or something else that wouldn't keep her in the public eye?

I'm sure if she changed her name and otally disappeared she could. But as long as her name is Amanda Knox, no.

Most people are sick of the story. But with her name recognition there are doors that are open to her. When I heard that she will be speaking at Loyola University, I thought this is her destiny. Eventually, people will remember her for this work.I see a time in the distant future when she may be welcomed back to Italy with a great apology.

Maybe this is just wishful literary thinking, but I see the arc of the her character as well as history.

Time will tell.

 

[acbytesla]

Many, if not most people manage to transcend the limits of the institutions/situations they find themselves in. From all indications, Father Saulo Scarabattoli is one such man.

Indeed, "the blight of Catholicism" perhaps is a caricature which is too wide a swath to provide a meaningful critique. Most surely the brand of Catholicism Giuliano Miginini adheres to could properly be said to belong to the middle ages.

And also there is the cultural differences with the USA and other countries. Italy has embedded even within its courts a nominal Catholicism. In the US it is only one political party, and only one faction within it which openly tries to enfranchise one religious view within the whole of the body politic.

Everyone's mileage varies.

I have known and enjoyed the company of many Catholic priests and like Amanda, I am anti religion. It is a huge mistake to see people only through the prisms of their associations and beliefs.

One of the things I love about this country and also often distresses me is the tolerance and intolerance of the belief of others.

I see no issue of a Catholic priest becoming good friends of an atheist.

 

[anglolawyer]

I have no doubt that she put some effort into her book. It is also possible therefore probable that she exaggerated and made conclusions to support he Guede was on a crime wave theory.

As you know she says he broke into the nursery but the owner is on record as saying there were no signs of a break-in and the door was faulty. She uses Cristian even though he couldn't say for sure he had ever seen Rudi before. She knew the owner of Merlin, the club CT claimed he had Rudi thrown out of, but she doesn't have him verifying it was Rudi, hmmmm. She tells the story of Manu Diaz having her house so damaged by fire it took three years (when translated to a modern society probably 3 months) to repair (but the fireman could tell it started from a scarf on a lamp) and yet not one independent corroboration even though people have directly asked her for some. And she all but names Rudi as the arsonist (or does she?) because he lived nearby.

I decline to be sucked into this. The field is yours.

 

[Bill Williams]

I have known and enjoyed the company of many Catholic priests and like Amanda, I am anti religion. It is a huge mistake to see people only through the prisms of their associations and beliefs.

One of the things I love about this country and also often distresses me is the tolerance and intolerance of the belief of others.

I see no issue of a Catholic priest becoming good friends of an atheist.

Exactly.

 

[Bill Williams]

In fact, if it weren't for atheists, I'd have no friends at all.

I've often had to stoop to the friendship of lawyers. How sad is that!

 

[Numbers]

An article by Greg Hampikian, which may not have been widely publicized. Source:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... YtjcPlViko

New Scientist 13 May 2015
Amanda Knox legal fight highlights fallibility of DNA forensics
In the wake of the Amanda Knox case, a DNA expert for the defence says greater scrutiny of crime labs is needed to avoid further injustice

GALILEO famously declared that “science proceeds more by what it has learned to ignore than by what it takes into account”. As DNA consultant for the defence in the Amanda Knox case, I was constantly reminded of the pertinence of this observation during her legal battle in Italy.

Knox, along with Raffaele Sollecito, was definitively cleared of killing Meredith Kercher earlier this year, but only after a long fight that had at its heart the ability of forensic science and the judiciary to know what to ignore.

On the day of the murder in 2007, police collected many samples from the room where Knox’s housemate Kercher died. Knox and then boyfriend Sollecito were held on the basis of the prosecutor’s gut instinct, but when fingerprints and DNA from the scene were analysed, only two profiles were identified: those of the victim and Rudy Guede, a man known to police. He was convicted of murder, but the prosecutor still pursued Knox and Sollecito.

One piece of evidence emerged as crucial: a kitchen knife at Sollecito’s house. It didn’t match many wounds on the body and tested negative for blood. DNA from Knox was on the handle – she had cooked with it. But on one swab from the blade, a minuscule trace of DNA was detected, just once during many analyses. It had some that was consistent with the victim’s. This finding was never repeated, despite many attempts. The debate was about whether or not that single result was reliable.

For any scientific procedure, it is crucial to know how often it gets things wrong as well as right. In Knox’s case, the DNA on the blade came from so few molecules that analytical instruments were pushed to read below the level that the FBI, my lab, or anyone I knew would go. We asked the Italian lab to supply validation of such a sensitive measurement, but they never complied. Despite this, Knox was convicted. DNA experts in the US spoke out and a new study on the knife was then ordered in Italy. This failed to repeat the DNA finding, and Knox and Sollecito were freed on appeal in 2011. Then in 2014, the conviction was inexplicably reinstated. The final hope rested with the supreme court this March. Justice would require it to see that there was no credible DNA evidence. Apparently it did.

Knox and Sollecito waited years to be properly cleared. Calls followed for global standards on use of low copy number DNA. But we also need better ways to weigh up new forensic techniques and issue warnings if required.

My research has shown that DNA tests are prone to subjectivity in labs. So forensic facilities must put out validation records and error reports, and open data up to scrutiny – anything less creates too high a risk of false convictions.

This article appeared in print under the headline “Fallible forensics”

By Greg Hampikian

 

[acbytesla]

In fact, if it weren't for atheists, I'd have no friends at all.

I've often had to stoop to the friendship of lawyers. How sad is that!

I won't go that low.

 

[Kestrel]

The thing that struck me right away was the map she had at the front with the principal locations involved in the case identified. Although I'm sure that's floating around on the web someplace I hadn't seen it. I did not realize that the location that the phones were tossed was very close to Guede's house. That seems to be a strong suggestion that it was Guede that threw them there.

When Guede left the cottage on that fateful night, what route would he have taken to get home?

The shortest path takes him past the basketball courts and on streets where he is likely to run into people that know him. An alternative is to head home via the park outside the city walls and hope the gate a short distance from his home has not yet been locked for the night. On that route he is unlikely to run into anyone who might notice the bloodstains, him wearing a sweatshirt belonging to the murder victim, or notice that he was coming from the direction of the cottage. The park area is also consistent with the cell phone towers for the two aborted calls around 10 pm and the message received at 10:13 pm.

If the gate was locked, the path continues to another gate in the city wall that is open 24 hours. Guede might be noticed on the street, but at least he would not be coming from the direction of the cottage.

That path goes right by the villa garden where the phones were found. An interesting possibility is that Guede got the incoming 10:13 message just before he noticed the police coming toward the villa to investigate the bomb threat. Realizing that the phones directly connect him to a murder victim, Guede tosses them over a wall. Meredith's keys and the knife used to kill her may have been tossed at the same time and could still be in the garden. Does anyone know if the Perugia Police did a detailed search of the area where the phones were found?

 

[carbonjam72]

When Guede left the cottage on that fateful night, what route would he have taken to get home?

The shortest path takes him past the basketball courts and on streets where he is likely to run into people that know him. An alternative is to head home via the park outside the city walls and hope the gate a short distance from his home has not yet been locked for the night. On that route he is unlikely to run into anyone who might notice the bloodstains, him wearing a sweatshirt belonging to the murder victim, or notice that he was coming from the direction of the cottage. The park area is also consistent with the cell phone towers for the two aborted calls around 10 pm and the message received at 10:13 pm.

If the gate was locked, the path continues to another gate in the city wall that is open 24 hours. Guede might be noticed on the street, but at least he would not be coming from the direction of the cottage.

That path goes right by the villa garden where the phones were found. An interesting possibility is that Guede got the incoming 10:13 message just before he noticed the police coming toward the villa to investigate the bomb threat. Realizing that the phones directly connect him to a murder victim, Guede tosses them over a wall. Meredith's keys and the knife used to kill her may have been tossed at the same time and could still be in the garden. Does anyone know if the Perugia Police did a detailed search of the area where the phones were found?

IIRC, the police stopped looking for a knife on November 6, 2007, because they "already found the murder weapon" (when they seized Raf's kitchen knife).

I wouldn't go looking for that knife so fast. Showing up with it you might be charged as one of the "others who assisted Rudy Guede" in his crimes.

 

[davefoc]

When Guede left the cottage on that fateful night, what route would he have taken to get home?

The shortest path takes him past the basketball courts and on streets where he is likely to run into people that know him. An alternative is to head home via the park outside the city walls and hope the gate a short distance from his home has not yet been locked for the night. On that route he is unlikely to run into anyone who might notice the bloodstains, him wearing a sweatshirt belonging to the murder victim, or notice that he was coming from the direction of the cottage. The park area is also consistent with the cell phone towers for the two aborted calls around 10 pm and the message received at 10:13 pm.

If the gate was locked, the path continues to another gate in the city wall that is open 24 hours. Guede might be noticed on the street, but at least he would not be coming from the direction of the cottage.

That path goes right by the villa garden where the phones were found. An interesting possibility is that Guede got the incoming 10:13 message just before he noticed the police coming toward the villa to investigate the bomb threat. Realizing that the phones directly connect him to a murder victim, Guede tosses them over a wall. Meredith's keys and the knife used to kill her may have been tossed at the same time and could still be in the garden. Does anyone know if the Perugia Police did a detailed search of the area where the phones were found?

Thanks for the response. For whatever reason, I still enjoy these little extra insights into this case even after having participated in this thread on and off for years. That seems like a very good theory about the pitching of the phones. This has been one of those loose ends that I thought there wasn't much hope of additional insight on. The bizarre coincidence of the bomb threat being near to where the phones were found is an annoying little detail that there has been a lot of theorizing about in these threads but nothing seemed quite right to me until this suggestion. It was so unlikely that it seemed like there must have been something to tie the two facts together and I think your idea does that without the need to imagine deeper conspiracies. Especially after the source of the threat seems to have been identified and the bomb threat seems to have been truly independent of the murder.

One problem with it is the police's failure to find the knife where the phones were. But Guede may have dumped the knife in a place where it was less likely to be found and dumping the phones could have been a spur of the moment necessity as you suggest.

 

[andreajo]

There are some translated Raffaele book promotion interview excerpts on .net at the tail end of the current main discussion (page 22). He seems quite philosophical, and appears to focus on the problems of the system rather than just his own case.

 

[andreajo]

Duplicate

 

[acbytesla]

When Guede left the cottage on that fateful night, what route would he have taken to get home?

The shortest path takes him past the basketball courts and on streets where he is likely to run into people that know him. An alternative is to head home via the park outside the city walls and hope the gate a short distance from his home has not yet been locked for the night. On that route he is unlikely to run into anyone who might notice the bloodstains, him wearing a sweatshirt belonging to the murder victim, or notice that he was coming from the direction of the cottage. The park area is also consistent with the cell phone towers for the two aborted calls around 10 pm and the message received at 10:13 pm.

If the gate was locked, the path continues to another gate in the city wall that is open 24 hours. Guede might be noticed on the street, but at least he would not be coming from the direction of the cottage.

That path goes right by the villa garden where the phones were found. An interesting possibility is that Guede got the incoming 10:13 message just before he noticed the police coming toward the villa to investigate the bomb threat. Realizing that the phones directly connect him to a murder victim, Guede tosses them over a wall. Meredith's keys and the knife used to kill her may have been tossed at the same time and could still be in the garden. Does anyone know if the Perugia Police did a detailed search of the area where the phones were found?

I'm absolutely convinced that Rudy went around the city walls and through the park and the gate was probably locked and then threw the phones away en route to entering through the next entrance in the wall and came back to his apartment from the opposite direction of the cottage. OTOH I could be wrong.

 

[davefoc]

I'm absolutely convinced that Rudy went around the city walls and through the park and the gate was probably locked and then threw the phones away en route to entering through the next entrance in the wall and came back to his apartment from the opposite direction of the cottage. OTOH I could be wrong.

Has the part of you that is absolutely right picked a likely spot where the knife was thrown? A dumpster, a body of water, etc.?

 

[Sonia]

I have no doubt that she put some effort into her book. It is also possible therefore probable that she exaggerated and made conclusions to support he Guede was on a crime wave theory.

Possible therefore probable? What? Why would an investigative writer risk her entire reputation by publishing findings that were not true? Any of the sources interviewed by Burleigh (or their attorneys) would have checked her published accounts of their interviews, and they would surely have gone to the press if Burleigh had exaggerated or misrepresented their words for millions to read.

As you know she says he broke into the nursery but the owner is on record as saying there were no signs of a break-in and the door was faulty. She uses Cristian even though he couldn't say for sure he had ever seen Rudi before. She knew the owner of Merlin, the club CT claimed he had Rudi thrown out of, but she doesn't have him verifying it was Rudi, hmmmm. She tells the story of Manu Diaz having her house so damaged by fire it took three years (when translated to a modern society probably 3 months) to repair (but the fireman could tell it started from a scarf on a lamp) and yet not one independent corroboration even though people have directly asked her for some. And she all but names Rudi as the arsonist (or does she?) because he lived nearby.

The only way "independent corroboration" could be produced would be if another investigator took the initiative to travel to Perugia, re-interview the people Burleigh interviewed, re-examine the documents she examined, and report back on what he finds. What other independent corroboration could possibly exist? However, no publisher would be interested in footing the bill for such a junket because the work has already been done and and the results have already been published years ago, by Burleigh. So whoever flies off to Perugia to double-check all Burleigh's research will have to do it at his own expense. Can't you see how absurd this notion is?

All her sources were/are readily available FOR YEARS to anybody who wished/wishes to phone them up or go and see them. Local journalists, especially, could have pressed her sources if they doubted her accounts. Local reporters/bloggers never bothered. Considering the jackal-like pursuit of trivia about the case by the press during the last eight years, the absence of any "independent NON-corroboration" speaks to the accuracy of Burleigh's reporting.

 

[Kestrel]

One problem with it is the police's failure to find the knife where the phones were. But Guede may have dumped the knife in a place where it was less likely to be found and dumping the phones could have been a spur of the moment necessity as you suggest.

The residents of the villa found the two phones. Did the police ever do an intensive search of that garden?

 

[davefoc]

The residents of the villa found the two phones. Did the police ever do an intensive search of that garden?

I don't know, but I assume not. Still, I think the residents might have noticed a bloody knife on their lawn or even in their yard. We're just talking probabilities here, but I doubt he threw it in the yard.

If the police had pursued him as the principal suspect then I would guess they would have done a detailed search of the entire route between the apartment where Kercher was murdered and Guede's house. I think they might have found it and if they had it would have been very difficult to prosecute AK/RS because the double knife theory is pretty stupid and because the time of the last phone access pushes the TOD into the time that AK/RS have an assailable alibi even without the digestion evidence.

 

[Bill Williams]

I have no doubt that she put some effort into her book. It is also possible therefore probable that she exaggerated and made conclusions to support he Guede was on a crime wave theory.

Possible therefore probable? What? Why would an investigative writer risk her entire reputation by publishing findings that were not true? Any of the sources interviewed by Burleigh (or their attorneys) would have checked her published accounts of their interviews, and they would surely have gone to the press if Burleigh had exaggerated or misrepresented their words for millions to read.

Exactly. As you say below, all that would need to happen to in practise harm Burleigh's career was someone to re-do the investigation work she had done and - rather than come up with differing conclusions based on some corpus of finding - find that there has been dishonesty and undue-exaggeration. What we've had for years in this thread, instead, is a theoretical argument on the place of the true-crime genre.

The only way "independent corroboration" could be produced would be if another investigator took the initiative to travel to Perugia, re-interview the people Burleigh interviewed, re-examine the documents she examined, and report back on what he finds. What other independent corroboration could possibly exist? However, no publisher would be interested in footing the bill for such a junket because the work has already been done and and the results have already been published years ago, by Burleigh. So whoever flies off to Perugia to double-check all Burleigh's research will have to do it at his own expense. Can't you see how absurd this notion is?

All her sources were/are readily available FOR YEARS to anybody who wished/wishes to phone them up or go and see them. Local journalists, especially, could have pressed her sources if they doubted her accounts. Local reporters/bloggers never bothered. Considering the jackal-like pursuit of trivia about the case by the press during the last eight years, the absence of any "independent NON-corroboration" speaks to the accuracy of Burleigh's reporting.

This point of your bears repeating... "Considering the jackal-like pursuit of trivia about the case by the press during the last eight years, the absence of any "independent NON-corroboration" speaks to the accuracy of Burleigh's reporting."

What has happened here for yeas is the substitution of the ability to doubt, replacing the actual demonstration of any foundation for doubt.

That's where this absurd notion of "It is also possible therefore probable" comes from, and then the thread rides madly off in all directions.