Continuation Part 22: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[bagels]

I think the standard pro-guilt "argument" on this one is that the evil Kanox and knifeboy Sollecito opened the left half of the window into the room, then threw the rock (or hit it) against the outer pane of the window - in which case most of the glass would have either been propelled sideways across the inside of the room (since the pane was at right-angles to the window frame) or straight downward onto the floor of the room.

But unfortunately for the pro-guilt argument, the evidence is in fact wholly consistent with the rock having been thrown from the outside with the window closed. In that scenario, most of the glass would have fallen vertically down onto the broad stone exterior window sill (which is exactly where several large pieces of glass were in fact discovered), with only very tiny shards of glass being propelled backwards onto the ground below the window (since this was very thin single-pane glass, which thus exhibited a very low "trampoline effect" of glass springing back in the direction of the propelled object).

And we know for sure that the police totally botched the investigation of the outside ground below the window. Not one close-up photo was taken of this ground, only a ludicrously cursory examination was made of the ground (with none of the careful sifting of soil/grass that would be essential for discovering the very small glass particles), and the police laughably had to rely on second-hand oral anecdotal testimony in court. And of course even on the afternoon of the discovery, the police were already using this very area for taking cigarette and phone breaks. They would almost certainly have trampled any glass deep into the ground, or deposited it onto their own shoes and transported it elsewhere. Yet another obvious example of the grotesque ineptitude and malpractice endemic in this police investigation, unfortunately.

But the angle of the window opened into the room makes their theory impossible...unless Amanda and Raff pick up every single piece of glass, and move it to the middle of the room, and distributed it flawlessly as if it had been thrown through the glass window closed shut. It's like just about everything else with this case, absurdly stupid.

 

[LondonJohn]

But the angle of the window opened into the room makes their theory impossible...unless Amanda and Raff pick up every single piece of glass, and move it to the middle of the room, and distributed it flawlessly as if it had been thrown through the glass window closed shut. It's like just about everything else with this case, absurdly stupid.

Oh yeah, I think that the repositioning of the glass by Foxy and Knifey into - coincidentally - just the sort of glass dispersion pattern that one would expect to see from a rock thrown from outside with the interior shutters partially closed... is an integral part of this particular pro-guilt "argument"

 

[LondonJohn]

It is a criminal offence to make a death threat in the UK. The post might be a criminal offence IF it was a death threat. However, of course, it wasn't. It was poor taste and deserved to be removed, but nowhere did it threaten to kill anyone.

It appears you don't understand the adjective "implicit".

The post could reasonably be read as an implicit death threat, and/or incitement to murder.

 

[Vixen]

This post literally doesn't make sense. Your point is the opposite of what you think it is.

If the rock was thrown from inside to outside...then there would be glass outside.

Can the PGP think in coherent thoughts when it comes to this case? Like ever?

bagels, I have posted the photo of the crime scene umpty-nine times now and you still stone wall the inescapable fact of a faked burglary.

Think about it rationally.


A boulder of 9lb 4 oz is lobbed, or thrown overhead, or shotput, six feet across a car park, bearing in mind an outside wooden shutter is in the way.

Even if the shutter was not there, the boulder should go, from that angle, in a straight line towards the far wall of the room.

It does not. It goes underneath a chair on the adjacent wall. This is compatible with it being thrown from inside the room with the window opened inward, with the inner shutter behind it (there is a fresh indentation on it from the impact) and the boulder ricochets back in the same, or small angle away from, the direction the shutter is facing, having struck it, which is under the chair at the wall adjacent to the window.


I know I am wasting bandwidth as you prefer fantasy to graphic physical fact.

 

[acbytesla]

Unfortunately for you and your theory, there was no glass found below, outside.

It is a fact the boulder was lobbed from inside Filomena's room.

End of.

And why would there have been? The momentum of the rock and the glass is in to the room. This was tested and judging by the dispersion of the glass In the bedroom it's clear that the rock was thrown from the outside.

You of course I'm sure will igbore this inconvenient fact.

Still disingenuous. Nothing changes.

 

[LondonJohn]

bagels, I have posted the photo of the crime scene umpty-nine times now and you still stone wall the inescapable fact of a faked burglary.

Think about it rationally.


A boulder of 9lb 4 oz is lobbed, or thrown overhead, or shotput, six feet across a car park, bearing in mind an outside wooden shutter is in the way.

Even if the shutter was not there, the boulder should go, from that angle, in a straight line towards the far wall of the room.

It does not. It goes underneath a chair on the adjacent wall. This is compatible with it being thrown from inside the room with the window opened inward, with the inner shutter behind it (there is a fresh indentation on it from the impact) and the boulder ricochets back in the same, or small angle away from, the direction the shutter is facing, having struck it, which is under the chair at the wall adjacent to the window.

I know I am wasting bandwidth as you prefer fantasy to graphic physical fact.

Oh the sweet, sweet irony!

Too many mistakes to address in detail..... but a rather whopping one concerns the rock trajectory. (Hint: with the interior shutters pulled closed, the rock would have hit the right-hand (as viewed from outside) shutter after passing through the window pane. It would have lost a fair degree of its momentum through its impact with the glass, and its subsequent impact with the interior shutter would have caused two effects: the shutter would have swung open to the right (again, as viewed from the outside) and the rock would have been deflected downwards and slightly to the left. The rock would have landed very close to the wall below the window, and would probably have taken a slight roll further left until coming fully to rest. Which is..... pretty much exactly where it WAS discovered.)

 

[bagels]

bagels, I have posted the photo of the crime scene umpty-nine times now and you still stone wall the inescapable fact of a faked burglary.

Think about it rationally.


A boulder of 9lb 4 oz is lobbed, or thrown overhead, or shotput, six feet across a car park, bearing in mind an outside wooden shutter is in the way.

Even if the shutter was not there, the boulder should go, from that angle, in a straight line towards the far wall of the room.

It does not. It goes underneath a chair on the adjacent wall. This is compatible with it being thrown from inside the room with the window opened inward, with the inner shutter behind it (there is a fresh indentation on it from the impact) and the boulder ricochets back in the same, or small angle away from, the direction the shutter is facing, having struck it, which is under the chair at the wall adjacent to the window.


I know I am wasting bandwidth as you prefer fantasy to graphic physical fact.

We have no idea how the rock was thrown or from what angle. What we do know is the glass was distributed straight out from the closed window, so we know the window was shut when the glass was broken. The only delusional person ignoring the irrefutable physical evidence is, surprise, you. Wow can't believe it, and up to now your theories have all been so rational and evidence based.

 

[LondonJohn]

We have no idea how the rock was thrown or from what angle. What we do know is the glass was distributed straight out from the closed window, so we know the window was shut when the glass was broken. The only delusional person ignoring the irrefutable physical evidence is, surprise, you. Wow can't believe it, and up to now your theories have all been so rational and evidence based.

Or...... Captain Amanda and General Raffie had the wherewithal, ingenuity and ballistics understanding to pick up the glass fragments from their staged breaking of the window, re-dispersing them in just the pattern one would expect to see if the window had really been broken by a rock thrown from outside through the closed window, with the interior shutter pulled shut.....


..... before reverting to Hapless Amanda and Dunce-Raffie by leaving Sollecito's foot print on the bath mat and Knox's blood in and around the sink....

 

[Vixen]

The reasoning is this:

Raise an issue to divert from the subject.....

In refusing to address the main issue, speculate on what the other does or doesn't believe.....

When pressed to address the ignored issue, declare victory......

All the while maintaining the diversion.

And using the victims of crime as a rhetorical device, all the while claiming to have their best interests at the fore.

Please quit exploiting victims of crime to score points on a thread.

Answer the question, Bill. Answer the question.

 

[Vixen]

I think the standard pro-guilt "argument" on this one is that the evil Kanox and knifeboy Sollecito opened the left half of the window into the room, then threw the rock (or hit it) against the outer pane of the window - in which case most of the glass would have either been propelled sideways across the inside of the room (since the pane was at right-angles to the window frame) or straight downward onto the floor of the room.

But unfortunately for the pro-guilt argument, the evidence is in fact wholly consistent with the rock having been thrown from the outside with the window closed. In that scenario, most of the glass would have fallen vertically down onto the broad stone exterior window sill (which is exactly where several large pieces of glass were in fact discovered), with only very tiny shards of glass being propelled backwards onto the ground below the window (since this was very thin single-pane glass, which thus exhibited a very low "trampoline effect" of glass springing back in the direction of the propelled object).

And we know for sure that the police totally botched the investigation of the outside ground below the window. Not one close-up photo was taken of this ground, only a ludicrously cursory examination was made of the ground (with none of the careful sifting of soil/grass that would be essential for discovering the very small glass particles), and the police laughably had to rely on second-hand oral anecdotal testimony in court. And of course even on the afternoon of the discovery, the police were already using this very area for taking cigarette and phone breaks. They would almost certainly have trampled any glass deep into the ground, or deposited it onto their own shoes and transported it elsewhere. Yet another obvious example of the grotesque ineptitude and malpractice endemic in this police investigation, unfortunately.

How clever of the perps to get all sorts of people trampling over the crime scene.

 

[Vixen]

It appears you don't understand the adjective "implicit".

The post could reasonably be read as an implicit death threat, and/or incitement to murder.

See Voltaire, post #2802.

 

[LondonJohn]

How clever of the perps to get all sorts of people trampling over the crime scene.

"Perps"? There was only one perpetrator. It was Guede. Don't you know that by now....?

(And it didn't take anything (or anyone) other than incompetence, blatant failure to follow even the most basic of crime scene processing rules and malpractice for the police to have trampled all over the ground below the window and to not have analysed it anywhere near properly. I'd suggest that the people you need to ask about just how and why that happened are the morons, incompetents and liars in the Perugia police dept, the Rome forensics department and the PM's department - not Knox or Sollecito, or Guede for that matter.)

 

[LondonJohn]

See Voltaire, post #2802.

Let's see if the relevant law enforcement authorities take the same breezy view of this as you appear to do, eh....?

 

[Vixen]

We have no idea how the rock was thrown or from what angle. What we do know is the glass was distributed straight out from the closed window, so we know the window was shut when the glass was broken. The only delusional person ignoring the irrefutable physical evidence is, surprise, you. Wow can't believe it, and up to now your theories have all been so rational and evidence based.

Of course we do. We have missile trajectory experts. Every, single, each, individual, combined, as a whole, singular, discrete, particular, definitive, ultimate, diverse, national, local, law court into the case, upheld:

The burglary scene was staged.

Accept it.

 

[Vixen]

"Perps"? There was only one perpetrator. It was Guede. Don't you know that by now....?

(And it didn't take anything (or anyone) other than incompetence, blatant failure to follow even the most basic of crime scene processing rules and malpractice for the police to have trampled all over the ground below the window and to not have analysed it anywhere near properly. I'd suggest that the people you need to ask about just how and why that happened are the morons, incompetents and liars in the Perugia police dept, the Rome forensics department and the PM's department - not Knox or Sollecito, or Guede for that matter.)

Given it is a fact, finding, determination, upholding, edict, reality, that the burglary scene was staged it's about time you accepted it, instead of coming up with ridiculous conspiracy theories.

 

[LondonJohn]

Of course we do. We have missile trajectory experts. Every, single, each, individual, combined, as a whole, singular, discrete, particular, definitive, ultimate, diverse, national, local, law court into the case, upheld:

The burglary scene was staged.

Accept it.

This is a (to put it generously) "untruth".

(Not to mention the fact that it makes no sense grammatically or syntactically........)

 

[LondonJohn]

Given it is a fact, finding, determination, upholding, edict, reality, that the burglary scene was staged it's about time you accepted it, instead of coming up with ridiculous conspiracy theories.

The burglary scene was not staged

(And your thesaurus is sure getting a good beating this evening! Well done!)

 

[Vixen]

But the angle of the window opened into the room makes their theory impossible...unless Amanda and Raff pick up every single piece of glass, and move it to the middle of the room, and distributed it flawlessly as if it had been thrown through the glass window closed shut. It's like just about everything else with this case, absurdly stupid.

You PIP's are comparable to what a proud mother exclaimed on seeing her son marching down the road in a parade, "Look, at my boy, he's the only one who's marching in step!"

 

[Vixen]

This is a (to put it generously) "untruth".

(Not to mention the fact that it makes no sense grammatically or syntactically........)

That's your 'best truth', is it?

 

[bagels]

Of course we do. We have missile trajectory experts. Every, single, each, individual, combined, as a whole, singular, discrete, particular, definitive, ultimate, diverse, national, local, law court into the case, upheld:

The burglary scene was staged.

Accept it.

Yes some (but not all) of the Italian courts ruled that the scene where a known burglar was spotted on CCTV snooping around in what would have been a dark empty cottage, and later left his bloody footprints and handprints in the cottage, at the very same time it had a rock smashed window above climbable metal bars below - closely matching this same burglar's previous rock smashed wall climbing break-in a couple blocks away - was not the work of this burglar, but an elaborate staging that only perfectly matched his work and he just happened to be there standing in the middle of it by sheer coincidence.

The reason I don't agree with that finding, is because I'm not a complete *********** idiot.