Cont: The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 32

[AnimalFriendly]

Only in your alternative universe. A qualified scientist and forensic engineer identofied the footprint in blood as Sollecito's. In particular, the hammer toe which is astonishingly rare but matche Sollecito's perfectly, as were the dimensions of his size 42 foot. There is no evidence Gued ever took off his size 45 trainers as we can see one set of his footprints header straight towards the front door from Mez' room. There is no indication he turned to lock the door on his way out. But we do see Sollecito's feet highlighted by luminol - so they would have been blood-soaked feet - facing Mez' bedroom door. This is scientific. Your opinion is pure knee-jerk denial of an observable and measurable fact.

But you prefer fantasy and I won't stop you.


.

Good Lord, somebody needs a remedial reading course. My question to you was why would Knox & Sollectito leave a bloody bathmat behind if they pulled an allnighter clean-up? I never asked for an (inaccurate) explanation of who the footprint belonged to. Your response was that the bathmat had a "blob" instead of a discernable footprint. Which is untrue. I've seen pictures of the bathmat. But even if the shape was that of a "blob", it was still blood. A bathmat which clearly had blood on it.

So I'll ask you again: If a clean-up occurred, why was the bathmat left behind?

Oh, and hammertoe is a common condition, it is not "astonishingly rare". A simple Google search would have told you this.

 

[AnimalFriendly]

The pair only got off because of Bongiorno's contacts as a mafia-client barrister who also got Andreotti off mafia charges under the little known and little used 'insufficient evidence' provisio by sneaking in a 360-report prepared by innocence advocate Gill who didn't testify, evaded cross-examination and whose own report was based on defence advocates Conti & Vecchiottis own bent report for the corrupt and inexpert Hellmann. Bent, because they were supposed to be independent - and Supreme Court judge, Chieffi, was baffled as to why they were appointed at all as they were certainly no better than the ones appointed by Massei - and were also caught by the Carabinieri of advocating for the defence behind the Court's back. So the pair got off on a legal loophole, as used by politicians such as Andreotti and the thoroughly bent Berlusconi.

This is all thanks to the Sollecito 'family' <ahem> as it were.

But in fact Marasca-Bruno's MR is pretty damning of the pair, Knox in particular.



.

So you're back to it was the mafia who got them off? Fine. So we should remind you of this post the next time you inevitably say it was US State Dept. interference?

The MR isn't damning of the pair at all. It acquits them. Or else explain how Knox was "certainly present", "washed blood from her hands" but still got acquitted. Here it comes....

 

[Stacyhs]

Nice try! I think you missed your vocation as a defence attorney.

Per usual, you completely ignore Knox's testimony and the fact it was not night, but late morning, that disprove your claim it was "dark" in her room. Instead, you just move on.

Actually, the cleaner told the police she was ordered to use only the disinfectant type of cleaner by Sollecito's father who used the same method for his surgery. Lysoform is what she was told to use.

You're bringing up the Lysoform as a diversion when the subject was the bleach found under the sink in the same amounts Chiriboga testified were there long before the murder. There was no bleach clean-up. Smell the

It was only after the Sollecito family applied pressure on her that she changed her story.

Ah...that old chestnut. The Sollecito Mafia Crime Family strikes again! They sent Rocco to have a 'little talk' with Chiriboga.
"How ya doin', Ana? Nice lookin' kid ya got there. Pity if something were to happen to him, ya?

View attachment 60078


You still haven't explained how come Knox didn't notice her lamp was missing, or why it was under MK's bed behind locked doors...?

Sigh. Why would she when she didn't need to turn it on because it was late morning? You know: NOT DARK.
I don't know why or how her lamp was in the bedroom. Neither do you. But I'll say it yet again: If Knox were guilty, when she was asked about her lamp by the police, all she had to do was say that Kercher borrowed it for her desk. But she didn't know why or how it got there and that's what she told the police.

In any case it is quite futile to keep arguing the facts as the panel of judges and lay judges upheld the prosecution's case and found the defendants proven guilty as charged, as did the Nencini Appeal Court and these are the facts that remain on legal records.

Sigh. No matter how many times you laud Massei and Nencini, it is quite futile to keep arguing the fact that Hellmann overturned Massei and M-B annulled Nencini. The fact remains that Knox and Sollecito were definitively acquitted of the murder ad that remains on legal records.

The pair only got off because of Bongiorno's contacts as a mafia-client barrister who also got Andreotti off mafia charges under the little known and little used 'insufficient evidence' provisio by sneaking in a 360-report prepared by innocence advocate Gill who didn't testify, evaded cross-examination and whose own report was based on defence advocates Conti & Vecchiottis own bent report for the corrupt and inexpert Hellmann. Bent, because they were supposed to be independent - and Supreme Court judge, Chieffi, was baffled as to why they were appointed at all as they were certainly no better than the ones appointed by Massei - and were also caught by the Carabinieri of advocating for the defence behind the Court's back. So the pair got off on a legal loophole, as used by politicians such as Andreotti and the thoroughly bent Berluscon
This is all thanks to the Sollecito 'family' <ahem> as it were.

But the facts of the merits trial remain.

Really? Is it still fact that Amanda left bloody footprints? Is it still a fact that Kercher's DNA is on the knife? Is it still a fact that Sollecito's DNA on the bra hook is due to him touching it during the murder? Is it still a fact that Curatolo was found to be reliable? Is it still a fact that Quintavalle was reliable?

No point in your putting your 'alternative explanations' as they didn't wash with the courts then and they don't now. If there was a problem with the facts of the matter, the Supreme Court had the power to send it back down - as per convention - directing the court to revisit the matter in dispute.

Is that why Knox and Sollecito were definitively acquitted ten years ago?

But in fact Marasca-Bruno's MR is pretty damning of the pair, Knox in particular.

So damming that they definitively acquitted them!

 

[Stacyhs]

Er, you don't know about the bedsheet...? Or that the body was dragged towards the closet?


.

Er....you still haven't provided any evidence of that. Why not?

 

[Stacyhs]

Good Lord, somebody needs a remedial reading course. My question to you was why would Knox & Sollectito leave a bloody bathmat behind if they pulled an allnighter clean-up? I never asked for an (inaccurate) explanation of who the footprint belonged to. Your response was that the bathmat had a "blob" instead of a discernable footprint. Which is untrue. I've seen pictures of the bathmat. But even if the shape was that of a "blob", it was still blood. A bathmat which clearly had blood on it.

So I'll ask you again: If a clean-up occurred, why was the bathmat left behind?

Good luck. I've been asking Vixen that same question for years. The only answer I ever received was that AK and RS thought themselves smarter than the police and so wanted to 'pull one over' on the police. In Vixen's logic, they deliberately left damning evidence of RS at the murder scene.

Oh, and hammertoe is a common condition, it is not "astonishingly rare". A simple Google search would have told you this.

Vixen only presents the opinions of the experts or judges she agrees with. It's as if other experts never testified. OR those experts, judges, witnesses, etc. are all "bent", "paid off" or "incompetent".

 

[Stacyhs]

So you're back to it was the mafia who got them off? Fine. So we should remind you of this post the next time you inevitably say it was US State Dept. interference?

The MR isn't damning of the pair at all. It acquits them. Or else explain how Knox was "certainly present", "washed blood from her hands" but still got acquitted. Here it comes....

The claim that Knox washed her hands of Kercher's blood was never supported by any science. The source of Knox's DNA in the mixed sink sample was never identified as epithelial cells. That's why the courts only used "Knox's DNA" and "Knox's biological material" in their MR's. It could have been from saliva or buccal cells.

 

[gabeygoat]

Hey Guys! I solved this mystery, but boy am I tired. I'll tell you all about next week. on the next episode of...

 

[Vixen]

Per usual, you completely ignore Knox's testimony and the fact it was not night, but late morning, that disprove your claim it was "dark" in her room. Instead, you just move on.



View attachment 60086
You're bringing up the Lysoform as a diversion when the subject was the bleach found under the sink in the same amounts Chiriboga testified were there long before the murder. There was no bleach clean-up. Smell the

Ah...that old chestnut. The Sollecito Mafia Crime Family strikes again! They sent Rocco to have a 'little talk' with Chiriboga.
"How ya doin', Ana? Nice lookin' kid ya got there. Pity if something were to happen to him, ya?

Sigh. Why would she when she didn't need to turn it on because it was late morning? You know: NOT DARK.
I don't know why or how her lamp was in the bedroom. Neither do you. But I'll say it yet again: If Knox were guilty, when she was asked about her lamp by the police, all she had to do was say that Kercher borrowed it for her desk. But she didn't know why or how it got there and that's what she told the police.

Sigh. No matter how many times you laud Massei and Nencini, it is quite futile to keep arguing the fact that Hellmann overturned Massei and M-B annulled Nencini. The fact remains that Knox and Sollecito were definitively acquitted of the murder ad that remains on legal records.




View attachment 60087


Really? Is it still fact that Amanda left bloody footprints? Is it still a fact that Kercher's DNA is on the knife? Is it still a fact that Sollecito's DNA on the bra hook is due to him touching it during the murder? Is it still a fact that Curatolo was found to be reliable? Is it still a fact that Quintavalle was reliable?

Is that why Knox and Sollecito were definitively acquitted ten years ago?

So damming that they definitively acquitted them!

Objective hard science beats fantasy every time.

Let's have a look at the science:

• Physicists calculated the rock that smashed the window showed a trajectory and force that indicated it was thrown from INSIDE.
• Objective measurement of height of Filomena's window from ground: >12ft.
• Access to window: 6ft drop from parking area to ground on basement.
• Trajectory from parking lot to Filomena's window: circa 6ft.
• Limestone rock weight equivalent to small boulder.
• Glass from window strewn OVER Filomena's clothes and effects.
• Bits of postcards and paper strewn over Filomena's room (one with Knox' shoeprint) ALSO
• strewn over the duvet covering the body (i.e., the paper was strewn by the 'burglar' AFTER Mez was dead and covered).
• So the burglary took place AFTER the murder = a staged burglary to cover up an inside job.
• Glass from Filomena's room was trailed into the murder room.
• There is zero scientific evidence Guede was ever in Filomena's room. There is no trace of him there.
• Kercher's room therefore must have been locked AFTER the paper and the glass was trailed in there from Filomena's room AFTER the murder.
• Knox and Sollecito's bare footprints highlighted by luminol.
• Knox and Kercher mixed DNA in Filomena's room and bathroom.
• Sollecito's footprint on bathmat in victim's blood.
• Sollecito's FULL DNA on victim's bra hook, underneath body (no, DNA did not fly under the door nor come in with the cat).
• Kercher's near-full DNA on scrubbed knife blade trapped in a scratch, Knox' DNA on hilt of same knife belonging to SOLLECITO.
• Ladies size 37 ASIC print in blood near body.
• Long blond hair gripped in the deceased's hand in rigor mortis.
• Long blond hair found ACROSS Mez' handbag from which her credit card was stolen.
• Phone logs prove Knox was in Plaza Grimana at a time she claimed to be with Sollecito at his home.
• Phone logs prove BOTH switched off their phones circa 20:45 within fifteen minutes of each other.
• A P2P download of Amelie was set to play for the duration of the murder, to look like they were home watching it.
• Sollecito's internet provider confirmed there was no internet activity all evening as was claimed by Sollecito in his witness statements.
• Phone logs showed Sollecito's father rang circa 11:30-ish but had to leave a message.
• Sollecito did not pick up the message until next morning. Lied to police about it.
• Sollecito's dad said Solllecito told them about flooding in his kitchen at circa 20:30 but Sollecito told police it was after 23:00.
• Knox rang Mez' phone very briefly next morning without giving her a chance to reply. This was to set an alibi of 'not knowing' she was dead. She also rang Filomena but it was Filomena who immediately responded with alarm and raced over.
• the postal police arrived before Sollecito rang up the police himself. Sollecito told the operator 'nothing has been taken'.
• all the laptops in the cottage were 'fried' plus one of Sollecito's home laptops, yet Lumumba's was not, despite his being tested in between the ones that were (= there was nothing wrong with the communications police's testing equipment). Sollecito was a fourth year Computer Science student.
• Police forensic team find attempts to clean up with bleach re luminol highlighting.

Objective scientific facts re Guede:

• PIP all with one voice: WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN ANY FACTS HERE, WE CAN TELL HE WAS THE SOLE KILLER JUST BY LOOKING AT HIM!
• Guede's DNA was found on the the victim's body (epithelial cells [skin])
• Guede's DNA was found on Mez' jumper cuff (but in his case, the same scene that contaminated Sollecito's DNA suddenly isn't 'contaminated' after all, according to PIP)
• Guede's shoeprints show him to depart the flat straight out of the front door.

But the PIP choose to ignore the hard facts and prefer to believe a fairy story instead.



.


.

 

[AnimalFriendly]

• Long blond hair gripped in the deceased's hand in rigor mortis.
• Long blond hair found ACROSS Mez' handbag from which her credit card was stolen.

Did science recuse itself when it came to identifying the owner(s) of these long blond hairs?

 

[Bill Williams]

Objective hard science beats fantasy every time.

Let's have a look at the science:

• Physicists calculated the rock that smashed the window showed a trajectory and force that indicated it was thrown from INSIDE.
• Objective measurement of height of Filomena's window from ground: >12ft.
• Access to window: 6ft drop from parking area to ground on basement.
• Trajectory from parking lot to Filomena's window: circa 6ft.
• Limestone rock weight equivalent to small boulder.
• Glass from window strewn OVER Filomena's clothes and effects.
• Bits of postcards and paper strewn over Filomena's room (one with Knox' shoeprint) ALSO
• strewn over the duvet covering the body (i.e., the paper was strewn by the 'burglar' AFTER Mez was dead and covered).
• So the burglary took place AFTER the murder = a staged burglary to cover up an inside job.
• Glass from Filomena's room was trailed into the murder room.
• There is zero scientific evidence Guede was ever in Filomena's room. There is no trace of him there.
• Kercher's room therefore must have been locked AFTER the paper and the glass was trailed in there from Filomena's room AFTER the murder.
• Knox and Sollecito's bare footprints highlighted by luminol.
• Knox and Kercher mixed DNA in Filomena's room and bathroom.
• Sollecito's footprint on bathmat in victim's blood.
• Sollecito's FULL DNA on victim's bra hook, underneath body (no, DNA did not fly under the door nor come in with the cat).
• Kercher's near-full DNA on scrubbed knife blade trapped in a scratch, Knox' DNA on hilt of same knife belonging to SOLLECITO.
• Ladies size 37 ASIC print in blood near body.
• Long blond hair gripped in the deceased's hand in rigor mortis.
• Long blond hair found ACROSS Mez' handbag from which her credit card was stolen.
• Phone logs prove Knox was in Plaza Grimana at a time she claimed to be with Sollecito at his home.
• Phone logs prove BOTH switched off their phones circa 20:45 within fifteen minutes of each other.
• A P2P download of Amelie was set to play for the duration of the murder, to look like they were home watching it.
• Sollecito's internet provider confirmed there was no internet activity all evening as was claimed by Sollecito in his witness statements.
• Phone logs showed Sollecito's father rang circa 11:30-ish but had to leave a message.
• Sollecito did not pick up the message until next morning. Lied to police about it.
• Sollecito's dad said Solllecito told them about flooding in his kitchen at circa 20:30 but Sollecito told police it was after 23:00.
• Knox rang Mez' phone very briefly next morning without giving her a chance to reply. This was to set an alibi of 'not knowing' she was dead. She also rang Filomena but it was Filomena who immediately responded with alarm and raced over.
• the postal police arrived before Sollecito rang up the police himself. Sollecito told the operator 'nothing has been taken'.
• all the laptops in the cottage were 'fried' plus one of Sollecito's home laptops, yet Lumumba's was not, despite his being tested in between the ones that were (= there was nothing wrong with the communications police's testing equipment). Sollecito was a fourth year Computer Science student.
• Police forensic team find attempts to clean up with bleach re luminol highlighting.

Objective scientific facts re Guede:

• PIP all with one voice: WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN ANY FACTS HERE, WE CAN TELL HE WAS THE SOLE KILLER JUST BY LOOKING AT HIM!
• Guede's DNA was found on the the victim's body (epithelial cells [skin])
• Guede's DNA was found on Mez' jumper cuff (but in his case, the same scene that contaminated Sollecito's DNA suddenly isn't 'contaminated' after all, according to PIP)
• Guede's shoeprints show him to depart the flat straight out of the front door.

But the PIP choose to ignore the hard facts and prefer to believe a fairy story instead.

Most of this is untrue, and the few that are don't add up to Knox and/or Sollecito being in the murderroom, especially at the time of the murder.

For those who doubt that Rudy Guede could have easily climbed into Filomena's second storey, bedroom window, take a peek at this video of a recreation with a "climbing enthusiast".

 

[Numbers]

Let me update readers here with an interesting item from Amanda Knox's new memoir, Free: My Search for Meaning.

In chapters titled In Bocca al Lupo and Corragio, Knox describes her 2019 trip to Italy to address the newly formed Italian Innocence Project, at their invitation, at a justice conference in Moderna, to speak on "trial by media". She delivered a speech in Italian, parts of which she includes, in English translation, in the Corragio chapter. In this post, I will quote from two paragraphs from page 172 (hard-bound edition) that, for more than one reason, caught my attention.

A lot of people think I'm crazy to come back. I've been told it's not safe. .... That I'll be falsely accused and sent back to prison. ....

To be honest, I am afraid. I'm afraid of being harassed. I'm afraid of being mocked. I'm afraid of being framed. I'm afraid new charges will be brought against me just for telling the truth here today. But most of all, I'm afraid my courage will fail me.

I've bolded the word "framed".

Let's make up a hypothetical: A (fictional) pharmaceutical company develops a new drug to cure a disease. They inject a large group of laboratory rats with doses of the drug to verify its safety. The company and all its employees are convinced of the safety and efficacy of the drug before it is tested, based on their experience and, possibly, hopes and hunches. However, during the testing period, many of the rats die unexpectedly, but the lab personnel decide without doing any autopsy tests on the dead rats that these deaths are irrelevant to the test, and replace the dead rats with new ones. The lab personnel don't bother to record any of these events or their actions. They write a report at the end of the test period, not mentioning the premature deaths and replacements of the rats, stating that the testing showed that the new drug was safe and ready for further development.

In the above hypothetical, are the lab personnel acting properly? Are they making mistakes? Are they intentionally cheating? Is the lab report accurate? What would a regulatory agency, such as the FDA, make of such a hypothetical if, for example, a whistleblower reported that rats had died prematurely, their cause of death had not been evaluated, and the dead rats had been replaced, all with no documentation of the events and no mention in the lab's official report? Finally, do the events or schema of the hypothetical have relevance to the methods used by the interrogators of Knox and Sollecito?

 

[Numbers]

A few days ago I posted information about the ECHR judgment Knox v. Italy regarding its finding that Convention Articles 6.1 with 6.3c (unfair trial with unfair denial of a lawyer) had been violated without any doubt during the second interrogation - the one directed by Prosecutor Mignini and that concluded with a so-called Spontaneous Statement (a legal term that would be known to the prosecutor and police, but not Knox), type-written in Italian by the police, and signed by Knox. The ECHR's wording suggested that Knox had already been an accused (in the Convention meaning) during the first interrogation, but to be conservative, which implies that Convention Articles 6.1 with 6.3c had been violated during the first interrogation, but the ECHR did not find it necessary to insist on that point, since the violation of those Convention articles in the second interrogation had irremediably negatively affected the fairness of the entire trial (paragraph 166). The meaning of the ECHR statement is that the violation resulted in an unfairness that could not be overcome even in a new trial.

Now let's examine the ECHR judgment relating to the claimed violation of Convention Articles 6.1 with 6.3e (unfair trial with unfair/inadequate interpretation). The text for this part of the judgment is found in paragraphs 174 - 187. There's considerable information in this section, but I will jump to paragraph 182 to get to the kernel of the ECHR's argument.

In paragraph 182, the ECHR states, according to its case law, that the assistance of an interpreter must be provided when the accused is not fluent in the language of the proceedings, and that assistance must be provided in a manner that allows the accused to understand the charges against him or her and to defend himself or herself, in particular by allowing the accused to present his or her version of events. The exercise of this right must be practical and effective, as it is a guaranteed right of the Convention. The authorities therefore have an obligation under the Convention not only to appoint an interpreter but also to exercise appropriate control over the [judicial] value of the interpretation, especially when alerted to an issue.

In paragraph 183, the ECHR states that the right of a fair interpreter is guaranteed from the beginning of the investigation stage, just as is the right to a defense lawyer. The State would need to conclusively demonstrate a reason, compelling in the view of the ECHR, to justify restricting this right.

In paragraph 184, the ECHR states that the services of the interpreter must provide the accused with effective assistance in the conduct of the accused's defense; furthermore, the conduct of the interpreter must not be likely to prejudice the fairness of the trial.

In paragraph 185, the ECHR states that in this case (Knox v. Italy), it is evident from the interpreter's admission during her testimony during the trial that she played an inappropriate role during the questioning while Knox was an accused within the meaning of Convention Article 6.1, that is, while Knox was formulating Knox's version of the facts. The ECHR notes that the interpreter A.D. indeed intended to establish a human [non-professional] and emotional relationship with Knox, to assume the role of mediator, and to adopt a maternal attitude, all of which were not in any way required or appropriate for the role of an interpreter. The ECHR text goes on to reference paragraphs 40 and 41 of the judgment, which provide a summary of A.D.'s relevant testimony:

40. At one point during the interrogation, in an effort to establish a relationship of "human assistance" and "solidarity" with the applicant, she [A.D.]recounted anecdotes from her private life, including an accident she had allegedly suffered, as a result of which she had suffered a broken leg. She told the applicant that, due to the trauma she had suffered, she had experienced a memory lapse and no longer remembered the events. She stated that she had indeed noticed that the applicant had difficulty recalling the events because, in her view, her account was "extremely vague, uncertain, and fragmentary."

41. She also stated that she played the role of "mediator" because, in her view, her job consisted not only of simply translating statements but also of establishing a human relationship with her interlocutor in order to "perceive the needs of the person concerned and translate them."

In paragraph 186, the ECHR states that Knox [and her lawyers] had complained of these issues of allegedly unfair interpretation with the authorities [for example, on 13 March 2009 and 12 June 2009], but the authorities conducted no proceedings capable of shedding light on her allegations. The authorities failed to assess A.D.'s conduct, which would include an evaluation of whether her performance of her duties as an interpreter conformed to the safeguards provided in Convention Articles 6.1 and 6.3e, and to consider whether A.D.'s conduct had an impact on the criminal proceedings against Knox. The ECHR also notes that no mention of the exchanges between A.D. and Knox during the interrogation of 6 November 2007 was included in the relevant report.

In conclusion:

187. In the ECHR's view, this initial failure therefore had repercussions on other rights which, while distinct from the one whose violation is alleged, are closely linked to it, and compromised the fairness of the proceedings as a whole ....

188. In view of the above, Articles 6 §§ 1 and 3 e) of the Convention have been infringed in this case.

Translations by Google Translate.

HUDOC - European Court of Human Rights

The HUDOC database provides access to the case-law of the Court (Grand Chamber, Chamber and Committee judgments and decisions, communicated cases, advisory opinions and legal summaries from the Case-Law Information Note), the European Commission of Human Rights (decisions and reports) and the...

hudoc.echr.coe.int

 

[Stacyhs]

Objective hard science beats fantasy every time.

Let's have a look at the science:

• Physicists calculated the rock that smashed the window showed a trajectory and force that indicated it was thrown from INSIDE.
• Objective measurement of height of Filomena's window from ground: >12ft.
• Access to window: 6ft drop from parking area to ground on basement.
• Trajectory from parking lot to Filomena's window: circa 6ft.
• Limestone rock weight equivalent to small boulder.
• Glass from window strewn OVER Filomena's clothes and effects.
• Bits of postcards and paper strewn over Filomena's room (one with Knox' shoeprint) ALSO
• strewn over the duvet covering the body (i.e., the paper was strewn by the 'burglar' AFTER Mez was dead and covered).
• So the burglary took place AFTER the murder = a staged burglary to cover up an inside job.
• Glass from Filomena's room was trailed into the murder room.
• There is zero scientific evidence Guede was ever in Filomena's room. There is no trace of him there.
• Kercher's room therefore must have been locked AFTER the paper and the glass was trailed in there from Filomena's room AFTER the murder.
• Knox and Sollecito's bare footprints highlighted by luminol.
• Knox and Kercher mixed DNA in Filomena's room and bathroom.
• Sollecito's footprint on bathmat in victim's blood.
• Sollecito's FULL DNA on victim's bra hook, underneath body (no, DNA did not fly under the door nor come in with the cat).
• Kercher's near-full DNA on scrubbed knife blade trapped in a scratch, Knox' DNA on hilt of same knife belonging to SOLLECITO.
• Ladies size 37 ASIC print in blood near body.
• Long blond hair gripped in the deceased's hand in rigor mortis.
• Long blond hair found ACROSS Mez' handbag from which her credit card was stolen.
• Phone logs prove Knox was in Plaza Grimana at a time she claimed to be with Sollecito at his home.
• Phone logs prove BOTH switched off their phones circa 20:45 within fifteen minutes of each other.
• A P2P download of Amelie was set to play for the duration of the murder, to look like they were home watching it.
• Sollecito's internet provider confirmed there was no internet activity all evening as was claimed by Sollecito in his witness statements.
• Phone logs showed Sollecito's father rang circa 11:30-ish but had to leave a message.
• Sollecito did not pick up the message until next morning. Lied to police about it.
• Sollecito's dad said Solllecito told them about flooding in his kitchen at circa 20:30 but Sollecito told police it was after 23:00.
• Knox rang Mez' phone very briefly next morning without giving her a chance to reply. This was to set an alibi of 'not knowing' she was dead. She also rang Filomena but it was Filomena who immediately responded with alarm and raced over.
• the postal police arrived before Sollecito rang up the police himself. Sollecito told the operator 'nothing has been taken'.
• all the laptops in the cottage were 'fried' plus one of Sollecito's home laptops, yet Lumumba's was not, despite his being tested in between the ones that were (= there was nothing wrong with the communications police's testing equipment). Sollecito was a fourth year Computer Science student.
• Police forensic team find attempts to clean up with bleach re luminol highlighting.

Objective scientific facts re Guede:

• PIP all with one voice: WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN ANY FACTS HERE, WE CAN TELL HE WAS THE SOLE KILLER JUST BY LOOKING AT HIM!
• Guede's DNA was found on the the victim's body (epithelial cells [skin])
• Guede's DNA was found on Mez' jumper cuff (but in his case, the same scene that contaminated Sollecito's DNA suddenly isn't 'contaminated' after all, according to PIP)
• Guede's shoeprints show him to depart the flat straight out of the front door.

But the PIP choose to ignore the hard facts and prefer to believe a fairy story instead.

This is a gish-gallop of the typical PGP talking points, most of which are outright false and the rest are speculation, innuendo, or irrelevant. I'm not even going to address them because they've been repeatedly disproven by evidence. The only one I'm curious about because it's a new claim is this:

"Physicists calculated the rock that smashed the window showed a trajectory and force that indicated it was thrown from INSIDE."

Quote and cite these physicists' testimony or reports that support the rock was thrown from inside.
As we all know, former police ballistic expert, Francesco Pasquali, recreated the scenario and proved the rock came from the parking parapet directly across from the window.

I see you've also trotted out the old "boulder" nonsense: "Limestone rock weight equivalent to small boulder."
EIGHT lbs. is not a "small boulder". Police and Pasquali videos show an 8 lb. rock being being picked up with ONE HAND. Pasquali's recreation shows this "small boulder" being tossed through a window with ONE HAND.

I'm not bothering with the rest of the rubbish as it's clearly a bullet point copy and pasted from a website. Chances are it's TJMK.

By the way, you still haven't provided any evidence that Kercher's body was on a sheet and dragged on it to reposition the body. But we both know you haven't because it's not true.

 

[Numbers]

This is a gish-gallop of the typical PGP talking points, most of which are outright false and the rest are speculation, innuendo, or irrelevant. I'm not even going to address them because they've been repeatedly disproven by evidence. The only one I'm curious about because it's a new claim is this:

"Physicists calculated the rock that smashed the window showed a trajectory and force that indicated it was thrown from INSIDE."

Quote and cite these physicists' testimony or reports that support the rock was thrown from inside.
As we all know, former police ballistic expert, Francesco Pasquali, recreated the scenario and proved the rock came from the parking parapet directly across from the window.

I see you've also trotted out the old "boulder" nonsense: "Limestone rock weight equivalent to small boulder."
EIGHT lbs. is not a "small boulder". Police and Pasquali videos show an 8 lb. rock being being picked up with ONE HAND. Pasquali's recreation shows this "small boulder" being tossed through a window with ONE HAND.

I'm not bothering with the rest of the rubbish as it's clearly a bullet point copy and pasted from a website. Chances are it's TJMK
By the way, you still haven't provided any evidence that Kercher's body was on a sheet and dragged on it to reposition the body. But we both know you haven't because it's not true.

A gallon of milk (a typical and relatively frequent purchase for a US family with children and of course others) weighs a little more than 8 pounds.

According to one US definition, a boulder is a detached and rounded or much-worn mass of rock.*

Geologists define a boulder as a mass of rock that has a diameter greater than 25.6cm = 10.1 inches. In common usage, a boulder is too large for a person to move. Smaller boulders are usually just called rocks or stones.**

Vixen is confusing the geological definition and the common definition.

I suspect that for Guede, said to be a youth basketball star in Perugia, throwing the rock would not be a big effort.

For comparison, a US NFL football has a diameter of about 9 inches and weighs a bit less than a pound*** while an Olympic men's shot (the sphere used in a shot put competition) weighs 7.2 kg = about 16 pounds. The women's weighs 4 kg = 8.8 pounds****. Competitive shot putters reach distances greater than 20 m (about 66 feet).

* https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/boulder

** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulder

*** https://www.sportsrec.com/6560043/what-is-the-official-size-of-the-nfl-football

**** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shot_put

 

[Stacyhs]

Vixen uses "boulder" in order to encourage the idea that it was too large to pick up and throw "circa 6 feet" from the parapet through the window. She ignores Pasquali's report (he's probably bent!) She ignores the photo evidence of a glass shard embedded in the exterior side of the white interior shutters. The only way the glass could have been embedded in the shutter is if the rock was thrown from the outside.
Per usual, PGP 'evidence' is ONLY presented from a guilt perspective and contradictory evidence is not even mentioned. Another example is the "blonde hairs" that Vixen presents. But she KNOWS, because we've discussed this before more than once, that Knox was dying her hair blonde at the time of the murder and dyed hair is easily seen under a microscope. The prosecution never contended the blonde hair belonged to Knox.

 

[Numbers]

Vixen uses "boulder" in order to encourage the idea that it was too large to pick up and throw "circa 6 feet" from the parapet through the window. She ignores Pasquali's report (he's probably bent!) She ignores the photo evidence of a glass shard embedded in the exterior side of the white interior shutters. The only way the glass could have been embedded in the shutter is if the rock was thrown from the outside.
Per usual, PGP 'evidence' is ONLY presented from a guilt perspective and contradictory evidence is not even mentioned. Another example is the "blonde hairs" that Vixen presents. But she KNOWS, because we've discussed this before more than once, that Knox was dying her hair blonde at the time of the murder and dyed hair is easily seen under a microscope. The prosecution never contended the blonde hair belonged to Knox.

This is highly convincing evidence that the rock was thrown from outside. We don't know if the police and prosecutor missed this or decided not to include it as evidence; it destroys their hypothesis that the window was broken from the inside. They somehow missed or ignored other evidence, such as the apparent semen stain on the pillow under Kercher's body.

 

[Stacyhs]

Pasquali did include the embedded glass shard in his report and in his court presentation. See pg 16.

Massei goes into great detail of why the rock was not thrown from outside but makes no mention of the embedded shard.

 

[Stacyhs]

C&V were bent. They were discovered with a whole load of cadavers lining their corridors and no proper thermostat on their 'scientifically controlled' lab refrigerators. Vecchiotti convicted of covering up for another killer by concealing his DNA from the courts. I dare say Vecchiotti sees herself as some kind of 'innocence' campaigner. I see a misguided crook.

Unsurprisingly, both your statements above were disproven but you fail to acknowledge it. You never do when proved wrong.

 

[Numbers]

Pasquali did include the embedded glass shard in his report and in his court presentation. See pg 16.

Massei goes into great detail of why the rock was not thrown from outside but makes no mention of the embedded shard.

Thanks!

So the shard did not please the court (of Dr. Massei).

 

[Vixen]

Thanks!

So the shard did not please the court (of Dr. Massei).

Occam's Razor tells you Guede was let in. He knew both Knox and Mez. He had visited the guys downstairs on at least two known occasions. The entrance to the guys' section was at the other side of the house and had a low roof terrace which for a would-be burglar - who values being as quiet as possible, so as not to disturb anyone - would be the easiest, quickest and most private route inside the house. Three guys: think of all the student technology lying around and all of them away for the weekend. Expensive skiing gear, etc.

According to your theory, Guede not only had six arms, by which to hold two different knives, pin down both Mez' arms to stop her from defending herself, but he also managed to scale a sheer twelve-foot wall in slip-slidey trainers in full view of oncoming traffic in the street, whilst also holding a small boulder. And left no forensic trace of himself at all in Filomena's room. Nor bits of mud or grass - from the terrain below the window - on the wall itself.

Of course he did.




.