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

[Stacyhs]

Distance themselves as in, letting A.N. Other find the body.

You wrote in post Post #6,567

Mez' door was locked, so there's the distance.

How does locking the door distance them from finding the body when they were the ones who started the discovery process in the first place and they were there when the door was broken down? As already stated, if they wanted to distance themselves all they had to do was leave the bedroom door wide open and NOT BE THERE when Filomena came home.

Also asked by another poster and me but never answered by you:

Why would it [going to Gubbio] be any more suspicious than Laura, Filomena, and the boys downstairs not being there? Is it any more suspicious than Filomena being at the fair?

 

[Stacyhs]

No DNA of AK in the room even though HER lamp was on Mez' floor.

Oh, come on! How on earth would finding her DNA on her own lamp incriminate her? Besides, the lamp isn't even included in Stefanoni's testing report.
We only know Privitera couldn't lift any usable prints off it and he also testified that he saw no evidence of any attempt to remove prints in the cottage.

Did she wipe her DNA off it, then?

Sure...just after she removed all her DNA in Kercher's bedroom with the bleach she'd bought at Quintavalle's store that morning.

 

[catsmate]

What I said is factual: it is a simple acquittal. It is not an 'exoneration', a 'pardon' nor a 'miscarriage of justice'.

Yet again you demonstrate an abysmal ignorance of the law.

 

[catsmate]

Incorrect. The ECHR has no legal power to issue a criminal verdict.

Yet again you display your lack of comprehension.

 

[catsmate]

Acquitted but everybody knows the facts of the matter.

The facts being that she is innocent.

 

[catsmate]

It's well-documented.

Wallpaper words. Supply evidence, not just assertions.

 

[Vixen]

You wrote in post Post #6,567

How does locking the door distance them from finding the body when they were the ones who started the discovery process in the first place and they were there when the door was broken down? As already stated, if they wanted to distance themselves all they had to do was leave the bedroom door wide open and NOT BE THERE when Filomena came home.

Also asked by another poster and me but never answered by you:

Why would it [going to Gubbio] be any more suspicious than Laura, Filomena, and the boys downstairs not being there? Is it any more suspicious than Filomena being at the fair?

It distances them from the body because it meant AK could go in and out of the cottage freely without having to explain how come she didn't see it. Gubbio is simply a story. They said they were going to go to Gubbio. There is no way of verifying it one way or another.

 

[Vixen]

Oh, come on! How on earth would finding her DNA on her own lamp incriminate her? Besides, the lamp isn't even included in Stefanoni's testing report.
We only know Privitera couldn't lift any usable prints off it and he also testified that he saw no evidence of any attempt to remove prints in the cottage.

Sure...just after she removed all her DNA in Kercher's bedroom with the bleach she'd bought at Quintavalle's store that morning.

Whoosh!

 

[Vixen]

Yet again you demonstrate an abysmal ignorance of the law.

Au contraire. Your accusation is a confession.

 

[Stacyhs]

It would depend on whether Taramantano was another of RS' friends, like Popovic.

So here you go again with the completely unfounded by any evidence accusation of people committing perjury for RS. People who were a mere casual acquaintance through their mothers or they did not know at all. No connection between Tramontano and RS has ever been presented.

And it's Tramontano. "Taramantano" once could be a typo. Repeated several times is not.

What did the court have to say about his allegations?

Massei:

These episodes, concerning the Milan nursery school, the burglary in the law office in Perugia and the burglary of Tramontano's house (although for the last one, the identification of Rudy was expressed only by the phrase "I believe I recognise him") reveal obvious and notable differences with respect to the episode concerning the broken window in Romanelli's room; even stronger differences emerge if one assumes that the person who made use of that entry was Rudy Guede.

As if burglars always break-in the same way.

If appears that Massei considers breaking in a second story by throwing a rock through a glass door is notably different than breaking in a second story by throwing a rock through a window.

Hellmann took Tramontano seriously:

...the personality of Rudy Guede, as it emerges from the testimony of witnesses, does not show any particular respect for others. He not only ‐ as already mentioned ‐ had accrued experience as the perpetrator of thefts in buildings owned by others, even committed with the victims of theft present at home [122] (see Tramontano); not only did he not hesitate to use the knife to threaten the burglary victim who had chased him (Tramentano again, but also he had taken possession of a knife 40 cm long in the Milan nursery school )...

 

[Vixen]

Yet again you display your lack of comprehension.

Wow, This poster thinks the ECHR can issue criminal court verdicts and has the pomposity to sling an insult along with it.

 

[Stacyhs]

Stacyhs said:
Oh, come on! How on earth would finding her DNA on her own lamp incriminate her? Besides, the lamp isn't even included in Stefanoni's testing report.
We only know Privitera couldn't lift any usable prints off it and he also testified that he saw no evidence of any attempt to remove prints in the cottage.

Sure...just after she removed all her DNA in Kercher's bedroom with the bleach she'd bought at Quintavalle's store that morning.

Whoosh!

So explain to me the significance of finding Knox's DNA on her own lamp even if it was in Kercher's bedroom?

And, please, no evading by posting nonsense like "whoosh!".

 

[Stacyhs]

Yet again:

Why would it [going to Gubbio] be any more suspicious than Laura, Filomena, and the boys downstairs not being there? Is it any more suspicious than Filomena being at the fair?

Refusing to answer questions often tells us more than if you'd answered them.

 

[Stacyhs]

It distances them from the body because it meant AK could go in and out of the cottage freely without having to explain how come she didn't see it.

Being out of town by going to Gubbio and not initiating the discovery would distance them far better.

Gubbio is simply a story. They said they were going to go to Gubbio. There is no way of verifying it one way or another.

Dr. Sollecito verified it. But, of course, you'll now accuse him of lying to cover up for RS "naturally" because he's his father.
If guilty, even if Gubbio were only a story, it does not change the fact that being out of town would be the way to distance themselves.

 

[Vixen]

Being out of town by going to Gubbio and not initiating the discovery would distance them far better.


Dr. Sollecito verified it. But, of course, you'll now accuse him of lying to cover up for RS "naturally" because he's his father.
If guilty, even if Gubbio were only a story, it does not change the fact that being out of town would be the way to distance themselves.

It really doesn't matter one way or the other as an expressed wish remains intangible.

 

[Vixen]

Yet again:

Why would it [going to Gubbio] be any more suspicious than Laura, Filomena, and the boys downstairs not being there? Is it any more suspicious than Filomena being at the fair?

Refusing to answer questions often tells us more than if you'd answered them.

Filomena did come under a lot of suspicion. She, too spent hours at the questura being interviewed and giving depositions. She had to hand in her lap top. Laura and the others less so due to being able to show being out of town all weekend. Silenzi, too, also spent long hours being interviewed. Many people did.

As for the Gubbio issue, police will surely have wanted to know her movements and why she was at the cottage having spent most of her time at Sollecito's.

 

[Vixen]

Who cares what Nencini established. He got a lot wrong, and his court was the ONLY court to come to this conclusion. Further, there was no new or "fresh evidence of video footage", he just chose to re-swizzle what the other courts concluded.

It was proven in the Massei trial that the garage CCTV clock was 10 minutes SLOW. The very first time the Postal Police's Fiat is seen on CCTV is at 12:36. At 12:41 the Fiat is again seen driving past the gate, and an image believed to be Battistelli is seen walking away from the cottage towards the Fiat. At 12:48 two figures appear to meet and talk near the gate, one of which is believed to be Battistelli. Given the clock is 10 minutes slow, it shows them actually arriving at 12:58, which is AFTER the call to 112. This timeline is also consistent with what Amanda and Raffaele told the Postal Police when they arrived, that they were surprised the Carabinieri arrived so soon after calling them, only to learn they weren't the Carabinieri.

No, that is NOT what I said. I said Amanda told Filomena of the broken window during her last call with her at 12:34. I made no mention of when she learned the window was broken, but I think we all know they both said it was discovered shortly after their arrival at the cottage and it was at that time that Amanda told Raffaele it didn't appear like anything was stolen. Raffaele called the Carabinieri about 20 minutes after Amanda spoke with Filomena last, or 12:54. THAT'S how he was able to tell the Carabinieri that nothing was stolen. The Postal Police arrived shortly after that, and the Carabinieri arrived roughly 30 minutes after that (they called Amanda's phone at 13:29 looking for directions).

Unless you are claiming the police fraudulently tampered with the CCTV it is an objective scientific fact the police turned up before RS made his phone call. As RS had only been there once or twice, how would he know 'Nothing has been taken'?

 

[AmyStrange]

Unless you are claiming the police fraudulently tampered with the CCTV it is an objective scientific fact the police turned up before RS made his phone call. As RS had only been there once or twice, how would he know 'Nothing has been taken'?

Hi! Welcome to ISF!

Someone will be along shortly to disagree and also prove you wrong once again.

Have a nice day!

 

[TruthCalls]

Unless you are claiming the police fraudulently tampered with the CCTV it is an objective scientific fact the police turned up before RS made his phone call. As RS had only been there once or twice, how would he know 'Nothing has been taken'?

Hardly. The CCTV footage was quite clear as to when the Postal Police arrived, and it was an objective, scientific fact that the clock on the camera was 10 minutes slow, which PROVES they arrived minutes AFTER Raffaele called 112. Massei knew this, so did Hellmann.

Um, because Amanda, who, if you remember, lived at the cottage, told him it didn't appear anything was stolen.

 

[TruthCalls]

Filomena did come under a lot of suspicion. She, too spent hours at the questura being interviewed and giving depositions. She had to hand in her lap top. Laura and the others less so due to being able to show being out of town all weekend. Silenzi, too, also spent long hours being interviewed. Many people did.

As for the Gubbio issue, police will surely have wanted to know her movements and why she was at the cottage having spent most of her time at Sollecito's.

Interestingly, I couldn't remember how many times Filomena spoke with the police so I went into the case file library. There I found Amanda's deposition from 2 Nov, 3 Nov, 4 Nov, numerous phone intercepts, gathering of writings and emails, etc. They did a lot of talking to Amanda, filed away many, many documents and conversations right up to the interrogation. Filomena?.... ONE deposition prior to Amanda and Raffaele being arrested. So it would seem Amanda and Raffaele were far more 'under the microscope' right from the beginning than Filomena.

Perhaps most interesting, is that the people who waited at the cottage for the police fell far more under the microscope than the person who claimed to be out of town the night of the murder. So much for being out of town being suspicious.