Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[Fulcanelli]

But Raffaele is not in on this plan because his phone is still on at 8:42 when he gets a call from his dad and talks to him for almost 4 minutes.

Where did you get this from? Spoke with his father for 4 minutes??? Raffaele and his father NEVER spoke on the phone on the night of the murder. His father phoned, there was no answer and it went straight to answer phone. His father then sent Raffaele a text later that night, a text that wasn't received until 6 am the following morning when Raffaele's phone was switched back on (when Raffaele claimed to be in bed sleeping). Raffaele and his father both lied to police claiming they had a phone conversation at 11 pm on the landline, in order to give Raffaele an alibi. Phone records proved this to be a lie.

 

[Fulcanelli]

I was not aware of that. I understood that call went straight to voice mail. Is that not correct ?

Yes, straight to voice mail. There was never any phone conversation between Raffaele and his father at any time that evening/night.

 

[Fulcanelli]

On the FOA-page they explain the view of Amanda´s defense on some evidence:
The bathmat footprint:
"It is not certain how the footprint was made, but evidence suggests the killer cleaned up in the bathroom, and several blood-soaked towels were found at the crime scene. Very likely the killer laid a bloodied towel on the bathroom floor so that it covered or overlapped the mat. He removed his shoe to rinse the blood from it. While his shoe was off, he stepped on the towel, transferring an imprint to the bathmat. "
This taken from the FOA-Page (I am not allowed to post links).
To explain that the footprint belongs to Rudy Guede and not to RS they put a footprint of RS next to the bloody footprint on the bathmat, next to the footprint of Guede. And when you move the mouse on the bathmat footprint it is crossfaded with Guede´s footprint and one gets the impression that in fact Guedes footprint is a better match.

What irritates me is the fact that the print of RS and the one of Guede are printed in the same size. But RS shoe size is I think 42, while Guede´s is a lot bigger (46 or 47, I think). To whom does the footprint belong?. If it belongs to RS, I think this is very strong evidence that RS and AK are involved.
bennet

Hi Bennet. You can't trust a thing those people say. You are indeed completely right that they doctored the size of Rudy's print to make it fit. To see exactly how, download and view this PowerPoint, it makes it all very clear: DEAR MR MARRIOTT, I SHRUNK THE BLACK KID

 

[Fiona]

Very true, murder often does not make sense but I can see zero evidence that the motive for this murder was a "sex game gone wrong".

There is zero "evidence" for any motive, really. Motive is like that: it much more usually a story we impose.

MK had a boyfriend, there is no reason to believe she would willingly be with RG sexually.

Certainly.

He attacked her because she said no. A man attacking a woman for not giving in sexually makes far more sense than a woman attacking another woman in a "sex game gone bad".

Not to me. If this were the case then women's lives would be hell all the time: they aren't. Stranger rape is quite rare. It is very high profile, and we get a false impression of it, but it really is rare. Acquaintance rape is a little more common: but acquaintance rape with murder is not. I think this myth is damaging to all of us, and is particularly insulting to men. I sometimes wonder why we accept this as a "motive" when it is so far at odds with our everyday experience. It is ingrained in our picture of the world, but when you stop and think about it this really does not make much more sense than anything else. Sure a guy might not easily take "no" for an answer and he might push things too far: but force it with a knife? Not very likely at all. At least not to me

There would be no reason for her to not invite him in if he said he had to use the toilet. She had seen him hanging out with the people downstairs. From her point of veiw there was no reason to be fearful of him.

Can you see the contradiction in what you say? If the world was as you present it, and men were likely to be predatory in the way, and to the extent, that you suggest, then she would have every reason to be fearful. Surely the fact you say she would "have no reason to be" shows just how very uncommon the scenario you put forward actually is?

He uses the toilet, they start to talk. He comes on too strong, she asks him to leave. It esculates from there.

For me this is just vanishingly unlikely. Perhaps you picture of men is more accurate than mine but I honestly cannot envisage a scene like that. Most blokes get a knock back from time to time and he already knew she had a boyfriend who was a friend/acquaintance of his. He might try his luck but I think the idea that he would be so unprepared to accept a refusal is just weird.

I do. I believe the time of the time of death was between midnight and 2am? Plenty of time to get high and committ the murder.

I think it was earlier than that: it cannot have been earlier than 9pm and I think that originally it was said it was between then and 11 pm. But I know there was a change in the estimated TOD in the final outline the prosecution gave and IIRC it was moved to between 10pm and midnight. Could be wrong about that: I don't have time to look for it again, but I know Fulcanelli posted it in this thread

 

[lector]

I do. I believe the time of the time of death was between midnight and 2am? Plenty of time to get high and committ the murder.

I think it was earlier than that: it cannot have been earlier than 9pm and I think that originally it was said it was between then and 11 pm. But I know there was a change in the estimated TOD in the final outline the prosecution gave and IIRC it was moved to between 10pm and midnight. Could be wrong about that: I don't have time to look for it again, but I know Fulcanelli posted it in this thread

Someone had posted upthread that 2 hours elapsed between the fatal wound & TOD. I asked for a source of that assertion but haven't seen an answer. Perhaps this is all getting confused here.

 

[Dan O.]

I was not aware of that. I understood that call went straight to voice mail. Is that not correct ?

We have the call detail records for Amanda and Raffaele's phones. I've merged them here to help line up the times. If a call goes to voice mail because the phone is off it is forwarded to the vioce mail service number and would not show up as minutes used on that phone until the message is retrieved. If we had the Cell Tower Records (which the police do have), we would be able to see the actual interactions with the phone (ie: rings, roaming etc.). I haven't looked at logs for SMS messages before so can't say for sure if this log shows when the SMS messages were received by the carrier or transfered to the phone. We should be able to find confirmation for that from other sources.

[table=head]Called|Calling|MM/DD/YYYY|HH:MM:SS|Seconds|Type|||
'393293473230|'3484673590|11/1/07|0:41:49|20|1|Amanda|call to|
'393403574303|'3484673590|11/1/07|0:57:20|1|6|Amanda|SMS to|Raffaele
'3484673590|'759660789|11/1/07|1:04:58|53|2|Amanda|call from|
'3484673590|'393387195723|11/1/07|20:18:12|1|7|Amanda|SMS from|Patrick
'393387195723|'3484673590|11/1/07|20:35:48|1|6|Amanda|SMS to|Patrick
'447841131571|'3484673590|11/2/07|12:07:12|16|1|Amanda|call to|Meredith (UK)
'3471073005|'3484673590|11/2/07|12:08:44|68|1|Amanda|call to|Filomena
'3484873711|'3484673590|11/2/07|12:11:02|3|1|Amanda|call to|Meredith
'447841131571|'3484673590|11/2/07|12:11:54|4|1|Amanda|call to|Meredith (UK)
'3484673590|'393471073006|11/2/07|12:12:35|36|2|Amanda|call from|Filomena
'3484673590|'393471073006|11/2/07|12:20:44|65|2|Amanda|call from|Filomena
'3484673590|'393471073006|11/2/07|12:34:56|48|2|Amanda|call from|Filomena
'12069326457|'3484673590|11/2/07|12:47:23|88|1|Amanda|call to|mom?
'12069326457|'3484673590|11/2/07|13:24:18|162|1|Amanda|call to|mom?
'12069319350|'3484673590|11/2/07|13:27:32|26|1|Amanda|call to|USA-Seattle WA
'3484673590|'7554247561|11/2/07|13:29:00|296|2|Amanda|call from|postal police?
'12069326457|'3484673590|11/2/07|13:58:33|1|1|Amanda|call to|mom?
'12069319350|'3484673590|11/2/07|13:59:06|350|1|Amanda|call to|USA-Seattle WA
'3484673590|'494154794034|11/2/07|14:46:15|102|2|Amanda|call from|Germany
'3484673590|'393891531078|11/2/07|15:31:51|1|7|Amanda|SMS from|
'3403574303|'393397755093|11/1/07|0:00:39|1|7|Raffaele|SMS from|
'3403574303|'393484673590|11/1/07|0:57:24|1|7|Raffaele|SMS from|Amanda
'3403574303|3492000123|11/1/07|14:25:12|58|2|Raffaele|call from|dad?
'3403574303|'3475945977|11/1/07|16:50:06|214|2|Raffaele|call from|dad?
'3403574303|'3475945977|11/1/07|16:58:46|64|2|Raffaele|call from|dad?
'3403574303|'3475945977|11/1/07|20:42:56|221|2|Raffaele|call from|dad?
'3403574303|'393475945977|11/2/07|6:02:59|1|7|Raffaele|SMS from|dad?
'3403574303|'3475945977|11/2/07|9:30:42|41|2|Raffaele|call from|dad?
42010|'3403574303|11/2/07|12:35:08|135|1|Raffaele|call to|Vodafone
'3403574303|Vodafone|11/2/07|12:38:17|1|7|Raffaele|SMS from|Vodafone
'3403574303|'3475945977|11/2/07|12:40:03|67|2|Raffaele|call from|dad?
'393471323774|'3403574303|11/2/07|12:50:34|39|1|Raffaele|call to|sister?
112|'3403574303|11/2/07|12:51:40|169|1|Raffaele|call to|Police
112|'3403574303|11/2/07|12:54:39|57|1|Raffaele|call to|Police
'3403574303|3475945977|11/2/07|13:40:12|94|2|Raffaele|call from|dad?
'3403574303|3475945977|11/2/07|13:50:18|178|2|Raffaele|call from|dad?
'3403574303|3475945977|11/2/07|14:33:29|21|2|Raffaele|call from|dad?
'3403574303|3475945977|11/2/07|17:01:17|164|2|Raffaele|call from|dad?
'3403574303|3475945977|11/2/07|17:42:53|97|2|Raffaele|call from|dad?
[/table]

 

[lector]

MK had a boyfriend, there is no reason to believe she would willingly be with RG sexually. He attacked her because she said no. A man attacking a woman for not giving in sexually makes far more sense than a woman attacking another woman in a "sex game gone bad".

Kercher got home about 9:15. She must have arrived before him because how did he get in if she didn't. Did she invite him in?

There would be no reason for her to not invite him in if he said he had to use the toilet. She had seen him hanging out with the people downstairs. From her point of veiw there was no reason to be fearful of him.

He uses the toilet, they start to talk. He comes on too strong, she asks him to leave. It esculates from there.

We are really dealing in unknowns here. My understanding of the prosecution's case in both trials is that the forensic evidence leans toward a scenario of Meredith being restrained by one or two others while a sexual assault took place. The forensics aren't definitive but this is the most likely interpretation.

Unfortunately for us outsiders, the details of this evidence were presented in closed court sessions out of respect for the Kerchers, so we have to rely on second-hand accounts that have leaked out & the judges' summaries. (We have Micheli's & await Massei's.) The jury seems to have accepted this scenario. Hopefully they came to a reasonable conclusion.

 

[lector]

We have the call detail records for Amanda and Raffaele's phones. I've merged them here to help line up the times. If a call goes to voice mail because the phone is off it is forwarded to the vioce mail service number and would not show up as minutes used on that phone until the message is retrieved.

What do the two numbers after each time stamp mean?

 

[Fulcanelli]

We have the call detail records for Amanda and Raffaele's phones. I've merged them here to help line up the times. If a call goes to voice mail because the phone is off it is forwarded to the vioce mail service number and would not show up as minutes used on that phone until the message is retrieved. If we had the Cell Tower Records (which the police do have), we would be able to see the actual interactions with the phone (ie: rings, roaming etc.). I haven't looked at logs for SMS messages before so can't say for sure if this log shows when the SMS messages were received by the carrier or transfered to the phone. We should be able to find confirmation for that from other sources.

11/1/07 0:00:39 1 7 Raffaele SMS from '393397755093
11/1/07 0:41:49 20 1 Amanda call to '393293473230
11/1/07 0:57:20 1 6 Amanda SMS to Raffaele
11/1/07 0:57:24 1 7 Raffaele SMS from Amanda
11/1/07 1:04:58 53 2 Amanda call from '759660789
11/1/07 14:25:12 58 2 Raffaele call from dad?
11/1/07 16:50:06 214 2 Raffaele call from dad?
11/1/07 16:58:46 64 2 Raffaele call from dad?
11/1/07 20:18:12 1 7 Amanda SMS from Patrick
11/1/07 20:35:48 1 6 Amanda SMS to Patrick
11/1/07 20:42:56 221 2 Raffaele call from dad?
11/2/07 6:02:59 1 7 Raffaele SMS from dad?
11/2/07 9:30:42 41 2 Raffaele call from dad?
11/2/07 12:07:12 16 1 Amanda call to Meredith (UK)
11/2/07 12:08:44 68 1 Amanda call to Filomena
11/2/07 12:11:02 3 1 Amanda call to Meredith
11/2/07 12:11:54 4 1 Amanda call to Meredith (UK)
11/2/07 12:12:35 36 2 Amanda call from Filomena
11/2/07 12:20:44 65 2 Amanda call from Filomena
11/2/07 12:34:56 48 2 Amanda call from Filomena
11/2/07 12:35:08 135 1 Raffaele call to Vodafone
11/2/07 12:38:17 1 7 Raffaele SMS from Vodafone
11/2/07 12:40:03 67 2 Raffaele call from dad?
11/2/07 12:47:23 88 1 Amanda call to mom?
11/2/07 12:50:34 39 1 Raffaele call to sister?
11/2/07 12:51:40 169 1 Raffaele call to Police
11/2/07 12:54:39 57 1 Raffaele call to Police
11/2/07 13:24:18 162 1 Amanda call to mom?
11/2/07 13:27:32 26 1 Amanda call to USA Seattle WA
11/2/07 13:29:00 296 2 Amanda call from Station Police
11/2/07 13:40:12 94 2 Raffaele call from dad?
11/2/07 13:50:18 178 2 Raffaele call from dad?
11/2/07 13:58:33 1 1 Amanda call to mom? busy?
11/2/07 13:59:06 350 1 Amanda call to USA Seattle WA
11/2/07 14:33:29 21 2 Raffaele call from dad?
11/2/07 14:46:15 102 2 Amanda call from Germany Aunt?
11/2/07 15:31:51 1 7 Amanda SMS from '393891531078
11/2/07 17:01:17 164 2 Raffaele call from dad?
11/2/07 17:42:53 97 2 Raffaele call from dad?
​

Dan o, what is your source for this record? You neglected to post it.

 

[Fiona]

I know nothing about how calls are logged. Is there no record of missed calls? Is SMS not used for texts rather than voicemail? I have a feeling my old work phone kept messages on the phone itself: it did not seem to have a messaging service, at least, and it got full.

 

[Dan O.]

Dan o, what is your source for this record? You neglected to post it.

Sorry, I keep forgetting that not everybody is familiar with all the evidence.

The records are in the PDF http://lnx.giovinazzo.it/images/postale.pdf which was posted on page 38 here and details discussed on the PMF site in the thread http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=162&start=1000

 

[Fulcanelli]

Sorry, I keep forgetting that not everybody is familiar with all the evidence.

The records are in the PDF http://lnx.giovinazzo.it/images/postale.pdf which was posted on page 38 here and details discussed on the PMF site in the thread http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=162&start=1000

I was wondering Dan o, because the phone records are very difficult to find and you aren't exactly well known for reading too much. I have original copies from a source. Others have copies because they are close to the FOA/Amanda's family and they have been fed certain records by them out of the case file. Therefore, I was interested if you had originals or summaries and if they were originals who you'd got them from.

 

[stilicho]

I don't believe anyone has suggested that this murder involved much premeditation. I don't any of the three planned to murder Meredith, but they did.

I don't dispute the prosecution narrative mainly because I don't have all the evidence to support a viable alternative.

The most plausible narratives involve a combination of bullying and of escalating violence against the victim. Each of these can contain features of sexual assault and I hope I don't need to provide cites since that's virtually a whole separate thread.

How did it start? We'll never know exactly unless all three tell the truth.

 

[stilicho]

Please explain this then. From the "facts" that we know: On the evening of November 1, 2007 Amanda was scheduled to work at the bar. At 8:18 she received a text message that she was not needed at the bar and replied to Patrick "See you later" at 8:35 at which point she turned off her cell phone.

Do the proponents of Amanda's guilt believe that in less than 17 minutes Amanda hatched the plan that she would go back to the cottage to murder Meredith even though she knew that Meredith was out and didn't know when she would return?

But Raffaele is not in on this plan because his phone is still on at 8:42 when he gets a call from his dad and talks to him for almost 4 minutes.

And how did they find Rudy? They couldn't call him. Did they just happen to see him on the way and say "Hey, we're going to murder Meredith, do you want to come along?".


It just doesn't make any sense and none of the details fit but you put your heads in the stratosphere and say you are looking at the whole picture. The courts found her guilty and who are you to question the superiority of the courts.

Red herring upon red herring.

Provide any evidence you have that the prosecution implied premeditation. I'll save you the time. They didn't.

You seem to imply that RG had to be contacted by AK and RS before arriving at the cottage. Why is this? You already know that RG knew where the cottage was. What would be so unusual about his unannounced appearance there?

Where does this 17 minutes come from?

You appear to be incredulous that AK could have shown up, once again, at the cottage with a couple of men who Meredith scarcely knew, and probably stoned or about to get high. Meredith calls out the "druggie whore", maybe there's cash missing, and AK gets her acquaintances to help her bully her roommate into submission.

How long do you propose all this took?

By the way, have you taken the time yet to read AK's three statements I mentioned above or have you abandoned your position about her selectively false memory? I hope you've read them because I might be sending you off soon to read testimony from Meredith's British friends who dispute AK's claim that they were all good friends. They weren't. They didn't like one another at all.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Dan O...I have to question the validity of that call log (and who each number represents). And here's why:

This number: 3484673590 is listed as the "called to" number for 3 or 4 different people - Filomena, Seattle, Meredith.

I have to wonder if the people who put that together know how to read a cell bill...

It's relatively simple. You have the outgoing number, the number that was called, the time it was called, length of the call, type of call (used for billing purposes), and then we see a list of who was calling/called.

As I see, though, that number is shown as the called to number for various people. It, more than likely, is Amanda's cell number. So those calls with this number in the "calling" column are received calls, those calls with this number in the "called" column are the outgoing calls. This, actually, extends into the section with RS's calls as well.

 

[shuttlt]

Dan O...I have to question the validity of that call log (and who each number represents). And here's why:

This number: 3484673590 is listed as the "called to" number for 3 or 4 different people - Filomena, Seattle, Meredith.

I have to wonder if the people who put that together know how to read a cell bill...

It's relatively simple. You have the outgoing number, the number that was called, the time it was called, length of the call, type of call (used for billing purposes), and then we see a list of who was calling/called.

As I see, though, that number is shown as the called to number for various people. It, more than likely, is Amanda's cell number. So those calls with this number in the "calling" column are received calls, those calls with this number in the "called" column are the outgoing calls. This, actually, extends into the section with RS's calls as well.

I think you're wrong. The table is confusingly set out. There's the "called" and "calling" columns on the left, but then column 8 indicates "from" and "to" so Amanda's number (3484673590) for example, jumps back and forth.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I think you're wrong. The table is confusingly set out. There's the "called" and "calling" columns on the left, but then column 8 indicates "from" and "to" so Amanda's number (3484673590) for example, jumps back and forth.

Looking back over it, I think you're correct.

The hard part is the calling/called definitions.

Is the outgoing number the number that called...or the number that is calling... Labeling those headers with "To" and "From" respectively would make the log much easier to decipher.


Back to Dan O's argument...even if Sollecito were to have spoken with his father for 4 minutes the night of the murder, what does that prove about anything? There was still no activity between 8:45(ish)PM and 6AM the next morning. And since we're referring to a cellular log, the call could have been accomplished anywhere - at RS's apartment, while he and Amanda were walking to her cottage, in her cottage, etc. Unless you have the tower triangulation data proving that he wasn't in the cottage between, oh, 10PM and 2AM (given various reported ToD), the log means, well, nothing.

 

[Fiona]

As I understand it RS said he spoke to his father around 11 pm that night. I do not remember him saying anything about a call at 8:42. Did I miss that?

ETA: it is a little easier to understand the table if you sort by the "calling" number. It does not quite work because some of the numbers have an intial apostrophe and some don't. But it helps

 

[Dan O.]

As I understand it RS said he spoke to his father around 11 pm that night. I do not remember him saying anything about a call at 8:42. Did I miss that?

ETA: it is a little easier to understand the table if you sort by the "calling" number. It does not quite work because some of the numbers have an intial apostrophe and some don't. But it helps

You can sort on the last column to get the same thing but I appear to have a couple of errors there. That first call from dad is incorrect for instance. I may have mis-sorted the spread sheet before cutting and pasting into the forum. I'll clean it up and repost later.

You can also sort by time and then date to put the list in chronological order.

There would have been no need to ask about the earlier calls because Raffaele's whereabouts in the afternoon were not being questioned.


For your earlier questions, SMS is "Short Message Server" or Text messages. These are stored on the phone but they are also stored at the service center if the phone is off or out of range and delivered to the phone later. The police could also retrieve these messages from the service center and from what I saw in Amanda's testimony, it looks like they did. Voice mail is handled by forwarding the call to a voice message service number so it doesn't show up on the Call Detail Record until the message is played back (though the rings would show in the Cell Tower Logs which the police have but haven't shared yet).

 

[Fiona]

No need to ask about calls at 8:40? How come?

When RS was interviewed he was asked to give an account of the whole day. I may be misremembering but I think he said he spoke to his father at about 11pm.