Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[BobTheDonkey]

The tough calculations are for breaking the window by throwing the rock from the inside.

1. If the rock is thrown too fast, it will hit the exterior shutter and leaves a mark. You have to get the velocity exactly right to get the rock to break the window and not travel into the shutter.

2. Since the exterior shutter doesn't latch, hitting it will also push it open and let the glass and rock fall to the ground outside the cottage. The exterior shutters must be closed and stay closed to keep in the glass. (Even this might not work as the exterior shutters are not solid, they are slotted.)

3. The glass from the broken window will end up close to the window, not be strewn across the room. Leaving the problem of how to move dozens of small pieces of broken glass so it looks like the rock was thrown from outside.

4. The damage to the interior shutter, crushed wood with embedded glass, must somehow be created.

Throwing the rock from outside solves all of these problems. And since the goal is to break the window, you don't really care where the rock lands.

Did you bother to read the Massei report? And given that you don't know the mass of the rock, the friction of the shutters, the mass/density of the glass, you're not exactly in a position to be making these claims.

Although, perhaps you can provide us with evidence that Rudy was in Filomena's room, or explain how it's possible for someone to open the window latch through the hole in the window pane without a) cutting him/herself and/or b) knocking glass of the windowsill and into the garden below?

 

[BobTheDonkey]

It was Kestrel who brought up Newton's second law. The reason I asked my question is because conservation of momentum might explain the alleged 90 degree turn of the rock.

You keep using that term. I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

[stilicho]

The tough calculations are for breaking the window by throwing the rock from the inside.

1. If the rock is thrown too fast, it will hit the exterior shutter and leaves a mark. You have to get the velocity exactly right to get the rock to break the window and not travel into the shutter.

2. Since the exterior shutter doesn't latch, hitting it will also push it open and let the glass and rock fall to the ground outside the cottage. The exterior shutters must be closed and stay closed to keep in the glass. (Even this might not work as the exterior shutters are not solid, they are slotted.)

3. The glass from the broken window will end up close to the window, not be strewn across the room. Leaving the problem of how to move dozens of small pieces of broken glass so it looks like the rock was thrown from outside.

4. The damage to the interior shutter, crushed wood with embedded glass, must somehow be created.

Throwing the rock from outside solves all of these problems. And since the goal is to break the window, you don't really care where the rock lands.

Show your work. I can get Mackey over to check it for you too.

 

[stilicho]

I did not make a claim; I asked a question.

That's really no better. That's called "JAQ-ing off" on the CT forums here. It works like this: "I have no evidence for my claims so I am going to disguise them as questions that must be answered by other people." JAQ = Just Asking Questions.

A scientist such as you profess to be ought to recognise this right away.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

That's really no better. That's called "JAQ-ing off" on the CT forums here. It works like this: "I have no evidence for my claims so I am going to disguise them as questions that must be answered by other people." JAQ = Just Asking Questions.

A scientist such as you profess to be ought to recognise this right away.

Isn't that what Glenn Beck, et al. do? Just Ask Questions...

 

[stilicho]

It was Kestrel who brought up Newton's second law. The reason I asked my question is because conservation of momentum might explain the alleged 90 degree turn of the rock.

Show your work. We can get some resident physicists and engineers to verify your claims.

 

[stilicho]

Isn't that what Glenn Beck, et al. do? Just Ask Questions...

 

[Fiona]

The source I provided said they were having a pizza at 3 PM. You can call it a late lunch, an early dinner or high tea for all I care. But it doesn't answer the question of when Amanda last ate before being questioned on the night of Nov. 5 and 6.

If you have evidence that Amanda ate later in the day, dig it up and provide a link.

it is in her testimony in court Kestrel. It has been posted here before. I do not care whether you cannot retain information which does not suit your view or whether you just like making people run around after you. Find it yourself or don't. I am aware this may seem a little petty but you have done this too often for me to believe it is just a lapse.

 

[shuttlt]

LG: All right, I've exhausted this topic. Now, I said we were just coming to the
evening when you were called in, or rather when Raffaele was called in to
the Questura on Nov 5. Where did you come from? Were you having dinner
somewhere? Do you remember?

AK: We were at the apartment of a friend of his, who lived near his house, and
we were having dinner with them, trying, I don't know, to feel a bit of
normality, when Raffaele was called by the police.

http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=165

Interesting. This isn't part of the case I'd bothered with much before, but I think perhaps my casual understanding was wrong. I'd thought they'd come straight from having pizza in a cafe/restaurant and that that meal was much later (9pm, say). I'm going to have to look up the whole "it was suspicious that they were found eating pizza" thing now because that doesn't make any sense to me any longer.

 

[Megalodon]

"Whilst he was having a drink of fruit juice from the fridge, he claims Meredith found that 300 euros (her rent money) was missing from her bedside cabinet. Meredith was naturally upset by this discovery and straight away blamed “druggy Amanda”. Rudy said they both checked Amanda’s room to see if the money was there. However, it couldn’t be found and Rudy sought to console her."
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index...rejected_rudy_guedes_explanations_as_fiction/

Of course this site could be in league with FOA...

Are you accounting for conservation of momentum?

How large was the rock? Does anyone have its exact mass? Does anyone have the thickness of the glass? What about the size/mass of the shutters?

I did not make a claim; I asked a question. I would like to look into this further, but I need more information. However, the experts did not agree, from what I recall of this incident in Darkness Descending.

It was Kestrel who brought up Newton's second law. The reason I asked my question is because conservation of momentum might explain the alleged 90 degree turn of the rock.

Is this the new theory? Rudy broke the window, was surprised by Meredith and she offered him some fruit juice while making small-talk?

Fantastic... world class contortionism! It would be hilarious if we weren't talking about a murder.

 

[Moss]

Well, we could also discuss the possibility that the rock is a red herring and that the pane was smashed with something else.
The trajectory in the "thrown from outside" scenario certainly is a strange one. But there is always the possibility that the rock was moved later. Though I don't really see a reason for that in an attempted break-in.

I'm not exactly sure if the "offer conflicting theories until something hopefully sticks" kind of argument is really a good way to come to the heart of the matter.

 

[Fiona]

Quote:
LG: All right, I've exhausted this topic. Now, I said we were just coming to the
evening when you were called in, or rather when Raffaele was called in to
the Questura on Nov 5. Where did you come from? Were you having dinner
somewhere? Do you remember?


AK: We were at the apartment of a friend of his, who lived near his house, and
we were having dinner with them, trying, I don't know, to feel a bit of
normality, when Raffaele was called by the police.

LG: So, this is the telephone call that was intercepted on Nov 5th 2007,
starting at 22:29, and the first question that I will ask Amanda is: where
were you? Maybe it's better if -- do you remember where you were at 22:29?

AK: Twenty-two...wait...

LG: Ten twenty-nine, ten thirty.

AK: Which day?

LG: The 5th.

AK: On the 5th...umm...ten thirty...that would be around class time, so...

LG: No, in the evening.

AK: Oh, in the evening, oh, the evening! I was still at the house of these
neighbors.

She wasn't, of course, because that call was made in the questura.

So either Raffaele got the call from the police to come in at 3pm, while eating a late lunch : and they decided not to go until 10 pm and did not have any dinner in the interim: or he got the call from the police at 3 pm while eating a late lunch and they went to the questura around 4pm, in which case Amanda was doing homework and cartwheels for more than 6 hours; or they really were having dinner around 9 pm when the call came and went to the questura at around 10 as we already thought.

 

[odeed]

The rock could of ended up where it was by being thrown from inside, with the window open and against the inside shutter (which I think was used in a way to stop glass shattering in the direction of the wardrobe).



And there would be a danger of glass falling on someone throwing the rock from outside. Also how does glass explode back into the face, only thing I read about was smallest shards spray backwards, and only a short distance.


From what i remember about the discussions on the theory that it was thrown from outside, the internal shutter was partially closed and was hit by the rock (which is how it ended up by the window), so how did the glass get across the room, also from the photographs large fragments of glass are traveled as far (in some cases further) as some of of the smaller pieces which I think would go against the conservation of momentum.



Neither you nor I can know what state the room was in before the incident, but I am starting to think that some people want to Filomena in on the conspiracy to frame Knox.

The only video I can find illustrate my point is the first 20 sec of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvIv5Up-WWc which is a brick hitting a glass pane. The action starts about 10 secs in and continues for about 8 secs, at 1000-1500 which by my rough calcs put it in the 0.1 to 0.25 secs range in real time.

Notice that the smaller fragments of glass start to fly off faster than the larger fragments so would of traveled further, and also the fastest speed is at the point of contact with the glass.

Also this takes place in a quarter of a second, would a rock thrown some distance and below the window (so it would of been slowing down even as it hit the window) have enough velocity to push open a wooden shutter hit near the hinges, so glass could "explode" into the room and on to the blue mat near the bed and table?

Weird thing is I brought up the laws of physics and the conservation of momentum to why I thought the rock could not be thrown from outside, then the same phrase appears a dozen or so pages later as proof that the rock could not be thrown from inside the room.

 

[stilicho]

it is in her testimony in court Kestrel. It has been posted here before. I do not care whether you cannot retain information which does not suit your view or whether you just like making people run around after you. Find it yourself or don't. I am aware this may seem a little petty but you have done this too often for me to believe it is just a lapse.

I can't locate the time of the interview on November 5, 2007 in her testimony. I did find the news of Meredith's memorial that evening:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-491608/Foxy-Knoxy-I-heard-Meredith-scream--covered-ears.html

I remember seeing something about police testimony on when Raffaele was called in.

 

[Malkmus]

http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=165

Interesting. This isn't part of the case I'd bothered with much before, but I think perhaps my casual understanding was wrong. I'd thought they'd come straight from having pizza in a cafe/restaurant and that that meal was much later (9pm, say). I'm going to have to look up the whole "it was suspicious that they were found eating pizza" thing now because that doesn't make any sense to me any longer.

I had also taken this at face value, and now it's looking like it's full of holes. Been trying to fit the pieces together since Fiona suggested the answer to this was posted earlier and I couldn't immediately find it. Now what I've found is Amanda's testimony indicating they weren't at the pizzeria, and that the time for when Rafaelle was called to the questura is all over the place.

What's confusing is that there are two timelines on PMF. One was posted in September 2008, which is the one everyone keeps citing; the one that states they finished eating and went to the questura at 10:15 (no dispute over the vigil starting at 10:00 FYI). The other timeline on PMF, posted the following November (still 2008), states that Raffaele was called by Giobbi at 5 in the afternoon/early evening.

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=64

Nov 5

1. Amanda and Patrick see each other that morning, in front of the University for Foreigners
2. 1700 Raffaele summoned to the police station. Amanda goes with him and waits in a separate room.
3. 2000 Candlelight vigil for Meredith.
4. Raffaele "breaks."
5. 1040 (at the earliest - Amanda is talking to Filomena about where to live at 1039) Amanda is called in for formal questioning

The question here, for Fulcanelli, is why two timelines, and why the references to the earlier one only? The 1700 time was posted a month after the timeline claiming the 10:15 time, so aren't we to assume the newer timeline is the correct one? So we now have two sources claiming RS was summoned hours before the vigil: Paul Ciolini and PMF.

The other thing that seems to be a glaring problem with the September timeline is that when actually scrutinized it makes very little sense:

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2

2000 Meredith's vigil held in Perugia, sans Amanda and Raffaele

2215 After having dinner, Amanda and Raffaele arrive at the police station

2230 Raffaele, being questioned at this point, breaks and begins to change his story

So, according to this, we're to believe that:

A) At 22:15 Raffaele arrives at the police station, his questioning is started, and then 15 minutes later he "breaks and begins to change his story"?! That's barely enough time to be asked a few preliminary questions, and especially if we factor in the fact that RS and AK were taped having a conversation in the waiting room before RS was called in to be questioned. So we know RS wasn't immediately brought in to the interrogation room once they arrived. Therefore, we're literally talking 5 or so minutes into RS's interrogation before he breaks down and changes his story?

B) We're also to assume that RS and AK deliberately missed the vigil for Meredith. Even if this timeline were correct, you have to allow enough time for RS to receive the call, and for him and AK to drive to the station. Sounds like the phone call could have easily been placed by the police at 10:00 PM, or slightly before. Either way, it's so close, I don't know how we can or can't assume that they hadn't finished eating right before the vigil started and were planning to go or not to it.

I think from all this information, what we can assume so far is that AK and RS may not at all have deliberately missed the vigil. It's possible that RS was called by Giobbi around 5 in the afternoon, when they were eating at someone's apartment (not "caught" at a pizzeria), that they took their time to finish eating, and went to the questura shortly thereafter.

Amanda claims she was at the neighbors having dinner and that it was evening. If we go by the newest timeline on PMF, which states that RS was summoned (called) at 17:00, then this is a perfectly reasonable time to both have dinner and refer to it as evening. Here is the solar calendar for Italy on exactly November 5th, 2007:

Lat: 41.9 Long: 12.4833
11-5-2007 Timezone offset: 1 Time Azimuth Altitude
Begin Astronomical Twilight 5:11:51 94.998 -18.000
Begin Nautical Twilight 5:44:26 100.231 -12.000
Begin Civil Twilight 6:17:32 105.552 -6.000
Sunrise 6:46:45 110.339 -0.833
Transit 11:53:00 179.818 32.466
Sunset 17:00:00 249.482 -0.833
End Civil Twilight 17:29:13 254.256 -6.000
End Nautical Twilight 18:02:18 259.559 -12.000
End Astronomical Twilight 18:34:50 264.770 -18.000

http://www.spectralcalc.com/solar_calculator/solar_position.php

 

[stilicho]

Weird thing is I brought up the laws of physics and the conservation of momentum to why I thought the rock could not be thrown from outside, then the same phrase appears a dozen or so pages later as proof that the rock could not be thrown from inside the room.

The burden of proof isn't yours anyhow. Kermit did some very good work on the difficulties involved but only to illustrate what's already been argued and proved beyond reasonable doubt in the courts. If Kestrel and halides1 have some new and contrary evidence then they need to provide the maths and not dangle various physics laws in front of us.

Oddly, perhaps, I've been less concerned about the rock than the climbing feat. I've climbed for some time and I frankly cannot see how anyone could do that without leaving any evidence of having done so. Bruce offered that the cottage was coated with a porous surface but I'm not sure how that is relevant even if it's true.

It will be interesting to see how the sentencing report treats the probability of a successful scaling of that wall without leaving a trace. I know that there is some reference to the obvious support points--a nail or two, I believe--that were not in any way disturbed.

 

[odeed]

I was under the impression (may be something posted a hundred add pages ago), that Knox and Sollecito were asked to come into police station sometime on Nov 5, but they said they were attending the vigil so it would be after that.

 

[stilicho]

I had also taken this at face value, and now it's looking like it's full of holes. Been trying to fit the pieces together since Fiona suggested the answer to this was posted earlier and I couldn't immediately find it. Now what I've found is Amanda's testimony indicating they weren't at the pizzeria, and that the time for when Rafaelle was called to the questura is all over the place.

We need the police sources, obviously. They would know when Raffaele was summoned and when he actually arrived at the Questura.

 

[shuttlt]

Malkmus,

It's probably a typo, but at one point you confuse 20:00 as being 10pm for the time of the memorial.

Also, my understanding had been that they were summoned to the questura twice, hence the police being pissed off that they had been blown off supposedly for the memorial, but actually for pizza. Now I don't know, but I think we should keep in mind the possibility that they may have been asked more than once on the 5th, just as they may have eaten more than once on the 5th.

 

[shuttlt]

By the way, the initial part of Knox's questioning was in the waiting room being asked to list the men that had visited the appartment. She then says that the questioning got intense in the early hours. There is quite a lot of time between the beginning of the asking her questions and them telling her they think she's telling lies.