Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[stilicho]

Rudy was a burglar. He entered the cottage through Filomena's window. I know you think that is impossible but it was rather easy. Rudy could easily reach the latch and open the window while standing on the top row of bars on the first floor window.

I suppose if you keep repeating this incantation then you might convince yourself. But, until the events proceeding from their activities of 01 NOV 2007, none of the three convicted of murdering Meredith had any criminal record. Each of them appear to have had brushes with the law but nothing serious.

Rudy was not a burglar.

The rest of your entry is sheer conjecture based on nothing. There was no evidence that anyone entered Filomena's window. Saying something is "rather easy" is different than proving it. The precarious perch of the defence team volunteer is a far cry from establishing proof of entry through that point by any means.

 

[stilicho]

Good day Stilicho,
I am interested in discussing skepiticism, for that is what the James Randi Educational Foundation Forum is all about, in fact I believe that it even says that above on the header. So if I am skeptical of the court's conclusions or the evidence that was used for a conviction, it is because I have read much, and have formed my own opinion. If the court's conclusions or the authorites investigations were always correct, well I suppose that there would never be a need for an appeals process.
I wish to discuss anything that crosses my mind regarding this case in a friendly way, as it also says above. I even like to try and say hi to the person I will be discussing anything with.
So once again, Hi Stilicho.
Can you help me with the query I put forth, without telling me what you think is my mistake? I simply asked, since I have not found out after much reading, this:

"But I still do not recall reading of a comparison between the 2 break-ins, the lawyers office and the murder scene. Do you guys/gals know if there are specific similarities between the 2, since Guede had the stolen laptop, which was from a break-in on the 2nd floor, and Guede was also in the house you guys/gals have been arguing about regarding that break-in?"
Thank you, RWVBWL

The simple answer is "no". I provided the reasoning but you chose to ignore it.

 

[RWVBWL]

The simple answer is "no". I provided the reasoning but you chose to ignore it.

Hi Stilicho,
Thanks for your response.
I wonder if a rock might have been thrown at the lawyers office window after the burglar alarm was turned off. If not, I wonder how entry was made. I have not read of a comparison between either places, but since Guede was in possession of the lawyers stolen laptop, maybe he did have something to do with the breaking+entering there.
I say that with lots of past expeience with street thugs/criminals friends in mind.
RWVBWL

 

[Bruce Fischer]

I suppose if you keep repeating this incantation then you might convince yourself. But, until the events proceeding from their activities of 01 NOV 2007, none of the three convicted of murdering Meredith had any criminal record. Each of them appear to have had brushes with the law but nothing serious.

Rudy was not a burglar.

The rest of your entry is sheer conjecture based on nothing. There was no evidence that anyone entered Filomena's window. Saying something is "rather easy" is different than proving it. The precarious perch of the defence team volunteer is a far cry from establishing proof of entry through that point by any means.

the prosecution agreed that entering the cottage through that window was possible.

This is an online argument. It will not be a factor on appeal.

Rudy was a burglar. He was arrested for breaking into a school, he also broke into a law office. He was picked up numerous times by the law right before the murder. There is a lot of information about Rudy Guede that will come to light in the future.

We can agree to disagree on this point. You will eventually see the truth.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Nah, that would be no problem, compared to doing the balancing act on his toes, working the window latch, scooting through the window, then playing mahjonng with the pieces of glass, removing every piece of dna and forensics.

Try to spin it anyway you like. This is an online argument. The prosecution agreed that entrance to the cottage could be gained through that window. This will not be a factor on appeal.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

He has no official record of being a burglar. So he may or may not have been a burglar. Even then, he knew at least one of the occupants of the house. He could have just as easily rang their doorbell and if he found the cottage to be empty, entered through the kitchen window.


Evidence?


So, where are those gloves. Is there any record of Rudy having those leather gloves that you keep referring to? Or are you making stuff up?


Right

Quite clearly the Judge was not convinced by those 2 experts. So where does that leave you?


Based on what information did he reach that conclusion? Was he given access to all relevant information? Or was he given carefully selected material by the defense? Without that type background info I don't consider his opinions as credible.


We're not joking about Meredith's murder. We're joking about the rather unlikely (dare I say fantasy) theories that you guys come up with. There is a difference, even if you don't perceive it as such.

The evidence that Rudy's plans were altered is the fact that Meredith was found murdered.

Where are Rudy's clothes, shoes, underwear etc etc?

Rudy discarded everything. Gloves would be included.

I said he was likely wearing gloves, like any good burglar would do. I did not
say that I knew that for sure.

Your right, the Judge was not convinced, so now we wait for the appeal.


I present no fantasies. Mignini is the guy for that.

This crime was horrific but not complicated. Rudy broke into the cottage to burglarize it. He encountered Meredith and he murdered her.

 

[stilicho]

I have not read of a comparison between either places, but since Guede was in possession of the lawyers stolen laptop, maybe he did have something to do with the breaking+entering there.

It was established by an examination and ample cross-examination that there was no break-in at Via Pergola on 01 NOV 2007. There's no reason to try to compare an actual break-in with a staged one except as an intellectual exercise.

Insurance corporations depend on police investigations (and private contractors) to establish fraudulent claims. To suggest that the Perugia authorities were unable to distinguish one from the other would require proof. There has been none presented.

@Bruce Fisher: the prosecution agreed that entering the cottage through that window was possible.

And yet they established beyond a reasonable doubt that the break-in was staged. This is why AK and RS were convicted of staging the crimescene while RG was not convicted of breaking and entering.

Nobody entered through Filomena's window on the night of 01 NOV 2007.

 

[Mary_H]

On the TV crime shows, people always seem to leave good, identifiable fingerprints. In the real world, it takes the right combination of surface material, oils or other substances on the fingers, and touching an object so the print is not smeared. Only then do you get a print that can be matched to a person.

Also, crime scene technicians only look for fingerprints in places that may have been related to the crime. For example, in the room where the victim was found, in places where blood was found, objects such as a glass on the counter likely to have been used by recent visitors. The surfaces in Amanda's bedroom were probably not tested.

This is true. About a year ago, Barbie Nadeau wrote, "But the lack of fingerprints has raised eyebrows. Those who believe Knox is guilty say this points to a cleanup. Those who defend her, including her attorney Carlo dalla Vedova, say that the police weren’t doing their jobs. He asked one of the investigators why fingerprints were not taken from other objects in the house, such as her books and guitar. “It is me and the officer responsible for the inspection who decides what should be analyzed,” testified Antonino Francaviglia. “We decide based on our investigative experience."

You will recall that the police also relied on their investigative experience and intuition to recognize that Amanda was guilty of the murder, before they had collected ANY evidence. Steve Moore's discussion on injusticeinperugia provides a good description of the massive quantity of evidence the police "decided" NOT to analyze.

 

[RWVBWL]

Try to spin it anyway you like. This is an online argument. The prosecution agreed that entrance to the cottage could be gained through that window. This will not be a factor on appeal.

Hi Bruce,
I too believe that entrance could have been gained that way. Quickly.
However I sometimes wonder if Meredith was murdered in a home-invasion robbery gone wrong. Meredith was not sexually assaulted yet. Afterwards, Rudy came back and broke the window just to see if anyone was there. And if no one was there, Guede could then have re-entered the premises with the house keys that were never found. That would better explain the lack of fingerprints/DNA in that room.
Also, with it being a later hour, there was less chance of anyone hearing the window glass break. He was then free to move Miss Kercher's body, etc.
RWVBWL

 

[Amazer]

the prosecution agreed that entering the cottage through that window was possible.

Certainly it's possible. It's also possible to enter through the front door, the balcony, etc.
Simply because something is possible does not mean that it did happen that way.

This is an online argument. It will not be a factor on appeal.

Rudy was a burglar. He was arrested for breaking into a school, he also broke into a law office. He was picked up numerous times by the law right before the murder. There is a lot of information about Rudy Guede that will come to light in the future.

Be consistent! If Rudy is guilty simply because he's been arrested, then Amanda is guilty too.

Any further information on Rudy we can discuss once it has been made public, till then I suggest you drop the line that damning information will come to light in the future. I'm not interested in your assertions, they don't carry any weight.

 

[Mary_H]

stilicho wrote: Nobody entered through Filomena's window on the night of 01 NOV 2007.

I agree with this. Access to the cottage was too easy to have required a break-in. Rudy could easily have gotten in through the front door by force, by accompanying Meredith or by asking Meredith if he could come in.

It is most likely Rudy was there to burglarize, not to kill. Once the wounds had been inflicted, though, it is likely that in a guilt-stricken panic he fell back on some of his burglarizing experience. In that bag of tricks, there may have been a couple of reasons it occurred to Rudy to stage a burglary, but there is absolutely no reason it would have occurred to Amanda and Raffaele.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Certainly it's possible. It's also possible to enter through the front door, the balcony, etc.
Simply because something is possible does not mean that it did happen that way.




Be consistent! If Rudy is guilty simply because he's been arrested, then Amanda is guilty too.

Any further information on Rudy we can discuss once it has been made public, till then I suggest you drop the line that damning information will come to light in the future. I'm not interested in your assertions, they don't carry any weight.

I am simply trying to save you some embarrassment in the future with regard to Guede. Why? Because I care.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Hi Bruce,
I too believe that entrance could have been gained that way. Quickly.
However I sometimes wonder if Meredith was murdered in a home-invasion robbery gone wrong. Meredith was not sexually assaulted yet. Afterwards, Rudy came back and broke the window just to see if anyone was there. And if no one was there, Guede could then have re-entered the premises with the house keys that were never found. That would better explain the lack of fingerprints/DNA in that room.
Also, with it being a later hour, there was less chance of anyone hearing the window glass break. He was then free to move Miss Kercher's body, etc.
RWVBWL

Meredith's body was not moved. Her murder was horrific but it was accomplished rather quickly.

The prosecution claimed that Amanda and Raffaele returned to the scene of the crime, and staged the crime scene. This is related to the staged break in, but this accusation by the prosecution is in relation to the staging of the murder itself. The prosecution stated that Meredith's body was moved to a different location and her bra was cut off by Amanda and Raffaele to make the crime look like it was committed by a lone attacker. Meredith was found covered with a duvet. The prosecution claimed that Amanda covered Meredith with the duvet because she didn't want to look at the corpse. Mignini boldly said that only a woman would cover the body. He insisted it had to be the act of a woman.

The prosecution stated blood evidence proved that Meredith was wearing her bra when she died. Mignini stated: "Nor is it just the blood on her bra which demonstrates this. It’s also where the blood is not on her body. Meredith was wearing her bra normally when she lay in the position in which she died, and she was still wearing it for quite some time after she was dead."

This is simply not true. In fact, the photos of Meredith's body show small round droplets of blood on her bare breasts. She was on her back, with her bra pushed above her breasts. She had an aspirating wound in her neck causing her blood to spray into the air and fall back down onto her body. The blood droplets landed on her bra and on her bare breasts, proving that her bra was removed before she died.

The evidence doesn't show that Meredith's body was moved hours after her death. I believe she was moved a few feet immediately after she was no longer able to fight. Guede moved her out of the pool of blood so he could sexually assault her. When she was still breathing, her bra was pulled up exposing her breasts. At this time blood was spraying into the air from the wound in her neck and falling back down onto the bra and her bare skin as Guede cut her bra off of her body and sexually assaulted her. Meredith's sexual assault was not staged by Amanda and Raffaele. Rudy Guede's DNA was found inside Meredith's body. That evidence would be impossible to stage.

Rudy Guede attacked and murdered Meredith Kercher. He acted alone. This wasn't a staged crime scene. The evidence clearly proves this.

It was reported in the media that the duvet must have been laid over Meredith's body long after she had died because there was no blood transferred onto the duvet. It was reported that the blood was dry when Meredith was covered.

This is simply not true. Guede moved Meredith away from the large puddle of blood. Meredith was still bleeding profusely after Guede moved her. There was significant blood transfer onto the duvet.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/duvet.html

 

[Amazer]

The evidence that Rudy's plans were altered is the fact that Meredith was found murdered.

Ok

Where are Rudy's clothes, shoes, underwear etc etc?

Rudy discarded everything. Gloves would be included.

Evidence for said gloves?

I said he was likely wearing gloves, like any good burglar would do. I did not
say that I knew that for sure.

By that logic, like any good burglar would do, he would have entered through the kitchen. He didn't do that either, did he?

Your right, the Judge was not convinced, so now we wait for the appeal.

And what will you do if the appeal doesn't work out?

I present no fantasies. Mignini is the guy for that.

Until new evidence comes to light i care to differ.

This crime was horrific but not complicated. Rudy broke into the cottage to burglarize it. He encountered Meredith and he murdered her.

It is indeed not a complicated crime if you choose to ignore evidence, such as the staged break-in, evidence of multiple attackers, etc.

 

[RWVBWL]

stilicho wrote: Nobody entered through Filomena's window on the night of 01 NOV 2007.

I agree with this. Access to the cottage was too easy to have required a break-in. Rudy could easily have gotten in through the front door by force, by accompanying Meredith or by asking Meredith if he could come in.

It is most likely Rudy was there to burglarize, not to kill. Once the wounds had been inflicted, though, it is likely that in a guilt-stricken panic he fell back on some of his burglarizing experience. In that bag of tricks, there may have been a couple of reasons it occurred to Rudy to stage a burglary, but there is absolutely no reason it would have occurred to Amanda and Raffaele.

Hi Mary H,
After the stabbing, I can also see Guede panicking immediately and quickly running out of the apartment. Or if Guede was there with his still unknown aquaintance, who might have done the stabbing, they both would have probably left, FAST. But Rudy came back hours later, broke the window to see if anyone was there, and then re-entered with the missing keys. That kinda explains why there was no fingerprints/DNA, etc. of Guede in Filomena's room. And after making sure no one was in the apartment, Guede then moved and assaulted Miss Kercher's body.
RWVBWL

 

[odeed]

Question about the sexual assault.

Was there any of Meredith Kercher blood found around her genitalia, or was it just Rudy Guede DNA?

 

[Amazer]

I am simply trying to save you some embarrassment in the future with regard to Guede. Why? Because I care.

Based on the info available to me I have no difficult defending my current position. If new information comes to light which would make me to reconsider my position I will do so without a moments hesitation. There is really nothing embarrassing about that.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Ok


Evidence for said gloves?


By that logic, like any good burglar would do, he would have entered through the kitchen. He didn't do that either, did he?


And what will you do if the appeal doesn't work out?


Until new evidence comes to light i care to differ.


It is indeed not a complicated crime if you choose to ignore evidence, such as the staged break-in, evidence of multiple attackers, etc.

Do you have evidence that Rudy was wearing a shirt? How about Pants? Underwear? Shoes?

He discarded everything. He would have discarded gloves with everything else. I said that it was a possibility that Rudy had gloves on when he entered the cottage. Don't make anymore out of it than what it really is.

I am not ignoring evidence, I am interpreting it differently.

You asked me what I would do if the appeal didn't work. I won't personally do anything. I am not directly involved. I will be disappointed that this injustice wasn't corrected. I will hope that the Italian supreme court will do the right thing and exonerate Amanda and Raffaele.

You made a reference that the window was not an ideal choice for a burglar. It was also not an ideal choice if you were trying to stage a break in. The argument works both ways. It's a wash.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Based on the info available to me I have no difficult defending my current position. If new information comes to light which would make me to reconsider my position I will do so without a moments hesitation. There is really nothing embarrassing about that.

My comment was a lighthearted one. I figured the "Why? Because I care" would be a good indicator that I was making a lighthearted statement.

I respect your position.

 

[HumanityBlues]

Mignini boldly said that only a woman would cover the body. He insisted it had to be the act of a woman.

I remember reading about this and I can tell you right now that it is total bunk. There is no scientific or psychological evidence, nor any study, that would say that this would be the case. If you told any experienced police officer this they would laugh in your face.