From the top of the first para on page 411 to the end of the last full para on page 414 (3rd last line), Massei Report.
This reconstruction, according to which Meredith’s death is determined as being a few minutes after 23.30 hours is also confirmed by the thanato-chronological data [i.e. data concerning the chronology of death] as there has already been occasion to note, as well as by the following circumstances [which were] highlighted in the relevant chapters:
Meredith’s English mobile phone had a GPRS connection at 22.13.19 hours lasting 9 seconds, under the coverage of the Wind cell with the final numbers 30064, which is compatible with Meredith’s room in the house on Via della Pergola 7; the next telephone contact of the same mobile phone occurred at 0.10.13 hours on the day of 2 November 2007 and the cell connected to was that with the final numbers 25622, which provides coverage to the villa on Via Sperandio and is incompatible with the house on Via della Pergola.
Consequently, at 22.13.19 hours the situation must still have been quiet and Meredith may have been toying with her own mobile phone, as was noted in the chapter dedicated to the examination of the memory of Meredith’s English phone;
at 01.10.31 the mobile phone was no longer in the house on Via della Pergola: at that hour, therefore, Meredith must already have been killed and her phones taken and thrown away. And in fact, Amanda and Raffaele, exiting the house on Via della Pergola around midnight, could easily have reached Via Sperandio in a few minutes, and from there have thrown, towards the zone of trees and bushes which at that time of night may have looked like a precipice or uncultivated woods (an area where the telephones would, with difficulty, have been found by someone), Meredith’s mobile phones. In this regard, it should be underlined that from the file of planimetric surveys [i.e. maps] can be seen the contiguity and closeness of the various streets, situated almost in continuation from one to the other, and therefore known to the current defendants: Via della Pergola, from which one may easily reach Corso Garibaldi, where Raffaele Sollecito’s house was, and Via Sperandio, located almost behind the houses which mark the edge of the old town of Perugia but easily and quite quickly reachable from Corso Garibaldi across various communicating passages which lead to S. Angelo Park, along which runs, precisely, Via Sperandio.
In the chapter dedicated to the examination of the memory of Meredith Kercher’s English mobile phone, there was occasion to point out that the authors of the murder - where they are concerned with the mobile phones - would not have taken them to then throw them into the midst of trees and shrubs. It is clear, therefore, that the aim pursued was different.
A first hypothesis can be seen as an intent to further the simulated burglary so that discovery of the two mobile phones could confirm the lead of the unknown thief who had entered the house on Via della Pergola by breaking the window-pane and who had taken Meredith’s two telephones. This is a hypothesis which, while it has a certain logical validity, seems scarcely credible since to that end it would have been easier to (also) take one of the valuable items in Romanelli’s room, which had already been turned upside down [i.e. rifled].
The other hypothesis, which this Court prefers also in relation to what will be further observed at a later point, holds that it could have been to avoid that the two mobile phones might have rung as a result of calls which Meredith might have received, which thus because of the insistent ringing and lack of an answer might have brought forward the discovery of Meredith’s body to a much earlier time. In particular, Amanda and Raffaele may have thought that Mezzetti or Romanelli or one of the young men from downstairs, particularly Giacomo Silenzi who had a relationship with Meredith, might have gone to the house in the morning and if they had heard the telephone ring without being answered by Meredith, might have gone to check in the room and would have discovered what that room concealed. It was therefore necessary to take the mobile phones away and to throw them far away and it was also necessary to lock the door of Meredith’s room with the key in order to avoid that someone, returning to the house, might have called Meredith and not receiving a response, might have gone into the room and realized, too soon, what had happened.
The apprehension [taking] of the mobile phones which were immediately thrown away and the closing by key of Meredith’s room both had, therefore, the same objective: to isolate Meredith and her room to prevent that anyone who might have gone into the house on the morning of 2 November could have discovered what had happened too early.
Such a requirement may be explained by the necessity of having to check that no compromising traces had been left and by the consequent necessity of having to eliminate any possible traces left.
What has just been said is confirmed by the circumstance by which, on the morning of 2 November at 07.45 hours, Amanda was seen in Quintavalle’s shop and just after leaving was seen travelling downhill along Corso Garibaldi, most likely therefore in the direction of the house on Via della Pergola where, moreover, she might already have been prior to 7.45 hours.
Further confirmation is constituted by the fact that, after Meredith’s murder, some traces were shown to have definitely been erased, a cleaning activity had certainly been carried out. In fact, the bare foot which, stained/covered with blood, left its footprint on the sky-blue mat in the bathroom, could only have reached that mat by taking steps which should have left on the flooring other footprints, also marked out in blood just like (in fact, most likely, with even more [blood], since they were created before the footprint printed on the mat) the one found on the mat itself. Of such other very visible footprints of a bloody bare foot, on the contrary, there was no trace.
Even the drip of blood left on the internal edge of the bathroom door (see photos 141 and 142 already mentioned) seems to be the remainder of a much larger trace.
Moreover, this cleaning activity seems to fit in with the planning carried out by taking the telephones which were then immediately thrown away and by locking the door of Meredith’s room, otherwise one cannot see what other significance these behaviours could have had.
With regard to Meredith’s mobile phones, the hypothesis was also put forward that these same [mobile phones] were removed [taken/stolen] at about 22.00 hours and thrown in Via Sperandio because the author of the theft, hearing the connection made by one of the two telephones, became frightened of keeping them and, being already in Via Sperandio, threw both of them away.
This deals with an assumption that begins from premises that have been shown to be inconsistent according to what was [expanded on/looked at in greater depth] in the appropriate chapters (entrance to Meredith’s room and assault by a single aggressor who had used the broken window as access or had managed to make Meredith open [the door to him]; time of death to be established as being shortly before 22.00 hours; incompatibility of cell 30064 on Strada Vicinale Ponte Rio Monte La Guardia connected to during the connection of 22.13.9 hours with Meredith’s room located in Via della Pergola); such an assumption seems, moreover, completely illogical. Whoever takes mobile phones that, at some point or another, if they are switched on, they may ring or have some connection; to avoid this, it would be easy to turn the mobile phones off or to remove the SIM cards. And then: why throw both mobile phones away if the connection concerned only one of them? [We] cannot see any reason why the author of the crime would have been in Via Sperandio, which is located beyond the city walls of the town, in front of S.Angelo Park which, at that hour, must have been dark and deserted. Furthermore, it must also be observed, if one travels along the Via Sperandio road in the direction [of someone] coming from Via della Pergola, one advances into the countryside (see, once again, the file of planimetric surveys/maps) and [we] cannot see what destination [also aim] a person advancing along that street could have had with any objective other than that held by this Court: to throw the telephones in a place where they would be very difficult to find. To this must be added that[even] if the theft of the telephones had as its object/aim the benefit constituted by the economic value of the same [phones], and that throwing them away was a spontaneous action dictated by fear, [we] cannot see the motive/reason for having locked the door of Meredith’s bedroom.
