Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[Fulcanelli]

Are you saying that putting on shoes after she had dried off and dressed would have affected the bare feet images (placed there by walking from shower to bedroom)?

No. I was saying as per her story, she didn't walk back to her room, she went on the mat (hence no prints would be left). To this, you responded that perhaps she walked back to the bathroom to return the mat and left prints that way. I gave reasons why this wouldn't be the case. Then you came back with maybe she returned to the bathroom to return the mat wearing shoes and I responded that that wouldn't leave bare luminol footprints either, for obvious reasons. Neither would doing so effect any luminol prints because none would exist to effect since she hadn't walked on the floor. The whole point that I am making, is that in order to leave luminol barefooted prints on the floor, she would have had to have walked on the floor with bare wet feet. This is not rocket science.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

If so many samples were taken from Meredith's bedroom, then how was only this single sample contaminated? Again, were the only traces of Raffaele in the room not brought in during the first round of evidence collecting, but rather 46 days later?

You, and others, affirm that the DNA arrived via contamination. Yet nothing else in that room was contaminated. To believe this, one must believe that at no other time during the initial collection of evidence, you know, when those videos of Bruce's were filmed, did any of the multitude of Policemen, Investigators, etc manage to contaminate any of the places tested in the bedroom. No, it wasn't until the handful of forensics scientists returned 46 days later that Raffaele's DNA was transferred via contamination into the bedroom. That just seems unlikely, Charlie.

A fluke occurrence is by definition unlikely. But similar flukes have happened in many other cases, and that is why law enforcement agencies have formulated guidelines for handling DNA evidence, which were not followed in handling this item.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Your right, it doesn't explain the heal part of the print, so I'm curious, how do you think the prints on the mat and hallway got there?

Well, having thought on it a lot, I would have to go with Judge Massei's explanation. It's the one that makes the most sense, contradicts none of the evidence and explains the all the present evidence.

 

[Fulcanelli]

A fluke occurrence is by definition unlikely. But similar flukes have happened in many other cases, and that is why law enforcement agencies have formulated guidelines for handling DNA evidence, which were not followed in handling this item.

There seemed to be quite a few 'flukes' in that cottage then. Not to mention a great many everywhere else you happen to look regarding the pair.

 

[katy_did]

Yes, but she was on the mat, not walking on the floor, you need to walk on the floor, with wet feet, to leave luminol prints on it. Neither does it explain how blood, that was on only a small area of the mat coated the whole sole of her foot, from heel to toe, from instep to instep.

And it does not account for Raffaele's luminol print.

Except that none of them were Raffaele's though, were they?

I think you're splitting hairs, here. Amanda trod on the bathmat on which there was a mixture of blood and water, and says she used it to 'shuffle' back to her room. Most likely she would have stepped off the mat at various points, simply because it would be difficult to stay on the mat the entire time. So, the prints could clearly have been made in this way, rather than in the way Massei suggests (cleaned feet which had a residue of blood/water on them). And the fact the prints don't form a continuous trail would also support the bathmat theory rather than Massei's version.

The fact is that if they were made in a residue of blood/water as Massei claims, they could have been made by someone stepping on the bathmat just as (and probably more) easily than someone leaving a trail of prints with newly cleaned feet. There's nothing to rule out either theory (except perhaps the fact the prints aren't continuous).

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

I tell you this Mary, I do this for the LAST time, so don't you (or anyone else) ask again.

Yikes. I know you guys have good technical skills in this area, because I have seen the results. But this is almost as hard to follow as the google translation.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Except that none of them were Raffaele's though, were they?

I think you're splitting hairs, here. Amanda trod on the bathmat on which there was a mixture of blood and water, and says she used it to 'shuffle' back to her room. Most likely she would have stepped off the mat at various points, simply because it would be difficult to stay on the mat the entire time. So, the prints could clearly have been made in this way, rather than in the way Massei suggests (cleaned feet which had a residue of blood/water on them). And the fact the prints don't form a continuous trail would also support the bathmat theory rather than Massei's version.

The fact is that if they were made in a residue of blood/water as Massei claims, they could have been made by someone stepping on the bathmat just as (and probably more) easily than someone leaving a trail of prints with newly cleaned feet. There's nothing to rule out either theory (except perhaps the fact the prints aren't continuous).

Yes they were, one in the corridor was his.

Why would it have been difficult to step on the mat? She had walls and doorways to hold on to and the mat isn't small. Moreover, if she stepped off the mat, her footprint's also pointing the wrong way. Also, why is she not putting just the toes down...why step fully flat footed on the floor? Why is the left foot also not leaving luminol prints...does the blood on the bath mat not like left feet?

No, the prints couldn't have easily been made this way, it does not explain why her whole foot was covered. Also, you have to stop and accept that she's going to step on a mat that she sees covered with someone else's blood...sorry, that ones for the gullible.

Why is there not a long luminol revealed streak of blood along the path of the traverse from the shower to Amanda's doorway?

 

[Fulcanelli]

Yikes. I know you guys have good technical skills in this area, because I have seen the results. But this is almost as hard to follow as the google translation.

It's his writing style. And of course, that section is pre-proofreading.

 

[stilicho]

Then Massei's reasoning is flawed, too. I'll say again: if they cleaned up a trail of bloody footprints leading up to the bathmat footprint (whether on hands and knees or not) there's no way they wouldn't have known that the mark on the bathmat was also a footprint, especially considering that Raffaele is supposed to have made it.

If they were involved in the murder, the only reasons for them to have left the footprint and the other blood stains in the bathroom are either that they didn't have time to clean them up (unlikely) or that they knew Rudy was the one to leave them. Leaving 'just the right amount of blood' isn't plausible.

Your first mistake is assuming that Massei is an advocate for the defence teams of RS and AK.

Nobody knows exactly why they staged the burglary in Filomena's room rather than the most logical entry point, or why they left a little blood, or why they locked the door, or why they didn't steal the obvious things, or any number of other issues.

But Massei is working from the evidence presented, examined, and cross-examined in court. That includes everything and not just the bits and pieces you think fit Amanda's stories and the FOA line that only Rudy participated in the murder.

Most of us have previously argued that they should have, at the very least, removed the body and possibly burned down the cottage. As it was, the pair left so much evidence of their involvement that it's simply impossible to ignore.

Once the entire Massei report is available for everyone to read, in English, the logic of the court will become much clearer although--like the evidence and the verdict--it will simply be handwaved away.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

There seemed to be quite a few 'flukes' in that cottage then. Not to mention a great many everywhere else you happen to look regarding the pair.

If you remove the bra fastener from the equation, there is no other physical evidence against Amanda or Raffaele in the room where the struggle took place and where Meredith was killed.

The only other evidence against Raffaele consists of a single luminol footprint and the print on the mat, for which the big toe is completely different from Raffaele's and exactly like Rudy's. So, if Rudy left the print on the mat, if the luminol print is unconnected to the crime, and if the bra fastener is a fluke caused by mishandling, the case against Raffaele goes up in a puff of smoke.

 

[43degreesNorth]

There's nothing to rule out either theory (except perhaps the fact the prints aren't continuous).

and there isn't one giant slug trail from the bathroom into Amanda's room

 

[katy_did]

Yes they were, one in the corridor was his.

I posted an image on the previous page which showed how similar all the prints were. You threw your toys out of the pram and said you weren't going to bother commenting on something a random internet poster posted. Now you're back to your entrenched belief that one of the prints was Raffaele's, having refused to back up your claim that his print was totally different in size, shape and characteristics from Amanda's? Interesting.

Why would it have been difficult to step on the mat? She had walls and doorways to hold on to and the mat isn't small. Moreover, if she stepped off the mat, her footprint's also pointing the wrong way. Also, why is she not putting just the toes down...why step fully flat footed on the floor? Why is the left foot also not leaving luminol prints...does the blood on the bath mat not like left feet?

No, the prints couldn't have easily been made this way, it does not explain why her whole foot was covered. Also, you have to stop and accept that she's going to step on a mat that she sees covered with someone else's blood...sorry, that ones for the gullible.

Why is there not a long luminol revealed streak of blood along the path of the traverse from the shower to Amanda's doorway?

Now, this is getting silly. You're seriously arguing 'why step fully flat footed on the floor'?! LOL. The fact is you don't know exactly how Amanda walked back to her room, therefore you can't possibly rule any of these things out. This is just nitpicking because you have no proof it didn't happen this way. No matter how closely you analyze the exact way Amanda would have stepped(!), you can't rule this theory out. It's just as likely as Massei's theory, and I'd argue probably more likely.

By the way, I notice you ignored the question as to why, if Massei is right, there is no continuous trail of prints leading from the bathroom.

 

[Fulcanelli]

If you remove the bra fastener from the equation, there is no other physical evidence against Amanda or Raffaele in the room where the struggle took place and where Meredith was killed.

The only other evidence against Raffaele consists of a single luminol footprint and the print on the mat, for which the big toe is completely different from Raffaele's and exactly like Rudy's. So, if Rudy left the print on the mat, if the luminol print is unconnected to the crime, and if the bra fastener is a fluke caused by mishandling, the case against Raffaele goes up in a puff of smoke.

No matter, because the crime scene is not limited to Meredith's bedroom. Neither is it limited to physical evidence, but also ear/eye witnesses. Moreover, the staged break-in and the the behaviour/contradictory actions of the pair the next morning are damning.

As for the mat/luminol footprint we can completely exclude Rudy since it is totally the wrong size...Rudy's the ugly sister for that particular glass slipper.

 

[katy_did]

and there isn't one giant slug trail from the bathroom into Amanda's room

Why are you assuming the blood/water would have soaked through to the underside of the mat?

Interestingly though, there are quite a lot of 'slide' marks around the two parallel footprints in the corridor. Presumably the luminol was brighter and more visible where Amanda pressed down with her foot. Btw, do you have a picture of the entire corridor? I've only seen pictures of the individual footprints.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

How and why the prints got there seem irrelevant anyway, the door is the main part of this case for me that ties Amanda and RS into this:

1) Why in the world would Rudy lock it or even care to? Makes no sense.

2) Blood on the inside handle, but not on the outside handle. Walk through any door that opens the way Meredith’s does and you will use the same hand to open it, as you would to close it.

3) His shoeprints leaving the room don’t stop & turn to lock a door, and the closer he is to her door, the stronger the prints would be.

4) Amanda and RS are probably the only two people on this planet that would have a reason to lock this door, if they had something to do with this murder, otherwise, the door would be left open.

5) A 23 year old man who took kickboxing could not break it down, yet Filomena’s boyfriend had no trouble. RS had no intention to break it down; they didn’t want to be the ones who discovered the body.

6) If Rudy went through the trouble of locking Meredith’s door and closing Filomena’s door, then why wouldn’t he lock the front door as well, I’d bet the two keys were together.

7) Does not Amanda have a barefoot print pointing at Meredith’s door, but not inside?

 

[Fine]

I Hate To Sound Cynical.....

One would think that the cops were interested in the blood-stained bathmat from the very beginning of the investigation, and certainly any "interactions" the witnesses---such as Amanda---may have had with the bathmat.

And, so, you would expect the cops to be asking plenty of questions during her frequent visits to the police station, such as: "Ms. Knox, did you ever touch, or move, the bathmat after its discovery?" Well, sure---judging from her email of November 4---you can bet she said that she stepped on it after her shower, and dried her feet. But I gotta wonder whether at that time, prior to detection of the Luminol prints much later, Ms. Knox made any mention of her bathmat boogie. I wonder if some of the cops who initially interrogated Amanda were rolling their eyes in listening to Amanda's bathmat boogie testimony a year later.

Or maybe she forgot to tell them?

 

[Fulcanelli]

I posted an image on the previous page which showed how similar all the prints were. You threw your toys out of the pram and said you weren't going to bother commenting on something a random internet poster posted. Now you're back to your entrenched belief that one of the prints was Raffaele's, having refused to back up your claim that his print was totally different in size, shape and characteristics from Amanda's? Interesting.

It is not entrenched belief. It has been established in court. And as I have said, none of the experts involved in the trial thought that the print assigned to Raffaele belonged to Amanda. Therefore, why do I need to question all that, simply because you have suddenly decided that it is more convenient to your assertions to label that print as being Amanda's? Not to mention the fact, you failed to point out how it was when having her shower Amanda happened to step in a puddle of blood in order to make the print on the bath mat (the print which is identical to the luminol print in the corridor assigned to Raffaele), or where the prints leading up to the print on the mat are...I don't recall Amanda claiming she cleaned up any bloody footprints that morning when she got out of her shower, do you?

Now, this is getting silly. You're seriously arguing 'why step fully flat footed on the floor'?! LOL. The fact is you don't know exactly how Amanda walked back to her room, therefore you can't possibly rule any of these things out. This is just nitpicking because you have no proof it didn't happen this way. No matter how closely you analyze the exact way Amanda would have stepped(!), you can't rule this theory out. It's just as likely as Massei's theory, and I'd argue probably more likely.

By the way, I notice you ignored the question as to why, if Massei is right, there is no continuous trail of prints leading from the bathroom.

Sure it's more likely...people see other peoples blood on the ground and go scrunching their bare feet in it all the time. How could anyone be so stupid as not to see that?

As for the lack of the continuous trail of prints? I think that was down to the clean-up after...some of those prints got erased during their cleaning of the trail of visible bloody prints leading 'to' the bathroom they left when they went to wash their feet.

 

[Belz...]

All this talk of a supposedly very planned gradual discovery of the break-in is incredibly convoluted, and seems like an implausible attempt to connect every scrap of evidence into some kind of coherent narrative which is just...very unlikely. They could just have said they dropped by to pick up some things on the way to Gubbio for their daytrip and discovered the break-in. There was simply no need for anything else.

This thread is going by extremely fast and I haven't had time to catch up.

Who's arguing what, here ? It seems to me that everybody is providing interesting arguments, but at the same time you're all trying to ascertain what happened in the persons' minds and how they "would" have reacted, which we can't know.

Can somebody give me a short summary of the current status of the thread ?

 

[Fulcanelli]

7) Does not Amanda have a barefoot print pointing at Meredith’s door, but not inside?

Yes.

 

[stilicho]

This thread is going by extremely fast and I haven't had time to catch up.

Who's arguing what, here ? It seems to me that everybody is providing interesting arguments, but at the same time you're all trying to ascertain what happened in the persons' minds and how they "would" have reacted, which we can't know.

Can somebody give me a short summary of the current status of the thread ?

We're mainly passing time until the talented PMF translating and proofreading teams are finished with the Massei report.