• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.
By the way...did you notice in Charlie's posted pic...that whacking great drying rack sitting in the corridor? The lamp chord's the least of your problems.
Click to expand...

I don't believe the drying rack is blocking Amanda's door. There are two photos Charlie posted of the drying rack - the photo to the right appears that the rack is mostly past Amanda's door.
 
HumanityBlues said:
I'm still very interested to see if Rinaldi is the same idiot footprint expert who needed Raffaele's team to help him figure out how to do his job on the footprint originally attributed to him.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm pretty sure he is. I think Rinaldi did all the footprint stuff, from 'Amanda's shoe print' on the pillowcase to 'Raffaele's shoe print' in Meredith's room, and the faulty measurement on Rudy's print he used to try and show it was 'too big' to be the bathmat footprint. All Rinaldi...
 
katy_did said:
Yes, I'm pretty sure he is. I think Rinaldi did all the footprint stuff, from 'Amanda's shoe print' on the pillowcase to 'Raffaele's shoe print' in Meredith's room, and the faulty measurement on Rudy's print he used to try and show it was 'too big' to be the bathmat footprint. All Rinaldi...
Click to expand...

Haha. If that's true....he just sounds like a bastion of credibility doesn't he?
 
Fulcanelli said:
Then we must conclude the person who made them flew right? I'll stick with cleaned, that fits the world of reality. There you go again asserting the prosecution never claimed there was a clean-up. How do you know...have you read the case file, did you attend the trial? Do you actually have anything to support this assertion of yours?
Click to expand...
Oh, I don't know if I can bother to answer this... You're making the assumption the footprints were there, then saying the fact they are no longer there is evidence they were cleaned up. Since the first of your assumptions hasn't been established, the conclusion you draw from it isn't logical.

I keep asking and you keep refusing to answer....why was it important for anyone to mention it? Why would Mignini think it important enough to ask Amanda about it? The only way I see it being remotely important, is that the chord gets in the way of your precious bath mat boogie. But since nobody but you people find the bath mat boogie tale remotely credible in the first place, I can't see why anyone else would care.

By the way...did you notice in Charlie's posted pic...that whacking great drying rack sitting in the corridor? The lamp chord's the least of your problems.
Click to expand...

If it was never mentioned, then you obviously don't have any evidence it was there before the door was broken down, do you? I think that if it had been there, it would have been talked about by the eight people present at the time. It would be a possible safety hazard, for one thing, depending on what it was connected to. You don't find it just a little odd there was no discussion about it?

But let's suppose it was there, and was therefore presumably plugged into the corridor at some point. Since there's no plug socket near the door, what could it have been used for? The cable would only have stretched to just inside the door.
 
katy_did said:
Yeah, he's 0 for 3 so far. :p

They should've given Raffaele's granny the job instead.
Click to expand...

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt in saying that he's not being dishonest and is just really really bad at his job. But hey, it could be the other way around.;)
 
Fulcanelli said:
Why would it be damp? There possibly might be the odd drip on the floor, the but the surface isn't going to be covered in a 'layer' of water. And note, the lack of luminol prints heading to the shower, which is where she'd have been heading if she was returning the mat..
Click to expand...


Actually, all of the surfaces in the bathroom were covered with a layer of water. Have you ever taken a shower without steaming up the bathroom? I have often wondered why the investigators didn't take the steam into account when determing the age of the blood spots. After the shower, the spots all would have had more water in them than they had before the shower; this had to affect the investigators' ability to determine when they had been placed there.

There is a way the bathmat footprint could be Amanda's. On her way to the bathroom in her bare feet, she could have picked up some blood residue from Rudy's shoeprints and walked it into the bathroom, especially if her feet were sweaty or the blood was still dampish. Her footprints would have been very faint on the floor, but if the bathmat was wet from the previous day's showers or from Rudy washing up, it would have absorbed more blood from her foot than the floor did.

When she got out of the shower, the room was steamy, but she noticed the blood on the bathmat. Any footprints she had made on the floor would have been diluted by the steam, and when she moved the bathmat across the floor, that would have taken care of cleaning those up.

If she stepped off the bathmat at the bathroom door, her feet would still have been damp enough to pick up more residue of Rudy's footprints in the hallway, thus leaving her one footprint in the hallway that may have had blood in it.

If there was no blood on the bathmat until Amanda put it there, that would explain why she hadn't noticed it before her shower.
 
Last edited:
Belz... said:
And apparently, I'll never know!
Click to expand...

That's probably true.

I think the Italian justice system did a good job; others don't. I think the Seattle media unfairly portrayed Amanda as an innocent woman who was railroaded by a vengeful foreign prosecutor; other's don't.

Beyond that, it's all about footprints, luminol, DNA and lone-wolf scenarios. Those who think the Italian justice system did a good job tend to agree with the prosecution's case. Do you need names?

@LashL: You're entitled to your opinion about what they should have done regarding the DNA swabbing. If it's in their training pamphlet and they didn't do it then they should be scolded. I doubt her defence team will make it a primary concern upon appeal. They have much more serious issues to contend with.
 
stilicho said:
That's probably true.

I think the Italian justice system did a good job; others don't. I think the Seattle media unfairly portrayed Amanda as an innocent woman who was railroaded by a vengeful foreign prosecutor; other's don't.

Beyond that, it's all about footprints, luminol, DNA and lone-wolf scenarios. Those who think the Italian justice system did a good job tend to agree with the prosecution's case. Do you need names?

@LashL: You're entitled to your opinion about what they should have done regarding the DNA swabbing. If it's in their training pamphlet and they didn't do it then they should be scolded. I doubt her defence team will make it a primary concern upon appeal. They have much more serious issues to contend with.
Click to expand...

What side is Fulcanelli arguing for again? He's posted over 80 times today, but he is so coy about his real feelings about the case.
 
Amazer said:
First of all, why do you assume that Stefanoni wouldn't have a choice?
Click to expand...

Maybe she wanted to keep her job.

Second of all, why do you assume that Mignini (and Stefanoni) didn't think anyone would question the results? Cases involving foreign nationals are always a little more high-profile then those where only nationals are involved simply because typically the embassy or consular staff are involved. And that is a fact that Mignini wouldn't have been unaware of.
Click to expand...

From what I have gathered, not a lot of public questioning of the prosecution's case is done in general. It is an authoritarian system in which the magistrates hold the most power.

I found an interesting article from earlier this week that may explain some of the hesitation on the part of the United States to intervene in Amanda's case:

Italy's anti-Mafia fighters fear wiretap bill

ROME -- Italian organized crime prosecutors received a boost Friday from a top U.S. justice official in their campaign against a bill designed by Premier Silvio Berlusconi's government to drastically tighten restrictions on electronic eavesdropping....

...But Breuer added that U.S. prosecutors don't want anything done that would choke off the flow of what he called "extraordinarily helpful" information from Italian organized crime prosecutors.

Pressed by reporters about the proposed legislation, Breuer said the Americans hope that "we would still have the same valuable information" that Italian organized crime investigators regularly share with their counterparts in the United States.

"From a prosecutor's point of view, we don't want anything to occur" that would hamper the Italians from doing their job in fighting organized crime, Breuer said.

He called wiretapping "an essential part" of such investigations.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/21/AR2010052101885.html
Click to expand...

I would imagine the U.S. and Italy have similar other shared interests, as well.

So, did they take the bra clasp to prison for Raffaele to get a good grip on it... or did they employ some other devious means? Of course a little evidence would be appreciated.
Click to expand...

They didn't even have to test the bra calsp -- they could just SAY they tested it, and show the results of another DNA test instead. Or, they could just wipe some of Raffaele's DNA on it from his clothing or a napkin.

So they figure it out for Raffaele... but forget about Amanda till it was too late? Right.... in those six weeks it didn't occur to them once that perhaps they needed to plant some DNA of Amanda too.

I'm more then willing to entertain the idea that contamination occurred somewhere but the scenario you present is beyond ridiculous. It involves the police, the prosecutor, the crime lab and personnel from the prison to be willing participants in this little gem of a scheme. And let's not forget the various judges that have from time to time given their verdicts... they're in to it too.
Click to expand...

They already had the evidence from Amanda -- the knife. They probably thought everybody would believe that was enough. Like I said, they weren't terribly brilliant about all this.

All of the other judges don't have to know what's going on behind the scenes. They only have to believe what Mignini and Comodi tell them.
 
HumanityBlues said:
What side is Fulcanelli arguing for again? He's posted over 80 times today, but he is so coy about his real feelings about the case.
Click to expand...

I don't think he cares about the representation of the Italian justice system in the Seattle media since he's from the UK.
 
Mary_H said:
They didn't even have to test the bra calsp -- they could just SAY they tested it, and show the results of another DNA test instead. Or, they could just wipe some of Raffaele's DNA on it from his clothing or a napkin.

They already had the evidence from Amanda -- the knife. They probably thought everybody would believe that was enough. Like I said, they weren't terribly brilliant about all this.

All of the other judges don't have to know what's going on behind the scenes. They only have to believe what Mignini and Comodi tell them.
Click to expand...

Why are you the only one with the courage to fully explain what others have only hinted at? If the Italian justice system was pulling out the stops to unfairly convict Amanda and Raffaele then they wouldn't depend merely on accidental discovery of DNA as suggested. They'd simply have Stefanoni swab up the necessary stuff and supply it.

No need for floating DNA dust or other cryptic nonsense.
 
HumanityBlues said:
I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt in saying that he's not being dishonest and is just really really bad at his job. But hey, it could be the other way around.;)
Click to expand...
_________________________________________________________________

Hi HumanityBlues,
Though I have never met Mr. Rinaldi, his workmanship in this particular instance shows, to me at least, that he is probably just another cog in the machine: go to work, punch in, have lunch, punch out, go home. Wake up, do it again.

Personally, I found it very hard to believe that it was a member of Raffaele Sollecito's family, instead of Mr. Rinaldi, who correctly ID'ed the shoe prints as belonging to Rudy Guede, not Raffaele Sollecito.

If I was this guy, I would have been simply embarrassed that a family member of the guy that my bosses were trying to keep locked up showed proof that I did not know how to do my job!

How the heck can this be considered a very "professional" investigation, with the quality of workmanship that is shown time and time again?
Job well done in Perugia, I think not! But that's my opinion only, viewed from Los Angeles...
RWVBWL

Post Script: After a little bit of thought, maybe this particular investigation was done professionally,
but by many folks who were not at the top of their class...
 
Last edited:
Belz... said:
And apparently, I'll never know!
Click to expand...

Have a little patience and it'll become extremely obvious in many cases.

And yes, this is a fast moving thread - but an interesting one if you like to people-watch sometimes. I've actually become more interested in the people discussing the case than the case itself.
 
stilicho said:
Why are you the only one with the courage to fully explain what others have only hinted at? If the Italian justice system was pulling out the stops to unfairly convict Amanda and Raffaele then they wouldn't depend merely on accidental discovery of DNA as suggested. They'd simply have Stefanoni swab up the necessary stuff and supply it.

No need for floating DNA dust or other cryptic nonsense.
Click to expand...


Aw, stilicho, a rare compliment from you... I am honored.
 
Re:
"They'd simply have Stefanoni swab up the necessary stuff and supply it."

And tell her to just walk outta the court room if someone questioned it...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom