Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Malkmus]

Hi Malkmus,
I had read that Luca Altieri was the guy who broke down the door to Miss Kercher's room that day.
I had also read that later on, while in court, Mr. Altieri disagreed with the testimony of Postal Police officer Battistelli when he said that he did notenter Miss Kercher's room. It is written that he "merely stood in the doorway and observed the scene, which was enough to tell him that the girl's throat had been slit."
But yet Mr. Altieri was certain that he saw officer Battistelli enter Miss Kercher's room that day and lift the duvet to see if she was alive.

Now when I read of this, I thought that this would make sense, the first police officer on the scene checking to see if a woman, whose foot was found sticking out under a blanket, was still alive.

But yet Officer Battistelli appears to state in court that he did not enter Miss Kercher's room.
I wonder why?
Hmmm...
RWVBWL

Hi, RWVBWL, great weather we're having, yes?

I have read that as well. It definitely sounds as if Batistelli lied on the stand. Luca had no reason to be dishonest about this, and why would Batistelli not have gone into the room? What if Meredith were still alive?

 

[HumanityBlues]

Italian law certainly does have the concept of innocent till proven guilty. And like any system which adopts that principle it holds until there is evidence of guilt presented which displaces the assumption. At that point it is for the defence to undermine that evidence.

In the UK once the first trial convicts the burdern of proof reverses. That is not true in Italian law. It has better safeguards for the accused than the UK (and I think the US as well) for that reason.

Your conclusion is unjustified by the facts you present. Italian law has some better safeguards maybe. But certainly an accused doesn't have better safeguards in the Italy than the US or the UK by virtue of the way the burden of proof changes alone.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

In my view, the autopsy findings are consistent with the following scenario: A single intruder confronts Meredith with a knife, forcing her into the corner of her room against the wardrobe. He tells her to get on her knees, then puts the knife to her throat while pulling up her top and pulling down her trousers with his other hand. He inserts his fingers into her vagina, at which point she struggles against the knife, which causes the shallower non-fatal wound. Meredith then begins to scream, causing the attacker to inflict the large fatal knife wound(s). I think (but am not certain) that anatomically the breakage of the hyoid bone could easily have occurred during the infliction of the knife wounds, rather than during a separate strangulation.

That's not quite what the bloodstain patterns and other evidence show. It all happened very quickly. He chased her into the corner of her room, grabbed her from behind, and threw her to the floor. He clapped his left hand over her mouth, hard enough to leave fingertip bruises on her jaw. He stabbed her twice in the right side of her neck and then slashed her throat on the left side. The bloodstains show that she was on all fours with blood pouring out onto the floor and spraying on the wardrobe doors in front of her. After she ceased to struggle, but before she had stopped gasping for breath, he rolled her onto her back. He pushed her bra above her breasts. A fine spray of blood was visible on her chest and on the cups of her bra.

Then he moved her to the spot where she was found and completely removed her bra along with her jeans and her underpants. That is probably the point at which he left his DNA inside her body.

Nobody came back two hours later and staged the scene to look like a sexual homicide. It was a sexual homicide.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

I agree - but really if you think about it, both Amanda and himself could not both take the stand without doing major damage to themselves. I'm guessing they thought Amanda was the better talker and actor, and maybe less likely to break down.

What I really can't see, is how a 23 year old man, who took kickboxing for several years and weight trained in a gym, could not kick down Meredith's door, when I'm positive, my 13 year old son, who also takes kickboxing could do it. I would like to see a picture of Filomena's boyfriend that did kick down the door.

My understanding is that he kicked the door, or threw his shoulder against it, hoping the latch would fail or slip, but when he heard wood start to splinter, he stopped, for the same reason the postal police weren't willing to take responsibility for breaking down the door until Filomena ok'd it.

 

[Fine]

Mary: Raffaele and Amanda may wish they had ACTED differently, but it wouldn't have changed the fact that they lied, and the evidence would prove that they were lying. Strange that only they were so confused, and yet could remember what they ate, what movie they watched, etc. They only get confused memories when their stories don't match up.Raffaele hasn't accused the police of beating him (what? were the police afraid he'd hit them back?) or co-ercing him. Not a word. And yet, he was the first to break.

____________________________-
Hi capealadin.

Yes, and Raffaele was the first to "break" for the simple reason that he was the first to be interviewed the night of November 5. Both the lovebirds showed up with the intention to change their story. The cops weren't buying their initial alibi. Neither lovebird was coerced. No need to. Both were in the mood to sing.

Amanda probably came with a plan to tell a story akin to Rudy's story. A LONE WOLF broke in while she and Meredith were home, a struggle ensued---maybe in Filomena's room too--- resulting in Meredith's death. (And leaving behind evidence of Amanda's presence.) She was too scared to call the cops and was too scared to tell the truth, for fear of reprisal. This isn't the story she did tell because during the course of her interrogation she realized that the cops would find her "Patrick did it" story more plausible---which, apparently, they did.

But it didn't matter what Amanda told the cops, she was going to be arrested anyway. By that time Raffaele had already acknowledged to the cops that he had changed his story, and had changed his story because Amanda had so asked. The cops saw the collusion and that, in conjunction with their respective (and profound!) amnesia for events of November 1, was sufficient to make 'em official suspects and detain them. A trap of their own making. The cops merely spectators.

///

 

[LondonJohn]

Hi, RWVBWL, great weather we're having, yes?

I have read that as well. It definitely sounds as if Batistelli lied on the stand. Luca had no reason to be dishonest about this, and why would Batistelli not have gone into the room? What if Meredith were still alive?

It's very possibly the case that the postal police had no real business investigating murders (or even burglaries). I suspect that proper protocol may have meant that Batistelli and his colleague should have called other branches of the police as soon as they were informed about the broken window etc, and certainly long before they "authorised" the breaking down of Meredith's bedroom door. I suspect that Batistelli followed his natural instincts and entered Meredith's bedroom, then pulled back the duvet to investigate further. I then suspect that it's likely that he soon realised that he was in breach of protocol (either while he was still in the house, or perhaps once he got back to the station to write up his report), and that he therefore sought to retrospectively minimise his level of intervention. And this would necessarily entail being "economical with the actualite" on the stand during the trial. Another fine tick in the box for Italian police procedures there!

 

[LondonJohn]

That's not quite what the bloodstain patterns and other evidence show. It all happened very quickly. He chased her into the corner of her room, grabbed her from behind, and threw her to the floor. He clapped his left hand over her mouth, hard enough to leave fingertip bruises on her jaw. He stabbed her twice in the right side of her neck and then slashed her throat on the left side. The bloodstains show that she was on all fours with blood pouring out onto the floor and spraying on the wardrobe doors in front of her. After she ceased to struggle, but before she had stopped gasping for breath, he rolled her onto her back. He pushed her bra above her breasts. A fine spray of blood was visible on her chest and on the cups of her bra.

Then he moved her to the spot where she was found and completely removed her bra along with her jeans and her underpants. That is probably the point at which he left his DNA inside her body.

Nobody came back two hours later and staged the scene to look like a sexual homicide. It was a sexual homicide.

Fair points. I'm still not sure how it can be ascertained with any clarity whether the sexual assault elements took place before or after the stabbings (although I suppose that the lack of genital bruising does suggest that the victim was highly incapacitated at the time of the assault). What's common to your and my scenarios, however, is that they could easily have occurred in the presence of just one assailant, rather that the two or three people whom the prosecution alleged must have been involved. And if the appeal court accepts that a lone attacker scenario could very well be supported by the evidence, this might change the way that the whole crime is viewed on appeal.

 

[RoseMontague]

The video doesn't really help much. Filomena most likely left the outside shutters open and the inside shutters were not latched. Filomena stated that she opened the shutters for light and then left in a hurry. She did not remember for sure if she had closed the shutters or not.

The rock was thrown to break the glass so that the window itself could be opened, not the shutters.

If the inside shutters were not latched, the rock would have broken the glass, hit the shutter and pushed it opened. The rock has many edges and could have deflected very easily in any direction.

From the position the rock took on the floor, it appears that the rock knocked over a purse, caught the lip of the clothing bag and knocked it over and came to rest on the floor.

The rock was thrown from the outside. If the window was broken from the inside, the person who broke it would have had to take glass and place it on the ledge. This is not very likely.

The evidence provided suggests that the rock came from outside.

Perhaps if we had the complete and uneditied video of the rock breaking the window it would be more helpful. Especially the one taken from the outside vantage point. That would show if any glass was shown to be deflected to the ground below. If the defense is so confident that this would explain things, let's see it.
I think this would be a valuable piece of information that you could post on your website.

 

[RoseMontague]

Rose - I see you have been reachering the window quite a bit - what do you know about the '2 1/2 inch Nail'?

The nail is mentioned in the Massei report and it appears to be a logical argument against a real break in. I am surprised that I do not see evidence of a nail of this size in the exterior photographs of the wall. The judges/jury seemed to put some emphasis on this being evidence that someone did not crawl in that window. As I said at PMF, it is not that I don't believe it exists, seeing it with mine eyes would bring me great joy and happiness.

 

[Mrs.Columbo]

That's not quite what the bloodstain patterns and other evidence show. It all happened very quickly. He chased her into the corner of her room, grabbed her from behind, and threw her to the floor. He clapped his left hand over her mouth, hard enough to leave fingertip bruises on her jaw. He stabbed her twice in the right side of her neck and then slashed her throat on the left side. The bloodstains show that she was on all fours with blood pouring out onto the floor and spraying on the wardrobe doors in front of her. After she ceased to struggle, but before she had stopped gasping for breath, he rolled her onto her back. He pushed her bra above her breasts. A fine spray of blood was visible on her chest and on the cups of her bra.

Then he moved her to the spot where she was found and completely removed her bra along with her jeans and her underpants. That is probably the point at which he left his DNA inside her body. Nobody came back two hours later and staged the scene to look like a sexual homicide. It was a sexual homicide.

But bevore chasing her, he must be in the room, therefore:

1) he throws the rock (quite a large one) which smashed the window
2) he climbes up that three and a half meter, and finally enters Filomenas room opening shutters and window (minium 1-2 min)
QU: is Meredith at home, if yes, still dressed and therefore not in her bed
does she not hear the noise of that splintering glass and the rock bumping on the floor
does she patiently wait until Rudy is ready to attack or would she quickly dial 112 and/or lock herself in her room or flee the house
QU: she is coming home, walking the drive, see the open and smashed Window - or Rudy climbing the wall.
Would she calmly enter the house or run away for help
**
Maybe I am missing something here and you can provide the with the missing pieces of evidence.

And about the time, when he left his DNA inside her body - shall that mean, he raped her while she was dying oder already dead?
Grrrrrrh!

 

[Chris_Halkides]

DNA degradation

Has Gilder been called in as an expert in DNA forensics? If you read your own sources more carefully you'll see that Dr Krane is the expert. Gilder is a computer scientist at Krane's firm.

Stilicho,

When I first encountered DNA electropherograms in which some loci were strong and others were weak or nonexistent, I was puzzled. Then I found one explanation for this phenomenon in Chapter 3 of Jason Gilder’s thesis, which is that the amplitude of peaks in a degraded sample is correlated with the size of the DNA fragment. One might characterize this work as applied biochemistry or molecular biology with a dollop of statistics, but characterizing it as purely computer science would be erroneous.

 

[capealadin]

Hello Bruce: First, you obviously have more information as to Raffaele AGREEING with the police. We know he did say he had told them a lot of ****, etc etc. Again, the police exaggered to Amanda?? Why the word exaggerate? I'm thinking they just told her: your boyfriend isn't backing up your alibi. I did'nt underline, or exaggerate. You have done this. After this mega wobbly, Patrick was blamed. What were the police going to do? Fine, Raff is no longer backing you? Thanks for being here, ciao?

 

[capealadin]

Hello Fiona: Yes, I forgot that that Raffaele also told the police that Amanda had asked him to lie. That is major, imo. Anytime anyone asks for someone to back up their alibi, it is highly indicative of a cover up. At the time of their questioning of Raffaele, I don't believe the police had any reason to imagine Amanda being a culprit. I think they were trying to break Raff's alibi, not Amanda's. They may have assumed HE had used Amanda as HIS backup. That Amanda was covering for him. Raffaele had been called into questioning. They suspected Raffaele, Amanda came with him, did omewrk, and some extra curricular activities, and when Raffaele backed down, THEN Amanda was questioned. This sequence is important, I feel. Amanda must have been shocked and scared when confronted with Raff's *betrayal*. The naming of Patrick was desperation. Anything to get out of there, and find out how to do damage control. I know this is supposition, but in view of what transpired, it seems logical. Even if one believes a couple of cuffs to the back of the head, and some shouting, that couldn't be SO traumatic as to not only blame your boss, but to add, he wanted Meredith, he's bad, I'm scared of him. She wanted Patrick picked up asap, so that she could question Raffaele. Well, we know that didn't happen, Raff and Amanda could not re connect, and Raffaele then adds to the breakdown of the story, in his diary, with no police present, and digs Amanda in deeper. Without coersion, without needing to. Freely written. This speaks volumes. imo.

 

[el buscador]

I have always been curious about using Nara's scream as the timeline for the murder when there is scientific evidence that is contrary to this timeline. The original coroner pronounced that Meredith died about 3 hours after ingesting her last meal. The British women said they ate dinner around 6:00 PM. That would put time of death more around 9:00 PM. I believe Meredith's stomach contents matched what was served at dinner that night with just one anomaly, the mushroom in her esophagus. Candace Dempsey provided an explanation for this mushroom in her book saying that each of the four women living in the house had their own refrigerator shelf. On Meredith's shelf was a package of mushrooms with one corner pulled back as if Meredith had reached in for a snack just before she was murdered. Candace says that a photo of the shelf and the package of mushrooms was taken and is in the police files. I wonder if Charlie has this photo in his archives?

 

[Danceme]

Unless you can prove that it is impossible for Amanda to have testified incorrectly about what part of the room Meredith's body was found in, your point is moot. You seem to have no problem in reconciling the many things that Amanda said that clearly weren't true. Why is this specific issue different?

Your concept of what seems reasonable differs from mine. For instance, I don't find it at all reasonable that a young woman (actually, a man or woman of any age) would come home after being away for the night, find the door ajar but no one home, find blood splattered in the bathroom, find a window broken out and a bedroom ransacked and not even think about calling the police. Or even try to contact the roommate whom she expected to have spent the night in the apartment (no, dialing cellphone numbers and hanging up after 3-4 seconds doesn't constitute trying to contact someone). And I don't find it reasonable that a woman who has just learned that someone was murdered in their home would go shopping for sexy underwear with her boyfriend. But maybe that's just me.

Which leads to 2 more questions:
1) Where was Amanda when she phoned Meredith's cellphones and Filomena?
2) Which did she do first: call Meredith's cellphones or call Filomena?

I find it implausible that a woman who had just left her boyfriend, came home to find the door open, etc., etc., and the first thing she didn't do was call him when she realized things were strange. It's the first thing I would think of. He either could have eased her mind about it or come straight over to check things out with her. I can't believe she didn't call him.

Amanda called Meredith's english phone which didn't answer, then she called Filomena but didn't tell her she had already tried to call Meredith. Then she called Meredith's english and italian phones for several seconds each, no answer or voice mail. Then Filomena called her back several more times, (though in her email Amanda describes these calls as herself calling Filomena). After all this, at 12:47, she calls her mother in Seattle for the first time to tell her she found strange happenings at home and Edda tells her to call the police.

 

[el buscador]

About rudy's bloody shoe prints going to the front door, imagine him reaching the door, turning the knob and....nothing, the door not budging. His panic must have been beyond belief, locked in with the body of the woman he had just murdered with no way out. His hand too injured to make the climb back out the window, what to do? Rudy soon realizes he has to find the front door key to make his escape. He returns to the murder room, the blood on his shoe now dissipated so he leaves no tracks. Once there he realizes he can't reach the lamps in the room without tracking through blood, perhaps he flips the switch to the overhead light but it's too bright, highlights the horror of the scene and is more easily seen from the outside so he shuts it off. He has Meredith's British cell phone in his pocket because he took it from Meredith when he interrupted her call to her mother at 8:56PM. He flips it open and uses the light to search for the keys, accidently dialing the first number in Meredith's address book which happens to be her bank. He finds the keys! Back to the front door where he tries to insert the keys in the lock, but disaster once again, the keys don't fit (they are, of course, the keys to the boy's house downstairs)! So, once again he has to trudge back to the murder room but on the way he glances in and sees the lamp in Amanda's room and makes a detour. He sets the keys to the boy's house down in Amanda's room and picks up the lamp so that he has a little more illumination in Meredith's room. Once back in Meredith's room he rummages around, perhaps getting some of the wet blood on his hand as he searches for the right key in Meredith's purse. Perhaps he wipes this blood off his hand on the towel that was setting on the bed. When he finds the set of keys he decides to try them first on Meredith's door before he goes back to the front door to make sure he has the right set of keys. In his search he has also found the other cell phone, money and Meredith's bank card, all of which he pockets. As he walks out of the room he key locks Meredith's door, perhaps thinking he can lock away this horrible incident. Without any blood left on his shoe there is no trace of him locking the door. He lets himself out of the house, turning the regular door lock because he has no idea that it is broken and that the door will swing open unless it is key locked.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Hello Bruce: First, you obviously have more information as to Raffaele AGREEING with the police. We know he did say he had told them a lot of ****, etc etc. Again, the police exaggered to Amanda?? Why the word exaggerate? I'm thinking they just told her: your boyfriend isn't backing up your alibi. I did'nt underline, or exaggerate. You have done this. After this mega wobbly, Patrick was blamed. What were the police going to do? Fine, Raff is no longer backing you? Thanks for being here, ciao?

Raffaele agreed that Amanda could have left the house when he was sleeping. This is not a betrayal. Raffaele did not stop backing Amanda's alibi. He simply stated that he couldn't possibly know what was going on when he was asleep.

The police went to Amanda and most likely left out the "sleeping" part of the questioning. Amanda was most likely told that Raffaele stated that she left during the night.

Or as you put it: "I'm thinking they just told her: your boyfriend isn't backing up your alibi"

That statement is false. Raffaele didn't turn against Amanda. He was pressured to agree with the fact that he couldn't know what Amanda was doing when he was asleep.

Amanda became confused because she couldn't understand why Raffaele would say these things.

This is pretty straight forward stuff. This happens all the time in interrogations.

It is one of your talking points that Raffaele stopped supporting Amanda's alibi. We all know that in reality he was only speaking about when he was sleeping.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Perhaps if we had the complete and uneditied video of the rock breaking the window it would be more helpful. Especially the one taken from the outside vantage point. That would show if any glass was shown to be deflected to the ground below. If the defense is so confident that this would explain things, let's see it.
I think this would be a valuable piece of information that you could post on your website.

There really is no way to properly recreate this. I am sure the owners of the cottage would not approve. Any replication of the cottage would not be accurate.

The defense is not going to argue a point that will not influence the appeal either way. Some of these debates get a lot of talk online but are not real issues in the courtroom. The prosecution did not disagree that Guede could have climbed in that window.

Even if we prove that the rock could be thrown from outside, the instant response will be that Amanda or Raffaele went outside and threw the rock to stage the break in.

There are some questions that will never be answered.

I do not believe that either Amanda or Raffaele would have thought out the details of the large rock coming through the window. They would not have knocked over the purse, laid the bag on the floor and placed the rock on the edge of the bag. They also would not have thought to throw the rock down on the floor to produce the dust that was present.

I believe the rock was thrown from outside and landed where we see it in the photos. No one can prove who actually threw the rock.

There is no evidence whatsoever showing that Amanda or Raffaele staged a break in.

 

[Supernaut]

"And I don't find it reasonable that a woman who has just learned that someone was murdered in their home would go shopping for sexy underwear with her boyfriend.":
You know that the cottage was quarantined, right? And that Amanda couldn't access any of her belongings, meaning she would be wearing the same underwear for the next two years unless she bought a pair. Whether it was "sexy" is completely subjective and irrelevant

Get's tiresome, doesn't it? To some people ALL women's'underwear is "sexy" (a gag in "Bridget Jones's Diary" is that her boss finds her "big pants" a turn-on).

The problem with the "lingerie" story (and much else "leaked" by the Italian prosecution) is that people are finding archived web-pages from various "news outlets" and faliing to note the dates on them (in particular, I suspect, from Murdoch-owned organs such as The (London) Times and Sky News, as these often appear in the first page of google results).

The "lingerie shopping" meme originated after the owner of the store store obligingly forwarded the CCTV footage of AK and RS to the prosecution, and (surprise, surprise) it was almost immediately distributed to the media (literally, within days), accompanied by with the desired narrative

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

Move the goalposts much? I thought we were talking about whether Amanda could have known how Meredith died. Instead, you decide to misrepresent my position on the subject and somehow generalize it as if I'm continuously hand-waving the evidence against Amanda. Why don't you give me a list of all the things I've "reconciled". So far from you I've only seen tired talking points that are easily refuted, yet you keep listing them. There's very good reasons for Amanda to have known how her roommate died, and my mention of the "corpse in the closet" and "strangulation" were simply peripheral to the point. The problem with your assertion that she couldn't have known how her roommate died unless she was involved in the murder is that you took it as fact. It doesn't have to be proven whether she indeed believed the body was in the closet because it doesn't change the overall point, that she knew how Meredith died from word-of-mouth.

I actually was just making the point that it appears that it is valid for those arguing on Amanda's side to make claims based on what seems "likely" or "reasonable" but not for those on the other side.