Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[quadraginta]

'Cos he broke in through the window.

So it's a one-way window?

That doesn't show up in the photos. How do you tell?

 

[katy_did]

So it's a one-way window?

That doesn't show up in the photos. How do you tell?

I imagine it would be easier for him to take the keys and unlock the door rather than attempt to climb back out through the window. It would also be a lot easier to climb up than it would be to climb back down again.

What photos are you talking about?

 

[LondonJohn]

'Cos he broke in through the window.

Or he got let into the house by Amanda Knox, who re-locked the door behind them using her own keys, after the two of them had entered.

Or.......he got let into the house by Meredith Kercher, who re-locked the door behind him using her own keys, after he had entered......

 

[Amazer]

I imagine it would be easier for him to take the keys and unlock the door rather than attempt to climb back out through the window. It would also be a lot easier to climb up than it would be to climb back down again.

Why would it be easier?

 

[LondonJohn]

Coincidentally I just translated that bit. I get the impression that this section is maybe just a summary of a report from Tagliabracci which is attached to the appeal? Either that or they go into it a bit later on (I'm only up to page 9/281 so far...):


Hopefully that's accurate - it gets tricky when I don't even understand what it means in English...!

Nice translation. I believe it says that the LCN analysis used to identify Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp was not conducted in accordance with internationally-agreed protocols - both in terms of the amplification methods and the interpretation of results.

This is, of course, purely the defence's appeal position right now, so it remains to be seen whether this position will be accepted by the appeal judges.

 

[LondonJohn]

Why would it be easier?

I understand that most mountaineers believe the descent to be trickier than the ascent.......

 

[katy_did]

Why would it be easier?

You think it would've been easier for him to climb out the oh-so-forbidding window than it would be to open the front door using Meredith's keys? Self-evidently, the easy option was to use the keys. AK had her own keys, of course, so needed neither to climb out a window nor to take Meredith's.

The taking of the keys for sure points to a non-resident, someone without keys to the house.

 

[LondonJohn]

You think it would've been easier for him to climb out the oh-so-forbidding window than it would be to open the front door using Meredith's keys? Self-evidently, the easy option was to use the keys. AK had her own keys, of course, so needed neither to climb out a window nor to take Meredith's.

The taking of the keys for sure points to a non-resident, someone without keys to the house.

Well, not necessarily, since Meredith's keys were also used to lock her own bedroom door. Otherwise, I agree with the door vs window part.

 

[katy_did]

Well, not necessarily, since Meredith's keys were also used to lock her own bedroom door. Otherwise, I agree with the door vs window part.

Yes, true of course. My main point is that if the purpose of taking the keys was to lock Meredith's door, that motive points to no one in particular, i.e. anyone could've done it to delay the body being found. But if the person who took the keys also needed them to get out of the house, that makes Guede's motive very much stronger than that of the other two. Particularly since the locking of the door is a slightly odd action anyway - it makes more sense as something done spontaneously simply because the person had the keys, than that he/they would go to the trouble of finding the keys just for that purpose.

 

[quadraginta]

I imagine it would be easier for him to take the keys and unlock the door rather than attempt to climb back out through the window. It would also be a lot easier to climb up than it would be to climb back down again.

Why would it be quicker? He presumably already knows where the window is, since he broke in through it. So he ought to be able to find it quicker than a set of keys that he has no reason to know where to find.

Why would it be easier to climb up? He has to do a full body lift from hands overhead straight up to his waist while using only his fingertips on a four inch ledge (and not touching the wall with his feet) to get in. All he has to do to get out is hang from his hands and drop.

What photos are you talking about?

The photos of the window that have been shared on these threads. I saw nothing which would suggest that the window is one-way.

 

[RoseMontague]

Coincidentally I just translated that bit. I get the impression that this section is maybe just a summary of a report from Tagliabracci which is attached to the appeal? Either that or they go into it a bit later on (I'm only up to page 9/281 so far...):


Hopefully that's accurate - it gets tricky when I don't even understand what it means in English...!

Thanks. I think you made the correct decision starting with Raffaele's appeal. It seems better organized and more comprehensive. If you get finished and want the translated report posted in full I would be happy to place in on my docstoc page.

 

[quadraginta]

I understand that most mountaineers believe the descent to be trickier than the ascent.......

He wouldn't be descending a traverse, he be dropping down from a window opening. By the time he's hanging his body length it's only a few more feet to the ground.

Nothing tricky about that.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Originally Posted by katy_did View Post
I imagine it would be easier for him to take the keys and unlock the door rather than attempt to climb back out through the window. It would also be a lot easier to climb up than it would be to climb back down again.
_________________________________________________________

Why would it be easier?

Climbing up is generally easier than climbing down. If you climb a ladder up to a roof, the step onto the roof is much easier than the step back onto the ladder going down.

This would also apply for most people climbing out of a window.

 

[katy_did]

Nice translation. I believe it says that the LCN analysis used to identify Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp was not conducted in accordance with internationally-agreed protocols - both in terms of the amplification methods and the interpretation of results.

This is, of course, purely the defence's appeal position right now, so it remains to be seen whether this position will be accepted by the appeal judges.

Ah, thank you for the summary - as I said, it's tricky when it sounds a bit like gibberish in English, too! This part of the appeal does sound like a reiteration of what was said during the initial trial, so it would need the appeal court to accept that the first court had made a mistake; at the same time, the arguments do sound quite valid.

One interesting thing earlier in the same section is that the defence point to the very convenient discovery of RS's DNA on the bra clasp just as other evidence against him had 'crumbled', perhaps implying they're prepared to argue the evidence might have been planted...

 

[quadraginta]

You think it would've been easier for him to climb out the oh-so-forbidding window than it would be to open the front door using Meredith's keys? Self-evidently, the easy option was to use the keys. AK had her own keys, of course, so needed neither to climb out a window nor to take Meredith's.

The taking of the keys for sure points to a non-resident, someone without keys to the house.

Nobody said that the window was forbidding, they said that climbing up to and through it without leaving any traces would be nearly impossible.

If he could do that as easily as some have suggested then getting back down again would be child's play.

The taking of the keys only only points to the keys being taken. It says nothing about why or by whom.

 

[LondonJohn]

Why would it be quicker? He presumably already knows where the window is, since he broke in through it. So he ought to be able to find it quicker than a set of keys that he has no reason to know where to find.

Why would it be easier to climb up? He has to do a full body lift from hands overhead straight up to his waist while using only his fingertips on a four inch ledge (and not touching the wall with his feet) to get in. All he has to do to get out is hang from his hands and drop.



The photos of the window that have been shared on these threads. I saw nothing which would suggest that the window is one-way.

You might have overlooked the small point that a man climbing out of a broken window, suspending himself by his fingertips from the ledge, and dropping to the floor, would appear somewhat more suspicious to any passing vehicles or pedestrians than a man exiting from the front door.

And yes, I do realise that he may have done the suspicious-looking reverse manoeuvre to get into the house through the window. But that doesn't negate my argument: if he did enter through the window, it would have been be because he had no choice but to do so - i.e. no option to use keys to open the front door and enter the house.

And I'm totally not getting these "one-way window" references. I'm supposing that they're meant to be sarcastic, but even then I can't be sure what they imply.

 

[Amazer]

You think it would've been easier for him to climb out the oh-so-forbidding window than it would be to open the front door using Meredith's keys? Self-evidently, the easy option was to use the keys. AK had her own keys, of course, so needed neither to climb out a window nor to take Meredith's..

The claim so far was that the window was easy enough to climb through (by your side). And now you suddenly have a change of heart, and the window entry/exit is difficult?

The taking of the keys for sure points to a non-resident, someone without keys to the house

Why? A resident would also have to take Meredith's keys in order to close her door. Or do all the residents have keys of the other rooms?

I understand that most mountaineers believe the descent to be trickier than the ascent.......

Something to do with the fact that it's more difficult to see where you can place your feet. I hardly think that should be a factor here.

Well, not necessarily, since Meredith's keys were also used to lock her own bedroom door. Otherwise, I agree with the door vs window part.

See above

Yes, true of course. My main point is that if the purpose of taking the keys was to lock Meredith's door, that motive points to no one in particular, i.e. anyone could've done it to delay the body being found. But if the person who took the keys also needed them to get out of the house, that makes Guede's motive very much stronger than that of the other two. Particularly since the locking of the door is a slightly odd action anyway - it makes more sense as something done spontaneously simply because the person had the keys, than that he/they would go to the trouble of finding the keys just for that purpose.

Perhaps you can explain this a little further? As it is it's not making a whole lot of sense to me.

 

[katy_did]

Climbing up is generally easier than climbing down. If you climb a ladder up to a roof, the step onto the roof is much easier than the step back onto the ladder going down.

This would also apply for most people climbing out of a window.

Yes, I thought this was common knowledge, really. I suppose it's also just easier to find footholds on your way up because you can see what you're doing, whereas when you climb down you're going feet first. Seems obvious. AK and RS certainly wouldn't have needed to take the keys, anyway, AK having her own. As far as motives go, RG's reason to take them was a lot stronger.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

If Rudy needed the keys to exit, locking the bedroom door could have been a last second decision. The keys would have given him the idea to lock the door. The purse was in open view. He would not have needed to search. He could have also retrieved the keys as he was taking the credit cards and cell phones. This would have been a lucky break for him when he arrived at the front door.

So, Rudy goes through the purse, takes the cell phones, credit cards and the keys. The keys give him the idea to lock the bedroom door. A spur of the moment decision that did not require a lot of thought. He gets to the front door and realizes that he needs the keys. It just so happens that he has them.

This is a very reasonable scenario. We will never know for sure exactly what happened.
All of the credible evidence points at Rudy. There is a reasonable scenario that fits Rudy's actions.

There is no reasonable scenario that would put Amanda and/or Raffaele at the scene to lock the door.

 

[katy_did]

Thanks. I think you made the correct decision starting with Raffaele's appeal. It seems better organized and more comprehensive. If you get finished and want the translated report posted in full I would be happy to place in on my docstoc page.

No worries, Rose. Yeah, I started with Raffaele's appeal mostly because you'd said it was better! Will let you know if I get it finished - might be a little while, though.