Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Kevin_Lowe]

__________________________

I wish all these mysteries could be so easily resolved.

LondonJohn, Raffaele was not the legal owner of that knife. The knife was owned by Raffaele's landlord. So the options for the lovebirds were: properly clean the knife and return it to the drawer in the kitchen (where it belonged), or dispose of it and risk the landlord reporting the knife missing. The lovebirds thought that the first option was safest. Makes sense to me.

///

Having lived in a few different rental houses in my life, I have never yet encountered a landlord who regularly inventoried the contents of the cutlery drawer. Unless Italian culture is markedly different on this point I don't see how this is could present a very great threat of exposure, especially since one could just say that the knife broke and replace it.

 

[Fuji]

Meaningless in this case because the victim's home is also the suspect's home.

No, I'm pretty sure most investigators would find this significant, as the person with the greatest motive for locking the door is the suspect.

Firstly, it hasn't been established to general satisfaction that there is no credible sign of forced entry. Entering a second-story window after breaking it with a rock is consistent with Rudy Guede's (highly probable) criminal MO, and it's solely the prosecuting team's opinion that he couldn't have gotten in the broken window without leaving traces. Their opinions have been proven to be conveniently wrong before.

It hasn't been established to your satisfaction, but it has to the court's, and based on what I have seen, I am inclined to agree with their assessment. You write: "Their opinions have been proven to be conveniently wrong before." as justification for concluding they are wrong in this case. This is an example of a Hasty Generalization.

Secondly, it makes just as much sense for Guede to fake a break-in as AK and RS, if he talked his way in the front door using his acquaintance with the downstairs tenants.

No it doesn't, because the only witness to his entry in this case (Meredith) is dead! As such, in this case, Rudy actually has a disincentive to fake a break-in; by not staging a burglary, Rudy would naturally focus the attention of investigators even more on the only key-holder without a solid alibi: Amanda Knox.

It has not been established that AK or RS lied about anything, as opposed to misremembering.

To an external observer, lying and "misremembering" are equivalent. In both cases, the suspect provides verifiably false statements. Only the suspect herself knows her mental state and whether her false statements are intentional or accidental. It is left to the observer to judge the likelihood in any instance of deception or forgetfulness. There is no way of independently "establishing" which is true.

Having read many trial excerpts, I am inclined to believe that many of AK's false statements to investigators could be reasonably inferred as simple mistakes of memory. However, there are many, major statements about which I am led to the opposite conclusion of willful deception.

As has been patiently explained time and time again, the circumstances under which that statement was made, the content of the statement and its subsequent retraction are all more consistent with a false statement made under duress (a well-known and unsurprising result of the kind of treatment Amanda was subjected to) than with a true confession.

I do not think so. I have read some of the examples provided of false confessions, and I do not believe that the circumstances of AK's interrogation are analogous to those. Primarily, there are two problems for those supporting this argument: 1) AK is not of below-average IQ, nor possessed of any significant mental disabilities, and 2) the time-frame of her interrogation is far too short when compared to the cases I have seen presented as examples of false confessions.

I'm pretty sure this one is pure PMF spin - everything AK and RS get right is "evidence they have perfect recall when they want to!" and everything they get wrong is "evidence they are lying, because they have perfect recall when they want to!".

I do not think so. As I stated above, I think that some of AK's false statements can be reasonably interpreted as not being willful deceptions. However, we are not talking of minor details when it comes to AK's amnesia. Much of her difficulty in defense can be attributed to her inability to establish a solid alibi, which is largely a consequence of her persistent "forgetfulness" as to her actions and whereabouts on the night in question.

Apart from the fact that we know some of these claims were media beatups, so what? Is it really more incredible to you that a young woman would at abnormally after a housemate was killed, than that the prosecution fantasy story is true?

In violent crime, more often than not the perpetrator is known by the victim. As such, investigators are often attuned to the aspect and behavior of the victim's family, friends, co-workers, etc. when conducting their interivews. There is a range of normal human reactions and behavior which investigators have experienced over the years when interviewing a victim's associates, the overwhelming majority of which are, in any given case, completely innocent. When someone close to the victim behaves in a manner outside the bounds of what is normally to be expected, suspicion will naturally upon them from any competent investigator.

As for the "prosecution fantasy story", it is a reconstruction based on partial knowledge, and even they will tell you it is only their best appoximation and will make no claims as to its complete veracity. As such, it is probably not true. However, it does not follow from this that AK & RS are innocent. Morevoer, I fail to see the relationship between AK's pre-trial behavior and the prosecution's theory of the crime. As such, I see no way of effecting a meaningful comparison of the two elements.

 

[Fuji]

Please stop going on about this.

No.

However............. for clarification, viz. the highlighted section:

I used the formations "very, very few nonchalant burglars", "most of them", and "between very nervous and terrified" to imply that most burglars are between nervous and terrified as they break into a property. Nothing more than that. Where did that lead to the "implication" that it is quite common for burglars to experience severe gastric distress during break-ins? In fact, I stated - elsewhere - that it's not unknown for burglars to defecate in properties they are burgling, and posited that criminal psychologists may seek to explain this as a complex behaviour based on territory marking and fear.

OK - so now you concede that it is not common for burglars to defecate at the scene, merely that it's "not unknown". Thus, even though you hold that it's unlikely for any given burglar to do so, you think that in this case, Rudy did. Why?

And, once again for clarification, it's clear from context that my lion/antelope analogy was about how fear may (or may not) diminish owing to increased number of experiences. It was in direct response to your use of the construct "experienced burglar" in regard to Guede. It in no way compared the absolute level of fear in the lion/antelope situation to that of a burglar entering a property.

If that is so, then I am at a loss as to why you juxtaposed the two situations in the first place.

 

[RoseMontague]

Hi RoseMontague,
This morning I finally read what "Thoughtful" has posted on PMF.
I felt that this was an interesting point to ponder as far as the murder timeline goes:

"33) Meredith's cell phone habits: a rather interesting remark, namely that on holidays and in the evenings/nights, Meredith's English phone (called the “black box” of the investigation as, like an airplane's black box, it contains information about her last moments) provides evidence that she tended to send quite a large number of text messages. On the evening of Nov. 1 very little happened on her phone, which they say is “drastically different” from her usual habits, and they attribute it to the murder happening earlier in the evening.

1. At 20:56 she attempted to call home. The attempt failed because either no one answered, or she wasn't in a good zone, or the network was congested. What is surprising is that she didn't try to call home again, although she usually spoke to her family before going to bed, and even several times a day. This fact together with the absence of her usual text messages seem to indicate that the events leading to the murder started around this time..

Interesting...
RWVBWL

PS-I wonder if you Rose, or anyone else knows "Thoughtful" and could see if both parts of the Summary of the Main Points of the Sollecito appeal could be posted here too on JREF. That would be nice...

It appears that thoughtful has already take quite a bit of heat on this by posting this summary so I will not be reproducing it here. It seems there is a concern that the speculation on the cell phone's location could undermine the prosecution case. My research into this seems to indicate that the ping they are saying proves the phones were in the area of the garden where they were found only at a time that was after midnight was not a ping at all but an incoming transmission that caused the phone company to register what area the phone was in. In fact, reading both the Massei report and the Appeals, I see no record of a single ping being discussed anywhere, just locations at a time a call was made or received.

My conclusion is that no "ping record" is kept on these phones, most likely the data is overwritten each time the phone pings a new location as discussed in my previous research into this, thus rendering the question of where the phones were and when still open, according to me. The plain and simple fact is that there is a strong indication the phone was already gone from Meredith's cottage around 8:30pm.

Thoughtful's summary does not go into much detail on the appeal regarding the time of death, I was hoping for more of a translation regarding that discussion in the appeal. It appears that the defense has outlined some pretty reasonable reasons that the TOD should have been significantly earlier than that stated in the Massei report.

 

[RoseMontague]

Thanks for that, Rose - so when Quintavalle said the TV stations 'tricked' him into doing the interview, what he really meant was that he was supposed to do it without anyone knowing about it!

Yes, my reading of it was he was supposed to be in disguise but everybody could tell who he was and he was pretty upset about it. I would love to see this interview, if anyone can track it down. I did some hunting for it but so far have not been able to find it on the web. (yet)

 

[quadraginta]

Except that the lock you've shown is a specialised commercial storeroom lock, which looks nothing like the domestic lockset from the cottage. Find me a lockset for a domestic front door which looks like the one at the cottage, and I'll start to change my mind. Furthermore, find me a Corbin model domestic lockset in which the key mechanism can operate both the deadbolt and the latch, and I'll fully change my mind.

But I'm guessing that you won't be able to.

Edited by Tricky: 

Edited for moderated thread.

First you say that you don't believe such a lock function exists, and offer as "evidence"(?) the on-line inventory of a big box consumer store. Now that it has been shown that it does you want to get more specific. It has been said by both me and Dan_O (not exactly normal allies in these threads) that without detailed specifications of the particular lock in that door we have nothing to go on but conjecture. Your assertion has been that such a lock didn't exist, or at best was highly unlikely. Both of us have demonstrated that to be untrue. The ball is in your court now.

The term "storeroom" is common vernacular (at least in the U.S.) for a lockset with a 'normally disabled' exterior handle. This is why I used it in a Google search term, simply to save time. It is not "specialized". The term just developed over time (as many do), and gradually became generic.

The function of having a 'normally disabled' exterior handle is seen in many applications. There is nothing "specialized" about that, either. Sometimes the function is even user selectable, usually by means of a 'stop' button or lever mounted in the edge of the lock assembly. (This is often seen in classroom and office doors, and is by no means unknown in residential entry doors.) The lock bodies in question are not different, and quite often even the operational mechanisms within them are the same. It is not unusual to disassemble one and find that it only requires the removal or repositioning of a particular cam or detente to change the lock function from one to the other. It can be less expensive to manufacture all of the lock assemblies identically with many or all of the potential functions available, and simply factory (or third party) preset them for the desired functions than it is to go to the trouble of separate production runs.

There are many different ways to describe the application we are discussing. "Storeroom" is only one. Dan_O has offered still others, even including the appropriate ANSI specification. (Kudos to him. I've been working from memory, and was too lazy to dig that much.) The point is that it is not unusual, or even particularly uncommon. The application dictates the security precautions selected for any given lock choice. Most higher end lock designs permit of a great range of selections. Even some of the cheap ones do.

A 'normally disabled' exterior handle is one which lends itself to quite a few different situations. The entry door of a residential dwelling is certainly one of them. The trade-off is between security and convenience, as I mentioned before. Someone who lives in a rough neighborhood might be more inclined to tolerate the inconvenience of a door which mandates a key to re-open when it closes behind them than someone who lives in BeaverCleaverLand. The convenience of having a user determined choice from within the structure of employing either or both the latch and deadbolt while in residence need not be sacrificed. This is the intent of such an application, and is desirable under many uses. Not just storerooms.

Edited by Tricky: 

Edited for moderated thread.

It has been made abundantly clear that not only is an application which requires an occupant to be in residence to work as designed extremely unlikely, it is also completely unnecessary. Nor is it at all needful to hypothesize a mishandled choice of hardware, an incompetent installer, or even a "broken" lock.

It is also moot. My interest, from the onset, has been to note that the spring latch in question was intentionally disabled, not just "broken" as has been commonly asserted. This is because the behavior of the door hardware in question would most probably be quite different under the different circumstances, especially to anyone attempting to operate the spring latch handle from the interior. Efforts to further your personal knowledge of the intricacies of lockset design have been interesting (if remarkably difficult), but they are really quite irrelevant to the overall discussion.

 

[Fuji]

An alternative theory is that the police and prosecutors lied.

Actually, no. That's an additional theory, not an alternative one. There is no "alternative theory" to AK's false statements - they are demonstrably false statements. The best one can do is to charitably attribute all of the misstatements to "memory lapses" or "temporary amnesia" or "false memories".

 

[Kestrel]

__________________________

I wish all these mysteries could be so easily resolved.

LondonJohn, Raffaele was not the legal owner of that knife. The knife was owned by Raffaele's landlord. So the options for the lovebirds were: properly clean the knife and return it to the drawer in the kitchen (where it belonged), or dispose of it and risk the landlord reporting the knife missing. The lovebirds thought that the first option was safest. Makes sense to me.

///

Do you have any evidence to back up your claim that this knife was owned by Raffaele's landlord?

It's not like this knife was anything special. Just a common low end kitchen knife with a molded handle.

What do you believe happened to the other knife used in the murder?

 

[Mrs.Columbo]

Roaming

One word to this: "dropped to save money"
It is absolutely correct, because it was her 'english phone'.
When this is used outside UK, she has to pay roaming, even when she is the called-one.


The caller pays roaming , and the one with the phone which is outside UK (Meredith, in this case), has to pay also.


and the roaming-fees are quite expensive!

**
If you do not know exactly about 'roaming' - I will then try to give a detailled description.

I could find a better description as my bumpy one:

Roaming in Europe
Main article: Regulation on roaming charges within the European Union

In the European Union, the Regulation on roaming charges has been in force since June 30, 2007, forcing service providers to lower their roaming fees across the 27-member bloc. The regulation sets a price cap of €0.39 (€0.49 in 2007, €0.46 in 2008, €.043 in 2009) per minute for outgoing calls, and €0.15 (€0.24 in 2007, €0.22 in 2008, €0.19 in 2009) per minute for incoming calls - excluding tax.[2] If the Commission is satisfied that competition will continue to keep prices at this level, or lower, the regulation will expire in mid 2010 (in force since June 30, 2007 for three years).

 

[Chris_Halkides]

two cells

Regardless of the ratio of red blood cells to white, there were still, at most, 2 cells tested for blood. Unless you can show that luminol is able to detect a single blood cell, your argument is, entirely, invalid.

BobTheDonkey,

I think you mean TMB, not luminol. The problems with Fulcanelli’s argument lie in the steps that reach a figure of 2 red blood cells. Maybe you can explain better. Also, I have been looking for a post of your where you claim to refute some of my arguments about DNA. Could you point out this comment? I was unable to find it but would like to respond. Thanks.

 

[Dan O.]

May I add some words about that front door - which not kept closed unless it was locked with the key -

this has directly nothing to do with the mechanism of that lock-system (this was surely ok),
just indirectly - the *door* must be adjusted correctly.
I had this problem when I moved into my new flat. My frontdoor closed, but a little push from outside - and it was open. The door was just a tiny little too far away from the doorframe with the correspondent part of the lock-system.
A locksmith came and adjusted it.

Something like one does with the doors of kitchen-cupboards or wardrobs.

Mrs.Columbo, you are claiming a knowledge about the cottage door that goes beyond what we have already seen in high resolution photographs of the latches on the door. It is possible that you are right if for instance there are roller latches associated with the multi-point deadbolts that don't engage their strike plates because the door is misadjusted. But you have provided no evidence that this is the case and the excerpts from the Corbin lock catalog did not show that option.

 

[Fuji]

Here, on page 251, under the headings "Dispositional Vulnerabilities" and "The Phenomenology of Innocence" Kassin talks about the fact that young people are more likely to make false statements under pressure, possibly due to "immaturity of judgment" (a quality I think it's safe to say Amanda has displayed on some occasions), and that innocent people are vey much more likely to cooperate with police, waive their rights and so forth because they think that they are not at risk of prosecution.

Someone young, naive and factually innocent of the crime fits the profile of someone quite likely to cooperate with police and then make an internalised false statement, under sufficient pressure.

Thanks Kevin,

Quick response: Your cite isn't quite on point - in context "youth" is referring to juveniles and the specific case referred to involved a 16 or 17 year old.

Good catch, Mr.D. I'd also note that the paragraph before the discussion of youth as a factor goes into more detail regarding dispositional vulnerabilities:

Originally Posted by Saul M. Kassin

Some people are dispositionally more malleable than others - and at greater risk for false confessions. For example, individuals whose personalities make them prone to compliance in social situations are especially vulnerable because of their eagerness to please others and avoid confrontation. Individuals who are prone to suggestibility - whose memories can be altered by misleading questions and negative feedback - are also subject to influence. People who are highly anxious, fearful, depressed, delusional, or otherwise psychologically disordered, and people who are mentally retarded are particularly prone to confess under pressure (for a review, see Gudjonsson, 2003).

(italics in original)

I've seen no evidence that Amanda was especially eager to please others and avoid confrontation. I've also seen no evidence that she is mentally retarded or particularly suggestible. Finally, I've seen no evidence that she was highly anxious, fearful, depressed, delusional, or otherwise psychologically disordered. This citation does not appear to support the "coerced false confession" theory.

It should also be noted, yet again, that in Amanda's case it was NOT a false confession at any rate, but rather a false accusation. The given citation is completely silent with regard to false accusations. Or false statements. The title of the piece is "False Confessions: Causes, Consequences, and Implications for Reform", which I note that Kevin_Lowe neglected to mention in his post.

 

[Fuji]

Sollecito would know full well that he could claim that he'd accidentally thrown the knife out with food preparation waste (for example) a few weeks before the murder. And unless the police ever actually found the knife, they would be totally unable to refute this.

Wait - what? You think that RS could have plausibly explained the knife's absence by telling the cops that he'd "accidentally thrown the knife out with food preparation waste"? You mean the knife that's approximately a foot long? How does one not notice that when sweeping onion skins and potato peels into the garbage can?

 

[Supernaut]

Yes, no one doubts Rudy was at the cottage that night or on several occasions before. I wonder though how frequent it is for burglars to break into their friends houses?

He was "friends" with the downstairs flatmates? News to me - I got the impression he was in their flat a couple of times as a hanger-on, trying to ingratiate himself, possibly in his "alleged" capacity as a drug dealer.

I assume we're back to the "burglars union code of conduct" and (yet)more 'incredulity' when you ask, rhetorically, "how frequent it is for burglars to break into their friends houses?"

I'd be willing to bet that it isn't AT ALL uncommon.

Anyway - who do you think it was lurking outside the cottage? Not of interest? Nothing to do with the murder?

 

[Dan O.]

I pricked her (still referring Meredith) on the hand...........

The rest is clear - IMHO

If you want to argue this point, you are going to need to step back and understand the context in which that excerpt was written.

 

[Dan O.]

Taken at face value a plausible reason, albeit via a rather roundabout path. The problem is that it's still little but conjecture written from a biased point of view - take out the supposition and use more neutral language and this is what we get.

“…Within days ... [Knox] was informed that tests [were positive for] HIV/AIDS. She ... list[ed] all her lovers in writing, and detail[ed] in each instance what sort of contraception, if any, was used, and how many sexual encounters she’d had with [each]. ... that list was leaked to an Italian and a British newspaper …."

“….And as things turned out, it wasn’t true.

...

As for the list, my recollection is that it leaked to the media via Knox's prison diary, not a medical form. Unless I'm mistaken it makes for an even more circuitous method to try to link Knox and Guede. (IE, "Let's tell her she's positive, but we're going to run another test to be sure. Then hope she writes in her entirely voluntary diary salacious material and/or her list of lovers, which might include Guede, THEN tell her the negative results.)

So unless someone has that information, I suspect this direction is going to be less fruitful than I had hoped.

You seem to be missing the part where the Italian authorities raided Amanda's prison cell and confiscated everything with her writings just a day before the HIV story was published in the press. Of course, it is entirely possible that the two events are unrelated and the authorities were merely seeking samples to be analyzed by their forensic graphologist.

 

[katy_did]

OK - so now you concede that it is not common for burglars to defecate at the scene, merely that it's "not unknown". Thus, even though you hold that it's unlikely for any given burglar to do so, you think that in this case, Rudy did. Why?

Well, there's this (admittedly involving no. 1s not no. 2s). As well as using the bathroom, RG also said he took orange juice from the fridge in Via della Pergola. From pages 225/6 of RS's appeal:

The judgment, in fact, has failed to consider that, almost always, Rudy entered buildings by breaking a window reachable only after a climb, leaving behind him a general state of confusion (clothes scattered on the floor, use of the bathroom, consumption of beverages found inside the buildings) and with the availability of a knife. This last fact - which assumes a fundamental importance in relation to the murder in Via della Pergola - was inexplicably ignored by the motivations, which merely mentions it.

In reality, both in the case of the theft from the nursery in Milan, and in that perpetrated at the home of Christian Tramontano, Rudy was carrying a knife: a knife used to threaten, in the case of Tramontano, to make sure he was able to get away, and in the case of Milan, taken from the kitchen.

Also the consumption of beverages and the use of the bathroom represents a common element between these episodes. The witness Brocchi, heard at the hearing of 26 June 2009, stated: "I noticed that this person or persons who had broken into the office had also drunk some drinks that were present in a cabinet" (p. 16 transcript); and also the witness Palazzoli, at the same hearing, reported "Yes, I remember that there was a bottle of orange juice left, if I remember correctly, in the trainees' room (p. 37 transcript 26 June 2009). And also it is likely that the bathroom was used (Palazzoli: "the light had been left on in the office bathroom" p. 35 transcript of the hearing on 26 June 2009).

On her part the witness Tittoni Del Prato, manager and owner of the nursery school in Milan, reported that the bathroom was dirty with urine: "I remember finding pipi in the children's toilet" (p.22, transcript hearing 27 June 2009).

 

[Danceme]

Perhaps the moderators thought the previous image wasn't clear enough. Here is the link to the full image: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_BZD30a25F...o8/s400-h/Perugia+crime+scene+-+the+house.jpg

According to the authors notes, this image was taken within 2 weeks of the murder so the vegetation should be substantially the same as it was on the 1st. This image may have been taken from a location below the level of the road to get the artistic effect.

Thank you Dan O, very nice shot actually with the fruit and the fog, although it's rather difficult to figure out from where this picture is taken when trying to coordinate it with the Google street view which only shows the balcony when you are pretty far away and not at all as you get closer.

Wow, I tell you what, something that's very evident from Google streetview is how close the front door is to the road and how visible. It's in an alcove but a street lamp is directly opposite. Having seen that it now doesn't surprise me at all someone who didn't want to be seen would avoid lingering outside the front door.

Was it also as evident to you as it was to me how visible Filomena's window is from this same vantage point? Her window is just as visible as that doorway which is why I can't wrap my head around the theory that Rudy scaled that wall, not once but twice, first to open the shutters, then back down to throw the rock, then up once again to climb through in through the window.
The balcony is infinitely more plausible to me and less visible allowing a much quicker entry.

 

[quadraginta]

Having lived in a few different rental houses in my life, I have never yet encountered a landlord who regularly inventoried the contents of the cutlery drawer. Unless Italian culture is markedly different on this point I don't see how this is could present a very great threat of exposure, especially since one could just say that the knife broke and replace it.

I'm always amused by the "In my experience I never ..." sort of statements which pop up in Internet discussions because they are so often promptly contradicted by someone whose experience is entirely different.

I'll field this one. I've rented several furnished apartments (mostly in college towns) and any number of 'extended stay' units while working on out-of-town projects. All of the ones which provided kitchen cutlery as part of the "furnishings" quite pointedly noted that they had been inventoried, and made me sign a document acknowledging such before allowing possession of the unit.

There. My experiences meet your experiences. I guess that makes it a wash.

It could be equally likely that Knox and Sollecito felt that cleaning a knife in an effort to destroy evidence of its use would be a safer alternative than having the possibility that a knife would be found to be missing hanging over their heads. It could be that they thought nothing about it either way, and just assumed that cleaning was sufficient.

I'm not trying to argue either, or any possibility as being more likely.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

ordinary Marietti knife

Wait - what? You think that RS could have plausibly explained the knife's absence by telling the cops that he'd "accidentally thrown the knife out with food preparation waste"? You mean the knife that's approximately a foot long? How does one not notice that when sweeping onion skins and potato peels into the garbage can?

From Perugia-shock on 19 September 2009, "But the most emotional exhibit of the day was a knife, the most popular knife in Italy, the cheapest possible knife, the one that you find in all stands at the marketplace: a Marietti knife. Presumed murder weapon of the case." Why not dispose of one knife and just buy another identical one?