Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[LondonJohn]

Here's an interesting thing:

It seems very likely that bleach was not used in any kind of "clean-up" effort at the girls' house. There was no evidence of bleach usage (smell, residues etc), and no luminol reaction to bleach (notwithstanding the time delay before testing).

The Machine goes so far as to state on PMF: "Amanda Knox didn't use bleach to remove incriminating traces of herself and Sollecito at the cottage".

So...... where does this place the veracity of the testimony of Quintavalle, who testified with confidence that he had seen Knox buy bleach at his shop at around 8am on the morning following the murder, and that after she had left his shop she headed off directly towards the girls' cottage?

If Knox had indeed been buying bleach in his shop at that time, before heading off to the murder house, what's the rationale behind the purchase of bleach - if no bleach was used at the murder house? Did Knox buy the bleach, then get to the crime scene and decide that, on reflection, she wouldn't use it for the "clean up" operation after all?

Or.....is it just possible that Knox didn't in fact purchase bleach from Quintavalle's shop that morning, and that this would help to explain why no bleach usage was discovered in the girls' house?

 

[Dan O.]

I also have a suspicion that Battistelli and his colleage had taken an ad hoc break (IOW "skived off" for half an hour for an espresso and a smoke, perhaps something they were accustomed to doing) on the way to the cottage, time they never expected they would have to account for.

So instead of coming clean, Battistelli casually lied about the time they arrived without thinking twice, and was then trapped in a lie which led to so much "controversy" about RS's call to the police.

Thanks, officer.

That is an extremely copious dose of personal supposition intended to prop up an opinion at the expense of any sort of reality or reasonable truth. It has its only basis in the belief in a conspiracy where seasoned officers are so afraid to say they went for a coffee that they let a lie proceed that results in two innocent people going to prison for a horrific murder. Come on.

I suppose what the evidence really shows is that they arrived at 12:38 where they looked at their watch and remembered the time a year and a half later without bothering to write it down in their report, got the quick tour of the scene by Amanda then popped out for a 30 minute break while Raffaele called 112 and the car park video captured their later return.

Except that I don't recall seeing any mention of the postal police leaving and returning in any official reports or statements.

 

[LondonJohn]

Time of death:

If the autopsy found recognisable pieces of cheese product and vegetable matter in Meredith's stomach, coupled with a lack of chyme matter in the duodenum, then this seems like very compelling evidence placing the time of death before 21.30.

Meredith's friends seem certain that the pizza which they prepared was eaten by Meredith at around 18.00. The physiology of the gastro-intestinal system is extremely well-studied, and it's conclusively known that acid and enzymes break down all solid food matter within the stomach into uniform, semi-liquid chyme within 90 minutes and 3 hours of ingestion - given an average-sized meal and a healthy adult. The chyme then passes out of the stomach, through the duodenum, and into the small intestine.

So, if one generously assumes that Meredith ate her last mouthful of pizza at 18.30, and that she was relatively sedentary in the period following her meal (they were watching a movie) - which aids the digestive process - then one can assume that the last remaining food pieces would have been converted to chyme by 21.30 at the latest. This chyme would have passed into the duodenum, and then into the small intestine.

I would find it astonishing if the defence couldn't find a well-renowned gastro-intestinal specialist to discuss the implications of the autopsy findings. My knowledge of the subject (which is more than that of many lay people, but of course far short of expert) would lead me to believe that the state of the stomach contents (and absence of duodenal contents) are only compatible with a time of death of 21.00-21.30. Furthermore, they are (in my unqualified opinion) completely incompatible with a time of death of even 22.30 - let alone 23.00 or 23.20.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

There have been numerous reports that bleach receipts were found at Raffaele's apartment. These receipts simply do not exist. The accusation that Amanda or Raffaele bought bleach on the morning after the murder or at any point after that is simply not true.

The police searched Raffaele's apartment on November 16, 2007. They went through plastic shopping bags to examine receipts. The police took video of the receipts that were found. They held them in front of the camera so it is possible to see the dates on each one.

There were five receipts found. All of the receipts are from 2007. They are dated February 11, March 17, March 21, May, and November 4. None of the receipts show that bleach was purchased. The November 4, 2007 receipt was for pizza.

You can view the receipts here: http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/receipts.html

 

[Malkmus]

There have been numerous reports that bleach receipts were found at Raffaele's apartment. These receipts simply do not exist. The accusation that Amanda or Raffaele bought bleach on the morning after the murder or at any point after that is simply not true.

The police searched Raffaele's apartment on November 16, 2007. They went through plastic shopping bags to examine receipts. The police took video of the receipts that were found. They held them in front of the camera so it is possible to see the dates on each one.

There were five receipts found. All of the receipts are from 2007. They are dated February 11, March 17, March 21, May, and November 4. None of the receipts show that bleach was purchased. The November 4, 2007 receipt was for pizza.

You can view the receipts here: http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/receipts.html

Nice work, Bruce. I see that over at PMF they are convinced the receipt found from the 4th was for bleach. I'm sure even presented with your proof they will find some reason to ignore that it simply doesn't, nor did it ever, exist.

 

[Chris C]

Time of death:

If the autopsy found recognisable pieces of cheese product and vegetable matter in Meredith's stomach, coupled with a lack of chyme matter in the duodenum, then this seems like very compelling evidence placing the time of death before 21.30.

Meredith's friends seem certain that the pizza which they prepared was eaten by Meredith at around 18.00. The physiology of the gastro-intestinal system is extremely well-studied, and it's conclusively known that acid and enzymes break down all solid food matter within the stomach into uniform, semi-liquid chyme within 90 minutes and 3 hours of ingestion - given an average-sized meal and a healthy adult. The chyme then passes out of the stomach, through the duodenum, and into the small intestine.

So, if one generously assumes that Meredith ate her last mouthful of pizza at 18.30, and that she was relatively sedentary in the period following her meal (they were watching a movie) - which aids the digestive process - then one can assume that the last remaining food pieces would have been converted to chyme by 21.30 at the latest. This chyme would have passed into the duodenum, and then into the small intestine.

I would find it astonishing if the defence couldn't find a well-renowned gastro-intestinal specialist to discuss the implications of the autopsy findings. My knowledge of the subject (which is more than that of many lay people, but of course far short of expert) would lead me to believe that the state of the stomach contents (and absence of duodenal contents) are only compatible with a time of death of 21.00-21.30. Furthermore, they are (in my unqualified opinion) completely incompatible with a time of death of even 22.30 - let alone 23.00 or 23.20.

I read that the coronor actually placed the time of death between 2 to 3 hours from eating her last meal. He was referring to the pizza not the object that resembled a mushroom but wasn't actually identified. Also there was a request to perform a 2nd autopsy to determine a more accurate time of death but this motion was denied. We also know that her phone was dumped in the garden by 10:13 pm. Which common sense puts her ToD before 10:13.

 

[RoseMontague]

Time of death:

If the autopsy found recognisable pieces of cheese product and vegetable matter in Meredith's stomach, coupled with a lack of chyme matter in the duodenum, then this seems like very compelling evidence placing the time of death before 21.30.

Meredith's friends seem certain that the pizza which they prepared was eaten by Meredith at around 18.00. The physiology of the gastro-intestinal system is extremely well-studied, and it's conclusively known that acid and enzymes break down all solid food matter within the stomach into uniform, semi-liquid chyme within 90 minutes and 3 hours of ingestion - given an average-sized meal and a healthy adult. The chyme then passes out of the stomach, through the duodenum, and into the small intestine.

So, if one generously assumes that Meredith ate her last mouthful of pizza at 18.30, and that she was relatively sedentary in the period following her meal (they were watching a movie) - which aids the digestive process - then one can assume that the last remaining food pieces would have been converted to chyme by 21.30 at the latest. This chyme would have passed into the duodenum, and then into the small intestine.

I would find it astonishing if the defence couldn't find a well-renowned gastro-intestinal specialist to discuss the implications of the autopsy findings. My knowledge of the subject (which is more than that of many lay people, but of course far short of expert) would lead me to believe that the state of the stomach contents (and absence of duodenal contents) are only compatible with a time of death of 21.00-21.30. Furthermore, they are (in my unqualified opinion) completely incompatible with a time of death of even 22.30 - let alone 23.00 or 23.20.

Just wanted to point out in the testimony given in the Micheli report (no, not the Massei report) it shows the time of dinner at 6pm or even earlier:

On 17 November, P. rendeva una nuova deposizione al magistrato procedente, confermando le prime dichiarazioni senza tuttavia poter precisare meglio l'orario in cui le quattro amiche avevano cominciato a mangiare nella casa di A. made a new statement to the magistrate proceeding, without confirming the first statements to clarify the time at which the four friends began to eat in the house of A. e R. and R. (probabilmente le 18:00, o forse prima): correggeva invece l'ora in cui era rientrata in Via del Lupo, ricordando che erano ancora le 20:55. Sull'abbigliamento di M., sosteneva che l'amica indossava dei jeans un po' strappati, un giaccone celeste e una felpa azzurra, entrambe “Adidas”. (Perhaps 18:00, or even earlier)

http://translate.google.com/transla...750&ei=WQ4eS_DSOYO4NZjA9asK&sa=X&oi=translate

 

[Danceme]

There have been numerous reports that bleach receipts were found at Raffaele's apartment. These receipts simply do not exist. The accusation that Amanda or Raffaele bought bleach on the morning after the murder or at any point after that is simply not true.

The police searched Raffaele's apartment on November 16, 2007. They went through plastic shopping bags to examine receipts. The police took video of the receipts that were found. They held them in front of the camera so it is possible to see the dates on each one.

There were five receipts found. All of the receipts are from 2007. They are dated February 11, March 17, March 21, May, and November 4. None of the receipts show that bleach was purchased. The November 4, 2007 receipt was for pizza.

You can view the receipts here: http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/receipts.html

Bruce, you do realize none of the receipts from the small stores show the actual item purchased? The one from Quintavalle's on March 21 is for "various" and the one from another small store dated May 19 just reads "department 2". The pizza shop receipt says pizza, and the one for 162.64 Euro must have been from a larger general or department store because it's itemized. You can see on the last line he bought a bathmat

 

[lane99]

...Could you point out the areas of discussion in this thread where the idea that "no one could climb in through that window" was proposed as a serious argument? ]...

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5847410&postcount=7606

Apart from countless times elsewhere, not necessarily in this thread, but elsewhere. Places such as Amanda Knox's trial, for example.

...there was no evidence outside the confines of the house. This isn't something which "happens everyday"...

Yes, it is something which happens everyday.

 

[Mary_H]

Just want to point out that London John's post #4017 and halides1's post #4019 appear to be quoting me, but they are actually quoting Danceme, who quoted me in post #4011.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Just wanted to point out in the testimony given in the Micheli report (no, not the Massei report) it shows the time of dinner at 6pm or even earlier:



http://translate.google.com/transla...750&ei=WQ4eS_DSOYO4NZjA9asK&sa=X&oi=translate

One could speculate that she might have had a snack when she got home. The coroner could not accurately determine the time of death because the investigation was bungled at the start. The normal procedure is to insert a thermometer into the victim's liver and chart the temperature at regular intervals, so they can plot the curve backward to the time of death. In this case, they didn't do that, and they didn't let the coroner into the room until 12 hours after the body was discovered.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Bruce, you do realize none of the receipts from the small stores show the actual item purchased? The one from Quintavalle's on March 21 is for "various" and the one from another small store dated May 19 just reads "department 2". The pizza shop receipt says pizza, and the one for 162.64 Euro must have been from a larger general or department store because it's itemized. You can see on the last line he bought a bathmat

No doubt he bought lots of things during the time that he lived in that apartment, but the only receipt dated after the murder was for pizza, so what is your point?

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Bruce, you do realize none of the receipts from the small stores show the actual item purchased? The one from Quintavalle's on March 21 is for "various" and the one from another small store dated May 19 just reads "department 2". The pizza shop receipt says pizza, and the one for 162.64 Euro must have been from a larger general or department store because it's itemized.

That still doesn't make it honest to claim that "receipts for bleach" were found, if none of the receipts represent any evidence any bleach was purchased. Especially if there is no other evidence that bleach was used for anything relevant. Your point does not appear to me to excuse the Perugia police for starting this lie or excuse anyone else for repeating it.

You can see on the last line he bought a bathmat

Aha! Of course! It all falls into place! It wasn't an unpremeditated murder at all, because Raffaele obviously knew in advance that Rudy Guede would leave a bloody footprint on Amanda's bathmat, and it was all part of his plan to have Rudy do that and then switch bathmats, but then he didn't switch bathmats, and so his terrible guilt was revealed by the receipt!

Hang on, that makes no sense. What did you[i/] think the bathmat meant?

 

[Fine]

Here's an interesting thing:

It seems very likely that bleach was not used in any kind of "clean-up" effort at the girls' house. There was no evidence of bleach usage (smell, residues etc), and no luminol reaction to bleach (notwithstanding the time delay before testing).

The Machine goes so far as to state on PMF: "Amanda Knox didn't use bleach to remove incriminating traces of herself and Sollecito at the cottage".

So...... where does this place the veracity of the testimony of Quintavalle, who testified with confidence that he had seen Knox buy bleach at his shop at around 8am on the morning following the murder, and that after she had left his shop she headed off directly towards the girls' cottage?

If Knox had indeed been buying bleach in his shop at that time, before heading off to the murder house, what's the rationale behind the purchase of bleach - if no bleach was used at the murder house? Did Knox buy the bleach, then get to the crime scene and decide that, on reflection, she wouldn't use it for the "clean up" operation after all?

Or.....is it just possible that Knox didn't in fact purchase bleach from Quintavalle's shop that morning, and that this would help to explain why no bleach usage was discovered in the girls' house?

_______________________

LondonJohn,

Marco Quintavalle did not testify ---"with confidence" or otherwise--- that Amanda had purchased bleach from his shop the morning of November 2, 2007. Here is what he said in his trial testimony, translated by Nick Pisa:

"I can't remember if she bought anything. A few hours later I heard about the murder and then a few days later I saw Amanda's picture in the newspaper and I recognised her as the same girl."

See: Telegraph

///

 

[quadraginta]

...Could you point out the areas of discussion in this thread where the idea that "no one could climb in through that window" was proposed as a serious argument? ]...

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5847410&postcount=7606

That post doesn't seem to say what you apparently think it does. The subject of climbing through Filomena's window is conspicuously absent.

Apart from countless times elsewhere, not necessarily in this thread, but elsewhere. Places such as Amanda Knox's trial, for example.

<snip>

I'm not involved in discussions "elsewhere". If you are responding to them perhaps those responses don't belong here.

I must admit to some curiosity about testimony in Knox's trial that it would be impossible for someone to climb through that window. Can you cite that testimony?

 

[Chris C]

Bruce, you do realize none of the receipts from the small stores show the actual item purchased? The one from Quintavalle's on March 21 is for "various" and the one from another small store dated May 19 just reads "department 2". The pizza shop receipt says pizza, and the one for 162.64 Euro must have been from a larger general or department store because it's itemized. You can see on the last line he bought a bathmat

Danceme, I think your missing the whole point. The prosecution was trying to prove that Sollecito/Knox bought bleach to cleanup Knox's apartment after the murder. They couldn't find a witness that saw them buy bleach, so they looked for receipts to try and prove they purchased bleach on the morning of Nov. 2. The best they could do was get a guy to change his story a year later and say he saw Knox and Sollecito in his store the morning after the murder but they didn't buy anything. Even though a few days after the murder he was showed their pictures and made it CLEAR that neither of them was in his store the morning after the murder. The prosecution also claimed to the media that Knox/Sollecito bought bleach on Nov. 4 but it turns out to be pizza. Of course it baffles me why it was so important about buying bleach on Nov 4, when you are trying to prove a clean up on Nov. 2. The reason they where looking for receipts for the purchase of bleach is because they needed empty bottles of bleach. The 2 bottles at Sollecito's place, (1 parcially used) had a witness to the level of bleach in the open bottle. Apparently they didn't find any empty bottles of bleach in the garbage cans or that would have been entered as evidence.

 

[Kestrel]

_______________________

LondonJohn,

Marco Quintavalle did not testify ---"with confidence" or otherwise--- that Amanda had purchased bleach from his shop the morning of November 2, 2007. Here is what he said in his trial testimony, translated by Nick Pisa:

"I can't remember if she bought anything. A few hours later I heard about the murder and then a few days later I saw Amanda's picture in the newspaper and I recognised her as the same girl."

See: Telegraph

///

On Nov. 19, 2007, Inspector Orestes Volturno questioned Marco Quintavalle and showed him photos of Amanda and Raffaele. Quintavalle said the couple had been to his store a couple of times, but neither one had been in his store on November 2.

About a year later, Quintavalle started telling a different story.

 

[Scorpion NITE]

Hello everyone!

Just a quick note to say Hi. I hope to make a small contribution every so often to the debate on here regarding this intriguing case. Have spent months reading the entire thread (and, sometimes, re-reading sections...lol) but haven't plucked up the courage to join JREF until this week!

I have also read copious amounts on PMF and Perugia Shock, but feel JREF is more suited to me, if I am to submit any comments, musings etc.

Not really sure where to start, so I will sit back awhile (again) and read through at leisure, until I can contribute to the actual discussion!

P.S. For the record, I am still 'sat on the fence' somewhat, though leaning towards LJ's assertion of an 'unsafe conviction' due to a number of reasons, many mentioned in this thread itself by a number of regular posters.

Thanks for indulging me.

Kind regards,
Scorpion NITE.

 

[RoseMontague]

That post doesn't seem to say what you apparently think it does. The subject of climbing through Filomena's window is conspicuously absent.




I'm not involved in discussions "elsewhere". If you are responding to them perhaps those responses don't belong here.

I must admit to some curiosity about testimony in Knox's trial that it would be impossible for someone to climb through that window. Can you cite that testimony?

I did not see anything in that post about climbing in the window either, perhaps linked to the wrong post. I did find this quote to be interesting:

– that a good 36 police officers signed Amanda Knox’s notification of arrest on the morning of 6 November;

Is this notification of arrest like a petition or something? How unusual is it that that many police officers would sign it?

 

[LondonJohn]

On Nov. 19, 2007, Inspector Orestes Volturno questioned Marco Quintavalle and showed him photos of Amanda and Raffaele. Quintavalle said the couple had been to his store a couple of times, but neither one had been in his store on November 2.

About a year later, Quintavalle started telling a different story.

SB on PMF has just made the extraordinary suggestion that perhaps Knox left the shop hurriedly without paying........because she thought she might have been recognised.

Now, let's think for one moment about this claim. At 8am on the 2nd of November, the crime had not yet even been discovered, much less had Knox been identified as a suspect. So how could Knox have any worries about being "identified"?

Of course, the other way to interpret this explanation is that Knox suddenly realised that her "distinctive" appearance would make it easy for any shop workers to remember her some time later - when the police were investigating the crime and asking questions. To this, I would say two things: firstly, it's ludicrous to suggest that Knox had a "stand-out" appearance in Perugia. She was a Caucasian young woman of middle-European descent. Is anyone REALLY suggesting that there are not hundreds of other women in Perugia who have similar facial features, or who highlight their hair, or who have blue eyes, or share any of Knox's other features? It's ludicrous. And secondly, why would Knox have suddenly got frightened by this while in the shop? She must, after all, have entered the shop knowing full well that human interaction would take place. It just doesn't stand up.

There are only four possibilities, so far as I can see:

1) Knox went in there on the morning in question and bought what she intended to buy (but where are Quintavalle's till records, and why is there no evidence of bleach or cleaning product usage at the murder house, which is where Quintavalle says he saw Knox heading towards?)

2) she shoplifted what she wanted (but this possibility has never been suggested by anyone in the small shop - and why is there no evidence of bleach or cleaning product usage at the murder house? And why would Knox risk being apprehended for shoplifting if she'd just committed a murder in the house where she lived?)

3) she couldn't find what she wanted (unlikely, since she knew what the store sold, and it had a wide range of cleaning fluids and bleaches - if that's what she was after)

4) she didn't actually visit the shop at 7.45-8.00am on the 2nd November (which dovetails with Quintavalle's statement to police on the 17th November, and his employee's position).

I wonder which one seems more likely?