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

Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
anticipation

loverofzion,

Now that you are back, we look forward to your replies to all of the comments directed toward you.
 
Mary_H said:
Just a reminder -- this was a long holiday weekend in Perugia. Rudy was friends with the boys downstairs, so may very well have known they were all going out of town for the weekend. If he noticed the house was completely dark, he may have concluded the girls had done the same thing.

Someone posted recently -- I'm sorry, I can't remember where or who it was -- an excellent, if speculative, explanation of why Rudy was in a spot where he needed money fast, and that this might just have been an opportunity that presented itself. That is, if he did climb in the window, with the goal of burglarizing the house.
Click to expand...

Guede's “acquaintanceship” with the tenants of the ground floor flat shouldn't be under-emphasised, but generally it is. Guede was there for the evening on at least two occasions, so he had socialised with them elsewhere - he definitely had opportunities to learn about the habits of the women in the upstairs flat (they should have been questioned in detail about where and when they had seen and talked to him, and what they had told him)

It’s also likely that he knew all or most of the Italians in the cottage were going to leave for the All Saints holiday weekend – he’d lived in Italy since the age of five, he was quite familiar with their customs.

He'd made it known to the men that he found both Amanda and Meredith attractive, and had explicitly referred to Amanda as “beautiful". He had probably found out that she'd acquired a boyfriend, and that she had recently been staying at his flat overnight.

(The individual seen lurking outside after dark, twice? Guede has to be a likely candidate - casing the place, who had which room, and maybe a little extra-curricular stalking of Amanda and Meredith while he was at it ).

He may have hit on Meredith in the previous few days, and if she had told him that she was returning to England at the weekend to see her family, he might of taken it to mean the long weekend, along with the Italians. Or, she may have deliberately led him to believe that – I reckon she knew enough about Guede to surely NOT have wanted him knowing that she was likely to be by herself in the cottage for a couple of nights before she left.

Whatever - he probably chose the time he did to rob the cottage because he thought it was the mostly likely time for it to be deserted - early enough that Meredith and Amanda would both be out socialising, but after dark so he could tell for sure.
 
Last edited:
Trigood said:
The "actual scientific literature" reveals that scientists do not much trust stomach contents as an accurate TOD indicator. Viz.:




I'm not sure what you're referring to when you mention Dr. Ronchi. As it says in the Massei Report PMF Translation, p 178, Dr. Umani Ronchi contradicts your main thesis:




The report goes on to state two other issues, on this page and the next, that support the later TOD:

1) The duodenum appearing empty could have been an artefact of poor handling in autopsy. Material in duodenum could have slipped into the small intestine. Therefore, part of her meal may have been in duodenum (i.e., partially digested) at death.

2) Presence of vegetal fragment in her esophagus plus a low alcohol level in blood could indicate MK ate another small meal at home, including a mushroom (say) and beer or wine. Alcohol slows down digestion, as well as the other food she ate.

There is an "actual scientific" concept called the normal, or Gaussian, distribution. Most natural phenomena follow it. By this distribution, although most digestion times would mainly fall within the 2-sigma limit, there would be others that would fall under the long tail. This is one reason you cannot say that digestion time is absolute.

Another variable is that neither Sophie nor Robin can say at precisely what time MK ate. (See Massei PMF Translation, pp 35 and 37). They weren't taking notes, after all.

Another variable is how much MK ate. It's possible she ate heavily as she was hungry from staying up all night the night before. Again, her friends were probably not taking notes on this at the time, unaware that she would be murdered later that evening.
Click to expand...

"Absolute"? "Precisely"?

Not a bad strawman, better than most I've seen on this thread, anyway.

It's a question of ascertaining a 'window' for TOD. The autopsy clearly indicates one of 21.00 - 22.00.
 
If the Italian equivalent of America's FBI ever investigates this and similar cases, they could plausibly produce a case similar to that of: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joyce_Gilchrist

Is there a list of the prosecution outnesses in this case?

1) The police picked at random one shiny knife from a draw full of knives at the RS apartment. Why only one knife? The implication is that they "knew" they would find DNA on that knife (because they intended to put it there).

2) An unsubstantiated story of a "sex orgy" was proposed as an explanation to the involvement of AK and RS. Otherwise Guede was the sole murderer. Since MK can't be murdered twice, an explanation for the involvement of AK and RS had to be found. A story from another case was used because it seemed that it could be believed. This type of fantasy had caused other cases to be tossed by other Italian courts. Why was it allowed in this court?

3) An exact ToD was needed to circumvent the alibis of both AK and RS. An exact ToD was needed to Place Guede, AK, and RS together at the crime scene and thus, by innuendo, associate AK and RS with the murder. Isn't this very poor police work? It is a logical fallacy called circular reasoning to use the intended result to prove the evidence that proves the result.

All these things are red flags that the state has made egregious errors.

I have no doubts about the innocence of AK and RS. I had a few at the beginning, but none now. My only amazement is why the Italian FBI hasn’t investigated this case.
 
As I said to Danceme before you, and as I'm saying to you and to Fulcanelli, what the heck are you people reading that you think is so authoritative?

We know it's not the peer-reviewed scientific literature, the gold standard for factual accuracy amongst the reality-based community. We're the ones citing that, and you're the ones flailing around for some excuse to deny what it says.

We know it's not even the Massei report, because even Ronchi knows that unless you explain away the lack of matter in Meredith's duodenum the prosecution time of death is sunk.

So what the heck is it you people are reading, that you are convinced is more authoritative than the peer-reviewed scientific literature we have cited? So far it looks like it's a cherry-picked snippet from someone's lecture notes (which ignores that same source's clear statement that we should have reasonable medical certainty that Meredith died before 21:30, or maybe 22:30 at the very latest), one abstract from an article that you haven't read and whose body contains caveats specifically covering the use of stomach data that we are making, and absolutely nothing else.

Yet you are carrying on as if you have "sourced" something more authoritative... what is this source you have sourced, Sherlock?
Click to expand...

With all due respect, you are the one arguing against the findings of experts who testified in trial, unless I am misunderstanding. I find it hard to believe that the average person can trump the judgment of experts simply by finding literature online. I'm not saying you are wrong, but it seems kind of unrealistic to assume any of us (myself, Sherlock Homes, or you) can sit another world away, and determine the time of death of a body as opposed to an actual coroner or expert studying the body.

That is my main problem with all this info, I see you guys have done a lot of research on this, and appreciate you taking the time to point it out to me (as opposed to saying google it you noob, or go back and read since we already posted it), but in the end Im not an expert, and it's hard for me to determine if the literature is enough evidence to disprove the findings of actual experts who were there and testified in court.
 
Chris C said:
Actually the supreme court orderd them to be investigate and Mignini refused.
Click to expand...

I'd LOVE to see a cite for this.

First of all, Mignini can't 'refuse' an order from a court. A cite would be great...first one showing Mignini was ordered to investigate by the Supreme Court and secondly one that shows he refused.
 
Chris C said:
1. I'm not aware of them taking a control sample from the boyfriend. Of course I dont think they took any control samples. If its the boyfriends, both Rudy and the Knox/Sollecito can claim the boyfriend did it. Thus forcing the police to investigate his alibi like they did Knox/Sollecito's. Its a smoking gun the police can't refuse to investigate since people are convicted of sexual assault.

2. If its Rudy's then it goes against the testimony Rudy presented at his appeal that was used against Knox/Sollecito at their trial. Testimony they where not allowed to cross examine by asking Rudy questions. It also goes against how the Prosecution claims this Murder happened. There by driving a major fissure in the already flawed conviction.

3. Why would the prosecution not want it tested. If its Sollecito's they have major evidence of 2 people raping Meredith that night. Knox/Sollecito end up getting life instead of 25 years for the rape and murder. If Sollecito didn't rape her, would he not want that semen tested.

4. The thing no one wants to discuss. If they test it and its not Rudy, Sollecito or Meredith's boyfriend. Then it sets Rudy free also. It gives his original story that a man other than himself killed Meredith and he fled the scene. Of course it gives that baby killers story alot of strength, that Rudy confessed to him another man sat over Meredith's body and ejaculated.
Click to expand...

1. The police DID investigate the boyfriend's alibi.

2. None of the evidence at Rudy's appeal was offered as evidence in Raffaele and Amanda's trial.

3. Because it tells us nothing new about the giult or innocence of Raffaele, Amanda and Rudy. We already know Rudy was 'there'. We already know he performed a sexual act on Meredith. It certainly wouldn't exculpate Amanda and Raffaele in any way.

4. How do you figure that? Since it cannot be dated, it could have got there any time. It would prove nothing.
 
RWVBWL said:
_________________________________________________________________

Greetings Fulcanelli,
Nice to see you back here.
I have a couple of questions for you.

If my memory is correct I recall reading that Miss Kercher hardly ate any pizza as she hung out with her English girlfriends that night. So does that effect the possible time of digestion? In other words, would eating less food than a normal meal start the digestion process sooner or later.

Miss Kercher was found to have a blood alcohol count of 0.43 grams/liter.
From what I have read, this is similiar to having half a glass of wine or one glass of beer.
The English girls said they did not drink that evening.
So how did Miss Kercher have a 0.43gram/liter BAC?
Did she drink some wine before she died that night?

I await your reply Fulcanelli, and please don't tell me, again, that "Google is my friend".
I would like to hear an answer from you, for you know A LOT about this case...
Thanks in advace,
RWVBWL
Click to expand...


Actually, it depends more on 'what is eaten. Protein digests slower then fats and fats digest slower then anything else.

As for the alcohol, there was probably some residue left from the night before when Meredith had been out.
 
Chris C said:
No I believe in their eyes the slap to the head was nothing more than an attempt to get her attention to respond to questions. I believe physical harm wasn't what they where trying to get her to believe. However, knox took the slap differently. You add in the other things, such as sleep deprivation, late night, multiple italian speaking interrogators, threatening her with 30 years in jail, the whole food and water issue, refusal to use the bathroom, denial of an attorney, lieing to her telling her they got proof, and you can see where a slap in the back of the head can suddenly mean something different to Knox. Just like sexual harrassment, the person might not intend to sexual harrass someone, but actions of an individual can be perceived as harrassment. The same situation applys to the interrogation. How many of the other claims Knox made against the interrogators was she charged with slander for? Of course why would knox say she was beaten in interrogation if it wasn't true. Wouldn't knox believe the interrogation was being taped and recorded. The defense has asked for the tapes to be turned over, so the defense believes it was recorded.
Click to expand...

This is pure fantasy.
 
Fulcanelli said:
1. The police DID investigate the boyfriend's alibi.

2. None of the evidence at Rudy's appeal was offered as evidence in Raffaele and Amanda's trial.

3. Because it tells us nothing new about the giult or innocence of Raffaele, Amanda and Rudy. We already know Rudy was 'there'. We already know he performed a sexual act on Meredith. It certainly wouldn't exculpate Amanda and Raffaele in any way.

4. How do you figure that? Since it cannot be dated, it could have got there any time. It would prove nothing.
Click to expand...

It could prove everything. Why not test the semen. Heres an article about my own home state.

http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/...on-could-see-260th-exoneration-because-of-DNA
 
RWVBWL said:
_________________________________________________________________

Hi Solange305,
Thanks for the reply.
No, the fact that I wrote of Amanda Knox wrapping presents does not mean I think she is innocent. That has come from a few years of following this strange, brutal murder case.

However, in response to what you wrote above, I bet ALL of those police officers and investigators you mentioned would probably like to keep their jobs too, you know, to buy presents for their friends, support their kids and families, be able to afford to go out on the town and listen to some music when Rudy Guede's defense attorney celebrated his 50th birthday, you know, stuff like that...

Why get the boss mad and take a chance on getting fired, like what seems to have happened with Dr Luca Lalli, the pathologist in the case? :(
Hmmm...
RWVBWL
Click to expand...

Dr Lalli was fired from the case because he leaked information to the press and the journalists recorded him doing so and played it on TV! That would have got him thrown off the case no matter what case he was on.
 
Chris C said:
Did or did they not tape the interrogation? The prosecution, taped the inteviews of everyone but Knox, Sollecito, and Patrick. They had surveillance on them before the interrogation, they had copies of phone records. Why would the 3 murder suspects, Knox and Sollecito where suspects well before the interrogations that night, not have their interrogations taped. They taped everyone else. Mignini wiretapped tons of people even illegally wiretapped people.
Click to expand...

No, they didn't. None of the witnesses were recorded.


Chris C said:
What does the evidence point to. They are only filing slander charges against the slap. Why wouldn't you file charges against the other claims. Some of them are bigger rights violations than a tap on the back of the head. The only reason to file slander on the slap and none of the others is there is proof of the others. So you make an issue out of the slap to hide the other accusations.
Click to expand...

Actually, she's looking at calunnia charges. Completely different.
 
Last edited:
katy_did said:
I'm curious, are you suggesting this is something that should be a general principle when it comes to guilty verdicts which are confirmed on appeal (i.e. that people should shut up and accept the court's verdict is correct?). I think there's certainly a strong argument to be made that if a person is acquitted, he or she should be considered innocent by all reasonable people: it goes to whether or not you believe in the presumption of innocence, and the principle that it's better to have one guilty person go free than one innocent person be convicted. Continuing to treat someone as if they're guilty after they've been acquitted means rejecting those principles.
Click to expand...

A bit like we should consider OJ innocent? Like that you mean?
 
Charlie Wilkes said:
Take a look at the diagram in this article:

http://knoxarchives.blogspot.com/2009/11/comodi-asks-for-common-sense-posted-by.html

Rep. 3 is one of Guede's shoe prints, and rep. L9 is the luminol footprint oriented toward Meredith's door. Both are roughly in the path between the blood on the floor in Meredith's room and the small bathroom. So are one or more of the shoe prints inside Merediths' room.

Do you think Raffaele stepped in blood with his bare foot in Meredith's room, walked into the bathroom and left the print on the mat, after which he (or Amanda) cleaned the prints on the tile floor without disturbing Rudy's shoe print, but left the mat in plain sight?
Click to expand...

Take a cup of coffee and make a coffee ring on the table. Then take it again and make a ring next to it. Take a cloth and clean one ring and leave the other. There, that was easy wasn't it?
 
Malkmus said:
Patrick's account of being arrested is quite brutal. Funny that Amanda and her family get slapped with charges for talking about alleged police abuse after not retracting their statements, but at least two others who have come out against the police have since retracted theirs. I wonder why????
Click to expand...

Except Patrick said on National television that he never made those comments in the paid human interest article. As you know very well.
 
Kevin_Lowe said:
As far as breaking in through a window broken with a rock is concerned, it is indeed something that you or I wouldn't do for fun. However we have multiple independent reports linking Rudy Guede to crimes committed in exactly this way. It seems to have been his modus operandi to break a second storey window with a rock and then climb in to steal valuables.

It's perfectly possible he wore gloves when climbing through the window and rummaging around in Filomena's room. They would have been disposed of along with the other clothes he was wearing at the time of the murder, so we'll never know for sure, but if you find the idea of him climbing in bare-handed ridiculous then gloves are an obvious answer.

Why did he break into a house where people knew him? Well, we don't really know for sure since he isn't telling. However he'd just been busted after his last break-in and his loot confiscated. Since he had no other means of support that we are aware of, he was probably flat broke and very desperate. He needed to score some money fast, and he knew about this apartment with a group of girls living in it, who might well have cash for rent money on the premises. So I think he took a chance, and it worked out very badly for him and even worse for Meredith, who I believe came home while he was robbing the place and who could have identified him to police.

As far as the risk of someone being home, a plausible story is that he pitched the rock through the window and was poised to run if anyone inside the house reacted. When it turned out nobody was inside, he climbed in and started mucking around inside. Then Meredith came home, probably catching him literally with his pants down on the toilet.
Click to expand...

Which 'crimes'? What's this plural rubbish?

His last break-in was also his first break-in.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom