Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
PDiGirolamo said:
If the defense had been on their toes they would have done it prior to June 2009... prior to the new tenants and, more importantly, prior to the trial.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think the defense teams made some major mistakes both in what they did as well as what they did not do.
 
Amazer said:
I think there isn't a snowballs chance in hell that the defense, or any of the Amanda supporters, will actually attempt to give a demonstration of how easy it is. It would look kind of bad and foolish if it fails.
Click to expand...

But if it failed, they could just burn the video of it. If it succeeded, it might have make a huge difference. At the very least it could have made Massei's theory look stupid. For all we know, they tried, failed, and they pitched the taped evidence because it couldn't be used effectively in the defense.:nope:
 
PDiGirolamo said:
But if it failed, they could just burn the video of it. If it succeeded, it might have make a huge difference. At the very least it could have made Massei's theory look stupid. For all we know, they tried, failed, and they pitched the taped evidence because it couldn't be used effectively in the defense.:nope:
Click to expand...

It's possible that this happened of course. To me, though, it's far more likely that the defence teams never even thought about taking a reconstructed break-in to its logical conclusion. They'd already had Matteini's opinion that in essence any reasonably athletic person was capable of getting in through that window, and I guess they might have assumed that Massei wouldn't flat contradict that reasoning. It should have been done though, and still could potentially be done with the permission of the landlord and the current occupants.
 
LondonJohn said:
It's possible that this happened of course. To me, though, it's far more likely that the defence teams never even thought about taking a reconstructed break-in to its logical conclusion. They'd already had Matteini's opinion that in essence any reasonably athletic person was capable of getting in through that window, and I guess they might have assumed that Massei wouldn't flat contradict that reasoning. It should have been done though, and still could potentially be done with the permission of the landlord and the current occupants.
Click to expand...

I think it would be more effective if they got the park bench bum and the miracle ear lady to do the demonstration.
 
el buscador said:
Where were the hair and blood stain found? I had read at Rerugia Shock that they were found on the window latch and that the hair was black. Do you know what tests were performed on the hair?
Click to expand...

The motivations records the findings on page 193:

In Filomena Romanelli's room a few items were tested: a hairlike fibre [formazione pilifera] on the lower part of the window frame, and a presumed haematological substance on the wooden part of the window which held the broken pane. Both of these items yielded negative results on analysis.
Click to expand...

I am also curious about findings further down on page 193 concerning blood spots:

On the floor of the corridor of the flat (the corridor going from the small bathroom to the living room-kitchen corner), some samples were taken of bloody spots nearly circular in form, which were identified as the blood of the victim.
Click to expand...

What is the location of the blood spots, how near are they in relation to the shoeprints in the corridor, how many blood spots were there and was there any hypothesis as to caused the blood spots?
 
christianahannah said:
The motivations records the findings on page 193:



I am also curious about findings further down on page 193 concerning blood spots:



What is the location of the blood spots, how near are they in relation to the shoeprints in the corridor, how many blood spots were there and was there any hypothesis as to caused the blood spots?
Click to expand...
I still wonder what kinds of tests were performed on the hair. Do you need the roots of the hair to determine what ethnic group the hair might have come from? I've often wondered if this hair was a basis for looking for a black man from the beginning. I've read that the police were looking for a black man or men by the next day after discovering the body.

"and a presumed haematological substance on the wooden part of the window which held the broken pane. Both of these items yielded negative results on analysis."

What is meant by analysis? Just DNA? Was this presumed blood spot on the window tested for blood type?
 
Dan O. said:
I think the one large piece of glass in the middle of the rug that is split into multiple pieces but still maintaining their proper orientation as if the glass continued to fracture imediatly after landing is the most artfully arranged.
Click to expand...

Kevin_Lowe said:
That doesn't fit with glass being scattered across the room as if by a rock being thrown in from outside at all, nor does it do much of a job explaining the glass on the sill. In fact I can't see any aspect of the crime scene it explains as well as, let alone better than, the defence hypothesis.
Click to expand...

This piece of glass caught my eye too and if it didn't occur as someone accidentally stepped on it at some point, what it could look like is glass that broke as it was tossed there as part of the supposed staging. The stagers may have surveyed their handiwork after breaking the window and figured out they needed a bit of glass further in the room to make it look like the rock was thrown from outside (not rocket science, just common sense needed) so picked up a handful and tossed it, perhaps even by picking up an item of clothing and shaking it.

The scenario presented by Fine solves the part that keeps bothering me if I think of the rock being thrown from the outside and that's the gash on the inner blind so close to the inside edge. This seems to only be able to be made if the rock was thrown from the outside and from the left of the window facing the exterior wall, but this is also where the ground slopes away and is the steepest therefore the furthest down from the window making the throw more difficult.
 
Danceme said:
This piece of glass caught my eye too and if it didn't occur as someone accidentally stepped on it at some point, what it could look like is glass that broke as it was tossed there as part of the supposed staging. The stagers may have surveyed their handiwork after breaking the window and figured out they needed a bit of glass further in the room to make it look like the rock was thrown from outside (not rocket science, just common sense needed) so picked up a handful and tossed it, perhaps even by picking up an item of clothing and shaking it.

The scenario presented by Fine solves the part that keeps bothering me if I think of the rock being thrown from the outside and that's the gash on the inner blind so close to the inside edge. This seems to only be able to be made if the rock was thrown from the outside and from the left of the window facing the exterior wall, but this is also where the ground slopes away and is the steepest therefore the furthest down from the window making the throw more difficult.
Click to expand...

For sure one can create multitude of weird, weirder and more and more contrived scenarios, that's not in question. It's not enough to fantasize complicated scenarios compatible with a "staged break-in". To even consider such scenarios you must first prove that the simplest scenario of Rudy breaking and entering through the window is impossible. And there is absolutely zero evidence that would invalidate that simple fact.
 
Danceme said:
The scenario presented by Fine solves the part that keeps bothering me if I think of the rock being thrown from the outside and that's the gash on the inner blind so close to the inside edge. This seems to only be able to be made if the rock was thrown from the outside and from the left of the window facing the exterior wall, but this is also where the ground slopes away and is the steepest therefore the furthest down from the window making the throw more difficult.
Click to expand...

If the inner shutter was partly open (as Filomena says it was) I don't think the rock would need to have been thrown from the left of the window, since in this scenario the first impact point for the rock would've been the far right of the shutter. That would be the most natural part of the shutter for the rock to hit, if the window were closed and the inner shutter partly open.

On the other hand, it's very difficult to see how the rock would hit the far right of the shutter in the scenario Massei proposes. If the window were only slightly open, as he says, there's no way there would've been room to get the rock far enough behind the window to strike that point on the shutter. In a 'staged' version, both the impact on the shutter and the glass on the window sill are difficult to explain.

The fact is that in terms of the window, the shutter impact, the glass distribution, the rock, there's zero evidence anything was staged. So Massei is left trying to conjure a scenario in which the scene was staged in such a way as to appear exactly the way it would've if it were genuine...
 
Last edited:
Katody Matrass said:
For sure one can create multitude of weird, weirder and more and more contrived scenarios, that's not in question. It's not enough to fantasize complicated scenarios compatible with a "staged break-in". To even consider such scenarios you must first prove that the simplest scenario of Rudy breaking and entering through the window is impossible. And there is absolutely zero evidence that would invalidate that simple fact.
Click to expand...

I disagree they are weird and weirder. I thought Fine came up with a perfectly simple workable scenario which takes into account how the inner shutter would get damaged exactly in that spot and how the glass can land on both the inner and outer portions of the sill. The only thing left was to explain was how glass ended up on the blue mat in this scenario which as well can be very simply answered by suggesting someone shook an item with glass on it or picked up a few pieces and tossed them, hardly fantasizing. I don't see this as weird at all if you believe the broken window was staged. You don't so I guess it can seem weird to you.

I also don't think anyone would have to prove it's "impossible" to climb through that window, just believe it was difficult enough to not have happened.

katy_did said:
If the inner shutter was partly open (as Filomena says it was) I don't think the rock would need to have been thrown from the left of the window, since in this scenario the first impact point for the rock would've been the far right of the shutter. That would be the most natural part of the shutter for the rock to hit, if the window were closed and the inner shutter partly open.

On the other hand, it's very difficult to see how the rock would hit the far right of the shutter in the scenario Massei proposes. If the window were only slightly open, as he says, there's no way there would've been room to get the rock far enough behind the window to strike that point on the shutter. In a 'staged' version, both the impact on the shutter and the glass on the window sill are difficult to explain.

The fact is that in terms of the window, the shutter impact, the glass distribution, the rock, there's zero evidence anything was staged. So Massei is left trying to conjure a scenario in which the scene was staged in such a way as to appear exactly the way it would've if it were genuine...
Click to expand...

I think Fine's scenario explains it best. The impact mark in the corner of the blind is not consistent with a rock thrown from outside unless the thrower is to the left of the window aiming toward the right (as seen from the exterior). The jamb is simply too deep to ever get this mark from a vantage point anywhere near the driveway or front of the house.
 
Danceme said:
I think Fine's scenario explains it best. The impact mark in the corner of the blind is not consistent with a rock thrown from outside unless the thrower is to the left of the window aiming toward the right (as seen from the exterior). The jamb is simply too deep to ever get this mark from a vantage point anywhere near the driveway or front of the house.
Click to expand...

I just can't see how that's true, if the inner shutter were partly open. The first part of the rock to come into contact with the shutter would be at the extreme right, where the mark on the shutter actually is. That's even without taking into account of the irregular surface of the rock.

On the other hand, as I said, I find it very difficult to see how the rock would've struck that part of the shutter in a fake break-in with a near closed window. The middle or left of the window would be the obvious (and only possible) area to strike.
 
Danceme said:
I disagree they are weird and weirder. I thought Fine came up with a perfectly simple workable scenario which takes into account how the inner shutter would get damaged exactly in that spot and how the glass can land on both the inner and outer portions of the sill. The only thing left was to explain was how glass ended up on the blue mat in this scenario which as well can be very simply answered by suggesting someone shook an item with glass on it or picked up a few pieces and tossed them, hardly fantasizing. I don't see this as weird at all if you believe the broken window was staged. You don't so I guess it can seem weird to you.

I also don't think anyone would have to prove it's "impossible" to climb through that window, just believe it was difficult enough to not have happened.



I think Fine's scenario explains it best. The impact mark in the corner of the blind is not consistent with a rock thrown from outside unless the thrower is to the left of the window aiming toward the right (as seen from the exterior). The jamb is simply too deep to ever get this mark from a vantage point anywhere near the driveway or front of the house.
Click to expand...

I don't see it as a problem. You can even see the cars parked outside from the window. This picture it appears would just be a straight on throw.

 
Danceme said:
The impact mark in the corner of the blind is not consistent with a rock thrown from outside unless the thrower is to the left of the window aiming toward the right (as seen from the exterior). The jamb is simply too deep to ever get this mark from a vantage point anywhere near the driveway or front of the house.
Click to expand...

First, you are already qualifying your argument with assumptions where Rudy could and where he couldn't stand.
Second, you are simply wrong. Standing in the corner of the elevated driveway behind the wooden railing Rudy was not only level with the window but also directly in front of it. He could throw the rock perpendicular to the window - he had all of it in view and could hit any spot.
Coincidentally that corner of the driveway is also a closest point to the window.
 
RoseMontague said:
I may need to change my opinion of the feasibility of stepping over from the planter to the ledge. In this high resolution photo it appears to me that the planter is more than just slightly below the level of the ledge, rather it appears as much as 18-24 inches below. Perhaps this is an optical effect, if someone can give me a better perspective. Also you can see some white particles on the bottom left sole of lawyer dude's shoe. LOL.

http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/9552/wallshowingnail.jpg
Click to expand...

Wow, for a nail that was so hard to find before, now it's popping up in every picture, this is the best one yet.... Thanks, even though it's not the nail your talking about here.
 
383964c98eb37e68a9.jpg


I apologize for my late entry into the entry window discussion. I know little about this discussion, so bear with me.

Is that the window under the overhang?

Seems like Guede could have climbed on the roof, hung down from the roof, put his feet on the sill, reached in through the broken glass to open the window and climbed in. I used to climb up to my third floor apartment by climbing up the balconies in back, so forgive my ignorance on this subject.

With a rope, I would have climbed to the window and smashed in the window without throwing anything... It's not that great a feat.

If I have misidentified the entry window, please correct me.

Also, please tell me how Guede would have gotten in through this window. (The emphasis seems to be on how AK and RS staged the break-in, which requires first an assumption of their guilt whereas the most probable scenario should be to first assume their innocence.)
 
Last edited:
Danceme said:
I would think a chunk of glass embedded in the sole of someone's shoe would become obvious fairly quickly when walking on a hard ceramic tile floor, what with the scraping noise, the lack of give etc. I'm not convinced anyone had this on their shoe but I suppose it could have been.
Click to expand...
_________________________________________________________________

Hello Danceme,
I just wanted to bring this up as another possible way that the glass might have come to be found in Miss Kercher's bedroom, for Postal Police Officer Battistelli was the first and only person, IIRC, to go into both rooms right when Miss Kercher was found.

I would think with a lot going on and 4 or more people in such a small area Officer Battistelli probably wouldn't have even noticed if he had a piece of glass on his shoe bottom. Heck, he might never even have stepped on it. But he could have...

One thing though, that I have a hard time trying to believe is that this police officer CAN NOT remember going into Miss Kercher's bedroom and lifting up the duvet and seeing her face. It directly contradicts what Luca Altieri said.

Officer Battistelli, when testifying, denied that he entered Miss Kercher's room. How many murders has this guy, a Postal Police Officer, been the first police officer onto the scene?
Yet he says that he didn't enter that room, lift the duvet and see Miss Kercher's face. Hmmm.
Who wouldn't remember seeing her face?

Why would he deny this?
Just because he was not supposed to and his boss would get mad?
Or maybe did he something else besides just look at her...
Heck, I wonder, did he pick up the bra clasp?
Isn't there DNA of a few other unidentified people on it?
Wouldn't that be something if his DNA is also on that bra clasp?
Hmmm...
RWVBWL

PS-So does anyone know off the top of their head if Postal Police Officer Battistelli also recieved a medal for a job well done?
 
LondonJohn said:
It's possible that this happened of course. To me, though, it's far more likely that the defence teams never even thought about taking a reconstructed break-in to its logical conclusion. They'd already had Matteini's opinion that in essence any reasonably athletic person was capable of getting in through that window, and I guess they might have assumed that Massei wouldn't flat contradict that reasoning. It should have been done though, and still could potentially be done with the permission of the landlord and the current occupants.
Click to expand...


The defense couldn't do any more than what they showed by climbing up the outside. That open window would have been sealed very soon after the investigators finished collecting evidence and photographing the window.

I've heard that a new security screen was added to that window which would make future testing slightly more difficult.
 
Justinian2 said:
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/383964c98eb37e68a9.jpg[/qimg]

I apologize for my late entry into the entry window discussion. I know little about this discussion, so bear with me.

Is that the window under the overhang?

Seems like Guede could have climbed on the roof, hung down from the roof, put his feet on the sill, reached in through the broken glass to open the window and climbed in. I used to climb up to my third floor apartment by climbing up the balconies in back, so forgive my ignorance on this subject.

If I have misidentified the entry window, please correct me.

Also, please tell me how Guede would have gotten in through this window. (The emphasis seems to be on how AK and RS staged the break-in, which requires first an assumption of their guilt whereas the most probable scenario should be to first assume their innocence.)
Click to expand...

Katody marked the entry window with a blue arrow. Hanging down from the tip of the roof looks to me to be about 7 feet or so, maybe 349689 meters (but i am not so good with metrics).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom