Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Antony]

(msg #7190)
She confessed she had made an appointment with Patrick (without telling Raffaele) to take him to Meredith's place and was present (in a different room)when Patrick attacked Meredith but did nothing to stop it. Then she woke up at Raffaele's the next day.

Let's not forget that this is what Arturo de Felice described as "an admission of facts we knew to be true. We were then able to bring all 3 of them in".

(From memory - the exact working might be different.)

 

[katy_did]

Amazingly, he places himself downstairs at the boys house before meredith arrives home. Which is where you would have to be if you where gonna climb up the wall and into filomena's window.

And it also lines up with the CCTV footage of the person thought to be Rudy, of course. The first shot of him is at about 19:50, and the second (though much less clear) at around 20:20.

 

[loverofzion]

Some sources reported she brought along a colander, a Cuisinart, a toaster oven, a double boiler and several wooden spoons.

She was photographed in the Holocaust museum with her laughinglyl holding a machine gun (okay you can't convict anyone for their lack of sensitivity and compassion) with a very large bag easily able to contain a kitchen knife.so there really is nothing funny about your exaggeration; more fodder for the nonsense pile again.

 

[loverofzion]

Appeal to authority?

Ever see that suspension bridge that fell apart because of wind generated oscillation? Those guys (designers) are actually sharp knives too.

The Massei report had the facts and was largely accurate until the conclusion. The conclusion was written without logical consideration of the facts. The conclusion seemed to be written to support the initial bias that AK and RS did the crime and should do the time.

The Massei report is a dichotomy; the conclusion is a non-sequitur.

Huh?
Where exactly do you find the conclusions to diverge with the facts in the report??

 

[loverofzion]

me too, looks like a wet, blood soaked, sock print.
the lack of the second toe matches Rudys foot, imo.

but as Mary said, is this a diversion?

If the bathmat print was found to be Rudys would it free Raffaele? probably not. Raffale already was cleared of the bloody tennis shoe print, and he's still in prison.

However if the bra clasp is found to be a misread in the lab, via convincingly being shown to be a incorrect interpretation of a noisy graph... or some form of contamination
Raffaele might be released.

Whoa now you are all forensic experts identifying a partial print in blood from photographs??!
Surely you and rose could be putting your hunches to work in some laboratory with these special gifts of yours.
Not to mention your supreme self confidence in these matters.

 

[loverofzion]

I read Rudi Guede's diary for the first time today. It is clearly the product of a sad young man who has had difficulties in life with parental figures, friendship, and expectations about himself and others.

Did any part of his account involving visiting his friends both before and after the murder check out?

I was surprised at how deeply the sentimentality about his foster family, friends and former life, is mixed up with fantasy.

Clearly, there's something pathological at work here.

Also, at the time it was written, blaming this on Amanda Knox and Sollecito obviously had not dawned on him fully yet. He wonders aloud how Amanda could have slept in the murder scene house, for instance, something he clearly got from the press.

Which press repot was that?

 

[loverofzion]

How do you propose that contamination be proven? It is the responsibility of the DNA lab to show by following known and tested procedures that no contamination of any kind was a contributing factor in their result. When the lab fails to properly test for contamination, the suspects will generally go free as was the case with this serial killer suspect that evaded police for 15 years.

PS: look further for the rest of the story!

The lab that did the testing had never had an instance of contamination.
They were found to have rigorously followed standards of procedure.

 

[loverofzion]

This has always been a factor that shapes perception, and it is frequently invoked as an argument of convenience. But Guede was not targeted because of his race. He was targeted because of physical evidence. Let's summarize the physical evidence Guede left in the room where Meredith was killed:

- Bloody fingerprints
- Bloody shoe prints
- DNA inside Meredith's vagina
- DNA on two articles of her clothing and on her purse

Let's suppose no visible evidence had been present at the crime scene, that the only reason Guede became a suspect is because he happened to be in the neighborhood, and the only physical evidence was a single DNA trace on the victim's clothing, recovered weeks after he had been named as a suspect. In those circumstances, I would be inclined to question the evidence, and suspect that Guede might have been framed. Certainly it would be a murky case.

But it's not. We're not looking at one DNA trace. We're looking at a clear pattern of physical evidence proving that Guede murdered Meredith Kercher. His race is completely beside the point.

Well then it must be pure coincidence that Amanda falsely accused Patrick of the assault and murder, the ONLY OTHER black person she knew in Perugia? (AK:"He's bad...he's bad...")

There is sadly a long ugly history in the U.S. of white women falsely accusing black men of sexual, violent crimes.

 

[RoseMontague]

If you think it worthy, you should Nominate it for the monthly pith language award. I would second the nomination though I don't believe it has a chance of making the cut give the stiff competition on this board.

Thanks Dan, I did not know about this. There are some really talented people on this board and yes, that quote does not stand a chance against the likes of case#46cw39 and many others.

 

[RoseMontague]

Whoa now you are all forensic experts identifying a partial print in blood from photographs??!
Surely you and rose could be putting your hunches to work in some laboratory with these special gifts of yours.
Not to mention your supreme self confidence in these matters.

This is amusing loverofzion. Maybe you missed my post about the prosecution footprint expert working from photographs without even looking at the actual evidence.

 

[loverofzion]

Who would ask for a new trial? To seek a new trial against Guede as a lone attacker, the prosecutor would have to admit that they were wrong in the first trials. I've seen very few instances of prosecutors admitting they were wrong, even after convictions are overturned by higher courts.

Rudy cannot seriously hope to get a better deal in a new trial. Even if Rudy were in fact innocent, he would have already squandered his credibility by falsely accusing Amanda and Raffaele. Nobody is going to believe his "bushy haired stranger did it" story now.

Actually his fingering of AK and RS only LENT credibility to the guy.

 

[RoseMontague]

Originally Posted by Mary_H View Post
Some sources reported she brought along a colander, a Cuisinart, a toaster oven, a double boiler and several wooden spoons.

She was photographed in the Holocaust museum with her laughinglyl holding a machine gun (okay you can't convict anyone for their lack of sensitivity and compassion) with a very large bag easily able to contain a kitchen knife.so there really is nothing funny about your exaggeration; more fodder for the nonsense pile again.

The reasoning starts with Massei, loverofzion. Mary is simply pointing out how irrational it is. From Raffaeles appeal:

The following passage from the sentencing report might also be considered paradigmatic: the Court, moving from the dimensions of Amanda’s bag (“Amanda carried with her a very large bag as Romanelli declared”: p. 403 sentenza) – in itself a totally neutral circumstance, not to say completely insignificant in the factual reconstruction of the crime – concludes by affirming that “in this bag the knife in question could have been placed (…) Moreover, it is entirely [Massei translation: “quite”] plausible that Amanda, taking this knife in her very large bag, when going with Raffaele to the house on Via della Pergola the late evening of 1 November could have taken this knife (…) with the intention, initially, of mere threat” (pages 403 and 404 sentenza).
In other words, the fact that Amanda had with her a capacious bag was considered an essential fact and sufficient to deduce that on the evening of the murder she took the kitchen knife seized by investigators in Raffaele’s house (sic!).
Think also of the consideration given by the Court to the habit of Raffaele Sollecito of carrying an ornamental boxcutter knife. Starting from this premise, the judgment claims that “Raffaele Sollecito not only found himself at the scene of the crime and pursuing with violence the same objective as Rudi Guede, but was armed with a sharp boxcutter (…). Elements which lead one to consider that the wound with a depth of 4cm was inflicted by Raffaele Sollecito with the boxcutter that he always carried with him” (pages 400 and 401 sentenza).
In essence, in the view of the Court, Raffaele Sollecito’s habit of carrying in his pocket a small boxcutter would be enough to deduce that he used it to strike the victim, and it is for the defence, if anyone, to prove otherwise.
It is important to note that not only does there not exist a single element to link the murder with a boxcutter of Sollecito’s, but even the representatives of the prosecution have never drawn attention to this theory.
The judgment considers it totally irrelevant whether or not elements exist which are able to support this theory and likewise irrelevant that this phantom boxcutter was never found: “That the boxcutter used on this occasion by Raffaele Sollecito has never been found is an irrelevant fact since such a weapon was not difficult to find and very easy to conceal” (p. 401 sentenza).
No wonder: if the mere fact of the capacity of a bag proves that it was used to transport the knife from the house of Sollecito to Via della Pergola, it is obvious that the 4cm depth of one of the victim’s wounds can in itself only prove that it was inflicted by one of Sollecito’s boxcutters (never mind which one, of course!).
Ultimately, elements and circumstances of total insignificance, which should in no trial even assume the dignity of suspicion, were even elevated to the rank of decisive proof against Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox.
Symptomatic of this erroneous and misleading approach is the passage in which the judgment comments on the declarations given by a witness, Nara Capezzali, on the alleged scream heard the evening of 1 November: to justify the credibility of an absolutely unreliable witness it is noted “if this scream did not happen and Capezzali did not hear it, we do not see the reason why she would have spoken about it” (p. 89 sentenza).
The illogicality of this assumption is obvious: rather than objectively evaluating the inconsistencies which emerged from the testimony of the witness, we start, without any justification, from the presumption that the same is reliable.

 

[Mary_H]

Well then it must be pure coincidence that Amanda falsely accused Patrick of the assault and murder, the ONLY OTHER black person she knew in Perugia? (AK:"He's bad...he's bad...")

There is sadly a long ugly history in the U.S. of white women falsely accusing black men of sexual, violent crimes.

Ah... the plot thickens.

 

[loverofzion]

I wonder what it is with that colpevolisti's fixation. I personally cannot see any difference, no matter which girl was it that Raffaele fantasized in his diary about pricking with the knife it won't make the ToD problem go away, it won't conjure evidence for a clean-up or a fake break-in nor will it fix the rest of botched forensics.

Perhaps not but it clearly demonstrated Mr. Sollecito's lies and fabrications when questioned about HIS kitchen knife with Meredith's DNA on the blade.

Clearly the discovery of said DNA had him extremely worried (see his diary) even before he was questioned about it.

Why the lie?

 

[RoseMontague]

Originally Posted by loverofzion View Post
Well then it must be pure coincidence that Amanda falsely accused Patrick of the assault and murder, the ONLY OTHER black person she knew in Perugia? (AK:"He's bad...he's bad...")

There is sadly a long ugly history in the U.S. of white women falsely accusing black men of sexual, violent crimes.

Ah... the plot thickens.

It does seem to be a deliberate effort recently to accuse the innocent as well as those who believe in innocence of racism.

 

[Dan O.]

The lab that did the testing had never had an instance of contamination.
They were found to have rigorously followed standards of procedure.

You are just echoing the talking points over and over. Show your evidence!

 

[RoseMontague]

Perhaps not but it clearly demonstrated Mr. Sollecito's lies and fabrications when questioned about HIS kitchen knife with Meredith's DNA on the blade.

Clearly the discovery of said DNA had him extremely worried (see his diary) even before he was questioned about it.

Why the lie?

I am not sure why the prosecution lied about this. Perhaps they really believed the non-existent DNA was on the knife blade. The blame for that probably lies with Stefanoni.

 

[Mary_H]

It does seem to be a deliberate effort recently to accuse the innocent as well as those who believe in innocence of racism.

I would love to see some citations about Patrick being the ONLY OTHER black person Amanda knew in Perugia, as well as about this long ugly history in the U.S. of white women falsely accusing black men of sexual, violent crimes, but I suppose that's way too much to ask of the little fellow.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

anything worth having is worth waiting for

loverofzion,

Mary H and I, among others, have been waiting for some time now for your responses to our comments directed toward you. Would you please tend to this unfinished matter? Thank you ever so much.

 

[Mary_H]

We all wait, with our little red check marks....oops! There were four, now there are three.