• 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.
Fulcanelli said:
Actually, Guede identified Amanda and Raffaele back in March 2008.

As for the guy who said his brother did it, you're going off topic. We're discussing the witnesses that contributed to Massei's conclusions for the TOD.

These would be Nara and the other witness who heard a scream. The other witness that heard arguing and running footsteps. Antonio Curatolo. The couple in the car and the mechanic. That makes a total of seven.

There is also the Albanian who'd make eight and Rudy who'd make nine and allesandra Formica and her boyfriend who'd make eleven, but Massei discarded the Albanian as he considered him unreliable and Rudy is no use whatsoever in determining TOD and the person seen by Allessandra and he BF was judged not to be Rudy. One could even include Meredith's English girlfriends, since they established they Meredith was alive until at least a little before 9 pm, but I'm trying to keep things simple)

Therefore, the total amount of witnesses used to determine TOD is seven.

To finalise with the main point I was originally making, TOD was determined by using seven witnesses (with other clues including medical and phones), not one 60 year old lady alone.
Click to expand...

Guede claims to have left the scene around 1000hrs. Meredith was dead or dying at this point. He has never retracted the time he left. Eyewitness to the murder. I mean seriously even if you dont believe Knox, Guede or Sollecito acted together or if they did act together. Guede gives you a ToD. The doctors autopsy supports Guede's testimony of the ToD.

Dr Lalli using the stomach contents and testimony of Meredith's friends, supports this ToD.

Did any of the other witnesses see Meredith get killed or call the police when they heard someone scream a blood curdling scream or people speaking italian.

So basicly you got 1 EYEWITNESS and a DOCTOR that confirms ToD. Atleast 1.5 hours before Mignini's.

None of the other witness can confirm anything or even testify that the voice they heard was Knox's or Meredith's.
 
Last edited:
Mary_H said:
He might have been believable if he had identified them back in November 2007.
Click to expand...

He kind of did. In November 2007 he said it must have been they that stripped Meredith, broke the window, put the stuff in the washing machine and cleaned the place up. That was in one of his skype conversations. And in his diary he said Amanda was downstairs. His description of the Italian male also matched Sollecito.

But you are right he didn't say OUTRIGHT "Amanda and Raffaele were there during the murder and they murdered Meredith", but then he was observing 'omerta' in order to protect himself.
 
Fulcanelli said:
He kind of did. In November 2007 he said it must have been they that stripped Meredith, broke the window, put the stuff in the washing machine and cleaned the place up. That was in one of his skype conversations. And in his diary he said Amanda was downstairs. His description of the Italian male also matched Sollecito.

But you are right he didn't say OUTRIGHT "Amanda and Raffaele were there during the murder and they murdered Meredith", but then he was observing 'omerta' in order to protect himself.
Click to expand...

Link the entire translated skype message in english please if you can, I have been looking for the entire conversation. Mignini claims Guede wasn't there for the Clean up. The washing machine has been disproven and they still havn't proven a clean up. He names which window was the correct window broken. So if he was able to talk about Meredith being stripped after death, and which window was broken. This must have happened before 1130. There is a reason Rudy couldn't have been around for a clean up after Meredith's death. He has an alibi to not be there for a clean up after 1130.
 
Last edited:
Fulcanelli said:
He kind of did. In November 2007 he said it must have been they that stripped Meredith, broke the window, put the stuff in the washing machine and cleaned the place up. That was in one of his skype conversations. And in his diary he said Amanda was downstairs. His description of the Italian male also matched Sollecito.
Click to expand...


Can you provide citations for these claims?

But you are right he didn't say OUTRIGHT "Amanda and Raffaele were there during the murder and they murdered Meredith", but then he was observing 'omerta' in order to protect himself.
Click to expand...


From whom?
 
Chris C said:
Guede claims to have left the scene around 1000hrs. Meredith was dead or dying at this point. He has never retracted the time he left. Eyewitness to the murder. I mean seriously even if you dont believe Knox, Guede or Sollecito acted together or if they did act together. Guede gives you a ToD. The doctors autopsy supports Guede's testimony of the ToD.

Dr Lalli using the stomach contents and testimony of Meredith's friends, supports this ToD.

Did any of the other witnesses see Meredith get killed or call the police when they heard someone scream a blood curdling scream or people speaking italian.

So basicly you got 1 EYEWITNESS and a DOCTOR that confirms ToD. Atleast 1.5 hours before Mignini's.

None of the other witness can confirm anything or even testify that the voice they heard was Knox's or Meredith's.
Click to expand...


Actually, he claimed to have left just after 10:30. Guede also claims he played no role in murdering Meredith.

As for the rest, you're offering your own opposing view, which is kind of irrelevant since we are discussing how MASSEI came to his decision on TOD. You're starting a completely different subject.

But while I don't plan to go there right now, I will say these seven witnesses don't get simply hand waved away. And I will say, the fact none of them called the police does not discredit them or their testimony.
 
Fulcanelli said:
Actually, he claimed to have left just after 10:30. Guede also claims he played no role in murdering Meredith.

As for the rest, you're offering your own opposing view, which is kind of irrelevant since we are discussing how MASSEI came to his decision on TOD. You're starting a completely different subject.

But while I don't plan to go there right now, I will say these seven witnesses don't get simply hand waved away. And I will say, the fact none of them called the police does not discredit them or their testimony.
Click to expand...

How long did it take Meredith to bleed to death? He was with her until she died. According to him he even brought bath towels to try and stop the bleeding. There was towels recovered at the scene in the bedroom with Meredith. I find it odd that he confirms alot of evidence. His presence downstairs. His arrival at the cottage around 830 before Meredith arrives. His presence in every room in the house, including the bathroom where the bloody footprint was found. Even drinking from a carton in the fridge. He is even believed by the prosecution when he says Knox/Sollecito did it. Yet when he gives a ToD that is confirmed by Doctor Lalli its ignored.
Did Massei leave open a ToD in his report before 1130? If he did, that means the judge even believes it happened before 1130.

If the crime happened at 930 to 1030 how strongly are you convinced it was knox/sollecito.

My main problem is, why doesn't Mignini move the ToD between 1000 and 1030 to line up with Guede's testimony. Thats one of my main reasons for believing Knox/Sollecito to being innocent. I think he might have made an off handed comment towards the end of the trial. But he stuck to those guns early in the trial about that 1130 tod. It leads me to believe that there is some evidence that would make Knox/Sollecito innocent of a 2200 to 2230 hrs ToD. I'm convinced that knox/sollecito couldn't have killed Meredith before 2200hrs.

Also Fulcanelli, I believe anyone is capable of killing another person. I may or may not have taken a few lives while serving my Country. I do not lose any sleep over it or regret it like others do. I say this because you dont know how you will react until you are put in the situation. Its possible Knox killed meredith because something happened and she snapped. However, I'm 100 percent certain whatever happened that night didn't happen at 1130 or later.
 
Last edited:
Mary_H said:
According to the cables you linked to, the first record of embassy officials visiting her is May 14, 2009. The guidelines say: "An American consular officer will visit any U.S. citizen in jail as soon as possible after his/her arrest." They were a little late.
Click to expand...


That's because the ones he obtained pertain only to during the trial.
 
Witnesses have possible scream time boxed in

Chris C said:
My main problem is, why doesn't Mignini move the ToD between 1000 and 1030 to line up with Guede's testimony. Thats one of my main reasons for believing Knox/Sollecito to being innocent. I think he might have made an off handed comment towards the end of the trial. But he stuck to those guns early in the trial about that 1130 tod. It leads me to believe that there is some evidence that would make Knox/Sollecito innocent of a 2200 to 2230 hrs ToD. I'm convinced that knox/sollecito couldn't have killed Meredith before 2200hrs.

Its possible Knox killed meredith because something happened and she snapped. However, I'm 100 percent certain whatever happened that night didn't happen at 1130 or later.
Click to expand...


Witness Antonio Curatolo - park bench observer is the reason it has to be later.

From IIP Raffaele's Appeal
"Curatolo testified nine times that he saw Amanda and Raffaele until near midnight or until about 23:30-24:00. He testified only once that he only saw Amanda and Raffaele until about 23:00. The court ignores the nine other statements and chooses to believe the one."


There is also the stalled car witnesses who say they were there from 22:30 to 23:20-23:35

The prosecution has a mess to deal with. They are forcing a square peg into a round hole. They accepted the park bench witness who says he saw them until 23:00. Are they then saying that Amanda and Raffaele entered the cottage right in front of the stalled car witnesses who were still there until 23:20 - 23:35 ? Otherwise, if they are waiting for the stalled car witnesses to leave first it would have them entering the cottage at 23:20-23:35 and killing Meredith almost immediately upon entry to have her scream around 23:30. Where is the time for a build up to the confrontation?

I understand Mignini pushed back the TOD late in the trial. Does anyone know when he did that?

I think the prosecution would have had a more believable timeline if they ignored the testimony of Toto the Hobo and had the TOD be before 22:30. It would have worked better for the stomach contents and cell phone ping also. Even then it is more than a stretch that Amanda and Raffaele were involved. It would have Raffaele putting in a cartoon at 21:45, leaving immediately with Amanda, hooking up with Rudy spontaneously and killing Meredith all within a 45 minute window. They would have had to leave before the stalled car arrived at 22:30. The 23:30-23:40 TOD the prosecution stated is even harder to believe.
 
Last edited:
Chris C said:
CDV: My objection concerned the way the pubblico ministero presented his
question, appearing to contest the fact that in the Dec 17 interrogation,
Amanda also explained that she turned off her phone because she didn't want to be called by Patrick, because she didn't want to be disturbed. This doesn't correspond to the truth, because on page 40 of the minutes, she actually says "So, I turned it off also to not run the risk that Patrick would change his mind and call me in."
Click to expand...

Here “this doesn’t correspond to the truth” does not refer to something stated by the prosecution, it is referred to its interpretation as “appearing to contest”. The defence here only wants to an add a piece of information to the prosecution question, in order to highlight a different contextual meaning of Amanda’s statements: the defence claims that the citation, by the wording of the prosecution, is incomplete, and if taken alone it might suggest a conclusion that is not true, therefore they want to recall another. The defence only wants to highlight that two different statements by Amanda do not form a contradiction, never affirms that the prosecution states anything false.
When Amanda speaks, she confirms both reason were true: says .. she switched the phone off to.. by Patrick“ is true .. but also this and that is also true. The following explanation by Amanda further explicitly confirms that no false piece of information was inserted by the prosecution.



LG or CDV: I object to that remark! That is a personal evaluation!
Presidente! That is very suggestive. He is making an unacceptable
conclusion. He can ask a question, but this is a personal opinion. It
seems to me that she did answer. She answered for a good five minutes.
Click to expand...

This is valid for all you quotes: all those translations of attorney’s remarks are hee in isolation, whil should be read together with the text they refer to.
In this second remark (which I don’t know what is referred to) the defence attorney complains for the prosecution giving a personal evaluation on true facts, not for giving false information.


CDV?: The suggestions of the PM before asking the question are inopportune,
because he is suggesting and making suggestive...
Click to expand...

The objection (reported incompletely) is here a complaint about a comment being inopportune

CDV? It seems to me that the pubblico ministero, in presenting his
questions, always makes references which go as far as actually suggesting
the answers, and also –
Click to expand...

This one is again a complaint about the prosecution being suggestive of an answer, not for giving a piece of false information.


CDV? In the question he just asked, he mentions the memorandum and says it confirms. Now, this might be a specific question, but it should not be an assertion on the part of the pubblico ministero, followed by another question.
If we look in the minutes, we find a series of unilateral declarations which all go to show what interests the pubblico ministero. To my mind, this mentality goes against our way of examining the accused. I just want to make this clear.
Click to expand...

Not very different. No false statements by the prosecution. The defence complains for the “mentality” of the prosecution who makes a judgment, a conclusion, defining the hand written memoriale of Amanda a “confirmation”. The defence doesn’t like the prosecutor to make these assertions, to state these conclusions.
Which is totally different from accusing the prosecutor to release false information to the court.

CDV: I object to this question! Because the reference to the transcription was read out with one sentence skipped by the lawyer for the civil plaintiff.
Click to expand...

This objection (not aimed to the prosecution) is a demand that a previous declaration be read starting one line before.


If the questions pertain false informations, then he is objecting to false information or opinions being added to questions directed at Knox. There is even one question where there prosecutor words a question with evidence that doesn't correspond to the truth.
Click to expand...

There is an important difference between “false information” and “opinions”, and there no “evidence that doesn’t correspond to the truth” is stated, as explained above. There is no defence objection claiming the prosecution states a false datum. The only possible cited case is the “12 – mezzogiorno” statement by Comodi, but, in that case, there is no objection by the defence at all.
In that specific case in fact there is not even a logical implication, given Amanda’s explanation about her phone calls to her mother. Amanda said she doesn’t remember of any phone call but the ones made later when the police was already there. There is no ambiguity, no possible mistake on which call they are talking about, because her explanation (and her forgetting) can only be matched to the 12:47 call and the 12:47 call can only refer to her explanation.
The only logical question to answer is whether her explanation is credible.
 
Magister said:
According to this source appeal court hearings in Italy last on average 2 to 3 years.

http://www.usembassy.it/acs/emergency/emergency-arrest.asp

and here another source stating the appeal court process is a brand new trial

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php..._appeals_process_actually_works_and_what_we_/
Click to expand...

The appeal in Italy is a brand new trial, but not a brand new investigation, neither a brand new process.

I confirm that the appeal hrarings do not last 2 or 3 years. Usually the appeal verdict requires 2 or 3 years in average, starting from the beginning of the process.
 
Chris C said:
Ive read the same thing and have even quoted 1030. However, I have never verified that time.
Click to expand...

The Micheli report seems to me to indicate that Rudy left Meredith's at 22:30 (meaning a TOD earlier than that) and that he met someone at about 23:30 going by the Google translation.

The accused indicated approximately 23:30 in the time that the other boy had come home, where he was held until half past midnight or so, then take a stroll downtown, meet another American friend and usually go to the «Domus» (but perhaps also A., who had disagreements with the staff of this pub) here had been more or less up to 02:30 / 03:00 and from there went the «Velvet», since one of his friends had to talk with anyone in the staff room.Going back to the times, even to distances covered on foot and the duration of his stay in Via del Canerino to clean, assumed to be out of the house on Via della Pergola around 22:30 or some minutes later
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom