• 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.
Katody Matrass said:
Of course he used a reference picture with a perpendicular metric tapes visible, which he precisely analysed in 3d.

What Rinaldi did instead, was simply make the tiles roughly rectangular (maybe by transforming the pic in photoshop) that's not the same as proper perspective correction.

When cross examined by the defense, Rinaldi was totally unable to explain himself, that's a fact.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, did you listen to him?

And, just curious, what method did Vinci use to measure the print in the dark picture?
 
Alt+F4 said:
Hasn't a big part of Amanda's defense been the lack of her DNA in Meredith's bedroom? Yet now, they want to present evidence that someone (the gangster's brother) could have murdered Meredith and left ZERO DNA or any other evidence!

If the gangster's brother could have murdered Meredith without leaving DNA then so could Amanda. What is the defense thinking?
Click to expand...

Hi Alt-F4,
Good point, Alt-F4 and 1 that I too have wondered about.
So I've spent a bit of time thinking about this while I do shark research observation here in Los Angeles...

I then try to think of the whole picture and recall that Amanda Knox was not a gangster, she was just a college student in a far away community with a new local boyfriend,
-(well local, not as Perugian, but as in Italian!), who looked like "Harry Potter", probably living her dream.
She was definately not, IMHO, "some criminal mastermind" who seemingly could entice that new boyfriend of hers and a near stranger to commit,
-(in a very personal, horribly bloody way), the stabbing murder of her friend + room-next-door housemate!
And I do not believe that she could magically leave no trace of herself in that room where that bloody, bloody murder had occured!

But could a "Mafioso" burglar do so who was looking for paintings to steal?
Surely a guy doin' this line of work would have to be somewhat of a "PRO",
so could he be involved in a bloody, bloody murder and NOT leave any trace of his presence?
Yes, I believe so...

Peace,
RWVBWL

PS-If Antonio Aviello did enter Meredith Kercher's apartment with the intent to steal paintings,
it makes a little bit of sense, in my humble opinion, that he would not care about stealing laptop computers,
which does help answer that question that is asked: "Why didn't the burglar steal anything else?"

Of course Rudy Guede, since he was recently "busted",-(without seemingly have to spend time in jail), for B+Eing and possession of a stolen laptop computer, among other things,
well 1 might think that he might have learned a lesson, and was thereby not interested in stealing laptop computers,
which does also help answer that darn question also...

For the record, I believe that Rudy Guede is the person responsible for the loss of Meredith Kercher's $$$ and/or credit cards and keys.

That brings up another problem though, since it kind of rules out that lil' Aviello had the keys, as his older brother has said,
since we know without a doubt that Rudy Guede was in that bedroom, probably when or shortly after Meredith was stabbed
and so Rudy is, I believe, likely to be the person who locked Meredith Kercher's door afterwards...

PSS-Alt-F4,
I like reading your thoughts and opinions, you bring forth many good ideas!
I especially enjoy hearing from you since you were here before the murder of Meredith Kercher happened and will probably still be here in the future,
hence you did not come here to debate with a pre-formed opinion.:)
Take it easy,
RW
 
katy_did said:
I could be wrong but I think Amanda first mentioned the bathmat thing in an interrogation in early December, before the luminol tests were carried out (and certainly before she knew the footprints would be attributed to her).
Click to expand...

I think you are right and Machiavelli is wrong :)
 
RoseMontague said:
(..)

ETA You said identical? That is a bit of a stretch, is it not?
Click to expand...

Yes I say identical to emphasize they are compatible not by a single measurement, but over a whole array of measurments, a combination of features. They are identical within an error below significance (a non significant error is an error not affecting the outcome).
 
Machiavelli said:
And who produced the prints, and how, during the previous weaks? And why those people don't remember of such an unusual behaviour? And in what substance? And why they all resisted floor cleaning? And if the substance and the methods were common, why there are no other such traces in the rest of the house (instead there are similar bloody prints on the bathmat)?

I think your scenario is a bit too short of details. You shall better explain what is your idea to fit this data.


*

"We do know that the second presumptive test was negative for blood and that is a test that rarely gives a false negative".
How rarely? On wht dilutions? And do you know the methodologies of emply of TMB test? And in what the assessment of "negative" consists?
DNA from Meredith was found some in luminol traces and mixed with Amanda's DNA. Those traces were not prints, but the substance ws the same (as the light frequence is identical in all traces, this can be taken as reference: it is the same substance)


*

Do you realize the bathmat shuffle story was elaborated in court in a dialogue with her lawyers?


Do you at least realize there is a crushing set of evidence, or not?
Click to expand...

Meredith's DNA was found in the blob on the floor in Filomena's room, the rest were not footprints and can be attributed to Rudy. The prosecution failed to prove they were blood and failed to prove who made them and failed to proved even when they were made.

The fact is they did not even get reference footprints from Laura and Filomena, so who knows which one might be a better match? Did they even bother to compare them to Meredith's? I realize what a weak case the prosecution has and how crushed Mignino will be when the appeal verdict goes against him.

I am curious as to your claim of the light frequency being the same in all prints. Is this something that was measured?
 
TomM43 said:
What makes you think that there has to be single, complete theory that explains the crime in order to convict?
Click to expand...

There can of course be multiple complete theories, each of which explain all the facts, and you might not be able to tell which of them is correct (if any). There are, as a matter of fact, multiple complete theories for Amanda and Raffaele's innocence (Curatolo the perjurer versus Curatolo being sincerely confused, for example).

However it seems to be a problem for the guilter position that there aren't multiple complete theories consistent with the facts. There isn't even a single guilter theory consistent with the facts.

Now if there isn't even one single coherent theory that explains the facts and has Amanda and Raffele killing Meredith then yes, the guilter position has a huge, fatal problem. If you can't come up with even one coherent story that covers the facts and has Amanda and Raffaele doing it then then how can you sincerely believe they did it?

This is why comments about guilter cultists have some factual basis. It seems that for some people at least the guilt of Amanda and Raffaele is an article of religious faith. They preach the truth of their faith and ridicule what they see as rival faiths but there's absolutely no sound evidentiary basis for their beliefs, nor any coherent story to point to. I guess some people have preached that faith for so long, made that faith such a core part of their personal identity and immersed themselves so deeply in a peer group where that faith is a condition of social acceptance, that preaching it is now something they do for its own sake regardless of whether it's true.
 
Machiavelli said:
And, just curious, what method did Vinci use to measure the print in the dark picture?
Click to expand...

Considering ILE's screw-up of not placing fluorescent reference tapes in the photo there is only one method possible. You have to use visible reference points, which would be floor tile ridges. You then need to measure the tile correctly, perform proper perspective correction and apply the coordinate system you obtained from the reference (what Rinaldi failed to do properly).
 
Machiavelli said:
Yes I say identical to emphasize they are compatible not by a single measurement, but over a whole array of measurments, a combination of features. They are identical within an error below significance (a non significant error is an error not affecting the outcome).
Click to expand...

I agree they are probably female and that Amanda can't be excluded. Other than that there is no way anybody can make the claim they are identical, in my opinion.
 
RoseMontague said:
Meredith's DNA was found in the blob on the floor in Filomena's room, the rest were not footprints and can be attributed to Rudy. The prosecution failed to prove they were blood and failed to prove who made them and failed to proved even when they were made.
(...)
Click to expand...

Everybody else failed to propose a scenario in order to logically construct a doubt they are blood, and you fail too.
 
Katody Matrass said:
Wrong on this:
Click to expand...

This shows you are reading what you want.

Amanda said on December 18. she "used the bathmat to go to her room". She mentioned this. I always said that he mentioned this the first time on December 18. It was still a in vague terms though.
But this was elaborated during the dialogue in court with her lawyers. Meaning it was made more detailed, more elaborate. In this dialogue Amanda and her lawyers higlighted further elements to stress that she produced the luminol prints right on that occasion.
 
Machiavelli said:
Everybody else failed to propose a scenario in order to logically construct a doubt they are blood, and you fail too.
Click to expand...

Sure,
I am still looking. The burden is still on the prosecution to prove it's case, and they have failed to do so on this evidence as well as many other pieces of evidence. As far as the luminol prints I believe it is still a mystery that neither side has solved.
 
RoseMontague said:
I agree they are probably female and that Amanda can't be excluded. Other than that there is no way anybody can make the claim they are identical, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

If Amanda can't be excluded in two prints in terms of probable identity (all measurements fit), the prints are identical.
 
Machiavelli said:
This shows you are reading what you want.

Amanda said on December 18. she "used the bathmat to go to her room". She mentioned this. I always said that he mentioned this the first time on December 18. It was still a in vague terms though.
But this was elaborated during the dialogue in court with her lawyers. Meaning it was made more detailed, more elaborate. In this dialogue Amanda and her lawyers higlighted further elements to stress that she produced the luminol prints right on that occasion.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. katy_did and katody are both wrong.
 
Machiavelli said:
This shows you are reading what you want.

Amanda said on December 18. she "used the bathmat to go to her room". She mentioned this. I always said that he mentioned this the first time on December 18. It was still a in vague terms though.
But this was elaborated during the dialogue in court with her lawyers. Meaning it was made more detailed, more elaborate. In this dialogue Amanda and her lawyers higlighted further elements to stress that she produced the luminol prints right on that occasion.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry I've understood elaborate in the meaning "to produce by effort; create".

But do you mean they added some elements? What were they? And how do you know?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom