Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[RWVBWL]

Basically I cannot see any explanation for Amanda insisting on making another statement at 5:45 in the morning. Especially when there is virtually nothing more in it then in the paper she signed at 1:45. But I can't see anything wrong in the idea that they called Mignini to Questura and tried all night to make Amanda substantiate her story and implicate Lumumba more clearly.
If you compare the statements of 1:45 and 5:45 it is quite eminent they tried to put some details into the story but failed. That's also how Amanda describe the course of the interrogation:

Then, following this, they wanted details, they wanted
to know everything I had done. But I didn't know how to say. So they started
talking to me, saying, "Okay, so you went out of the house, okay, fine, so
you met Patrick, where did you meet Patrick?" I don't know, maybe in Piazza
Grimana, maybe near it. Because I had this image of Piazza Grimana. "Okay,
fine, so you went with him to your house. Okay, fine. How did you open the
door?" Well, with my key. "So you opened the house". Okay, yes. "And what
did you do then?" I don't know. "But was she already there?" I don't know.
"Did she arrive or was she already there?" Okay. "Who was there with you?"
I don't know. "Was it just Patrick, or was Raffaele there too?" I don't know.
It was the same when the pubblico ministero came, because he asked me: "Excuse me, I don't understand. Did you hear the sound of a scream?" No. "But how could you not have heard the scream?". I don't know, maybe my
ears were covered. I kept on and on saying I don't know, maybe, imagining...​

Didn't "the scream" show up only in the 5:45 statement, after Mignini arrived?

Hello Katody Matrass,
A question for you.
What scream are you asking about?

Did someone report to the police that they heard a loud scream on the night Meredith Kercher was murdered
before the interrogation of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito on the night/morning of Nov. 5/6, 2007?

Any help is appreciated!
Thanks, RWVBWL

 

[Justinian2]

I've ruined quite a few pairs of underwear that way by trying to bleach out the blood stain. You are correct that you should wash it in cold water but I believe you are a little uninformed about the way cops use luminol to detect blood splatters.

Even if you clean it up it can be detected. It has been used in many many crime cases.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminol

From Wikipedia:

Luminol is used by crime scene investigators to locate traces of blood, even if it has been cleaned or removed. The investigator prepares a solution of luminol and the activator and sprays it throughout the area under investigation. The iron present in any blood in the area catalyzes the chemical reaction that leads to the luminescence revealing the location of the blood. The amount of catalyst necessary for the reaction to occur is very small relative to the amount of luminol, allowing the detection of even trace amounts of blood. The glow lasts for about 30 seconds and is blue. Detecting the glow requires a fairly dark room. Any glow detected may be documented by a long exposure photograph.

I've found that the rusty water from iron pipes will lead to anywhere from strong concentrations of iron to weak concentrations. The bathroom in the old part of my house will leave brown rusty setiment on the bottom of my tub, if the cold water isn't run for a few seconds before drawing the bath.

But you're right, Guede's bloody footprint would be hard to remove from a mat glued to the floor.

Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not trying to source information here.

 

[LondonJohn]

In passing, I think I've figured out why any break-in to the cottage had to have been through Filomena's window: I think it might well have been the only point of entry that could feasibly have been used for a break-in without using tools such as a jemmy.

And the reason why I make this claim is this: I think that every other opening into the cottage except Knox's window, the kitchen window and the balcony door had a metal grate to prevent B&E, and - most importantly - I think that the door and the window to the balcony were constructed either of reinforced glass or were double glazed, with a modern frame and lock.

Here's a photo from PMF which shows the construction of the balcony door from an exterior view while the shutters were open:

http://perugiamurderfile.org/gallery/image.php?album_id=21&image_id=1694

You can see that the door is of modern construction, with a PVC or aluminium frame, and large areas of glass. It's therefore very unlikely that the glass is not reinforced and/or double-glazed - modern manufacturing regs dictate that glass doors of this construction are resistant to breakage for reasons of safety and security.

Similarly, the window between the balcony and the kitchen/lounge is of modern construction:

http://perugiamurderfile.org/gallery/image.php?album_id=21&image_id=2123

In addition, the shutters may have been locked shut on the kitchen window on the night of the murder.

It's immediately noticeable that the only points of entry in the entire cottage that weren't protected by metal grates were Filomena's window, Amanda's window, the kitchen window and the balcony door. Of these four, only Filomena's window was an old-style casement window - all the others were of modern construction, and would almost certainly have had better locking mechanisms and stronger glass.

I therefore think that any potential burglar casing the house would not take long to realise that the balcony door was impervious to being broken by a rock or a hammer. And (although it's speculation), I suspect that the kitchen window was hard to break into as well - due to tough construction and toughened glass. After all, why else would all the other windows on that side of the house be protected by grates? And who knows whether the balcony door and/or kitchen window were further protected that night by locked exterior shutters?

My suspicion therefore is that whoever broke in might well have taken a close look at the balcony. He might even have scaled the wall to the balcony and tested the balcony door and the kitchen window - only to realise that both were impervious to a simple "rock through the glass" method of breaking in. I think that Filomena's window offered the dual attraction of having a visibly unlocked exterior shutter and a visibly old-fashioned construction. And those factors, coupled with the ability to make a quick getaway back to the basketball court and beyond, might have more than outweighed (in my opinion) the possible extra visibility of Filomena's window.

PS. I believe that the later break-in to the house (while it was a "secured crime scene") took place through the kitchen window. I wonder therefore either if the police left the exterior shutters to that window open, and/or if the people who broke in had tools or sufficient numbers to effect a more long-winded break-in?

 

[el buscador]

You have a point, LondonJohn. Plus, how much more noise would there be by throwing a rock through a glass door? There's a lot more glass to break and crash down to the floor.

 

[Katody Matrass]

In passing, I think I've figured out why any break-in to the cottage had to have been through Filomena's window: I think it might well have been the only point of entry that could feasibly have been used for a break-in without using tools such as a jemmy.
(...)

Good point!

Still I think that after the traumatic encounter with Cristian Tramontano Rudy was very wary of unexpected people inside his target house - according to the testimony he broke into Tramontano's flat through a window, only to be surprised by inhabitants who he woke up. I think after that the rock throwing served a role not only of a window opener, but also as a crude yet reliable way of checking if someone's inside - much more reliable than ringing the doorbell.
If we take that into account, the balcony looks very uninviting. There's no way to easily throw a large rock there from the ground level - you'll have to lob it precisely over the railing. There's no sure escape route from there if something goes wrong - if you're on the ground you have to go around the house and by the door, if you're on the balcony already, you're screwed.

 

[Chris C]

Why, in order to type up the confession, do they need total recall? Not that remembering what she said might not be important for other reasons, it's just not that important for the confession document that she signed. Presumably police were able to interview/interrogate people before recording became possible? Naturally that allowed some of them to get away with a few things, but having to hold in their heads every word that the witness/suspect said is a problem that was solved long before audio recording became common, let alone video recording.

Because if the statement is written by someone other than the person that gave the statement, it has to be exactly what they said. or its not what they said. The typed statement was done in a different room and brought back in for Knox to sign. So either they just wrote down what they wanted on the document or they translated it from a recording.

So did the interrogators translate the interrogation from a recording, just put down what they wanted or did the supposed neutral interpreter type it up from memory?

 

[Chris C]

What's your feeling on OJ? His case went on forever.

OJ had one of the best lawyers money could buy. To poke fun at south park. Cochran used the Chewbacca defense. He also played on the general mistrust of the Police Department, since they had been recently racked by scandals. The evidence against OJ was solid. He walked free because the people didn't trust the police.

 

[Chris C]

To convict, the jury have to look at the defendant and think "I can believe that that person could do what they're accused of". I wouldn't discount demeanor in enabling the jury to reach that conclusion.

Seriously what your saying is if they think a person was capable of doing the crime, they are guilty even if the evidence is lacking. Thats the kinda reasoning innocent people are in jail. Because they look guilty regardless of the evidence. Which is what the tabloids helped the prosecution do.

 

[quadraginta]

In passing, I think I've figured out why any break-in to the cottage had to have been through Filomena's window: I think it might well have been the only point of entry that could feasibly have been used for a break-in without using tools such as a jemmy.

And the reason why I make this claim is this: I think that every other opening into the cottage except Knox's window, the kitchen window and the balcony door had a metal grate to prevent B&E, and - most importantly - I think that the door and the window to the balcony were constructed either of reinforced glass or were double glazed, with a modern frame and lock.

<snip>

modern manufacturing regs dictate that glass doors of this construction are resistant to breakage for reasons of safety and security.

<snip>

I therefore think that any potential burglar casing the house would not take long to realise that the balcony door was impervious to being broken by a rock or a hammer. And (although it's speculation), I suspect that the kitchen window was hard to break into as well - due to tough construction and toughened glass. After all, why else would all the other windows on that side of the house be protected by grates?

<snip>

"Impervious"?????



Hilarious. Great stuff, LJ.

Please tell us more about "reinforced glass" in balcony doors and the security advantages of "double glazed". Product specs would be good, too. Maybe even some cites of the "modern manufacturing regs" which would make the balcony door so "impervious".

Then share what evidence you have that the balcony door isn't some garden variety residential door.

Or even why a seasoned burglar like Guede would bother to essay such an impregnable fortress in the first place, instead of merely opting for easier pickings.

I haven't laughed so hard in days.

 

[TomCH]

What I find unbelievable is the number of people That have apparently taken the other side in this larger battle and actively spread lies to undermine support for the family.

Me too.

However, we probably disagree on which family is having their support undermined.

 

[Justinian2]

Because if the statement is written by someone other than the person that gave the statement, it has to be exactly what they said. or its not what they said. The typed statement was done in a different room and brought back in for Knox to sign. So either they just wrote down what they wanted on the document or they translated it from a recording.

So did the interrogators translate the interrogation from a recording, just put down what they wanted or did the supposed neutral interpreter type it up from memory?

With my own much smaller skirmish with the law, I was confused from just reading the police report. The lawyers were confused. The witnesses were confused. The ONLY thing that lessened the confusion was time and logic. I actually had to put things in order on a spreadsheet before I straightened out things in my own mind.

The cops and witnesses both screwed up. A witnesses said we were struggling over the police revolver. It was a can of mace. I was holding the cop's wrist to keep the mace from my eyes. Most of the witnesses said the cop was holding my wrist. The cop whose wrist I held and I knew differently. We were the two that should have known.

The point is - never trust the accuracy of every word by every witness. NEVER! Every sentence of every witness contains at least one inaccuracy in the police report written about my incident.
Many of the posts here dissect every word of every statement as if it contained a hidden meaning. HA.

 

[Katody Matrass]

And those factors, coupled with the ability to make a quick getaway back to the basketball court and beyond, might have more than outweighed (in my opinion) the possible extra visibility of Filomena's window.

I don't think there was any extra visibility compared to the balcony.
Considering the neighboring houses, the line of sight to the cottage is generally blocked by the edge of the concrete multi-level parking lot structure. Apart from the top level windows of the few taller buildings there is no line of sight to Filomena's window or the driveway. But the balcony has even better line of sight with the upper stories of the neighbors, too.

What about the direction of the driveway and the corner of the streets?
There's a large tree that significantly blocks view to Filomena's window and covers most of the driveway. Let's look through Filomena's window:
http://injusticeinperugia.org/dsc_0059.jpg We see a tree.

http://injusticeinperugia.org/105.JPG No neighoburs or road, only a tree.

http://injusticeinperugia.org/150.JPG Again, a tree.

What about the illumination? Is Filomena's window illuminated? Let's look at this cool long exposure photo:


Not exactly. Yes, the wall facing the road gets a lot of light from the nearby streetlight - the porch is a bit darker yet we can see some sharp highlights and shadows there, too. But the side wall with Filomena's window don't get any direct light - only blue gloomy ambient light of the misty evening. It's not illuminated any better then the balcony.

 

[Justinian2]

With my own much smaller skirmish with the law, I was confused from just reading the police report. The lawyers were confused. The witnesses were confused. The ONLY thing that lessened the confusion was time and logic. I actually had to put things in order on a spreadsheet before I straightened out things in my own mind.

The cops and witnesses both screwed up. A witnesses said we were struggling over the police revolver. It was a can of mace. I was holding the cop's wrist to keep the mace from my eyes. Most of the witnesses said the cop was holding my wrist. The cop whose wrist I held and I knew differently. We were the two that should have known.

The point is - never trust the accuracy of every word by every witness. NEVER! Every sentence of every witness contains at least one inaccuracy in the police report written about my incident.
Many of the posts here dissect every word of every statement as if it contained a hidden meaning. HA.

"The cop whose wrist I held and I knew differently. We were the two that should have known". My experience would suggest that the ONLY people that knew that Amanda was struck in the back of the head were Amanda and the Cop that hit her. All others missed it.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

please be specific

Me too.

However, we probably disagree on which family is having their support undermined.

TomCH,

Please indicate which lies you mean and how they undermined support for the family. Thanks.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Or even why a seasoned burglar like Guede would bother to essay such an impregnable fortress in the first place, instead of merely opting for easier pickings.

Indeed so far we considered Rudy's actions assuming he was indeed a skilled and seasoned burglar, perfectly rational and professional in picking his targets.

But looking on the entirety of his career it cannot be missed that it consists of a series of blunders:
He got caught multiple times. He didn't manage to sell the stolen items, he got caught with them. Where he managed to make it - like with the lawyer's office - it was more of bravado then skill. Breaking the window with rock in a courtyard where everyone could see or hear it?
He's methods were rough and he was a very unlucky burglar.
And his last burglary ended up very unfortunately for him, his victim and many other people.

 

[RWVBWL]

Basically I cannot see any explanation for Amanda insisting on making another statement at 5:45 in the morning. Especially when there is virtually nothing more in it then in the paper she signed at 1:45. But I can't see anything wrong in the idea that they called Mignini to Questura and tried all night to make Amanda substantiate her story and implicate Lumumba more clearly.
If you compare the statements of 1:45 and 5:45 it is quite eminent they tried to put some details into the story but failed. That's also how Amanda describe the course of the interrogation:

Then, following this, they wanted details, they wanted
to know everything I had done. But I didn't know how to say. So they started
talking to me, saying, "Okay, so you went out of the house, okay, fine, so
you met Patrick, where did you meet Patrick?" I don't know, maybe in Piazza
Grimana, maybe near it. Because I had this image of Piazza Grimana. "Okay,
fine, so you went with him to your house. Okay, fine. How did you open the
door?" Well, with my key. "So you opened the house". Okay, yes. "And what
did you do then?" I don't know. "But was she already there?" I don't know.
"Did she arrive or was she already there?" Okay. "Who was there with you?"
I don't know. "Was it just Patrick, or was Raffaele there too?" I don't know.
It was the same when the pubblico ministero came, because he asked me:
"Excuse me, I don't understand. Did you hear the sound of a scream?" No.
"But how could you not have heard the scream?". I don't know, maybe my
ears were covered. I kept on and on saying I don't know, maybe, imagining...

Didn't "the scream" show up only in the 5:45 statement, after Mignini arrived?

Hello Katody Matrass,
A question for you.
What scream are you asking about?

Did someone report to the police that they heard a loud scream on the night Meredith Kercher was murdered
but before the interrogation of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito on the night/morning of Nov. 5/6, 2007?

Any help is appreciated!
Thanks, RWVBWL

Hi Katody Matrass, El Buscador, LondonJohn, Chris C, and anyone else!
As I have an hour left before I hit the road, I am really wondering if anyone had reported to the local police that they heard a scream the night Meredith Kercher was murder,
before the fatefull night that Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox were interrogated.

You know, something along the lines of this: Everyone in the neighborhood hears of the murder, people gather and watch the investigation scene unfold, talking amongst themselves. Someones says "I heard the scream". Someone else says "So did I!" and then someone tells the cops this...
One reason that I ask is that awhile back,
I had wondered if Alessandra Formica had went to the police to tell them she and her guy friend had bumped into a black male leaving the area that same night Meredith Kercher was murdered.
Had she done this before that night that RS and AK were interrogated or afterwards?

No one could help answer my question, so I asked someone who really, really knows ALOT about this case.
No, not Michael at PMF or Newsweek writer Barbie Nadeau, but Perugia local Frank Sfarzo, who is, according to some, just a nobody as far as this case is concerned.
Mr. Sfarzo was kind enough to write me back and said she came forth after Raffaele and Amanda were interrogated that night.
And that helped me to form an opinion whether the cops were already looking for a black male the night Raffaele and Amanda were questioned.

So, does anyone know if someone had informed the police that they had heard a scream the night Meredith Kercher was killed
but before Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox were interrogated the night/morning of Nov. 5/6, 2007?

If so, I can see why Mignini was asking Amanda Knox "But how could you not have heard the scream?"

However if there were no reports of anyone reporting that they heard a scream that night Meredith Kercher was murdered,
then isn't Mignini making it up?
Hmmm, I wonder?
RWVBWL

PS-Check out
http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/
+
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/

 

[Jungle Jim]

Katody Matrass: Several comments regarding your post #20412:

1. Two of the photo links you provided from the perspective of Filomenia's window are the same photo.
2. The long exposure photo is indeed pretty cool. However, you can still plainly see Filomenia's window.
3. A more telling photo of the window from the street shows that any vehicle coming down the road would have its headlights pass directly on Filomenia's window. http://perugiamurderfile.org/download/file.php?id=132

 

[Malkmus]

AK admitted on the stand that she was the one who brought up PL's name and by (very direct) implication that her earlier Dec 17 answers and her whole 'story' on this issue were in fact lies.

AK: They hit me twice, before I said the name of Patrick, to make me say a name that I couldn't give.

AK: Because I knew that they arrested him because I gave them his name. But they are the ones who suggested the name. They wanted me to accuse him, and I didn't like that.

AK: Because that was the one where they suggested Patrick's name to me.

Something tells me you're looking at some other part of her testimony and taking it out of context.

 

[RWVBWL]

Katody Matrass: Several comments regarding your post #20412:

1. Two of the photo links you provided from the perspective of Filomenia's window are the same photo.
2. The long exposure photo is indeed pretty cool. However, you can still plainly see Filomenia's window.
3. A more telling photo of the window from the street shows that any vehicle coming down the road would have its headlights pass directly on Filomenia's window. http://perugiamurderfile.org/download/file.php?id=132

Thanks Jungle Jim for including that photograph.

I have a question for you:
I have read of Rudy Guede saying that there was a white car in the driveway when he 1st arrived around 8:30pm that night, he recognised some drug dealer near it.
I have also heard that a black car was seen there in the driveway too later on that night.

Do you know the whereabouts of the either car's location that night?
Thanks, RWVBWL

 

[RWVBWL]

"The cop whose wrist I held and I knew differently. We were the two that should have known". My experience would suggest that the ONLY people that knew that Amanda was struck in the back of the head were Amanda and the Cop that hit her. All others missed it.

I agree with you Justinian2.
Having been kicked by a police officer before, I remember that the only 1 who saw it was he who did it.

Alas, until any of the others who post here experience this, they will never really understand.
But I hope that this never happens!

In Amanda Knox's case, I can easily see a co-worker coverin' whomever's hide, so to speak.
But hey, that's just my own opinion!
Peace,
RWVBWL