• 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.
daydreamer said:
Interesting that you should say this. I ran across this item on IPP: 33% of Italian prison inmates are foreigners and 46% of the female inmates are foreigners. Subsequent posts state that this is old data, and that the percentages are even worse now. Some possible explanations:

1) there is an Italian bias against foreigners
2) Italy attracts criminals
3) a statistical fluke

http://www.injusticeinperugiaforum.org/amnesty-international-t529.html#p4049
Click to expand...
Is this high, low, or typical for Europe? Presumably this has been discussed on injusticeinperugia, otherwise this is just yet another quote being used purely because, on the face of it, it supports Knox. Has any attempt been made to put this into some context to make it meaningful?
 
SomeAlibi said:
Katy_did's arguments on the choice of window are specious I'm afraid - not deliberately so but simply that's not how burglars work and this is an area I am an expert in, whatever else you may think of me, because it is meat and two vedge stock in trade to defend burglars. Even Steve Hyperbole Moore would tell you that the one thing a burglar does is thoroughly case (quickly, efficiently, sure) a house or apartment. A burglar always looks for lights on and always rings the doorbell at least twice to check no-one is in. If Rudy was going to break a window, he would have to check both lower and upper floors because of the sound of broken glass. He knew about both because he had been a guest of the boys side (by the balcony of course) at least twice.

Even better for Rudy, if he'd been there, had a perfect alibi for ringing the doorbell - he'd been there before, so no worries about using it at all - he wouldn't even need to reach for one of the burglar's stock-in-trade excuses for ringing the bell only to find someone at home. So very relaxed, if this was his intention. But this was 9pm. The chances of of someone being in but with the lights off or no light spilling from a window AND that they would not come to answer a ringing front door bell would have been so extremely low as to be utterly negligible. That's a general condition all burglars seek - always - before you even add in that it was a holiday where a lot of students had gone away to see family.
Click to expand...

Sorry SomeAlibi, but your reasoning here consists purely of "burglars always do this, and I know because I'm an expert!" and doesn't address my arguments at all. Saying a burglar "always looks for lights on and always rings the doorbell at least twice" - as if there were some kind of burglar handbook - is just ridiculous. The burglar who broke into Tramontano's home while he was there, whether or not it was Rudy, clearly didn't do that.

The simple fact is that Rudy's biggest problem in breaking into the house was that he could be recognized, and it's also a fact (I take it you don't disagree on this?) that escaping from the balcony would take a lot more time than getting away from the area where Filomena's window was. Where the doors to both upstairs and downstairs flats are located would make it very difficult for Rudy to make a quick getaway from the balcony without being seen, if someone turned out to be home. He would also be oblivious to someone coming up the driveway as he was in the process of breaking in and being caught redhanded, so to speak. With Filomena's window, he could check no one was coming home right up until the moment he entered the house, and could keep a look-out afterwards. That entry point is far preferable from that perspective.

There's simply no way he could be sure no one was home, not until he'd actually broken the window. Even if he knocked on the door and there was no response, one of the residents could've been home in bed with their boyfriend/girlfriend and chosen not to answer (you've never ignored a doorbell in those circumstances...?). In a house of 8 young people, that's not exactly an unlikely possibility.

You haven't addressed any of the points I've made; saying "burglars always follow the burglar handbook" doesn't do that.
 
Last edited:
Dan O. said:
I've raised this point before but nobody seems to have caught on. Could Rudy have rung the doorbell?

What I've seen in photos of the front entrance is that the only doorbell is part of the intercom unit which is mounted behind where the metal gate is stored when it is opened. If the girls didn't regularly lock this gate (and why would they with that solid door with triple deadbolt lock), Rudy could not have rung the bell. The best he could do would be to knock on that heavy door and hope the occupants aren't preoccupied listening to their iPod.

You've been there so you would be the best to know, is there another doorbell that would be accessible with the gate open?
Click to expand...

Thanks Dan, another good point.
 
shuttlt said:
Is this high, low, or typical for Europe? Presumably this has been discussed on injusticeinperugia, otherwise this is just yet another quote being used purely because, on the face of it, it supports Knox. Has any attempt been made to put this into some context to make it meaningful?
Click to expand...
This reminds me of the survey from months ago that got trumpeted all over claiming to show Italians confidence in their justice system was non-existent. 5 minutes on Google showed it was on a par with the rest of Europe (their confidence in their politicians on the other hand....).

If anybody is remotely curious about populations of foreign nationals in prisons worldwide:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_pri_for_pri-crime-prisoners-foreign

The site seems to provide references for it's statistics, so we could even check it if we're really keen.
 
shuttlt said:
This reminds me of the survey from months ago that got trumpeted all over claiming to show Italians confidence in their justice system was non-existent. 5 minutes on Google showed it was on a par with the rest of Europe (their confidence in their politicians on the other hand....).

If anybody is remotely curious about populations of foreign nationals in prisons worldwide:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_pri_for_pri-crime-prisoners-foreign

The site seems to provide references for it's statistics, so we could even check it if we're really keen.
Click to expand...

Ahh, so it's actually 70.8%, and not just 70% as I posted! :eek:

Interesting that Italy is apparently much safer, and has less crime, than the UK!
 
Last edited:
Hey TomCH, Machiavelli, SomeAlibi, pilot padron, capealadin -- where is our old pal Fulc? I thought he was back in the mix. He only stuck it out for one day -- what's up with that? We need his uniquely energetic take on things around here, don't you think?
 
Last edited:
TomCH said:
Ahh, so it's actually 70.8%, and not just 70% as I posted! :eek:

Interesting that Italy is apparently much safer, and has less crime, than the UK!
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say safer and less crime. Apparently, Rudy was able to go on a crime spree and it wasn't until Meredith was murdered that he was charged with anything.
 
Dan O. said:
I've raised this point before but nobody seems to have caught on. Could Rudy have rung the doorbell?

What I've seen in photos of the front entrance is that the only doorbell is part of the intercom unit which is mounted behind where the metal gate is stored when it is opened. If the girls didn't regularly lock this gate (and why would they with that solid door with triple deadbolt lock), Rudy could not have rung the bell. The best he could do would be to knock on that heavy door and hope the occupants aren't preoccupied listening to their iPod.

You've been there so you would be the best to know, is there another doorbell that would be accessible with the gate open?
Click to expand...

Rudy claims Knox rang the doorbell and waited for Meredith to answer the door while he was on the toilet. So apparently he knows there is a working doorbell on that apartment.
 
Chris C said:
I wouldn't say safer and less crime. Apparently, Rudy was able to go on a crime spree and it wasn't until Meredith was murdered that he was charged with anything.
Click to expand...
How does the second sentence support the first?
 
TomCH said:
Ahh, so it's actually 70.8%, and not just 70% as I posted! :eek:

Interesting that Italy is apparently much safer, and has less crime, than the UK!
Click to expand...
What little reading I've been able to do on this indicates they have a much larger police force than the UK. Perhaps this accounts for it?
 
Mary_H said:
Hey TomCH, Machiavelli, SomeAlibi, pilot padron, capealadin -- where is our old pal Fulc? I thought he was back in the mix. He only stuck it out for one day -- what's up with that? We need his uniquely energetic take on things around here, don't you think?
Click to expand...

I can't speak for Fulc, but he'll be in the mix till the cake is set, I imagine.
 
SomeAlibi said:
Katy_did's arguments on the choice of window are specious I'm afraid - not deliberately so but simply that's not how burglars work and this is an area I am an expert in, whatever else you may think of me, because it is meat and two vedge stock in trade to defend burglars. Even Steve Hyperbole Moore would tell you that the one thing a burglar does is thoroughly case (quickly, efficiently, sure) a house or apartment. A burglar always looks for lights on and always rings the doorbell at least twice to check no-one is in. If Rudy was going to break a window, he would have to check both lower and upper floors because of the sound of broken glass. He knew about both because he had been a guest of the boys side (by the balcony of course) at least twice.

Even better for Rudy, if he'd been there, had a perfect alibi for ringing the doorbell - he'd been there before, so no worries about using it at all - he wouldn't even need to reach for one of the burglar's stock-in-trade excuses for ringing the bell only to find someone at home. So very relaxed, if this was his intention. But this was 9pm. The chances of of someone being in but with the lights off or no light spilling from a window AND that they would not come to answer a ringing front door bell would have been so extremely low as to be utterly negligible. That's a general condition all burglars seek - always - before you even add in that it was a holiday where a lot of students had gone away to see family.

Burglars in such situations establish a really good level of comfort - doing a burglary with someone inside a house is a disaster for them - the thing to be avoided above all. You get really comfortable and then you make sure you're not seen going in. The balcony as in the two subsequent break-ins(!) is how you do that.

Burglars care about i) ensuring the place is empty and ii) not being observed during the break-in and iii) doing the break-in as easily, safely as possible. The argument that you go into Filomena's window just in case you get caught in that transitory act by someone on the inside is incredible. The suggestion is choose the option involving jumping down for preference a 14-18 foot drop from Filomena's window from a perilous tiny window ledge covered with broken glass versus lowering yourself in an instant from a balcony railing with a firm hand hold with about a two feet drop from a hanging position? Please. Come on!

Of course, once you are inside, the exit to Filomena's room and the entrance from the balcony both lead to... the same room - the communal kitchen. A completely specious argument.

You'll notice that your best debaters on your side of the argument (Wilkes / Chris H in my estimation) are willing to concede points or acknowledge weaknesses / inexplicable aspects of the evidence from their point of view.
I really judge your credibility by knowing when to say "yes ok that's just unlikely / weak". You even have a get out that Rudy could have simulated a break-in. But this is so terribly terribly weak... I'm really lost for words to be honest.
Click to expand...


You're just lecturing people at great length on what you personally believe burglars do or should do. Rudy would not have been able to get through the balcony because he didn't have a crowbar. He picked Filomena's window because the shutters were already open. That's all there is to it. Similiar opportunist crimes happen every day.
 
Withnail1969 said:
You're just lecturing people at great length on what you personally believe burglars do or should do. Rudy would not have been able to get through the balcony because he didn't have a crowbar. He picked Filomena's window because the shutters were already open. That's all there is to it. Similiar opportunist crimes happen every day.
Click to expand...

A couple of things...

You haven't established that Rudi didn't have a crowbar.
You haven't established that a crowbar was required for the balcony entrance.
You haven't established that Filomena's shutters were open.
 
Amazer said:
A couple of things...

You haven't established that Rudi didn't have a crowbar.
You haven't established that a crowbar was required for the balcony entrance.
You haven't established that Filomena's shutters were open.
Click to expand...

Rudy certainly didn't have one the last time he was caught burgling.

How would you force open the balcony entrance without some kind of tool?

Filomena's shutters were unable to be fully closed because the wood had swelled.
 
Withnail1969 said:
Rudy certainly didn't have one the last time he was caught burgling.
Click to expand...
So?

How would you force open the balcony entrance without some kind of tool?
Click to expand...
Lots of glass there... and clearly noise wasn't an issue for Rudi.

Filomena's shutters were unable to be fully closed because the wood had swelled.
Click to expand...
Which is not quite the same is being open... is it.
 
Withnail1969 said:
Rudy certainly didn't have one the last time he was caught burgling.

How would you force open the balcony entrance without some kind of tool?

Filomena's shutters were unable to be fully closed because the wood had swelled.
Click to expand...

I still think you guys are looking at this upside down. If the assumption is Rudy broke in, then he chose Filomena's window.

If the assumption is Amanda and Raffaele staged the burglary, all this talk about what Rudy would have done or had done in the past is meaningless. That is, which would be better and easier to stage from the inside.
 
Amazer said:
So?


Lots of glass there... and clearly noise wasn't an issue for Rudi.


Which is not quite the same is being open... is it.
Click to expand...

Filomena's statement (Micheli report):

R. argued that there were certainly valuable items, including a laptop, a pair of sunglasses and some gold jewelry, stored in a drawer: a look surface, it seemed that nothing was missing, except perhaps some article makeup.As for the window, remember to have certainly closed the windows, but probably leaving the shutters open: the shutters, but can not be hundred percent sure, without thought of them still closed both since left the tax met resistance on the sill due to a swelling of the wood. His memory was no longer accurate, since it considered to have certainly opened the shutters in the morning needing light to change (while not having stayed home, but with your boyfriend, had moved from there and reached the A. who was celebrating his birthday), but was then removed in a hurry because he was already late.
Click to expand...

Massei quotes one of her other versions on the shutters (can you say cherry picking....again).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom