Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Machiavelli]

It's below the road level, and looking from the car driving on the right side of the road you wouldn't see much if anything.
Here's a pic I just snatched from PMF :
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_427054d0a2467cba8b.jpg[/qimg]

Here's how it looks from the road, again:
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_427054d094b980bbfc.jpg[/qimg]
And that's how much of the cottage you see from the right side of the road
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_427054d094b0abfa00.jpg[/qimg]

I don't think Rudy had to be afraid of being spotted from the cars.

The window id above the road level.

And perfectly visible in all your pictures.

 

[Justinian2]

Do you realize what you just said?

My implication was that if anyone knew that a staged burglary implicated others in the house, then Guede would have broken into the house in such a way that it looked staged.

I think Guede broke into the house to make a robbery or have sex. My second point is why would anyone in the house stage a burglary if they knew it would not shed blame?

 

[Withnail1969]

How about posting the link to this alleged statement by Kermit and then we can all look at it together and see if we agree that it really says what you are claiming it says.

It's easy to find. Just search the forum for the phrase 'burglar's backpack'. Apparently it's part of the burglar's dress code which obviously is in addition to the burglar's code of practice cited by SomeAlibi.

 

[Justinian2]

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

Wow! That's a revealing statistic! In the USA, about half the inmates are black, yet the USA is only 20% black.

Wow! That's bad to the bone!

 

[platonov]

Yes platonov, my post was intended to show the silliness of some of the arguments I have heard presented for the motivation for the staged break in. If you can't see elements of number 4 in the quote from the Massei report I provided, I can't help you further.

RoseMontague.

You weren't helping me, I was merely showing that you were the author of the silliness not Massei and this has been done.

On the latter, as I said before.

Admittedly some of the individual words or clauses aren't 'silly' - but the overall 'argument' is

 

[Dan O.]

Gee. I donno.

Maybe take pictures or something?

Can you point to the pictures such as you would have taken that clearly establish that the break in was staged? One showing the glass on top of the clothes would be a start. Or how about the pictures showing that the wall and garden below the window are undisturbed.

 

[SomeAlibi]

Do you have any idea who was it that dragged the brightness sliders all the way down on it?


Thanks, the new one is much better and even resembles a bit the one I corrected for you

It looks like you had lots of good photos there. It's a pity we get them only after pointing out that the ones you posted initially were either misleading or outright altered.

Cheap score acknowledged but if you can explain why I have two black ones as well in the original directory also I'd be most grateful. I know you guys don't like motivations but one does not become a master conspiracist by deliberately manipulating an image of a place which is publicly accessible to anyone who wants to go and take a picture of any time. As distinct from footprints which people can't revisit, for instance You could of course send Chris Mellas down there tonight to iron it all out for us. He hasn't got much to do in the evening. Anyway you say "that one's got a flash" and I'm more than happy to say "yes it has" and "that one doesn't look right" and indeed it doesn't and out of keeping with the others I posted which also included a clip of the balcony so I correct that and happy to. So, I post what I've got and you're welcome to it. There are some 50 pictures up from my trip http://perugiamurderfile.org/gallery/album.php?album_id=13 and http://perugiamurderfile.org/gallery/album.php?album_id=12 and and the videos are under somealibis (note s) on youtube with a couple more to come.

 

[RoseMontague]

RoseMontague.

You werent helping me, I was merely showing that you were the author of the silliness not Massei and this has been done.

On the latter, as I said before.

Admittedly some of the individual words or clauses aren't 'silly' - but the overall 'argument' is


RoseMontague

I agree, in fact I neither denied that some of it was not Massei's nor confirmed that it was all Massei's, simply stated that one you said was silly contained an argument made by Massei, and I also agree with the silliness of that one. Massei is simply not alone in the silliness of this argument, including some of the other arguments I have seen and attempted to put together. I am sure that some have been left out if you want to add to the list.

 

[Withnail1969]

You could of course send Chris Mellas down there tonight to iron it all out for us. He hasn't got much to do in the evening.

How would we send Chris Mellas down there?

 

[Fuji]

Staged burglaries usually get someone in the house where they were done convicted. Thus, the only person that would have benefitted from a staged burglary would have been Guede.

In a thread replete with rhetorical abortions, this is a noteworthy example of such.

The reason why "staged burglaries usually get someone in the house where they were done convicted" is because they are overwhelmingly fabricated by someone who has a legitimate reason to be in the structure in question (i.e., by residents if it is a domicile, by employees if it is a place of business). They do so to simulate the appearance of a "random crime" and to deter the investigation from focusing on them, as they would surely do in the absence of any staging.

Thus, the only person who would have benefited from a successful staged burglary in the Kercher case was Knox (and Sollecito, by extension, but only because he claimed her as his alibi). That the staging was unsuccessful does not in any logical fashion implicate Guede as a likely candidate for the staging. To claim otherwise is, frankly, bizarre.

 

[RoseMontague]

Should have Rudy's verdict on his SC appeal shortly. This brief summation is confusing to me however as it seems to indicate the prosecution could have objected to the sentence of the appeal court.

It 's the request of the Attorney General of the Supreme Court, Antonio Gualanella, who asked the courts to take on the conviction on appeal against Rudy. For Pg the ruling of the Court of Appeal was "correct, logical, exemplary, respectful of the principles of due process. " At first instance, the Ivory Coast was sentenced to 30 years for the death of English girl. Gualanella has also promoted the reconstruction of the case made on appeal, given that according to the Pg is "legitimate competition in the murder of English girl by Guede. In the second instance the boy had obtained the grant of extenuating circumstances, which resulted in the reduction of sentence from 30 to 16 years. The Pg has raised no objection on mitigating circumstances.

http://notizie.virgilio.it/notizie/...n_carcere_per_omicidio_meredith,27482697.html

 

[Fuji]

You didn't state that there was a 'burglar's handbook' but you had clearly decided that burglars operated according to a set of rules which you claim to know. (Argument from authority). Much the same as Kermit with his bizarre insistence that Rudy must have filled up and then emptied some 'burglar's backpack' which he allegedly had.

Much the same as you when you claimed earlier that you were privy to what sort of items burglars commonly carry.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

The window id above the road level.

And perfectly visible in all your pictures.

And not only that, when he's deciding which window to break in, he is standing up above, at road level there, where as when he's at the back looking up at the balcony, he is below street level, completely invisible to the road.

 

[Withnail1969]

This Daily Mail article states the following:

Burglary victims attacked in their own home once every 30 minutes

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245417/Burglary-victims-attacked-home-30-minutes.html

 

[SomeAlibi]

Can you point to the pictures such as you would have taken that clearly establish that the break in was staged? One showing the glass on top of the clothes would be a start. Or how about the pictures showing that the wall and garden below the window are undisturbed.

As you know, there are no such photos in the public domain. Although of course there is the photo of the glass on the window ledge being undisturbed by anyone placing their hand on it to pull themselves up. The window below is off centre to the right of the windowsill as you look from the outside towards the cottage. The picture from the inside shows the glass on the left (i.e. same, dominant side one would have needed to pull up on most) completely undisturbed. Similarly no blood from someone cutting their wrist on the same glass if they pulled themselves up on the ridge of the cill. No disturbance from having pulled themselves up and having knelt on the glass while opening the window from the outside in. No blood on the jagged glass despite having to reach a long way up and inside to open the inside shutters.

I look at these two photos and always love to imagine exactly where the handholds were for Rudy such that he was able to pull himself up a) at all and b) without cutting himself, given the height and the off-centre aspect of the "pull up". Looks to me like he'd have had to do a finger pull up the human fly would be proud of...

http://perugiamurderfile.org/gallery/image.php?album_id=21&image_id=1454

http://perugiamurderfile.org/gallery/image.php?album_id=21&image_id=1398

On the other hand, if it were staged, no such problem. Big old chunks of glass those on the windowsill aren't they? Right behind where the window broke with no powdered glass or small fragments. Just nice chunky bits. Unlike on the inside sill where once can see small fragments. Pesky those type, always have a good chance of cutting oneself on them and leaving DNA. Probably best to avoid picking those up to lay on the outside sill if staging a burglary eh?

I believe the only person posting who has access to the raw crime scene footage which would hopefully include such pictures if they exist is Charlie Wilkes but as we know, he only shares what he wants to / is allowed to. A great shame since selective disclosure is a profound barrier to fair evaluation of evidence.

 

[Dan O.]

I did this for you on the train this morning. Uploading now..

(some of?) The data you are missing from the timeline are as follows:
...

Thanks, I'll pencil these in but I really like to include a reference to the sources for each entry in my timeline. I don't think it would look too good to list "SomeAlibi" as the source.

As you know, the lack of corroboration of Raffaele and Amanda's interview and testimony of interaction with the computer versus their story of sleeping in until 10 / 10.30 on the morning of the 1st is a significant problem in the defence case. It needs to be noted in any objective timeline.

I recall from somewhere that Raffaele said he woke up about that time and then went back to bed. He didn't say how late he stayed up and he may not have even been aware of how late it was. He did mention he thought he received a message form his dad around 11PM. If he saw that time that the message was sent before going to bed it would be consistent.

Can't remember if you added the 7.30/7.45 point for Amanda being seen outside of the store at the bottom of Corso Garibaldi. Again, by all means dispute the evidence but a comprehensive timeline is important to both sides and must be complete as to the evidence presented.

I think it's in there. At least it should be since it is sourced.

 

[platonov]

I agree, in fact I neither denied that some of it was not Massei's nor confirmed that it was all Massei's, simply stated that one you said was silly contained an argument made by Massei, and I also agree with the silliness of that one. Massei is simply not alone in the silliness of this argument, including some of the other arguments I have seen and attempted to put together. I am sure that some have been left out if you want to add to the list.

I think I've just found (another) one

In other news - due to govt. cutbacks the Argument Clinic has been merged with the "The Ministry of Silly Walks" with predictable results.

.

 

[quadraginta]

How about posting the link to this alleged statement by Kermit and then we can all look at it together and see if we agree that it really says what you are claiming it says.

It's easy to find. Just search the forum for the phrase 'burglar's backpack'. Apparently it's part of the burglar's dress code which obviously is in addition to the burglar's code of practice cited by SomeAlibi.

Why on earth should I go off in search of something you claim exists.

With the likelihood that it is as bogus as the other claim you made in the same thread I cannot imagine why I should bother.

Back up your own claims. Assuming you can.

 

[Withnail1969]

Similarly no blood from someone cutting their wrist on the same glass if they pulled themselves up on the ridge of the cill. No disturbance from having pulled themselves up and having knelt on the glass while opening the window from the outside in. No blood on the jagged glass despite having to reach a long way up and inside to open the inside shutters.

So Rudy wasn't wearing gloves? I know little about burglaries, but i would imagine that wearing gloves might be an action item in the burglars' handbook. That way you can avoid annoyances like cutting yourself on broken glass or leaving fingerprints.

 

[Withnail1969]

Why on earth should I go off in search of something you claim exists.

With the likelihood that it is as bogus as the other claim you made in the same thread I cannot imagine why I should bother.

Back up your own claims. Assuming you can.

I've asked for citations or links many times from those on the guilt side and I've been told to find them myself. If you don't want to use the search function on the forum, I don't care.