Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Katody Matrass]

SomeAlibi, as you're around, another thing before it slips my mind.
What do you think about Mr Curatolo disco buses? Are you aware of the controversy around this topic?

One last thing, about your theory of the crime:
Do you think AK and RS were running to and fro between the cottage and the piazza to get noticed by Mr Curatolo every time he did a break from reading his newspaper?

And why didn't Meredith redial her mother when the first call didn't get through?

 

[Katody Matrass]

I already said: I think it's a very bad mistake in the judge's summary. I would jump on it from a height. He needs to correct.

it's up to the appeal court I think, but doesn't it mean Amanda didn't leave Raffaele's after all?

 

[SomeAlibi]

Fresh couple of questions for the Knox supporters here. What do you think of Steve Moore's claim that Amanda was "beaten". How do you feel about the contradiction between Moore's claims on television that he reviewed the case (but not Massei) after Michelle Moore watched the CBS documentary when she has now admitted that Bruce Fisher approached them to get involved. Why does Steve exaggerate and make up stories?

 

[Chris C]

Rudy, Amanda and Raffale were getting blasted in the kitchen / communal area at the cottage that evening up until the murder. What time precisely that happened, no one knows.

Getting blasted? Rudy arrived at 830pm. Knox and Sollecito have an iron tight alibi till 9:26pm. Then Mignini's super witness puts them in the park from 9:30pm until 11:30pm. Meredith was murdered according to Mignini after 11:30pm. So when did they have time to get blasted with Rudy? Nice try.

Rudy tells a story of Meredith getting very worked up about missing money and I think that's a transplant of an argument between Meredith and Amanda. Pure supposition. Rudy tried to use the towels to assist Meredith which is why they are completely soaked in blood. That's why he stepped in the blood. Amanda and Raffaele did not. I don't find anything terrible surprising in that.

In that same statement he also says:
Knox rang the doorbell to an apartment she has a key to,
That he arrived at 8:30pm, which i believe was verified by the garage cameras.
That Meredith was killed a little after 10pm and he fled the scene before 10:30pm. Tells of the broken down car while fleeing the scene.
He never identified Guede or Knox. He only said that Sollecito looked like the guy that assaulted him. Yet he couldn't give a positive identification even though he supposedly struggled with him. He only claims to have heard knox's voice. Though some how he sees knox walk out the door without seeing her face and from the bathroom which can't see the exit.
He places himself in every room in the house. Plus he even claims to have looked around the house for a burglar.

Chris - what is your take on the cellphone tower at Via Aquila versus Amanda's story of not leaving the flat.

What does that have to do with the murder? She was seen at Sollecito's apartment after that, which is a time before the murder. Whats your take on Meredith cell phone picking up a different tower after 10pm, which also happens to be around the time Guede flees the scene.

Second, do you not find the one joint versus the absolute statement of never smoking marijuana again incongruous? Does it not tell you something about Amanda's truthfulness?

Truthfulness? Stefanoni, Kokomani, Curatolo, and Quintavalle all lied on the stand. There is even proof of it. Yet your worried about how truthful Knox is. Dont you find it odd that 4 key people in the prosecutions case all lied on the witness stand. Plus whats so important about after she gets out, if she doesn't smoke a joint again or if she even turns into a prostitute addicted to drugs. None of that has a bearing on whether she killed or didn't kill Meredith. Its just an attempt to move the discussion away from the evidence.

 

[Fulcanelli]

I heard the entire court realised it when they burst out laughing after his ridiculous claim to owning a watch was proved to be wrong. I assume it was Bongiorno who asked him to show if he had one.

Then you heard wrong. They burst out laughing because when Bongiorno asked him how he knew the time he answered "I looked at my watch". The joke being, that Bongiorno had assumed because he was homeless he wouldn't have a watch. The joke was on her, not Curatolo.

 

[SomeAlibi]

SomeAlibi, as you're around, another thing before it slips my mind.
What do you think about Mr Curatolo disco buses? Are you aware of the controversy around this topic?

One last thing, about your theory of the crime:
Do you think AK and RS were running to and fro between the cottage and the piazza to get noticed by Mr Curatolo every time he did a break from reading his newspaper?

And why didn't Meredith redial her mother when the first call didn't get through?

The buses are easy: either the defence has sworn statements from ALL the relevant companies they weren't running that night or they don't. Either the prosecution can prove that that is incorrect or they can't.

On Nov 1st 2010, there were two buses in the square after 11pm.

http://perugiamurderfile.org/gallery/image.php?album_id=12&image_id=2038

Massei's report doesn't make clear the duration of AK and RS's presence in the square.

Do you redial every time you can't get through?

 

[SomeAlibi]

Then you heard wrong. They burst out laughing because when Bongiorno asked him how he knew the time he answered "I looked at my watch". The joke being, that Bongiorno had assumed because he was homeless he wouldn't have a watch. The joke was on her, not Curatolo.

Correct. It backfired badly.

 

[Jungle Jim]

Hey, SomeAlibi

I checked in the appeals. Looks like they did catch it. They point out that Massei used a cell tower that covers Raffaele's to conclude Amanda wasn't there. What do you think about it?

Very interesting. I look forward to how it is addressed in the appeal trial.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Hi, Fulcanelli, we're not in court here
I don't have to prove he burglarized this or that. It's undeniable that he broke into the kindergarten. It's undeniable that he was in possession of items stolen in another burglary in Perugia, which links him to it very strongly. It was a second story entering with use of a rock, remember? He had some other items IIRC, (some woman's watches etc?) Tramontano links him to yet another burglary. There are clues strong enough.
It's simple common sense.

When we have an apparent burglary ending up in murder, with his traces all over the place and a second story window broken with a rock from the outside - we need a really strong evidence he didn't do it. Some vague "the kitchen window or the balcony would be easier" doesn't wash. You really need a hard proof it's impossible to do it via Filomena's window.

Oh I see, so since we are not in court we can just make baseless unsupported accusations against people and then claim them to be fact. Do I have it right?

Filomena's window doesn't have to be proven to be impossible, all that's required is that the fake break-in by the evidence was stahed. The trial's done that. Many have done that here and elsewhere. But then, I though we didn't have to prove anything anyway since we aren't in court here? So, tell me again why I have to 'prove' it on this message board? Or have I mistaken your meaning and what you actually meant was I have to prove stuff...but you don't?

 

[Chris C]

Now Rudy has been fully convicted and has no avenues of appeal left, what is to stop him deciding to tell the truth? If I was Amanda I would be very very worried right now.

Really, he will also get to be cross examined by the defense. He will have to explain to a jury about all the past break ins, including how he just came into possession of items that where from a robbery from a 2nd story window. He will then have to give up a name to who he got the stuff from in the office break in. He will have to explain about pulling the knife on the woman and the break in which he struggled with another man. How the cell phones happened to be dumped next door to his place. How its just coincidence a faked break happens to match the office break in. If he testifies, he would be doing the defense a favor.

 

[SomeAlibi]

Getting blasted? Rudy arrived at 830pm. Knox and Sollecito have an iron tight alibi till 9:26pm. Then Mignini's super witness puts them in the park from 9:30pm until 11:30pm. Meredith was murdered according to Mignini after 11:30pm. So when did they have time to get blasted with Rudy? Nice try.


In that same statement he also says:
Knox rang the doorbell to an apartment she has a key to,
That he arrived at 8:30pm, which i believe was verified by the garage cameras.
That Meredith was killed a little after 10pm and he fled the scene before 10:30pm. Tells of the broken down car while fleeing the scene.
He never identified Guede or Knox. He only said that Sollecito looked like the guy that assaulted him. Yet he couldn't give a positive identification even though he supposedly struggled with him. He only claims to have heard knox's voice. Though some how he sees knox walk out the door without seeing her face and from the bathroom which can't see the exit.
He places himself in every room in the house. Plus he even claims to have looked around the house for a burglar.

What does that have to do with the murder? She was seen at Sollecito's apartment after that, which is a time before the murder. Whats your take on Meredith cell phone picking up a different tower after 10pm, which also happens to be around the time Guede flees the scene.


Truthfulness? Stefanoni, Kokomani, Curatolo, and Quintavalle all lied on the stand. There is even proof of it. Yet your worried about how truthful Knox is. Dont you find it odd that 4 key people in the prosecutions case all lied on the witness stand. Plus whats so important about after she gets out, if she doesn't smoke a joint again or if she even turns into a prostitute addicted to drugs. None of that has a bearing on whether she killed or didn't kill Meredith. Its just an attempt to move the discussion away from the evidence.

This idea that Curatolo said that AK and RS were in the basketball court for 2 hours is total nonsense. There's nothing to do, it is bare, it is frigging cold in November. There is no-one who would stay there for two hours and that's not what Curatolo said in testimony. This is a ridiculous assertion and it's not terribly credible you're all sitting around saying that's what was said in the trial. It wasn't. Fight the case, not the made up stuff that makes you feel better.

Kokomani was discounted as unreliable so I don't believe anything he said. The court found the other three witnesses credible. You're making an argument from your conviction - there's no evidence to support you so no, I don't have any concern because no-one shows they have lied. The fact that you need Stefanoni, Kokomani, Curatolo,Quintavalle, Filomena, the Postal Police attending the same room and an absolute host of police personnel and forensic staff, ALL to be lying, really ought to give you a clue as to how unlikely your arguments really are.

 

[katy_did]

[whoops, quoted wrong post]

 

[Chris C]

Chris C: "What do cartwheels have to do with being guilty. "

Are you deliberately missing the point?

You never answered. so I ask again "Are you deliberately missing the point?"

Sorry If I went to bed before answering your post. Could you cite when Knox was doing cartwheels and how its involved with the interrogation. Though I do find it odd, that whenever people discuss the interrogation, suddenly guilters start flinging cartwheels around as their defense of their beliefs.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

Great photos. They demonstrate very well how how the kitchen window can't be seen from the road (blocked by the roof of the outhouse). In those shots, one can see 'most' of the balcony (although only for a fraction of a moment since the cars are moving), but not at night. At night that area isn't lit, being at the back of the house rather then the front areas which are close to the road and street lights.

Isn't that some kind of light at the bottom of the stairs?

 

[Matthew Best]

Ad hominem, unproven and incorrect as he didn't fold under questioning in the trial. When do the mods ban you is a reasonable question.

I'm afraid the mods here don't work the same way you are possibly accustomed to elsewhere: they don't ban people for posting stuff you disagree with.

 

[Chris C]

Geez, what problem is an 8 pound rock up one floor?
(probably in a backpack)

Its 8 pounds. what on earth would he need a backpack for? Go fill up a gallon jug with water. That weighs 8.35 pounds. Have fun. It would not be hard to throw that rock from the ground through the window.

 

[shuttlt]

Sorry If I went to bed before answering your post. Could you cite when Knox was doing cartwheels and how its involved with the interrogation. Though I do find it odd, that whenever people discuss the interrogation, suddenly guilters start flinging cartwheels around as their defense of their beliefs.

I believe ColonelHall is reprising a running gag about the OP.

 

[Fulcanelli]

One is backed by science in search of the truth, the other is voodoo in search of hoodoo. But you are welcome to defend statement analysis dude. I am not sure that strengthens your position, which was the point I was making.

I know that Rose. Just with the other way round for the subjects as you mean them. The fact is one person is trained, while the other person has read a couple of articles and claims to be a world expert as a result, the same person who claims he can accurately nail down TOD from the stomach contents when all respectable articles state one must not use stomach contents to pronounce TOD due to it's unreliability and inaccuracy. To do so is indeed hoodoo in search of voodoo.

 

[Fulcanelli]

As with Platonov, I think you should review Machiavelli's definition of the legal term 'voluntary [or spontaneous] statement' (I think 'unsolicited' is a misleading translation, by the way; 'spontaneous', 'voluntary' and 'unsolicited' are not simply interchangeable terms. Though I understand why you chose 'unsolicited').

I chose unsolicited because it was unsolicited. Knox asked to be heard again, the ILE didn't demand she be interviewed again.

I do find it really odd why you are so determined to contest this when Amanda's defence never have.

 

[Draca]

How Bruce Fisher Met Steve Moore

Fresh couple of questions for the Knox supporters here. How do you feel about the contradiction between Moore's claims on television that he reviewed the case (but not Massei) after Michelle Moore watched the CBS documentary when she has now admitted that Bruce Fisher approached them to get involved. Why does Steve exaggerate and make up stories?

You're spreading untruths SomeAlibi. A person can easily read a piece of a blog and think they have the whole story.

Michelle Moore posted on an Amanda Knox Facebook page that her husband had reviewed the case and wanted to help. An Innocentisti saw the post and told Bruce among others. Bruce then contacted them and Steve's articles on Injusticeinpergia came out of it. Bruce Fisher did not go out seeking a random retired FBI agent. Steve and Michelle Moore did not lie about how they became involved in the case. Perhaps you should apologize to the three of them.

---------

Michelle Moore's Mar 16, 2010 post on Amanda Knox Facebook page can be read on this thread:

http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=289513668265&id=193468818894


Michelle Celestial Easterly Moore
My husband is/actually WAS an FBI agent. He's traveled world wide. Was supervisor of counter terrorism for all of Asia. For as much as he's seen, been through, been a part of, for some reason, the young girl has really affected him. Proba...bly partially because he feels helpless in helping her. He's studied every single fact on this case. He's brilliant in my opinion. And he knows law, and he knows this is one of the biggest injustices ever.

He wants to help. It honestly feels like a death to him several times a day.
If there is ANYTHING we can do to help, we are extremely passionate about what you're going through. He needs to help you. He is a problem solver. He gets things done. He's worked with several DA's. He prosecuted Neal Buford, the guys who shot up a Jewish Community Center where young children were. He had a dream career. He retired because of an amazing job opportunity when he became 50, a year ago.

If you need him in anyway, shape, or form, I know he could help you somehow. Seriously. Not your typical agent. At one point, his actual job was to get Bin Laden. Gets things done one way or another-outside the box kinda guy. If you would like to call him, feel free to write me a personal message and I will give you his cellphone #. He would like to help you. It's actually affected our family. Part of this I think is Post tramatic stess disorder for dealing with things in the Beaureu that he had to deal with. But regardless, it's real, this pain.

We're appalled at the two cents people are putting in who really have no freakin' idea of what's going on, and the true facts. Media can be very damning. And a lack of logic and looking at the evidence. And in finding out what was true and not. Thank you for listening on this. We have not stopped praying in that we are believers and we have seen God help in situations even like these--for real.

Sincerely, michelle moore
March 16 at 12:11am