• 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.
loverofzion said:
Nonsense.
By then her mother had been privy to amanda's series of partners; she knew amanda was sleeping with raf at his place.

I was there refers to what it appears, the scene of the murder.
Click to expand...

This article, if correct, places the quote into its surrounding context and helps to explain what Knox was referring to:

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Sky-News-Archive/Article/20080641295262

If this report is accurate, then what Knox actually said, in context, is this:

"It's stupid, because I can't say anything else. I was there and I can't lie about that, I have no reason to."

This makes it pretty clear that "I was there" does not refer to Knox being at the cottage at the time of the murder. Otherwise she most definitely would have a reason to lie about it. It therefore almost certainly refers to her being at Sollecito's apartment, or there's also a small possibility that it refers to her being at the cottage at some time other than the time of the murder.
 
Mary_H said:
Thank you to Catnip on PMF for providing this photograph from La Nazione, of PM Mignini talking to Luca Lalli outside the cottage on November 7th. RWVBWL, what is that I see in Mignini's hands?

http://www.repubblica.it/2006/05/gallerie/cronaca/ragazza-perugia/2.html
Click to expand...
Hi there Mary H!
Whoa, whoa, whoa, what the heck did you find?!?
That looks sure looks like a audio mini-cassette recorder to me! Could it be?
If that is so, Mignini is a lot smarter than I had given him credit for, he's moved into the modern age...

But why use one to record the conversation of an Italian speaking guy he works with, BUT not use one when questioning a woman whose Italian was seemingly so hard to comprehend that the police had to bring in a mediator to help them understand what she was saying 1 late night while questioning her further?

Hmmm, now this I find really, really strange,
especially since they had 3 other, earlier days of trying to understand Amanda Knox's grasp of the Italian language.

Mignini now appears
http://www.repubblica.it/2006/05/gallerie/cronaca/ragazza-perugia/2.html
to be smart enough to be using an audio recorder out in the field...



PS-I wonder what other over-looked details are sitting in early photographs of the crime scene area?
Wouldn't it be a shock if there was a photo with a police officer speaking to Antonio Curatolo in the background?
 
Last edited:
RWVBWL said:
Hi there Mary H!
Whoa, whoa, whoa, what the heck did you find?!?
That looks sure looks like a audio mini-cassette recorder to me! Could it be?
If that is so, Mignini is a lot smarter than I had given him credit for, he's moved into the modern age...

But why use one to record the conversation of an Italian speaking guy he works with, BUT not use one when questioning a woman whose Italian was seemingly so hard to comprehend that the police had to bring in a mediator to help them understand what she was saying 1 late night while questioning her further?

Hmmm, now this I find really, really strange,
especially since they had 3 other, earlier days of trying to understand Amada Knox's grasp of the Italian language. Mignini now appears
http://www.repubblica.it/2006/05/gallerie/cronaca/ragazza-perugia/2.html
to be smart enough to be using an audio recorder out in the field...



PS-I wonder what other over-looked details are sitting in early photographs of the crime scene area?
Wouldn't it be a shock if there was a photo with a police officer speaking to Antonio Curatolo in the background?
Click to expand...


LOL, RWVBWL! As Chris C pointed out, they're all standing around outside in their protective shoe covers, too.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6716408&postcount=23970
 
Alt+F4 said:
That must have been really strong weed to make him forget this important fact for almost a year.
Click to expand...


What do you think made Rudy forget for four months that he saw Amanda and Raffaele at the scene of the crime?
 
Mary_H said:
What do you think made Rudy forget for four months that he saw Amanda and Raffaele at the scene of the crime?
Click to expand...

And not only that, but to start by "remembering" that he saw just one unidentified male. To me, it seems pretty clear that Guede started by substituting a stranger for himself as the perpetrator - so that all the elements of a single-assailant attack would be consistent with his fairy tale. However, when he and his lawyer realised that the authorities had convinced themselves that the murder was some sort of bizarre group killing with multiple knives, he naturally changed the fairy tale to include two people. And since the authories had also convinced themselves that Knox and Sollecito were members of the "murder group", it's only logical that he changed the fairy tale to substitute these two people into the story.
 
RWVBWL said:
Hi Dan O.!
As I have never heard of this, I wondered if a photograph of Laura's bedroom publicly exists that shows it, and was anything taken from this drawer, etc...
That's all.:)
RWVBWL
Click to expand...

(see edit to previous post)


The one thing ILE did right was to photograph the entire scene before moving anything so that an accurate picture of the crime scene could be preserved. I first noticed the mention of the sferon camera in Massei and google suggested Spheron. I asked Charlie and he checked his source and confirmed that there was a complete (double) set of 360º images for every room of the house. As it says in Massei pg 185:
Showed that all environments were included, in priority to any technical activity, with the Sferon: a device that allows a recovery like a sort of video camera that turns on itself. Thus any room had been "frozen" so that it would be possible to review the positions and the scene which was presented at the beginning.​


This is about paying attention to the details.
picture.php
 
loverofzion said:
Yes amanda knew exactly how the body had been positioned at death, and she also knew that she "*********** bled to death", among other facts not yet publicized.She bragged in the presence of her flatmates that she had found the body first.
Click to expand...

Can you cite this?
 
Dan O. said:
(see edit to previous post)


The one thing ILE did right was to photograph the entire scene before moving anything so that an accurate picture of the crime scene could be preserved. I first noticed the mention of the sferon camera in Massei and google suggested Spheron. I asked Charlie and he checked his source and confirmed that there was a complete (double) set of 360º images for every room of the house. As it says in Massei pg 185:
Showed that all environments were included, in priority to any technical activity, with the Sferon: a device that allows a recovery like a sort of video camera that turns on itself. Thus any room had been "frozen" so that it would be possible to review the positions and the scene which was presented at the beginning.​


This is about paying attention to the details.
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=597&pictureid=4169[/qimg]
Click to expand...

But I wonder how much the scene in Filomena's room was disturbed before the Sferon camera was used in there..........
 
loverofzion said:
Once again: that the perpetrator was an African man; that there were plural attackers; that there was a sexual assault; and that she (amanda) knew the positioning of the body at death WITHOUT being able to see into the room.
Click to expand...

Where do you see this? Can you cite it?
 
Mary_H said:
LOL, RWVBWL! As Chris C pointed out, they're all standing around outside in their protective shoe covers, too.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6716408&postcount=23970
Click to expand...
Greetings again Mary H,
I just found the other photographs included.

WOW! Will you look at those!
http://www.repubblica.it/2006/05/gallerie/cronaca/ragazza-perugia/3.html

http://www.repubblica.it/2006/05/gallerie/cronaca/ragazza-perugia/4.html

http://www.repubblica.it/2006/05/gallerie/cronaca/ragazza-perugia/5.html
Surely the police investigators replaced those shoe covers as they went from room to room and inside and outside of the apartment?!!!?
Hmmm...
 
Katody Matrass said:
I just find it curious that while the pro-innocence side has a solid theory encompassing both the crime....
Click to expand...

No, there is no "solid theory" explaining...

1. Amanda’s lamp being found in Meredith’s room.

2. Inconsistent and contradictory statements in regard to her alibi email, her trial testimony and his prison diary (none of which were coerced).

3. Amanda phone calls on November 2:
a) In the 48 minutes between 12:07 – 12:55 she spent a total of 23 seconds trying to phone Meredith though she stated she was “panicked” as to her whereabouts.
b) Amanda was back at her apartment by 12:34. The Postal Police did not show up for another 21 minutes with Meredith’s phones.
Why didn’t Amanda stand outside Meredith’s door, call her phones and listen for rings?
c) Both Amanda’s mother and Filomena told Amanda to call the police based on what she told them...she didn’t. Both also knew her Italian was poor, but they told her to call the police anyway.

4. Raffaelle’s call to the police:
a) He told them that nothing was taken from Filomena’s room. He knew that because he knew there was no break in.
b) He told the police “there is a lot of blood” when everyone at the scene agreed there was very little visable blood. He knew there was a lot of blood behind the locked door.
c) why would he even mention a closed door?

5. Raffaele’s lie in his prison diary regarding the knife.

6. Amanda’s behavior:
a) not flushing the un-flushed toilet
b) not looking in the murder room
7. bra clasp – it is Rafaelle’s DNA is on it.

8. evidence of a cleanup – FBI guy Steve Moore (who says he has seen all of the evidence) said no one could have left that room without blood on the bottom of their shoes.

9. Amanda knowing that Meredith's throat was slashed despite the fact that she came into no contact with anyone who would have had that information before she made that statement.
 
Last edited:
Mary_H said:
What LondonJohn said. Rudy changed his story quite a few time before settling on Amanda and Raffaele as the perps.
Click to expand...
Certainly, but does he say he forgot, or that his previous stories where lies of one sort or another?
 
katy_did said:
Whether it's standard practice ...... they didn't take any control samples to take into account the fact that Amanda used the bathroom every day.
Click to expand...

How is this known to be true? was testimony given wrt the taking of control samples? If so can you link please, thanks.


Kaosium said:
I am unaware of any luminol footprints attributed to Raffaele.
Click to expand...

The Rinaldi report attributes a couple of luminol footprints to Raffaele.

LondonJohn said:
You think the entire surface of the outside face of Meredith's bedroom door was swabbed and tested for DNA? By the same "crack" forensics experts who, by all accounts, didn't even test Meredith's neck and wrists for DNA, despite there being evidence that she was restrained by the wrists and held in a choke grip around her neck? Good luck with that one......
Click to expand...

Can you please provide the link to the proof they did not try to retreive DNA from Meredith's wrists, or elbows for that matter. The neck is sort of understandable given the quantity of dried blood there must have been on it, but perhaps you can still link to the proof they didn't even try. Plus, how do you know she was held in a "choke grip around her neck"?

LondonJohn said:
Oh, it's simply that I am unwilling currently to assert with any level of certainty that Knox and/or Sollecito definitely weren't involved in some way or other with Meredith's murder.
Click to expand...

I find this a real cop out as you consistently pounce on any argument suggesting guilt or even suspicion from any word or item or scenario argued by those favoring guilt. I can't say I recall you even speculate beyond the purely innocent argument.

halides1 said:
Danceme,

Raffaele's fingerprints were on the door, if I am not mistaken, and I have documented that DNA can be extracted from fingerprints. It seems reasonable to conclude that Raffaele's DNA was on the door.
Click to expand...

I did find an article indicating DNA being extractable from fingerprints through a method being developed in Canada. The article was dated 2003. Has the process come into use?

http://www.fdiai.org/articles/dna_extractable_from_fingerprint.htm


halides1 said:
Alt+F4,

Given Rudi's previous lack of success with stolen goods, I suspect he was looking for cash. He must have suspected that the occupants would have rent money stashed somewhere, what with rent coming due shortly.
Click to expand...

halides1 said:
Justinian2 and loverofzion,

I just gave the context in a previous message. Where = Raffaele's apartment. When = night of the murder. One surmises that she was a little hesitant to acknowledge to her mother that she had spent the night at Raffaele's.
Click to expand...

You giving the context is only your supposition. Not enough context has ever been given to fully say with confidence she meant Raffaele's house, unless you have that entire conversation, in which case I'd like to see it.
Also, it's highly doubtful she was trying to hide staying at Raffaele's house from her mother, she's already admitted it to over 25 people in her email.
 
Alt+F4 said:
<snip>
b) He told the police “there is a lot of blood” when everyone at the
scene agreed there was very little visable blood. He knew there
was a lot of blood behind the locked door.
<snip>
Click to expand...
Hi Alt-F4,
I believe that there was a discussion about 6 months back or so regarding an Italian to English translation error here.

It should be "there are drops of blood", not "there is a lot of blood...

Apologies if I am incorrect on this.
RWVBWL
 
Mary_H said:
What do you think made Rudy forget for four months that he saw Amanda and Raffaele at the scene of the crime?
Click to expand...

Maybe it was the same weed that Raffaele was smoking that made him forget for 11 months he was watching Naruto on the night of the murder.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom