Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Antony]

Amanda didn't flush the toilet because she wanted the police to find that evidence, which they did. She's quite cunning, that one!

EDIT: In fact, she mentions what was in the toilet over and over again just to make sure everyone knows what was in there.

You are committing the fallacy of fitting a random fact into your favoured narrative, and trying to claim it is evidence of that narrative. There are several reasons why Amanda would not have flushed the toilet if she didn't know what had happened, and one of them is that it was one of several disturbing signs in the flat that things were not as they should be. It's quite likely that she (even subconsciously) was thinking: "let's not alter anything without needing to."

Had she flushed the toilet before finding out about the murder, she would have then been in the position of having to mention it in her witness statements, and no doubt people like you would be accusing her either of making it up, or of destroying evidence; I can just imagine the chorus: "innocent people don't do that!"

What I'd like to see from you, or from any of the pro-guilt faction, is how the unflushed toilet fits into the three-way murder scenario; one in which Guede would have had plenty of leisure to flush it himself. Kindly explain why he would not do so.

The existence of this detail of the crime requires the explanation offered by the straightforward "lone wolf" narrative, in which Guede is surprised while on the toilet by Meredith coming home, doesn't flush because he wants to sneak out unheard, and then forgets about it in the horror of the aftermath.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

And Raffaele was right to be afraid. Once it became clear that Raffaele did not have a clear alibi, Rudy's story changed to implicate Raffaele instead of that stranger whose description didn't match Raffaele.

Once it became clear to whom? To Rudy? How did Rudy know RS did not have a clear alibi in order to change his story?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

how did Rudi identify Raffaele?

The Scott Peterson case is interesting because he was convicted of murder despite the fact that was no physical evidence against him. There were no witnesses that saw him commit the crime yet almost everyone (except his family) believes in his guilt.



But it wasn't Filomena's lamp, it was Amanda's.



At least two of Raffaele's alibis had nothing to do with police interrogation and where is the evidence that he was subjected to police interrogation that produced the other two?



Often cases are judged on the nitty-gritty details. Those who believe in this pairs innocence seem to think that if the knife and bra clasp are thrown out by the court the prison doors will just open so the lovebirds can run out and do an interview with Oprah. Not gonna happen. Despite how constantly we are told that the two were just "confused" or "misremembered" it doesn't make this other evidence go away.



There is a HUGE difference between not thinking anything was taken and knowing nothing was taken. He knew nothing was taken because he knew there was no break-in.



No he lied. It's that simple.



Until someone involved in this case aquires Superman's vision you still can't see DNA with the human eye. You want to say sloppy police work, ok, but I'm not qualified to say contamination....are you?



Moore said it was impossible for someone to leave Meredith's room without blood on the bottom of their shoes. Then how did someone leave that room, go to the bathroom, leave the footprint on the bathmat without leaving bloody footprints between the bedroom and bathroom - because there was none. Either Steve Moore doesn't know what he's talking about or there was a clean up. Which is it?

Once it became clear to whom? To Rudy? How did Rudy know RS did not have a clear alibi in order to change his story?

PDiGirolamo,

I have asked this question before, but I think it bears repeating. When Rudi, Curotano (spelling?), or any other witness claimed to have identified Amanda or Raffaele did so, did the police use standard techniques in evaluating this claim? Such techniques might be a photo lineup with fillers, for example.

 

[Dan O.]

Once it became clear to whom? To Rudy? How did Rudy know RS did not have a clear alibi in order to change his story?

It would be a suitable project for all of us to piece together a composite timeline of Rudy's changing story side by side with the media reports of the case. I'm sure though that the guilters will quickly see where this is leading and try to derail the effort.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Once it became clear to whom? To Rudy? How did Rudy know RS did not have a clear alibi in order to change his story?

How about: from the media before his arrest, from his lawyer after.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

PDiGirolamo,

I have asked this question before, but I think it bears repeating. When Rudi, Curotano (spelling?), or any other witness claimed to have identified Amanda or Raffaele did so, did the police use standard techniques in evaluating this claim? Such techniques might be a photo lineup with fillers, for example.

Halides,

I have no idea but I suspect there was no official identification. My guess is they went solely based on 'witness word.'

 

[Sherkeu]

Responses to Alt F4 by me are in blue:
There is no evidence that Meredith borrowed it or that is was brought into her room by Rudy or by the police.

There is also no evidence that Ak or RS or RG brought it in.Or any reason why they would need to. Or any fingerprints to support it.


Yet they spent at least another 21 minutes in her apartment before calling the police. And if she was so "panicked" about her "friend" why stop calling after just 23 seconds? I would have called non-stop, wouldn't you?
Have you ever had your house broken into? At first, subtle clues do NOT cause undue alarm. It's normal not to think the worst. Its normal to try to explain things away until they become overwhelming. Having a murder in your home is an extremely rare occurance (unless you live in a gang house or something and even then it is rare).
I dont call my sister again after reaching voice mail. As for the time spent dialing MK, the actual dialing and ringing of the call is not counted in the "seconds" of the call. Only the connection. So 23 seconds is quite misleading.


Her laptop being visable is not the same thing as saying "nothing" was taken. He had never been in Filomena's room. He had no idea what valuable possesions she had.
AK and RS had been in the home for some time. I'm sure they checked out if it looked like things were missing. RS telling this info to police just speaks to the fact that it was easier for him to talk to them than for AK, as she did not know the language fluently.



Amanda never stated that she was in a hurry, in fact, by that morning their trip to Gubbio seems to almost to be forgotten or pushed back to the afternoon. The unflushed toilet is the opposite of a cleanup, she deliberately didn't flush knowing what was in the bowl would lead back to Rudy.
So AK wanted them to blame Rudy? And yet when pressed under interrogation she names someone else? Doesnt make any sense. "Lets frame this guy, but I'm going to name another guy if I say I was there!!! Protect Rudy, that guy I barely know!!....oh wait....uh...what?" Or "Lets blame it all on Rudy, because even though we were here Im sure he wont say anything when he gets caught!!" Either way it is ridiculous.



Who do you think present wasn't freaked out at that point? All the others probably had a bad feeling about it too, yet there were all there when the door was broken down. They wanted to see what was behind that door. Amanda and boytoy didn't - because they already knew.
They were there because they were the ones who could speak to them in fluent Italian. Do people forget that AK had only been there not even 2 months? Of course she takes a back seat and lets the native speakers and the ones who contracted the cottage talk to the police and waits on the sideline. Filomena was the one with the contract with the landlord, yes? Only so many people can stand in a small hallway. And obvious that RS would stay with AK.




How did Rudy leave Meredith's bedroom, walk to the bathroom, take off his sneakers, wash his feet, leave that footprint on the bathmat WITHOUT leaving shoeprints going from Meredith's bedroom to the bathroom? FBI guy Steve Moore says it's impossible.
No one left bare footprints in blood in the hallway because there were NOT any. The only footprint in blood was on the bathmat and that belongs to RG. He walked to the bathroom WITHOUT blood on his shoes. He cleaned up and took off his shoes to clean them and stepped on something bloody. A towel, a tshirt, drippings from his pants, who knows? When he went back into her room he stepped in the blood and tracked it out the door. I think it all happened rather quickly and that she was not dead when he left the room the first time.



How could Amanda have understood what the police were saying about the murder when her Italian was so poor that she couldn't even call the police about what she had seen?

As far as i know, she only understood that there was a "foot' initially. Then she heard from others what they had found. RS certainly would have understood what they were saying.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

It would be a suitable project for all of us to piece together a composite timeline of Rudy's changing story side by side with the media reports of the case. I'm sure though that the guilters will quickly see where this is leading and try to derail the effort.

But based on your response:

Once it became clear that Raffaele did not have a clear alibi, Rudy's story changed to implicate Raffaele instead of that stranger whose description didn't match Raffaele.

it sounds as though you already know what happened and when. If you are going to explain away Raff's diary entry about the Ivorian making up stories shouldn't you already know when that was written vs. media reports, etc.? Otherwise I believe it stands that it was a strange thing for Raff to be worried about. Especially given the assertion Raff and Rudy did not know eachother.

 

[Danceme]

Moore is not entirely correct on this one. We have discussed this before and one of the theories is that he sat on the foot of the bed (making the knife imprint on the sheet as well as the two Luminol revealed footprints on the floor at the end of the bed) and removed his shoes prior to going to get some towels.

Then his bloody shoeprints should be side by side and close to directly beneath the bed's edge. If this theory were true it would be more than easy to tell based on the actual shoeprints left behind. I don't believe they look like that though.

You're first problem is that you are escalating the level of the emergency because you know that Meredith was dead at the time. An innocent Amanda knew only that Meredith couldn't be reached because her phones had possibly been turned off, the battery died or she was out of range of the network.

Why would she then run outside and try to climb over the balcony railing to look in through Meredith's window? Why would she then describe her panic in her email? as did Raffaele in his letter? Anyone so panicked would probably try the phones again. The Italian one just kept ringing remember. If I want to get a hold of my daughter and she's not answering I try over and over until I get her. I think anyone with a cell phone has missed more than one call being in a noisy place or by having the phone in a coat pocket or purse and simply just not hearing it. That's why they would most likely keep trying an unanswered phone.

In the 48 minutes between 12:07 and 12:55 why would Amanda think that the phones were off for that entire time?

It doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Multiple tries would be expected.

How did Michele Battistelli know that Meredith's throat had been slashed when he didn't put one foot in the room, the body was covered and everyone was immediately ordered out of the apartment?

Telegraph 06 Feb 2009

When Insp Battistelli ordered the locked door of Miss Kercher's bedroom to be kicked in, he encountered a scene of horror.
"There was blood everywhere, a great deal of it. I told everyone to get out and I did not go in. I had some idea of how she died because I could see the marks on her neck and the blood but I didn't speak to anyone about it."​

Early reports described just her foot and her head being uncovered. I suppose he could see her a bit of her neck soaked in blood, as well as the pool of it under her head. From there it's not rocket science.

 

[komponisto]

_________________________

In this case you're both wrong. There was never any disagreement on the amount of blood found by the lovebirds. Raffaele never said to the cops that there was a lot of blood. Poor quality audio tape of that call to the cops lead to this misunderstanding, which was corrected on PMF months ago.

///

Note that I did not actually say there was such disagreement, but only argued that it wouldn't be significant evidence even if it existed. So only Alt+F4 is wrong here.

 

[Danceme]

But if he took a shower (even a quick one) there would be no blood on the bottom of his feet when he got out of the shower. Also, there are no bloody naked footprints going from Meredith's room to the bathroom.

I think luminol would detect blood in the bottom of the shower if he had done this. He would also likely have a very dilute blood and water mixture on his feet which would have possibly left luminol visible bare footprints but there are none of Rudy, only Amanda and Raffaele according to Rinaldi.

You have an amazing ability to forget everything that has been discussed in this thread. If Rudy stepped into the shower to rinse blood off his lower trowser leg without taking off his pants, the blood/water mix would flow over his foot and that is exactly what we see in the print on the bathmat; a mix of blood and water creating a clear print of the front of the foot and the mat is saturated at the edge where additional bloody water would be flowing off the back cuff of the pants when he steps out of the shower to grab a towel. We also see in some of Rudy's bloody shoe prints additional drips of blood like there is still dripping from the pants cuff.

Yes, there is a front of foot print but what is your theory for the lack of a heel print?
Do you have the photos of all Rudy's shoeprints? I would like to see these additional blood/water mix droplets next to them.

To all,

The claim elsewhere on this forum is that people are interested in the Knox/Sollecito case because of Ms. Knox’s “(allegedly) kinky sex life.” ..............

I hardly see the reason for this post. Do you see yourself as some sort of white knight defending Amanda's virtue?

BTW, do you want to see a picture of what you would be cleaning? A simple flushing would have removed the bulk and the toilet paper that contained the DNA but the bowl would still be in need of cleaning.

I've seen the picture but also can't believe she wouldn't flush that toilet. No one says she has to then take the brush and add a sparkle to the bowl.
Also, why would she assume it was from an intruder? It could have been a roommate who simply got distracted and forgot to flush. At least she would have lessened the smell as she stood there drying her hair.

 

[Danceme]

The "bra clasp" evidence found after 47 days is laughable.

I guess you don't watch Cold Case Files

Both of them redirected to voicemail, which is functionally the same as off from the caller point of view. Amanda called Meredith's English phone twice, the second time it was on voicemail, her Italian phone was on voicemail too.

Her Italian phone was not on voicemail. Amanda wrote in her email:

"i called both of merediths phones the english one first and last and the italian one between. the first time i called the english phone is rang and then sounded as of there was disturbance, but no one answered. i then calle the italian phone and it just kept ringing, no answer. i called her english phone
again and this time an english voice told me her phone was out of service. "

She spent 16 seconds on the first call to the english phone, then talked with Filomena for 68 seconds, then called the italian phone for 3 seconds (whereas she claims it rang and rang), then the english phone again for 4 seconds (when it presumably went to voicemail). It doesn't quite add up.

Yet they spent at least another 21 minutes in her apartment before calling the police. And if she was so "panicked" about her "friend" why stop calling after just 23 seconds? I would have called non-stop, wouldn't you?

21 minutes is a long time to stand around a small apartment. It doesn't take more than a few minutes to look in each room and decide the police should be called.

 

[RoseMontague]

Then his bloody shoeprints should be side by side and close to directly beneath the bed's edge. If this theory were true it would be more than easy to tell based on the actual shoeprints left behind. I don't believe they look like that though.

One is close to the beds edge the other is slightly in front and to he left. It would appear to me consistent with sitting on the corner of the bed and facing towards her desk then taking his shoes off-denoted as B and C in this picture.



In this representation of the location we can see these distinctly separate from the others (on the pillow case and the one heading out the door).

 

[Danceme]

One is close to the beds edge the other is slightly in front and to he left. It would appear to me consistent with sitting on the corner of the bed and facing towards her desk then taking his shoes off-denoted as B and C in this picture.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/383964d4f3a07dcc47.bmp[/qimg]

Is there by chance a better photo with higher resolution? I can't really see the prints on this one.

 

[komponisto]

But it wasn't Filomena's lamp, it was Amanda's.

That is not a valid response to my question, which, I will remind you, was:

If a lamp belonging to, say, Filomena had been found in Meredith's room, but otherwise everything else remained the same, how would your view of the case change?

At least two of Raffaele's alibis had nothing to do with police interrogation and where is the evidence that he was subjected to police interrogation that produced the other two?

Raffaele had only one alibi (Latin for "elsewhere", i.e. an account of one's location): he was at his house. Under police pressure he said that Amanda may have gone out; he retracted this later.

Often cases are judged on the nitty-gritty details. Those who believe in this pairs innocence seem to think that if the knife and bra clasp are thrown out by the court the prison doors will just open so the lovebirds can run out and do an interview with Oprah. Not gonna happen. Despite how constantly we are told that the two were just "confused" or "misremembered" it doesn't make this other evidence go away.

In case you missed it, I'll remind you that the strength of this other "evidence" is precisely what is being disputed here. Rhetoric will not suffice as an answer. The question, once again, is:

do you really, truly think this kind of stuff raises the odds of guilt by more than a factor of, say, 1.1? ... Do you honestly think that the behaviors above are so far outside of "normal" that they constitute significant evidence of homicide? Just how unlikely do you think it is that an innocent Amanda would have behaved in such a way?

There is a HUGE difference between not thinking anything was taken and knowing nothing was taken. He knew nothing was taken because he knew there was no break-in.

Reasserting your opinion is not the same as justifying it. You have not provided any argument for your conclusion that "he knew there was no break-in" other than the fact that he said to the police that nothing was stolen. Once again, I put it to you that this could have been a judgement he arrived at from looking in the room. Do you have an argument showing that this is unlikely?

No he lied. It's that simple.

See above: reasserting your opinion is not the same as justifying it. I already know that you believe he's guilty, thank you; now it's time for you to explain why. You will need to show that your hypothesis is a better explanation of the data than mine, which entails a bit more work than saying "No, mine is right and yours is wrong."

Until someone involved in this case aquires Superman's vision you still can't see DNA with the human eye. You want to say sloppy police work, ok, but I'm not qualified to say contamination....are you?

In a word, yes.

There are only two possibilities: contamination (or other investigative error) or guilt.

Are you qualified to say guilt?

Moore said it was impossible for someone to leave Meredith's room without blood on the bottom of their shoes. Then how did someone leave that room, go to the bathroom, leave the footprint on the bathmat without leaving bloody footprints between the bedroom and bathroom - because there was none.

There's nothing here for me to address because you're simply mistaken. See diagram.

 

[RoseMontague]

Is there by chance a better photo with higher resolution? I can't really see the prints on this one.

None of the links Charlie provided here to pictures, video's, and documents are now working (I wonder why) and I wished I had copied more of them. That one came from the Vinci report and there is a better one in that report, IIRC. I'll try to upload it.

 

[RoseMontague]

Best I can do on these for tonight anyway:

 

[Katody Matrass]

I guess you don't watch Cold Case Files

I guess you haven't watched how it was collected.

Her Italian phone was not on voicemail. Amanda wrote in her email:

"i called both of merediths phones the english one first and last and the italian one between. the first time i called the english phone is rang and then sounded as of there was disturbance, but no one answered. i then calle the italian phone and it just kept ringing, no answer. i called her english phone
again and this time an english voice told me her phone was out of service. "

She spent 16 seconds on the first call to the english phone, then talked with Filomena for 68 seconds, then called the italian phone for 3 seconds (whereas she claims it rang and rang)

That 3 second^*) phone call would look very damning (do you think it is damning?) if not for one tiny detail:

12:11:02 (3 seconds) the Vodafone number 348-4673711 belonging to Meredith (this is the one [i.e. SIM card] registered to Romanelli Filomena) is called and its answering service is activated

21 minutes is a long time to stand around a small apartment. It doesn't take more than a few minutes to look in each room and decide the police should be called.

Most of that time was spent on recharging Raffaele's phone credit, phone calls with Filomena, Raffaele's father and sister, Amanda's mother.


*) 3 seconds is the connection registered by the service, after the phone redirected to voicemail, obviously Amanda was on the phone actually much longer.

 

[Dan O.]

I think luminol would detect blood in the bottom of the shower if he had done this. He would also likely have a very dilute blood and water mixture on his feet which would have possibly left luminol visible bare footprints but there are none of Rudy, only Amanda and Raffaele according to Rinaldi.

Luminal wasn't used in the bathroom. They sprayed something else in the bathroom on the 6th and only produced those "house of horrors" pink bathroom photos that have no evidentiary value. After figuring out that they totally screwed that up, they tried the Luminal late on December 18th. I believe Massei gives a list of all the locations where the Luminal was used if you are interested in looking it up.

Yes, there is a front of foot print but what is your theory for the lack of a heel print?

My currently standing theory is that the bathmat was flipped around and that Rudy just stepped out of the shower on the ball of his foot to grab the towel he left sitting on the sink after washing his hands.

Do you have the photos of all Rudy's shoeprints? I would like to see these additional blood/water mix droplets next to them.

I don't have the footprints organized but it was one of the hall prints that I first noticed a splatter that couldn't have been left by the shoe. Looking at the other hall prints, they have the same characteristic dark border of a diluted puddle that dries out. Someone should experiment with whole and diluted blood on tile to see what most closely resembles the ones seen in this case.

The footprint in Meredith's room at 5C (posted by Rose above) shows a saturation of blood on the edge of the shoe. I wonder if Rudy was being careful not to step in the blood but didn't notice the bloody water that continued to drain off his pant leg.

 

[Dan O.]

One is close to the beds edge the other is slightly in front and to he left. It would appear to me consistent with sitting on the corner of the bed and facing towards her desk then taking his shoes off-denoted as B and C in this picture.

How about sitting on the corner of the bed to lace his shoes? After rinsing off his pants and drying the pants and foot with the towel, he slips his feet into the shoes and walks back to Meredith's room where he sits on the corner of the bed to lace up the shoes. The towel is left next where he sat on the bed. Then he stands up, approaches the open door and tests the lock with Meredith's key. Steps out into the hall pulling the door closed behind him with the key and locks it. Then walks down the hall, opens the front door with the other key and leaves.

There are still a few details to fill in such as the existence of the large water or blood+water stain on the duvet. Did Rudy stand, kneel or sit on the duvet after the shower?

If someone wants to try an experiment: Saturate a pant leg with water and pat it dry with a towel. Then see how long it takes until enough water accumulates on the bottom edge to start dripping?