Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Ampulla of Vater]

OK, fair enough, but if they were eating 'discontinously' persumably the time of any visits to the bathroom should also enter the equation?

I have not seen any discussion of that !!

LOL - that is w-a-y down the line! The food has another 8 meters or so before any of that occurs.

It is really quite interesting that the duodenum was completely empty because had she eaten a little bit of something before she left home earlier in the day or had she have been eating continuously throughout the day there would probably have been something in her duodenum and/or jejunum and it would have been really difficult to nail down times. The way it worked out makes it unusually reliable to estimate the ToD.

 

[Dan O.]

Perhaps Kevin should privately check that he knows what he is talking about... http://www.softschools.com/quizzes/science/digestive_system/quiz751.html

 

[Kevinfay]

Kevinfay, my understanding is that even if she dragged the meal out over two hours, the parts of it that were eaten earlier should have passed into the duodenum; but the latter was completely empty.

Also, what do you mean when you keep talking about the "Court Registry"? The court's website does not contain any indication of any online repository of documents; there is only a form that lawyers can fill out to obtain copies.

As for Knox's and Sollecito's appeal documents themselves, they have long been available on IIP.

Surely it depends on both when she ate and when she visited the bathroom?

I remember watching a lecture to medical students where an experienced doctor advised them that ' patients are always willing to talk about one end of the large intestine (i.e. when they vomit) but are less inclined to talk about problems at the other end' .... maybe posters here are similar?

Anyway, he made his point and got a laugh.

We don't know when she ate?, it was a 'girly get together' rather than a set meal.

We can only guess at when she went to the bathroom .... I've noticed that girls tend to go before leaving to go out .... probably because unlike us, they can't just 'nip down an alley'? if necessary. Was it the first thing she did when she returned home?.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

The appeals get lodged at La Cancelleria, Corte d’Assise d’Appello di Perugia. If you already have them, fine. some posters said they hadn't ... it would help if you could think of fellow posters?

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Anybody interested in discussing these jailbirds we'll hear tomorrow?. Is it true that one is a child killer?

Just a couple of points:

1. I think the statements Guede made to his buddy over Skype, before his arrest, will turn out to be more reliable?

2. I've always ignored the testimony of Antonio, the vagrant, but if we are to believe jailbirds, why not him?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

cell phone activity

So, humour me. Why is anyone even contemplating a hypothesis that Meredith died at 11.30, short of maybe evidence that she didn't eat her pizza with her friends, but instead took it home with her and ate it when she got in?

Rolfe.

Rolfe,

There is cell phone activity at about 10 PM (an attempted call to Meredith's bank without the country code) and a ping from a cell phone tower about 10:13, and this tower had not connected with Meredith's phone earlier that day, IIRC. Although not conclusive, these events suggest to me that Meredith died before 10 PM independent of the stomach/duodenum evidence. Others here are better versed in this evidence, and they can fill in the details.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

jailbirds; pizza

Kevinfay,

There was an extended conversation here with Alt+F4 about these witnesses a couple of months ago. Unlike typical jailhouse testimony, it is impossible to argue that they are testifying to earn the favors of law enforcement.

My experience is that people usually eat pizza when it is sufficiently cool from being in the oven, but some find cold pizza unappealing. Meredith is remembered to have eaten only part of her pizza.

 

[Poppy1016]

I agree with the 9pm to 9:30pm time of death. But one thing puzzles me. RG claims he left the cottage around 10:30. If he killed Merideth right after she arrived home, why did he stick around til 10:30?

 

[Kevinfay]

Kevinfay,

There was an extended conversation here with Alt+F4 about these witnesses a couple of months ago. Unlike typical jailhouse testimony, it is impossible to argue that they are testifying to earn the favors of law enforcement.

My experience is that people usually eat pizza when it is sufficiently cool from being in the oven, but some find cold pizza unappealing. Meredith is remembered to have eaten only part of her pizza.

Halides,

The good thing is that the TOD issue is being covered in the appeals? We should get plenty of arguments from both sides ... which will be worth hearing, hopefully.

At the very least, the jailhouse testimony demonstrates the fairness of the system` ... at best we may learn something new.

The Mason murders were a complete mystery until someone snitched on one of the girls who was in jail for another offense ...

 

[Dan O.]

I agree with the 9pm to 9:30pm time of death. But one thing puzzles me. RG claims he left the cottage around 10:30. If he killed Merideth right after she arrived home, why did he stick around til 10:30?

Rudy Guede doesn't carry a watch. Are you suggesting that he looked at Meredith's phones for the time?

 

[platonov]

Rudy Guede doesn't carry a watch. Are you suggesting that he looked at Meredith's phones for the time?

What ?? he carries a long stick, a knife (or two), a Hindu god, a stepladder, a pogo stick, a backpack and a big rock but no watch.
Didn't he have a supply of ladies watches ?

In any case, does one need a watch to to know not to hang around an unplanned murder scene for an hour or three doing handstands and hokey-cokey's etc [and then leave in a hurry].

 

[Poppy1016]

Hi Dan, I believe that he made the statement that he left the cottage around 10:30. I was just curious as to why he hung around.

 

[Mary_H]

I suspect I was mistaken with respect to the time of his arrest being around 1:00 AM. It was probably later, but I am still searching for a definitive citation. However, my larger point is that Amanda was really a suspect earlier than 1:45. Once Raffaele signed a statement, Amanda might (and IMO should) have been legally considered a suspect.

They did not officially arrest Amanda until midday on the 6th, that is, that's when she was presented with an arrest warrant to sign. The same may have been true of Raffaele, who may have been kept isolated all night, waiting for someone to come back and tell him what was going to happen. They had gotten his "statement" from him early on, though -- that's when they came in and told Amanda Raffaele was not supporting her alibi. Is there a record of the specific charge on which Raffaele was arrested?

 

[Dan O.]

Hi Dan, I believe that he made the statement that he left the cottage around 10:30. I was just curious as to why he hung around.

Do you think you could find the source of that statement?

In Rudy's German diary he mentions the time he arrived at the cottage and the next time reference is after he went home and changed his wet dirty pants then goes out again

Rudy's diary page 17:

Then I headed for Meredith’s house. With all the
running around I did, I think it would have been around
8:30, approximately. Because we were supposed to
see each other at that time, even though I didn’t have a
watch I tried to arrive on time, because I usually arrive
late.​

Page 20:

I didn't have a phone…​

Page 22:

After I went to my place, I went
to Alex’s place, and it was around midnight.​

Although I did find a reference in a comment on Perugia-Shock that rudy was apologizing for creating a lie that gives him an alibi for the activity on the phones. I didn't see what statement the comment was referring to but a 10:30 exit time would insinuate that Meredith was responsible for the 10pm phone activity so it is plausible that he said that at some time.

A 10:30pm egress time would also be compatible with the witness bumping into a black boy on the steps near the cottage so this may be something a Judge or the PMF/TJMF crowd could have inferred.

 

[Kaosium]

Curatolo - he's the drug addict that was probably talking about a different day? Disco buses not running, right? So if all they have is that someone heard a scream, later - colour me unimpressed.

Rolfe.

Even better, these are equal opportunity screams for any damn time they want! They just 'hypothesize' and take anything that helps, discount anything that doesn't, and just move their screams to where they help the most. From right before the closing statements when Mignini has to move the time of death (it was originally supposed to be 10:30 as in Rudy's trial) to account for the Curatolo rambling on:

"Mignini’s new theory that Capezzali woke up at 11:30 relies on the information that the drug had its effect after 2 hours. But where did he get this information?

By looking at the window of the girl who heard a scream at 11 pm we see that the window looks in a different direction in respect to the cottage. Then she says she heard a different scream than the one described by Capezzali. It’s enough to understand that she lies. If then we add that she was convinced by a local newspaper after one year…

Mignini, by moving the scream at 23:30 forgot that Curatolo sees Amanda and Raffaele from 21:30 to almost midnight. Toto’s testimony doesn’t match with Capezzali’s. Curatolo lies."

 

[Kaosium]

I wonder if Mignini believed some of this stuff. According to Frank, he asked every witness and officer that arrived at the house if the washing machine was still warm or running.

From the way he appears to think, he could have fourteen people say no with varying degrees of absoluteness but if one guy said maybe..

But remember Amanda said Meredith always locked her door probably because she remembered at the last minute that she left that pesky lamp in there, and she called her Mom at noon and woke her up at 3AM Seattle time (in the middle of the night) and that was before anything had happened and then "forgot" it completely, trying to cover that she really had no need to call unless she was worried her crime would be discovered. And let us not forget the staged break-in, perfectly obvious to the highly trained professional law enforcement first responders. And of course, the infamous cartwheel, who does such a thing unless they are a cold blooded killer. The hip swivel, missed memorial, sexy underwear, smooches and kisses and hugs, mark on the neck, see you later, so long, farewell, meet you at the court. And that email to everyone and then some and the troubling mop even before it was gift wrapped. This is a veritable mountain of evidence.

I think it is daft and I believe platonov has made a good point on this issue. If she ate as early as 5:30PM per the testimony a 10PM TOD (defense) is 4.5 hours later which is just about impossible. If she ate as late as 7PM a 11:30 TOD (prosecution) is also 4.5 hours which is just about impossible. The fact that a 11:30 TOD with a meal time of 5:30PM is more impossible really makes no difference. Both indicate the stomach contents argument is unreliable.

But reality is another matter entirely, regardless of how stupid the defense is. It is clear to me that the meal began about 6PM and she was attacked almost immediately when she got home around 9PM. Whether the defense can recover from this blunder is beyond me.

LOL!

You're on fire tonight, Rose!

 

[Poppy1016]

I will try to find where I read that. I actually thought I read it here on JREF. I don't believe much that Rudy says, as he is a lifelong liar. I tend to believe that he left the cottage around 10:00 also.

 

[Kaosium]

I may well be losing the argument but I'm not sure its very compelling.

So the defence lawyers didn't discuss this with the expert witnesses pre-trial. They went to the expense & trouble of paying a guy to show rocks could be hoofed through windows and yet neglected to co-ordinate with expert witnesses on how ToD vs alibi evidence could be addressed.

I will bow to your superior knowledge but it seems very (very very very) unlikely [to a mere layman]

If it was me in that cell I would be most unimpressed.

I'll wager Andreotti was counting his blessings he also had political influence.

Platonov, did it occur to you the defense wasn't exactly aware ahead of time the prosecution would move the ToD to an entirely impossible time, thus when it assembled experts didn't look for those most conversant in that field? Maybe it didn't occur to them until it was too late that even a 10:30 ToD was basically impossible as well, however they did note it in the appeal thus its importance which falsifies most all prosecution theories.

 

[Fine]

The only reason why Mignini moved the ToD to 11.30-11.40pm was that it fitted in with one version of events given by Curatolo (one of multiple versions, it should be pointed out - all the others were completely useless to the prosecution...), and with the testimony of the alleged earwitnesses. It also meant that Mignini could sidestep the annoying (to him) presence of the broken down car opposite the cottage, which was there between around 10.30pm and 11.20-11.30pm. The occupants of the car all stated with apparent certainty that there was no visible or audible activity inside the cottage while they were there (and most of the time they were sitting in silence waiting for the tow truck to arrive). Furthermore, they saw nobody enter or leave the cottage during all that time - and they had a direct view of the well-lit porch and front door.

The presence of the broken-down car meant that Mignini knew he had to go with a ToD of either pre-10.30pm or post-11.30pm. And since he knew that he had a pretty weak case for pre-10.30pm (he'd have had to discard the testimony of Curatolo and the two alleged earwitnesses as either mistaken or unreliable, as none of their testimony was compatible with a pre-10.30 ToD), he went with the 11.30-11.40 option. And Massei bought it wholesale (even though there was contradictory medical evidence sitting there right under his nose), and the defence failed abjectly in its duty to show just how ridiculous this ToD was.

______________________

John,

Recall that Mignini had been trying to prove premeditation for the murder. Massei rejected that. So in Massei's reconstruction of events, the lovebirds didn't give a damn about being seen while they entered the cottage. They entered the cottage ---along with Rudy, apparently--- while the tow truck and disabled vehicle were still present....

"...a car which both Amanda and Raffaele must have noticed when they entered the house...." (Massei Report, English Translation, page 380.)

///

 

[Kaosium]

Surely it depends on both when she ate and when she visited the bathroom?


I remember watching a lecture to medical students where an experienced doctor advised them that ' patients are always willing to talk about one end of the large intestine (i.e. when they vomit) but are less inclined to talk about problems at the other end' .... maybe posters here are similar?

Anyway, he made his point and got a laugh.

We don't know when she ate?, it was a 'girly get together' rather than a set meal.

We can only guess at when she went to the bathroom .... I've noticed that girls tend to go before leaving to go out .... probably because unlike us, they can't just 'nip down an alley'? if necessary. Was it the first thing she did when she returned home?.

It doesn't matter, the duodenum portion of these proceedings is well before the delivery part. The meal was still in the stomach, it hadn't even started its journey.


---------------------------------------------------------------------

Anybody interested in discussing these jailbirds we'll hear tomorrow?. Is it true that one is a child killer?

Not just that, but a shovel-wielding babykiller. There will be pictures of the poor little fellow posted tomorrow, I can assure you.

Just a couple of points:

1. I think the statements Guede made to his buddy over Skype, before his arrest, will turn out to be more reliable?

2. I've always ignored the testimony of Antonio, the vagrant, but if we are to believe jailbirds, why not him?

1. The left-handed Italian stranger? That Raffaele and Amanda weren't involved?

2. Because his memory is associated with another night, it makes no sense at all, and he testified in three murder trials in about five years all the time under investigation/charges. He was also by his own admission on heroin at the time and he's nutty as a fruitcake.

 

[komponisto]

--------------------------------------------------------------------

The appeals get lodged at La Cancelleria, Corte d’Assise d’Appello di Perugia.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

This entity does not have a website -- or if it does it is extremely well hidden. Would you mind providing a link to wherever you're downloading from, please? Or are you actually traveling down from Lugano and picking the stuff up in person? What's the deal?

2. I've always ignored the testimony of Antonio, the vagrant, but if we are to believe jailbirds, why not him?

We need not believe any of it. Witness testimony is the least reliable and least relevant aspect of this whole case. Unfortunately, it's the part that people seem to be most interested in -- how witnesses "come across" being evidently more interesting (and therefore, apparently, more important) to people than all of the physical evidence concerning who was where, when.

 

[Poppy1016]

Dan, I found the post on JREF where Rudy tells Mattieni he left the cottage around 10:30. So far I have been unable to link.