Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Chris C]

So what evidence have you personally generated Chris?

generate: to produce,

On many posts I've produced the evidence that backs up my statements.

Yet you still dont deny that your whole argument is strawman.

 

[Mary_H]

Anther one for 'one of the most respected forensic experts in the whole wide world.'

Rolling Stone interview: The Never Ending Nightmare of Amanda Knox, by Nathaniel Rich

"When I ask Mignini whether he regrets any decisions he made during the Kercher case, he will name only one. It was the very first decision that he made. When he arrived at the crime scene he asked the chief forensics expert, Patrizia Stefanoni, whether she had taken Kercher's body temperature, a reliable indicator of time of death. Stefanoni, Mignini says, was worried that doing so might contaminate the body and advised that they wait until other testing had been done. The temperature was not taken until November 3rd."<snip>

The Massei report may be at odds with Mignini's memory of the sequence of events (it is also somewhat at odds with itself -- no surprise there). According to the report, Luca Lalli, the medical examiner, arrived at the scene hours before Patrizia Stefanoni:

On the afternoon of November 2, 2007 personnel of the Perugia Police headquarters went to said house. The 118 and Coroner Dr. Lalli also came; a few hours later, the Forensics staff from Rome arrived. (p. 100)

Early in the report, these facts are given:

[Luca Lalli]arrived at Via della Pergola 7 around 14:00/14:40 pm.... He did not do any tests, as he had been asked to preserve the crime scene as perfectly as possible in order to allow the scientific police to carry out their work.(p. 109)

The personnel of the Scientific Police in Rome arrived about 17:00 pm and began their own activity: the detection of latent prints under the direction of Dr Giunta, search and finding of biological traces under the direction of Dr Stefanoni. (p. 107)

Later in the report,

Turning to the event which is the subject of this trial, [Stefanoni] stated that during the early afternoon of Friday, November 2, 2007, following notification of a technical inspection in Perugia due to a homicide, she went to the house at via della Pergola 7, arriving at around 19:00-20:00 pm, together with other personnel from the Scientific Police of Rome.... (p. 180)

According to Mignini's recollection, he arrived at the scene, spoke to Patrizia Stefanoni, asked her if she had taken the temperature of the body, and agreed with her that it could wait. That means Mignini got there after 5:00 or 7:00 p.m. (depending on which part of the report you believe).

So who gave Luca Lalli the order at 2:00 not to touch the body? Did Patrizia Stefanoni phone it in en route from Rome? If so, why does Mignini call it "the very first decision that he made?"

Did Mignini really did not get to the scene until the evening of November 2nd?

 

[PhantomWolf]

So what evidence have you personally generated Chris?

So do you subscribe to the Mignini version of events, the Massei version of events, or some other version?

 

[bolint]

What is amazing and unlikely about it? The Massei report clearly says "compatible with Sollecito’s house" for all of those calls.

Of course, if it were not compatible than then it would be an easy case.
The problem is that in all the seven calls in which her location is not firmly established she uses cells which are not the best server for Raffaele's place.

So the cell use of not the individual calls, but the totality of them is what I find strange.

Especially in the light of the fact that in the only other case in which she is surely known to be at Raffaele's house, lo and behold, she uses the best server.

 

[RoseMontague]

One would be unlikely to mix up "I have called" (ho chiamato) with "I will call" (chiamerò), it seems to me. More plausible would be a misunderstanding involving the present tense (chiamo), which can be used to indicate the near future ("I'm going to call").

But my understanding is that Knox was at an early stage in her Italian studies at the time (recall the issues with the police), and that she mainly spoke English with her roommates and Raffaele, certainly regarding matters of any complexity or importance.

She didn't even know the Italian word for "call" much less what tense to use. In her court testimony they played an intercepted phone conversation between Filomena and Amanda. Amanda is speaking in Italian and when she gets to the word "call" she says the English word, not the Italian one.

thoughtful also points out that Filomena's English is even worse than Amanda's Italian.

 

[Mary_H]

I shudder to think about what Meredith would think about that site, the guilter community, and everything that has happened to Amanda and Raffaele, ostensibly in her name.

I'd momentarily forgotten how repulsive Quennell's site is. Even from a visual standpoint -- far too many pictures of poor Meredith. And the domain name: as someone on Less Wrong put it, "what is this, Marvel Comics?"

You think seventeen pictures on one page is too many?

Speaking of pictures, my curiosity was piqued by PQ's mentions of the type of woman he is attracted to. He wrote in his e-mails about the ballet dancers Veronika Part and Diana Vishneva, and the actress Angela Gots.

I've always felt sorry for posters who came onto other blogs and triumphantly announced the reasons for Amanda and Raffaele's guilt, using information that had learned on TJMK. They were always so surprised when they found out their "facts" were wrong. I've often wondered if any of them ever looked into the situation enough to admit they'd been had.

I feel even sorrier for them now, because of the way they have been used to feed the fantasy object of TJMK. Does PQ care about Meredith, or does he care about his fixation with a certain type of woman? Does the woman's identity matter, as long as she fits the mold -- young, thin, long dark hair, unobtainable.....?

To idolize someone is to depersonalize her. Seventeen pictures on one webpage is no different from seventeen posters of her on your bedroom wall. Meredith fits the mold, that's for sure -- young, thin, long dark hair, and eternally unobtainable.

None of this would be a matter for alarm if it weren't for the considerable influence PQ has yielded in feeding the conflict about guilt versus innocence. I think PQ has actually put more energy into his fantasies than Giuliano Mignini put into his. He's certainly put in more money.

 

[bolint]

That begs the question of what you believe the truth to be (which after all is what this debate is about). You seem to be assuming that Amanda and Raffaele really were involved in the murder, along with Guede - in which case he will of course be able to provide a coherent account of it that matches the known facts.

The trouble is that nobody among those sharing your assumption has been willing even to suggest a timeline of events (who was where at what time) that fits the bill. That is why many of us here are confident that Guede (hypothetically) telling the truth about the murder would exonerate Amanda and Raffaele.

(ETA: ) Since you appear to be assuming guilt of all 3, would you now do what nobody else has been able to do: describe what you think happened in terms of what time they each arrived at the cottage, what time and how the murder took place, and what time they left?

This is probably something that everyone can agree, on both sides of the debate. Even so, there is huge potential for a game-changing contribution from him.

I said to Katody that Rudy's testimony is so close that it is not worth to project full scenarios before that.
After that I'll give my best guess of what might have happened.

 

[bolint]

The call to the Italian phone only last three seconds. It's located at the police station and is turned off. I suppose it's possible that it can still keep ringing, even though that sounds at bit strange too.

This was not ringing at all.
It was a voicemail, she said, if I remember correctly.
A switched off phone will not result in ringing at the caller, either.

 

[bolint]

It is pointed out in the appeal that signal quality is not the only thing that determines what tower may handle a transmission.

The expert opinion you quoted basically means that Amanda's handset for some reason uses other criteria for the selection of best server than for example Sollecito's handset.
Massei says that Sollecito's calls in the month preceding the murder overwhelmingly used the best server.
It would be good to know that for the short time of their acquaintance what servers were used by Amanda's handset, not only on Nov 1 and 2 but in the days before and after the murder.

That could settle the question.

Anyway, it is remarkable, that regardless of the different selection criteria, at 20:35 Amanda's handset camped on best server.

 

[Matthew Best]

I think everyone should stop piling on lionking. It's kind of rude to attack someone's faith like this.

 

[bolint]

The following two paragraphs from Matteini:

Yes, that is it.
So your first quote was not fair, you cut it when it started to be inconvenient.

Matteini:

This being clarified, Raffaele, at the review hearing, said he spent the entire night of the 1st and 2nd November with Amanda. They made a return to his house around the time 20.00 – 20.30. He dined with her and became aware of the arrival of messages on her cell phone, thus knew from Amanda she was not required to go to work at the Le Chic pub that night. They went to sleep together to wake the morning after around 10.00, when Amanda was going out to go back to via della Pergola to take a shower; during the course of the same declarations, he added, on the contrary, that he could not remember whether Knox had left or not. He re-asserted, however, not having left the house, having remained in front of the computer, as well as having received a phone call from his father at the time of 23.00. A telephone call that shortly afterward he specified he could not remember whether he had actuality received, or whether he had referred to having received it to corroborate the circumstances surrounding his permanence in the house.

Why don't you put in the whole Matteini material to avoid selective quoting?

 

[odeed]

Regarding the upcoming appearance of Rudy Guede.

In Bruce Fisher's summary of Raffaele Sollecito's appeal he says the following:


http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/appeal4.html

Wonder what happened with that? Did the defence drop that argument?

And also:



I suppose they can ask him now? There seem to be some confusion to this. Did Guede really knew what window was broken, or was he referring to a wrong one?

It was reported before the Guede Skype conversation that a window was broken, and there are accounts that Filomena room had glass on the floor, so I don't think it was a big secret which room it was that had the window broken.

 

[bolint]

Matteini / Raffaele corrected version.
"They made a return to his house around the time 20.00 – 20.30. "

So even in the corrected version they were out at about 20 o'clock.
Is this Crap-3 or is it true?

That period coincides with Amanda's receiving Lumumba's SMS.

Hmm...

 

[RoseMontague]

Yes, that is it.
So your first quote was not fair, you cut it when it started to be inconvenient.

Matteini:



Why don't you put in the whole Matteini material to avoid selective quoting?

OK

http://download.repubblica.it/pdf/2007/ordinanza_perugia_meredith.pdf

 

[lionking]

I think everyone should stop piling on lionking. It's kind of rude to attack someone's faith like this.

Personalising the debate again. But it's good to see that someone is acknowledging what happens to those who don't toe the innocentisti line.

 

[bolint]

Thanks, but I've got the Italian version.
I was talking about the English one.

 

[bolint]

It is one document that we don't have, unlike Amanda's official statements. I just have to wonder if would have signed something that said his earlier statements were crap. The information leaked to the press is interesting, some of it is completely unreliable, in my opinion.

You mean that the "sack of crap" expression was made up by the press?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

some previous comments and questions

Halides,

Sure, could you point me to them, maybe the message numbers, I'll answer them all.

Kevinfay,
I generated a list using the advanced search function (my username plus your name as the search term). There are probably other commenters whose questions/comments could be retrieved in a similar manner. I realized that you answered some of these already, but but you did not always address all of the point that I had hoped you would.
12177
12065
11934
11917
11914
11913
11906
11887
11886

 

[odeed]

I think everyone should stop piling on lionking. It's kind of rude to attack someone's faith like this.

Do you have evidence that an Italian court which spent months hearing witness testimony and viewing the evidence, based the conviction of Knox and Sollecito on faith.

I really don't see why lionking has to repeat what the Italian court has concluded, if you think that the evidence and conviction is wrong then argue that point instead of trying to shift the burden and "piling on" the person with stupid snide remarks.

 

[pilot padron]

Since you mention piling on and faith

I think everyone should stop piling on lionking. It's kind of rude to attack someone's faith like this.

The overriding piling on endlessly expressed here faith in the imminent release of Knox and Sollecito due to supposedly thrown out evidence and discredited witness testimony (and the hearsay of a guy who killed a toddler with a shovel which was immediately contradicted by another jailbird) also might just be a bit of premature wishful thinking fortified by faith and lots of little more than factless cheerleading.

My opinion is fortified by the fact that the individual who probably has possession of, and access to, more current inside information than all the arguers here combined, the esteemed Mr Wilkes (aka Jim Lovering) is still deafeningly silent about Appeal success for Knox and Sollecito.

Correct me if not up to the minute, because I admittedly do not hang on Wilkes's every word, but to my knowledge he has not changed his oft expressed cynical opinions that Judge Hellmann will make no significant changes to the initial verdict.

But we shall see

BTW
The also 'piling on style' repeatedly regurgitated requests for guilter timelines with accompanying associations of 'inability' also seem senseless to me and little more than tag team echoing.
This because if one does not accept the Google based ToD, the very complete and very well debated previous PMF easily accessed timelines are in fact still very valid.
Furthermore even if one does accept Google's Gook, the to date silence on the matter from the principals in the case who are the only ones who matter is also underwhelming and grounds to ignore the questionably motivated requests.
This particularly if we need to conserve electrons here as earlier suggested by others