Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Chris_Halkides]

high-profile cases

What are the critical components of the playbook?
On what evidence would they start the proceeding in this instance?

Skwinty,

I don't understand your second question. With respect to the first question, in Duke lacrosse case the willingness of the defense to release an alibi to the media caused the prosecutor to juggle his timeline. However, I suspect that the lawyer thought it was necessary to combat a firestorm of bad publicity.

With respect to this case, I am going to go out on a limb today and suggest that they should at least consider putting Sollecito on the stand. I have often said that I think that this is a bad idea unless the defendant alone can provide critical testimony. A sharp but ethically-challenged DA (not naming anyone) can do a lot of damage because he or she has much more experience questioning defendants and witnesses than the defendant has in being questioned. However, this has to be weighed against the benefits of the jury seeing him as a human being, something that the first jury might not have.

 

[Skwinty]

Fastweb is a DSL ISP, using standard copper telephone lines to deliver service:

http://www.fastweb.it/portale/

Although it's in Italian I do notice they offer mobile internet and the Massei report makes no mention of the type of connection other than the name of the ISP ie Fastweb.

 

[Skwinty]

I dont understand your second question.

I was not sure of what throwing out the playbook entailed.

I would have thought that the evidence forms part of the playbook.

 

[Skwinty]

Well if it's really 4 years, you must live in the middle of either Joburg, Capetown, Pretoria or Durban, and you must be an extreme early adopter. Remember also that four years ago was August 2007 - only two and a half months before the murder.

Cape Town.

 

[LondonJohn]

Although it's in Italian I do notice they offer mobile internet and the Massei report makes no mention of the type of connection other than the name of the ISP ie Fastweb.

I was certain that Fastweb was exclusively a wired DSL operator at that time, but since we're in an evidence-based environment, here's some proof:

http://www.prepaidmvno.com/mvno-companies/eu-mvno-companies/italy-mvno/

Mobile Fastweb: MVNO, launch date September 2008

(MVNO stands for Mobile Virtual Network Operator: these are service providers who essentially buy wholesale network access from network operators (who are almost always also service providers themselves - e.g. Vodafone is both a network operator and a service provider over its own network). The MVNO then uses its host network to offer services. It's the same principle as ISPs using the incumbent national phone network to offer their own DSL services.)

 

[Chris_Halkides]

when to follow the playbook

I was not sure of what throwing out the playbook entailed.

I would have thought that the evidence forms part of the playbook.

Skwinty,

By playbook I just meant strategy and tactics, not evidence. It is the high-profile nature of this case, along with the misinformation, that makes me think that going against traditional defense dogma might be appropriate.

Another example of something that the defense might have done differently is to confront her false allegation against Lumumba more directly. Her statements were excluded as evidence against her, but they were allowed in the civil trial, which was heard by the same jury. Addressing this issue more directly might or might not be considered going against the playbook, but I don't have time to think it through right now.

 

[RWVBWL]

Betrayed...

Greetings all,
Last night, before I turned in for the night I was harping on Rudy Guede again. I made mention, as RandyN has recently pointed out, that 1 of Rudy's best friends, Giacomo Benedetto, was responsible for turning him into the cops when he helped arrange that 1st taped interview, which was then recorded at the police station over the course of 3 hours. Now to set the record straight, I am a guy, and 3 hours is a looong time for a coupla guys to converse, in my opinion. These 2 guys must have been pretty tight. Rudy has to have learned by now that Giacomo betrayed his friendship and turned him in. Friendship betrayal sucks! But yet from what I know, Giacomo visits Rudy in prison! I find this really, really strange, I guess Rudy doesn't have too many real friends and probably forgave the guy, + still likes him as a bro...

Yet Rudy, who was betrayed by a best friend,
still covers up, after all these years, for Amanda and Raff, who were pretty much strangers to the guy. Why?
Why doesn't he say that he witnessed the things that he must have seen Raff and Amanda specifically do if they were indeed there that night? The kind of details that only he would know. The kind of details that would have helped the prosecution convict Amanda and Raffaele, and sustain that conviction, without any doubts. Why didn't Rudy Guede give court testimony of the same kind of minute details that I knew of and told about in front of a courtroom of mostly strangers when I succesfully defended my honor in my own civil rape trial? These details, not vague whatsoever, helped clear my name, and these details, as brutally honest as they would be, could have helped convict Amanda and Raff, without any doubt, that they were involved in Miss Meredith Kercher's tragically brutal murder.

Rudy can not do this because Amanda and Raffaele were simply not there.
As Halides1 often notes, this is MOO.
Peace everyone,
RW

 

[LondonJohn]

Piktor rather amusingly (and unintentionally ironically) writes the following on .org:

If investigators or scientists in this case were deceitful, it would show a pattern. But it is the opposite, investigators have not suppressed information that could be used against them.

Piktor appears not to count Stefanoni's antics - first with the defence teams before and during the Massei trial, and then with Conti/Vecchiotti - as any sort of attempt to suppress information. Or her attempt to mislead and suppress information on the witness stand in Massei's court, in relation to whether presumptive blood tests were carried out on the luminol footprints in the hallway. Or Napoleoni lying on the stand about what happened in the early hours of the 6th November in the Perugia police HQ. Pravda, here we come!

And that's before we even talk about whether tapes of the 5th/6th November interrogations actually exist (or existed at one point before being mysteriously "disappeared"), or whether even if no recordings were actually made, this still constitutes an active suppression of information.

 

[Diocletus]

Piktor rather amusingly (and unintentionally ironically) writes the following on .org:




Piktor appears not to count Stefanoni's antics - first with the defence teams before and during the Massei trial, and then with Conti/Vecchiotti - as any sort of attempt to suppress information. Or her attempt to mislead and suppress information on the witness stand in Massei's court, in relation to whether presumptive blood tests were carried out on the luminol footprints in the hallway. Or Napoleoni lying on the stand about what happened in the early hours of the 6th November in the Perugia police HQ. Pravda, here we come!

And that's before we even talk about whether tapes of the 5th/6th November interrogations actually exist (or existed at one point before being mysteriously "disappeared"), or whether even if no recordings were actually made, this still constitutes an active suppression of information.

Stefanoni:

(a) failed to turn over the forensics files to the defense;
(b) failed to turn over the forensics files in response to Judge Massei's order; and
(c) refused to turn over the forensics files in response to C-V's request.

All of this ultimately required Hellmann to order production of the files and to delay the proceedings.

The withheld files proved material and exculpatory as set forth in the C-V report.

This is a pattern of unethical and prejudicial behavior by Stefanoni. What kind of justice is that?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

discovery of the evidence is fundamental to a fair trial

Piktor rather amusingly (and unintentionally ironically) writes the following on .org:

"If investigators or scientists in this case were deceitful, it would show a pattern. But it is the opposite, investigators have not suppressed information that could be used against them."

Piktor appears not to count Stefanoni's antics - first with the defence teams before and during the Massei trial, and then with Conti/Vecchiotti - as any sort of attempt to suppress information. Or her attempt to mislead and suppress information on the witness stand in Massei's court, in relation to whether presumptive blood tests were carried out on the luminol footprints in the hallway. Or Napoleoni lying on the stand about what happened in the early hours of the 6th November in the Perugia police HQ. Pravda, here we come!

And that's before we even talk about whether tapes of the 5th/6th November interrogations actually exist (or existed at one point before being mysteriously "disappeared"), or whether even if no recordings were actually made, this still constitutes an active suppression of information.

LondonJohn,

That the electronic data files were not released was finally settled once and for all by what Mr. dalla Vedova said on the matter this spring. If the prosecution had turned over the files, the defense could have been better prepared to challenge Dr. Stefanoni's ridiculous claims about which peaks were stutters, for example. Piktor is not only choosing to ignore this lack of discovery, he is also choosing to ignore the fact that Drs. Conti and Vecchiotti were not locked in an ivory tower (unlike what the rest of his comment implies). The prosecution withheld how much DNA was on the bra clasp, only releasing this information by accident. Dr. Stefanoni misrepresented how much DNA was on the knife blade. She gave a misleading answer on the question of whether confirmatory blood tests were performed. Any of these things could have been grounds for a mistrial, IMO.

 

[JREF2010]

Question:

In which bathroom were the famous Guede feces found?

In which bathroom was the famous Guede/Raffaele luminol footprint found?

Did the other bathroom have any 'evidence'?

The Rudy's legacy was left in the toilet by Laura's bedroom.

The bathmat print was left in the other bathroom by Meredith's.

Not that I know of.

 

[JREF2010]

the missing prints

Originally Posted by Dan O.
Before Rudy puts the pillow under Meredith, he is stepping on that pillow leaving prints of his left shoe. We do not however see a continuation of those shoe prints in the room or hall leading to the bathroom and back. The hall in particular was tested with Luminol so should have detected the weakest prints not even visible. Since we know that Rudy went into the bathroom between placing Meredith on the pillow and when he left the final sequence of tracks out the door, the shoes have to be left in the room for those trips.

I agree Dan. I believe the visible prints near the corner of the bed near the door are from Rudy taking his shoes off, leaving his shoes in the bedroom, and walking barefoot to the bathroom to clean up.

Yes I agree, somewhat. Initially maybe the floor wasn't bloody though?
How about a split scenario?

Part 1: Attack 9:00 to 9:25

Its obvious, when Rudy attacked in a violent rage, the floor was clean and therefore his shoe soles were clean of blood.

the attack/crime has been committed.

The bedroom floor and Rudys shoes are still clean, there is no large pool of blood yet.

Rudy then flees into the hallway to the bathroom, his shoes still clean, leaving no prints in the hallway to the bathroom.


Part 2: Hallway/ Bathroom/Hallway 9:25 to 9:45pm

Rudy mentions his pant leg having blood on it. I suspect his right pant leg did. Entering the bathroom, he turns on the light-switch leaving the bloody smear.

He probably rinsed his hands before his pant leg, as no prints were seen holding onto the shower wall or door. The "flicking" of blood that was found later on the cotton swabs and traces in the sink.

He goes to the shower, takes his foot from his right shoe and rinses off the leg/pants, the foot stepping in the shower water as he rinsed making the water bloody on the bottom of the shower floor.

Stepping out of the shower, he leaves the footprint on the bathmat.

Then dries his pant leg and foot as he slips back into the clean shoe. (this is why there are no other footprints and no cleanup smears found with luminol)


He returns to the hallway, with dry clean tennis shoes, hands briefly washed, no shoe traces in the hallway returning, because his shoes are yet to get blood on them.

The shoes still clean on the bottom soles= no prints to or from the bathroom.

Part 3: Return to the Bedroom 9:45pm to 10:00pm

He returns into the bedroom with the towel...... now the floor has a pool of blood beginning.

He moves her body, now its unavoidable stepping in the blood, even though he trys to not step in the blood. His leaves shoe patterns in the blood and on the pillow.

He props her, probably an attempt at some sexual assault, partially undressing her, but he gave up because the blood is too much now.
The large pool of blood the towel couldn't stop.

He rises, still somewhat clean from the blood, he yanks the bed cover/ Duvet and throws it over her, before sitting down on the bed.

He then sits in between the markers O & J.
He wipes off the knife blade using the towel (8) leaving the small bit of blood seen on the towel. He sets the knife down leaving a pattern on the bedsheet from the edge of the knife he missed, to his left (O). He then puts the knife on his self.

He probably wipes off his hands briefly, with the same towel (8) possibly, he contemplates what hes done, he rummages through the purse, he takes the items from the purse, keys, cellphones, money, credit cards, watch.

http://www.friendsofamanda.org/miscellaneous/dsc_0117.jpg


Part 4: Exit 10:00pm to 10:30pm

His shoes now having blood on the bottom sole, this time leaving prints in the hallway, as he exits the bedroom.
They are faint he can't see the bloody shoe prints, no one entering on Nov 2 could even see the prints Rudy left, the prints are so faint they wont be noticed until late in the day, on Nov 2.

He is outside, Merediths cell phone pings at 10:13pm connecting to a tower supporting this.

Rudy said he headed to the basketball court, then doesnt want to be seen with blood on his clothes so he takes the back road, he knows well.
He disposes of the cellphones that would lead to Meredith, maybe some other items too?
He goes home to wash up.Then he meets up with someone to create an alibi or to calm himself.
11:30pm to midnight timeframe.
Merediths cell pings from the garden at 00:12 Nov 2

 

[RWVBWL]

Wow, JREF2010!
That is a well thought out post!
RW

 

[Mary_H]

Greetings all,
Last night, before I turned in for the night I was harping on Rudy Guede again. I made mention, as RandyN has recently pointed out, that 1 of Rudy's best friends, Giacomo Benedetto, was responsible for turning him into the cops when he helped arrange that 1st taped interview, which was then recorded at the police station over the course of 3 hours. Now to set the record straight, I am a guy, and 3 hours is a looong time for a coupla guys to converse, in my opinion. These 2 guys must have been pretty tight. Rudy has to have learned by now that Giacomo betrayed his friendship and turned him in. Friendship betrayal sucks! But yet from what I know, Giacomo visits Rudy in prison! I find this really, really strange, I guess Rudy doesn't have too many real friends and probably forgave the guy, + still likes him as a bro...

Yet Rudy, who was betrayed by a best friend,
still covers up, after all these years, for Amanda and Raff, who were pretty much strangers to the guy. Why?
Why doesn't he say that he witnessed the things that he must have seen Raff and Amanda specifically do if they were indeed there that night? The kind of details that only he would know. The kind of details that would have helped the prosecution convict Amanda and Raffaele, and sustain that conviction, without any doubts. Why didn't Rudy Guede give court testimony of the same kind of minute details that I knew of and told about in front of a courtroom of mostly strangers when I succesfully defended my honor in my own civil rape trial? These details, not vague whatsoever, helped clear my name, and these details, as brutally honest as they would be, could have helped convict Amanda and Raff, without any doubt, that they were involved in Miss Meredith Kercher's tragically brutal murder.

Rudy can not do this because Amanda and Raffaele were simply not there.
As Halides1 often notes, this is MOO.
Peace everyone,
RW

Excellent points. My guess as to why Giacomo and Rudy are still friends is that it's because they share an understanding that the cops forced G. to betray R., and that if the roles had been reversed, R. would have done the same thing to G.

But yeah, there is no reason for Rudy not to describe the murder in a way that resembles the prosecutor or judge's scenarios. It's amazing his lawyers didn't advise him to do so; that would have been much worse for Amanda and Raffaele.

It's funny -- the police, investigators, lawyers and magistrates all did so many underhanded and illicit things, yet none of the things they did were quite underhanded enough or illicit enough to allow them to actually get away with what they were trying to get away with. What's up with that?

 

[RWVBWL]

Greetings all,
As I sit here a few feet from the Pacific Ocean in the middle of summer, watchin' the sun sink lower and lower while drinking a coupla cold Miller Lites, my mind wanders a bit as I reflect on my own life's experience and how I try to understand the actions of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito.

I had lived in a neighborhood for many years where gunshots sometimes went pop, pop, pop, pop, pop late at night, tires screatched, chicks screamed, sirens blared, and helicopters flew low over the 'hood with searchlights blazin'. Just a part of my old reality.

For doing something stupid, I have been handcuffed and arrested.

I wonder, have you been arrested too?
If so, you will know what I mean as I continue writing.

I have been fingerprinted. I have had my mug shot taken. I have been locked up in jail, alone, though not locked away in prison. I had to make that phone call to my parents. It was not fun. I did not like it. I changed my ways to avoid having to go back there. All I wanted to surf, get high with my friends, drinks some beers with the boyz and date some cute chicks. Not sit in jail.

Before November 6th, 2007, Amanda Knox had never been handcuffed and arrested. She had never been fingerprinted. She had never had her mug shot taken. She had never been in jail before. She had never had to call her parents to come and bail her out.

Before November 6th, 2007, Raffaele Sollecito had never been handcuffed and arrested. He had never been fingerprinted. He had never had his mug shot taken. He had never been in jail before. He also had never had to call his parents to come and bail him out.

On Novemeber 6th, 2007, Police Chief Arturo De Felice brought Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito onto the world stage and announced that they helped kill Meredith Kercher. This was the same day that he said "Initally the American gave a version of events we knew was not correct. She buckled and made an admission of facts that we knew were correct, and from that we were able to bring them all in." De Felice told the reporters that Raffaele had also "crumbled".

He boasted that Amanda and Raffaele would not see lawyers until their 1st court hearing. And threw them into solitary confinement.

Surely Amanda or Raff were scared when this happened.
They did not want to sit in jail. Neither did I. What about you?

I would wonder how the heck am I going to get out of this predictament?
I have to believe that Amanda or at least Raffaele, while in solitary confinement so as to prevent opportunites of collusion, would have at least gave it a thought to turn on Rudy Guede if they were involved with him in Meredith Kercher's brutal murder.

To help get themselves out of jail, as quickly as possible. But how?

Snitch on Rudy.

They didn't.
And they never have,
though Amanda barely knew Rudy and Raff had never met him.

Instead, Rudy's friend, his buddy, Giacomo Benedetti snitched on him...

When he was finally arrested, Amanda and Raff did not give minute details of Rudy Guede's actions that night as only the true killers could do.

Amanda and Raffaele did not snitch on Rudy because they were not there the night Mereidth Kercher was stabbed to her death.

M.O.O.
RW

 

[RWVBWL]

Excellent points. My guess as to why Giacomo and Rudy are still friends is that it's because they share an understanding that the cops forced G. to betray R., and that if the roles had been reversed, R. would have done the same thing to G.

But yeah, there is no reason for Rudy not to describe the murder in a way that resembles the prosecutor or judge's scenarios. It's amazing his lawyers didn't advise him to do so; that would have been much worse for Amanda and Raffaele.
It's funny -- the police, investigators, lawyers and magistrates all did so many underhanded and illicit things, yet none of the things they did were quite underhanded enough or illicit enough to allow them to actually get away with what they were trying to get away with. What's up with that?

Hi Mary H,
An excellant point backatcha!

Amanda and Raff would have indeed been so much more worse off if Rudy had went along with the official version of "facts that we knew were correct" of what went down that night Meredith was brutally stabbed to her death. And I bet that it would have been extremely easy to do...

On another note, Mary H, what do you think of what RoseMontague had decipered the other day when she put 2 + 2 together and seems to believe that Rudy Guede might have been in another burglary gone wrong?

Here's the quote again, it's interesting:

A Fatal Gift of Beauty contains details about one break-in I was not familiar with:

Ten days later, on October 23, Rudy Guede’s immediate next-door neighbor on via Canerino, Mara Madu Diaz, was at a friend’s farm in Gualdo Tadino, about an hour’s drive from Perugia, participating in the vendemmia—the annual grape harvest. She knew Rudy, as she often saw him in front of her house on his phone—he had to stand outside his own house to get cell service. She saw him almost daily, when she walked her dog in the morning and evening. He always said hello and often leaned down and petted her dog. That day, police interrupted her grape harvesting with bad news. Her little medieval house in Perugia—narrow, three floors high, with a single room on each floor—had been badly damaged in a fire.
She raced home to find her cat dead and her house nearly destroyed. Firemen and police told her a thief or thieves had entered through a lower window and that the fire had started on the third floor, in her bedroom, where someone had thrown a scarf over a lamp.
.......(snip)..........
Her cat strangled on the smoke, because whoever had feasted in the kitchen had left the pantry door open, blocking the animal’s escape route. When Mrs. Madu Diaz finally assessed the damage, she found that the thief had cleaned out her jewel box, including a gold watch of her mother’s.She didn’t see Rudy again after the fire. When she learned he had been arrested and had a habit of breaking into homes, she wondered if he’d had something to do with her disaster. But the police never charged anyone. Her insurance paid for repairs, and the little house became habitable again after three years of work.

And from the timeline:

October 27. A Saturday. Rudy is arrested inside the Milan nursery school owned by Mrs. Del Prato. Police find Paolo Brocchi’s laptop and cell phone, a woman’s gold watch, and a sixteen-inch knife belonging to the nursery school kitchen in his backpack.

How much evidence do you need to prosecute Rudy for burglary? I just don't get it.

As RoseMontague Fine, Danceme, and others often do, I too sometimes pick up on the out of place find or 2. I remember thinking it kinda odd that Rudy was found with a woman's gold watch on him. Coincedence that his next door neighbor had a gold watch stolen in a burglary?Rudy didn't have a Mom or a girlfriend that I am aware of, so why carry a woman's watch on him? Maybe he was wearin' it so he could get to work on time? Oppps, the guy didn't have a job, so no need for a watch, really...

I knew a guy once a long time ago, Lance is his name, he's been locked up for years now. He got really into hard drugs and murdered his old neighbor and then set the house on fire to cover his tracks I guess. Got burned by the fire and was caught.

If Rudy seems to have been involved in this burglary and arson that RoseMontague mentioned, well I wonder what he himself might have been usin' to get high, , so to say? For his next burglary turned into murder.
Hmmm...
RW

 

[JREF2010]

I agree Dan. I believe the visible prints near the corner of the bed near the door are from Rudy taking his shoes off, leaving his shoes in the bedroom, and walking barefoot to the bathroom to clean up.

Wow, JREF2010!
That is a well thought out post!
RW

thanks..it was the previous comments talking about the clean hallway.

here's a piece from Micheli too.


As to his clothing, said to have worn, among other things, a sweatshirt and shoes brand "Adidas", the latter - he said - remained clean.

He lied about them being Addidas , but he mentions his shoes remained clean.

Just a guess at the clean hallway and also the odd, "solo" footprint on the bathmat.

If he walked to the shower barefoot, why would he wash his feet off of blood and leave no other prints? I wondered.
Then I thought if the shoes were clean, a person could get from X to Y with no traces. But then why get your foot wet in a shower or bidet?

Then I recalled he said his pants were bloody but not his shirt and shoes, so he only changed pants and went dancing (still looking that up.)

 

[Dan O.]

He props her, probably an attempt at some sexual assault, partially undressing her, but he gave up because the blood is too much now.

You make some good points but this part I won't buy without stronger evidence that Rudy is a cold blooded rapist. If that purported semen stain is tested and proves to be Rudy's then Rudy will have lots of 'splanin to do.

Without the semen evidence, the sexual assault part could have happened at any time, even before the stabbing. It's something that is more likely to occur in the heat of the moment such as attempting digital rape in the beginning of the struggle or actual intercourse immediately after Meredith is incapacitated.

Once Rudy leaves the room and cleans up he will reflect upon what he has done and his every thought is going to be on how to get out of this situation.


For the rest of your scenario, the theory is just the first step. The hard part comes in trying to prove yourself wrong. It's only by proving a theory wrong that you get to narrow the field of possibilities and get one step closer to the truth.

I have given an alternate theory. We can look at where our theories differ and try to search for evidence that favors one theory over the other. Don't think of this as defending your own pet theory. If you strike my theory down I'll just take yours and run with it.

 

[Mary_H]

Hi Mary H,
An excellant point backatcha!

Amanda and Raff would have indeed been so much more worse off if Rudy had went along with the official version of "facts that we knew were correct" of what went down that night Meredith was brutally stabbed to her death. And I bet that it would have been extremely easy to do...

On another note, Mary H, what do you think of what RoseMontague had decipered the other day when she put 2 + 2 together and seems to believe that Rudy Guede might have been in another burglary gone wrong?<snip>

If Rudy seems to have been involved in this burglary and arson that RoseMontague mentioned, well I wonder what he himself might have been usin' to get high, , so to say? For his next burglary turned into murder.
Hmmm...
RW

Well, Rose asks the right question, which is why Rudy was not in jail. As you might know, Mark Waterbury (and others) believe Rudy had escaped prosecution because he was a police informant (there's a lot of African drug traffic in north central Italy).

Someone I know has suggested that we all may have been too quick to buy into the police's story about the anonymous bomb threat to the Lana family the night of the murder. Here is what it says in Massei:

Thus it happened that the evening of November 1, 2007 at around 10:00 pm, someone called and warned Elisabetta Lana not to use the toilet of her dwelling because it contained a bomb which could explode. Mrs. Lana immediately notified the police of this phone call; and they came to the house but did not find anything. Mrs. Lana and her husband were nonetheless asked to go to the Postal Police the next day to report said telephone call.

The next day (November 2), as they were preparing to go and file the report, their son Alessandro Biscarini found a mobile phone "in the garden, in the clearing in front of the house" at around 9:00 am ..... Thinking that it has been lost by one of the officers who had come the evening before, Mrs. Elisabetta Lana phoned Police Headquarters and was told to bring this phone to the Postal Police, where she was going anyway and where she arrived, with her husband, at about 10:15 am......

Shortly thereafter, and after Mrs. Elisabetta Lana and her husband had left the Postal Police office, their daughter Elisabetta Biscarini informed them that she had found a second mobile phone in the same garden of the house on Via Sperandio, between 11:45 am and 12:00 noon, a short distance from where the first phone had been found......

First of all -- 10:00? Isn't that an awfully significant coincidence, now that we know the time of death was probably around 9:30?

Second -- as an American, "garden" to me does not mean "yard," it means flower beds -- it sounds from the description in Massei that the phones were found not only in the front yard, but maybe even in the driveway -- they definitely were found where the police had walked, or Mrs. Lana would not have thought one of the cops had dropped his phone there.

The question is, did Rudy or one of his associates (even another cop, located outside of Perugia) call the house where he had thrown the phones, in order to get the police to find them that night and possibly trace them and look into finding Meredith the night of the murder instead of the next morning? (My personal belief has always been that Rudy left thinking Meredith could still be saved.)

The thought that there may be more to the coincidental bomb threat leads me to wonder whether there may be more to the story that Rudy's fingerprints were found via the immigration data base. Why would he have had no fingerprints in the criminal data base? Would the Perugian police actually have been unaware of such a habitual burglar/arsonist?

These theories all depend on one thing, though -- do people in Italy care if criminals commit more serious crimes after not being adequately prosecuted for minor ones? In Seattle, the authorities totally get their butts kicked if they let somebody dangerous out of jail and he turns right around and kills somebody. Maybe in Italy, they don't.

 

[JREF2010]

You make some good points but this part I won't buy without stronger evidence that Rudy is a cold blooded rapist. If that purported semen stain is tested and proves to be Rudy's then Rudy will have lots of 'splanin to do.

Without the semen evidence, the sexual assault part could have happened at any time, even before the stabbing. It's something that is more likely to occur in the heat of the moment such as attempting digital rape in the beginning of the struggle or actual intercourse immediately after Meredith is incapacitated.

Once Rudy leaves the room and cleans up he will reflect upon what he has done and his every thought is going to be on how to get out of this situation.


For the rest of your scenario, the theory is just the first step. The hard part comes in trying to prove yourself wrong. It's only by proving a theory wrong that you get to narrow the field of possibilities and get one step closer to the truth.

I have given an alternate theory. We can look at where our theories differ and try to search for evidence that favors one theory over the other. Don't think of this as defending your own pet theory. If you strike my theory down I'll just take yours and run with it.

Yes I wasn't sure where to put that within the events. The sexual assault was a whole crime in itself.

But I do feel its easier Rudy was the only one who did this. But when ?

Maybe before the wounds? IDK...

Your probably making more sense, it would have been before he cleaned up.

My problem placing this event is the movement of the body leans toward the time of sexual assault, or what other reason to move the body?
But to have a sexual assault with the blood and post wounds doesn't seem to make sense either , so that confuses me.

And I'll not be accepting Rudy had a date with Meredith. ....