Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Mary_H]

Hi Draca,
I too am curious about what LondonJohn writes about.
I had just assumed that they had the time wrong when they found the 2nd phone.

But what do I know, cell phones are weird. I've had my pre-paid cell turned on, at it's highest ringing level, #8, with vibrate on while at de casa, never heard it ring or felt the vibration, and then hours later found out someone had called and left a voicemail. Hmmm, weird...

The same cell phone weirdness happened to a good bud who surfs where I try to do shark observation and with whom I recently kayak paddled with from Marina del Rey to Santa Monica Pier and back. Steve related a story the other day about how his AT+T cell phone went straight to voicemail on a very important job related call that he was waiting hours for. He never heard the ring and he didn't even get that mssage waiting notification, only finding out there was 1 when he called to check if he had any messages later on that evening. he was pissed off as he told me this when he asked to borrow my cell phone a coupla days ago. Cell phones are weird...

As Draca mentioned above, I too wonder:
Am I missing a further issue with the calls or is that all there is?
Take it easy, RW


PS - Sometimes I mention Great White Sharks. Being as it's the middle of summer, that means it's Shark Week on the Discovery Channel right now. I had the opportunity to work with producer Jeff Kurr of Air Jaws fame, who produced this seasons show Great White Invasion, but I chose not to. However, here's a recent story from the L.A. Times that makes breif mention of my work, work that is gonna blow some minds when I do release it to the public:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/the...arks-off-la-beaches-yup-now-theyre-on-tv.html

This is a frame from the 1st ever photographed sequence of a Great White Shark breaching here in the waters of So. California that I shot:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lan...f-sunset-beach-causes-buzz-among-surfers.html

I am just sharing this with you folks here at JREF to show that those who argue for Amanda Knox's and Raffaele Sollecito's innocence come from all walks of life, and are not part of some bogus PR scheme...
L8, RW

ETA:
I see that LondonJohn did reply,
wow, I am a slow typing, 1 finger kinda guy!
Hahaha...

Way cool.

 

[Dan O.]

Thanks LondonJohn. I see that Frank confirmed the testimony that the phone was ringing a second time while it was on the table in his report on the second day of the trial.

For some reason I didn't have these times in my timeline. Perhaps I was waiting to solve the apparent inconsistencies.

 

[RWVBWL]

Way cool.

Hi Mary H,
Sharks are cool!
Heck, even Maresca wears a shark's tooth necklace, though it doesn't make me think any more highly of his conduct in this trial, pfffft, not wanting to open up and examine that huuuge knife handle for Meredith's blood. Doesn't he too want to know the truth?

From Burleigh's book, here is my favorite passage on Maresca:

By the end of the trial, Mignini was insisting that the last best piece of proof of the students’ guilt was the fake break-in and robbery. He and the police said that the defendants had made one little mistake in their carefully staged scene: they had tossed around Filomena’s clothing first, and then thrown a rock at the window from inside, spraying glass on top of the clothes when it should have been under them. Police had described this in trial testimony but never shown it. It was determined that the Kerchers’ civil lawyer, Francesco Maresca, was the only lawyer in the room who knew how to find the picture in his copy of the massive, unorganized digital case archive. His laptop was beamed onto the wall screen, and his motocross screensaver came up, a bike at rightangles to a spray of dirt. The dapper Florentine with the gold-embedded shark’s tooth dangling beneath his bespoke shirt collar smirked and then clicked the mouse again to bring up a picture of Filomena’s bed as it had looked on the morning of November 2, 2007. The defense lawyers insisted that what was supposed to be glass on top of a blue dress on the bed was actually a white dot pattern in the fabric. No one denied that or even bothered to explain what could have happened to the damning glass on top of the clothes in Filomena’s room. In the last minutes of the trial, it was clear that no photographic proof of “glass on top of clothes” even existed and that it didn’t matter anyway.

LOL, too funny.

Seriously though,
I found the following post from RoseMontague to be very interesting:

I finished The Fatal Gift of Beauty and will comment on the book as a whole later. A few interesting quotes and other information emerge including the burglary quote on Rudy and the one from Mignini I posted on the CT thread. This is the scoop on Comodi with a quote that says it all.

“The defense has been overly dramatic about this,” she explained, arguing against the defense request to toss out the case based on the fact that the crime lab hadn’t turned over all the paperwork involved in the DNA analysis. “No defense right has been threatened. We decide if documents are necessary or not. I didn’t even look at their request of July 30 [for the superwitness]. I opened it and closed it right away. It was so useless. No law says the scientific police have to produce all that’s requested. It’s not proof, and we didn’t need it to support our case. The prosecutor’s office decides what is useful and what is distraction. You can tell me that Stefanoni has to get another degree, but telling us that not producing the documents warrants tossing out the case is like asking the postal police to explain how they found a hooker online. The important thing is that they found the hooker!”

Very interesting in light of recent appeal events.

Wow, just wow.

Wow, just wow is right!
This case is such a very interestingly strange murder that we discuss. I still can't get over the fact that Dr. Stefanoni, with her suberb work habits video'd for all the world to see, needed, and then recieved, special permission to work on collecting the evidence in this brutal murder case. Strange...

See you folks later,
RW

 

[Fine]

We read in the media that Maresca represents the Kercher family. That ain't quite right. He represents Meredith's parents (John and Arline) and Meredith's two brothers (John and Lyle). Meredith's sister (Stephanie) is represented by another attorney, Serena Perna. See Massei Report, English Translation, page 10. Can anyone explain this oddity?

///

 

[christianahannah]

Thanks christianahannah,

I don't have any information on this. I have been under the impression that it was taken to be tested but they were never done. I'm just going off memory on this. It's good to hear the results of that test. Anyone know where that info is located?

It is located in the Relazione Tecnica Indagini di Genetica Forense (forensic tests results report), page 16 (Rep. 202); results of tracks A, B, and C on pages 241-242.

 

[RandyN]

Random thoughts of a rambling rambler....

Rudys friend ratted him out and told police about the first unrecorded call and that he thought Rudy was involved in the Kercher murder. Why does he still visit Rudy and does Rudy not know how he was actually caught?

Rudy started bringing first RS and then later on AK into his story after a meeting Rudy had with Mignini...I know I read this somewhere or else I dreamed that up too.

The Lana bomb threat is damned strange...what do the Bayesians say the odds are to that as being random?

What was ever decided about the “old style licensed “car parked in the cottage driveway that night when there should be no car there?

I think Meredith was dragged out of the huge pool of blood to be sexually attacked. ...I wanted to think that she was sexually assaulted at knife point while still unwounded but I see no other reason to drag her across the floor to the middle of the room which would be blood free at that time.

The prosecutor almost had it right....Covering the body is a common thing for a first time killer. Its recorded over and over. It does not indicate a woman’s touch as it were, simply a first time killer.

I think we will see much more about computer data in the argument portion. RS keyboard light will set them free in the end finally.

The Supreme Court will rule that Massei failed to uphold their ruling in the first trial and he will be forced to retire after this case.

Stefanoni is being thrown under the bus by Mignini and her boss Biondo. She is only the pawn though.

The term Dr. is also applied to Mignini so take it from there the high honor that title deserves in Italy....spit flies....

The Lana toilet bomber had to leave a caller id...and is certainly known unless he used a stolen phone.

Rudy took off one shoe as he rinsed his pant leg in the bidet....not in the shower. That’s why there is dilute MK blood found there.

Rudy used towels on the bathroom floor to mask his prints. I think the girls kept their personal towels in their bedrooms (as strangely they did for their tp as well). Rudy's partial print on the bathmat was due to a temporary loss of balance as he stood on one foot to rinse off his pants. He made this partial print as he placed his foot down half on the mat and half on the towel... later he smeared the towels around in the blood to hide his ID ...it just sounded better that he tried to save MK with those towels. The mat print did not catch his attention. The otherwise clean bathroom was due to towels on the floor. No cleanup necessary.

Rudy had a professional relationship with Perugia police. Nothing else can explain a criminal caught in a school with a knife and in possession of identified stolen items being left go without charge. No excuses here....It was a school....a knife!!! DUH!!! I realize this happened in Milan...somebody called someone and Rudy was put on a train back to Perugia w/o charge. Just a few days before Meredith was murdered. True Justice says the police allowed Meredith to be killed. Perhaps they needed a great big story to hide that great big story.

It doesn’t need to be a grand CT...just a few well placed criminals. Mignini had the power to place the fear of God in anyone...if you disagree with him he will charge you and bankrupt you and ruin you...and your family! Any questions.

The prosecution can not put these three together. Not this time anyway. I cant imagine the story they come up with. Toto is gone... And there simply is no other link. Perhaps they intend to call Rudy as a witness? That would be interesting. Personally, I think the defense is already entitled to question Rudy about "his letter" read in court. Seems to me he made a false accusation in this letter. He should be forced to explain exactly what he meant when he said AK and RS killed MK. How he knows, what he knows and when he knew it....you know the whole fair trial thingy...

Although there appears to be no evidence of it I still think Rudy had a friend with him. He stated many times he didn’t want to be forced to take the blame alone. Somebody close to Rudy knows who this friend might be. I’m certain Rudy told Giancomo this in his first call. He didn’t want to be blamed alone...he never mentioned RS or AK....he got that idea from the news and from Mignini.

Finally since its shark week...Randy, I take it there are seals in and about the water of your area? I know San Francisco has lots of seals thus I assume lots of sharks...why would anyone be surprised at sightings in the warmer waters if the food is available? BTW...great shot! What do you think caused this big boy to breach??? After food or just playing? Did you have to rinse out your suit later??? You know those sharks bite boats sometimes and a man on a board makes a pretty good seal imitation from below??? I like the warnings in your article...don’t wear bright clothes and shiny jewelry...lol yea stay away from the chartreuse green, leave the Rolex at home and skip the stink bait aftershave before heading out. I wonder why they come up on the starboard side? I think the writer was joking no? If a shark approaches I suggest you bite him first…sort of catch him off guard. Ya nut!

 

[theRealBob]

Interesting. Does anyone know where and what kind of degree(s) Ms Steffi has?

Also, a list of those who were observing the independent re-examination of the bra clasp and knife, and the titles given them (from the Independent Experts report):

-Dr.ssa Patrizia Stefanoni, consulente per la Procura Generale;
-Prof Giuseppe Novelli, consulente per la Procura Generale;
-Dott. Emiliano Giardina, consulente per la Procura Generale;
-Prof.ssa Francesca Torricelli, consulente per la parte civile;
-Prof. Adriano Tagliabracci, consulente per Raffaele Sollecito:
-Dott, Valerio Onofri, consulente per Raffaele Sollecito;
-Prof. Carlo Torre, consulente per Amanda M. Knox;
-Dr.ssa Sarah Gino, consulente per Amanda M. Knox;
-Dr. Walter Patumi, consulente per Amanda M. Knox.

I think this means she is a Doctor in Screwing Suspects Around, for which she is eminently qualified...

 

[theRealBob]

What is the truth here then? I have wondered aloud here and elsewhere just what Stefanoni's qualifications and title constitute. .

Probably not much.

Who cares ?

Her qualifications are not that important.

The obviousness of the type of work she has done in this case is what really counts...

 

[bolint]

In Italy today anyone holding a university degree is entitled to use the title dottore or dottoressa, respectively.
This is the consequence of a 2004 regulation of the Ministry of Education.
http://www.uniroma1.it/sites/default/files/DM270_04.pdf

 

[bolint]

Really? Why do you assume that his foot was covered in blood on the way to the bathroom? There is not evidence of bloody footprints in the murder room, just shoe prints, so how would the blood have gotten onto the person's foot?

If however the blood was on the person's clothing, particularly the pant leg, then attempting to quickly wash the blood from that in the shower would have meant that diluted blood would have washed down onto the foot, creating the footprint when he stepped out from the shower. By then drying his feet and replacing his socks before returning to the murder scene and replacing his shoes, that person would have then left footprints neither to, or from the bathroom.

The sharp edges of the footprint and the uniform coverage of the sole area does not look like some bloody water was flowing from the pant leg to the foot.
It is more likely that the foot stepped into some pool of bloody water and "stamped" on the mat.
Anyway, where are the drops of bloody water unavoidable also in your explanation?

 

[bolint]

I think she was not in the cottage between 10:00 and 12:30

Why do you think that?

- The timing and cell usage of her phone calls do not fit her story
- She was not captured by the parking lot CCTV. I know that it is not recording continuously, but it still captured three separate shots of the postal policemen, captured the carabinieri, captured the white lady, captured Rudy, so a capture was not a rare event at all.
In her story they passed through the camera field three times. The probability of not recording any of them is relatively low.

 

[bolint]

if merely a negligent (or unhelpful) witness is the actual case, then one would think that "credit for time served" would apply.

I think she is either totally innocent or more involved than that.
Tertium non datur.

 

[bolint]

A question: What if the bra clasp had been duly collected on the first day

Suppose that the bra clasp had been duly collected on the first day, directly from under the body where it was found.

Would the innocentists accept it for proof of involvement?

 

[bolint]

Amazing, that's what Amanda thought about the toilet when she looked in from the door.

Even if she was at the door (which is not clear), Raffaele says that he even leaned to have a look at it. At the door?

That was a photo taken by the Spheron camera at about eye height from in front of the sink. Here is another Spheron photo taken at about the same time from the same location only a little higher...

Are there more pictures from that Spheron recording? It's a good thing.
Where are they?

 

[bolint]

I see no reason to lie about it.

I don't understand it either. But it is Amanda who reports it in the Nov 4 email, bothe the discovery and the disappearance. So for some reason it was important for her.

If they were trying to protect Rudy why not just flush the toilet?

I don't think they wanted to protect Rudy. Just the opposite, let the police go after the unknown killer.

The real question: Why didn't she flush the toilet in the first place?
What is the innocentist explanation?

 

[bolint]

My impression of his appearance before Judge Matteini is that he described the events at the wrong times. I don't put any significance on his getting the times wrong.

No. If he was only wrong with some timing then it would not be a big problem.
But, for example, also before Matteini he said that they had gone to the town center before going home at about 20:30.
That directly contradicts Amanda's version.

 

[snook1]

Suppose that the bra clasp had been duly collected on the first day, directly from under the body where it was found.

Would the innocentists accept it for proof of involvement?

No, beacuse it doesn't fit the narrative presented by the prosecution and by the judge Massei.

If three people were involved, why only one of them leaves his shoeprints, footprints and DNA in the murder room? Why the other person, suppousedly involved, leaves his DNA on this one tiny metal bra clasp and *nowhere else* in that bloody crime scene? How did he do that? Did he grab it with two fingers and did not touch anything else? How did he enter the room and left it? Why there's no footprints of Sollecito in the room? Did he float around it along with Amanda, while Guede actually stood on his feet? It doesn't make any sense.

 

[bolint]

could you try to come up with an idea how Raffaele's DNA got on the bra clasp and why it was found only on that one tiny metal thing and nowhere else in the entire murder room? Could it possibly mean that he touched only that one metal hook and nothing else ?

The bra clasp is a problem also for my theory, because in it Raffaele is not in the room (likely not even in the cottage) at the time of the murder. But I think also unlikely a cleanup/coverup that puts the clasp under the body. Also I don't see how it would have been contaminated.

Why there's such a contrast between Guede's DNA/fingerprints/footprints and Raffaele's DNA? Why there's such a contrast between Guede's DNA and Amanda's DNA in the murder room?

Because Rudy is the chief murderer, whatever happened.

Could you come up with a plausible scenario of what happend during the murder?

I'm asking all of this not without a reason.

So far, after almost 4 years, no one, including Massei, came up with a narrative that would fit the evidence and prove Amanda Knox's and Raffaele Sollecito's guilt. No one. Ever

That's the main problem with this case.

I see it similarly.
The three murderer scenarios do not work.

 

[bolint]

I think the answer is stunningly obvious when you take the entry in context, but bolint doesn't want to accept it.

Look at what Raff wrote.

How could she have seen the faeces when she was taking a shower? She couldn't. It's simple, he assumed that it was in the small bathroom, where she had showered, so he went and looked in the wrong tiolet.

It is not that I just don't want to accept it.
It is quite clear from at least two other quotes of Raffaele that he speaks about the bigger bathroom.
Here he simplified "when she was in the house to take a shower" to "when she was taking a shower".

 

[Katody Matrass]

The sharp edges of the footprint and the uniform coverage of the sole area does not look like some bloody water was flowing from the pant leg to the foot.
It is more likely that the foot stepped into some pool of bloody water and "stamped" on the mat.
Anyway, where are the drops of bloody water unavoidable also in your explanation?

Hi, bolint!

The "edges" of the bathmat print are nothing but sharp and the coverage is not uniform. In fact the print is incomplete and there are areas more soaked, less soaked and parts that left no impression. In my opinion it's consistent with the bloody water flowing down onto the foot during pants cleaning.

There is corroboration to this:
- Guede mentioned his pants were wet.
- there was a trace on a lower frame of the bathroom door consistent with someone brushing it with bloody clothing.

Drops of bloody water are not unavoidable. If he replaced his shoe after cleaning himself, he could step back to the murder room without leaving any trace before the bloody water soaked his shoe and caused it to begin to leave prints.