Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[JREF2010]

I was the one who posted that recently at PMF. I deduced this based upon three items of evidence: 1) Knox claimed that the front door was open when she returned from Sollecito's flat, 2) the girls' upstairs accommodation was only a few hundred square feet in area, and 3) the recorded temperature for Perugia on 2 November 2007 varied between a low of 8º to a high of 15º Celsius.

There is no need to hypothesize about the purported frugality of the residents in regard to heating expenses - those three items establish the likelihood that the ambient temperature would have been around 10ºC in the flat when Knox supposedly had her shower.

Not that its a serious issue about how warm the cottage was, but 10c/ 50F is not something to be alarmed over, or suspicious of imo.

Have you ever lived up north, ice fishing? snowmobile's and snow skiing?

50F/10C is very warm at times.

Nothing to be suspicious about, unless you are searching for something to place blame for a theory of guilt using the temperature for a shower?

I grew up in the North and scooting bathmats on a cold floor isn't something Amanda invented or the first to do. What are you supposed to do? Put on socks in the shower? geeez...this seems very weak, or a cultural thing? or someone who has never lived in a cold environment.

Also taking showers everyday or even twice a day is not uncommon in the US.

 

[LondonJohn]

He is suing Amanda and will not get anything from Raf, IMO

Correct. Unfortunately for him, I think it's reasonably likely that not only will Hellmann throw out the criminal slander conviction at the same time as he acquits Knox (and Sollecito) of murder, he may also make a comment about the "confession/accusation" having been improperly coerced. If that's the case, then I think that Lumumba's chance of winning a civil case for damages against Knox would be pretty low.

I actually think that Lumumba stands a far better (and far fairer) chance of suing the police. I think that he has exemplary grounds for claiming that 1) the police improperly coerced Knox into accusing him; 2) the police - who either knew or should have known that the Knox confession was the result of their own improper coercion - arrested Lumumba on insufficient grounds; 3) the police mistreated him during his arrest and while he was in detention - including verbal, racial and physical abuse; 4) the police improperly kept his business closed for several months, contributing significantly to its failure.

I don't think Lumumba owes the Perugia police anything at this point. It will truly be a shame if he has been brainwashed by police and prosecutors into an unshakable belief that Knox accused Lumumba "out of a clear blue sky" and entirely of her own free will. I sincerely hope that Lumumba comes to realise who the real enemy are in regards to his personal situation. In my opinion, his vindictive stance towards Knox is not only undignified, it's also totally misplaced.

 

[LondonJohn]

Not that its a serious issue about how warm the cottage was, but 10c/ 50F is not something to be alarmed over, or suspicious of imo.

Have you ever lived up north, ice fishing? snowmobile's and snow skiing?

50F/10C is very warm at times.

Nothing to be suspicious about, unless you are searching for something to place blame for a theory of guilt using the temperature for a shower?

I grew up in the North and scooting bathmats on a cold floor isn't something Amanda invented or the first to do. What are you supposed to do? Put on socks in the shower? geeez...this seems very weak, or a cultural thing? or someone who has never lived in a cold environment.

Also taking showers everyday or even twice a day is not uncommon in the US.

And even if the cottage was cold, the only alternative for Knox would have been to pack a change of clothes, grab all her shower toiletries (and in my experience with girls that's quite a few bottles) and maybe even a towel, then return to Sollecito's apartment to shower. Not only that, but then she'd have needed to return her dirty clothes and shower toiletries/towel back to the cottage at some point later on. Wouldn't the logical easiest thing be to put up with the cold and post-shower shivering, if the alternative was as I've described above?

Incidentally, the Massei report gives Lalli's reading of the ambient temperature in Meredith's room as 13 degrees celsius, and that was taken at 00.50 (i.e. just before 1am) on the 3rd November. I don't therefore think it's reasonable to suggest that the temperature inside the cottage at 10.30-11.00am on 2nd November was a mere 10 degrees.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

cardiol

LondonJohn,

The other problem with the theory that Meredith expelled her meal in some fashion (trying not to be too graphic here) is that there is no evidence of it. Therefore, one has to posit additional clean-up that was done perfectly. No sale.

 

[Grinder]

It's interesting that PGP have no problem with the English girls not remembering nearly exactly when they ate that night. They had arranged for several of them to meet and had to time the baking of the pizza and one would think they would recall that the pizza was going be ready at 6 or 6:15, whatever.

The TOD stomach analysis is just an add on to all the other evidence. Even if it isn't exactly as most think here think it is, combined with all the other phone records, state of dress, laundry still in the washer, and the tow truck event, the evidence shows the death happened before 10:18.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Not that its a serious issue about how warm the cottage was, but 10c/ 50F is not something to be alarmed over, or suspicious of imo.

Not to mention that this estimation of 10 C is wildly off. Slightly ajar door will not cause such a quick temp drop in a warm flat without a serious draft. I'm sure there was at least 15 C or more when Amanda got there in the morning.

The next night Dr Lalli measured ambient temperature as 13 C and it was after the cops kept the front door and the balcony door wide open for the day and the night.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

They watched "The Notebook"

It's interesting that PGP have no problem with the English girls not remembering nearly exactly when they ate that night. They had arranged for several of them to meet and had to time the baking of the pizza and one would think they would recall that the pizza was going be ready at 6 or 6:15, whatever.

The TOD stomach analysis is just an add on to all the other evidence. Even if it isn't exactly as most think here think it is, combined with all the other phone records, state of dress, laundry still in the washer, and the tow truck event, the evidence shows the death happened before 10:18.

Grinder,

Given that the movie that they watched (The Notebook) is about 120 minutes long, I don't see ho they could have eaten much later than 6:15-6:30. I think that they also stopped the movie briefly in the middle, but someone else may remember more clearly than I do.

 

[Grinder]

I actually think that Lumumba stands a far better (and far fairer) chance of suing the police. I think that he has exemplary grounds for claiming that 1) the police improperly coerced Knox into accusing him; 2) the police - who either knew or should have known that the Knox confession was the result of their own improper coercion - arrested Lumumba on insufficient grounds; 3) the police mistreated him during his arrest and while he was in detention - including verbal, racial and physical abuse; 4) the police improperly kept his business closed for several months, contributing significantly to its failure.

The issue for Patrick is: does he wish to live in Perugia or Peru? The readings at the Shock along with the history of this trial make me believe that the ILE would have made life very unpleasant for Patrick if he hadn't recanted his Daily Mail story.

 

[LondonJohn]

LondonJohn,

The other problem with the theory that Meredith expelled her meal in some fashion (trying not to be too graphic here) is that there is no evidence of it. Therefore, one has to posit additional clean-up that was done perfectly. No sale.

Absolutely. Any expulsion either through faeces or vomit - if it had occurred - would almost certainly have taken place before the stabbing (and probably only shortly before the stabbing). It's therefore entirely reasonable to suggest that any faecal expulsion would have been at least partially deposited onto Meredith's underclothing or jeans or onto the floor of the bedroom. Likewise, any vomit would have been deposited onto the floor or bed (or possibly walls) of the room, and would also almost certainly have got onto Meredith's outer clothing - particularly her Adidas jacket.

Yet no evidence of faeces or vomit was found anywhere in Meredith's room (or in the hallway or kitchen/lounge for that matter). And while it's theoretically just about possible that faeces or vomit might have been cleaned up in the hallway or kitchen/lounge, it's impossible that such a clean-up could have occurred in Meredith's bedroom - which is the very place where one would expect to find such evidence if Meredith had indeed passed bowel motions or vomited through extreme fear.

The whole premise of excretion or vomiting in this case is wrong and misplaced. We know for certain that it didn't happen. The condition and volume of Meredith's stomach/intestine contents at autopsy is conclusive proof of this; but - as you point out - the absence of the necessary evidence of faeces/vomit at the crime scene, and the impossibility of such evidence having been cleaned up after the crime while leaving other evidence (blood, prints, dust) intact, serves as further confirmation of the irrefutable fact that this didn't happen.

 

[Grinder]

Halides,

You remember correctly, but my point remains that they should have been able to remember when they baked and ate. Yes, it is agreed that they started eating sometime between 5:30 and 6:30 and most likely right about 6:15 but when AK and RS having a much less structured evening couldn't remember details to the minute, it was proof of murder.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

poker

Halides,

You remember correctly, but my point remains that they should have been able to remember when they baked and ate. Yes, it is agreed that they started eating sometime between 5:30 and 6:30 and most likely right about 6:15 but when AK and RS having a much less structured evening couldn't remember details to the minute, it was proof of murder.

Grinder,

I see your point, and I raise you all of the policemen who said that they could not remember the exact time that they did something, as mentioned in Murder in Italy.

 

[LondonJohn]

The issue for Patrick is: does he wish to live in Perugia or Peru? The readings at the Shock along with the history of this trial make me believe that the ILE would have made life very unpleasant for Patrick if he hadn't recanted his Daily Mail story.

Well, they've already damaged his life and been a major contributory factor (if not the entire cause) of his business going bust. As you say, I suspect that the police have the power to make Lumumba's life (and business prospects) more difficult still if he were to take legal action as I suggested.

Sad (and wrong) as it may be, I think Lumumba might be best advised to move himself and his family away from Perugia, and to pursue the Perugia police for rightful damages. Like you, I can't see him getting involved in a possibly-bitter legal battle with the Perugia police and not having issues down the line if he continues to live there.

 

[Grinder]

The cleanup story of the first court was only an example of barrenness of thought process. Had they cleaned there would have been clear marks and swirls. In addition, they would have cleaned the faucet and even though the blood splotch on the mat was hardly an identifiable footprint, they would have tossed it in the shower.

They were obviously more than ready for the police by noon and certainly had the time to actually clean the floor in the hall and the small bathroom. They clearly didn't clean but why spoil a good story.

 

[LondonJohn]

By the way, with regard to the Katie Crouch article, it's important to note that Crouch didn't either write or imply that Lumumba told her during their lunch together that he was beaten/abused by the Perugia police. She writes the following:

Lumumba (whose uncle, he told me, was the real Patrice Lumumba, the great Congolese political leader slaughtered by the Belgians) wasn't sure exactly what I was doing asking him these questions. I wasn't either. But he didn't really care. What he wanted, like many wronged people, was for someone to listen to his story.

And what a story it was. Because of Knox's accusations, he was ripped away from his young son in the middle of the night, interrogated, beaten, and held in solitary confinement for 14 days. His business remained closed for four months, even after his name was cleared. And he definitely thought Knox and Sollecito were guilty.

"When put in front of a judge," he told me, "I pleaded with him. 'What was I doing here? I didn't do this!' And Knox? She said nothing. Why would she say nothing? She must have done it. She is a cold woman. She did it."

The middle paragraph of these three is the one where the claims of Police malpractice/brutality are mentioned. But this paragraph could easily be Crouch writing background information, based on the Mail report from 2007. There is no reason to conclude that the information in this middle paragraph necessarily came from her lunch with Lumumba this year. Having said that, the fact that she concludes the previous paragraph with the sentence "What he wanted, like many wronged people, was for someone to listen to his story." and opens the paragraph in question with the sentence "And what a story it was" tends to suggest that Lumumba might have included the details of that middle paragraph in the story he told to Crouch. But I don't think we can be certain that this is the case.


Oh and for pilot padron's benefit, Crouch wrote about hiding in bushes while a reporter was doing a piece to camera about the appeal trial. She didn't write about hiding in bushes while looking at Filomena's window at the cottage. But why let the facts get in the way of an agenda-driven story, eh?!


PS: As per Crouch's report above, Lumumba is almost certainly not related to the former Congolese dictator Patrice Lumumba. Patrick seems to have become somewhat of a fantasist in regard to this particular issue: it appears he's been making this claim for quite some time predating the murder. But I think it's important to note that even if this story is a fantasy, there's only potential upside to Lumumba from a pretence to be related to a famous former leader. Conversely, there was very little upside - and considerable potential downside - in Lumumba accusing the Perugia police of verbal/racial/physical abuse if it didn't actually happen. That's why most reasonable people ought to conclude that this abuse of Lumumba did in fact happen.

 

[Fuji]

But was there also no hot water?

I was referring specifically to the air temperature.

 

[Fuji]

But you don't really know, do you?

I thought it was a reasonable deduction to make. Are you suggesting that it is unreasonable? Based upon what factors would you reach such a conclusion? (By the way, I also neglected to include the broken window in Filomena's room, which would also serve as another factor tending to equalize the indoor and outdoor temperatures.)

What was the weather like that morning?

I provided a link to recorded temperature minimum and maximum for that day. Would you also like to know the relative humidity or atmospheric pressure in order to posit the likely air temperature in the flat that morning? I fail to see the relevance, but those are also stipulated in the link I provided.

Did the Police or anyone else make notice of the temperature inside the cottage when they arrived?

I do not recall if they did so on the afternoon of 2 November. However, on page 110 of the English translation of the Massei report, it is noted that the recorded ambient temperature of the flat at 0:50AM on 3 November was 13ºC. For purposes of comparison, the recorded temperature minimum and maximum for 3 November were 8ºC and 18ºC, respectively.

Four years after the event you draw conclusion of this kind without no real fact basis and think that this somehow shows not only Knox but also Sollecito's involvement in a murder?

I think I have provided ample "real fact basis" for making such a deduction. I do not believe her account of events for the morning of 2 November, and this is but one of many elements that I think indicate its implausibility.

 

[Fuji]

Not to mention that this estimation of 10 C is wildly off. Slightly ajar door will not cause such a quick temp drop in a warm flat without a serious draft.

There was a serious draft. There was an open door and a broken window.

I'm sure there was at least 15 C or more when Amanda got there in the morning.

Upon what basis do you assert this with such certainty?

The next night Dr Lalli measured ambient temperature as 13 C and it was after the cops kept the front door and the balcony door wide open for the day and the night.

Keeping the door open during the course of the afternoon would actually tend to increase the indoor temperature, as the recorded outdoor maximum was 15ºC, as previously noted. Moreover, daily temperature minima are usually recorded around dawn, not midnight. Finally, the presence of several live human beings within the flat throughout that afternoon and evening would serve as a (small) heat source within the flat.

 

[Dan O.]

Not to mention that this estimation of 10 C is wildly off. Slightly ajar door will not cause such a quick temp drop in a warm flat without a serious draft. I'm sure there was at least 15 C or more when Amanda got there in the morning.

Remember also that the boys downstairs would be keeping at least part of their flat at a moderate temperature unless they are total failures at commercial indoor gardening. The heat from downstairs would migrate to the upstairs rooms so the girls may not need a lot of heating of their own.

We know it was at least a bit chilly upstairs because Amanda returned to the bathroom to dry off. If it was very cold, she would have wrapped herself in a towel or bathrobe before going into the bathroom in the first place.

 

[Fuji]

Not that its a serious issue about how warm the cottage was, but 10c/ 50F is not something to be alarmed over, or suspicious of imo.

Have you ever lived up north, ice fishing? snowmobile's and snow skiing?

I lived through 22 winters in New Hampshire. I am well-acquainted with cold weather. In my original post at PMF which initially elicited this discussion, I also noted that I lived an entire winter in County Cork in an unheated bathroom, with open access to the outside. Never mind 10ºC - there were many mornings when the air temperature in my bathroom was closer to 5ºC.

Nothing to be suspicious about, unless you are searching for something to place blame for a theory of guilt using the temperature for a shower?

In isolation, of course it is not something upon which to found a belief in guilt or innocence.

I grew up in the North and scooting bathmats on a cold floor isn't something Amanda invented or the first to do. What are you supposed to do? Put on socks in the shower? geeez...this seems very weak, or a cultural thing? or someone who has never lived in a cold environment.

Also taking showers everyday or even twice a day is not uncommon in the US.

I lived the first 36 years of my life in the USA.

 

[Rolfe]

Hi, "LooneyJohn"!

I read that nonsense at PMF.org, and was thinking of replying here, though I was in two minds about whether to dignify such drivel by addressing it. I found this comment by Stilicho particularly offensive.

I know they read over here, though, and I hope many of them will understand why (in more detail than anyone thus far has bothered to explain to them) their pet theory is flawed. This is why they lurk here in droves. If they weren't able to read your statement then they'd never know why or how they were wrong.

As I said before, the medical evidence for time of death is hardly my "pet theory", it's merely what I picked up on as being so blindingly obvious that I realised right then and there that unless the prosecution could come up with a theory of how Knox and Sollecito had killed Meredith around 9.20, they had to be innocent.

These publications the PMF crowd like to post are in fact cautionary tales to dissuade the inexperienced from relying too heavily on GI tract findings to the exclusion of all else. As the documents correctly state, there are a number of factors that can influence these findings, which must be taken into consideration.

Anecdote in spoiler tags - the squeamish are counselled not to click.

As an aside, perhaps the most off-beam case was one I saw last year, where a fox which had been caught in an illegal snare for several days and quite possibly as long as a week still had all its last meal in its stomach, and normal faeces in the rectum. The first point is of course, at what point during that week did the animal die? Difficult to say, but it was probably alive for two or three days while trapped. So why the GI tract contents? The stomach contained the entire last meal - which was a small rat, swallowed whole. Not the sort of thing the stomach is going to get to grips with digesting while the animal is severely stressed and in a lot of pain. And the presence of faeces in the rectum was easy to explain. The snare itself had tightened in such as way as to prevent the animal emptying its bowels. So I was quite ready to refute any suggestion that these findings showed the fox had only been trapped for a short time. The rest of the evidence (the condition of the snare-wire wound in particular) was conclusive.

That's just an example of how other circumstances must be taken into account when interpreting the findings. However, the circumstances have to be present. There's no point in saying, but maybe this or maybe that, if there's no evidence for this or that having been a factor.

The findings in the Kercher necropsy were that the entire last meal was present in the stomach. 500ml - does "cardiol" realise how much that actually is? (I have some doubts whether "cardiol" is really medically qualified, but I think it may simply be that this person is not a pathologist and doesn't think about these things in a professional capacity. And people do sometimes use the word "pylorus" as shorthand for "pyloric sphincter".) And of course the duodenum was empty, and as I understand it, most of the jejunum right down to the ileum where there was some ingesta present. Not only that, but the constituents of the last meal were still recognisable in the stomach to some extent, in a semi-digested state.

It is absolutely impossible for these findings to be consistent with a normal healthy young woman having eaten a meal with nothing "bad" about it (food toxins will certainly cause a meal to be retained in the stomach, but the others who are the meal showed no signs of food poisoning), and having lived subsequently for more than five hours, undisturbed for most of that time.

"Cardiol" thinks maybe stress caused intestinal transit to speed up, moving ingesta on from the duodenum to the distal jejunum. Wrong, for at least two reasons. One is that the entire meal was still in the stomach, only semi-digested, so it hadn't gone anywhere. And secondly, if stress had caused such speeding up of intestinal transit, what about the large intestine? I'm sorry, but as LondonJohn says, there would have been stained underwear or other evidence of involuntary defaecation.

He also suggests vomiting as another possible confounder. I think even Stilicho corrected him on that. That theory would perhaps explain an empty stomach - but Meredith's stomach wasn't empty, the meal was still there. Also, "cardiol" has to postulate a selective and perfect clean-up of the vomit, which is clearly impossible.

This illustrates one of the double standards which are so prevalent on that forum. Anyone coming and making a point suggestive of innocence is immediately met with a demand for citations to show that their point has been unequivocally proven. "Please post a link to show that x was shown to be the case. Thanks in advance." But this nonsensical speculation about cleaned-up vomit (of food that was still quite plainly tucked up in Meredith's stomach) is allowed to pass without comment.

In contrast, a little way up this thread someone posted some speculations he clearly stated were speculation, as regards how Rudy might have got in and whether a staged burglary must inevitably have been staged by Knox and Sollecito. Stint7 (who is of course a completely separate person from Pilot Padron, even though both share some very unusual quirks of written English) immediately trots over there and posts a paraphrase of these musings, stating that they have been claimed here as being actual truth.



The sooner they just let these poor innocents out of jail, the better, in my view.

Rolfe.