Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[js202]

OK. Note that this is definitely speculation. The book does not say specifically that Rudy has anything specific, but the author, Nina Burleigh, spent more time on the background of each of the key players involved in the case than other authors, vs. spending a lot of time on the court case.

Some of the facts in the book about Rudy are:

* He had an extremely difficult early childhood. He was separated from his mother at a very early age, and brought to Italy from The Ivory Coast by his father. Although his mother was still alive and had another family in the IC, he never saw her again after a very young age
* His father would go to work and leave Rudy alone in the house to take care of himself at a very young age (like 5), and sometimes not come home. He would also lock Rudy in the bathroom or other small space and leave
* There was mention that Rudy told someone (can't recall who) about being whipped and having a stick smashed over his head when he disobeyed
* Rudy's dad was often not around, and went back to the IC a time or two without him. Rudy was taken in by some kind Italian women who would make sure he got to school and had food to eat
* At one point, as a teenager, Rudy was basically "adopted" by this wealthy family, and for a year or two had a great life, from the standpoint of having whatever he wanted materially. But for some reason, he threw that all away, acting out in ways that ended up in that family giving up on him.
* After high school years, Rudy had one friend in particular that he liked to hang out with, and Rudy would ask to come over to this guy's apartment to stay overnight, because Rudy did not like to stay alone at his own place. But this guy had to ask Rudy not to stay over anymore, because Rudy would wake up in the middle of the night and act out strange scenes, like he pretended he was teaching a school class, and was lecturing the students on some subject, except that in reality, Rudy was asleep. This guy and another friend of his got creeped out by Rudy doing this, and they asked him not to come over any more.
* There is also mention of some other burglaries, including one where a woman who was very close to Rudy had a bunch of her personal stuff stolen, and it was never solved. Of course, there is no evidence Rudy was involved, but the MO was similar to later burglaries he committed and one of the things that was missing, a woman's gold watch, is similar to one Rudy was caught with at that nursery school in Milan. Except the cops never checked the watch, so it may or may not be the same one.

Now, none of this indicates why someone would commit a murder, but it does indicate evidence of a person who might have some mental or emotional problems that have never been properly diagnosed. To most in Perugia, he probably appeared to be just a regular guy, and maybe he was, before the murder, but it seems that, if this info is true, Rudy may have had some very real emotional issues. Issues that might lead someone to act very irrationally when triggered by something. He might not deal well with rejection -- but who knows.

None of the above is proof of anything, not compared to his DNA and prints in the murder room.

Thanks a lot for this breakdown, Dougm. Greatly appreciate your time.

I will seek out a copy of Fatal Gift.

 

[JREF2010]

the human memory and the car in the driveway

Hi Dave,
I'm going off memory here, but it still is usually pretty accurate, since I've discussed Miss Formica a bit here on JREF and have used the early Perugia Shock writings as information also.

Miss Formica had dinner with a male friend and they were returning to their car when a male of colour hurriedly walked by them and bumped into her friend, on a staircase I believe, and he did not apparently wish to be seen. This was about 10:30pm, that is how Alessandra knew of the time.

As Frank Sfarzo reported from court in the 1st trial,
Miss Formica stated that the person she saw that night was not Rudy Guede.

I find this time frame the most intense.
Not sure what translator this was from..but the timing down to minutes or seconds is really a difficult task.
Most witnesses are being truthful to their best ability it seems, and often say between 10: or 10:30pm for example.

Maybe I'm adding fiction too, but the dark colored car in the driveway was seen by the witness the Tow Truck driver. It sat there at the end of the cottage driveway, during the time of the murder and still there when the driver left at 11:40pm aprx.

I wonder is this common, that cars would be parked there
or is it an abnormality?

Alessandra Formica's testimony is open to 10-10:30pm, as I see it.
It would be a great testimony to read, in addition to the towing driver's.

It was there when the Tow truck driver arrived, and still there when he left.
Those in the broken car what did they say about it?


That incident occurred, by her estimates and the garage ticket, around 10:00-10:30pm. She also remarked that just near the parking building entrance there was a station wagon with a guy outside it on his mobile phone, calling for help as the car did not start. She also saw a women in the back seat with a baby seat next to her…baby or in it not she could not say.

I think the truth is Naras testimony was vague, like "an hour or two after I went to bed" which leaves her story open to 10-11. If I'm not mistaken...
Personally I would be horrible with exact times, I look at the clock rarely, pc activity and cell logs would be much more reliable.

Thats why the 10:13pm Cell Tower 300064 really solidified my vote on the earlier ToD. The test was carried out by the police standing in the cottage driveway, also up at the level of the cottage windows if I recall correctly.
This leaves the burglar could have been anywhere from the cottage driveway to the area of back road.

I'm not a cell ping expert, but I get the fact that Meredith made several calls they connected to another tower, then the one test showed the 10:13pm was from outside the cottage, which aligns to Rudys story he left around then, and before the Tow Truck driver arrived because he saw no one coming or going.

There was a lot going on in that driveway area/parking garage area at the time of the murder and immediately afterwards.

The mysterious dark car, sitting empty, at the end of the driveway with the gate open (as usual).

Anyone have more info on this car?

 

[smkovalinksy]

-

just a guess (and in no way to be considered accurate in any sense of the word), but maybe he did have an appointment with Meredith to buy some pot from the guy's stash downstairs, came on to Meredith, she rejected him, and this set him off in a blind rage of temporary insanity. Some criminal profilers have postulated (not saying I agree, but it is interesting that many of the women Bundy is accused of killing generally had the same style and hair color) that a women's rejection of him (Elizabeth Kendall, a pseudonym used by the author of "the Phantom Prince" which was an account of her life with Bundy) is what started Bundy off on his killing spree. As an aside, Bundy was also a petty criminal.

By the way, I have read somewhere that Meredith sustained 57 stab wounds. Is this true?

Dave

I have imagined the same scenario and the same motive. Guede had mother issues and within the psyche this is huge. I believe MK was stabbed twice, with 23 other wounds on her body (pared down from an originally reported 40).

 

[RoseMontague]

The Machine said:

It's not true that convictions are routinely overturned on appeal in Italy. It's a FOA myth.

I am not sure it's a myth or if it is coming from the FOA. Here is what Yummi/Machiavelli had to say about it:

I have to go by memory because I don't have data in front of me. The rate of verdicts totally overturned (not just "acquittals") is around 10%. There is then a percentage of technical acquittals, that could be 5-8% if I don't get it wrong, but somewhere I read the total number of all kinds of technical acquittals is bigger, maybe 15% - 20%. Those are all cases of expiration terms or changing in laws, because appeals in Italy are made even for small charges that can be dropped for various reasons during the way.
The remaining about 75% is made roughly of a half of verdicts that are upheld as they are (30-40%) and another half that are "reformed", which means modified, as it was the one of Rudy Guede. Modification could relevant or can be be minimal.

http://www.injusticeinperugiaforum.org/post7732.html#p7732

The way I read this is (approximates);

10% completely overturned on merit
15% overturned on technical grounds
35% reformed or changed
40% judges copy and pasted

There are several different ways of looking at this, but the way I see it about ¼ are overturned completely, which I don't believe can be considered much of a myth.

 

[Fine]

She was convicted of all of the above but not all of theft charges. She was not convicted of the money and credit card thefts only the cell phones. I don't think she was charged with obstruction except that the simulating a burglary is, as you say, very similar. So by staging they were trying to cover up a crime. It seems an odd charge when they were convicted of much more serious crimes.

It seems a possible out for the court to keep the simulated burglary and false accusation (not on your table) but find her not guilty of the murder. Time served and the Italians wouldn't have to pay her a fortune.

May I ask what you are getting at?

_____________________

Grinder,

Hmmm. How the heck did Massei know it was the lovebirds---instead of Rudy---who stole Meredith's cell phones? Does Massei have psychic abilities? Okay, maybe he does, but all charges must be proved, and proved beyond reasonable doubt. I'm not aware of any evidence presented in court---or in the Massei Report---showing that the lovebirds stole the phones.

Or was it just plain obvious to a brilliant judge like Massei that only a criminal mastermind like Amanda would be thinking so far in advance, to avoid cell phone ringing behind a locked door.........while Rudy was too damn simple-minded?

///

 

[Fine]

Oh, and since the prosecutors have now decided the lovebirds killed Meredith for NO MOTIVE WHATSOEVER, you have to wonder how the lovebirds survived the next four days living together after the murder. You'd expect one lovebird to have killed the other for NO MOTIVE WHATSOEVER. Arresting them on November 6th probably saved one (or both) of their lives. Are they grateful? Nope.

///

 

[RoseMontague]

_____________________

Grinder,

Hmmm. How the heck did Massei know it was the lovebirds---instead of Rudy---who stole Meredith's cell phones? Does Massei have psychic abilities? Okay, maybe he does, but all charges must be proved, and proved beyond reasonable doubt. I'm not aware of any evidence presented in court---or in the Massei Report---showing that the lovebirds stole the phones.

Or was it just plain obvious to a brilliant judge like Massei that only a criminal mastermind like Amanda would be thinking so far in advance, to avoid cell phone ringing behind a locked door.........while Rudy was too damn simple-minded?

///

It is certain for Massei, a Captain Amanda moment:

She makes sure that Meredith’s phones had not ended up in the hands of someone who might have reported their recovery thus leading to a search being started, and to this end she called Meredith’s English mobile phone number. Nor can an argument be made against such an interpretation by recalling the circumstance that Amanda called Meredith on only one of the phones. It should in fact be observed that, having thrown both phones together and in the same place (they were, in fact, found very close to each other), the fact that one [phone] had not been found would lead to the conclusion that the other had not been found either.

 

[snook1]

I've read one of the many reports after Saturday's closing arguments and there was this quote :

A decision is expected in the first week of October.

They could decide to uphold the sentence, clear them completely or rule that they were 'in some way involved' but that it cannot be proved and reduce the sentence considerably, possibly freeing them immediately as they have served four years already.

Is this a possible scenario or just Daily Mail's fantasy?

 

[JREF2010]

Another point about Novelli's comments. In essence what he is saying is that Meredith's DNA did not show up on other samples tested after this gap that would tend to indicate something like machine or lab contamination. He is comparing apples and oranges on this one. <Dr Steffi only cranked up the knob on this one sample, if she had done the same with these others (including ones that showed the presence of some DNA under normal sensitivity), who knows if Meredith's DNA would show up or not? If she had not cranked up the knob on this sample, it would have (and should have) been reported as no DNA found to test.

What Stefanoni did with the RFU chart, X/Y, was very misleading to those not qualified or trained in this field. (including the Judge most likely).
But then anyone whose ever made a simple X/Y chart using Excel knows how to manipulate the chart by adjusting different range values for the X/Y aka vertical and horizontal values.

Charlie Wilkes posted the actual tool model, Applied BioSystem something...8130 or 3180?...and if I recall they recommend not using anything below 150RFU. Thats the tool manufacturer them self. The manufacturer manual includes they are aware labs go below this, but that's their own business in laymens terms.

To go beyond the tools standard ability, the lab and procedures must be proven solid. But even with the best of the labs and this tool, nothing below 50RFU as I understand some literature.

Stef showed the courtroom of untrained and uneducated, in this field, charts with peaks. The peaks were interpreted by Stef and paraded around this trial.

She knew what she was doing. Its very dishonest and absolutely, intentional-misleading. imo.

I think C&V confirmed, very strongly, that Stef was not showing good intentions. They knew exactly what she had done.

I personally believe, Hellman was a surprise. Had another system-Perugia Judge been over this Appeals trial, her work and skulduggery would never have been questioned.

Without the "Hellman surprise/ C&V" the defense would not have had a chance in this Appeal.

 

[js202]

_____________________

Grinder,

Hmmm. How the heck did Massei know it was the lovebirds---instead of Rudy---who stole Meredith's cell phones? Does Massei have psychic abilities? Okay, maybe he does, but all charges must be proved, and proved beyond reasonable doubt. I'm not aware of any evidence presented in court---or in the Massei Report---showing that the lovebirds stole the phones.

Or was it just plain obvious to a brilliant judge like Massei that only a criminal mastermind like Amanda would be thinking so far in advance, to avoid cell phone ringing behind a locked door.........while Rudy was too damn simple-minded?

///

This is one of the more outrageous assertions/assumptions by Massei. Were it not so preposterous and despicable, it would almost be worth it for the contortions into which it forces guilters, trying to defend the Report. As in...

"Now wait a second, given that it was Guede's DNA on the purse, how the heck do I defend charging Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito with the crime of theft?... Oh, flock it, I'll just refer any objectors to the Report as 'evidence' that they did it!"

 

[Grinder]

_____________________

Grinder,

Hmmm. How the heck did Massei know it was the lovebirds---instead of Rudy---who stole Meredith's cell phones? Does Massei have psychic abilities? Okay, maybe he does, but all charges must be proved, and proved beyond reasonable doubt. I'm not aware of any evidence presented in court---or in the Massei Report---showing that the lovebirds stole the phones.

Or was it just plain obvious to a brilliant judge like Massei that only a criminal mastermind like Amanda would be thinking so far in advance, to avoid cell phone ringing behind a locked door.........while Rudy was too damn simple-minded?

///

I think Peg has his email address and you could get it and ask him directly.

Re: Phoines being turned off

It would have been far smarter to leave them at Raf's turned on so their GPS would add to their alibi. I have oft wondered why they would have carried them along. Another case where they were just really, really stupid.

 

[JREF2010]

Hi JREF2010,
If I find the photo again, I'll post a link to it, I think that Piktor, the Photoshop wizard, created it. Though it's just a blended photo, when you look at it, you also realize that Meredith is lying dead inside her bedroom, so the presence of this car has a sinister possibility. Photo's, and video's really help you understand what you read about, they can be very powerfull tools to use.

With that said,
I wonder if the prosecution will somehow include in their arguments, once again "a video dramatization of the murder, complete with sexy avatars of Amanda, Meredith, Raffaele, and Rudy - the women with big breasts and tiny waists a la Lara croft, the men with broad shoulders and bulging crotches. It was a bizzare film that superimposed these animated figures over real crime scene photos." Reading from 'Angel Face', Barbie Nadeau continues, "But the video did prove effective. Rather than listening to defense experts hypothesize with mannequins and diagrams, jurors saw an exact enactment of what the proecution thought had happened. It was compelling."

I surely hope that the defense is ready for this possibility and can somehow combat this powerful video visualization, if it comes into play in court this time around...

RW

I read someone who was in the courtroom, mention how powerful the video was. It woke up the sleeping jurors, it made a very strong visual impact that this is how it could happen. I cant imagine the Defense not being aware, however... they have a better chance with Hellman this time.

I'd like to see the picture. As I recall they tested Raffaeles Audi and found nothing. It seems somewhere maybe after 11:40 when the tow truck left someone came and moved the car?
Who did Rudy maybe know that had a dark colored older car?
Did they even ask?

 

[RoseMontague]

Here is an interesting analysis on the Luminol prints I would like to address:

I just want to address a couple of FOAKer talking points, concerning the TMB presumptive blood test, the footprints and DNA.

There are two alternative blood test talking points we will hear about the footprints. One, is that a blood test wasn't performed. The other and most prevalent, is that they were tested for blood and found negative. First of all, the prints tested positive for blood with luminol. In addition there was a TMB blood test which is also a presumptive blood test (and therefore cannot be used to absolutely confirm or rule out the presence of blood) and this test was negative. The FOAKers claim this proves it wasn't blood. This argument is false. The problem comes down to TMB's sensitivity...it is far less sensitive to blood than luminol and therefore cannot detect volumes of blood below a certain level. And here's the kicker to really nail this home...Rudy Guede's final footprint leaving the cottage, which was very faint but visible to the naked eye, was also tested with TMB and that showed a NEGATIVE for the presence of blood. Therefore, if TMB is unable to detect even low but visible volumes of blood, what hope for it to detect traces that are so low they are too faint to be seen by the human eye? Therefore, for these reasons, the TMB test is not even evidence, let alone proof, that the barefoot prints are not blood and cannot be used to argue so.

Maybe some claim this but the vast majority of posters, including so-called FOA members simply state that a Luminol test that was positive does not prove that it was blood. That would require a specific test for blood, which for some very strange reason was not done.
The fact that a TMB test was negative along with the fact that the majority of these footprints did not contain the victim's DNA that this presumed blood came from is a further indication of doubt, in my opinion.

In addition, the contextual evidence at the crime scene reinforces the barefoot prints designation as being in blood. Firstly, blood is in plentiful supply around the cottage whilst other potential luminol reactants are not present. The most likely of these and which reacts with luminol most commonly is bleach. Since we have testimony from the residents that they never used bleach and the fact that bleach dissipates in 24 hours and the luminol wasn't laid down until the 18th Nov, two and a half weeks after the murder, bleach or products containing bleach, can be firmly ruled out. Finally, we have a barefoot print on the math mat, matched to Solllecito (as is one of the invisible luminol barefoot prints in the corridor) and that is in visible blood. This therefore identifies the luminol prints as being in blood.

I recently had this discussion with a poster named Fulcanelli at Websleuths. The bolded statement is not proven. There are many other things that can cause a Luminol reaction. The big study of a whopping 250 items is vastly over-rated. A look at the items tested does not show many common cleaning products. I have an entire isle of these things at my grocery store. Limiting these to just the few that can cause a strong reaction to Luminol is also an argument not supported by the facts. Looking at the high resolution photo's Charlie linked to, it can be concluded that the Luminol was over-applied. The fact that a negative TMB test was obtained is also an indication that the reaction would not normally have been a strong reaction it the substance was in fact, blood.

The final talking point is issued by Steve Moore who claims that a negative TMB test on a sample, results in no DNA test being performed on it (we only have his word for this though).

The reason why the FBI would perform no DNA test if getting a negative TMB test is because of the low sensitivity of TMB, that if it's negative it means there either is no DNA or if there is DNA it is of a Low Copy Number volume. By default, the FBI do not perform Low Copy Number DNA testing since they do not believe the technique to be commonly recognised in US courts and therefore would have very little value in US trials. This is now changing as US courts are beginning to accept the Low Copy Number technique. The situation is not the same in Europe where the technique was pioneered and where many countries are expert and experienced in it. Therefore, in those practicing European countries, a negative TMB test would never, in and of itself alone, rule out the performing of a DNA test. Instead, more sensitive presumptive tests would be performed (like with luminol) and should those reveal a positive, then DNA testing would be performed.

I would love to see a cite for the bolded statement in this part. I don't think they do a DNA test simply because they don't think the reaction is caused by blood at all. That is my opinion, if someone has better information please provide it, otherwise I am going with the FBI guy's statements as to why the FBI does or doesn't do certain things.

On the highlighted part, I would love to see a cite where Italy is an expert at LCN DNA. I don't believe it for one minute after watching their top people preform on this case.

 

[Grinder]

Imagine if the police had waited for the fornensics evidence to be analyzed before jumping to conclusions.

• Can there be any doubt that Rudy would have been charged with break and enter, rape and murder?
• Can you imagine Rudy claiming he did not break in the Filomena's window because it was difficult to do and the prosecution agreeing with him?
• Can you imagine Rudy saying the bloody footprint on the bathmat was not his and the prosecution bringing in an expert to agree with him?
• Can you imagine the prosecution refusing to test the alleged semen stain on the pillow case?
• Can you imagine the prosecution looking for and finding a couple of molecules of Meredith's alleged DNA on a kitchen knife in someone else's kitchen?
• Can you imagine the prosecution reopening the trashed crime scene 1-1/2 months later to find more evidence.
• Or if Curatolo gave Rudy an alibi can you imagine Mignini describing Curatolo as 'Credibile credibilissimo, absolute'?
• Can you imagine the prosecution reading Rudy's excuses in court and nodding in agreement?

I was thinking along similar lines, not exactly but similar.

I was thinking in a more general way how this would have proceeded if the ILE had done their whole job properly.

Unlike some here, I do understand and accept that Amanda's and Raffaele's behavior legitimately caused the police to have suspicions.

What would have happened if the police "knowing the truth" had acquired a search warrant the next day for Raf's apartment? Did they even search the surroundings for evidence, including garbage cans etc.

Had they used proper protocol would the luminol spot have shown up in Filomena's room.

Had they not leaked all the things they leaked what would Rudy have said? They didn't even need to make A and R's arrest public for some time. They could have searched all the roommates' friends' places including Raf's.

Rudy was fed so much information he easily was able to craft the story. There should not have been anything released about the fourth suspect.

As for Curatolo - spot on. Imagine any of these year after witnesses coming forward for the defense. Imagine Quintavalle coming forward and saying he had walked by Raf's at 10 pm and had seen them through the window or taking out garbage. We would only hear about water running uphill.

 

[Grinder]

I'd like to see the picture. As I recall they tested Raffaeles Audi and found nothing. It seems somewhere maybe after 11:40 when the tow truck left someone came and moved the car?
Who did Rudy maybe know that had a dark colored older car?
Did they even ask?

What did Koko's car look like. Still think a reputed member of an Albanian drug group who admits to being there at 10:30 that night who says he threw his cell phones and olives at the three and then left for Albania who somehow be a suspect for being an accomplice.

 

[NancyS]

Imagine if the police had waited for the fornensics evidence to be analyzed before jumping to conclusions.

• Can there be any doubt that Rudy would have been charged with break and enter, rape and murder?
• Can you imagine Rudy claiming he did not break in the Filomena's window because it was difficult to do and the prosecution agreeing with him?
• Can you imagine Rudy saying the bloody footprint on the bathmat was not his and the prosecution bringing in an expert to agree with him?
• Can you imagine the prosecution refusing to test the alleged semen stain on the pillow case?
• Can you imagine the prosecution looking for and finding a couple of molecules of Meredith's alleged DNA on a kitchen knife in someone else's kitchen?
• Can you imagine the prosecution reopening the trashed crime scene 1-1/2 months later to find more evidence.
• Or if Curatolo gave Rudy an alibi can you imagine Mignini describing Curatolo as 'Credibile credibilissimo, absolute'?
• Can you imagine the prosecution reading Rudy's excuses in court and nodding in agreement?

This post makes the whole craziness of the case so clear - just turning it around the other way makes you realise just how irrational the claims are.

 

[AmyStrange]

There are two separate issues here. The first is whether or not the evidence shows that AK and RS are guilty and the second is whether or not the court will find them guilty.

The evidence shows that they are 100% innocent or, at the very least, NOT guilty as charged.

However, the way the court will vote is beyond my ability to predict. If the jury had to be unanimous, they they will be found innocent with 100% certainty. However, Italy does not require a unanimous verdict, so the verdict requires a knowledge of all the jurists.

Since Hellmen seems to be on the side of innocence, I would think that a verdict of innocence is a distinct probability. I have never seen a person that believes in the innocence of Amanda and Raffaele change their minds. It is also the tendency of the people to follow the authority figure, which in this case is Judge Claudio Pratillo Hellman. Therefore, it seems highly probable that she will be found innocent.

The law sometimes floats in space by itself without any connection to the real world, just like the floating mountains in Avatar. If somehow the prosecution attaches the case to one of those floating mountains (laws) the defense could encounter more problems. However, I haven't seen the prosecution argue points of law, so I think we are safe there.

I'll have to rely on the opinions of those that have personally seen the trial for an estimate of whether or not they will be soon free.

-

Hi Justinian2,

the calculation post you quoted was originally in response to a poster asking (paraphrasing) what most posters here believed. Are Amanda and Raffaele innocent or guilty?

But I like your law in space comparison none the less,

Dave

 

[RoseMontague]

Result of quick googling:
http://www.sensibilia.it/Novelli.html

I initially thought this guy is simply a crook without morals or integrity, but looking at his credentials it's clear he is also completely clueless when it comes to forensics.

His CV is interesting and the main focus is medicine. I did find this bit somewhat ominous in terms of retrocausality.

1999: Consultant at the Criminal Police Division of Science and DNA analysis, Roma.

 

[moodstream]

Here is an interesting analysis on the Luminol prints I would like to address:



Maybe some claim this but the vast majority of posters, including so-called FOA members simply state that a Luminol test that was positive does not prove that it was blood. That would require a specific test for blood, which for some very strange reason was not done.
The fact that a TMB test was negative along with the fact that the majority of these footprints did not contain the victim's DNA that this presumed blood came from is a further indication of doubt, in my opinion.

Thank you for that clear and nice rebuttal.

I would also like to point out that even if it were blood, it was so dilute that it was not detectable by TMB testing. It is therefore impossible for Knox to have dragged the material directly from the blood on the floor in Ms Kercher's room. Knox did take a shower in the morning and then go to her room. There is plenty of opportunity for Knox to have stepped somewhere with a small trace of blood in the bathroom and to have carried it out into the hall. There is no reason to suppose it got there through involvement with the crime.

Besides of course the clean up question. It seems very unlikely that someone (wirh a mop handy no less) to pick and choose where in the hall to clean up.

 

[AmyStrange]

I think Peg has his email address and you could get it and ask him directly.

Re: Phoines being turned off

It would have been far smarter to leave them at Raf's turned on so their GPS would add to their alibi. I have oft wondered why they would have carried them along. Another case where they were just really, really stupid.

-

I agree Grinder,

As Frank might say, stupid for bringing the phones with them (IF they did that, which doesn't make sense), but geniuses for turning them off first.

It just makes more sense that they turned them off so they wouldn't be bothered while enjoying personal time with each other,

Dave