Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Katody Matrass]

I'm pretty much completely new to following this case, not having read much since before the original trial, but I recall from my reading today that even the prosecution admits activity was on Raffaele's computer at 21.10, didn't they?

Wouldn't that, along with the evidence for an apparent time of death between 21.00-21.30 be a sufficient alibi in itself?

And the defence says there was other activity as well?

You're right. Cops testing the computer missed a lot of activity that left trace on the hard drive, they also destroyed a lot of data - after Raffaele got arrested someone of the police turned on his computer, overwriting "last access time" metadata for a lot of files.

Yesterday Raffaele's defence mentioned that they retrieved additional proof of computer activity from the log files of screensaver and keyboard backlight, that shows the computer was used throughout the night. They also have proof that another video was played around 21:30.

 

[icerat]

The 21:26 would be enough for one of them (obviously Raffaele) with that time of death.

Amanda, however, has no alibi after about 20:45 (after the Popovic visit).

Isn't Raffaele her alibi? And if he's taken out of the equation, does that mean you believe it may have just been Knox and Guede?

???

can't remember where I read it sorry.

I did find this interesting discussion on the computer analysis. Apologies if it's already been posted here.

 

[Mary_H]

The Magnificient Seven:

Calvera: What I don't understand is why a man like you took the job in the first place, hmm? Why, huh?
Chris: I wonder myself.
Calvera: No, come on, come on, tell me why.
Vin: It's like a fellow I once knew in El Paso. One day, he just took all his clothes off and jumped in a mess of cactus. I asked him that same question, "Why?"
Calvera: And?
Vin: He said, "It seemed to be a good idea at the time."

It's true that people often act impulsively. That's one reason modern cities have police departments equipped with the latest technology in record keeping, so that communications between the police and citizens remain transparent. If only the videotapes of the interrogations of Amanda, Raffaele and Patrick weren't missing, we would be able to judge for ourselves whether Amanda thought it was a good idea at the time. From a logical standpoint, though, it makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[Katody Matrass]

It's interesting how yesterday two themes appeared in the argumentation of the defence that were widely discussed and proposed here on JREF from quite a long time:

Bongiorno brought up Saul Kassin's work on false confessions.

Maori argued time of death based on stomach contents.

 

[Mary_H]

You see in the various online forums how many people say that the bottom line for them is that Amanda accused an innocent man, and that that is the main reason they believe Amanda is guilty. If Amanda and Raffaele are found innocent and acquitted, will these people then transfer their feelings of disgust onto the magistrates who accused two other innocent people of the crime? Or is it only bad when Amanda does it?

 

[komponisto]

You see in the various online forums how many people say that the bottom line for them is that Amanda accused an innocent man, and that that is the main reason they believe Amanda is guilty. If Amanda and Raffaele are found innocent and acquitted, will these people then transfer their feelings of disgust onto the magistrates who accused two other innocent people of the crime? Or is it only bad when Amanda does it?

Exactly.

(Especially since many of these people apparently consider court decisions to be inherently beyond questioning.)

 

[bolint]

You're right. Cops testing the computer missed a lot of activity that left trace on the hard drive, they also destroyed a lot of data - after Raffaele got arrested someone of the police turned on his computer, overwriting "last access time" metadata for a lot of files.

Do you think that computers when turned on rush through all the movie and cartoon files in order to overwrite the time stamps?

Yesterday Raffaele's defence mentioned that they retrieved additional proof of computer activity from the log files of screensaver and keyboard backlight, that shows the computer was used throughout the night.

I am very curious to see that "additional proof".

From the few pages discussed earlier they seem to claim that the screensaver never was active for more the 6 minutes during the whole night.

Watching films while the screensaver is active is in itself a remarkable feat but the added alleged activities like browsing the net without matching records of the ISP and simultanoeusly having sex all night long is indeed worth a top place in the book of Guiness records.

 

[Onofarar]

__________________

Komponisto,

As a footnote, the lovebirds were also ordered by the Massei court to pay lawyer fees for the Kerchers, Patrick, and the landlord of the cottage. (Patrick's fees to be paid only by Amanda.)

The Kerchers were represented by Francesco Maresca and Serena Perna. Massei awarded these fees:

Maresca's fees = 160,000 euros
Perna's fees = 100,000 euros
__________________________
Total fees awarded to Maresca & Perna = 260,000 euros = 353,000 US dollars

These fees were calculated after about two years into the legal process. Now, about four years into the process, these fees are probably double, in which case.............

Today, total due to Maresca & Perna = 520,000 euros = 706,000 US dollars.

///

Hmm what ws that line from the Paul Simon song?
Oh Yeah I remember:

"Slip sliding away - the nearer your destination the more its slip sliding away"

I think Maresca is having nightmares seeing his compensation joining certain former evidence is this case at the bottom of the Tiber! (apologies to Kaosium)

 

[Kaosium]

Knowing the real murderer provides some clue.

Precisely! Which is why silence is more indicative of innocence.

There she was before Matteini and she did not retract anything. She opted for silence.

This was after they locked her in a bathroom for two days without letting her talk to her lawyer? Or did they let them speak briefly before the hearing, I forget? It's probably not surprising in any case she wasn't feeling talkative.

 

[icerat]

A question for the "innocent" side. Looking at the "evidence" I honestly don't really see anything that "convicts" Knox/Sollecito unless you already assume they're guilty, but how is the break-in explained? It does look like an awful dumb - and difficult - way to break in to the house.

 

[bolint]

Computer evidence

Was the computer evidence discussed in detail during the appeal?

The RS defence (Maori) mentioned it yesterday, but it was only a few minutes.

 

[Kaosium]

Do you still need it?

Bolint, were you unaware twelve of the interrogators were eligible for the calunnia charge?

 

[Mary_H]

A question for the "innocent" side. Looking at the "evidence" I honestly don't really see anything that "convicts" Knox/Sollecito unless you already assume they're guilty, but how is the break-in explained? It does look like an awful dumb - and difficult - way to break in to the house.

As one of possibly two or three pro-innocence posters who don't think Rudy broke in through the window, I will take the opportunity to answer. Ha ha.

Apparently (if you believe the rest of them), it is not that hard to climb in that window. It is not as high as it looks, Rudy is an athlete, he had broken into other homes in the same way, and there may be scuff marks on the exterior wall and glass evidence on the window sill suggesting someone moved pieces of glass to avoid stepping on them.

Like you, icerat, I don't think it makes sense to do something dumb and difficult when you can do it smart and easy (like tricking Meredith into letting you in). My essential approach, though, is that since there is not the slightest indication whatsoever anywhere that Amanda and Raffaele had anything to do with the break-in, I don't waste my time trying to analyze it.

 

[bolint]

Isn't Raffaele her alibi? And if he's taken out of the equation, does that mean you believe it may have just been Knox and Guede?

Yes, that is my best guess.

can't remember where I read it sorry.

I did find this interesting discussion on the computer analysis. Apologies if it's already been posted here.

Clearly if there is proof of activity, then it should be obtained by similar arguments as those described in the linked page.

The defence's experts looked at those logs and other metadata.

Where are the findings?
Where is the proof that somebody was at the machine at say 22:40?

Give me one single human activated log entry or file stamp after 21:26 and before 24:00, the period of highest importance.

 

[Kaosium]

A question for the "innocent" side. Looking at the "evidence" I honestly don't really see anything that "convicts" Knox/Sollecito unless you already assume they're guilty, but how is the break-in explained? It does look like an awful dumb - and difficult - way to break in to the house.

The rest of the windows were thicker or had burglar bars, this was one an athletic person could get to and was easy to get into if you could. They eventually put bars on them anyway, thus apparently a concern. It also was one that offered escape routes if interrupted.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Do you think that computers when turned on rush through all the movie and cartoon files in order to overwrite the time stamps?

Hundreds of files, including videos, had timestamp indicating they were accessed while in police custody. It is not disputed. I think it was extremely incompetent and stupid for the cops to allow such destruction of evidence. IIRC cops used the PC to browse the web and watched some of the movies.

I am very curious to see that "additional proof".

It was filed along with the appeal papers. I believe it's in the case file. You may want to ask someone who has access.

From the few pages discussed earlier they seem to claim that the screensaver never was active for more the 6 minutes during the whole night.

Watching films while the screensaver is active is in itself a remarkable feat

You may want to rethink that argument to make it more logical.

but the added alleged activities like browsing the net without matching records of the ISP and simultanoeusly having sex all night long is indeed worth a top place in the book of Guiness records.

You're mistaken. The defence didn't claim browsing the web. Just media playback.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Was the computer evidence discussed in detail during the appeal?

The RS defence (Maori) mentioned it yesterday, but it was only a few minutes.

The additional evidence was in the case file from the beginning of the appeal. The prosecution made no attempt to refute it AFAIK.

 

[bolint]

Bolint, were you unaware twelve of the interrogators were eligible for the calunnia charge?

The question specifically was how many people signed the statements.

As for the twelwe people were probably all those in the homicide group.

From my news collection I could find the following names handling the pair that night

Raffaele
--------
Napoleoni
Facchini

Amanda
----------
Ficarra
Zugarini
Raffo
Donnino (translator)


I don't see how the "hordes of cops torturing them all night long" story comes out of this.

Especially beacuse all the breakdown happened relatively shortly after the questioning began.

Raffaele had been questioned on Nov 2, so he had 3 full days to recover and Amanda also had more than 24 hours

 

[icerat]

As one of possibly two or three pro-innocence posters who don't think Rudy broke in through the window, I will take the opportunity to answer. Ha ha.

Apparently (if you believe the rest of them), it is not that hard to climb in that window. It is not as high as it looks, Rudy is an athlete, he had broken into other homes in the same way, and there may be scuff marks on the exterior wall and glass evidence on the window sill suggesting someone moved pieces of glass to avoid stepping on them.

Like you, icerat, I don't think it makes sense to do something dumb and difficult when you can do it smart and easy (like tricking Meredith into letting you in). My essential approach, though, is that since there is not the slightest indication whatsoever anywhere that Amanda and Raffaele had anything to do with the break-in, I don't waste my time trying to analyze it.

How tall is Rudy Guede? I see references that he's tall and skinny, and a basketball player, so I suppose breaking the window, then jumping up to put your hands on the sill and lifting yourself up is possible. The whole "no scuff marks" thing is silly. I've "broken" into (my own!) 2nd floor apartment a similar way and I didn't leave any scuff marks.

If other ways of entry were barred then it would be a plausible choice. Still, wouldn't Meredith have reacted? I suppose he might have tried the door first and she was asleep. Then again she was dressed wasn't she?

The window thing doesn't make a lot of sense, but as you say it doesn't implicate Knox and Sollecito anyway. I noticed too that some "guilters" use a lack of Rudy's DNA in that room as evidence he was never in there, but a lack of Knox and Sollecito DNA in Meredith's room is dismissed as unimportant.

 

[Katody Matrass]

A question for the "innocent" side. Looking at the "evidence" I honestly don't really see anything that "convicts" Knox/Sollecito unless you already assume they're guilty, but how is the break-in explained? It does look like an awful dumb - and difficult - way to break in to the house.

First of all the burglar, Rudy Guede, had a history of entering through the second floor windows, using a rock to break them.

Maybe it was dumb, but not difficult. the grating below the window provided for a very easy climb. Defence lawyer Maori ordered someone to climb exactly that way and presented that reconstruction yesterday.

ETA:

here's an old pic of a lawyer negotiating that deadly climb.