Continuation Part 4: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[komponisto]

I had thought that the wording of this carried weight, moreso than the "not guilty" verdicts rendered in the US:

It doesn't. Those formulas are always used for acquittals in the Italian system; they distinguish different circumstances under which one may be innocent, not different degrees of certainty regarding one's innocence.

For example, one may be innocent of murder because someone else committed it (as here; this would be "for not having committed the act"), or because the victim wasn't murdered in the first place (this would be "because the act did not take place"); or perhaps because one had a legitimate reason ("because the act does not constitute a crime"), or because one is somehow above the law in the given circumstance ("because the act was committed by a non-prosecutable person").

The type of acquittal has nothing to do with how certain the judges are that the defendant is not guilty.

 

[Grinder]

I am on the search for the point of convergence between those who believe in guilt for AK and Rs, and those who do not. I have run smack into a point somewhat beyond the point of convergence - proof is, that I said something that I consider patently obvious, ie. that the police also at random somehow miraculously settled early on AK as if she had something to do with the crime, but me saying that creates a rather strongly worded backlash from a guilter.

I've given up trying to convince a guilter that their position is wrong - it simply annoys them. Seriously! This is evidence that the point of convergence is somewhat prior to me saying, "when the police mysteriously settled on Knox as a suspect." To me it IS a mystery. How does Giobbi, a well respected investigator, settle on a case closed scenerio - ie. that Knox did it - because of her crying unpredictably, her saying "hoopla", and her eating a pizza with Raffaele.

Well when you joined here you said that you been given a hard time at IIP and had been banned at PMF you it looks like there is one point of convergence.

Seriously, the PGP (just think saying guilter is unnecessary) believe the cops and never believed a word of the kids. I'm of the school that the ILE bungled the case and lost any chance that the kids could be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt. Their inability to give a simple explanation of what they did the night before and eventually Amanda's "accusation" sealed the deal for the PGP.

One of the reasons I have focused on the "accusation" (my first post here IIRC) and what the police said is that I have always thought that is the keystone that needs to removed to make them see the case is flawed. That's also why I think it is important for Amanda to clear herself of the callunia because people need to see that the police "questioned her until she buckled and told them what they knew to be correct."

If you had followed this case from the beginning (that is not a Peggy command to go back and read every post here and at PMF etc.) you would know that the PGP have never admitted that the ILE did a bad job in any aspect. Ironically, they accuse the pro-innocence and pro-not guilty of being groupies of Amanda unable to see any faults in her and maintaining she is perfect, when, in fact, most of us describe her as an average girl that was enjoying her youth, which is wasted on the young. To be clear, I think Amanda is far from perfect and in fact seems to have some annoying habits and her writing is not stellar. They on the other hand treat the ILE as if they were all clones of Sherlock Holmes without a Watson in the bunch.

Talk to them about the lack of a recording of the interrogation and they spew out that she was a witness and not a suspect (right ask Giobbi), that it was the middle of the night, that maybe one cop forgot, that it wouldn't matter and they even keep a straight face when Mignini said it was budget problems.

Talk about the obvious forensic problems and they ask for documents showing that they violated Italian protocol. Point out to them that science is science and that if it wasn't done right, it wasn't done right they come back with the protocol book.

As I posted up-thread, there is a list of "facts" in the case that they have spread far and wide that have been debunked. It is a rare PGP that has admitted anything done wrong (just thought of another: they spoiled the towels and MK's blood sample) not even storing the clasp so that it rusted. I mean it lasted 6 weeks all on its on wiles but rusted after Stefanoni got a hold of it. One PGP, Greggy, who actually was a DNA person quit PMF after that because the rest of the crew attacked C&V.

Way back a guy called Stewarthome2000 reported from the trial and one day reported that the washing machine wasn't running or warm in the morning but rather the contents were damp (humid) but a poster The Machine argued with him that he was sure it was warm. S was at the trial and PG but he wasn't trusted.

They are only skeptical about the kids behavior never the ILE.

 

[Grinder]

From what I've seen Hellmann's idea of how the footprint got on the mat is flawed. I agree with thoughtful that the print was made with diluted blood after Rudy washed off his pant leg in the bidet. (Dan I liked your turning the mat and have him wash off in the shower but I don't think he'd get in so the foot would be coming out of shower) With the foot dripping of the mixture I believe that the drop of color near the tip of the big toe came from a drip as the foot was placed on the mat.

The use of the eyes rather than measurements that depend on where they start seems very sensible by Hellmann. As I said before, when my SO looked at the images she, without having any interest or idea of which was which picked Rudy because the shape of the big toe which Hellmann nails.

Also if the print comes from a foot that has watery blood on it, isn't that even greater proof it's not Raf's because of the space between the big toe and foot.

This is an excellent example of bias by the PGP people. They could say, well okay it's Rudy's but that doesn't mean Raf is innocent, but instead they look at what is clearly not Raf's print and say but, but the cop Rinaldi said it wasn't Rudy's (he never said it was positively Raf's).

 

[Bill Williams]

Okay, the conspiracy theories are running off the charts. I love the newest one that suggests that Raffaele scrunched his foot up on purpose when he stepped on the bathmat in order to distort his print.

Does anyone actually think that Raffaele would have thought to distort his print at the time? Hey, if he was thinking that far in advance then why didn't he just pick up the bathmat and throw it away with his bloody clothes and the murder weapon?

Hey, why not just think logically? Logic tells us that Raffaele was not there. Hey, now lets throw in a little common sense when trying to imagine Raffaele thinking to scrunch up his foot. Yeah, not a very good theory after all.

The truth is that the print on the bathmat was inconclusive but it certainly looks a lot like Guede's foot. With all of the other evidence available at the scene, common sense tells us its Guede's print.

So much for the theory that it was Knox who was directing the cover-up. With the precision and coolness of a soldier under fire, Sollecito with total recall imagines the outline of Guede's bare foot, as Sherlock Holmes would infer from the size of Guede's shoes and the manner of his foot falls. It is simple, but rapid, deduction. Elementary. Instinctively guessing the nature of Guede's foot pronation, Sollecito scrunches his foot on the bathmat enough. Brilliantly, Sollecito does this not too much, but only to destroy some future judicial officer's sense of reasonable doubt. No sense in overfunctioning.

So it is genius of pronation-science, forensics, as well as Italian criminal law, all in one brief action. They still had to run like hell afterwards.

And during the clean-up, the one where Knox and Sollecito cleaned the place with their portable electron microscopes and DNA-sampling software (so as to leave Rudy's and clean up their own), when Knox went over to clean up the bathmat, Sollecito said, "Hey! I put a lot of work into that! It doesn't look like much now, but four years from now it's going to drive gulters nuts!"

Knox was heard to say, "Honey, if we do this right, there will be no guilters. Besides, I've just had a text from mom and dad, who say they'll handle the massive PR effort - if we get caught - from Seattle."

Sollecito: "'PR'? Why PR?"

Knox: "Honey, there's a lot you have to learn about Americans. This is and always has been about the book deal. I can't wait to read Peter Quennell's Statement Analysis of my every word!"

Sollecito: "Peter who?"

Knox: "Stop talking. You just missed some of your own mitochondrial organelles, stupid. Pay attention. Don't they teach you DNA-sequencing in Jesuit school in this country? Dad has said he'll be damned if he has to pay for a multimillion dollar PR campaign. And he doesn't want to have to buy off any more judges than necessary...."

 

[Bill Williams]

Well when you joined here you said that you been given a hard time at IIP and had been banned at PMF you it looks like there is one point of convergence.

Seriously, the PGP (just think saying guilter is unnecessary) believe the cops and never believed a word of the kids. I'm of the school that the ILE bungled the case and lost any chance that the kids could be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt. Their inability to give a simple explanation of what they did the night before and eventually Amanda's "accusation" sealed the deal for the PGP.

One of the reasons I have focused on the "accusation" (my first post here IIRC) and what the police said is that I have always thought that is the keystone that needs to removed to make them see the case is flawed.

This may be it. Thanks for the time. Even guring my time as one of the PGP the behaviour of the police was troubling.

For the record, I was banned from TJMK, and was only given trouble at IIP for claiming that Hellmann got it right on calunnia. It was civil disagreement. I had never thought of Hellmann's way of looking at it:

This Court therefore finds that Amanda Knox had indicated Lumumba as the perpetrator only because, at that moment, it appeared to be the quickest and easiest way to put an end to the situation in which she found herself, her interrogators having insisted on an explanation of the message she sent to him.

she must in any case be held responsible for the crime of calumny, the constitution of which does not require any specific purpose from a psychological point of view, such as shifting the blame off of oneself [conseguire la propria impunità] (an aggravating circumstance alleged [here]). Generic criminal intent [il dolo generico] is sufficient, thus including the aim of escaping from a particularly oppressive personal situation.

 

[smkovalinksy]

I don't see what your problem is. If you're not guilty, you are innocent - those are actual words of Hellmann if you recall the interview he gave. He even used words like "absolutely innocent" IIRC. The strength of the verdict also comes from the finding that the proof of guilt was non-existent, not merely insufficient.

Yes, I see. Just that we were always, always taught - at least where I went to school in the US - that "no one is ever found innocent, only not guilty beyond reasonable doubt, which is not the same as innocence." And I had thought Italy had the 2 distinctions. Ah well, it is no matter now....

 

[Kaosium]

Grinder,

There were other things at first, such as the Harry Potter book and Amanda's supposedly missing clothes. Perhaps these are not repeated so much anymore.

Probably because those are especially embarrassing for the prosecution. The Harry Potter book actually being 'found' at the cottage when it's seen in the crime scene videos at Raffaele's like she said was trumpeted as 'proof' she was a 'liar' getting all sorts of exposure in the press right before a judges decision. I forget what the resolution of that was, I read somewhere that there were actually two Harry Potter books and one was at both places and it was simply a mistake, but being as that source was rather deferential to the prosecution I am unsure if it was actually true or an excuse made to 'explain' the 'mistake.' Does anyone know for sure?

The 'missing' sweatshirt being 'evidence' of murder was included in the Matteini Report,¹ despite the crime scene photos showing it on her bed where she left it. I do love how that Sky link embedded first shows them trying to hold it over her head almost four months later, along with the CCTV video they tried to claim was 'clear cut.'



¹

A propos of the clothes worn by Amanda, it must be emphasised that Romanelli Filomena specified that the same [=Amanda] on the 1st November was wearing a sweatshirt that she never saw her wearing again and that did not seem to be part of the clothing that has been placed under sequestration.

 

[Kaosium]

I agree. It just surprised me to see certain postings calling Hellmann a blatant racist, and his motives, the same. I thought perhaps I was missing something. ........I meant "separating" them within his motivation report: It would seem certain PG posters see his inability to place Knox and Sollecito with Guede at the murder scene as simply KKK thinking. The more I reflect on it, the more absurd is the charge of "racism".

No wonder it is such a shock, some have spent three years maintaining that Amanda was the true archfiendess here, Raffaele merely her mindless drone and Rudy just an innocent guy seduced by here wanton wiles who didn't actually do much of anything but try to save Meredith after the two degenerates were done with her. That's how he ended up with his shoeprints all over the murder room, his DNA on her clothes and inside her, and his DNA in her blood on her purse. I never did figure out how the squared the latter with 'convicting' Raffaele and Amanda of the theft. Noble Rudy must have tried to stop her! He just got to Germany on no cash by walking--fast!

The reality that Rudy was a burglar who'd committed several in recent months as well as an arson he was suspected of and was caught with a woman's watch another time he was caught, which was an item stolen from the place that burned as I recall. He had no job, no lover, and few prospects being as he was in the process of being evicted. Raffaele and Amanda were young and in love, good students who'd been in only the little sorts of trouble teenagers sometimes get in, band gets too loud at a party, or caught with naughty pictures on the computer.

Here's Massei on some of Rudy's priors, note that Nina Burleigh did some groundwork on this and added additional episodes attributed to Rudy Guede. I don't recall them off the top of my head outside the arson which included the loss of the watch, if anyone does please feel free to add.

At the hearing of June 27, 2009, the witness Maria Antonietta Salvadori Del Prato Titone testified that on the morning of October 27, 2007, a Saturday, as she entered the nursery school at via Plinio 16, Milan, of which she was the principal, she noticed coming out of her office a person whom she didn't know, later identified as Rudy Guede. There were no signs of a break-in. There was some money missing from the money box, but just small change. Rudy Guede had a backpack inside which was a computer. Called at once, the police made him open the backpack, in which they found a 40cm kitchen knife. She recalled that there were other objects in the backpack: a bunch of keys, a small gold woman's watch, and a tiny hammer of the type found in buses to smash windows. The police told her that the computer had been stolen from a law office in Perugia. The witness stated that she was with her six year old son, with a smith [fabbro] who was there to do some work, and with a rep.

Rudy Guede justified his presence by saying that he had asked at the central train station of Milan where he could spend [33] the night, and that this nursery school had been indicated to him after he had paid 50 euros to his informant. The witness stated that the knife came from the kitchen; the kitchen door was not locked and Rudy Guede must have taken it from there.
The witnesses Paolo Brocchi and Matteo Palazzoli, lawyers, testified on the subject of the burglary of their legal office, located in via del Roscetto 3, Perugia, on the night between Saturday October 13 and Sunday October 14, 2007.

The thief or thieves had entered through a window whose panes had been smashed with a rather large stone; the glass was scattered around, and they had found some of their clothing on top of the glass (p. 10, hearing June 6, 2009). From the first inventory they did, they found that a computer, a cell phone, USB keys and a portable printer were missing. On October 29, a colleague in the law office had called the lawyer Paolo Brocchi to tell him that in the corridor was a person who said that he had been found with some goods in Milan, goods that had been declared stolen by the lawyer Brocchi, but which he claimed to have purchased legitimately in Milan. Later, the lawyer Paolo Brocchi recognised this person as Rudy Guede (p. 20, hearing of June 6, 2009).

The lawyer Palazzoli, who testified at the same hearing, and who was a colleague in the same law firm as Brocchi, declared that the broken window was "a French window opening onto a small balcony overlooking the inner courtyard of thebuilding; beneath it, corresponding precisely to our window, there is a door equipped with a metal grille..." (p. 41, hearing of June 26, 2009). He also stated that he had been notified that the computer which had been stolen from him had been found in Milan.

Cristian Tramontano, whose brief deposition the subject of July 1, 2008 was acquired at the hearing of June 6, 2009, testified about an [attempted] robbery in his home, carried out by a young man who, seeing that he had been observed, tried to exit the house and, finding the door locked, pulled out a jackknife with which he threatened Tramontano, who was following him to make him leave the house. Tramontano declared that he believed he recognised that the thief was Rudy when he saw his picture published in the newspapers.

 

[CDHost]

I want to throw out a quick question about the footprint. This seems to be the major PMF argument against Hellman. I'll leave it to others to argue the case about whether the footprint could have been Guede's or not...

But... what I'm failing to understand is why the footprint presents a problem. Raffaele had been over, he could very easily have stepped on the bathmat at a different time. Further Amanda admits she took a shower and in her statement on the 6th indicates she actually sex in the shower.

So assuming for the purpose of argument, this was RS' footprint, why does that matter? Did the footprint have to happen on the 2nd. Does the final version of the timeline indicate for certain that RS and AK didn't have sex on the 2nd...?

 

[Antony]

It was embarrassing to find Mignini and Comodi arguing the relevance of the Guede Supreme Court report, and it was almost as embarrassing to find pro-guilt commentators who purport to have criminal law expertise doing the same. It was always abundantly clear that the Guede rulings were totally irrelevant and inapplicable to the trial process of Knox and Sollecito. Hellmann's ruling and logic on this issue is correct and unassailable.

Not only that, but even the Massei court ruled that the murder occurred at 11:45pm, ignoring not just biological science, but also the Supreme Court endorsed conclusion in Guede's trial, which was that it was at 10pm IIUC.

 

[Antony]

There were certainly an extraordinarily large number of widely-circulated stories related to this case which turned out to be either completely false/invented or massively distorted.

One of them was Amanda's and Raffaele's alleged "compulsive lying". It's one of the ironies of the case that these stories of "lies" were themselves, lies.

It's hard to see how these stories could have reached the media (and the arraigning courts) other than through systematic and deliberate leaks from the police or prosecutors. I'd argue that it's improper for these sorts of public bodies to be leaking prejudicial information on principle - even when the leaks are accurate and subsequently provable in court. But when the leaks are themselves subsequently shown to be lies, spin and misdirection, one has to cast serious doubt on the probity and fitness-for-purpose of either the Perugia police or prosecutors' office (or both).

What I'd like to know before this while discussion is laid to rest is whether the misconduct of the Perugia authorities is going to be called to account, or whether impunity is so entrenched that nothing will ever be done. I have to admit that the experience of other miscarriages of justice, at least in the UK, doesn't give much to hope for on that score.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Hellmann is spot on with the important part, that Rudy could have very well washed his foot and leave the print, and the dimensions and shape of the print are very compatible with his foot. I really like how the pro guilt people are in shock about that conclusion obvious to any rational and non-biased observer and how they twist into pretzels to conjure away this uncomfortable truth. It's interesting that they don't seem to know basic facts, like that Guede's foot was the same size and in fact even smaller in many measurements, and they try to argue that it's all impossible because he was a basketball player with large feet It's shocking they can hold such strong beliefs while being completely clueless about basic facts of the case. I guess it's a result of staying in their propaganda echo-chamber isolated from rational thoughts and reality.

Ah yes, and the crazy theory about Raffaele sabotaging his footprint by "scrunching toes" to make it look just like Guede's gains traction now . What a total meltdown..

 

[Katody Matrass]

Another crazy idea of pro guit people is that Guede was from the same social circles and the same "class" as the rest of the students, especially Amanda and Raffaele.
The prominent poster, the "one who speaks with Mignini" wrote a half mad, lenghty and vicious rant about it, calling the judges "fascist", "racist pigs" etc. just because they made the obvious observation that Guede's background totally differs. Others in the echo-chamber nod their heads in approval. Stilicho already proposed that they should organize the "essay" to be published somewhere in western media, because Americans are so sensitive about racism..

Reality check guys! Guede had nothing in common with the students. The only thing that connected him were the guys downstairs that he got acquainted with at the basketball court and was their uninvited and rather burdensome guest a few times.
There is not a shred of communication record, no emails, no facebook friends, no sms, no phone calls with AK and RS.
He was not a student, he didn't even have full secondary education!
He had no work, no school, nothing to do, while Raffaele was finishing his degree and Amanda was studying diligently while working part time, when she came to Italy she found herself a job, too.
Guede was an immigrant orphan left by his natural parent and dispossessed by his foster family for being no good. He was hanging around, bothering and harassing girls while drunk, breaking into properties, stealing things and threatening people with knife when caught. Amanda and Raffaele had loving and caring families, and their total "criminal record" amounted to a noise ticket and cannabis using.
Well, I guess I'm a fascist, racist pig too, for noticing those obvious differences.

 

[Antony]

They are only skeptical about the kids behavior never the ILE.

This is what perplexes me as well. I had an exchange with someone on the comments section of one of the numerous news pieces on the case. She kept typing "innocent people don't do this!" about each detail of Amanda and Raffaele's behaviour which could be regarded as in any way strange. I replied, "you say 'innocent people don't do this!'; I say 'guilty people don't do this'," which in most cases is at least as true (do "innocent people" flush other people's toilets for them or not?)

I went on, listing some of the antics of the Perugia police, and focussing particularly on the all-night interrogation endured by Amanda. I pointed out: "honest police don't do this" - which AFAIAC is far more cogent than any doubts raised by supposedly odd behaviour by the 2 accused. I also pointed out that "innocent people" certainly do make false statements implicating themselves and others in the circumstances in which Amanda found herself. The person I addressed this to did not reply.

It should be clear to everyone looking at this that the entire investigation, instead of following the evidence, followed an agenda of its own. But, as you say, there is a group of people commenting on this case who won't examine the behaviour of the Perugia police.

 

[Grinder]

The discussion of racism and tribalism here and elsewhere about Hellmann are troubling. It does seem that Hellmann has some issues but so do the PGP.

When anyone has suggested that Meredith could have made a date with Rudy I have always read between the lines that it was impossible because of race and class. Not just between the lines it was clearly stated that Meredith was too good for Rudy and really she was too good for Amanda as well.

What further interests me about this current discussion is that Yummi is raging about Hellmann being a tribal character that is making his decision based on that and to some extent fascism. What strikes me is that another word for this is medieval, which the FOA types were excoriated for saying.

Hellmann should as someone suggested used more of the defense scenarios and not made it up himself just like Massei should of. Maasei had a cleanup because he needed it. Massei had Amanda carrying a knife around in a bag, because he needed it. Massei chose the TOD because he needed it. Massei refused an independent test of the DNA and didn't take the defense experts seriously.

Hellmann's report is not perfect and in some cases I think he just went too far in explaining rather than saying the evidence just isn't conclusive.

NT - Bruce you know by now that the theory on the footprint is that he scrunched when the refrence print was done.

To the person questioning why no one had corrected Bruce (same person that accused the Seattle PD of destroying Amanda's noise ticket incident report when in fact it was online at the Seattle PI ) it is because this thread, while open to all opinions, is moderated.
That means that posts don't appear immediately.

 

[smkovalinksy]

The discussion of racism and tribalism here and elsewhere about Hellmann are troubling. It does seem that Hellmann has some issues but so do the PGP.

When anyone has suggested that Meredith could have made a date with Rudy I have always read between the lines that it was impossible because of race and class. Not just between the lines it was clearly stated that Meredith was too good for Rudy and really she was too good for Amanda as well.

What further interests me about this current discussion is that Yummi is raging about Hellmann being a tribal character that is making his decision based on that and to some extent fascism. What strikes me is that another word for this is medieval, which the FOA types were excoriated for saying.

Hellmann should as someone suggested used more of the defense scenarios and not made it up himself just like Massei should of. Maasei had a cleanup because he needed it. Massei had Amanda carrying a knife around in a bag, because he needed it. Massei chose the TOD because he needed it. Massei refused an independent test of the DNA and didn't take the defense experts seriously.

Hellmann's report is not perfect and in some cases I think he just went too far in explaining rather than saying the evidence just isn't conclusive.

NT - Bruce you know by now that the theory on the footprint is that he scrunched when the refrence print was done.

To the person questioning why no one had corrected Bruce (same person that accused the Seattle PD of destroying Amanda's noise ticket incident report when in fact it was online at the Seattle PI ) it is because this thread, while open to all opinions, is moderated.
That means that posts don't appear immediately.

I would agree that in over-explaining too many aspects of the case which fall far outside of the evidence proper, Hellmann opened the door for such a discussion about his racism, classism, and alleged Italian tribalism purview.

Some PG posters place a LOT of importance on the kissing, the cartwheels, the comments - even though legally it ought to be the evidence alone which determines proven or not proven guilt.

I can see clearly that the acquittals have made not one iota of difference to the PGs, notwithstanding their former protests that they would respect the court's decision.

I am hoping those who allege that "this case will be open for the next 2-10 years" are wrong: Why did the CNN report state that the appeal would take 1-2 days and could only be argued on the most narrow and technical of grounds?

 

[Draca]

Probably because those are especially embarrassing for the prosecution. The Harry Potter book actually being 'found' at the cottage when it's seen in the crime scene videos at Raffaele's like she said was trumpeted as 'proof' she was a 'liar' getting all sorts of exposure in the press right before a judges decision. I forget what the resolution of that was, I read somewhere that there were actually two Harry Potter books and one was at both places and it was simply a mistake, but being as that source was rather deferential to the prosecution I am unsure if it was actually true or an excuse made to 'explain' the 'mistake.' Does anyone know for sure?

Yes, there were two different german Harry Potter books. One at Raffaele's and one in Amanda's room.

http://www.injusticeinperugiaforum.org/post5402.html?hilit=harry potter#p5402

 

[smkovalinksy]

Addendum: Probably it would have been more effective for Hellmann, regarding the various aspects of Knox and Sollecito in terms of behavior and character, to have simply stated, "Speculation regarding this is of no consequence; no evidence points toward their involvement." To my thinking, this would have sounded stronger (now that I see what this has given rise to elsewhere re race and class issues).

In attempting to clear up certain misconceptions, he appeared (to some) to be "joining the massive PR campaign." Will it ultimately matter, though, regarding the final court?

 

[smkovalinksy]

No wonder it is such a shock, some have spent three years maintaining that Amanda was the true archfiendess here, Raffaele merely her mindless drone and Rudy just an innocent guy seduced by here wanton wiles who didn't actually do much of anything but try to save Meredith after the two degenerates were done with her. That's how he ended up with his shoeprints all over the murder room, his DNA on her clothes and inside her, and his DNA in her blood on her purse. I never did figure out how the squared the latter with 'convicting' Raffaele and Amanda of the theft. Noble Rudy must have tried to stop her! He just got to Germany on no cash by walking--fast!

The reality that Rudy was a burglar who'd committed several in recent months as well as an arson he was suspected of and was caught with a woman's watch another time he was caught, which was an item stolen from the place that burned as I recall. He had no job, no lover, and few prospects being as he was in the process of being evicted. Raffaele and Amanda were young and in love, good students who'd been in only the little sorts of trouble teenagers sometimes get in, band gets too loud at a party, or caught with naughty pictures on the computer.

Here's Massei on some of Rudy's priors, note that Nina Burleigh did some groundwork on this and added additional episodes attributed to Rudy Guede. I don't recall them off the top of my head outside the arson which included the loss of the watch, if anyone does please feel free to add.

Yes, I read Nina Burleigh's book and was impressed with the woman who lost her cat in the fire. It certainly seemed likely that Guede was the culprit, having her mother's watch in his possession, and that he struck again, surprising Kercher. He was obviously a menace to society, literally, and was sent back from Milan wrongly.

To PGers, he is of fine character, and his intelligence, of a very high order. In their purview, he has been victimized by 2 psychotics. They seem unable to change their perspective in any way whatsoever. I wish the SC would uphold Hellmann, and be done with it. Not that it will make any difference to them, I have come to believe now.

 

[LondonJohn]

I want to throw out a quick question about the footprint. This seems to be the major PMF argument against Hellman. I'll leave it to others to argue the case about whether the footprint could have been Guede's or not...

But... what I'm failing to understand is why the footprint presents a problem. Raffaele had been over, he could very easily have stepped on the bathmat at a different time. Further Amanda admits she took a shower and in her statement on the 6th indicates she actually sex in the shower.

So assuming for the purpose of argument, this was RS' footprint, why does that matter? Did the footprint have to happen on the 2nd. Does the final version of the timeline indicate for certain that RS and AK didn't have sex on the 2nd...?

No, the print cannot both a) belong to Sollecito and b) be compatible with Sollecito's innocence (at least regarding a clean-up, and probably also regarding the murder itself). The print was made in Meredith Kercher's blood (almost certainly a dilute mixture of her blood and water), and it's generally accepted that it's unreasonable to suppose that there would have been that much of Meredith's blood anywhere in the cottage prior to her murder.

So this means that the blood/water partial print must have been made at some point after the murder. Sollecito's defence has always been that he was nowhere near the cottage on the night of the murder, and that he only entered the cottage post-murder when he came back with Knox at lunchtime (after she told him about the spots of blood and open door etc). He has never suggested that he removed his shoes during this time in the cottage, and nor would there have been any logic or reason for him to have done so. When he and Knox entered the cottage that lunchtime, it was to investigate the situation, which seemingly escalated steadily in seriousness until the postal police arrived just before 1pm. It's therefore unfathomable as to why Sollecito might have gone barefoot in the cottage at any time on the morning/lunchtime of the 2nd, and he himself has never made such a claim anyhow.

So it's vital to Sollecito's defence that the footprint on the bath mat was found by the court not to be identifiable as his. If Hellmann's court had concluded - as (erroneously) did Massei's - that the print belonged to Sollecito, then this piece of evidence on its own could likely convict him - and it would indirectly place Knox herself in a certain amount of trouble too.

In fact, the print was very probably made on the night of the 1st by Guede as he washed blood from his trouser leg. I still subscribe to the theory that the bathmat was rotated 180 degrees from the position in which it was later found and photographed. If that were the case, the position of the print corresponds accurately to someone stepping out of the door to the shower cubicle with their right foot. A dispassionate, objective analysis of the bathmat print against the reference prints of Sollecito and Guede leads, in my opinion, to only one conclusion: the print cannot be matched with any degree of accuracy to anyone other than an adult male with above-average-sized feet. This description applies to both Sollecito and Guede, and in my view the print tends to more closely match Guede. Having said that though, I don't think the bathmat partial print could (or should) have been used as positive evidence against Guede either - it simply cannot be individually connected to anyone (including both Sollecito and Guede) with enough accuracy to make it strong evidence pointing to a particular individual.