Continuation Part 5: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[Sherlock Holmes]

She never had any reason to lie. The story she tells in her book is the same one she told the cops on Nov. 2, 2007. She changed her story under pressure, during a police interrogation, just as many other innocent people have done.

But, if she is somewhat guilty, then she has lied, and lied, and telling the truth now, not many would believe, that ship has long since sailed. She could well server 26 years for a murder she didn't commit, but lied about.

 

[Kaosium]

But, if she is somewhat guilty, then she has lied, and lied, and telling the truth now, not many would believe, that ship has long since sailed. She could well server 26 years for a murder she didn't commit, but lied about.

What do you think she lied about?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

What do you think she lied about?

Her involvement, everything she did that night in question.

 

[Kaosium]

Her involvement, everything she did that night in question.

I got the impression you accepted Rudy Guede as the murderer. If Rudy Guede was the murderer, a local athlete and known burglar, what reason is there to think anyone else was involved?

 

[Skind]

And somehow got into the live zone at 06:02 while their were sleeping?

Easily.

Someone moves a cover or a pillow and knocks the phone.
Fluctuations in the tower signal strength creates a few seconds of connection.
The interferance subsides allowing a few seconds of connection.

Having lived in a bit of a dead zone myself, the difference between getting signal or none can be as small as moving your phone half a foot.

 

[acbytesla]

I love Sherlock Holmes posts, he says Amanda is obviously lying or that she changed her story but he never ever offers any examples. It's all just a feeling with him and nothing else.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I got the impression you accepted Rudy Guede as the murderer. If Rudy Guede was the murderer, a local athlete and known burglar, what reason is there to think anyone else was involved?

It's the only way I could fit all the knowns into a likely scenario, if you have an open mind, and look at all possibilities, she didn't kill Meredith and also didn't stay at Raf's house either that night.

 

[Kaosium]

It's the only way I could fit all the knowns into a likely scenario, if you have an open mind, and look at all possibilities, she didn't kill Meredith and also didn't stay at Raf's house either that night.

What makes you think she didn't stay at Raffaele's that night? The police needed to rely on the computer data being erased and Curatolo, who I just read testified for Mignini in three murder trials, to attempt to break the alibi. If there was a legitimate provable possibility Amanda wasn't at Raffaele's why did they have to rely on such dubious circumstances and questionable testimony from Curatolo?

 

[Kaosium]

Reading Amanda's book now it is quite clear that there were no other movie being watched after Amélie, neither heavy computing performed by Raffaele that night.
So the Stardust alibi, which was so weak, anyway, that it was maintained only on internet forums, along with the the computer alibi, can be laid to rest.

You should have read Raffaele's book too!

"Only later, when I lay in the dark, unable to sleep, did it dawn on me that Papa had broken his usual habit of calling to wish me good night.

It turned out he did so out of consideration. He had been about to pick up the phone when my stepmother talked him out of it. "Stop bothering him" Mara said, as they got ready for bed about eleven o'clock. "He's with Amanda, and they want to be alone. Why don't you send a text instead?"

My father took her advice, but because my cellphone was turned off, I didn't receive the message until six the next morning.

It was desperately unlucky combination of circumstances. If my father had tried my cell and then called be on the home line--which he would have done, because he's persistent that way--I would have had incontrovertible proof from the phone records that I was home that night. And the nightmare that was about to engulf me might never have begun.


* * *

My father called my landline a little before nine thirty the next morning to make sure we would be ready for our day trip to Gubbio. I was too groggy to talk. I'd been up several times in the night listening to music, answering e-mail, making love--and wanted only to go back to sleep. Amanda got out of bed and said she was going home to shower and change her clothes, so I walked her over to the front door, gave her a kiss, and crawled back under the covers."

Raffaele was up and about at times during the night, and on his computer, while Amanda was sleeping.

 

[acbytesla]

It's the only way I could fit all the knowns into a likely scenario, if you have an open mind, and look at all possibilities, she didn't kill Meredith and also didn't stay at Raf's house either that night.

Really?? Why? What evidence do you have of Amanda not staying at Raf's house?? Why would she leave his nice comfy apartment?

I have a very open mind in the sense if you or anyone can show any evidence that Amanda left Raffaele's flat. Other than the coerced statement there is none that I think is credible. Certainly Curatolo is not credible so why would I or you think Amanda left Raffaele's flat??

 

[Dan O.]

I love Sherlock Holmes posts, he says Amanda is obviously lying or that she changed her story but he never ever offers any examples. It's all just a feeling with him and nothing else.

Sherlock is trying to insinuate that Amanda lied about the whole evening.

We can construct a reasonable sequence of events for that evening and show point after point that she wasn't lying about. The hard fact with a witness is a good place for starters: She wasn't lying about when she met Raffaele's friend at the door. But that was much earlier than the TOD window so perhaps it doesn't get counted. I think it is accepted that she wasn't lying about helping Raffaele fix dinner. That would be rather silly but we've had all types here. On into the evening and approaching the TOD: Was she lying about watching Amile? We know only when it was downloaded and played. Perhaps they declined to watch it. Were they lying about reading the German edition of Harry Potter? The book was seen on the bedside table. Was she lying about smoking a joint with Raffaele? That is something you just wouldn't talk about if it wasn't true. And what about the question of the two of them having sex that night? They would have to be lying together. Are we ready for conspiracy thinking 101? After that, Amanda says she was asleep.

This is a perfectly reasonable set of events. And though we don't have the exact timing, Raffaele vouches that she never left the apartment and confirms the same set of events. While many here have their own prefered posture with regard to these events, I think it is important to realize that unless there is PROOF otherwise, what Amanda says MUST be accepted as factual.

 

[Bill Williams]

It's the only way I could fit all the knowns into a likely scenario, if you have an open mind, and look at all possibilities, she didn't kill Meredith and also didn't stay at Raf's house either that night.

What makes you think she didn't stay at Raffaele's that night? The police needed to rely on the computer data being erased and Curatolo, who I just read testified for Mignini in three murder trials, to attempt to break the alibi. If there was a legitimate provable possibility Amanda wasn't at Raffaele's why did they have to rely on such dubious circumstances and questionable testimony from Curatolo?

What's amazing to me is that such a straight forward albeit horrible and inexcusable crime is made complex.

Rudy broke in, Rudy did it, Rudy fled. Everyone, Knox included (in her book) gets somewhat transfixed by the notion that someone else was with Rudy.... Knox seems to believe the prison stories that Rudy had said that another was with him, and perhaps this unsub himself staged the burglary to deflect attention back to Rudy...

It's justy me and I'll try not to be too snarky about it, but what it is about Occam's Razor that people find so offensive? They get a pet theory stuck in their brain, and won't let it go? Theories are fine, it's what it's all about really - a comprehensive theory which explains the evidence....

But really?!??!?

 

[anglolawyer]

I wouldn't use any form of the word mull.

I'm sure that police knew who Patrick was before the 5th. They had spotted him with AK in a plaza and he had called her the night of the 2nd.

Are you saying that Amanda wasn't asked anything about her work or what she did the night of the murder until the 5th? If she was asked it seems improbable that they didn't find out she had been scheduled to work and where.

According to her account, no, she was not asked about her work. And here we have a Corax. An innocent Amanda would attach no importance to her work or Patrick and would not bother to mention either unless specifically asked. A guilty Amanda would strive to avoid the subject of Patrick and would resolutely refuse to mention him despite hour upon hour of questioning in which she was asked to name male visitors to the apartment (remember that Patrick is one such according to the 1.45 confession).

So, I think her failure to name Patrick and the exchange of texts without prompting served to heighten police suspicion even more. De Felice gave it away at the press conference. They already knew about Patrick. In the book she says they looked at her text and said she sent it to 'Patrick'. 'Who is Patrick?'

Her account of the interrogations throws up many points of interest and it is criminally negligent of anyone posting here not to buy the damn book and read it!

 

[acbytesla]

According to her account, no, she was not asked about her work. And here we have a Corax. An innocent Amanda would attach no importance to her work or Patrick and would not bother to mention either unless specifically asked. A guilty Amanda would strive to avoid the subject of Patrick and would resolutely refuse to mention him despite hour upon hour of questioning in which she was asked to name male visitors to the apartment (remember that Patrick is one such according to the 1.45 confession).

So, I think her failure to name Patrick and the exchange of texts without prompting served to heighten police suspicion even more. De Felice gave it away at the press conference. They already knew about Patrick. In the book she says they looked at her text and said she sent it to 'Patrick'. 'Who is Patrick?'

Her account of the interrogations throws up many points of interest and it is criminally negligent of anyone posting here not to buy the damn book and read it!

Grinder doesn't have an excuse either. I checked with the both the KCLS (King County Library System) and Seattle Library System both of which have numerous copies. (Grinder lives in Seattle like I do)There is a waiting list at both at the moment but the Librarians recommend getting on the waiting list. For grins I got on the list a few weeks ago with Kenmore branch and they just sent me an email saying I could pick up a copy. I replied that I was no longer interested as I have my own copy.

 

[RandyN]

According to her account, no, she was not asked about her work. And here we have a Corax. An innocent Amanda would attach no importance to her work or Patrick and would not bother to mention either unless specifically asked. A guilty Amanda would strive to avoid the subject of Patrick and would resolutely refuse to mention him despite hour upon hour of questioning in which she was asked to name male visitors to the apartment (remember that Patrick is one such according to the 1.45 confession).

So, I think her failure to name Patrick and the exchange of texts without prompting served to heighten police suspicion even more. De Felice gave it away at the press conference. They already knew about Patrick. In the book she says they looked at her text and said she sent it to 'Patrick'. 'Who is Patrick?'

Her account of the interrogations throws up many points of interest and it is criminally negligent of anyone posting here not to buy the damn book and read it!

This leaves out the boner moment for the prosecutor and police. The morning meeting of Lumumba and Knox. Who thinks that meeting was not observed by the police? They have Knox buying pizza and underwear...so.

The Kerchers have once again stepped up to the plate and took a swing at condemning innocent persons. "We are waiting to be heard" Stephanie proclaims. Well who is stopping you dear? Maresca? The good sense of your father?

Look your sister was murdered by Rudy Guede. Prosecutor Mignini and your own lawyer and you all at some point have played a game to help convict innocent persons for this crime. In doing so you and the others aided the real murderer of your sister and daughter so that he is a footnote to the crime and that you helped him to get a very light sentence for the brutal murder and sexual perversion he inflicted upon her as she lay dying.

These are UN-contestable facts of Merediths death. Charlie is exactly right about the evidence of this attack and after Guede has her bleeding to death he then starts removing her clothing. You must study the brutal facts of this case. The photos reveal exactly what happened. Meredith was fully clothed when her mortal wounds were inflicted. The evidence and pathology reveal this to be true. Guede then decided to sexually assault the dying Meredith. He removed her jacket and jeans and drug her into the middle of the room...likely by grabbing onto the back of her bra and using this hold to drag her there. The evidence is clear. You just need to look at it.

Merediths last breath comes when she is on her back and her breasts are bare. There is no other alternative that fits the facts of the case. Im sorry for your loss. I am quite certain that Meredith did not suffer a prolonged conscious attack...she would have passed out in a very few minutes due to the quick loss of blood.

Sadly you continue to aide Guede by failing to look at the evidence. You wont read Knox book. Probably no one really cares about that except perhaps Miss Knox. That should be your first clue.

Did you hear Knox explain her feeling for her family if she should have been found guilty for life? She wanted them to move on without her. Not suffer and ruin their lives because she was gone from them...perhaps naive but certainly honest. I bet your daughter would feel the same. Instead you all seem consumed with a false hate. You were lied to and are still in hope that the lie is somehow true...this in spite of overwhelming evidence and complete proof of what exactly happened to your daughter.

Your conclusions are illogical. They do not fit the facts of the case. The Italians are lying to you. Perhaps they are lying to themselves. But the facts?? They are quite clear. Incontrovertible in fact.

 

[codyjuneau]

What's amazing to me is that such a straight forward albeit horrible and inexcusable crime is made complex. Rudy broke in, Rudy did it, Rudy fled. Everyone, Knox included (in her book) gets somewhat transfixed by the notion that someone else was with Rudy.... Knox seems to believe the prison stories that Rudy had said that another was with him, and perhaps this unsub himself staged the burglary to deflect attention back to Rudy...

It's justy me and I'll try not to be too snarky about it, but what it is about Occam's Razor that people find so offensive? They get a pet theory stuck in their brain, and won't let it go? Theories are fine, it's what it's all about really - a comprehensive theory which explains the evidence....

But really?!??!?

Exactly Bill. A simple case, really simple, if the police had only waited for the evidence to come to them, instead of making a case without evidence. But in lieu of evidence, and even with contrary evidence, isn't it amazing what can be done with bullying, innuendo, lies, prosecution leaks, destruction and concealment of exculpatory evidence, the co-operation of lapdog reporters, and the public's appetite for an unlikely salacious villain.

The truth can never be covered up now. The cat is out of the bag. All of the surprises will be revelations of prosecution and police abuses. History will eventually be very clear about this case. It will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court judges want to be judged by historians.

 

[anglolawyer]

Exactly Bill. A simple case, really simple, if the police had only waited for the evidence to come to them, instead of making a case without evidence. But in lieu of evidence, and even with contrary evidence, isn't it amazing what can be done with bullying, innuendo, lies, prosecution leaks, destruction and concealment of exculpatory evidence, the co-operation of lapdog reporters, and the public's appetite for an unlikely salacious villain.

The truth can never be covered up now. The cat is out of the bag. All of the surprises will be revelations of prosecution and police abuses. History will eventually be very clear about this case. It will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court judges want to be judged by historians.

The funny thing is Amanda, Filomena and Laura solved the crime between them, just by using their brains. I can't cut and paste from the book unfortunately but at an early stage when trying to piece together what happened they hypothesise exactly what did happen - an unsuspecting Meredith entered the apartment unaware the intruder was already there.

Another forensic point from the book: at one point, maybe on the 3rd or 4th, they take back to the apartment and send her along to her room to check if anything is missing while they wait in the kitchen. She forgets even to check to see if her money is missing. Did they find it suspicious that she didn't mention the missing lamp, or, as they surely knew, that her money was untouched by the 'burglar'?

Randy - I believe they knew it was Lumumba before the boner moment. I am also starting to wonder about the whole set up. Why didn't they retrieve the victims clothing, bra strap, purse etc? When did they first know Guede was there? When did they first know there was not a single scrap of forensic evidence against Lumumba? Just how badly did Monica hate her?

 

[bolint]

Where does she say she had a discussion of "about an hour" at Raffaele's place?

Raffaele says that. He says that she came back at around 11.30.

 

[bolint]

You should have read Raffaele's book too! .

I don't have it yet.

Raffaele was up and about at times during the night, and on his computer.

Of which there is no trace.
What did he do on the computer according to your understanding?


Anyway, even what you cited from his book deserves scrutiny.
He says:

but because my cellphone was turned off, I didn't receive the message until six the next morning.

So from the horse's mouth we hear that his phone was turned off.
In the trial an expert of his "proves" with special measurements that it did not receive the message because of the poor reception conditions. (Massei p.320-321)
Raffaele sitting there silently and now after five years he, honor bound, declares that it was turned off.
Even now in this thread it is being argued how his phone could not have received it while turned on.

Give me a break.

(I expect now some explanation that this "turned off" did not mean that it was turned off )

 

[bolint]

Wow, we should talk, just today I heard Barbie N say she believed Amanda wasn't telling the truth and what you just said above fits into what I believe to have happened as well. She was convicted, and will be again, not because of the fact that she actually killed Meredith, but because she is obviously lying, ad if she is lying, she must be guilty. Now, she can no longer change her stories, no one will believe her anymore.

Something like that.
She likely was not at Raffaele's place all night long.

Beginning with Lumumba's SMS. It was not received from the normal cell of that place.
However, the answer, at the time of which we know (by Popovic) that she was there, amazingly goes through the right cell.
So I think that at around 20:18 she was out.
Interestingly Raffaele also places her out at that time in his Nov 5 questioning.
I know it was before the murder, but denying it must have a reason.