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

[Mary_H]

Is that your theory about how the sex went down? I haven't heard that one before. Maybe you and Miginini should write porno scripts together.

William Faulkner wrote a novel along the same lines. It's called As I Lied There Dying.

 

[Dan O.]

they only touched the bra clasp, which was more prone to touching than the rest of the bra. just b/c something is touched doesn't mean DNA is transferred which a lot of people seem real confused about. I don't think it is true that 4 people's DNA was on the bra clasp, but regardless, there is no innocent explaination for Raffe's DNA on the bra clasp. talking about other people's DNA is an attempt to divert from that.

You are absolutely correct. There is no innocent explanation for Raffaele's DNA on the bra clasp. And there is tangible evidence that Raffaele was at his appartment all night till 6 am. DNA doesn't just fly around the house and happen to land just on the metal hooks of the clasp. There is only one possibility left. Somebody had to put Raffaele's DNA on the hook of that clasp. Rudy couldn't do it for the simple fact that he had never met Raffaele. Amanda couldn't do it because at worst Mignini has her in the hall never entering Meredith's room.

Who does that leave? The police were in control of the cottage since the afternoon of November 2nd. There was the incident on or before November 14 where the door was found open. But the police testified that the seal was intact when they returned to the cottage in December. However, the photographs show for a fact that the seal was retaped between November 14 and their return in December. Therefore the police are lying to cover up the November 14th incident so that means they own it.

There is of course one other person that had access to the bra clasp and to Raffaele's DNA. She also was in charge of preserving the evidence so it could be retested. A task for which she so totally screwed up that it looks like deliberate sabotage. That person is of course the bs doctor Stefononi.

By eliminating the innocent explanations, you have driven the conclusion that there is corruption within the Italian police or prosecution.

 

[Dan O.]

As I recall Raffaele's defence team during the appeal claimed that a screensaver log file showed that there was no period in which Raffaele's laptop went unused for longer that twenty minutes until 6am the morning after the murder.

This evidence wasn't examined in court because Hellmann (correctly) concluded that there was no case to answer once the DNA evidence and Curatolo's testimony had been chucked out, but I see no particular reason to think they were lying.

Also, they could not have fabricated the evidence because the prosecution has their own copy of Raffaele's computer hard drive. The appeal contained enough information including file names and time stamps for the data to be independently extracted and analized.

 

[anglolawyer]

As I recall Raffaele's defence team during the appeal claimed that a screensaver log file showed that there was no period in which Raffaele's laptop went unused for longer that twenty minutes until 6am the morning after the murder.

This evidence wasn't examined in court because Hellmann (correctly) concluded that there was no case to answer once the DNA evidence and Curatolo's testimony had been chucked out, but I see no particular reason to think they were lying.

Well, that's not enough to back the assertion you made. Yes the appeal advances a contention but the evidence on which it's based is unknown. I hope you're right about it because the point can be fully developed in Florence but I don't think it refutes Sherlock's theory as matters stand. I agree with the rest of your critique though.

 

[anglolawyer]

This is what the appeal summary at IIP says:

The prosecution stated that the last time Raffaele used his computer on November 1, 2007 was 21:10. The defense argues that the prosecution did not take into account downloading activity on Raffaele's computer at 21:26. The court also ignored the computer activity from 5:40 to 6:38. Raffaele was listening to music. The prosecution’s analysis of Raffaele’s computer usage is incomplete. Apparently, the software used by the prosecution’s expert was not effective in retrieving all of the data from Raffaele’s MacBook-pro computer. In light of these circumstances, further investigation is required to ascertain the exact interactions that actually occurred on Raffaele’s computer on November 1, 2007, under Article. 603, first paragraph, cpp.

 

[Mary_H]

This is what the appeal summary at IIP says:

There is discussion of this topic in Continuation Part 3 of this thread. For example, this comment from Dan O. http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7593845&postcount=5881

 

[Dan O.]

you more worried about this guy making excuses over not videotaping witnesses than the fact Knox butchered her roommate and then had sex with her "boyfriend" right next to the dead body, or maybe as the victim lied there dying.

Is creating lies the way you handle having your arguments demolished? There is no credible evidence that Raffaele left his apartment and there is evidence that he was there all night till 6 am the next morning. There is no evidence that Amanda was in Meredith's room and no credible evedence that she even left Raffaele's apartment. The Italian supreme court may have overturned Hellmann's acquittal but the report and testimony of the independent DNA experts still exists.

 

[anglolawyer]

There is discussion of this topic in Continuation Part 3 of this thread. For example, this comment from Dan O. http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7593845&postcount=5881

Thanks. In the post you linked, Dan says this:

Only what the defense said in the part of the documentation I've seen. They found in the WindowServer.log file evidence that the screensaver had been active and reset several times during the night with no period of activation longer than 6 minutes. The last activation was at 06:22 which indicates activity on the computer ended just after 06:02 which just happens to be the time raffaele's phone received the SMS from his dad.

Then there is the message from Raffaele about the keyboard light log which appears to be additional confirmation of activity.

First, I saw no reference in the appeal summary to the screensaver or to the WindowServer.log file evidence. Maybe Dan can explain where he got this info. Second, IIUC is it being suggested that there was continuous interaction with the computer the whole night, with the screensaver never operative for more than 6 minutes? This does not accord with their accounts of the night, in which some sleeping and shagging (OK, that's only two minutes) was involved. So maybe something else was capable of deactivating the screensaver - passing cars or doors closing in the building - but if that is so then the laptop is not proof of human interaction.

 

[Dan O.]

This is what the appeal summary at IIP says:

21:26 was from the finder metadata that showed the last time the file "Naruto ep 101.avi" was manually opened by clicking on it.

"In particular, from the computer expertise a new human interaction was found on his notebook. The help Amelie couldn't give comes by surprise from a Manga cartoon: Naruto. That night Raffaele, after having downloaded a Naruto cartoon, has opened it and then closed at 9.46 pm. If this is true he could hardly have been in time for the orgy at via della pergola (and if you miss preliminaries you miss everything)." (Perugia-shock 2008-10-04)
"What claimed by Bongiorno, that there was an interaction with Naruto at 21:26 simply it wasn't true according to the postal police, otherwise they would have found it." (Perugia-Shock 2009-03-16)​

 

[anglolawyer]

21:26 was from the finder metadata that showed the last time the file "Naruto ep 101.avi" was manually opened by clicking on it.

"In particular, from the computer expertise a new human interaction was found on his notebook. The help Amelie couldn't give comes by surprise from a Manga cartoon: Naruto. That night Raffaele, after having downloaded a Naruto cartoon, has opened it and then closed at 9.46 pm. If this is true he could hardly have been in time for the orgy at via della pergola (and if you miss preliminaries you miss everything)." (Perugia-shock 2008-10-04)
"What claimed by Bongiorno, that there was an interaction with Naruto at 21:26 simply it wasn't true according to the postal police, otherwise they would have found it." (Perugia-Shock 2009-03-16)​

Hmm. The appeal extract I quoted is not consistent with this. The appeal says the downloading started at 9.26 not that the the download was opened. Also, as far as I recall, neither of them mentions watching a Naruto film.

 

[Dan O.]

Thanks. In the post you linked, Dan says this:


First, I saw no reference in the appeal summary to the screensaver or to the WindowServer.log file evidence. Maybe Dan can explain where he got this info. Second, IIUC is it being suggested that there was continuous interaction with the computer the whole night, with the screensaver never operative for more than 6 minutes? This does not accord with their accounts of the night, in which some sleeping and shagging (OK, that's only two minutes) was involved. So maybe something else was capable of deactivating the screensaver - passing cars or doors closing in the building - but if that is so then the laptop is not proof of human interaction.

The information on the screensaver times was in the addendum to the appeal. Raffaele's computer is an apple MacBook pro laptop which has a trackpad instead of a mouse. Amanda's account is that she had sex and fell asleep. Raffaele's account is that he then stayed up for a bit, received a message from his father and then went to bed. Raffaele initially said he received a call from his father around 11 pm. His father actually sent an SMS at 11:41 and that's what the timestamp would show on Raffaele's phone. The phone did not actually receive this message until 06:03. This is right after Raffaele created the playlist at 05:56 so we know Raffaele is still up at this time and may have moved his phone or turned it on so it could receive the SMS.

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>First, I saw no reference in the appeal summary to the screensaver or to the WindowServer.log file evidence. Maybe Dan can explain where he got this info. Second, IIUC is it being suggested that there was continuous interaction with the computer the whole night, with the screensaver never operative for more than 6 minutes? This does not accord with their accounts of the night, in which some sleeping and shagging (OK, that's only two minutes) was involved. So maybe something else was capable of deactivating the screensaver - passing cars or doors closing in the building - but if that is so then the laptop is not proof of human interaction.

Nice.

 

[Dan O.]

Hmm. The appeal extract I quoted is not consistent with this. The appeal says the downloading started at 9.26 not that the the download was opened. Also, as far as I recall, neither of them mentions watching a Naruto film.

Who wrote the extract? Frank is getting his information from court testimony and direct interviews. I got my information from reading the Google translated documents.

 

[Kaosium]

You bring up a good point, tsig. I would think the police and prosecutors would have been a lot more interested in getting the details out of Amanda than they seem to have been. The confessions they got from her were so sketchy! It seems to me that if you have a murder suspect, or even an accomplice, in your interrogation room, you would want to know every single detail about what happened that night.

As far as we know, since there is no interrogation tape, the interviewers let up on Amanda just as soon as she implicated Patrick. Don't you think that's strange? I mean, after all the work it took to get that out of her, don't you think they would want to know the entire story, step by step? How and when did Amanda and Patrick make their plan? What did Patrick say to Meredith when they got there? Did Meredith willingly go into the bedroom with Patrick, or did she ask Amanda what was going on?

Then for Amanda to say she woke up in Raffaele's bed the next morning? Come on! Is that good enough for the Perugian police and prosecutor? How about WHEN did you leave the cottage? HOW did you get to Raffaele's? Did Patrick walk you there? What did you and Patrick talk about after the murder? What did Patrick do with his bloody clothes? Do you think you might have gone back to the club first? Did Patrick seem nervous?

The questions to get to the bottom of everything that happened could have gone on and on for hours more. They certainly would have been important to any really thorough investigation. Then, on top of all that, when Amanda was on the stand at trial, they never even asked her to describe the murder, or even if she murdered Meredith!

Why, do you think, were they so uncurious?

But Mary, you forgot, she was a witness! If she'd actually been a suspect and this was a confession they would have had to give her a lawyer. You do remind me of something that I never understood how some people could overlook. Let's look at her 'witness' statement:'

"Last Thursday, November 1, a day on which I normally work, while I was at the house of my boyfriend Raffaele, at around 8:30 pm, I received a message on my cellular phone from Patrik, who told me that the premises would remain closed that evening, because there were no customers, and thus I would not need to go to work.

"I responded to the message by telling him that we would see each other at once; I then left the house, telling my boyfriend that I had to go to work. In view of the fact that during the afternoon I had smoked a joint, I felt confused, since I do not frequently make use of mind-altering substances, nor of heavier substances.

"I met Patrik immediately afterward, at the basketball court on Piazza Grimana, and together we went [to my] home. I do not recall whether Meredith was there or arrived afterward. I struggle to remember those moments, but Patrik had sex with Meredith, with whom he was infatuated, but I do not recall whether Meredith had been threatened beforehand. I recall confusedly that he killed her."

I left off the top part with the information about the police, cellphones, passport number, description of Patrick and whatnot, but if you look you'll see it identifies Amanda as "person informed of facts" which means witness in Italian legal parlance.

Then there's this at the bottom:

"The Office records that the statement was interrupted and that Amanda KNOX was placed at the disposition of the Judicial Authority for further proceedings."


What did they arrest her for, smoking the joint? This is a 'witness' statement cracking their big case, it's not like she does anything in it but meet up with Patrick and go to the cottage. Sometime later she realizes Meredith is there and Patrick has gone off and is having sex with her, she remembers nothing about threats, but just 'confusedly' that at some point he kills her.

Now we have the 'spontaneous' declaration, again I'll leave off the official stuff at the top and just quote the actual statement:

"I wish to spontaneously report what happened because this case has deeply disturbed me and I am very afraid of Patrick, the African owner if the pub called 'Le Chic' on Via Alessi where I occasionally work. I met him on the evening of the first of November, after having sent him a message replying to his, with the words 'see you' ['civediamo', lit. "we'll see each other"].

"We met immediately afterward around 9:00 pm at the basketball court on Piazza Grimana. We went to my house at Via Della Pergola no. 7. I do not recall exactly whether my friend Meredith was already home or if she arrived later, [but] what I can say is that Patrik and Meredith went off to Meredith's room, while it seems to me that I stayed in the kitchen. I cannot recall how much time they stayed together in the room but can only say that at a certain point I heard Meredith screaming and I, frightened, covered my ears.

Then I don't remember anything anymore, I am very confused in my head. I
do not recall whether Meredith was screaming and if [I? she?](*) also heard thuds [tonfi] because I was involved, but I was imagining what could have happened.

"I met Patrik this morning, in front of the University for Foreigners, and he asked me some questions, specifically he wanted to know what questions I had been asked by the Police. I think that he also asked if I wanted to meet with journalists perhaps in order to find out if I knew anything about Meredith's `death. [I am] not sure whether Raffaele was present that evening but I do remember waking up at my boyfriend's house in his bed, and that I returned in the morning to my residence, where I found the door to the apartment open. When I woke up, the morning of November 2, I was in bed with my boyfriend."

It is recorded that KNOX repeatedly brings her hands to her head and shakes the latter.

Read[,] confirmed and signed [sottoscritto] at the time and place indicated above.

Now according to this she's so afraid of Patrick she must make a 'spontaneous' declaration to PM Mignini, but as this also says she'd just met up with Patrick earlier that day, how come she all of a sudden was so afraid of him? The real answer of course is they'd convinced her Patrick murdered Meredith and she must have witnessed it, and they had 'hard evidence' this was so and she'd 'repressed' it due to trauma, the latter of which even Domino admitted in court she'd said to Amanda.

Is this how they treat 'witnesses' in Perugia? They only want that for information? It's almost devoid of content, and again, what did Amanda do in this to get arrested? She goes and sees her boss, they go home, at some point Meredith is there...she hears screaming....and she's frightened in the kitchen....what did Amanda do worthy of arrest? In legal terms she actually is a witness and if they don't believe she all of a sudden remembered what she'd 'repressed,' like they suggested, the worst they can get out of this is she was so afraid of Patrick she was afraid to tattle on him.

Instead they throw her in solitary, she gives them the note saying she doesn't think any of that happened, that she's so confused and didn't know what was real but they need to look for the 'REAL murder (sic)' but they ignore it, and instead pack her up in a police caravan with Raffaele and Patrick and parade through the streets of Perugia like conquering heroes with sirens blaring and lights flashing and then later give this statement, quoted from Barbie Nadeau in her 11/14/07 article:

"Initially the American gave a version of events we knew was not correct," Perugia police chief Arturo de Felice told reporters. "She buckled and made an admission of facts we knew were correct and from that we were able to bring them all in. They all participated but had different roles."

They take that 'witness' statement and 'spontaneous' declaration and have no problem at all arresting Patrick on the basis of it as it 'matches the facts we knew were correct' and admit they changed her story ("buckled") and liked it better but when it comes time to face the reality that Patrick didn't have anything to do with it, they blame Amanda for Patrick's arrest.

Here's more of Arturo's statement that Barbie didn't include:

"There were holes in her alibi and her mobile phone records were crucial," he said. Police also found text messages from Lumumba, fixing a meeting between them at 8.35pm on November 1, the night Miss Kercher died.

They had Amanda's phones tapped, they'd been taping her conversations with Raffaele elsewhere in the police station, they had taped all her previous witness statements, but somehow the important one, the one where they took her into the little room for about seven hours and produced those statements they claim they didn't tape.

They knew when they called Raffaele in that Amanda had exchanged texts with Patrick the night of the murder and had never told them. That was entirely innocent, of course, but it must have made them suspicious. They get Raffaele's statement conflating Halloween and the First, and now they think Amanda doesn't have an alibi...and neither does Raffaele.....

But they knew Amanda and Patrick exchanged those texts, they had her phones tapped, they may well have known what it said, I did some googling and it appears some carriers save the content of text messages, others wipe it after some time, but this was less than a week, Italy's fascination with wiretapping would indicate to me they probably are available to police.

I don't know for sure, but it is apparent that they had Amanda's phone records, they knew she'd exchanged texts with Patrick, and then they called Raffaele in late at night to go over Amanda's alibi. They may not have wanted Amanda there at first, to isolate Raffaele, and if they got what they wanted they'd have given Amanda the Patrick treatment, it didn't matter, Amanda wasn't going anywhere--they had her passport.

They'd take these statements and Raffaele's entirely non-incriminating one that just mixed up the days into Matteini's court with a plethora of mistakes and imaginary evidence (Amanda's handprint on Meredith's face?) with a bizarre theory of a Halloween sexual rite/sex game gone wrong that Mignini just made up and Matteini edited.

 

[anglolawyer]

Who wrote the extract? Frank is getting his information from court testimony and direct interviews. I got my information from reading the Google translated documents.

David Kamanski and Bruce Fischer. Is this evidence that Massei just ignored? The word 'Naruto' does not show up in a word search of Massei. If he ignored exculpatory evidence that would have been a separate head of appeal.

 

[Kaosium]

Victim's DNA is found on the blade of a knife at the boyfriend's house. Let it go, nothing to see here. Move along.

Since that knife wasn't used in the murder being as it didn't match the wounds, tested negative for blood, and DNA test was invalid, what does it matter except to wonder if they're that stupid or if it was a really mindless attempt at fraud?

 

[Briars]

You are absolutely correct. There is no innocent explanation for Raffaele's DNA on the bra clasp. And there is tangible evidence that Raffaele was at his appartment all night till 6 am. DNA doesn't just fly around the house and happen to land just on the metal hooks of the clasp. There is only one possibility left. Somebody had to put Raffaele's DNA on the hook of that clasp. Rudy couldn't do it for the simple fact that he had never met Raffaele. Amanda couldn't do it because at worst Mignini has her in the hall never entering Meredith's room.

Who does that leave? The police were in control of the cottage since the afternoon of November 2nd. There was the incident on or before November 14 where the door was found open. But the police testified that the seal was intact when they returned to the cottage in December. However, the photographs show for a fact that the seal was retaped between November 14 and their return in December. Therefore the police are lying to cover up the November 14th incident so that means they own it.

There is of course one other person that had access to the bra clasp and to Raffaele's DNA. She also was in charge of preserving the evidence so it could be retested. A task for which she so totally screwed up that it looks like deliberate sabotage. That person is of course the bs doctor Stefononi.

By eliminating the innocent explanations, you have driven the conclusion that there is corruption within the Italian police or prosecution.

Meredith was moved after the fatal attack lifting up and dragging by clasp by back of the bra could have caused it to snap, pressure of skin contact on metal good place for transfer.Her clothing was removed after the fatal attack fumbling with hooks before ripping or cutting , another excellent example of skin on hard metal transfer. There were only 2 profiles that were complete on the clasp Meredith's and a good sample of Sollecito's. Partial bits are different and could have been dust. There is no evidence of contamination and corruption is the only only "creative" method you can come up with.

 

[anglolawyer]

Kaosium

On the assumption that the two 'confessions' were not the product of coercion, their content does seem to be incriminating in conjunction with other things the cops (thought they) knew. Amanda, knowing there had been a killing committed by Patrick, had gone to the apartment the following morning and spent some time there - doing what? Well, staging the burglary for one thing, since it cannot have been real and obviously not calmly taking a shower. Then she had spent the next several days lying about it.

If your point is that the content of the confessions gave them nothing on her, then I disagree. In combination with everything else it gave them plenty.

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>They'd take these statements and Raffaele's entirely non-incriminating one that just mixed up the days into Matteini's court with a plethora of mistakes and imaginary evidence (Amanda's handprint on Meredith's face?) with a bizarre theory of a Halloween sexual rite/sex game gone wrong that Mignini just made up and Matteini edited.

Honi soit qui mal y pense, Kaosium.

 

[Dan O.]

Meredith was moved after the fatal attack lifting up and dragging by clasp by back of the bra could have caused it to snap, pressure of skin contact on metal good place for transfer.Her clothing was removed after the fatal attack fumbling with hooks before ripping or cutting , another excellent example of skin on hard metal transfer. There were only 2 profiles that were complete on the clasp Meredith's and a good sample of Sollecito's. Partial bits are different and could have been dust. There is no evidence of contamination and corruption is the only only "creative" method you can come up with.

I already said up thread that Meredith was moved and Rudy's DNA on the band shows that it is Rudy that moves her. Once the bra breaks, the clasp is left behind to be covered by the pillow and Meredith's naked body which Rudy proceeds to rape (or do you contend that it wasn't rape because Meredith didn't say NO!)