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

[anglolawyer]

4pm AK RS goodbye MK

4.30pm AK RS head to RS flat

8.18pm text from PL dont come in - AK angry

8.20pm finds/bumps into RG who lives near to RS. AK flirts and suggests he steals MK rent money in exchange for cocaine, gives him her key (and RS kitchen knife) and says meet at basketball court at 9.30pm to party

8.35pm AK returns to RS flat texts PL seeya!

8.45pm Popovic sees AK at RS flat

9.00pm RG arranges HK meet him near cottage to supply cocaine

9.15pm RG HK enter cottage with key make themselves at home - goes to steal money surprised to find MK there - she is angry - confrontation RG sexual assault ; HK's contribution is brief but deadly

9.30pm AK RS wait at basketball court for RG

9.45pm MK fatally wounded HK flees early with his weapon. RG left amongst devastation - flees

10.00pm AK RS at basketball court argue as to what has gone on and what to do

10.30 - 11.15pm breakdown truck near to cottage - sees and hears nothing

11.15pm AK RS visit cottage. AK screams when they see body and realise what her actions have led to. They stage scene to make it point to a male outsider. call police.

Next morning AK RS stay around cottage to manage discovery and gauge reaction/evidence found

Now it makes sense, even if it didn't happen this way.

 

[Bill Williams]

4pm AK RS goodbye MK

4.30pm AK RS head to RS flat

8.18pm text from PL dont come in - AK angry

8.20pm finds/bumps into RG who lives near to RS. AK flirts and suggests he steals MK rent money in exchange for cocaine, gives him her key (and RS kitchen knife) and says meet at basketball court at 9.30pm to party

8.35pm AK returns to RS flat texts PL seeya!

8.45pm Popovic sees AK at RS flat

9.00pm RG arranges HK meet him near cottage to supply cocaine

9.15pm RG HK enter cottage with key make themselves at home - goes to steal money surprised to find MK there - she is angry - confrontation RG sexual assault ; HK's contribution is brief but deadly

9.30pm AK RS wait at basketball court for RG

9.45pm MK fatally wounded HK flees early with his weapon. RG left amongst devastation - flees

10.00pm AK RS at basketball court argue as to what has gone on and what to do

10.30 - 11.15pm breakdown truck near to cottage - sees and hears nothing

11.15pm AK RS visit cottage. AK screams when they see body and realise what her actions have led to. They stage scene to make it point to a male outsider.

Next morning AK RS stay around cottage to manage discovery and gauge reaction/evidence found

Dovetailing from AngLaw.....

Why the 11:15 pm step? Why not just call the police?

There's also this 17 minute window in your scenario between 8:18 and 8:35 pm which, frankly, defies belief. The 8:20 mini-narrative you provide packs a lot in, barely allows for to'ing and fro'ing from RS's flat; not to mention two other things:

1) RG and AK speak different languages
2) there's no evidence at all that RG and AK had a prior relationship, really. Even Judge Massei concedes this point.​

At least you give it a go. That's more than most. By, sorry. It doesn't wash. It is outcome-driven and because of that tries to pack too much into too brief times. My opinion only.

 

[Grinder]

It said that the C&V report never should have been allowed, because first there had to be clear evidence that somehow Stefanoni had erred or that samples had been contaminated. In the absence of the defence demonstrating contamination, the court should have no authority to order a review of police work. In essence, if I am reading this correctly, the ISC said that Judge Massei and the 1st Court was correct in disallowing an independent review.

Any chance you could provide a link or two to this angle on things?

Why do you put fictitious dialog in quotes? Why don't you just say that it seems Massei was of the opinion that one more expert opinion wouldn't change his opinion as he had, as per Italian law, made the decision which interpretation was correct.

My read is that the SC is saying that Hellmann didn't consider all the evidence, specifically the sex game and the accusation of Patrick. I always thought, unlike one person, that Hellmann needed to throw out the calumnia or the verdict wasn't consistent.

I've yet to read any report that the ISC says that Stefanoni was correct and that's that. They did say that contamination must be more than just alleged.

 

[Bill Williams]

My read is that the SC is saying that Hellmann didn't consider all the evidence, specifically the sex game and the accusation of Patrick. I always thought, unlike one person, that Hellmann needed to throw out the calumnia or the verdict wasn't consistent.

I pre-argued Hellmann argument before Hellmann did! Then reading Mignini's own account of the interrogation in his interview with Drew Griffin was a watershed for me... I had not put 2+2 together before that as to the way the interrogators actually created the outcome they were looking for.

...... which is, afterall, the goal of interrogation. Yes, I'm not making that up, so I won't put it in quotes(!). Everyone on both sides of whatever debate we're having here has to accept what cops do - mostly for good, and every once in a while for ill. They play the grey areas of the law around self-incrimination and the right to representation at interrogation; all with the goal of confession.

The "conversion point" for me was Mignini's claim he was acting as if only a notary, to record so-called spontaneous statements he somehow "intuited" (meaning without asking Knox if she, in fact, wished to continue with statements at all), and then he continues his own narrative by actually vocalizing the invitation for her to continue and he'll just write it down.

It is my own fear that in effect, the ISC has just ruled that the real trial Knox got was from 1:45 am to 5:45 am on Nov 6, 2007 at the hand of Mr. Mignini. And it is now up to everyone else to prove that his motives were suspect or illegal or misguided....

..... yet by saying what they (appear to have) said about C&V, you're not allowed to actually get an expert opinion to challenge the assumptions, you also now have to somehow prove things like contamination, BEFORE calling on the expert who may or may not demonstrate it at an expert level. It means skeptics are hooped in Italy.

PARAPHRASE ALERT!!!!!!! "You must demonstrate contamination BEFORE consulting an expert who might be able to prove it, because without that pre-proof we should all believe the expert." If you don't it's calunnia or defamation for you!

So, in effect, those four hours was Knox's trial. And it had disastrous effect for Sollecito and he was not allowed even to be there for it. As he says in his book, he spent the first months in jail wondering what all this had to do with him!

 

[Grinder]

After thinking about this SC alleged ruling, I began to wonder why they came out a week early and if there is a chance that this story came from Cipolla the magazine.

The mind reels thinking that the SC demands that the appellate court consider the sex game, prove contamination and make their judgment line up with Rudi's SC final judgment.

Even Cuki doesn't believe in the sex game or the DNA on the knife. I'm sure that the defense will be able to find experts from everywhere, except Italy, that will scream that contamination must be kept from being possible by the use of proper protocol.

The PGP are already screaming about the implication that Meredith was a player in the sex game.

Police said last night there were indications that she had sex before she was stabbed in the neck. Her attacker locked the bedroom door before fleeing the house and dumping her two mobile phones in a nearby garden.

By Chris Hastings and Jasper Copping in Perugia12:01AM GMT 04 Nov 2007

 

[Dan O.]

4pm AK RS goodbye MK

4.30pm AK RS head to RS flat

18:27:15 VLC was launched to play the multimedia file Amelie.avi - Massei Report pg 325
19:53 First sighting of figure thought to be Guede on car park CCTV camera, adjusted forward 12 minutes per the defence's theory.
8.18pm text from PL dont come in - AK angry

8.20pm finds/bumps into RG who lives near to RS. AK flirts and suggests he steals MK rent money in exchange for cocaine, gives him her key (and RS kitchen knife) and says meet at basketball court at 9.30pm to party

20:22 Second sighting of figure thought to be Guede on car park CCTV camera, adjusted forward 12 minutes per the defence's theory. He is walking from left to right along the street, past the car park on the right and the cottage on the left. Fits with Guede's claim to have arrived at the cottage around 20:30. CCTV time stamp is 20:10.
8.35pm AK returns to RS flat texts PL seeya!

8.45pm Popovic sees AK at RS flat

9.00pm RG arranges HK meet him near cottage to supply cocaine

21:04 Sighting of figure thought to be Meredith on the car park CCTV camera, CCTV time adjusted forward 12 minutes per the defense's theory. The figure is walking from left to right on the same side of the street as the cottage. CCTV time stamp was said to be 20:43 in early news reports (when the figure was thought to be Amanda); later reports of 20:41 are possibly a confusion with Guede's sighting at 19:41. Fits with Sophie's arrival home at 20:55, and the interrupted call at 20:56. (Telegraph 2007-11-12, Daily Mail 2009-03-14)
9.15pm RG HK enter cottage with key make themselves at home - goes to steal money surprised to find MK there - she is angry - confrontation RG sexual assault ; HK's contribution is brief but deadly

21:26 Last opening of file "Naruto ep 101.avi" recorded in spotlight metadata on Raffaele's computer. (from Raffaele's appeal) runtime is 23 minutes
9.30pm AK RS wait at basketball court for RG

9.45pm MK fatally wounded HK flees early with his weapon. RG left amongst devastation - flees

21:58 Attempt to call voice mail (from phone memory) Massei Report pg 350
10.00pm AK RS at basketball court argue as to what has gone on and what to do

22:00 Kercher's phone attempts to call Abbey Bank. Source Micheli Report. Call fails because 44 prefix for UK not used.
22:13:19 Kercher's mobile phone had received a picture message. Source Micheli Report. Connected via cell area of Ponte Rio - Montelaguardia. the phone connected to the 30064 Strada Vicinale Ponte Rio Monte La Guardia cell (Massei 337)
10.30 - 11.15pm breakdown truck near to cottage - sees and hears nothing

11.15pm AK RS visit cottage. AK screams when they see body and realise what her actions have led to. They stage scene to make it point to a male outsider.

00:58:50 Fastweb log files show 4 second web connection from Raffaele's computer to www.apple.com (Massei 332)
Next morning AK RS stay around cottage to manage discovery and gauge reaction/evidence found

Some parts that were simply desire driven suppositions had to be struck out but otherwise this is a solid timeline. I added a few time points that are well established for reference (highlighted).

 

[Grinder]

Bill any cites that back up the alleged remarks about Stefanoni by the SC?

From what I've read the contamination remarks by the SC are separate from the expert situation. I've yet to read, other than your accounts, that the SC made those remarks.

Please, since I can't find the accounts you report provide cites and actual quotes (you know copy and paste from the article )

 

[RoseMontague]

The explanations weren't far fetched. You refuse to look at the facts. There is no reason that Rudi couldn't have returned to the murder room with shoes that no longer left any trace. Whether the last of the blood wore inside the house or outside it is certainly possible therefore probable that the shoes with Rudi moving them returned to the room and this time he was careful not to step in the blood.

Rudi himself said he returned to the room with the towels.

The last two footprints (IIRC) at the door were so faded out they yielded no forensic results. If Rudy entered by the window he would not know you needed a key to unlock the door and possibly returned to the room to get the key from Meredith's purse (where he left DNA evidence, btw).

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill any cites that back up the alleged remarks about Stefanoni by the SC?

From what I've read the contamination remarks by the SC are separate from the expert situation. I've yet to read, other than your accounts, that the SC made those remarks.

Please, since I can't find the accounts you report provide cites and actual quotes (you know copy and paste from the article )

I will copy and paste from a competent translation. Id copy and paste from the Italian but, well, you know how it is.

 

[Grinder]

The last two footprints (IIRC) at the door were so faded out they yielded no forensic results. If Rudy entered by the window he would not know you needed a key to unlock the door and possibly returned to the room to get the key from Meredith's purse (where he left DNA evidence, btw).

There are so many ways that he could have left the visible print by Meredith's door and returned later with nothing left on his shoes the assertion is of no force. He could have walked out the front door if MK left the key there and then turned around. He could have done exactly what you said. He could have wandered around the kitchen for a bit and then back to her room.

Dan O's work shows that his prints just peter out so why would there be evidence of him returning. The prints stopped lighting up with luminol.

 

[Bill Williams]

After thinking about this SC alleged ruling, I began to wonder why they came out a week early and if there is a chance that this story came from Cipolla the magazine.

The mind reels thinking that the SC demands that the appellate court consider the sex game, prove contamination and make their judgment line up with Rudi's SC final judgment.

That one caught no less than even Barbie Nadeau by surpise. In her The Daily Beast piece, she called it something akin to "the discarded theory that..." Me, my head is spinning right now, and my appetite is to wait for a competent translation rather than to spin wheels with pre-opinions in the press. If those counted for anything, we'd still be arguing the allegation in the days past the Oct 2011 acquittal, that Hellmann thought there was a "judicial truth" separate from reality.

Even Cuki doesn't believe in the sex game or the DNA on the knife. I'm sure that the defense will be able to find experts from everywhere, except Italy, that will scream that contamination must be kept from being possible by the use of proper protocol.

The PGP are already screaming about the implication that Meredith was a player in the sex game.

Police said last night there were indications that she had sex before she was stabbed in the neck. Her attacker locked the bedroom door before fleeing the house and dumping her two mobile phones in a nearby garden.

By Chris Hastings and Jasper Copping in Perugia12:01AM GMT 04 Nov 2007

It must be hard for any PGP or partial-PGP like cuki777 to view the ISC motivations with any satisfaction.

Re: the highlighted bit - Nadeau's piece hints that (wait for it) the Kerchers themselves plan a lawsuit against Conti and Vecchioti for allegedly being in the hire and thrall of the defence. Machiavelli himself alleged that C&V were liable to prosecution for wrong doing - albeit before Machiavelli became a sleep expert.

This is getting stranger and stranger.... but which Italian expert is now going to stick their neck out for simple science if the results of that science leads them to implicate Stefanoni and/or Mignini in wrongdoing?

As quippied on another site - it looks like this time it's still Italy 1, Galileo 0.

 

[Grinder]

I will copy and paste from a competent translation. Id copy and paste from the Italian but, well, you know how it is.

Heavens to Murgatroyd! You have made many posts here stating this and that about the SC ruling. I ask for cites and actual quotes and this is your reply?

Look upthread and you will a quote from an early newspaper account about the sex game angle. See how that works?

Instead of spreading stuff you can't back and using fake quotes why not go and find the quotes that back your contentions. I can't find them.

Or admit you were just making stuff up.

 

[Bill Williams]

Heavens to Murgatroyd! You have made many posts here stating this and that about the SC ruling. I ask for cites and actual quotes and this is your reply?

Apparently it is. You may wish to put me on your ignore list.

 

[JREF2010]

I've yet to read any report that the ISC says that Stefanoni was correct and that's that. They did say that contamination must be more than just alleged.

I guess the courtroom laughing out loud at the forensic video of the bra clasp scene, wasnt convincing of contamination?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

quick thoughts on contamination

The contention that contamination must be proved to exist is utter, usually self-serving nonsense, but it is what I have come to expect from law enforcement around the world.

 

[Grinder]

The contention that contamination must be proved to exist is utter, usually self-serving nonsense, but it is what I have come to expect from law enforcement around the world.

It would be reasonable for the SC to state that contamination must be possible. They could demand that some reasonable chance of contamination needs to be identified but it is ridiculous to demand that the specific contamination must be identified.

As I said earlier, the contamination combined with the sex game aspects make me wonder if the "motivations" came from Cipollo the magazine.

This will be very hard on the PGP and the Kerchers as the snip from the article on her consensual sex shows.

 

[RoseMontague]

I will copy and paste from a competent translation. Id copy and paste from the Italian but, well, you know how it is.

If somebody present heard it in court that way it would not surprise me. Burleigh relates an incident in court with Comodi using an example about police catching a hooker.

You can see some similarities in her recounting of this in the transcripts, but it is really not even close to the actual wording of the transcripts itself. Now which one do I believe? Maybe you should ask me if I think the transcripts are a perfect recounting of what happened in the court room?

 

[Dan O.]

Dan O's work shows that his prints just peter out so why would there be evidence of him returning. The prints stopped lighting up with luminol.

You are still not quite reflecting what I am saying. I do not believe that the prints had petered out at the last marker but that there would be at least 1 or 2 visible prints that could have been followed if an experienced investigator had been there.

The problem with the luminol is also incompetence.

This is an image at marker #2 in the hall where we have a visible shoe print and a luminol blob (maybe i'll adjust the rotations another day). The visible blood in the print is not even as bright as the rest of the blob. And this some claim is blood too diluted to be seen.

What's happening here is a couple of issues. The luminol is being applied way to thick. You can see it beading up and even changing the shape in successive images of the same print. This is an indication that the investigators had not allowed themselves to become dark adapted and we can see they even turned on the lights between shots. These factors limit their ability to see the finer prints as would be created on the return to the bedroom.

Since there wasn't a luminol survey of the floor, they only photographed what they saw so we can't say what was or wasn't there except in those few spots.

 

[Bill Williams]

I will copy and paste from a competent translation. Id copy and paste from the Italian but, well, you know how it is.

If somebody present heard it in court that way it would not surprise me. Burleigh relates an incident in court with Comodi using an example about police catching a hooker.

You can see some similarities in her recounting of this in the transcripts, but it is really not even close to the actual wording of the transcripts itself. Now which one do I believe? Maybe you should ask me if I think the transcripts are a perfect recounting of what happened in the court room?

It's tricky business.... written transcripts of oral testimony does not always capture the meaning well. The cadence of speech is not necessarily good written prose. I remember Aaron Sorkin talking about why he was successful in writing screenplays which are meant to be delivered orally. He called it, following the cadence of speech, whatever that is! But he's had enough success that he's worth listening to!

I remember first reading Knox's court testimony, then seeing/hearing it on that YouTube video that looks like it was taken in turn from a video monitor.. For what it's worth I got a completely different sense to it.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

4pm AK RS goodbye MK

4.30pm AK RS head to RS flat

8.18pm text from PL dont come in - AK angry

8.20pm finds/bumps into RG who lives near to RS. AK flirts and suggests he steals MK rent money in exchange for cocaine, gives him her key (and RS kitchen knife) and says meet at basketball court at 9.30pm to party

8.35pm AK returns to RS flat texts PL seeya!

8.45pm Popovic sees AK at RS flat

9.00pm RG arranges HK meet him near cottage to supply cocaine

9.15pm RG HK enter cottage with key make themselves at home - goes to steal money surprised to find MK there - she is angry - confrontation RG sexual assault ; HK's contribution is brief but deadly

9.30pm AK RS wait at basketball court for RG

9.45pm MK fatally wounded HK flees early with his weapon. RG left amongst devastation - flees

10.00pm AK RS at basketball court argue as to what has gone on and what to do

10.30 - 11.15pm breakdown truck near to cottage - sees and hears nothing

11.15pm AK RS visit cottage. AK screams when they see body and realise what her actions have led to. They stage scene to make it point to a male outsider.

Next morning AK RS stay around cottage to manage discovery and gauge reaction/evidence found

I believe the beginning times a bit late but this is totally possible, Amanda and Raff slightly involved but did not murder, where have I heard that before, no one here will like it though, but I do.