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

[anglolawyer]

Speaking of Guede, now that the "sex game" is back in play, was he taking a dump during the time others were playing the game or was the dump part of the game? The PGP need to come up with a unified theory on this.

Now that Mach has certified that TOD is after 10.30 we have to factor in not only the dump but also what A & R were doing in the Piazza before murdering anybody. Mach has offered his fish dinner theory to explain how the knife got to the apartment (briefly, the leak at Raf's place forced a change of venue for the evening repast but Raf needed his favourite boning knife in order to create so they headed over to her place followed by the town cats). Now, if Mach doesn't mind I will bring in a brilliant forensic point of Stilicho's here. He points out the remarkable thing about the 1.45 and 5.45 confessions is how close they are to the truth of what actually happened. Adding that observation to Rudy's own timeline and to what we already know to be true, we seem to have this:

Amanda and Raffaele headed straight over to the apartment as soon as she put the phone down from texting her boss. They met Rudy on the way and let him in. All four people were there from about 9.00 p.m. onwards. Nothing bad happened, except maybe Rudy didn't flush. Meredith happily fiddled with her phones. Then, at 9.27-9.28 p.m. Amanda and Raffaele go out and stand in the square for two hours on a cold night, not cooking fish. I expect Amanda was upset after an argument with Meredith over money and needed to cool off. Then they went back at 11.30 and carried out the murder for some piffling reason that need not detain us. Rudy had long since left after getting frisky with Meredith OR he was there all along listening to music on his iPod - take your pick.

I know it's too soon to offer this conclusive timeline but I thought it would help guide the discussion to have a stab at a PGP narrative that makes sense.

Btw. I like Mach's statement of the value of Toto's evidence: it really doesn't matter what time he says they were in the square, the main thing is he proves they weren't at Raf's. Toto is thus 100% reliable on identification and dates but not so good at times.

 

[Bill Williams]

Btw. I like Mach's statement of the value of Toto's evidence: it really doesn't matter what time he says they were in the square, the main thing is he proves they weren't at Raf's. Toto is thus 100% reliable on identification and dates but not so good at times.

Anglo.... however, didn't the ISC just conclude that it doesn't matter that Curatolo was date with dates.... He saw them either Oct 31 or Nov 1, but since it couldn't have been the 31st, it must have been by deduction declared as Nov 1st? Pat no attention to the party buses!

 

[anglolawyer]

Anglo.... however, didn't the ISC just conclude that it doesn't matter that Curatolo was date with dates.... He saw them either Oct 31 or Nov 1, but since it couldn't have been the 31st, it must have been by deduction declared as Nov 1st? Pat no attention to the party buses!

Well, that's a copy and paste from Galati. Surprised it took 90 days to do that. They must have blown the IT budget on the cartoon.

 

[Bill Williams]

Anglo.... however, didn't the ISC just conclude that it doesn't matter that Curatolo was date with dates.... He saw them either Oct 31 or Nov 1, but since it couldn't have been the 31st, it must have been by deduction declared as Nov 1st? Pat no attention to the party buses!

Well, that's a copy and paste from Galati. Surprised it took 90 days to do that. They must have blown the IT budget on the cartoon.

So let me get this straight.... Curatolo said he saw them on Oct 31 complete with party buses, but at trial they need him to say he saw them on Nov 1st.

And to add to this, Raffaele says that Amanda went out either Oct 31 or Nov 1, "But let me check a calendar because I may have my dates wrong," and they threaten to beat Raffaele to a pulp.

Would it be fair to say that the PLE were in a hurry to have Amanda and Raffaele out and about on Nov 1st, when just about everyone in the known universe who seems to have something to say on the subject starts out saying it was Oct 31?

Or am I showing my confirmation bias?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Ah, er, you're kidding, right?

The obvious reason is that he gets a reduced sentence if Knox and Sollecito are charged with staging it rather than him doing it. But I'm sure he will do his full 30 years.....

Yes, sorry, I was. He didn't get 30 though, it got lowered to 24 after A&R were found guilty, then lowered by 1/3 due to the fast track trial he choose, so he only ended up with 16 years, with good behaviour, he'll be out in a couple of years. Now everyone I know, PIP, PGP and guys in between like me, can all agree that this is sick, so if you thought he got 30, you are going to be really disappointed in this.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

And what do you do if there is somebody inside? This is another one of those facts that you refuse to confront.

I'm not worried about that, because Rudi didn't break any window, he used the door Amanda opened for him.

And speaking of confronting the facts, last time you were here, one of the facts you were having difficulty with was that the luminol was reacting less to the visible blood from the shoe print than it was to the invisible substance creation the presumed bare footprints. Have you tried yet to confront that one?

Number one, why would I care how the luminol reacted with anything, the bare footprints the luninol did react to was diluted blood, almost everyone knows that, I suppose your one of the ones that think it was turnip juice.

 

[RandyN]

Snip crap


They didn't use the MO of Rudy (if you mean his modus operandi as an alleged burglar). That one was actually from a balcony. They didn't use the same MO of Rudy also if you mean their movements on the scene: there are obviously two different modus operandi by different murderers in in th apartment. This is a standing out feature of that crime scene.



I think Knox and Guede were already there when Meredith arrived home. Knox possibly went away for an interval of a few minutes then came back, Sollecito came afterwards.



The killing is between 22.30 and 23:30.

I think yes but impossible to know with certainty.

Actually from a second story balcony...oddly piled glass, UN-flushed toilet, open drink robbed from frig...sounds like the same MO to me and the rest of the sane world.


If the killing is between 22:30 and 23:30 then Toto proves it was impossible for RS or AK to involved. How can you disagree? No matter he has the dates wrong...that night he saw them both in the plaza from 9 til 12 midnight...so who do you think might have done the killing? Duh.


So MK was using her phone from 9 to 10:30...funny she forgot to retry her call to her ill mother. It is you and the SC who sound illogical and biased and corrupt.

Tell us all again why you and the SC feel it is legal to use Guedes trial and results in an another case where those defendants didn't get the chance to participate in Guedes trial. They could not cross exam his lies and for that matter what is this "proof" of multiple attackers? What are the points of evidence again? 40 wounds? Ridiculous...Jodi Arias caused hundreds of wounds by herself on a much larger man. Italians must be the most illogical people on earth.

But please...lay out the proof the Guede had accomplices. You know the finger prints, shoe prints, DNA (and please dont insult us with the two impossible LTN, LCN samples no one in Stefanonis lab was qualified to test...stick to regular DNA samples...

BTW if as you claim there was a 125 picogram sample that C and V did not test then please explain why all the prosecution witnesses attending this testing failed to request this test when asked if they should continue? Anything?

Finally what did the SC say about the prosecution and Kercher slime ball lawyer objection to the Independent Experts request to open the handle of "the Knife"? Why would they object to that? And then later cry that they now want more exam? Illogical and stupid...

Just like the police failing to test the semen stain on the pillow under the body of the murder victim. DO you call this logical good police and scientific work? I call it foolish and amateur and possibly even corrupt. But I suppose you fail to see the logic of that right? You are all operating with the morals of the mafia...you legal system is corrupt and foolish.

That is why the ECOHR charges Italy with the most human rights violations by its own courts. Get out of the dark ages. Stop trying to make this foolish case into something logical and fair...you are fooling no one.

 

[RandyN]

I'm not worried about that, because Rudi didn't break any window, he used the door Amanda opened for him.

Number one, why would I care how the luminol reacted with anything, the bare footprints the luninol did react to was diluted blood, almost everyone knows that, I suppose your one of the ones that think it was turnip juice.

Actually it Filomena who opened the door for Rudy and for Lumumba.

 

[RandyN]

I'm not worried about that, because Rudi didn't break any window, he used the door Amanda opened for him.



Number one, why would I care how the luminol reacted with anything, the bare footprints the luninol did react to was diluted blood, almost everyone knows that, I suppose your one of the ones that think it was turnip juice.

Thats funny that it tested negative for blood then huh? I suppose you are one of the ones who think the blood test was wrong. BTW they were also negative for DNA...how do you explain that?

Turnip juice was an idiotic statement made by Comodi. It could be any of a hundred different substances including rust from an old sub-par Italian shower.

But please expand on what the luminol traces prove in this case. Try to be specific.

 

[Bill Williams]

Now that you mention it RandyN, just because SH says that Knox opened the front door does not make it so. Simple declaration is not proof.

Like you say, there is just as much proof really that Filomena let Rudy in. Fortunately Filomena has an alibi, she was staying with her boyfriend.

Wait a minute. Wasn't that Knox's alibi? Now I see how this works.

 

[Antony]

I'm not worried about that, because Rudi didn't break any window, he used the door Amanda opened for him.



Number one, why would I care how the luminol reacted with anything, the bare footprints the luninol did react to was diluted blood, almost everyone knows that, I suppose your one of the ones that think it was turnip juice.

Sherlock, you are making statements of fact that have no evidence to support them. They originate from a PGP picture of the crime, built from the starting assumption that Amanda and Raff committed the murder - a belief that you don't even share.

 

[Dan O.]

I'm not worried about that, because Rudi didn't break any window, he used the door Amanda opened for him.



Number one, why would I care how the luminol reacted with anything, the bare footprints the luninol did react to was diluted blood, almost everyone knows that, I suppose your one of the ones that think it was turnip juice.

That is such a stupid reply I'm really surprised that your keyboard didn't revolt when you typed it.

For those that just tuned in, Sherlock is claiming that luminol will produce a brighter reaction for blood that is too diluted to show up visually than it produces for blood that is easily visible. It's lucky that ILE over applied the luminol. The could have been blinded if they accidentally used a 10C solution.


Again, here it the photo that Sherlock cannot see due to his visual impairment.

In this photo, you can see the dim arcs where the visible blood from Rudy's left shoe stepped and the brighter splotch that the prosecution is trying to claim is a bare footprint in blood that is too diluted to see.

 

[Methos]

Which note was this?

Looks like the first memoriale to me. That's the one with the "illegible section".

 

[Oliebol]

Again, here it the photo that Sherlock cannot see due to his visual impairment.
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=597&pictureid=7865[/qimg]

In this photo, you can see the dim arcs where the visible blood from Rudy's left shoe stepped and the brighter splotch that the prosecution is trying to claim is a bare footprint in blood that is too diluted to see.

Seems like Amanda's bloody footprints were made when she stepped on Rudy's bloody shoeprints.

 

[Wildhorses]

Seems like Amanda's bloody footprints were made when she stepped on Rudy's bloody shoeprints.

There's no such thing as Amanda's bloody footprints.

None of the bare footprints tested positive for blood or for Meredith's DNA.

 

[Machiavelli]

[/HILITE]

Actually from a second story balcony...oddly piled glass, UN-flushed toilet, open drink robbed from frig...sounds like the same MO to me and the rest of the sane world.

The only true element was the drink taken from fridge. There is nothing like oddly pled glass etc.
All break ins actually look the same; the balcony was the same as the cottage balcony. The most easily reachable. All from balconies.

If the killing is between 22:30 and 23:30 then Toto proves it was impossible for RS or AK to involved. How can you disagree?

I consider this pure BS.
If they lie obstructing the search for truth on a murder, this is circumstantial evidence they are implicated in the murder. No way this could be an alibi.

So MK was using her phone from 9 to 10:30...funny she forgot to retry her call to her ill mother. It is you and the SC who sound illogical and biased and corrupt.

No, you are not funny.
And why do you say "forgot"? I never said that.

Tell us all again why you and the SC feel it is legal to use Guedes trial and results in an another case where those defendants didn't get the chance to participate in Guedes trial.

No, I prefer to tell things only once. Maybe you can read the summary of the SC ruling.
Btw, the defendants did take part to the Guede trial.

They could not cross exam his lies and for that matter what is this "proof" of multiple attackers?

They could cross exam witnesses, and they also brought in their own evidence (the broken glass allegedly stuck in Guede's shoe...).

What are the points of evidence again? 40 wounds? Ridiculous...Jodi Arias caused hundreds of wounds by herself on a much larger man. Italians must be the most illogical people on earth.

You are being just superficial and insulting. The autopsy shows a bit more than just the number of wounds.

BTW if as you claim there was a 125 picogram sample that C and V did not test then please explain why all the prosecution witnesses attending this testing failed to request this test when asked if they should continue? Anything?

I already explaionied this in a post responding to you on this forum. Go back and read it, before repeating false claims again.

Finally what did the SC say about the prosecution and Kercher slime ball lawyer objection to the Independent Experts request to open the handle of "the Knife"? Why would they object to that? And then later cry that they now want more exam? Illogical and stupid...

I already explained that in the sam post. Go back and read it.

Just like the police failing to test the semen stain on the pillow under the body of the murder victim. DO you call this logical good police and scientific work?

Yes, I do.
Btw, this allowed pfor. Vinci to re-assess the pillowcase evidence himself.

Anyway the main reason why the semen stain was not tested in the subsequent trial, is that Gude chose a fast-track trial. The fast track trial cuts out part of the evidence set. It's the law. Probably to complicate for you to understand.
But you may instead question why the Sollecito defense team didn't request to test the semen stain during the 2007 examination, and didn't request it until 2009.

I call it foolish and amateur and possibly even corrupt.

But I suppose you fail to see the logic of that right? You are all operating with the morals of the mafia...you legal system is corrupt and foolish.

You call whatever you want but you sound like a superficial, childish bully.
It's like when you wre talking about sea disasters, mocking "the Italians" because of the captain wrecking a liner. The US and BP destroyed half of the Mexico gulf sea by recklessly drilling holes they could not close; you can build thousands of liners, but we only have one planet. You had governments telling the world Iraq had mass destruction weapons, 60% of Americans believe 9-11 was an attack by Saddam Hussein.
Yet you mock "the Italians", you brag about your moral superiority with that bullying, self-qualifying, xenophobic presumption; the fat that you seem still unaware of you prejudice seems to me an indication for medical treatment. Your pomposity is grotesque.

Btw you also quote self-serving picked out pieces of data from ECHR reports, avoiding to detail data that contradicts your rants; all this is more of a childish game.

 

[MDDVS]

The italian judicial system is in dire need of reform. It is innificient and corrupt. Corruption is to be expected when there isn't a true system of checks and balances.

 

[Bill Williams]

No, I prefer to tell things only once. Maybe you can read the summary of the SC ruling.
Btw, the defendants did take part to the Guede trial.

I already explaionied this in a post responding to you on this forum. Go back and read it, before repeating false claims again.

I already explained that in the sam post. Go back and read it.

Here's a tip for you Machiavelli.

It is in your interest to re-explain things. Here's why.

Because of the success of Amanda Knox's book in North America (NY Times bestsellers list, etc.) there is a renewed interest in this wrongful conviction/prosecution.

But please, let's not get bogged down in what each call it.

The point is that many people are newly checking the internet for further information on this case.

By you not commenting each time you are asked to explain, you are depriving these new people understanding the nuttier aspects of why Italian justice (through one wrongful prosecution, not the whole system per se).

For you just to say, "I've already answered this," does not give them information. Not many people scroll back or have the need to scroll back. They will make assessments of your sincerity based on what reads like arrogance.

For instance, you should be periodically repeating your belief in a Masonic conspiracy behind this whole thing, how the Masons are secretly supporting Amanda and Raffaele and actually paying off judges. You claim to know the actual amount Judge Hellmann was paid to acquit Sollecito and Knox. You should be repeating this, even if not asked, so that a new generation of inquirers can read for themselves the nuttier aspects of the wrongful prosecution.

While you are at it, you may wish to also periodically repeat your claim to being "almost an expert" on sleep and sleep deprivation issues, so that you can (so you claim) make expert-like comments on Knox's ability to withstand the exhaustions and stresses of police interrogation.

To me this sounds a lot like Mr. Mignini telling Knox (his own words) that he can act, "as if only a notary", instead of his role as Public Minister to trap Knox at interrogation.

Please take my advice. It just doesn't communicate anything to say, "I already told you." You use letters and your own theatre background to make clinical assessments of someone else's sleep patterns; and you don't take into account that they've just had a friend murdered. You should be repeating that, because people will not scroll back... (if they do, they'll find the REALLY nutty stuff!)

You see, it's not RandyN you are arguing with here... it is the 100s of people who read your comments without commenting, you just look at your posts and think to themselves, "he's a nut," and then go back to Knox's book.

Be a good chap and at least use this medium the way it is intended.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the footprints come up short in two respects

There's no such thing as Amanda's bloody footprints.

None of the bare footprints tested positive for blood or for Meredith's DNA.

Agreed, the negative TMB test, the lack of DNA, and the lack of a confirmatory test for blood should legitimately be stumbling blocks for the prosecution. On top of the that is the fact that the luminol was overapplied (leading to dilation of the image), and very few reference footprints were taken. The footprints should not be ascribed to anyone in particular.

 

[RoseMontague]

For beginners, let's see some picture taken on Nov 1st, when the leaves are likely off the trees. Secondly, you see someone climbing up into Filomena's window, it's a burglary, you see someone climbing up to the balcony, no big deal really, once up there and it is way easier, you break the kitchen window, when there are no cars, the apartments across the street can not see that window, you climb in when no cars are coming again but on the other side, once you start climbing, you are exposed and there is no turning back.

You should see the pics taken by SomeAlibi at this time of the year. They are posted at pmf. The leaves are not off the trees including the tree that obscures Filomena's window. The balcony is clearly visible from apartments and parking lot.