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

[RoseMontague]

Bill, I'm aware there were several Amanda/Meredith DNA mixed samples in the bathroom, but how many Amanda DNA samples were there not mixed, you would think there should have been quite a few.

3 mixed, 4 Meredith, 1 Knox, 2 negative. Ten reps, not counting the bathmat.

 

[Bill Williams]

No, that may be a fair answer, I just would have thought the defense would want to show that Amanda's DNA was all over the room, but I suppose they can't tell the police what to collect. However, wouldn't they collect many samples, maybe trying to get Raff's or Rudi's or Patrick's DNA even.

Which room? I think the point is that Meredith's room was the one most heavily examined, and there was no forensically interesting evidence of Amanda there. I think it is also fair to say that there is no evidence of Knox there at all, forensically interesting or not. This is the very reason some people still go on-and-on about a clean-up.... but heck, even Massei did not posit a clean-up in Meredith's room. It would be absurd to claim a clean-up that would be able to tell the difference between Rudy's and the other two's forensics. Do you agree with that?

Otherwise, what is at all suspicious of Knox's DNA presence in the very cottage she lived in? Heck, Massei himself dismissed the alleged semen stain below Meredith's hips on the pillow (!) on the grounds that semen is not time-stamped! How much of this do we have to listen to before suspecting that Massei is completely out to lunch - esp. for convicting the pair?

What I would really like to know, I've been reading over at PMF as well your aware and now I'm curious, what is it that the PIP's say is why Quintavalle's testimony is not reliable. I myself felt hos testimony was unreliable as well until I started reading up on it over there. He listed the cloths she was wearing when she was in his shop that morning, but those are the same cloths she left on her bed later that morning, how would he know that before the trial, I doubt anyone would have posted a picture even of them before the trial.

Once again, people seem adverse to putting anything on to a timeline. Please remember, the thing which brought Nixon down was the twin question, "What did the President know and when did he know it?"

Why is Quintavalle's testimony unreliable? Well it was completely reliable for the first year. He said he saw nothing. Then when apporached by a journalist, someone allegedly trying to coax memories from people Quintavalle suddenly becomes a key witness, along with a drug-dependent homeless person, in a murder case?

Even then, what did Quintavalle testify to? This mysterious female walks into the shop and doesn't buy anything. The whole sub-text of Knox being there to begin with was to add credence to the non-existent clean-up. She was there not to buy bleach. Further, other employees in the store that morning don't remember what Quintavalle, a year later after coaxing, remembered.

I mean it's not as if the prosecution's case stands or falls on this...... which, just in case you're not in a mood for irony today is meant sarcastically.

The PMF sites make great hay on parts of evidence. The simply statement is offered, "Quintavalle saw her, so she's a liar and guilty." However, spread it out on a timeline..... you get my drift.

I mean, what's not to trust about Quintavalle's testimony? And given that it is the PM with the power of charging someone with perjury or not, it's a tad a conflict of interest that the PM is in, is it not?

I mean, what's not fishy about this? And it's not as if this is not one of the two or three anchors of the prosecution's case - Curatolo and DNA being the others.

What's to trust about Quintavalle? I mean, put it the other way around for a second - indeed, is that not the burden put on to the prosecution? Show us why we should listen to this man?

 

[el buscador]

Bill, I'm aware there were several Amanda/Meredith DNA mixed samples in the bathroom, but how many Amanda DNA samples were there not mixed, you would think there should have been quite a few.

The forensic techs should have taken control samples from around the bathroom, isn't that procedure? Did they even take any samples other than the ones with Merdeith's blood?

 

[Grinder]

This young woman remained impressed in his memory because of her very light coloured eyes, azzurri [light blue]. She was wearing jeans, a gray coat, a scarf, a hat. (‚I say hat; I don’t remember if it was a headset/cap or something else, however she had a head cover

I don't see that as describing her clothes in a way that matches what she was wearing. Neither of us can say what the Italian tabs reported about her clothes and we don't know what the cub reporter knew or when he knew it. As leaky as the PLE were from the very first, it is totally believable that people knew her dress or what she said was her dress the morning she went to the cottage.

She didn't have a grey coat except she wore Raf's in the pictures outside the cottage after the murder.

Is there a picture of her clothes on the bed that can easily be linked? Was that picture available to reporters from the police?

I'm sure leaking must be proven not just very possible.

ETA - Oh yeah, he didn't see anything when asked immediately after the murder by a detective. Talked into coming out by the cub reporter.

 

[RoseMontague]

No, that may be a fair answer, I just would have thought the defense would want to show that Amanda's DNA was all over the room, but I suppose they can't tell the police what to collect. However, wouldn't they collect many samples, maybe trying to get Raff's or Rudi's or Patrick's DNA even.

What I would really like to know, I've been reading over at PMF as well your aware and now I'm curious, what is it that the PIP's say is why Quintavalle's testimony is not reliable. I myself felt hos testimony was unreliable as well until I started reading up on it over there. He listed the cloths she was wearing when she was in his shop that morning, but those are the same cloths she left on her bed later that morning, how would he know that before the trial, I doubt anyone would have posted a picture even of them before the trial.

Seriously? I guess that is why I call him Mr. Memory. It's almost as if he has been coached. He remembers this yet claims to not remember a TV interview he gave and remembers seeing Amanda and Raffaele together in his shop before they had even met. And he fails to remember when shown pictures by the police inspector. This is to me evidence that he is lying.

To this must be added as the same Quintavalle has reported seeing only the
Left profile of the girl's face,* ‬which was half covered by a cap and
by a scarf:
<< c'aveva a hat,* ‬hat I say,* ‬I do not remember if it was a
headset,* ‬or something else,* ‬however a headdress had it,* ‬jeans them to me
memory.* ‬Then this gray coat,* ‬a* ‬scarf,* ‬I'm in my memory is a
bluish color,* ‬something like that.* ‬A little bit* ‬abundant here in front
to the face* ‬...* >>‬ (hearing transcripts March* ‬21,* ‬2009,* ‬p.* ‬73*)‬.

 

[NancyS]

What I would really like to know, I've been reading over at PMF as well your aware and now I'm curious, what is it that the PIP's say is why Quintavalle's testimony is not reliable. I myself felt hos testimony was unreliable as well until I started reading up on it over there. He listed the cloths she was wearing when she was in his shop that morning, but those are the same cloths she left on her bed later that morning, how would he know that before the trial, I doubt anyone would have posted a picture even of them before the trial.

The only thing I can add to what people have said above is why would Amanda lie about this? If she had gone to the shops, why not just say I went to the shops - most people are aware that there is a possibility of CCTV or being remembered by shop keepers - what benefit was lying?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Which room? I think the point is that Meredith's room was the one most heavily examined, and there was no forensically interesting evidence of Amanda there. I think it is also fair to say that there is no evidence of Knox there at all, forensically interesting or not. This is the very reason some people still go on-and-on about a clean-up.... but heck, even Massei did not posit a clean-up in Meredith's room. It would be absurd to claim a clean-up that would be able to tell the difference between Rudy's and the other two's forensics. Do you agree with that?

While I believe there was a staged break in and clean up, the clean up was nothing more than possibly wipe down Meredith's door handle, Filomena's as well, maybe clean up a few dishes and such. Remember, I don't have them killing Meredith so most likely the mixed blood in the bathroom was just overlapping, I really doubt Amanda went into Meredith's room.

Otherwise, what is at all suspicious of Knox's DNA presence in the very cottage she lived in? Heck, Massei himself dismissed the alleged semen stain below Meredith's hips on the pillow (!) on the grounds that semen is not time-stamped! How much of this do we have to listen to before suspecting that Massei is completely out to lunch - esp. for convicting the pair?

I thought the 'alleged semen stain' was actually an 'alleged Vaseline stain'.

Once again, people seem adverse to putting anything on to a timeline. Please remember, the thing which brought Nixon down was the twin question, "What did the President know and when did he know it?"

Nixon, showing your true age are we. I tell you, if you live in Saskatoon, we have got to get together for a beer. I heard over at PMF, that you old and retires now, you family kicks you out of the house and now you sit in the garage all day with your computer. I just retired two weeks ago and although I don't plan on spending a ton of time on the internet, it's nice to know we can if we want.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

The only thing I can add to what people have said above is why would Amanda lie about this? If she had gone to the shops, why not just say I went to the shops - most people are aware that there is a possibility of CCTV or being remembered by shop keepers - what benefit was lying?

Because, it would be really bad for her to change her story again, she and Raff are now forever stuck in whatever lies they have told. If for some reason, she all of a sudden came out and changed her story to match what I believed happened, word for word, not even I would believe her, it would have to be worse than she is willing to omit.

 

[NancyS]

Because, it would be really bad for her to change her story again, she and Raff are now forever stuck in whatever lies they have told. If for some reason, she all of a sudden came out and changed her story to match what I believed happened, word for word, not even I would believe her, it would have to be worse than she is willing to omit.

Why lie about it ever - and again why not just blame Rudy?

 

[Bill Williams]

While I believe there was a staged break in and clean up, the clean up was nothing more than possibly wipe down Meredith's door handle, Filomena's as well, maybe clean up a few dishes and such. Remember, I don't have them killing Meredith so most likely the mixed blood in the bathroom was just overlapping, I really doubt Amanda went into Meredith's room.

Apologies for jumping in on this - there is no mixed blood. Massei is clear on that point... for Massei it is Meredith's blood mixed with Amanda's skin cells in the act of cleaning herself in the bathroom. I mean, this begs a huge question that takes us back to no forensics of Knox in the murder room, and her clothes are right on her own bed where she said she left them, but there is no mixed blood.

I thought the 'alleged semen stain' was actually an 'alleged Vaseline stain'.

Wouldn't that be what testing it is for, to determine what it is? Massei is quite clear - even if it is semen, semen is not time-stamped, and Massei finds as factual that Meredith was sexually active; and supposedly even if it was Rudy's semen there, on the very pillow used to prop up the hips of the victim, then Massei was not prepared to see that as incriminating against Rudy.

Nixon, showing your true age are we. I tell you, if you live in Saskatoon, we have got to get together for a beer. I heard over at PMF, that you old and retires now, you family kicks you out of the house and now you sit in the garage all day with your computer. I just retired two weeks ago and although I don't plan on spending a ton of time on the internet, it's nice to know we can if we want.

Ha! Well one out of 5 isn't bad I suppose! I am definitely old.

It never ceases to amaze me the imaginings of people. It's a bit of a morality tale about the way folks at PMF handle "evidence". They substitute unsubstantiated and wildly wrong guesses for facts. If they can say these wild things about me, imagine what they'll say about someone who is actually important!

 

[Bill Williams]

Nixon, showing your true age are we. I tell you, if you live in Saskatoon, we have got to get together for a beer. I heard over at PMF, that you old and retires now, you family kicks you out of the house and now you sit in the garage all day with your computer. I just retired two weeks ago and although I don't plan on spending a ton of time on the internet, it's nice to know we can if we want.

Ok, just call me slow. I now "get" why you queried me about using the word "Saskatchewan" in a post to you...... no, I had no idea you were in Saskabush. It's just one of those happenstances on which one can build a great conspiracy around. Nature abhours a vacuum. Apologies for freaking you out.

Also, given what PMF does, I'd be careful if I were you about disclosing personal details here. Machiavelli did that in a long post way, way up thread and I cautioned him, too, about doing that.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Seriously? I guess that is why I call him Mr. Memory. It's almost as if he has been coached. He remembers this yet claims to not remember a TV interview he gave and remembers seeing Amanda and Raffaele together in his shop before they had even met. And he fails to remember when shown pictures by the police inspector. This is to me evidence that he is lying.

My question is how could he have known what cloths she wore, he kind of hit it right on the money.

 

[Antony]

Because, it would be really bad for her to change her story again, she and Raff are now forever stuck in whatever lies they have told. If for some reason, she all of a sudden came out and changed her story to match what I believed happened, word for word, not even I would believe her, it would have to be worse than she is willing to omit.

The only people who changed their stories were the police and the prosecution witnesses.

 

[Briars]

Holy cow. You admit there is confusion. And this is the witness you are staking the case against Knox and Sollecito on?

I honestly don't think you vette what you say. First Machiavelli admits that Knox and Sollecito were suspects almost from the beginning, and now you admit there could have been confusion.

You do realize, don't you, that Curatolo only has legitimacy as a witness (drug-dependent or not) if there is no confusion as to Oct 31 and Nov 1?

And no fair consulting a calendar. They wouldn't let Raffaele have one, so why should you?

All those closest to a murder victim need to be ruled out as suspects , standard procedure. Alibi's need to check out . Curatolo was certain he saw them the night before the men in white coats arrived. I always assumed there were no buses, but the men in white memory trumped that in importance. Now I learn that there were some buses. Who's confused? Apparently if there were some buses not Curatolo.

 

[RoseMontague]

Seriously? I guess that is why I call him Mr. Memory. It's almost as if he has been coached. He remembers this yet claims to not remember a TV interview he gave and remembers seeing Amanda and Raffaele together in his shop before they had even met. And he fails to remember when shown pictures by the police inspector. This is to me evidence that he is lying.

My question is how could he have known what cloths she wore, he kind of hit it right on the money.

Hmmm.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Why lie about it ever - and again why not just blame Rudy?

They can't blame Rudi, by the time the police know about him, they are well entrenched in their stories. I also fully believe Amanda was extremely scared of Rudi, and at the time, she had no idea he had left town, she stayed as close to Raff as was humanly possible and she had seen what Rudi is capable of doing.

 

[Briars]

A small store shopkeeper with regular customers would notice a young girl so early in the morning. The importance of course would be innocently not known at the time but that doesn't mean he wouldn't remember seeing her.

 

[Grinder]

My question is how could he have known what cloths she wore, he kind of hit it right on the money.

I already explained that a year after many people could have seen the photo or been told what she claimed to have been wearing. He supposedly told his story to the cub reporter and the press definitely had access.

Why didn't he respond with this story when asked by the detective? The detective disagreed with what Q said he had been asked.

Q makes this sighting to have been extremely odd and took place less than twelve hours after the murder yet when asked if he saw anything to do with Raf he said no even though he later claimed to have seen her with Raf in the preceding days.

Since you have expressed such interest in what the court cares about (Rudi's shoe prints) why do you think the SC focused on the blue eyes which had been reported?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Hmmm.

Sorry, but next time maybe take the maybe out. Too many crooked, incompetent and lying people in Italy for me. I'm going to Italy one day to find out for myself, I'll most surely go to Perugia, I'll take lots of pictures like SomeAlibi did.

 

[NancyS]

They can't blame Rudi, by the time the police know about him, they are well entrenched in their stories. I also fully believe Amanda was extremely scared of Rudi, and at the time, she had no idea he had left town, she stayed as close to Raff as was humanly possible and she had seen what Rudi is capable of doing.

Read back through the last few pages as we went into quite a lot of depth regarding why this doesn't make sense. If involved they wouldn't have known there was no evidence of themselves at the murder scene - and all advice from family/lawyers would have been to blame Rudy and claim that you were too scared to do this earlier. It's the most likely thing they would have done if guilty - it makes no sense to keep on protecting him against their own best interests.

Or are you saying that they are innocent witnesses who are too terrified by Rudy to say anything? Curiouser and curiouser!