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

[RWVBWL]

The delivery truck at StarBucks is gone.
It's quiet, except for the odd car travelling down the street...


And still I can not hear a human sound from the hundreds of people living on this street.
Weird.

Go ask your neighbor 5 houses away if they can hear you scream.
Tell 'em to close all windows and doors, and you too do the same before you scream at the top of your lungs.


Briars,
I'm sorry, but I just doubt the story of a woman hearing a scream,
coming from a residence from hundreds of feet away,
with all of the doors+windows closed...

 

[anglolawyer]

Reconstructing what happened at a crime scene requires a trained eye, but anyone can evaluate whether the resulting narrative makes sense and fits the physical evidence. Briars thinks the fingertip bruises on Meredith's jaw were made by someone in a frontal position. To test that, hold your hand out as though you're about to grab the face of someone in front of you, and notice how your fingers are positioned.

It's also worth noting this, from the pathology report:

Escoriazioni attorno alle narici ed ecchimosi alle labbra. Si tratta degli effetti contusivi di azione volta ad occludere gli orifizi del volto (volta a soffocare o, più probabilmente, vista la loro tenuità, ad impedire l’emissione di suoni).

Mancano del tutto segni di urto o di compressione del volto contro il suolo.

Google translation:

Bruises around nostrils and bruising of the lips. It is blunt the effects of action to occlude the orifices of the face (time to choke or, more likely, given their tenuous, to prevent the emission of sounds).

Completely lacking signs of impact or compression of the face against the ground.

In other words, bruising on the face and jaw from a tight grip rather than a blow or impact.

Imagine grabbing someone's face from a frontal position, tightly enough to leave that kind of bruising, with your hand positioned so the fingers are on the underside of the victim's jaw. How believable is that?

Then position your left hand as though you're reaching around to grip the face and cover the mouth and nose of someone who is facing away from you. Notice the position of your fingers. Then look at the photo on Frank's blog.

Common sense goes a long way in this area.

I agree Charlie. I agree with Bill too. We are all eligible to be jurors and to make findings of fact but we need expert evidence on points which are not the province of everyday knowledge and experience, like mortal combat. What gets my goat is Briars going on about multiple attackers without the slightest sign that she has paid heed to the experts or that she possesses any expertise of her own. The most dangerous people are those who don't know what they don't know.

One of the things we hear a lot is about the supposed lack of defensive injuries in this case. I have posted here at least once, possibly more than once, a quote from a forensic text saying it is a common misconception that such injuries should be found. One of the cases in which they may not be is where the victim is taken by surprise. Personally, as an online juror, this is what I think happened here. No preliminaries.

 

[codyjuneau]

The day they last see Meredith the day before they are at the scene of her murder. A pretty memorable day for a new couple. Didn't Sollecito need a calender and was upset he couldn't look at one. Was he at a party like he told Kate, did her make love, or had the novelty worn off. Did Amanda eat dinner before leaving for work or was it hours later conflicting with Mr Sollecito's call as she claimed. Sollecito even said she may have gone out. Big difference to not checking the clock by Nara.

.
I guess it all depends on how you look at things. If my room mate was brutally murdered, the last thing I would be thinking about is what "I" did the previous evening.
.

 

[Antony]

Yes well the slaps were imagined Donnino said so. I don't imagine her to be a liar.

Your imagination is not evidence. As others have pointed out, she and the other cops made their statements in the knowledge that the video recording of the interrogation would never see the light of day. They have impunity to commit perjury in Italy so there is no weight to be attached to anything they claim.

Amanda statements on the other hand, were made with the possibility that they could be falsified at any time by the police video. The fact that even now it's possible that her account could be verified against material held by the police, is an overwhelming indication that it is true.

Why do you think Kokomani might be near the cottage and why implicate the defendants then leave Perugia?

Err ... to protect his own skin?

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

I agree Charlie. I agree with Bill too. We are all eligible to be jurors and to make findings of fact but we need expert evidence on points which are not the province of everyday knowledge and experience, like mortal combat. What gets my goat is Briars going on about multiple attackers without the slightest sign that she has paid heed to the experts or that she possesses any expertise of her own. The most dangerous people are those who don't know what they don't know.

One of the things we hear a lot is about the supposed lack of defensive injuries in this case. I have posted here at least once, possibly more than once, a quote from a forensic text saying it is a common misconception that such injuries should be found. One of the cases in which they may not be is where the victim is taken by surprise. Personally, as an online juror, this is what I think happened here. No preliminaries.

I agree, it happened very fast. But I think the mode of attack is the most significant factor. I've looked at quite a few autopsy photos over the years. Extensive cuts on the hands are typical in cases where someone is stabbed repeatedly in a frontal attack, usually by someone who is on top of them. Stabbing victims subject their hands to that kind of trauma because they have no other defensive option. Meredith would have been in a position where she could try to deflect his arm instead of deflecting the point of the knife.

 

[anglolawyer]

Double standard alert! Yet Knox and Sollecito at interrogation are expected to remember precise details of a night 4 days' previous.

Just thought I'd point this out.

They are expected to remember whether a door was open, closed or ajar. Gotcha! What precise time did she call her mother and why and what did she say and what did Mum say among a flurry of other calls and events which were not contemporaneously recorded in a notebook (standard issue for police officers - wonder why).

The PGPs are all about double standards and are in good company. Recall the risble 'grave indications of guilt' which enabled Matteini to lock them up for a year. They included Amanda's and Patrick's inability to recall his (unlawfully deleted) text message word for word a week later and Patrick's inability to recall what time he opened and why there were no receipts before 10.30 p.m. Clear proof of murder - except they weren't, just examples of the biased way in which even supposedly trained judges have looked at this case. I bet Matteini remembered her stupidity when criticising Amanda for not showing 'remorse' at a subsequent hearing. Nothing is so painful as making a public fool of yourself.

 

[Antony]

If Amanda were guilty of this crime, there is no way she would willfully go back to Italy,

If she was guilty, she would have got as far away as possible at the earliest opportunity - as did both Guede and Kokomani. The fact that she and Raffaele stayed in Perugia from 2-5 November and cooperated with police, is one of the strongest indications that they had nothing to do with it. This was while Filomena was getting a lawyer and Meredith's English friends were flying home.

however, if she is innocent, she may go back or may not, therefore, if she does go back willfully, she is innocent.

Has the Supreme Court ruling completely passed over your head?

Ok, we were drinking a few as well, but this did seem logical, no?

It's "logical" if you assume that the judicial process is fair. That's an assumption that cannot be supported.

 

[anglolawyer]

.
I guess it all depends on how you look at things. If my room mate was brutally murdered, the last thing I would be thinking about is what "I" did the previous evening.
.

Quite, and I think the cops deliberately stayed well clear of that subject through the many hours spent at the questura until the night of the 5th-6th. Bear in mind they couldn't go there without seeming to think she was a suspect.

Read Amanda's book (Grinder) and recall that Amanda was asked at trial by Mignini why she never mentioned Patrick before that night. I would give a lot to be certain but I am reasonably sure the cops had Patrick in their sites before the interrogations. The exchange of texts stands out prominently in her phone record and the cops had the means to tie that number to Lumumba ('the phone records were crucial' De Felice boasted). They saw him the morning of the 5th talking to her, they saw he called her the night of the 2nd when she was at the questura, they questioned others about her (e.g. John Kercher - take note Grinder, it's in his book) and will have gathered intelligence, they knew how to find him without his home address, she told them what they knew to be true etc

 

[Mary_H]

Think about this for a minute, up at the lake yesterday, late at night I brought up this case with a few friends around a campfire. While they didn't know enough about this case to give any fair opinions on it, we did come to one conclusion. If Amanda were guilty of this crime, there is no way she would willfully go back to Italy, however, if she is innocent, she may go back or may not, therefore, if she does go back willfully, she is innocent. Ok, we were drinking a few as well, but this did seem logical, no?

No, Sherlock, it is not logical at all. If Amanda is innocent, then she already knows what they do to innocent people in Italy, and that is something she will be determined to avoid.

A lot of the PGP think Amanda is cagey and wily -- that she only pretended to find everything in disarray at the cottage in order to look innocent. They see her as a psychopath whose meticulous planning put her one step ahead of the cops (and her supporters) at all times. If she were that kind of person -- and guilty -- then surely she would want to go back to Italy to see if she could fool everyone again.

 

[Mary_H]

Quite, and I think the cops deliberately stayed well clear of that subject through the many hours spent at the questura until the night of the 5th-6th. Bear in mind they couldn't go there without seeming to think she was a suspect.

Read Amanda's book (Grinder) and recall that Amanda was asked at trial by Mignini why she never mentioned Patrick before that night. I would give a lot to be certain but I am reasonably sure the cops had Patrick in their sites before the interrogations. The exchange of texts stands out prominently in her phone record and the cops had the means to tie that number to Lumumba ('the phone records were crucial' De Felice boasted). They saw him the morning of the 5th talking to her, they saw he called her the night of the 2nd when she was at the questura, they questioned others about her (e.g. John Kercher - take note Grinder, it's in his book) and will have gathered intelligence, they knew how to find him without his home address, she told them what they knew to be true etc

They had to have had Patrick in their sights. They were looking for a man, and they knew perfectly well who he was and what his connection was to Amanda and Meredith. Plus, they are way prejudiced against foreigners.

The minute they got Amanda to accuse him they ran right out and picked him up -- they were ready to go; they just needed her eyewitness testimony. That she incriminated herself, too, was possibly an unexpected bonus.

 

[Briars]

I'm not following you. Perhaps you could use one of the servants at your Italian villa as a model, so you can recreate this face-hold and post a photo.

Why not try putting paint on your fingertips and reach around your own face with your left hand to cover your mouth. I think you'll find the prints reach up in a u shape towards your jaw not turning down like an n as a frontal attack.

 

[Katody Matrass]

I think I'm already getting bruises from constant facepalming reading this. No paint needed.

 

[Grinder]

Why not try putting paint on your fingertips and reach around your own face with your left hand to cover your mouth. I think you'll find the prints reach up in a u shape towards your jaw not turning down like an n as a frontal attack.

As I commented before and Bill and Anglo agreed, doing your own forensic analysis of this seems a stretch. As best as I can tell from your description the marks would be similar front or back.

Perhaps if you wrote your own book, a true crime novel, you might be quoted in this very thread

Naturally I'd like you to deal with more mundane things that we here all have actual life experience in, such as the likelihood of noticing the time when getting up to pee, hearing the most terrifying scream, peeing, going to a window hearing but not seeing the cause of footsteps, going to the kitchen, putting water on to boil, waiting for it to boil and then drinking the tea to calm down.

Or why you think a person that admits coaxing admissions out of a person she was supposed just to be translating and using personal stories of repressed memories that worked for the police would lie about illegal treatment of the suspect?

Or why a couple hanging out with no knowledge of a crime being committed would note events to the minute and might after the shock of having a murder in their circle be a bit confused about details. Using second hand translated accounts like Mansey isn't really providing facts. Yes, under the interrogation Raf seems to have been led to say that Amanda could have left, at least we are told that without ever seeing the transcript or recording of those statements. Do you actually think that Raf was trying to say he was at a party when he knew that couldn't be verified?

If they killed Meredith or even were "involved" ask yourself why they didn't put together a simple alibi story and stick with it? As Nancy has pointed out the story would have included as much truth as possible. If they actually spent some time in the piazza they would have said so as well as when they really woke and listened to music and even the stop at the store. They were into the cover-up enough to stage a burglary, clean-up their traces, have a shower story, etc. yet they didn't have a simple time line alibi?

 

[Grinder]

I think I'm already getting bruises from constant facepalming reading this. No paint needed.

U shaped or N shaped?

 

[Bill Williams]

Charlie Wilkes]I'm not following you. Perhaps you could use one of the servants at your Italian villa as a model, so you can recreate this face-hold and post a photo.

Why not try putting paint on your fingertips and reach around your own face with your left hand to cover your mouth. I think you'll find the prints reach up in a u shape towards your jaw not turning down like an n as a frontal attack.

One actually doesn't need paint on one's fingertips. There's a natural "paint" of sorts, called DNA.

When a victim is tightly grasped and being restrained, there is transfer DNA.....

Oooooooops..... none from Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito. Not one iota of transfer DNA. Then again, there's a full set of forensics pointing to one man.

Briars - consistency is a harsh task master.

Oh yes, getting back to memory, because it's come 'round the merry-go-round so many times in the past 6 years.

Amanda and Raffaele are expected to have a perfect memory of stuff happened on a perfectly ordinary night for them. As pointed out upthread, the events of the next morning eclipse those memories. As expected of innocent people, the memories of the preceding 18 hours get overshadowed by the horror of Meredith's dreadful murder.

Consistency alert: the oft-claim is that Knox is selfish. Yet quite naturally she pays no mind to when she had dinner in relation to when the pipe had burst. That, at interrogation, is used against her - but please remember, the whole point of interrogation is not to reconstruct events. It is to get them to confess.

The two students' memory is imperfect.

Yet (Double-standard alert) Nara and Quintavalle don't remember a thing in the weeks after the murder. A year later, Nara herself is collected as a superwitness against Knox and Sollecito. And what does she remember? Well, the scream could have been Oct 31, it could have been Nov 1, she does not remember.

And for that laser-like accuracy of memory, you conclude Knox and Sollecito are guilty! That's how it works in double-standard-land.

To repeat - the blood-curdling scream made such an impression, Nara did "what"? Nothing. She didn't even look at a clock much less call the carabineiri... I mean, that sounds like what you might do on Hallowe'en to me! Acc. to you, she can be forgiven not looking at a clock and establishing the time (nor looking at a calendar to establish the date). I mean, that would be unnatural.

What the heck does the PLE have against calendars? They denied Raffaele one! Aren't they trying to solve this case? Or are they trying to obscure it as much as possible? You decide.

Sorry for the topic drift. But then again it isn't topic drift is it. The topic is to paint one's fingertips to try to vilify two innocents.... which actually WAS done.... the "paint your fingertips" thing, I mean..... it's called transfer-DNA.

O look, squirrel. In your case the squirrel is Italian landscape photos. Take a look at this photo, because it proves beyond doubt that Sollecito and Knox are guilty. I mean, just look at it.

 

[Bill Williams]

I think I'm already getting bruises from constant facepalming reading this. No paint needed.

I'll be right over with Amanda's lamp so that I can distinguish your DNA from someone else's. Are you sure it is you face-palming yourself!?

 

[Grinder]

Hey Anglo, thought you might enjoy this report from StewartHome2000 from the first trial.

Patrick was finally asked about his arrest. He stated that he was feeding his child at about 5-6am and there was a knock on the door indicating that they were the police. He opened and a sea of policemen entered (10 or so), telling him he was under arrest. He asked if he could get a sweater, they refused and took him away. He said that he had no idea what he was being arrested for; I guess Miranda rights are not something used or respected here. He said he was not hit, but he described it as a “situazione dura”, a very difficult situation, as he was placed in solitary for three days and was not allowed to shower or even speak with an attorney. Although not hit, he said he was stripped searched and required to stand against the wall naked for a good length of time.
He claimed financial hardship, as his bar was closed and he still had to pay his employees taxes and rent etc. Ghirga askjed if he paid the taxes on what he paid Amanda (obviously under the table) and he just looked at him like, gimme a break.

 

[GreyFox]

Think about this for a minute, up at the lake yesterday, late at night I brought up this case with a few friends around a campfire. While they didn't know enough about this case to give any fair opinions on it, we did come to one conclusion. If Amanda were guilty of this crime, there is no way she would willfully go back to Italy, however, if she is innocent, she may go back or may not, therefore, if she does go back willfully, she is innocent. Ok, we were drinking a few as well, but this did seem logical, no?

I had a campfire and told a story to some freinds and they believed my version of things too.Proves .........nothing !

 

[anglolawyer]

Hey Anglo, thought you might enjoy this report from StewartHome2000 from the first trial.

Patrick was finally asked about his arrest. He stated that he was feeding his child at about 5-6am and there was a knock on the door indicating that they were the police. He opened and a sea of policemen entered (10 or so), telling him he was under arrest. He asked if he could get a sweater, they refused and took him away. He said that he had no idea what he was being arrested for; I guess Miranda rights are not something used or respected here. He said he was not hit, but he described it as a “situazione dura”, a very difficult situation, as he was placed in solitary for three days and was not allowed to shower or even speak with an attorney. Although not hit, he said he was stripped searched and required to stand against the wall naked for a good length of time.
He claimed financial hardship, as his bar was closed and he still had to pay his employees taxes and rent etc. Ghirga askjed if he paid the taxes on what he paid Amanda (obviously under the table) and he just looked at him like, gimme a break.

Which point are you making? If it's that the police who arrested him were bad guys we already know from Mach this doesn't prove Amanda's interrogators were too. Just as contamination must be proved so must the name, date of birth, home address and DNA profile of each individual cop.

If you are being deep and alluding to the reason Patrick was vague about opening times and till receipts, I hear you loud and clear.

 

[platonov]

.... thats all.

Fortunately, the "vast conspiracy" is coming apart, as judges are breaking ranks. It is simply unprecedented from what I know that sitting and/or retired judges openly dispute the ISC.

Still.... this is not being tried on the evidence anyway. No presence of Knox in the room, three "superwitnesses" one of whom had drug dependency issues seriously compromising his credibility and another who can't testify to the day she heard screams.... one of the possibilities being Hallowe'en itself where screaming is unheard of....

I just hope that JREF stores your IP address... that's all.

Of course they do – are you not familiar with this site.

However why do you ask ? Do you hope that JREFF will release member’s details to fans of a convicted sex killer?
For what reason – because the member in Q is deconstructing racist groupie arguments?

I certainly hope not, comrade – you can ask here at Forum Mgt and get back to me.