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

[acbytesla]

Thanks Chris and Dan for responding. Nothing about that knife is credible, but here we are talking about it.

You guys are great!!!

 

[Grinder]

Thanks Chris and Dan for responding. Nothing about that knife is credible, but here we are talking about it.

You guys are great!!!

Tesla hurt Grinder feelings

It is clearly the most important single piece of "evidence" against Amanda.

The prosecution experts claimed there was no hilt bruise on Meredith's neck, therefore they claim the hilt never reached the neck and the blood. I don't know why blood would go further inside the hilt than breach would reach.

 

[acbytesla]

Tesla hurt Grinder feelings

It is clearly the most important single piece of "evidence" against Amanda.

The prosecution experts claimed there was no hilt bruise on Meredith's neck, therefore they claim the hilt never reached the neck and the blood. I don't know why blood would go further inside the hilt than breach would reach.

I'm sorry Grinder, you have made your contributions, but when it comes to DNA, I have a lot of faith in Chris and Dan to give me the straight skinny.

 

[RandyN]

How did they know Rudi's MO?

Without trying to restart the conversation, the police did initially think that the sex was consensual and that she had met someone the night before at a party. That's where the sex game gone bad started.

I know everyone here can't imagine Meredith agreeing to have a date or just a meetup with Rudi but I can. If they did and Rudi expected more and it turned into rage and he killed her, he might then worry that she had mentioned this to her girl friends. He then might have thought he needed to provide another possibility and staged in the way he thought burglars all broke in, his way.

He could of course just have broken in. Or he could have heaved the rock and then Meredith let him in.

It seems so strange that the kids would pick the high window and use his MO. I really think that it is very far-fetched to think the kids worried about how Rudi entered the house since Meredith could easily have let him in.

Personally I think all these things are true. Rudy broke out the window with intentions to get inside but to first check if anyone was home.

As he waited in the darkness behind the cottage he notices Kercher returning and decides to approach her with an urgent need to use the bathroom. She would be fine with that since he would give the excuse that he was trying the boys downstairs first but they were gone.

Not that there are facts to back this up...just a possible alternative theory. Which should be unnecessary because nothing indicates a staged break-in. In fact the opposite is true. Every known fact indicates that Guede entered thru Filomenas window. Ron Hendry has this down pat. I think he has it exactly correct and I see nothing that refutes that analysis. Forget the dirty wall...its weak. There is grass. Wet footprints dry. Grass springs back shortly after being walked on.

Like all the other crazy speculation without facts or real evidence the Italians are making a case (quite successfully btw) without any facts at all. In fact the evidence slim as it is points to the exact opposite. No glass on top. An impossible staging from inside. Oh and then the missing blood and hair sample from the window. How does everyone forget these things and simply allow the Italians to get away with such BS?

No recorded interrogation, burned up hard drives, no lawyers, three people telling similar stories about threats and actual beatings. How is it all ignored? Meanwhile a corrupt judicial system has its SC ruling based on evidence they find illogical? And additionally they force a link to Guedes trial knowing full well that AK and RS had no chance to cross examine or participate in his fast track trial. Guede never testified that AK or RS were involved. He or (Mignini) wrote it in a letter. A letter that smells like 10 day old fish.

And the people go yea ya ya yea ya ya ya....

The court date is set. Today I would expect the defense to demand full discovery of all prosecution documents including full and complete scientific data including all electronic data files and all notes as well as copies of the laboratory certification file plus the full SOP of the lab.

These lazy stupid defense lawyers have screwed around enough. They pussyfoot around in fear that overcomes their effectiveness as a proper defense. If they are afraid then they should turn the case over to someone with the balls to fight for the truth in spite of the corrupt ludicrous case Italy is trying to pass off as legit.

The SC has proven that they have no intention to provide anything remotely close or described as a fair trial. And its so transparent that it is laughable but yet they can get ten people to swear to the lies they profess.

Queer tabloid thought process seems to have infected the whole country.

 

[anglolawyer]

They got the knife when they realized they didn't have any forensic evidence putting Amanda at the scene of the crime ("Doh!"). They would have said Raf's DNA was on it, too, if they hadn't had his shoes. When they found out the shoes were no good, they got the bra clasp.

Respectfully, no. The knife was retrieved on 06 Nov, before they knew they had no forensics on Amanda and at a time when they believed they had a crushing case against the three of them. So why did they take it? My current theory FWIW is they primitively thought, 'murder weapon, we gotta find the murder weapon to close the case' and because one of the wounds was large they thought they needed a big knife.

Here's a question: given the case was that Lumumba killed her, why didn't they lift a knife from his place? And secondly, given the overall crime theory as of 06 Nov, why did they suppose Amanda took that knife with her when letting Lumumba in?

 

[Dan O.]

Tesla hurt Grinder feelings

It is clearly the most important single piece of "evidence" against Amanda.

The prosecution experts claimed there was no hilt bruise on Meredith's neck, therefore they claim the hilt never reached the neck and the blood. I don't know why blood would go further inside the hilt than bleach would reach.

The knife is initially dry and the crack is filled with air which is essentially a vacuum as far as liquids are concerned. When blood touches the crack between the blade and the handle it sucks itself in through a process referred to as capillary action.

For a demonstration, look closely at a glass of water. Notice how the water climbs up the side of the glass at the edge. If you have a small diameter clear straw and dip that into the water, the water will climb up even further inside the straw. For very very thin straws such as the membrane under bark, water can climb all the way up to the top of a tall tree.

So, back to your question, why doesn't the bleach also suck into the crack?: it can't because the crack is already filled with blood. Now, you could try some games like drying the knife in the oven, cooling it off and then letting it suck in bleach. That might be partially effective. But when the blood dries , the solids in the blood migrate to the edges and forms walls That segment the space. The bleach will reach some of the blood but not necessarily all of it.




It's basically the affinity of the liquid to attach to the surface that

 

[anglolawyer]

Put the coffee down and finish swallowing before you lookup whose print it is that they found in Amanda's room. This is obviously the guilty person if they were there after the cleanup after the murder.

I don't know where to look it up so I'm taking three wild guesses hoping you will put me out of my misery:

A) Mignini (he even broke the window and made the climb)
B) Machiavelli
C) Lumumba

 

[Dan O.]

Personally I think all these things are true. Rudy broke out the window with intentions to get inside but to first check if anyone was home.

As he waited in the darkness behind the cottage he notices Kercher returning and decides to approach her with an urgent need to use the bathroom. She would be fine with that since he would give the excuse that he was trying the boys downstairs first but they were gone.

I'm not going to sit idle while you insult Meredith like that. She may take pity on poor Rudy and let him in to use the bathroom but she is not going to let him use the Italian girls toilet.

 

[anglolawyer]

I think keeping the knife after cleaning is less idiotic than keeping a gun used in a crime but people do that all the time. Yes, guns cost money but if it was fired during a crime that adds 5 years here (probably is cause for a reduced sentence you know where) yet people keep them.

Not only was there an inventory of the knives at the rental flat but getting rid of things isn't that easy (unless you took a trip to Gubbio) in town and one would surely think it would be found. Where are those darn keys anyway (Hint: Germany).

That's an answer not a hint . The keys are probably rusting somewhere down the slope beneath the apartment or still waiting to be found in Lana's garden. I agree about the knife. I don't see any problem at all for a psycho who just killed someone with it to chuck it in the sink with the rest of the washing up and just clean it like you would clean any other kitchen utensil.

 

[Dan O.]

I don't know where to look it up so I'm taking three wild guesses hoping you will put me out of my misery:

A) Mignini (he even broke the window and made the climb)
B) Machiavelli
C) Lumumba

A) no.
B) no.
C) no.

Although for B, we don't actually know who Mach is so there is a remote possibility (very remote).

 

[anglolawyer]

A) no.
B) no.
C) no.

Although for B, we don't actually know who Mach is so there is a remote possibility (very remote).

You are remorselessly cruel - like a cat or something.

 

[RandyN]

A little off the current topic, but I am slightly frustrated that whether one views AK as innocent or guilty the knife recovered from RS flat is still in play. A thought experiment. The knife was used in the crime. The only wound compatible is the fatal neck wound resulting in major haemorrhage. The knife would have been covered in blood. The knife is then so thoroughly cleaned that no trace of blood is left. No measurable amount of the victims DNA is left. Certainly the much smaller if any DNA from the wielder of the knife would have been cleaned away. Therefore any DNA (AK's) found on the handle cannot be from the time of the crime. Did AK have an opportunity to innocently come in to contact with the knife after the crime? The knife was recovered from her boyfriend's flat where she had been staying, some days later. Therefore it has no probative value. There is no physical evidence of AK. There are two doubtful pieces of evidence against RS, the bra and the knife.

Hi Planigale welcome to the forum.

Actually good questions...plus the additional facts that one must reconcile why in the name of hell would the murderers return the murder weapon to the utensil drawer? A rather common and cheap and easily replaced knife.
Why proof is there that this two are so deprived as to utilize a murder weapon to cut the bread for their next meal?

Its a ludicrous proposition at best. Now add your points that this knife would have had to have been blood covered. And especially in the fine groves designed into the handle that make it slip resistant. And yet somehow it is clean and not just clean but so clean as to be noticeable to police. And yet there remains DNA of Knox on the handle and MK on the blade? Right. Plus one must now add an additional knife since this knife was not able to make two of the three major wounds.

That the Italians try to pull this crap with a a straight face is unfathomable. Now add all the suspicious related analysis of that data. A sample "too low" to quantify and which with several other similar quantified and suspect samples was discarded but somehow this genius lab tech (lying Stefanoni) decides that this sample deserved her special UN-certified and untested experiment. And guess what....she made sure that test was UN-repeatable.

No matter what branch of science you study the one basic rule about testing is that it must be repeatable. If it is not repeatable then it is not valid. No exceptions that I can think of.

You are correct to question how this remains as evidence...in fact in the appeal trial the knife was barely mentioned after the experts determined the sample claimed to be Kerchers was impossible to find at such low levels...especially in 2007 and with that periods equipment and the labs unsuitability or lack of special tools to even begin testing low template samples. Forget that Stephanoni had zero training or qualifications to do such testing...apparently the defense is afraid to mention her unqualified status. I suppose they fear being sued.

What a joke of a country.

ETA...btw the knife is not evidence against RS at all. Only the contaminated bra clasp with at least three other people mixed with and contained on the tiny metal hook (which is also now destroyed and therefore non repeatable) remains against RS. I suppose the Italians will expect us to simply trust the former tests when in fact I would call them unverified speculation made by an unqualified lab technician out of her job classification and cross checked by her boss who was also consultant to the prosecution. Could they get anymore conflicted of interest? And they don't even get that. WTH no one raised that issue in the first trial is beyond me...how can Biondo confirm Stefanonis work when he is employed by the prosecution and at the same time is Stefanonis boss? But the ISC doesnt find anything illogical about all that.

 

[acbytesla]

The knife is initially dry and the crack is filled with air which is essentially a vacuum as far as liquids are concerned. When blood touches the crack between the blade and the handle it sucks itself in through a process referred to as capillary action.

For a demonstration, look closely at a glass of water. Notice how the water climbs up the side of the glass at the edge. If you have a small diameter clear straw and dip that into the water, the water will climb up even further inside the straw. For very very thin straws such as the membrane under bark, water can climb all the way up to the top of a tall tree.

So, back to your question, why doesn't the bleach also suck into the crack?: it can't because the crack is already filled with blood. Now, you could try some games like drying the knife in the oven, cooling it off and then letting it suck in bleach. That might be partially effective. But when the blood dries , the solids in the blood migrate to the edges and forms walls That segment the space. The bleach will reach some of the blood but not necessarily all of it.

It's basically the affinity of the liquid to attach to the surface that

So I guess you would want to put the knife in an oven drying it out as much as possible and then quickly putting it in bleach and the same capillary action would suck the bleach in to the crack and that would destroy the DNA???

 

[RandyN]

I think keeping the knife after cleaning is less idiotic than keeping a gun used in a crime but people do that all the time. Yes, guns cost money but if it was fired during a crime that adds 5 years here (probably is cause for a reduced sentence you know where) yet people keep them.

Not only was there an inventory of the knives at the rental flat but getting rid of things isn't that easy (unless you took a trip to Gubbio) in town and one would surely think it would be found. Where are those darn keys anyway (Hint: Germany).

Inventory shimnintory....that is a nothing but a guilter guess. But I would be very pleased to see a copy of this inventory. Certainly it must be available in the public record. Some sure footed reporter would be right on top of that.

Two things ....

1.There was no inventory

2.This was a cheap easily replaceable common knife...a few Euros at most. Or do you suppose it had a serial number that had to match? DOH.

ETA Three things...

3. To get rid of the knife drive out to Lake Narducci and whip it somewheres around where they found Narducci floating in his too small pants....or drop it down a street drain like Hal did in the Kish case...even after someone telling the police they saw that...no one ever bothered to actually look. Put it in a box and mail it to some random person in Rome...

 

[acbytesla]

Inventory shimnintory....that is a nothing but a guilter guess. But I would be very pleased to see a copy of this inventory. Certainly it must be available in the public record. Some sure footed reporter would be right on top of that.

Two things ....

1.There was no inventory

2.This was a cheap easily replaceable common knife...a few Euros at most. Or do you suppose it had a serial number that had to match? DOH.

ETA Three things...

3. To get rid of the knife drive out to Lake Narducci and whip it somewheres around where they found Narducci floating in his too small pants....or drop it down a street drain like Hal did in the Kish case...even after someone telling the police they saw that...no one ever bothered to actually look. Put it in a box and mail it to some random person in Rome...

I know.. I don't buy the inventory of the knife at all. Great comment!!!!! Very Funny.

 

[bri1]

Personally I think all these things are true. Rudy broke out the window with intentions to get inside but to first check if anyone was home.

As he waited in the darkness behind the cottage he notices Kercher returning and decides to approach her with an urgent need to use the bathroom. She would be fine with that since he would give the excuse that he was trying the boys downstairs first but they were gone.

Not that there are facts to back this up...just a possible alternative theory. Which should be unnecessary because nothing indicates a staged break-in. In fact the opposite is true. Every known fact indicates that Guede entered thru Filomenas window. Ron Hendry has this down pat. I think he has it exactly correct and I see nothing that refutes that analysis. Forget the dirty wall...its weak. There is grass. Wet footprints dry. Grass springs back shortly after being walked on.

Good point, Randy. I think that even if the prosecution could actually prove that the break-in was staged, there are reasonable scenarios that see Rudy doing this: including him bumping into her as she's close to home and him asking to borrow the loo as he'd come to see Giacomo (not realising he was away). In this case, he would have good reason to believe he could be connected to the house through his association with the boys, so to stage a break-in to intimate that the crime was carried out by a complete stranger makes a kind of sense. There are also plenty of scenarios where Rudy stages a break-in because he's thinking irrationally. The argument that if there was staging, a keyholder must be involved is weak sauce at best.
However, I agree that there's never been evidence presented to show the break-in was staged...

 

[yimyammer]

They only had 4 days but who's counting. The point isn't whether she brought the knife but would it be bizarre for them to keep the knife had they used it. I don't think the argument they would never keep the knife has weight.

They missed the tiny piece caught in the crevice is the story, but had they soaked the knife in bleach for a few minutes the DNA wouldn't be found.

Isn't the PG argument that the knives in Raf's flat were inventoried by the landlord and if was missing, it would be suspicious so they had to return the knife to cover up their "crime"?

 

[acbytesla]

Isn't the PG argument that the knives in Raf's flat were inventoried by the landlord and if was missing, it would be suspicious so they had to return the knife to cover up their "crime"?

I think some people are arguing that, but it really isn't believable. Who really keeps track of every piece of cutlery?

 

[JREF2010]

Now seriously. I can't understand how someone can call that window an "illogical" point of entry when:

- it takes much less than 1 min to climb
- the first floor window has bars

Of course you alsa have the balcony but I don't understand what makes the balcony a much better point of entry. They both look similar to me, and some people here take it even further, defending that the balcony is worse because of the street lights.

But at worst they're both similar, so I can't understand why it'd be called illogical. I'd understand if the first floor window didn't have bars, but not like this.

and to a seasoned burglar like Rudy, the shutters being noticed to be unlatched might be inviting.

its actually very common I was told by a city cop, that the person who burglarized your home was probably there as a friends friend, like Rudy became invited to the cottage. Often its a hired hand who scopes your place out.

Rudy wasn't close with anyone in the cottage, a fairly new acquaintance. They invited him to their home unknowing he was spending his days burglarizing places.

still I wish someone could pull up various second story, window, break-ins and put this to rest. this might be a main focus this coming trial, this mystery of Filomenas room.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

why not buy a replacement

Isn't the PG argument that the knives in Raf's flat were inventoried by the landlord and if was missing, it would be suspicious so they had to return the knife to cover up their "crime"?

They could say, "Oh, we broke it trying to cut a frozen steak. We'll pay for a new one." Or they could buy another one just like it. IIUC it was a common, cheap knife.