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

[Grinder]

When you claim that PIP arguments are weak, you put the onus on the defendant to prove innocence.

That doesn't follow. First of all as Anglo pointed out it is one specific argument not arguments. This is the same thing that the PGP do, throwing one after the other on the wall and it makes them look stupid. noise ticket (riot), rape prank (Slog comment) and lately unsolved murder cases in Seattle.

The prosecution, much like yourself , seems to think they don't have to prove things, they just have to make allegations, and if the defendants can't disprove the allegations, they must be true.

Nothing of the sort. The defense need not say anything about the knife beyond it doesn't fit the outline, the DNA is faulty and a knife that size couldn't make most all of the wounds. In addition Amanda's DNA on it is meaningless because she admits using it in the flat.

In light of the way the knife was discovered, to even consider it as a possible piece of evidence is to pay the investigators much more respect than they deserve. It would not be accepted in any sane court in the civilized world.

It wouldn't be because of the DNA work, not because of how it was discovered.

 

[Dan O.]

ETA I did some surfing (not my strong suit) and found bundles of cases where knives had been recovered after being ditched. This supports Grinder's point that it's not so easy to lose a murder weapon. What really is amazing is that we are supposed to believe the cops went straight to the kitchen drawer and plucked out that one knife, homing in on the murder weapon unerringly. Right. What does Bayes say the chances of that are?

It tells me that maybe someone needs to reexamine those cases where the the cops go straight to the murder weapon that was ditched. Rudy's knife has not been found.

I would have expected the woods around the cottage to have been searched. But the cops didn't even look under the bushes near the house where one of the defense lawyers found a knife.

 

[Grinder]

Defence strategy is an important topic and there seems to have been a great deal of restraint in calling people out. In hindsight, that doesn't seem to have worked out too well but, for all we know, it could have been worse if they had come right out calling everybody liars. Even Hellman joins in saying Stefanoni had an 'understandable lapse of memory' about which equipment she used. As a consequence we have Mach prating about the supposedly key fact that no one called Quintavalle was a liar as if that shores him up (which, to a small extent, if does).

The cat's out of the bag now though, since Amanda does accuse police witnesses of flat out lying in her book. I am leaning towards Grinder's strategy of treating Florence as a prelude to extradition: flinging accusations of corruption and incompetence around (where appropriate) and making wide-ranging requests for discovery, daring the court to refuse. That's fine for Amanda, (relatively) safely ensconced in the US, but maybe not so good for Raffaele.

Good points and not just the ones agreeing with me. Defense strategy is at the heart of the knife taken home argument. It doesn't win and looks desperate.

For those that want to conflate using a knife at home that has killed with cannibalism, risk giving the jury a choice that the defense doesn't need to offer and having them say that they are cannibals.

The defense this round needs to focus on the major points that are the strongest. Throwing out these are good kids that had no motive and would never have returned the knife to the apartment doesn't work.

Btw, just because a knife wasn't disposed of doesn't mean that people used it.

 

[Grinder]

I cannot cite a comparable case, but I do not accept my inability to do so as meaningful. I have not devoted myself to the required kind of study. Nor would it mean much if there were no such case. Taking their participation as a given, there is certainly nothing impossible or offensive to reason in them deciding to hide the weapon in plain sight.

Police find murder weapons at the perps place all the time. The football player from NE apparently had the gun from multiple murders at one of his places. The police solve multiple murders all the time from finding guns that match past ballistics. A 16 year old girl was killed walking on a road here last month and they found the gun at his place.

Anyway, didn't Jack the Ripper put his surgeon's knife back in his medical bag? There you go.

ETA I did some surfing (not my strong suit) and found bundles of cases where knives had been recovered after being ditched. This supports Grinder's point that it's not so easy to lose a murder weapon. What really is amazing is that we are supposed to believe the cops went straight to the kitchen drawer and plucked out that one knife, homing in on the murder weapon unerringly. Right. What does Bayes say the chances of that are?

I concur that the PLE work is dicey at best. I appreciate your ability to separate issues. The knife is bunk but not because it was found in the flat. If that were the rule guess where everyone would "hide" murder weapons - in their house.

 

[anglolawyer]

Good points and not just the ones agreeing with me. Defense strategy is at the heart of the knife taken home argument. It doesn't win and looks desperate.

For those that want to conflate using a knife at home that has killed with cannibalism, risk giving the jury a choice that the defense doesn't need to offer and having them say that they are cannibals.

The defense this round needs to focus on the major points that are the strongest. Throwing out these are good kids that had no motive and would never have returned the knife to the apartment doesn't work.

Btw, just because a knife wasn't disposed of doesn't mean that people used it.

Point of Italian law - can a defence lawyer be prosecuted for difumazione (or even calumny) if, in the course of a trial, he puts it to a prosecution witness, a police officer say, that he has lied in court or fabricated evidence? If yes, that would seem to be a major impediment to a fair trial.

 

[Grinder]

It tells me that maybe someone needs to reexamine those cases where the the cops go straight to the murder weapon that was ditched. Rudy's knife has not been found.

I would have expected the woods around the cottage to have been searched. But the cops didn't even look under the bushes near the house where one of the defense lawyers found a knife.

That story never played well and I think the knife found wasn't a sharp one, more of a butter knife.

Rudi admits ditching his shoes in Germany. What was in the shoe?

I certainly hope the defense and the PR work done is focused and doesn't run to the PIP extreme points.

They need to lay the groundwork for the US appeal. They need to request reviews of the key points of evidence.

 

[Grinder]

Point of Italian law - can a defence lawyer be prosecuted for difumazione (or even calumny) if, in the course of a trial, he puts it to a prosecution witness, a police officer say, that he has lied in court or fabricated evidence? If yes, that would seem to be a major impediment to a fair trial.

I don't know but the first trial seemed to demonstrate that the defense lawyers ran from any accusations. Even with the evidence of the interrogations including Patrick nothing was said except by Amanda. The PGP to date still argue that since her own attorneys didn't make the case, it can't be true.

I would call De Felice and ask him what he meant using the transcript of his conference.

I would call the shamed Napoleoni and her buddies and ask what exactly they did on the 6th and 7th and how all the stuff was moved and why.

I would bring all of the interrogators in etc.

I still think she should plead poverty and have the Italians pay for her defense and maybe some hot shot young lawyer and some veteran would be happy to take on the state.

It seems the judge is a civil case judge but I'm sure if he convicts that will no problem for the PGP

 

[anglolawyer]

I don't know but the first trial seemed to demonstrate that the defense lawyers ran from any accusations. Even with the evidence of the interrogations including Patrick nothing was said except by Amanda. The PGP to date still argue that since her own attorneys didn't make the case, it can't be true.

I would call De Felice and ask him what he meant using the transcript of his conference.

I would call the shamed Napoleoni and her buddies and ask what exactly they did on the 6th and 7th and how all the stuff was moved and why.

I would bring all of the interrogators in etc.

I still think she should plead poverty and have the Italians pay for her defense and maybe some hot shot young lawyer and some veteran would be happy to take on the state.

It seems the judge is a civil case judge but I'm sure if he convicts that will no problem for the PGP

Certainly there seems to be a huge cultural resistance to calling a spade a spade (do you have that expression?) over there. In the recent Arias case in Arizona the defence pulled no punches in accusing the prosecution of all sorts of heinous crimes in reconstructing the order of events at the door of the court, repeatedly applying for orders for mis-trial for one supposed infraction or another. I cannot see an English defence barrister having any difficulty at all making an accusation of impropriety where the evidence disclosed a basis for it but in Italy it seems to be off the cards. There must be a reason.

 

[Dan O.]

That story never played well and I think the knife found wasn't a sharp one, more of a butter knife.

But the butter knife does have a point and that is that the police never conducted a proper search.

I certainly hope the defense and the PR work done is focused and doesn't run to the PIP extreme points.

It's the prosecution that went to extremes producing Meredith's DNA on the knife.

The meme had been presented in this thread that it is normal for the assailant to keep the murder weapon, even putting it back in it's proper place and not trying to hide it. I am simply questioning if there is evidence backing that meme. It has little to do with this case.

They need to lay the groundwork for the US appeal. They need to request reviews of the key points of evidence.

There is no US appeal except perhaps an appeal to the US public in order to strengthen the resolve of the US politicians that may be involved in an extradition fight if it comes to that.


It serves little purpose to speculate endlessly on what didn't happen. I would rather be spending more time working out the details of what did happen based on all the available evidence.

 

[anglolawyer]

snip
The meme had been presented in this thread that it is normal for the assailant to keep the murder weapon, even putting it back in it's proper place and not trying to hide it. I am simply questioning if there is evidence backing that meme. It has little to do with this case.

No it hasn't. Don't mischaracterise the argument. The meme in question is that only a Jeffrey Dahmer-like psychotic nut would preserve the knife and use it for cooking. That's your meme.

No one, despite request, has come up with a safe and solid plan for disposal of the knife (assuming it was used at all, of course) .

 

[Chris_Halkides]

someplace away

No one, despite request, has come up with a safe and solid plan for disposal of the knife (assuming it was used at all, of course) .

I would dispose of it where I disposed of my bloody clothes.

 

[anglolawyer]

But me no buts

I would dispose of it where I disposed of my bloody clothes.

But you were butt naked.

 

[Grinder]

But the butter knife does have a point and that is that the police never conducted a proper search.

That whole story was sketchy and why even pick up an old dirty butter knife?
The knife could have been thrown there after the police finished their search.
If you have a good summary of that event pass it on.

The meme had been presented in this thread that it is normal for the assailant to keep the murder weapon, even putting it back in it's proper place and not trying to hide it. I am simply questioning if there is evidence backing that meme. It has little to do with this case.

Some weapons are disposed of and some are kept. I gave two examples of weapons kept by non Manson or Damler types. In this case HAD the kids used the kitchen knife I think the best policy would have been to clean and replace.

There is no US appeal except perhaps an appeal to the US public in order to strengthen the resolve of the US politicians that may be involved in an extradition fight if it comes to that.

Obviously there is no US appeal except for the extradition. That's what I'm talking about because the Italian system looks fixed at this point. I'd suggest the defense while trying to win there make sure that even requests that will obviously be turned down need to be made for the later appeal in the US.

It serves little purpose to speculate endlessly on what didn't happen. I would rather be spending more time working out the details of what did happen based on all the available evidence.

I think it is best at this point to be speculating on what to do moving forward.

 

[Grinder]

I would dispose of it where I disposed of my bloody clothes.

So you admit that they disposed of their bloody clothes? Case closed, guilty!

Chris less of a response than I would expect from you. Where would you suggest that they could have disposed of their clothes, shoes and cleaning tools?

One argument that I've made along with others is the very point that none of those things were ever found. It is not easy to get rid of things that aren't found later. No DNA or blood was found in Raf's flat indicating that they disposed of the evidence before arriving there.

Do you think they tossed everything in a weighted trunk into Lake Mignini?

Even if the police didn't end up searching for tossed items the kids wouldn't have known that when deciding what to do with the stuff.

 

[acbytesla]

So you admit that they disposed of their bloody clothes? Case closed, guilty!

Chris less of a response than I would expect from you. Where would you suggest that they could have disposed of their clothes, shoes and cleaning tools?

One argument that I've made along with others is the very point that none of those things were ever found. It is not easy to get rid of things that aren't found later. No DNA or blood was found in Raf's flat indicating that they disposed of the evidence before arriving there.

Do you think they tossed everything in a weighted trunk into Lake Mignini?

Even if the police didn't end up searching for tossed items the kids wouldn't have known that when deciding what to do with the stuff.

I think the point is Grinder, that while the police do sometimes find the murder weapon after someone disposes of it in a lake or a river or digs a little hole and covers it up or tosses it in a garbage can, most of time these items are not discovered and when they are it can be difficult if not impossible to tie them to the defendants.

But when you didn't commit the crime, these things never come to mind.

 

[Bill Williams]

So you admit that they disposed of their bloody clothes? Case closed, guilty!

Chris less of a response than I would expect from you. Where would you suggest that they could have disposed of their clothes, shoes and cleaning tools?
One argument that I've made along with others is the very point that none of those things were ever found. It is not easy to get rid of things that aren't found later. No DNA or blood was found in Raf's flat indicating that they disposed of the evidence before arriving there.

Do you think they tossed everything in a weighted trunk into Lake Mignini?

Even if the police didn't end up searching for tossed items the kids wouldn't have known that when deciding what to do with the stuff.

Getting rid of evidence in such a horrid murder as this one is not possible in total. I suppose that the lone Y-Haplotype allegedly thought to be Raffaele's and the unknown substance on the knife blade, with Knox's undated DNA found on the handle might qualify.... but when it is alleged they took part in a murder, cleaned up, and staged a break-in: just where is the lingering evidence that resisted clean-up or disposal?

Unless someone who thinks they are guilty shows that the clothes on her bed are not Amanda's - I mean it is they who must demonstrate it! - or that they just forgot to toss the knife back (found in Raffaele's kitchen drawer) into the deepest darkest woods nearby, or take it with them to (Bari?) and toss in a lake en route...

Knox and Sollecito should hire themselves out to the mafia for crime-scene cleans. Even the cleaning tools they were spotted with - the mop - tested zero as evidence.

If the Florence court rules on the evidence this will be an acquittal. If the Florence court rules on the reputations of everyone along the line - Central Park Five, etc. - then anything can happen.

The Italian judiciary is on trial this time.

 

[Grinder]

I think the point is Grinder, that while the police do sometimes find the murder weapon after someone disposes of it in a lake or a river or digs a little hole and covers it up or tosses it in a garbage can, most of time these items are not discovered and when they are it can be difficult if not impossible to tie them to the defendants.

But when you didn't commit the crime, these things never come to mind.

Tesla the police often find murder weapons. In this case you don't seem to grasp how difficult it would be to dispose of bloody clothes, shoes and a knife.

I don't think they disposed of anything but the argument which you seem incapable of grasping is that keeping the knife made sense. It isn't that the police would find the knife in the lake but that going there at 4 am might just look a little suspicious and the perps would consider that when making their decision.

The highlited section highlights your inability to understand the discussion. If they used the knife to murder Meredith (which they didn't) then keeping it under the circumstances makes sense. So you must get rid or all of your other arguments except that no one would ever return a murder knife to where it came from and keep it after cleaning.

I don't know how you know about how many weapons are thrown away but yes they find some and often they can tie them to the person and the crime.

In this case had they tossed the murder knife (yes we know it's not) into the garbage or elsewhere, when found the old flat inventory would have nailed them even if they had cleaned it.

It is clearly better for them to find a clean knife in the drawer and not in some garbage or bush. It does make sense to keep it at home after cleaning.

 

[codyjuneau]

Hi Machiavelli,
Can you help me understand The Law
and help me to see The Truth?

You do want to get to The Truth in this horrible murder case we've been discussing for years now,
don'tcha?

I gotta few questions about Rudi Guede's visit to Milan.
Supposedly his Auntie lived there, right?

After travellin',
IIRC, some 400 miles from Perugia to Milan,
why didn't Rudi just head over to her place to spend the night?

Heck, my relatives in Las Vegas, only 250 miles away,
don't mind putting me up, ya know, let me stay over at their place,
at any hour of the day:
"Hi Randy!!! It's great to see ya, come on in"!!!

But what about Rudi Guede.
he who was without a job in October of 2007,
he whose own rent in Perugia was $320 Euro a month at that time,
he, a dude apparently not on a budget, who says that he had paid $50 Euros to stay the night in a little kids school in Milan,
he who had a laptop in his possesion that was reported stolen,
1 that he had already put his own photo on it as the screensaver:
[qimg]http://imageshack.us/a/img194/1869/xywx.jpg[/qimg]


I gotsta wonder:
With Rudi's pic on the screensaver,
how did the cops in Milan even know this laptop was stolen?
Did The Rudi tell 'em?

Another question:
Did the cops confiscate this laptop from The Rudi?
Or give it back to him because his pic was on the screensaver?

Guede-o also had in his possesion a womans gold watch.
Why, I don't know. Do you?
Christmas was far in the future, as most definitely was Valentines Day too.
And as far as I know, The Rudi did not have a girlfriend and his mommy was far away and he wasn't even speakin' with her, right?
Why did RG even have a womans gold watch on him, hmmmm, my enquirin' mind on this summer evenin' wantsta know!?!

Another question:
What became of this womans gold watch?
Did the cops in Milan confiscate that womans gold watch?
Or the cell phones or the whole lotta keys that The Rudi had on him?

Or give 'em all back to The Rudi?

Thanks for a reply Machiavelli,,
I'm just tryin' to getto The Truth...
RWVBWL

.
Great insights and questions RW, in all your posts, not just this one.

Like you said, how did the police know it was the lawyer's laptop? Was it the Milan police or the Perugian police that figured that out?

Rudy was obviously using the computer, since he had his own screensaver installed. The only way he could do that would be to either log into the computer using the lawyer's password, or wipe the hard drive and re-install a new operating system.

If he wiped the hard drive, what remained to ID the computer?

If he used the lawyer's password, how did he know it? May he can guess passwords just like the Postal Police.
.

 

[Grinder]

Yes Bill.

They planned a trip to Gobbio not Bari which is far away. It has always been my contention that had they done the crime, they should have gone to Gubbio and yes, a perfect way to get rid of things. I'm not familiar with the countryside on the way but I'm sure that some opportunity for disposal would be available. In addition they wouldn't be around for the discovery and since the trip had been planned it wouldn't seem odd. They could have worked on their alibi for the missing 2 or 3 hours that evening and gone over what would be found in terms of their activities when investigated. Surely one would think (at least before writing about emails) that Raf would know what records would be found through the ISP and computer logs. They would know they needed to mention THE THREE HOURS IN THE PLAZA and the early morning music (we woke and put some music on and did a little horizontal dancing ).

They would eat on the way and have more food in Gubbio and maybe look at a couple of tourist things and wait for the call or text. The idea that Amanda wanted to control the investigation is ridiculous.

That last sentence is a good counter to the knife would never be returned to the drawer ,which I still would have done with the trip as the inventory would come in to play.

The PGP make the ridiculous argument that she wanted to control the Italian cops without speaking Italian and they have no example of how she attempted this control. the PGP weaken their stance by making the argument just as the PIP weaken their stance by saying no one would ever return the knife.

 

[acbytesla]

Tesla the police often find murder weapons. In this case you don't seem to grasp how difficult it would be to dispose of bloody clothes, shoes and a knife.

I don't think they disposed of anything but the argument which you seem incapable of grasping is that keeping the knife made sense. It isn't that the police would find the knife in the lake but that going there at 4 am might just look a little suspicious and the perps would consider that when making their decision.

The highlited section highlights your inability to understand the discussion. If they used the knife to murder Meredith (which they didn't) then keeping it under the circumstances makes sense. So you must get rid or all of your other arguments except that no one would ever return a murder knife to where it came from and keep it after cleaning.

I don't know how you know about how many weapons are thrown away but yes they find some and often they can tie them to the person and the crime.

In this case had they tossed the murder knife (yes we know it's not) into the garbage or elsewhere, when found the old flat inventory would have nailed them even if they had cleaned it.

It is clearly better for them to find a clean knife in the drawer and not in some garbage or bush. It does make sense to keep it at home after cleaning.

I think you are noting the extremely rare exceptions and not the rule. Where are any of the suspects clothes worn during the murder or the knife that killed Meredith?

Where are the shoes that Rudy wore that made all those shoe prints? You know, the ones they first thought were Raffaele's because they can't count?

Rudy disposes of the shoes, but the moron left the box they came in in his closet!!!

Unless there is a significant lead to where the item is, it's not that likely or common as you are making it out to be. You do hear about the cases where they are found, but you're not counting the thousands and thousands of cases where they don't. It's like finding a needle in a haystack. It can be done....sometimes. Sure they check the garbage cans within maybe a block or 2 from the crime scene or the person's home or workplace, but beyond that it's just plain dumb luck.

If Amanda and Raffaele had really been involved, they would have never just hung around Perugia. They would have went to Gubbio. Meredith's body probably isn't discovered for another 6 hours or even another day or two. If they had been involved, there wouldn't have been a trace. Except at the murder scene.