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

[acbytesla]

Nope. In terms of physics, lower frequency sound pressure waves travel further through air (i.e. with less amplitude degradation) than higher frequency sound. The reason why we tend to use higher frequencies to alert or warn is an evolutionary one, based on the fact that sounds at these frequencies are less common in nature (e.g. noises related to wind, water, movement, other animals), and therefore tend to stand out against the background more.

On this subject, it's also highly relevant to our discussion to point out that higher-frequency sound waves are degraded far more than lower-frequency waves when passing through liquid or solid mediums (I think others have also pointed this out). That's why, for example, if there were a loud party in the next room, you would hear the bass end of the music through the walls, but not the top end. And that's why any scream would be very significantly muffled by having to pass through a modern double-glazed patio door (let alone solid stone walls).

I repeat: whatever Nara and Monacchia heard (or think they heard, or lied about hearing) that night, it's extremely highly unlikely that it was a scream originating from within the girls' cottage.

Excellent response LJ, I was writing mine and you beat me to the post. You did a much better job in describing this than I did, so I deleted mine. Kudos

 

[RoseMontague]

Sollecito lived 5 minutes away. they ran back at 10:30 changed and were seen later by Curalolo waiting by the rail for the tow truck to leave. Back to break the window and other important details such as moving Meredith and cleaning the bathroom.

Nara is pretty certain it was after 11PM that she heard the scream. You know the scream you have been constantly defending she would have had to have heard. Yet in your theory, Meredith is dead before 10:30. I don't get it.

And we have yet to fit the homeless park bench bum into this. He is asked about a dozen times what time Amanda and Raffaele left. He consistently says around midnight or shortly before and when pressed goes as far back as 11:30. Yet you have them leaving the court at 10:30 to go back for an all night clean up (and wait for Meredith's scream sometime after 11PM-even though she was dead before 10:30 according to your theory).

These are some of the problems the pro-guilt crowd have with trying to fit these witnesses as well as the cell phone evidence and stomach contents evidence into a comprehensive timeline.

Amanda was caught off guard when Sollecito withdrew her alibi at the Questura, Lumumba was on her phone, the police naturally checked and that bad man was a quick exit to stop whatever was going on with Sollecito. Naming Guede would have meant her real involvement. Lumumba was a decoy and she admitted only to being there in the kitchen and not helping Meredith , but still not responsible in her mind. She was surprised by her arrest ,but really she and her mother played along with Lumumba's possible guilt for too long after. The bathroom was cleaned for starters there is no way that washing that amount of blood off would leave just a few missed watery drips with no finger print of origin. drips would have been all over the outside of the bidet and on the floor. Drips would have come off Guede's pants in the hall . In my opinion there is something amiss with Amanda Knox, Meredith was not her friend the HOT video was a glimpse of Amanda's real feelings for Merdith and the competition she felt .No friend would ever star in a production like that.The giggling and fooling around at the Questura were not the actions of a normal friend. Random killings of teens motivated by minor slights are not unheard of. No doubt her problem what ever it is existed before Perugia, the opportunity, the drugs and unreality of a foreign country may have unleashed whatever disturbance may be there.

Wow. Thanks for sharing.

 

[RoseMontague]

I don't think it's impossible. I do, however, think it's very highly unlikely. And when you add in the timing issues, and other issues (such as the improbability of Capezzali allegedly being woken by a "blood-curdling scream of death", yet taking so long to come forward about it in spite of the latter knowledge that a murder occurred that night - not to mention the obvious possibility that post-hoc knowledge of the murder might have *ahem* "transformed" her memory of what she thought she heard), I contend that the earwitness testimony cannot be taken as probative.

Of course, the obvious thing to do would be to place a speaker emitting sound at various frequencies and amplitudes (replicating the human range of sound emission) at various points in the cottage, and measuring the sound received at various key points outside the cottage - including within Capezzali's room, Monacchia's apartment, along the road, and in Piazza Grimana.

Yes, the obvious thing to do and the fair one. Yet it still has not been done.

 

[anglolawyer]

LJ and acbytesla

I agree a test would be best, although I can imagine why each side would be tentative about it. I am aware that there are other problems with the ear witnesses but, equally, there is no suggestion that either was in the pay of the police or on drugs and each was willing to come to court, face the glare of publicity and the stress of public examination to give evidence. They corroborate each other, to some extent.

Still, for all the learned-sounding statements about sound, I am not completely persuaded it would be impossible or near impossible for the sound to have carried from inside the building. If I whistle, someone behind me can hear it. Same if I shout. The sound isn't like a laser beam. How could someone on Nara's side hear anything at all at whatever distance if it were?

True - most screaming is in the street but I already said I have heard the sound of domestic violence coming from inside a building to my ears inside another building.

And the 'sound' of a bass is usually felt as much as heard. In fact, if the neighbours have a party I can forget about blocking my ears - I'll feel the base in my chest. But I can hear their kids scream through the walls easily, doubtless as mother nature intends.

 

[LondonJohn]

Deleted, since the post I was addressing was itself deleted

 

[LondonJohn]

I am not completely persuaded it would be impossible or near impossible for the sound to have carried from inside the building. If I whistle, someone behind me can hear it. Same if I shout. The sound isn't like a laser beam. How could someone on Nara's side hear anything at all at whatever distance if it were?

If you whistle, the sound of the whistle radiates out in a spherical pattern from the source of the sound (your lips). A two-dimensional analogy would be throwing a pebble into a calm pond, and watching the waves radiate outwards in concentric circles from the source (the point where the pebble hit the water). Sound is essentially exactly the same in its propagation - only in three dimensions rather than two.

That's why someone behind you can hear your whistle. But suppose you placed a sound-absorbing wall between your head and the ears of the person behind you. In the pond analogy, suppose that a rigid barrier were placed in the water. In that instance, the waves would hit the barrier and stop (i.e. the wave energy would be absorbed and/or reflected). The area of water behind the barrier would remain calm and still. It's exactly the same with sound. Note that I am for the sake of argument discounting diffractive effects, which - depending on the medium, the barrier, and relative dimensions, would lead to some minor transmission of the waveform "around" the barrier.

True - most screaming is in the street but I already said I have heard the sound of domestic violence coming from inside a building to my ears inside another building.

I can only assume the other building was quite close and with window-to-window line of sight, and that the argument was taking place within the room whose window faces yours. And I am now slightly concerned that you live in an area where you have the *ahem* "opportunity" to be an earwitness to domestic violence in such a way.....

And the 'sound' of a bass is usually felt as much as heard. In fact, if the neighbours have a party I can forget about blocking my ears - I'll feel the base in my chest. But I can hear their kids scream through the walls easily, doubtless as mother nature intends.

[/QUOTE]

Yes and no. It's a fact that lower-frequency components travel through any medium - and especially a liquid or solid medium - far better than higher-frequency components. It's a simple fact. Put on some music in one room (not a track with thumping bass...) and go and listen to it from behind a wall in another room. I guarantee that you will hear the mid-range and low-frequency components of the music far more clearly than the top end, which will be relatively more muffled.

And yes, of course you can hear kids scream through the wall (although again, I am minded to pity you!), but had they shouted at the same amplitude, you'd have heard the shout significantly more loudly.

 

[acbytesla]

LJ and acbytesla

I agree a test would be best, although I can imagine why each side would be tentative about it. I am aware that there are other problems with the ear witnesses but, equally, there is no suggestion that either was in the pay of the police or on drugs and each was willing to come to court, face the glare of publicity and the stress of public examination to give evidence. They corroborate each other, to some extent.

Still, for all the learned-sounding statements about sound, I am not completely persuaded it would be impossible or near impossible for the sound to have carried from inside the building. If I whistle, someone behind me can hear it. Same if I shout. The sound isn't like a laser beam. How could someone on Nara's side hear anything at all at whatever distance if it were?

True - most screaming is in the street but I already said I have heard the sound of domestic violence coming from inside a building to my ears inside another building.

And the 'sound' of a bass is usually felt as much as heard. In fact, if the neighbours have a party I can forget about blocking my ears - I'll feel the base in my chest. But I can hear their kids scream through the walls easily, doubtless as mother nature intends.

The real problem as LJ pointed out is that Meredith's scream took place inside the cottage. An easy way to demonstrate this to yourself is to find a cd with a lot of high sounds like a flute concerto. First listen to it from inside the room and and then go outside and listen to it from the other side of a double pane window. You'll understand the point immediately. Most of the sound would be absorbed by the window and what you would hear on the other side of the window would be a much softer and lower pitched sound. I can write about it all day and it's much much easier to understand by doing little experiments.

 

[anglolawyer]

If you whistle, the sound of the whistle radiates out in a spherical pattern from the source of the sound (your lips). A two-dimensional analogy would be throwing a pebble into a calm pond, and watching the waves radiate outwards in concentric circles from the source (the point where the pebble hit the water). Sound is essentially exactly the same in its propagation - only in three dimensions rather than two.

That's why someone behind you can hear your whistle. But suppose you placed a sound-absorbing wall between your head and the ears of the person behind you. In the pond analogy, suppose that a rigid barrier were placed in the water. In that instance, the waves would hit the barrier and stop (i.e. the wave energy would be absorbed and/or reflected). The area of water behind the barrier would remain calm and still. It's exactly the same with sound. Note that I am for the sake of argument discounting diffractive effects, which - depending on the medium, the barrier, and relative dimensions, would lead to some minor transmission of the waveform "around" the barrier.




I can only assume the other building was quite close and with window-to-window line of sight, and that the argument was taking place within the room whose window faces yours. And I am now slightly concerned that you live in an area where you have the *ahem* "opportunity" to be an earwitness to domestic violence in such a way.....



Yes and no. It's a fact that lower-frequency components travel through any medium - and especially a liquid or solid medium - far better than higher-frequency components. It's a simple fact. Put on some music in one room (not a track with thumping bass...) and go and listen to it from behind a wall in another room. I guarantee that you will hear the mid-range and low-frequency components of the music far more clearly than the top end, which will be relatively more muffled.

And yes, of course you can hear kids scream through the wall (although again, I am minded to pity you!), but had they shouted at the same amplitude, you'd have heard the shout significantly more loudly.

Thank you for your concern LJ. I live in the high security wing of HMP Parkhurst. Not really.

I live in Guildford and closing time brings the standard troupe of young souls past my house fresh and exuberant from their revelry. I will ask the neighbours to induce their kids to scream and then shout and then report back. He also plays acoustic guitar and that comes through the wall pretty well, despite being fairly soft and (partly) high-pitched.

I forgot to record the precise window alignments when listening to neighbourhood squabbles. So you may well be right. People can scream very loud all the same.

Assuming we agree a scream could have been heard, leaving Acbytesla on his own on the extreme wing of the party, the problems with this evidence, from an osmotic POV, are only just beginning, as Briars' crime theory shows. She has to rearrange Curatolo , who does not hear the piercing scream despite being better placed (how come that and the disco buses don't prove he was talking about the 31st if not lying?) and 'correct' Nara on her timing, such as it is, and all for what - to shift TOD back far enough to overcome all the much more powerful indicators of an early time. The running feet I guess are supposed to show multiple killers but none of them is heading over to Lana's etc etc

 

[acbytesla]

Yes and no. It's a fact that lower-frequency components travel through any medium - and especially a liquid or solid medium - far better than higher-frequency components. It's a simple fact. Put on some music in one room (not a track with thumping bass...) and go and listen to it from behind a wall in another room. I guarantee that you will hear the mid-range and low-frequency components of the music far more clearly than the top end, which will be relatively more muffled.

And yes, of course you can hear kids scream through the wall (although again, I am minded to pity you!), but had they shouted at the same amplitude, you'd have heard the shout significantly more loudly.

Thank you for your concern LJ. I live in the high security wing of HMP Parkhurst. Not really.

I live in Guildford and closing time brings the standard troupe of young souls past my house fresh and exuberant from their revelry. I will ask the neighbours to induce their kids to scream and then shout and then report back. He also plays acoustic guitar and that comes through the wall pretty well, despite being fairly soft and (partly) high-pitched.

I forgot to record the precise window alignments when listening to neighbourhood squabbles. So you may well be right. People can scream very loud all the same.

Assuming we agree a scream could have been heard, leaving Acbytesla on his own on the extreme wing of the party, the problems with this evidence, from an osmotic POV, are only just beginning, as Briars' crime theory shows. She has to rearrange Curatolo , who does not hear the piercing scream despite being better placed (how come that and the disco buses don't prove he was talking about the 31st if not lying?) and 'correct' Nara on her timing, such as it is, and all for what - to shift TOD back far enough to overcome all the much more powerful indicators of an early time. The running feet I guess are supposed to show multiple killers but none of them is heading over to Lana's etc etc

What puts me on the extreme wing of the party Anglo? It seems to me that LJ and I are perfectly in sync.

Neither LJ or I are saying that Nara couldn't have heard, only that she would not be able to reliably discern a scream through the double pane French window door of the cottage and across 45 meters and then through the glass of Nara's window. I don't know what Nara heard but her testimony is unreliable. Not that it was false, just you sure as hell shouldn't count on it for establishing Meredith's TOD.

 

[anglolawyer]

What puts me on the extreme wing of the party Anglo? It seems to me that LJ and I are perfectly in sync.

Neither LJ or I are saying that Nara couldn't have heard, only that she would not be able to reliably discern a scream through the double pane French window door of the cottage and across 45 meters and then through the glass of Nara's window. I don't know what Nara heard but her testimony is unreliable. Not that it was false, just you sure as hell shouldn't count on it for establishing Meredith's TOD.

Can you fix the quotes?

You say 'impossible' (actually 'IMPOSSIBLE') and LJ says not likely. That makes you a fundamentalst . I am not talking about the whole of her evidence but only the purely factual question whether a scream from the apartment could be heard at Nara's. Your opinion does not dispose of the possibility in my, admittedly less qualified, opinion.

it's perfectly possible she heard an unrelated, inconsequential scream. I know that. Kids coming home from a bar or something. I frequently hear such noises that can sound alarming but it turns out to be just someone fooling around.

ETA apologies - it was me that had to fix my quotes!

 

[Diocletus]

Exactly.

Uh huh. Well, my BS meter is on high so you're going to have to provide some law to that effect.

That said, it is possible that there is such an inane law. After all, we see in the supreme court report that the legislative body has passed a law saying that the supreme court can't re-open the factual findings of the court below. But then we see that the supreme court has some prior decision where it has decided that this rule doesn't really apply if the supreme court can think of some a reason why it should disturb those findings, and the supreme court uses this prior decision as justification for opening Hellmann's factual findings.

So, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a law that said that witnesses are credible as a matter of law unless there is some reason to disbelieve them. And oh, BTW, drug use, inconsistent prior statements, bias, passage of time and such things aren't good reasons.

I'm not really sure why they even have jury (guys with ribbons) trials in Italy, given the facts that the jury can't decide witness credibility and the supreme court (guys with robes) can change any fact-findings that it wants to. Shoot, since trials are so useless, they might as well just have a different guy's trial and decide whether you're guilty in that guy's trial. Oh, wait . . .

 

[acbytesla]

Can you fix the quotes?

You say 'impossible' (actually 'IMPOSSIBLE') and LJ says not likely. That makes you a fundamentalst . I am not talking about the whole of her evidence but only the purely factual question whether a scream from the apartment could be heard at Nara's. Your opinion does not dispose of the possibility in my, admittedly less qualified, opinion.

it's perfectly possible she heard an unrelated, inconsequential scream. I know that. Kids coming home from a bar or something. I frequently hear such noises that can sound alarming but it turns out to be just someone fooling around.

ETA apologies - it was me that had to fix my quotes!

I actually think LJ and I are saying exactly the same thing. When I say it was would be IMPOSSIBLE, I mean it would be IMPOSSIBLE to reliably discern the scream, not hear the scream.

I wouldn't say I'm a fundamentalist anglo, this isn't a religion or a philosophy, it's a science. It's not subjective at all. And while this has no bearing on my opinion regarding the possibility or impossibility we know by Rudy's statement as well as the status of Meredith's digestion that Nara did NOT hear Meredith scream at 11:30 PM on November 1st.

No apologies needed at all!!!!

 

[Diocletus]

The absence of a piece of evidence from a report is not evidence of its absence.

That's for damn sure. Like, for example, Stefanoni's suppression of the extraction, amplification and concentration the records for 36b; and also, all controls relevant to 36b; and also, 12 of the 16 egrams in 36b's electrophoresis run.

The absence of that evidence from her report doesn't prove that it doesn't exist, because we know it does exist; it just proves deceit.

 

[Dan O.]

Don't high pitched sounds travel better in some way? If I want to hail a taxi I whistle. Evolution has equipped women and small children with a high-pitched scream, often described as 'piercing'. In my experience, one sound that carries from building to building is that of domestic violence, often involving screaming.

The high frequency sounds are important in the local setting. You need to hear your own kids scream not all of the neighbors. Elephants emit ultra low frequency sounds that travel for many miles. Jungle drums used for communications over long distances use low frequency. The high frequency whistle gets the attention of the nearby cab because it stands out from the low frequency rumble reverberating through the city canyons.

In an urban setting, the noise travels further than the communication. The echo's mix up the information and make it unintelligible. I recently tried to communicate with a colleague that was in view 3 floors away in a concrete stairwell. It was impossible.

 

[Dan O.]

She might have screamed while encountering Guede in the kitchen, maybe standing by Filomena's open door.

Maybe. But what does that do to the timing between the scream and the footsteps?

 

[Diocletus]

Is it true that the testimony of a witness must pass a test before being allowed in an U.S. court? Who is it that determines which testimony may be heard and which may not be heard? Wouldn't this process severely hamper the defense or the prosecution?

No. Unless you're talking about "expert" (not fact) witnesses, in which case the judge might decide to disallow junk science testimony. Stefanoni's testimony, for example, would likely be thrown out if a US court because her methods are not generally accepted, her documentation and protocols are incomplete and she has not disclosed her lab records.

 

[Diocletus]

I do not worship Mignini but I believe him to be fair and just when prosecuting a case. Those are important traits for a prosecutor to have whether one is innocent or guilty of a crime.

Sorry, but a prosecutor who hides exculpatory evidence is a crook.

 

[acbytesla]

Delete

 

[anglolawyer]

I actually think LJ and I are saying exactly the same thing. When I say it was would be IMPOSSIBLE, I mean it would be IMPOSSIBLE to reliably discern the scream, not hear the scream.

I wouldn't say I'm a fundamentalist anglo, this isn't a religion or a philosophy, it's a science. It's not subjective at all. And while this has no bearing on my opinion regarding the possibility or impossibility we know by Rudy's statement as well as the status of Meredith's digestion that Nara did NOT hear Meredith scream at 11:30 PM on November 1st.

No apologies needed at all!!!!

I don't believe she did either but we weren't talking about that. Jury's still out on the possibility point so far as I'm concerned. I don't buy Briars' echoing alley though. I want a demo. If I were on a jury I would give the accused the benefit of the very considerable doubt on this point, given all the inconsistencies and the fact Curatolo didn't hear it (if he was there at all, which is not my problem).

 

[anglolawyer]

Maybe. But what does that do to the timing between the scream and the footsteps?

Good point. It makes them unconnected.