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

[Dan O.]

Standing on the grate with no hand hold and at the same time would not be that easy.

Physically impossible actually. The center of mass must be outside the wall while the support point on the grate is inside the wall. The climber is in a state of falling away. The only way this works is that the climbers momentum gives him time to reach up and grab the upper ledge.

Look at the defense lawyer pics. If they were not latched or jammed shut it would be easier.

The lawyer held onto the lower window opening while climbing up the grate. He may have been able to maintain 3 point contact with one hand on the lower window while grabbing the upper window sill with the other hand.

The shutters were open. Filomena didn't close them in her rush.

That's what you believe, not what you can show. It makes this entry easier and more likely to be the path that Rudy chooses but as shown it is not a requirement for the lone wolf scenario.

I'm surprised by this comment. The defense need prove nothing. By some chance do you have the video of the lawyer climbing?

In Italy where judges think if something is possible it must be probable, the burden of proof for the defense is higher.

The lawyers climb was recorded by a series of snapshots. I believe IA has them.

Yes a rock climbing expert. Too bad they didn't just use a 5' 10" basketball player.

They probably found it difficult to recruit a professional cat burglar. Most basket ball players are not familiar with negotiation vertical surfaces as the horizontal surface is more their court.

The move he made is a practiced rock climbing one. I doubt Rudy would have climbed that way. Put a short ladder straight up against a wall and walk up with no hand holds, not that easy.

But that isn't what he did. He walked up to the lower window, grabbed the bars near the top and climbed three steps to put his feet both on the lower sill. Then he released his hand hold and streatched upwards to grab the upper window sill. A very simple move whose only skill is knowing your reach and trusting your grasp. There's no risk either since it is so close to the ground, if you miss grabbing the upper sill you just hop down to the grass and start again.

After reviewing the show some more, I concede that Rudy could have reached the shutter from the porch area by grabbing the wall with his right hand and the shutter with his left.

Now do it again but this time reach out with your left foot to find the upper bar of the lower window. This way you never have to drop your nice shoes into the muddy area below the windows.

I still believe the shutters were not closed that afternoon.

Unless you are an itailan judge in Florence assigned to this case, what you believe doesn't matter.

 

[Bill Williams]

This information is false. The seismologists were never accused of "having failed to predict an earthquake".
They were accused of lying to the press and of organizing and taking part to a bogus meeting of a scientific comittee, and of signing a report which they didn't write (was written by politicians under the direction of Mr. Bertolaso).

Machiavelli - you are the only person on the planet who is interpreting it this way. Please do not worry, this was NOT one of Mr. Mignini's prosecutions.

What does Ms. Vogt think?

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/oct/22/scientists-convicted-manslaughter-earthquake

The defendants were accused of giving "inexact, incomplete and contradictory information" about whether small tremors felt by L'Aquila residents in the weeks and months before the 6 April 2009 quake should have constituted grounds for a quake warning.

Just to note, Machiavelli and Ms. Vogt, "inexact, incomplete and contradictory information" assumes that there could be exact information....

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/10/seismologists-convicted-of-manslaughter-for-failing-to-predict-earthquake.html

This follows a 2009 meeting in L'Aquila Italy in which defendants were asked to assess the risk of damage from a major earthquake, following months of seismic activity. They were charged with assessing "inexact, incomplete and contradictory" information on the earthquake risk.

http://io9.com/5953701/verdict-due-in-trial-of-six-scientists-facing-manslaughter-charges-for-failing-to-predict-earthquake

The prosecution's primary complaint is not so much that the government appointed panel of seismologists failed to predict the earthquake, but that they gave a falsely reassuring statement about its potential effects. The L'Aquila region had experienced two tremors prior to the earthquake, and local officials consulted the seismologists about whether or not it was a harbinger of things to come. In his closing statement, prosecuting attorney Fabio Picuti said the defendants had provided "an incomplete, inept, unsuitable and criminally mistaken" analysis which gave the residents of L'Aquila a false sense of security and led many to stay indoors when the first tremors hit. Science, they're arguing, did not do what was required.

The defense is claiming that science is being terribly overextended in this case, and that earthquakes are still impossible to predict, both in terms of their timing and magnitude. The seismologists' lawyer, Carlo Sica, said, "They are not guilty of anything, the earthquake's no-one's fault."

And many members of the scientific community are inclined to agree. More than 5,000 scientists recently signed an open letter to Italian president Giorgio Napolitano in support of the seismologists and geologists.

 

[Mary_H]

Yes, I read that at PMF, the strange thing here though, now both sides, PIP and PGP, have no faith in her anymore, what happened?

Barbie took the blue pill. Now she's paying the price.

I think it's simply utterly foolish, beyond any sense of reality, to belive the prosecution gave crime scenes to the press.
It is obviously also an unfounded wild claim.

I heard it from Barbie, when she said it on American TV. (But then, Barbie took the blue pill.)

It would be also a complete nonsense to do so, because it doesn't offer absolutely any legal advantage. It would be even more nonsense to publish them in another country, on newspapers which the Perugians will never read.

Yes, the mainstream media themselves are favourite means used by mafia powers and they play a major role in enforcing mafious methods.
<snip>
There was obviously no 'prosecution leaking a picture to influence public opinion'.

Regardless of the photos, all the news in English-speaking countries in the early days of the case came directly from local Italian newspapers, such as Corriere della Sera and Giornale dell'Umbria, who published first. And all the news in the Italian newspapers came directly from the police and/or prosecutor and/or the nationally-sponsored press conference, which spelled out the prosecutor's case. Only one side of the story was made known, the side that deeply prejudiced the Italian people, to this day.

If a hundred non-Italian legal analysts thoroughly studied the first trial in detail, they would conclude the decision for guilt was not the result of the evidence. Therefore, it was the result of something else, such as national honor, which is fed by public opinion, which is fed by the media.

If Mignini did not put great store by the media and public opinion, he would not be going around suing everybody for defamation.

 

[Mary_H]

.
Me too.

On another topic, when I look at Filomena's bedroom, how little storage she had for the amount of clothes, boxes, bags, shoes, etc., it is obvious she stored many things on the floor.

I wonder where she stored her dirty laundry before it got washed? I don't see a laundry hamper. Did she maybe just throw it in a pile on the floor?
.

I think so. I think Filomena's room was a mess, and if she said anything to the contrary, she was not being truthful. I also think she left the shutters open; she was disorganized and in a hurry, and there was no real reason to close them if she wasn't going to be there.

 

[RandyN]

This information is false. The seismologists were never accused of "having failed to predict an earthquake".
They were accused of lying to the press and of organizing and taking part to a bogus meeting of a scientific comittee, and of signing a report which they didn't write (was written by politicians under the direction of Mr. Bertolaso).

So you want us to believe you and ignore Scientific American which is a well respected magazine not known for sensationalism or for lying in their articles...meanwhile you are known for arguing for illogical nonsense...I'm going with SA.

 

[JREF2010]

Did any of you actually watch the whole Ch 5 show? The climb was simple. The guy did it with the new top bars and also without the top bars...He opened the shutters without use of the top bars. Then he put his elbows on the ledge and discussed how easy it would be to open the shutters, break out the window and climb inside. The show was not perfect...in the window breaking reproduction they failed to use inner shutters but the end result and conclusion would have been little different.

This entry site for RG is not something that is even debatable. It is clear and conclusive. The only reason anyone silly enough to argue against it has already bought into all the illogical evidence used by police and prosecutor to create a "staged break-in" BTW remember that they used a full year to concoct and refine the argument before presenting it in court. And it is still a stupid theory that is backed only by recollections...proof? No pics of any glass on top of anything. No data to prove glass distribution evidence from a staging. The illogical ignoring of evidence of no burglary without consideration that the burglary had quickly developed into the unexpected murder.

What Ch 5 showed was that in general the case as per the prosecution is highly suspect and certainly makes the evidence highly doubtful. Had a real investigative team done a study and tests with more knowledgeable collaborators then there would have been more than 5 questions asked and answered.

Here is a link to an expert on false memories...note the Italy connection, planted memories, etc...its rather long but worth the watch.

http://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_...ium=email&utm_content=talk_of_the_week_button

yes it was a decent show, it "touched" on things. the climber went up so fast, and easy. the defense could use that clip in the trial if they need to, it was good enough to smash the impossible PGP jurors.

just saw this.,..Maresca is a bad apple, imo. I would think he would be more like the Ms.Kercher who seemed and mentioned a few times, in a more neutral and logical manner....where the lawyer seems to want a conviction at all costs no matter whose innocent or guilty and to the wind with evidence, he doesn't want it.
He silenced Rudy in court too, as I understand it.

here he fakes a neutral stance but... he cant even hide his bias for three lines.

On Friday, Francesco Maresca, the Kercher family lawyer, said of the fresh appeal: "The hopes are to have a complete, total, neutral and balanced trial which can then lead to a sentence which, whatever it is, is properly developed and well-reasoned."

 

[RandyN]

Edited by jhunter1163: 

Moderated content removed.

Please try to restrain your anger by attacking the argument rather than the arguer.

As for foolish arguments...you seem to be incapable of anything else actually...

So tell us why Mignini kept Lumumbas bar closed for months after he was released from jail? And try to keep in mind that Mignini was in charge of all aspects of this case for the first few years.

PS...the evidence against Mignini are his own twisted words recorded on TV. Or are you sticking with the "it only matters if Mignini lies in court" theme? because that is one of the more illogical arguments you make.

Mignini is a corrupt liar who should be forced out just like the American prosecutor Ken Anderson in the Michael Morton case was...both are corrupt officials who will do or say anything in order to get a conviction. In Andersons case his crimes were far fewer and less public than the huge amount of evidence showing Migninis corruption in this case. Just too much nonsense to ignore at this point. Too many strange circumstances...too much for anyone with a normal mind to ignore.

 

[JREF2010]

I think so. I think Filomena's room was a mess, and if she said anything to the contrary, she was not being truthful. I also think she left the shutters open; she was disorganized and in a hurry, and there was no real reason to close them if she wasn't going to be there.

I think Filomena understands the Lying Squad Polizia Pack mentality environment.

Doesn't it seem likely, she can understand that if she were to explain things in truth it would be trouble for her?
I think Filomena could be charged with something if she admitted to disrupting the crime scene and again, helping the defense. I mean Migninni and others could surely come up with some abuser-of -power charge....

Filomena knows how things work and the ego of those in power and offering things that go against the prosecutors case isn't safe.

I think? what does she have to gain by telling the truth and what does she have to lose by telling the truth , that she didn't follow orders and went back inside and grabbed her laptop and disturbed a crime scene?

maybe Im wrong, she did testify that Amanda and Meredith got along, and Migninni didn't have her tossed into jail or charged with assisting a satanic sex orgy... maybe because she lawyered up faster! migninni left her alone..idk

5:09am in Perugia....

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>On Friday, Francesco Maresca, the Kercher family lawyer, said of the fresh appeal: "The hopes are to have a complete, total, neutral and balanced trial which can then lead to a sentence which, whatever it is, is properly developed and well-reasoned."

What a complete knucklehead. This belongs in the ISC's "osmotic" section: "Now, go forth and find us a verdict of guilt!"

 

[RandyN]

.
He's on to us Rose. Wait until he see what happens next!.

Oh lookie see ...next Vogt is reporting that the Italian economy is about to fall but that...never fear the criminal justice system will forge ahead...

Good job everyone...you have made the Italian economy fail.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I think so. I think Filomena's room was a mess, and if she said anything to the contrary, she was not being truthful. I also think she left the shutters open; she was disorganized and in a hurry, and there was no real reason to close them if she wasn't going to be there.

Hello Mary, hope you are fine. I agreed with what you stated above a very long time ago when Bruce was saying the same, I changed my mind when Amanda herself told Filomena on the phone that her room had been broken into and was trashed, (I believe that was the word she used). Amanda was the last one to see Filomena's room the day of the murder, she wrapped a present in there, so she was aware the state of the room, why would she say it was trashed.

 

[Grinder]

Hello Mary, hope you are fine. I agreed with what you stated above a very long time ago when Bruce was saying the same, I changed my mind when Amanda herself told Filomena on the phone that her room had been broken into and was trashed, (I believe that was the word she used). Amanda was the last one to see Filomena's room the day of the murder, she wrapped a present in there, so she was aware the state of the room, why would she say it was trashed.

I was under the impression that she wrapped it in the common area. Perhaps I forgot could you refresh my memory with a cite?

The last person would have been F after she "closed" the shutters.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I was under the impression that she wrapped it in the common area. Perhaps I forgot could you refresh my memory with a cite?

The last person would have been F after she "closed" the shutters.

I can not find a cite for that, perhaps it was wrapped in the common area, can you find a cite that states that, I will look some more. I always thought it was wrapped in Filomena's room. Amanda said trashed, Filomena said a disaster....

She said that, knowing by then that the window of her bedroom had been smashed, her first instinct on returning to the flat had been to go to her room. What she saw was "a disaster". Her clothes were on the floor and her cupboard was open. But none of her jewellery was missing, nor her designer sunglasses and handbags. Her laptop was among the clothes. She said there was glass on top of the pile of clothes: "I remember that in lifting the computer I realised that I was picking up bits of glass because there were bits of glass on top and it was all covered with glass."

 

[Mary_H]

Hello Mary, hope you are fine. I agreed with what you stated above a very long time ago when Bruce was saying the same, I changed my mind when Amanda herself told Filomena on the phone that her room had been broken into and was trashed, (I believe that was the word she used). Amanda was the last one to see Filomena's room the day of the murder, she wrapped a present in there, so she was aware the state of the room, why would she say it was trashed.

I can not find a cite for that, perhaps it was wrapped in the common area, can you find a cite that states that, I will look some more. I always thought it was wrapped in Filomena's room. Amanda said trashed, Filomena said a disaster....

She said that, knowing by then that the window of her bedroom had been smashed, her first instinct on returning to the flat had been to go to her room. What she saw was "a disaster". Her clothes were on the floor and her cupboard was open. But none of her jewellery was missing, nor her designer sunglasses and handbags. Her laptop was among the clothes. She said there was glass on top of the pile of clothes: "I remember that in lifting the computer I realised that I was picking up bits of glass because there were bits of glass on top and it was all covered with glass."

Hi Sherlock, I am fine, I hope you are, too. You might know I have never been a proponent of the break-in theory, although I certainly believe Rudy threw a rock through the window from the outside, whether before or after the assault.

Filomena seems to me like the kind of person who thinks it's important to make a good impression and have people not think badly of her; for example, she asked Amanda not to tell the police they had smoked pot at the house. So, I can imagine her also pretending to have a neat room when she didn't.

I admit I have not studied Filomena's room to any extent. I think my questions about it would be answered if I knew whether throwing the rock through the window and shattering glass across the piles of stuff would make a big enough mess that she would call it a disaster.

 

[Dan O.]

We can look at the photos taken the next day and there appears to be only one suitable space in that cottage for wrapping a present. That space is the dining table in the common area. If you would like to suggest an alternate area, go ahead and make your case and we can evaluate it.

 

[Mary_H]

We can look at the photos taken the next day and there appears to be only one suitable space in that cottage for wrapping a present. That space is the dining table in the common area. If you would like to suggest an alternate area, go ahead and make your case and we can evaluate it.

I would agree with you on that, Dan. It makes more sense that Filomena would give Amanda the present to wrap in the common area than that she would have Amanda come in her room to wrap it. The common area is where A & R were when they talked to Meredith, too.

 

[Mary_H]

I can not find a cite for that, perhaps it was wrapped in the common area, can you find a cite that states that, I will look some more. I always thought it was wrapped in Filomena's room. Amanda said trashed, Filomena said a disaster....

She said that, knowing by then that the window of her bedroom had been smashed, her first instinct on returning to the flat had been to go to her room. What she saw was "a disaster". Her clothes were on the floor and her cupboard was open. But none of her jewellery was missing, nor her designer sunglasses and handbags. Her laptop was among the clothes. She said there was glass on top of the pile of clothes: "I remember that in lifting the computer I realised that I was picking up bits of glass because there were bits of glass on top and it was all covered with glass."

Okay, I'm looking at the pictures from this page and I am still going to maintain that Rudy could not have made his way across that room from the window without disturbing anything in his path or stepping on any of the glass. Filomena kind of makes it sounds like the floor is absolutely covered with her stuff, but there's quite a bit of bare space, albeit none without splinters of glass.

I don't know if anyone has ever suggested before that the inner shutter, when hit with the rock, could have banged into either the wall or the wardrobe, causing the flimsy, unlatched, particleboard upper wardrobe doors to fall open, adding to the "disastrous" look of the room.

ETA: Yes, Ron Hendry did mention that: "If the outer top shelf door at the wall had been left open by Filomena, then the action of the rock being thrown threw the window from the outside may have induced several articles of clothing to fall from the top shelves. When the large rock impacted the inner solid wood shutter, it would have induced a strong rotation of the shutter. This rotation may have slammed the inner wood shutter into a fully opened wardrobe door and this contact may have induced a strong twisting and jostling action of the wardrobe closet to the extent that many of the overstuffed clothing items fell to the floor. The several photos of the inner solid wood shutter and the top shelf door show varying positions between the two. One position we don’t see is the inner shutter swung around to the wall until it was well out of the way. The shutter’s position in the various photographs is always such that it could have been stopped by contact with the wardrobe door."

However, after reading the whole page, I am still not at all convinced Rudy came in through the window.

I think Filomena is a snake.

 

[Mary_H]

.
Me too.

On another topic, when I look at Filomena's bedroom, how little storage she had for the amount of clothes, boxes, bags, shoes, etc., it is obvious she stored many things on the floor.

I wonder where she stored her dirty laundry before it got washed? I don't see a laundry hamper. Did she maybe just throw it in a pile on the floor?
.

Yeah, that's her dirty laundry in front of the wardrobe. You can tell because the curtain is on top of the clothes; the clothes are not on top of the curtain. The yellow sweater might have fallen out of the wardrobe, but if she is anything like me when I'm in a hurry, she pulled a bunch of choices of what to wear out of various places, took what she wanted and left the rest there to clean up later.

In too big a hurry to wrap a present = too big a hurry to close the curtain = too big a hurry to close the shutters.

 

[christianahannah]

Filomena seems to me like the kind of person who thinks it's important to make a good impression and have people not think badly of her; for example, she asked Amanda not to tell the police they had smoked pot at the house. So, I can imagine her also pretending to have a neat room when she.

I thought it was Laura who Amanda said asked this of her? Did Filomena do the same?

 

[billyryan]

Sky news reporting that the retrial has started in Florence and that neither of the defendants,Raffaelle or Amanda are in court