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

[Mary_H]

Okay I know it's early in day for you,

Hey, you're the one who wrote brish instead of British. What, did you have a Bloody Mary for breakfast?

but you think that daddy paid the lawyer but wasn't informed of a deal that was offered? Remember that Raf talked with his daddy every day and was dependent on him for money and that would be needed after he was found not guilty.

The fact that GB assessed the situation in way that had her "work" for both Raf and Amanda in no way reflects that daddy wasn't in control.

Are you honestly saying that the deal Raf describes was offered would not be known to his father?

Again, I don't see any reason why anyone would feel like this is something to be made public. But I can't talk about it with any authority because I haven't looked into it. So I will stop.

 

[acbytesla]

Because it looked clean and was on top. The detective remembered the purloined letter story and thought he would take what was left in the "open". As always I go with incompetence first, second, third...

It's one thing for the Detective to take this knife. But why would they have just tested only this "cooking" knife when there were others at the cottage and at Patrick's ?

 

[Grinder]

I'm curious Grinder, what does make sense about this knife? Virtually nothing does. Scaring Raffaele makes as much sense as anything else. In fact, more sense than they took this knife at random or because it looked "too clean" or that it smelled of bleach.

I've explained this a few times. It makes no sense to take a knife to be used for "scaring" that doesn't fit anything known and the size was known.

They never said it smelled of bleach.

There were so many other things that could have been used to scare him why the knife. How about telling him they had found blood at his place and he had better come clean before the DNA results came back.

I think they thought one or both were involved in the murder and that they them dead to rights. They had the shoe prints and believed they were Raf's. They had his addled statements. They had his violent comics. they had his tactical knives. They were still awaiting DNA from the murder room and prints as well.

I'm just not buying that they wanted to frame Amanda on the 6th or 7th.

 

[Mary_H]

Because it looked clean and was on top. The detective remembered the purloined letter story and thought he would take what was left in the "open". As always I go with incompetence first, second, third...<snip>

Well, now I have to go read the frickin' Purloined Letter again.

Of course, we all go with incompetence, first, second and third. So your argument is that they did not use the knife as a threat because that would have required some thought?

I still don't see why they needed to grab a knife at all at that early stage of the game, especially when they had just sent Raffaele's flick knife over to forensics and thought it would turn out to be the murder weapon.

 

[Grinder]

Hey, you're the one who wrote brish instead of British. What, did you have a Bloody Mary for breakfast?

Now that's an odd drink for you to name

Again, I don't see any reason why anyone would feel like this is something to be made public. But I can't talk about it with any authority because I haven't looked into. So I will stop.

Okay but Raf did make it public and after he did why wouldn't someone back him?

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>I'm just not buying that they wanted to frame Amanda on the 6th or 7th.

Has anyone said they did?

 

[Mary_H]

Now that's an odd drink for you to name

Okay but Raf did make it public and after he did why wouldn't someone back him?

We can probably find twenty things in his book that nobody has specifically backed him up on. Why would they? How did this subject come up, anyway?

 

[Grinder]

Well, now I have to go read the frickin' Purloined Letter again.

Of course, we all go with incompetence, first, second and third. So your argument is that they did not use the knife as a threat because that would have required some thought?

I still don't see why they needed to grab a knife at all at that early stage of the game, especially when they had just sent Raffaele's flick knife over to forensics and thought it would turn out to be the murder weapon.

It's short and free

My argument is that there is absolutely no reason to believe that at that time they were looking to frame Amanda and that they thought they had plenty on them already.

As I said the detective saw it sitting there on top and grabbed it. They did so many stupid things why would that stand out? Now later when the shoes weren't looking good and no DNA had come out on the kids I think Stefanoni did all she could to find DNA on the knife.

If they were grabbing a knife to scare him, they would have that in mind and would want the fear to be maximized by having it fit all known info. It was out in the british p) tabs that they were looking for a pen knife.

 

[Grinder]

Has anyone said they did?

What other motive would there be but to get Amanda? Why would they think that they would need Raf and what could he say except that she went out which he had already mistakenly said.

 

[Mary_H]

It's short and free

Thanks!

My argument is that there is absolutely no reason to believe that at that time they were looking to frame Amanda and that they thought they had plenty on them already.

I agree.

As I said the detective saw it sitting there on top and grabbed it. They did so many stupid things why would that stand out? Now later when the shoes weren't looking good and no DNA had come out on the kids I think Stefanoni did all she could to find DNA on the knife.

If they were grabbing a knife to scare him, they would have that in mind and would want the fear to be maximized by having it fit all known info. It was out in the british p) tabs that they were looking for a pen knife.

Well, I don't think you're really at odds with anyone here. People are merely speculating, as they tend to do, day in and day out. So adjust your ornery-ometer accordingly.

 

[Diocletus]

There were so many other things that could have been used to scare him why the knife. How about telling him they had found blood at his place and he had better come clean before the DNA results came back.

I think they thought one or both were involved in the murder and that they them dead to rights. They had the shoe prints and believed they were Raf's. They had his addled statements. They had his violent comics. they had his tactical knives. They were still awaiting DNA from the murder room and prints as well.

I'm just not buying that they wanted to frame Amanda on the 6th or 7th.

They got the DNA results on the 6th, maybe the 7th at the latest. And they knew then that the rapist wasn't Lumumba or Raffaelle.

 

[acbytesla]

Grinder, the problem with this process is pretty damn significant. Instead of an organic, go where the evidence takes the investigation. It is clear, that the exact opposite approach was followed.

There are countless knives available to process and only three knives were tested. All belonging to Raffaele? And the only knife subjected to this bizarre process of ignoring the negative results and testing it again and again and again until DNA from Meredith's magically appears on the blade was this cooking knife?

It is just far too big a coincidence to have faith in this process.

 

[Mary_H]

What other motive would there be but to get Amanda? Why would they think that they would need Raf and what could he say except that she went out which he had already mistakenly said.

Possible motives:

1. They were incompetent.
2. They wanted to scare Raffaele.
3. ?
4. Frame Amanda.

Is it me, or are you just being difficult and self-contradictory?

I just wrote this about 12 hours ago. I can't believe you are not hanging on my every word.

They confiscated the knife on the 6th, but did not reveal the forensics until the 16th, which, coincidentally, was around the same time they got wind of Rudy. They couldn't use Raffaele's knife, they couldn't use Patrick, they had nothing on Amanda -- that was when they trotted out the kitchen knife.

ETA: But when they snagged the knife, they DID have something on Amanda -- her confession. But they were not looking to make her the stabber at that time anyway.

 

[acbytesla]

It's short and free

My argument is that there is absolutely no reason to believe that at that time they were looking to frame Amanda and that they thought they had plenty on them already. As I said the detective saw it sitting there on top and grabbed it. They did so many stupid things why would that stand out? Now later when the shoes weren't looking good and no DNA had come out on the kids I think Stefanoni did all she could to find DNA on the knife.

If they were grabbing a knife to scare him, they would have that in mind and would want the fear to be maximized by having it fit all known info. It was out in the british p) tabs that they were looking for a pen knife.

Really? You think they thought they had enough already? What did they have? Really not much at all.

 

[Bill Williams]

Really? You think they thought they had enough already? What did they have? Really not much at all.

They were transparent and upfront about what they had... they had all the behaviour, from which they bragged they'd solved the case before the forensics came in.

I also don't thnk they were so much trying to frame the two, as they were under tremendous pressure to solve the case - the case of their lives, and as John Douglas says, a one-in-a-career case for most of them.

 

[acbytesla]

They were transparent and upfront about what they had... they had all the behaviour, from which they bragged they'd solved the case before the forensics came in.

I also don't thnk they were so much trying to frame the two, as they were under tremendous pressure to solve the case - the case of their lives, and as John Douglas says, a one-in-a-career case for most of them.

Frame may be too strong a word. However,

They became convinced that they knew what happened without any real evidence. At some point they must have felt that they didn't have enough. That they either needed "stronger" statements of criminality from Amanda and/or Raffaele or they needed some real physical evidence or this was going to crumble like a house of cards.

I think they picked this knife to try and pressure Raffaele. Not that it worked, it was weak, even to do that. They wanted Raffaele to know that they were going to get him, so he might as well give it up. PERIOD.

But he didn't. And then at some point Stefanoni, figured that they needed something to allow them to hold Raffaele. So she rubbed Amanda's sweater or some other piece of Amanda's clothing on the blade. Anything to get something. but nothing was working. So she tried again,and again and again.

 

[acbytesla]

You know how this worked It's not that people were told to "frame" Amanda. It's that they were instructed to find the evidence that will put this murderer away. That "not finding it" was unacceptable. Don't let this American "whore" get away with murder in our home town. Don't t let Amanda make a fool of us. So get us the evidence we need.

 

[Dan O.]

But beyond connection, the mail service provider would retain the sending information.

Who is Raffaele' mail service provider? Does the school have it's own mail system? Does Raffaele use Gmail? Does pis-on-u even require recording port 25 (SMTP) connections? I know it's been a major talking point for the PGP that Raffaele has claimed to have sent email that night but they haven't got squat to back up their argument. And here you are bringing it up again. you don't even know what questions need to be asked in order to put together a valid argument. You just repeat the talking points.

The internet connection showed activity which could not be tracked to Sollecito's computer, and moreover it was consistent with the automatic functioning of a runging p2p app.

And what do you think made that connection? And what p2p app is opening a web browser connection to apple.com? Does this tech stuff confuse you?

 

[Machiavelli]

There was at least one private security camera on Corso Garibaldi that was in full working order - it was at a Bank just down the road from Sollecito's apartment. It would necessarily and without any doubt have recorded the movement of everybody down Corso Garibaldi, and thus would unequivocally have captured Knox and/or Sollecito going to or from the cottage (whether on the night of the murder or the morning after).

Too bad that the police waited so long to request the footage that the data had been overwritten......

This information is from the same poter who claims that TMB "non-Hemasix" version test is more specific than Hemastix TMB and Luminol, and who called peroxide a "catalyzer" and said blood "oxidizes" Luminol...

There is no bank with a vide-surveillance camera that could see road in via Garibaldi, at least there wasn't any in 2007. This is what I know.
Such bank owned video-camera doesn't exist not even in Gumbel's book:

(...) The second idea was to ask to see video footage from two security cameras on the route from my house to Amanda’s. The first camera was outside a military barracks on Corso Garibaldi, halfway between my front door and Piazza Grimana. The second was a city-operated camera on the corner of Piazza Grimana itself. (...)

There are only two video-cameras on the road, the one at the corner and the Army barracks one. As far as I know they were non-operational; about the city-operated on, I'm sure it was requested immedately by the police and it turned out to be inactive. As for the military I don't know the reason, but I just guess they would hardly tell us exactly the details about their video surveillance policy.

 

[acbytesla]

Who is Raffaele' mail service provider? Does the school have it's own mail system? Does Raffaele use Gmail? Does pis-on-u even require recording port 25 (SMTP) connections? I know it's been a major talking point for the PGP that Raffaele has claimed to have sent email that night but they haven't got squat to back up their argument. And here you are bringing it up again. you don't even know what questions need to be asked in order to put together a valid argument. You just repeat the talking points.

Originally Posted by Machiavelli:
The internet connection showed activity which could not be tracked to Sollecito's computer, and moreover it was consistent with the automatic functioning of a runging p2p app.

And what do you think made that connection? And what p2p app is opening a web browser connection to apple.com? Does this tech stuff confuse you?

I guess Machiavelli doesn't get that P2P means Person to Person. It is the same protocol that IMs make. It is a link between two computers setting up a Skype call or a chat session or music sharing session and much much more) It is possible that someone set up an auto connection for a specific time, but they would leave a trail. No that is almost positively, undeniably a human interaction with the computer.