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

[charlatan]

Well, she definitely has an agenda -- to make Hampikian look bad and, by extension, the defense.

"... it seemed relevant that an American university might be withholding potentially pertinent information."

What information? The only thing pertinent would be that they know that the defendants are guilty but they refuse to reveal it. If they have that information, why doesn't the prosecution?

The agenda here is to promote the idea that the esteemed professor -- and by extension the defense -- directly influenced Hellmann, Conti and Vecchiotti. The twits are all atwitter about it. IIRC, one of Vogt's former twitter followers unsubscribed with the complaint that Vogt is acting more like a conspiracy theorist than a journalist.

My actual best guess is that she is now betting the house on the slim chance of Knox and Sollecito crashing and burning, and that she may consequently end up being venerated as some sort of "Bernstein and Woodward-lite" intrepid investigative journalist.

That's the only "strategy" I can think of to explain her stance. After all, she must be at least intelligent and media-savvy enough to realise that she's never going to sell this sort of stuff until and unless Knox/Sollecito ultimately stand convicted and condemned, and that if (when) Knox/Sollecito are acquitted and exonerated, her work on this case will be consigned to the dustbin of history marked "embarrassingly wrong".....

Meanwhile Barbie is palling around with Kate Beckinsale while consulting on a film devoted to her own 'heroic' journalistic exploits. That's gotta hurt.

 

[Kestrel]

Can I ask a question about the time of death evidence - I checked back through my old medical and physiology books and it seems fairly basic undergraduate science that food will pass from within the stomach to the duodenum within 2-4 hours (with 4 being the very limit). How wasis thepresented in court - did the pathologist give his best estimate for the time of death or am I missing something?

The time of death presented by the prosecution in the first trial was based on body temperature readings. The problem is that the readings were taken after midnight on the day the body was found. A measurement that long after death (at least 24 hours) is far from precise. Meredith dying at 9 pm would be well within the expected error from such a measurement.

Stomach contents were mentioned at the first trial, but I am not sure that passage into the duodenum was brought up. It was however in the documents for the first appeal.

 

[Dan O.]

The irony of this, to me, is that the essential questions of the case are social, and revolve around the oppression of women by members of a male-dominated society. That could be a topic of discussion, too, but it rarely is. When Meredith was lying in a pool of blood and Amanda was sitting in prison for four years, do you think they really cared about the ******* lock on the bedroom door?

Don't you think Meredith would have thought about that lock as she was running into her room to escape the intruder running after her with his pants falling down? I'm not sure I mentioned this before but I think it was Rudy that cracked the door when he slammed into it while Meredith was holding the handle trying to keep him out. You see, Raffaele wouldn't have had the motivation to physically break the door when he and Amanda were searching the cottage the next day. But applying force to the door to see if the latch would slip would cause an existing crack to show itself.

 

[RandyN]

I think most people would want to get rid of the knife - as most people (apart from the Pro-Rudy lot at PMF) must be aware that you can match the knife to the wounds. If you were really mad enough to keep it, I would of expected some obsessive cleaning and boiling it in water etc. etc.

Can I ask a question about the time of death evidence - I checked back through my old medical and physiology books and it seems fairly basic undergraduate science that food will pass from within the stomach to the duodenum within 2-4 hours (with 4 being the very limit). How wasis thepresented in court - did the pathologist give his best estimate for the time of death or am I missing something?

This was presented just like all the scientific data was presented. It was hidden inside a cloud of smoke and then presented in fun house mirror view.

The prosecution "experts" harped about how time to empty the stomach was not a reliable or accurate method to use in determining TOD which is true actually. BUT...the real question which unfortunately the defense failed to present ....not sure they have even to this day...is that this transition time of two to four hours from the beginning of the meal to where something proceeds into the duodenum remains as an UN-presented fact to the court.

That's how the morons on the SC allow themselves the time span of 4PM until 6AM the next day and so split the time in half and wrongly conclude a TOD of 11 or 11:30 PM.

And after 6 years...they are still getting away with this Twilight Zone type scientific lies.

Rather than adding up the circumstantial evidence of all the data...the dropped phone call to mom, the fully dressed when attacked fact, no return call to mom and no typical media interaction by MK, no laundry interaction, no computer interaction... and finally no digestive reaction ...in short nothing to indicate that MK was alive much past 9:15PM and yet...

Somehow after 6 years this remains some sort of unknowable secret is atrocious. As if no proof of a staged break-in or nothing indicating any sort of assisted attack and is only the result of a murder by Guede alone were not enough. But the Italians appear to think the world is stupid and that no one sees what they are doing.

It remains unfathomable as to why someone like Vogt puts her foolish thoughts to pen. Who is she paying back? Nothing about her ideas make any sense at all.

 

[andreajo]

So, I wrote this:



acbytesla responded, but then he wrote this:



In response to acbytesla (not me), LJ wrote this:



Also in response to acbytesla (not me), CW wrote this:



I am trying not to be paranoid here, but this sort of thing happens often enough that it is really getting on my nerves. I have already been public about my posts being invisible at least once.

This board has become dominated by men. The subject matter addressed most often are engineering-oriented topics (not in the particular case of the phones). It's not that I think women are not capable of engineering-oriented thinking, but we are all aware of research showing basic general differences between men's and women's brains.

There are lots of women engineers, scientists and business people (look at Rolfe and Ampulla of Vater), but over time, this board has lost the input of women posters and, as I said, is dominated by topics men are more interested in discussing. I often wonder whether this is eventually inevitable in any internet group comprising both sexes.

The irony of this, to me, is that the essential questions of the case are social, and revolve around the oppression of women by members of a male-dominated society. That could be a topic of discussion, too, but it rarely is. When Meredith was lying in a pool of blood and Amanda was sitting in prison for four years, do you think they really cared about the ******* lock on the bedroom door?

I get that to many posters, settling the questions of evidence seems like the key to winning the case. But it isn't. It's just more rewarding for you to think about than the social and personality issues are. If your ideas never make it to the defense, they are simply intellectual exercises.

Here is an emotional exercise for you, instead. You came to this case, presumably, because you wanted to defend a woman (or two, if you include Meredith). If you care about women, then realize the tendency in our society is for them to be relegated to second-class status, and try not to participate in that.

Mary_H, I have been reading this thread for a while, and you are among my favorite posters because you frequently look at whatever is being discussed from a bit of a different direction than other posters. It is possible that there is an bias of interests toward topics that are evidence/science/engineering oriented, so posts of this nature may be answered more frequently than those that come from a socially-oriented perspective. If there is such a bias, I am not sure that it is gender based.

This is only my fourth post in this thread, so I can't really report about a pattern of response to my posts. I can only say that LondonJohn and Bill Williams took the time to reply to me on my first post. I took that as encouragement to stay and post if I had something meaningful to say.

 

[acbytesla]

I want to add to my earlier post Mary. I kind of got a little angry there. Sorry. I'm a strong believer in women's ..no people's rights. Women are as capable and in many cases far more capable then men. And there is no question that women have gotten the short end of the stick, far more often than they should. It's also true that men have subjugated women since the beginning of time. That isn't right.

I would want my daughter (theoretical) to have the same opportunities as a son. I'm also not sure why women who demonstrate themselves to be just as capable as men in the sciences and engineering often give up on it in their late teens or in college. It's an interesting dynamic and something that should be explored.

I do think however that I haven't seen any out and out sexism on this forum. If I have engaged in any unconsciously or subconsciously, my apologies. Feel free to point out my my faux pas'. I would like to know.

 

[Strozzi]

Mary_H, I have been reading this thread for a while, and you are among my favorite posters because you frequently look at whatever is being discussed from a bit of a different direction than other posters. It is possible that there is an bias of interests toward topics that are evidence/science/engineering oriented, so posts of this nature may be answered more frequently than those that come from a socially-oriented perspective. If there is such a bias, I am not sure that it is gender based.

This is only my fourth post in this thread, so I can't really report about a pattern of response to my posts. I can only say that LondonJohn and Bill Williams took the time to reply to me on my first post. I took that as encouragement to stay and post if I had something meaningful to say.

Mary: you recently posted the clear and definitive explanation of why Rudy's shoeprints were not found in the hallway between the bedroom, the bathroom, and his return to the bedroom. It is because Rudy slaughtered Meredith, then sat on her bed to remove his bloody shoe, and in so doing set the bloody knife down momentarily on her bedsheet where it left a bloody print outline. It was not as Massei invented for his false conviction motivation report - that absence of bloody footprints in the hall must be evidence of a selective cleanup.

I cited that in my post this morning where I accuse Stefanoni of fabricating evidence on the knife and bra clasp. So when Stefanoni charges me with calunia, we can sit in the iron cage together!

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

<snip>

Feel free to point out my my faux pas'. I would like to know.

Oh geez, this thread is already up to how many hundreds of thousands of posts, and now you're going to lay this opportunity out there?


FWIW, I think many times there is a disconnect once the page flips over to a new page. I have found most people do not go back very far to read what has transpired. I have actually become frustrated and snippy in other threads because someone will come along and chime in without having read what was just discussed on the prior page or so. I'm not saying that is what happened here, just that it is a potentially similar situation I have witnessed on this forum.

 

[RoseMontague]

The irony of this, to me, is that the essential questions of the case are social, and revolve around the oppression of women by members of a male-dominated society. That could be a topic of discussion, too, but it rarely is. When Meredith was lying in a pool of blood and Amanda was sitting in prison for four years, do you think they really cared about the ******* lock on the bedroom door?

I get that to many posters, settling the questions of evidence seems like the key to winning the case. But it isn't. It's just more rewarding for you to think about than the social and personality issues are. If your ideas never make it to the defense, they are simply intellectual exercises.

Here is an emotional exercise for you, instead. You came to this case, presumably, because you wanted to defend a woman (or two, if you include Meredith). If you care about women, then realize the tendency in our society is for them to be relegated to second-class status, and try not to participate in that.

I think there is a place for both and both are important. If there was ever an Italian case where this mindset screams out it is the Murder of Avetrana, which is now six months since a guilty sentence by the first court without a motivation report. Those evil ladies persuaded their dad and wife to sexually assault and murder their cousin, no evidence, no problem, even a confession from the dad, doesn't matter.

 

[Mary_H]

Odd that you should mention all of this, as I get the same feeling on many true crime discussion forums; here and elsewhere - but I had not seen it as a case of men v women, but of those who are interested in technical and forensic details v those who have a more intuitive, psychological, broader and more socio-cultural purview. hmmmmm......

That's a good point, smk.

 

[Grinder]

The question is, did Guede want the phones to be found?

I can think of a dozen ways to hide a knife if I don't want it to be found. And if I didn't mind if it's found, then, yes, I would clean it well enough to remove my DNA.

Have you been hanging out with BW and Tesla?

No Rudy didn't want the phones found and it is not so easy to dispose of evidence as you believe.

Since we can't isolate things here or at least many can't process things without bring their biases into the convo, I'll use the discredited technique myself. They knew that the vast majority of cuts came from another knife and may well have known that the knife wasn't used for any of the injuries and therefore had no worries about taking it home and rinsing it off.

I could hide a knife right now but I'm not worried about someone watching me because I didn't just kill someone.

And not directed to you but just because people don't look "that crazy" on TV doesn't mean they aren't crazy or weren't crazy at some other point in time. How often have we heard that the perp was a great neighbor and good guy?

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>If you feel you've been slighted, overlooked, patronised or ignored, Mary, I would like to bear my share of the apology for giving you that impression. I can promise you, however, that your impression does not match my actual intention or underlying point of view. I hope we can sort it out among ourselves, and be more careful in future not to convey the wrong impression - even if unintentionally. Sorry.

Thank you, LJ. Apology accepted.

 

[Mary_H]

Don't you think Meredith would have thought about that lock as she was running into her room to escape the intruder running after her with his pants falling down? I'm not sure I mentioned this before but I think it was Rudy that cracked the door when he slammed into it while Meredith was holding the handle trying to keep him out. You see, Raffaele wouldn't have had the motivation to physically break the door when he and Amanda were searching the cottage the next day. But applying force to the door to see if the latch would slip would cause an existing crack to show itself.

That's quite an argument, Dan.

 

[Mary_H]

Mary_H, I have been reading this thread for a while, and you are among my favorite posters because you frequently look at whatever is being discussed from a bit of a different direction than other posters. It is possible that there is an bias of interests toward topics that are evidence/science/engineering oriented, so posts of this nature may be answered more frequently than those that come from a socially-oriented perspective. If there is such a bias, I am not sure that it is gender based.

This is only my fourth post in this thread, so I can't really report about a pattern of response to my posts. I can only say that LondonJohn and Bill Williams took the time to reply to me on my first post. I took that as encouragement to stay and post if I had something meaningful to say.

Thank you for your input, andreajo, and welcome.

 

[Mary_H]

Mary: you recently posted the clear and definitive explanation of why Rudy's shoeprints were not found in the hallway between the bedroom, the bathroom, and his return to the bedroom. It is because Rudy slaughtered Meredith, then sat on her bed to remove his bloody shoe, and in so doing set the bloody knife down momentarily on her bedsheet where it left a bloody print outline. It was not as Massei invented for his false conviction motivation report - that absence of bloody footprints in the hall must be evidence of a selective cleanup.<snip>

I don't think that was me, Strozzi, but I appreciate the support.

 

[acbytesla]

I think there is a place for both and both are important. If there was ever an Italian case where this mindset screams out it is the Murder of Avetrana, which is now six months since a guilty sentence by the first court without a motivation report. Those evil ladies persuaded their dad and wife to sexually assault and murder their cousin, no evidence, no problem, even a confession from the dad, doesn't matter.

Wow!!! I just read a little about this and now I think that whatever great minds there ever were in Italy died with Da Vinci. Amazingly stupid country.

 

[Grinder]

The incredible coincidence in the Knox case is the bomb threat to the villa just outside of Perugia.

That odd coincidence may explain why Meredith's phones were found in the villa garden. If Rudy was making his way home outside the city walls, the timing is just about right for him to be near the villa when the police responded to the call about the bomb threat. Hearing the sirens, Rudy realizes that the phones link him directly to the murder so he tosses them over a wall.

Why would they use sirens? They received a call from an older person that she had received a call warning of a bomb in the toilet. It boggles the mind that they responded at all, much less with sirens blaring late at night.

What do they do when someone suggests that the person he called should go catch his refrigerator if it was running?

 

[Strozzi]

Don't you think Meredith would have thought about that lock as she was running into her room to escape the intruder running after her with his pants falling down? I'm not sure I mentioned this before but I think it was Rudy that cracked the door when he slammed into it while Meredith was holding the handle trying to keep him out. You see, Raffaele wouldn't have had the motivation to physically break the door when he and Amanda were searching the cottage the next day. But applying force to the door to see if the latch would slip would cause an existing crack to show itself.

Dan you are right on target. Rudy would have hit that door hard to shove Merideth back and force his way in once she saw or heard him in the living area.

I always thought Raffaelle tried to shoulder the door hard to get the doorknob to pop, but not break it out of a worry about breaking it needlessly. He indicated he was concerned about finding out if Meredith was in her room, but not as worried as was Amanda who seemed more and more alarmed - until the postal police arrived and partially-calmed Amanda with their calmer behavior and authoritative presence.

I also believe that either the landlord or Fulimena and Laura bear responsibility for failing to maintain the physical security of the flat. Someone is responsible for failing to repair the malfunctioning front door lock. And someone is responsible for the failure to maintain working shutters. If they were not just decorative but were supposed to really close and lock when shut for security reasons, then someone is at fault. Filomena and Laura jointly rented the house and subleased two bedrooms to foreign students. They are to blame for their failure to maintain effective, working front door lock and shutters that close and lock. They should have reported the security problem to the landlord and seen to it that repairs were made. Their negligence exposed Meredith to danger.

 

[Dan O.]

Oh geez, this thread is already up to how many hundreds of thousands of posts, and now you're going to lay this opportunity out there?

Even if you count all the side threads we are only at about 95,000 posts.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/tags.php?tag=Amanda+Knox

 

[Grinder]

We're they both turned off? I am sure that they were, but I swear I read that one of the phones were actually ringing in the yard. Probably just a false memory planted in my brain..

No they weren't as a call came in from Amanda.