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

[RoseMontague]

DEFENSE - AVV . BONGIORNO
QUESTION - You said that at 21.30, as she start time
did refer to 21.30.
ANSWER - Yes, but already I had been there in the afternoon.
QUESTION - You told me that in the afternoon it was already past
ovviai standing there because she often was already in the past
afternoon.
ANSWER - Yes
QUESTION - In the afternoon he saw Sollecito and Knox ?
ANSWER - No.
QUESTION - At 21.30 see them for the first time?
ANSWER - At 21.30 when I saw the Police in front
the house?
QUESTION - What do you see at 21.30 that evening we
described ?
ANSWER - The night before I had seen the Police , the
men in white so ...
QUESTION - In the morning sees the men in black , the night before
men in white are we talking about it?
ANSWER - Yes
QUESTION - What do you see at 21.30 ?
ANSWER - I confirm it again, I saw two boys ,
like two boyfriends who were down at the bottom of
basketball court.
QUESTION - At 21.30 ?
ANSWER - At nine and a half more or less , half past nine - ten o'clock. APPLICATION - These guys were from 21.30 then the day before the murder , until midnight ... ANSWER - Before midnight.QUESTION - Up to always be there before midnight .
ANSWER - Yes , they were discussing , they were talking to each other. not
it was the first time I had such a thing .
QUESTION - Yes, but we are interested rebuild. How would you know it was
arrived precisely at nine and a half?
ANSWER - Because apart from that there is a clock of ZTL ,
plus i have it too a clock.
QUESTION - Then at 21.30 there were together on park bench
Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito .
ANSWER - No, they were not ... I was on the bench, their
were on the low wall of the basketball court .
APPLICATION - The two of them were always there continuously ? ANSWER - Yes, until before midnight, I go away , I think so because they were there.QUESTION - So it's not that they've come and gone , are
always been there?
ANSWER - No , I am neither left nor returned , there were
sitting around talking to each other.
QUESTION - And the next day is the day when there are these
with the white overalls and there is a crime.
ANSWER - Yes
QUESTION - So the night before the murder she saw continuously Raffaele and Amanda there? ANSWER - Yes, yes .QUESTION - I have no further questions.
DEFENSE - AVV . THE WIDOW - No question .
PROSECUTOR - DR. MIGNINI
QUESTION - So you 're sitting on the bench .
ANSWER - Yes
QUESTION - And we said around 21:30 ?
ANSWER - Yes, half-past nine - ten o'clock.
QUESTION - 21:30 to 22:00 .
QUESTION - When she is there and ... she looks at the time,
21:30 to 22:00 ?
ANSWER - Not right away , I light up a cigarette and then I'm going to
see a little ' the people who are around.
QUESTION - But these guys , as soon as she saw them was there
immediately ?
ANSWER - No, I've got just looked down at the golf
basketball , but I think it has been some five minutes,
as well .
QUESTION - I Listen to the context in which her ​​statements
which made February 2, 2008 states differently
the arrival of the boys. Now I can see it ...
DEFENSE - AVV . BONGIORNO - President when there is a difference between
verbal summary and transcripts I would prefer that
to be read a transcript forever.
PRESIDENT - If we have the transcript we can ...
PROSECUTOR - DR. MIGNINI - There is also the
verbalization summary .
PRESIDENT - Yes , however the transcript prevails as in
all the minutes .
PROSECUTOR - DR. MIGNINI - So sorry but I have to ...
I have to read it to him , is long enough, then I read the
verbalization summary because it is very concise ,
But she says on page 2 ...
PRESIDENT - Declarations of 2 February 20008 , is the
transcript .
PROSECUTOR - DR. MIGNINI - Yes, then I read that
more synthetic that makes us understand better : "This will be
success between eleven and a half - after midnight "," between
23.00 and after midnight then ? "," yes, "" very
after midnight ? "," no , I think ... I went down ,
I went away after they have left the bus . "
PRESIDENT - Public Ministry , sorry, can re-read because
we did not understand . Around 23:00 after midnight?
PROSECUTOR - DR. MIGNINI - Yes "Between 23.00 and after
midnight so ? "," yes "," much after the
midnight? "," no , I think ... I went down, they are
went away after they left the bus "," a
ten minutes after the start ? "," yes , ten, a
quarter of an hour "," buses and depart at midnight ? "
" More or less the time is ," " what you noticed that?
They went to the house ? "," No, they were sitting
down to the bottom and chatting "," she was near
the newsstand ? "," yes , they will almost fifty
meters , more or less , of distance and were chatting
and then every so often watched. One of these two
get up ... ", " boy or girl? "," the boy
got up and went to look under there . " Now I try
time and in any case has shown , says: " I ​​was in
Piazza Grimana , usually I stop at Piazza Grimana
Grimana square is a few tens of meters from the house
Via Della Pergola - and then says - I had noticed , there was a
little 'casino of students who went , they took the bus to go to the disco to have fun and I noticed a young couple who were down at the bottom the square . "ANSWER - Yes
QUESTION - And then he says : "Yes, this will be successful between eleven
and a half after midnight , "that you refer to
eleven thirty - midnight.
ANSWER - No I'm nine and a half, I went to
Piazza Grimana , until about ten o'clock so I was
reading the Express and I was smoking a cigarette does not
I had noticed. Then about half-past nine - ten I have noticed these two guys , until around midnight.PRESIDENT - She said: " I ​​was there from half-past nine
at ten , I read the Express , I had not noticed the
boys. "
ANSWER - Yes .
PRESIDENT - "After I've noticed ," she repeats , however, still
half-past nine - ten or so is not good.
ANSWER - That is among the nine and a half and ten.
PRESIDENT - So she arrives at half past nine - ten ...
ANSWER - It must have been five or ten minutes , nine and a half
are nine and a half , the ten are the ten , is half an hour
of time , so if I smoke a cigarette it takes me
five minutes, accordingly ...
PRESIDENT - She said : " half past nine - ten," after he
yet added : "After I've noticed ," and then after the
presupposes a passing of time , vice versa so repeats the
half-past nine - ten or so ...
ANSWER - No, no, between half-past nine and ten they already had them
noticed the cigarette because it takes me five minutes
smoke it .
PROSECUTOR - DR. MIGNINI - She said, however,
there is the verbalization that is very clear summary
on the point.
DEFENSE - AVV . BONGIORNO - President excuse me, then
the opposition is this ...
THE PRESIDENT - No, no , we are in verbalization , that
integral .
DEFENSE - AVV . BONGIORNO - Registration is on her hands .
PRESIDENT - Also because the summary ...
PROSECUTOR - DR. MIGNINI - So her as she was
there, watching them getting these guys?
ANSWER - No.
QUESTION - There have been times ...
ANSWER - Yes, that staccavo moments to read the articles
that interested me , I smoked a cigarette and then I
put in place to look and saw who was inside
the square.
QUESTION - How many times has observed ?
ANSWER - Four or five times, I have smoked four or
five cigarettes , not more.
QUESTION - She fell asleep too?
ANSWER - No.
QUESTION - Now I do not know where the verbalization ...
THE PRESIDENT - No, we're in the integral because the
Summary ...
PROSECUTOR - DR. MIGNINI - What I wanted to know
this is , so she is able to point out when he sees
these two guys ? At that precise time ?
DEFENSE - AVV . BONGIORNO - President, at this point begin the opposition because when we do three hundred identical questions , we cross-examination more ... PRESIDENT - no fourteenth century , but more of a ... PROSECUTOR - DR. MIGNINI - Yes, but there is a dispute on the basis of the minutes. DEFENSE - AVV . Ghirga - He said it twice! PROSECUTOR - DR. MIGNINI - Based on the report ... PRESIDENT - I'm sorry we can reread that part used for the challenge .PROSECUTOR - DR. MIGNINI - The part
dispute , " often more than a few couples stops
there before blindside the bus and occasionally one of
they attacked down below the road and then
returned to put to sit there. "
ANSWER - Yes
QUESTION - "After a while, 'but they are gone , say after
parties are buses that take kids in
disco , yes. And this will be successful - she says - including
eleven and a half after midnight . "
ANSWER - Yes
QUESTION - Between 23 and after midnight, but she did not indicate
here the time that sees the boys , that she shows ...
ANSWER - Among the ...
DEFENSE - AVV . THE WIDOW - There is opposition because the accurate reading of the text just reported by the Public Ministry is clear that the reference is to start the bus . Buses leave for the disco about eleven and a half hours , midnight, so there is a attempt to confuse the witness.THE PRESIDENT - No, absolutely not !
ANSWER - No, they always start at that time.
PRESIDENT - It seeks only to know what the witness
has seen and to know for a ...
PROSECUTOR - DR. MIGNINI - Here's a unique time
in this report , if you want to read the first part
and there is only one time , " she is presented
spontaneously ? "," yes, this is granted, " " then the
night ... "," the evening that was supposed to happen
the murder I was in Piazza Grimana and I was downstairs ...
I stop in Piazza Grimana "," square is Grimana
few tens of meters from the house on Via Della Pergola ? "
" Yes , and I had noticed , because there was a little ' casino students who went , they took the bus to go disco to have fun , I noticed a pair of young men who were down in the bottom of the square where there is , there is a basketball court "," and they were down in
bottom to chat with each other ? "," yes , often more than
some couple stops there before blindside
the bus and occasionally one of them attacked down
under the road and then returned to to seat
there, sit there , after a while, 'but disappeared , "
" Say that after they left the buses that carry the
the disco boys ? "," yes and this will be successful among
eleven and a half after midnight "," between 23 and after
midnight so ? "," yes "," much after the
midnight? "," no , I think ... I went away after
they left the bus " . So the only time that he
indicates in the report is ...
DEFENSE - AVV . BONGIORNO - I am opposed to this
dispute , and today the witness has given a start time
of what he saw , had not been made
evidently the application by the Public Prosecutor in
verbal and therefore lacks . The witness has ever reported
the time that went by , the minutes for me
we can acquire , there is a question with reference
at the beginning, he talks about when they go away of 23.30
so there is no dispute.
PROSECUTOR - DR. MIGNINI - The dispute here is
a single time ...
PRESIDENT - Excuse me, but the point is this ... it is acknowledged
of this opposition and further acknowledges
full report , so the recording of the words
as she said in this report ... is of 2 February

With apologies to Rose

Wow. Just. Wow.

What a powerful witness...

for the defense.

It is amazing the history rewrite that went on with this for the guilters to make some kind of timeline fit. So much for leaving and coming back. Thank you, Grinder.

 

[acbytesla]

No it doesn't. If the evidence were there for conviction they would be guilty as charged no matter if they had lived like saints. If the evidence for guilt isn't there, they are not guilty even if they had spent half their lives in juvenile hall.

With all respect, we will have to agree to disagree. While you can't convict a person just because they have a troubled background and acquit just because they've been angels all their lives there is little doubt it is far curious-er when the angel acts like the devil.

It's easy to see Rudy's motive and impossible to see Amanda's. Now normally it would be the other way around since Amanda is much closer to the victim.

But they aren't married, not having an affair with each other, not business partners. There is no great loan outstanding between each other. There is no history of fights or domestic disturbances between them. And their roommate relationship is only 42 days old. Amanda is not broke, there is no reason for Amanda to steal from Meredith. There is NO Reason for Amanda to kill Meredith and less of one for Raffaele.

MOTIVE MATTERS..motive matters. Sorry you don't like the capslock.

That fact that Amanda doesn't have massive personal or psychological problems matters because there is no reason or motive for Amanda to kill Meredith. The prosecution is speculating that they "had" a some kind break with reality.

 

[RoseMontague]

This is interesting. It looks like Comodi is taking the heat on the cartoon expense, more so than Mignini.

http://www.gonews.it/2013/il-csm-pr...er-pagato-oltre-180mila-euro-danno-allerario/

 

[Grinder]

With all respect, we will have to agree to disagree. While you can't convict a person just because they have a troubled background and acquit just because they've been angels all their lives there is little doubt it is far curious-er when the angel acts like the devil.

Not only may one not convict because of history, in the US it can't be brought up before sentencing.

It's easy to see Rudy's motive and impossible to see Amanda's. Now normally it would be the other way around since Amanda is much closer to the victim.

Psychotic break. Drug use. Deep seated issues.

"Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows!"

But they aren't married, not having an affair with each other, not business partners. There is no great loan outstanding between each other. There is no history of fights or domestic disturbances between them. And their roommate relationship is only 42 days old. Amanda is not broke, there is no reason for Amanda to steal from Meredith. There is NO Reason for Amanda to kill Meredith and less of one for Raffaele.

"Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows!"

MOTIVE MATTERS..motive matters. Sorry you don't like the capslock.

"Well, we have their fingerprints in the victims blood and an eyewitness but no motive so we'll have to release them."

It is always nice to have a motive to seal the deal but motive isn't needed to be known or even exist.

That fact that Amanda doesn't have massive personal or psychological problems matters because there is no reason or motive for Amanda to kill Meredith. The prosecution is speculating that they "had" a some kind break with reality.

If the evidence the prosecution had matched and wasn't just compatible, they would be guilty in my eyes regardless of background.

I certainly would hope the defense wastes no time on their backgrounds or perceived lack of motive.

 

[Grinder]

It is amazing the history rewrite that went on with this for the guilters to make some kind of timeline fit. So much for leaving and coming back. Thank you, Grinder.

Rose or anyone,

Did the defense ever ask Curatolo why he said nothing when asked shortly after the murder and why it took him so long to "come forward"?

Mach would it be defamation to ask him those questions?

It didn't seem that he was able to describe them beyond saying they were the ones in court. Did I read it correctly that they were 50 meters away?

Briars are you out there? You were the one familiar with the plaza. 50 meters seem right?

 

[acbytesla]

If the evidence the prosecution had matched and wasn't just compatible, they would be guilty in my eyes regardless of background.

Well I agree with this. But there isn't and it didn't. The simple fact, is that you have Rudy with a motive who left significant evidence he committed the crime and Amanda and Raffaele without motive and no real evidence.

I certainly would hope the defense wastes no time on their backgrounds or perceived lack of motive.

It bears mentioning, it doesn't bear dwelling on.

 

[acbytesla]

I'm curious, maybe someone has seen Mr. Pellero's report on the cellular communications? Has that ever been translated? This and the computer evidence is the only area where I have any expertise.

 

[RoseMontague]

Rose or anyone,

Did the defense ever ask Curatolo why he said nothing when asked shortly after the murder and why it took him so long to "come forward"?

Mach would it be defamation to ask him those questions?

It didn't seem that he was able to describe them beyond saying they were the ones in court. Did I read it correctly that they were 50 meters away?

Briars are you out there? You were the one familiar with the plaza. 50 meters seem right?

He said it is common not to tell the cops anything. The fact that he had testified for the prosecution more than once in the past (therefore he talked to the cops then) makes that excuse seem a little silly.

 

[Grinder]

He said it is common not to tell the cops anything. The fact that he had testified for the prosecution more than once in the past (therefore he talked to the cops then) makes that excuse seem a little silly.

Now you added another question that should have been asked. Were you a witness in other trials? Which ones and how did those come about?

Mach, would Curatolo's 2003 drug dealing charge been known to the prosecution? Would his drug use have been known to the prosecution? Would the defense have known about these things? Would the prosecution have been required to inform the defense of these things?

ETA - do you know when he said that?

 

[Grinder]

I'm curious, maybe someone has seen Mr. Pellero's report on the cellular communications? Has that ever been translated? This and the computer evidence is the only area where I have any expertise.

It's in the list of Amanda's documents linked above.

 

[acbytesla]

Rose or anyone,

Did the defense ever ask Curatolo why he said nothing when asked shortly after the murder and why it took him so long to "come forward"?

Mach would it be defamation to ask him those questions?

It didn't seem that he was able to describe them beyond saying they were the ones in court. Did I read it correctly that they were 50 meters away?

Briars are you out there? You were the one familiar with the plaza. 50 meters seem right?

What do you want to know about Piazza? Grinder? There are two benches in the square are on both sides next to the kiosk for a total of four. and then a basketball court that ran lengthwise. and on the other side of the court are the stairs that go down to the cottage. Since a basketball court is 94 feet. A person standing under the far basket is probably about 50 to 55 meters away from the Kiosk. So for the most part 50 meters is about as far away two people could be and both be in the Piazza.

 

[Grinder]

What do you want to know about Piazza? Grinder? There are two benches in the square are on both sides next to the kiosk for a total of four. and then a basketball court that ran lengthwise. and on the other side of the court are the stairs that go down to the cottage. Since a basketball court is 94 feet. A person standing under the far basket is probably about 50 to 55 meters away from the Kiosk. So for the most part 50 meters is about as far away two people could be and both be in the Piazza.

Have you been there or is the above just Google maps? I doubt that court is regulation unless by chance.

Briars I believe has been there and a while back was arguing how easy it would be for Curatolo to see the kids at the end of the plaza. He made statements about where C would have sat and where the kiosk was in relationship.

I thought I read in the C interview that he was 50 M away. Over half a football field at night for a man over fifty possibly wearing reading glasses is not an easy task to see clearly.

 

[acbytesla]

Have you been there or is the above just Google maps? I doubt that court is regulation unless by chance.

Briars I believe has been there and a while back was arguing how easy it would be for Curatolo to see the kids at the end of the plaza. He made statements about where C would have sat and where the kiosk was in relationship.

I thought I read in the C interview that he was 50 M away. Over half a football field at night for a man over fifty possibly wearing reading glasses is not an easy task to see clearly.

I can't verify that it regulation size court since the baskets and base lines are totally obscured by the foliage of the trees surrounding the court It's at least 3/4 court and maybe pretty close to being a regulation court. Google maps has the distance from the Kiosk on one end to where I think the is the far basketball hoop on the far end is 61 meters.

I think even 20 meters away at night in November, would be difficult to make a facial recognition of someone you didn't know. Then later he starts seeing pictures of Amanda and Raffaele and eventually he comes to the conclusion that he saw those two people in the Piazza.

 

[Dan O.]

I thought I read in the C interview that he was 50 M away. Over half a football field at night for a man over fifty possibly wearing reading glasses is not an easy task to see clearly.

If he could read the clock across the street from the corner of the plazza to the west he wouldn't be needing any glasses. Most people would have difficulty reading that clock with a pair of field glasses.

 

[JREF2010]

Curatolo and the park was so small and the amphitheater so close,so loud, tremnedously loud, he would have heard the double pane window breaking, scream too. Maybe heroin numbs the senses.?

(i think i posted that out of an old habit?)

 

[Machiavelli]

Police Inspector Finzi picked the knife out of Sollecito's cutlery drawer and put it in an evidence envelope. Finzi stated in court under oath that he collected it because it looked clean. That is why he chose it, he said. He later referred to using "police intuition".

But you fail to note that that was the only knife in the drawer (the only large one exept a bread knife, the only pointed one, and the only one that could be used to kill; the others are butter knifes).

Basically you got it wrong when you said that it was one among "several" other knifes in the drawer.

It's also worth note that all knifes suitable as weapons in the possession of Sollecito were seized, all three.
So it's not true that the knife was "chosen" among others, all knifes were seized, that was the only in the drawer, so there was actually no choice.

Visual examination of the knife showed a number of visible streaks including several on the right side of the blade running from the tip half way the length of the blade, other areas of discoloration, and dark-colored material exactly in the area where the blade meets the handle. You may read of this in the Conti-Vecchiotti report.

Yes. You can see the streaks in the picture.

 

[acbytesla]

If he could read the clock across the street from the corner of the plazza to the west he wouldn't be needing any glasses. Most people would have difficulty reading that clock with a pair of field glasses.

Where the hell is this clock? I've been scanning on Google Maps StreetView and I can't see any clock West of the Piazza Is it on the University for Foreigners? If it is I can't see it. I actually haven't noticed a clock anywhere around the Piazza.

 

[Strozzi]

But you fail to note that that was the only knife in the drawer (the only large one exept a bread knife, the only pointed one, and the only one that could be used to kill; the others are butter knifes).

Basically you got it wrong when you said that it was one among "several" other knifes in the drawer.

It's also worth note that all knifes suitable as weapons in the possession of Sollecito were seized, all three.
So it's not true that the knife was "chosen" among others, all knifes were seized, that was the only in the drawer, so there was actually no choice.

Yes. You can see the streaks in the picture.

Machiavelli, thank you for pointing this out and correcting this. I am not trying to alter or conceal factual evidence. I want to go on the genuine facts. If the knife Finzi took was the only knife in the drawer with a sizeable blade or sharp blade then I change my view and accept that Finzi took the one dangerous knife from the drawer, as he should have.

Does anyone know if there were other knives with sharp blades in Raffaele's cutlery drawer? Any paring knives or steak knives?

If the only ones left are butter knives or their equivalent then I want to acknowledge that what Finzi took was the one cutting knife and revise my previous view that he just took the first mean-looking knife he found in the drawer.

I believe Finzi was perfectly correct to take all the sharp knives from Raffaele's flat. Had there been any ice picks, screwdrivers, too, he should have taken them for examination. He or someone else should have also taken all the sharp knives and screwdrivers from Kerscher's flat as well. And from Lumumba's bar and residence. That would be the proper way to investigate a murder where the victim had cutting or stabbing wounds.

 

[Strozzi]

Does anyone know if the police took and examined any knives, screwdrivers, etc. from Rudy's flat?

 

[Machiavelli]

Rose or anyone,

Did the defense ever ask Curatolo why he said nothing when asked shortly after the murder and why it took him so long to "come forward"?

In the court questioning, he said (without being asked by the defence) he was asked by the police on Nov. 2. The police asked him and the people in the Piazza, he told them he didn't notice anything strange.

Mach would it be defamation to ask him those questions?

No.

They could have well asked; but they didn't.

It didn't seem that he was able to describe them beyond saying they were the ones in court. Did I read it correctly that they were 50 meters away?

Exactly, this is what he says. (in reality the distance is about 30 meters)