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

[kwill]

Nice post up above Kwill,

But Sexy underwear?

No, Amanda didn’t buy a red g-string a couple of days after the murder for a night of wild sex with Raff,
just a pair of red bikini briefs with a cartoon cow on them. IIRC, it was that time of the month, right?

Sexy underwear?
Sure Guilters, sure...

There is, unfortunately, a clear tendency among guilters to think overmuch about Amanda's underwear, sexual history, flirtatiousness, and attraction to men.

For them, I think ANY underwear is by definition sexy, because Amanda herself is all about that. I want to be clear that I'm not accusing any particular guilter of this, okay? It's just an odd pattern I notice over and over . . . you can tell that she's always seen in their eyes as if standing in one of those red-lit windows in Amsterdam.

The actual human being named Amanda Marie Knox has almost nothing in common with the person they love to discuss -- and their intense interest in her sexuality is really about them, not her. For some, I'm sure the case itself is a pretext for indulging that interest.

 

[kwill]

No. I was asking about those things that have been presented as evidence things that have led some observers to a belief in guilty of murder.

The list is long.

Amanda had sex with three different men in Perugia.
Amanda got a noise ticket in Seattle.
Raffaele carried a pocket knife.
Amanda did not use the scrub brush on the toilet.
Amanda was jealous of Meredith.
Amanda was loud.
Raffaele was dependent on his father.
Amanda was not a serious student.
Amanda was a party girl.
Raffaele smoked pot.
Raffaele had looked at bestiality porn.
Amanda didn't cry at the police station.
Amanda bought sexy underwear.
Amanda didn't want the door to Meredith's room to be opened.

To me, all these things are absurd, but it seems that they carry a great deal of weight with some observers. These same observers refuse to acknowledge that:

Meredith's meal was still in her stomach when she died, which means she was killed within an hour of returning home. This one fact, it seems to me, requires those who believe Amanda and Raffaele committed this murder to present a logical framework that shows how and when they killed her. That would meet your standard for something factual. A finding. And logic itself.

Autopsy report; Knox's lies; Sollecito's lies; luminol footprints; bathmat print; phisical evidence of staged burglary; cell phone records; testimonies of Filomena, Capezzali, Monachia; knife DNA: bra clasp DNA; mixed DNA on blood drops and luminol stains; Knpox's calunnia...

These that I just listed are the actual areas of evidence.

You above list instead is just a list of facts, useful for building conjecture. They are just details, they are very small accessories, they only help suggesting a context, a scenario, once the evidence has been established. All little elements except the last point (Knox's behaviour before Meredith's door) which belongs to the list of evidence of lying, this is one of the many points which show a factual contradiction (a lie) in Knox's account.

Is your list of actual areas of evidence complete? Does this represent the whole case as you see it?

Also, you quoted part of my post but ignored the highlighted part, which is kind of ironic but not unexpected.

 

[Machiavelli]

So nobody is going to choose to break this window after someone has been murdered - and nobody would use this window to try and stage a crime, especially when Amanda already knew that there was a problem with the lock on the main door.

Do you think Amanda really said "hey Rafaelle, let's throw a rock through this window - it's lovely and illuminated and everyone can see from outside - and you would need to be a young fit basketball player to climb this"

A person would only choose to throw a rock through this window, if they were outside and could see that nobody was around and knew that they could run off if anyone noticed. If you've just killed someone, you're not going to chance someone noticing you throwing a rock through the window and someone calling the police to the house.

But no, staging a burglary is not the same as actually breaking trhough the window. What is exposed and inconvenient to a burglar, might be convenient and less exposed for a stager.

I believe the window was chosed by excluding the ones that were "exposed" and less convenient from the point of view of someone inside the house, a person who has a story about being inside the apartment. The other otpions were the window in Amanda's room, easier to climb in, but much more "exposed", she may have to "ransack" her own room and she would have to "notice" that and call the police immediately quite early in the morning.
The same goes for the windows on the balcony and the kitchen window (those actually convenient for a burglar, through which all real break ins occurred), but these would be extremely exposed to the visitor's view. She could not tell about any "mop and shower story" (she needed to tell the mop-and-shower story in the event someone noticed her walking across the city with a mop in the morning).

If you stage a burglary you don't actually clim throuigh a window. You may even do that from the inside. So nobody would catch you while climbing, thus the window is not actully exposed if you don't intend to actually climb through there.

The window was also half closed and there are many other physical elements about the staging besides its being an "illogical" point of entry, btw.

 

[Strozzi]

The broken window was the most exposed to sight, the closest to the road and the most illuminated (as well as the less easy one to climb in).

I don't agree with you on that. And what may be "less easy" for you or Mignini or me is a "piece of cake" for Rudy.

To throw a rock through Filomena's window, Rudy stood at the car park area that protrudes from the side of the road. From that spot, he had to toss the 9 lb. rock horizontally 8' or so - something a basketball player could easily do. Before tossing it, he had to see if any pedestrians or cars were coming along the winding road. Several trees along his side of the road near the car park shielded him somewhat and gave him a feeling of being less noticeable. If he needed to escape, he could take off in several directions including jumping down and running down the hill through the trees and vegetation.

The window would have be difficult for Mignini to climb in. But Mignini at the time of the crime (Nov 2007) was 56 years old, 5'10", and about 210 lbs. Rudy at the time was about 21 years old. He was a trim, lanky basketball player who could bob, weave, spin around, duck, dribble a basketball, do jump shots, and maybe even "stuff" the basket. The window grid bars on the lower window are an inviting ladder to climb up. When standing on the window grid's top horizontal bar, Rudy would have been at chest level at Filomena's windowsill.

Those who suggest that the most logical entry route - through the doors on the terrace - are suggesting what they prefer as the entry point - probably what they would chose if they had to do it. But Rudy had different criteria. Tossing the rock horizontally 8' from the car park was easy for Rudy. Standing at the car park area just off the side of the road partially shielded at night by roadside trees might have been comfortable for Rudy. Being able to choose your direction of escape from the car park may have been a comfort factor - that location afforded him 5 directions of escape - up the stairs to the basketball court he knew so well, 2 directions along the road, into the parking garage with its other exits, or jumping down and running downhill through the trees and thick vegetation. Lots of options from the car park area.

I will point out that anyone choosing to break in through the terrace must first get up to the terrace. Easy enough to do as the window on the wall beneath the terrace has horizontal window bars, just like the window beneath Filomena's window. In either case, climbing up the window's grid-like bars puts the climber in a standing position where he places he hands on the terrace edge or Filomena's windowsill and raises himself.

 

[moodstream]

But no, staging a burglary is not the same as actually breaking trhough the window. What is exposed and inconvenient to a burglar, might be convenient and less exposed for a stager.

I believe the window was chosed by excluding the ones that were "exposed" and less convenient from the point of view of someone inside the house, a person who has a story about being inside the apartment. The other otpions were the window in Amanda's room, easier to climb in, but much more "exposed", she may have to "ransack" her own room and she would have to "notice" that and call the police immediately quite early in the morning.
The same goes for the windows on the balcony and the kitchen window (those actually convenient for a burglar, through which all real break ins occurred), but these would be extremely exposed to the visitor's view. She could not tell about any "mop and shower story" (she needed to tell the mop-and-shower story in the event someone noticed her walking across the city with a mop in the morning).

If you stage a burglary you don't actually clim throuigh a window. You may even do that from the inside. So nobody would catch you while climbing, thus the window is not actully exposed if you don't intend to actually climb through there.

The window was also half closed and there are many other physical elements about the staging besides its being an "illogical" point of entry, btw.

My God... you've cracked it! Why haven't I seen this before!!!! I have been blind! AK + RS chose a window for a stage burglary because it provided access to the house and was not exposed whereas a real burglar would chose a window that provided access to the house and was not exposed!!!!!!

Hey, wait a minute.....

 

[acbytesla]

But no, staging a burglary is not the same as actually breaking trhough the window. What is exposed and inconvenient to a burglar, might be convenient and less exposed for a stager.

I believe the window was chosed by excluding the ones that were "exposed" and less convenient from the point of view of someone inside the house, a person who has a story about being inside the apartment. The other otpions were the window in Amanda's room, easier to climb in, but much more "exposed", she may have to "ransack" her own room and she would have to "notice" that and call the police immediately quite early in the morning.
The same goes for the windows on the balcony and the kitchen window (those actually convenient for a burglar, through which all real break ins occurred), but these would be extremely exposed to the visitor's view. She could not tell about any "mop and shower story" (she needed to tell the mop-and-shower story in the event someone noticed her walking across the city with a mop in the morning).

If you stage a burglary you don't actually clim throuigh a window. You may even do that from the inside. So nobody would catch you while climbing, thus the window is not actully exposed if you don't intend to actually climb through there.

The window was also half closed and there are many other physical elements about the staging besides its being an "illogical" point of entry, btw.

Total speculation and conjecture. No actual evidence of anything.

You know Machiavelli, proving a case actually requires some evidence not just a moron spinning tall tales.

 

[Grinder]

But no, staging a burglary is not the same as actually breaking trhough the window. What is exposed and inconvenient to a burglar, might be convenient and less exposed for a stager.

I believe the window was chosed by excluding the ones that were "exposed" and less convenient from the point of view of someone inside the house, a person who has a story about being inside the apartment. The other otpions were the window in Amanda's room, easier to climb in, but much more "exposed", she may have to "ransack" her own room and she would have to "notice" that and call the police immediately quite early in the morning.

Or she could just go to Gubbio. Why would she have to call the police because it was her room? What's different from Filomena's room in terms of urgency? She would have been able to be sure nothing was taken.

Why would a window be more convenient for a stager? Either the window is visible or not.

The same goes for the windows on the balcony and the kitchen window (those actually convenient for a burglar, through which all real break ins occurred), but these would be extremely exposed to the visitor's view. She could not tell about any "mop and shower story" (she needed to tell the mop-and-shower story in the event someone noticed her walking across the city with a mop in the morning).

Why did she need a mop? There is zero evidence either the mop or the bucket where used to clean anything.

Why not just leave the balcony door unlocked and let people guess that it had been unlocked when the perp entered. Why no let the police think, as they did, that Meredith had made a date and let her killer in?

If you stage a burglary you don't actually clim throuigh a window. You may even do that from the inside. So nobody would catch you while climbing, thus the window is not actully exposed if you don't intend to actually climb through there.

The stone was thrown from the outside.

The window was also half closed and there are many other physical elements about the staging besides its being an "illogical" point of entry, btw.

You have no idea whether the window was half closed or wide open. Filomena's first testimony was that she didn't know if she had closed the shutters.

 

[acbytesla]

I don't agree with you on that. And what may be "less easy" for you or Mignini or me is a "piece of cake" for Rudy.

To throw a rock through Filomena's window, Rudy stood at the car park area that protrudes from the side of the road. From that spot, he had to toss the 9 lb. rock horizontally 8' or so - something a basketball player could easily do. Before tossing it, he had to see if any pedestrians or cars were coming along the winding road. Several trees along his side of the road near the car park shielded him somewhat and gave him a feeling of being less noticeable. If he needed to escape, he could take off in several directions including jumping down and running down the hill through the trees and vegetation.

The window would have be difficult for Mignini to climb in. But Mignini at the time of the crime (Nov 2007) was 56 years old, 5'10", and about 210 lbs. Rudy at the time was about 21 years old. He was a trim, lanky basketball player who could bob, weave, spin around, duck, dribble a basketball, do jump shots, and maybe even "stuff" the basket. The window grid bars on the lower window are an inviting ladder to climb up. When standing on the window grid's top horizontal bar, Rudy would have been at chest level at Filomena's windowsill.

Boy are you giving Mignini too much credit. Mignini is at least 2 and half bills if he's a pound.

Those who suggest that the most logical entry route - through the doors on the terrace - are suggesting what they prefer as the entry point - probably what they would chose if they had to do it. But Rudy had different criteria. Tossing the rock horizontally 8' from the car park was easy for Rudy. Standing at the car park area just off the side of the road partially shielded at night by roadside trees might have been comfortable for Rudy. Being able to choose your direction of escape from the car park may have been a comfort factor - that location afforded him 5 directions of escape - up the stairs to the basketball court he knew so well, 2 directions along the road, into the parking garage with its other exits, or jumping down and running downhill through the trees and thick vegetation. Lots of options from the car park area.

I will point out that anyone choosing to break in through the terrace must first get up to the terrace. Easy enough to do as the window on the wall beneath the terrace has horizontal window bars, just like the window beneath Filomena's window. In either case, climbing up the window's grid-like bars puts the climber in a standing position where he places he hands on the terrace edge or Filomena's windowsill and raises himself.

That window was also obscured by the tree and entering through that window would take little more than a minute. Most people on a cold November night wouldn't be looking down at the cottage but at their tvs. It's a very easy entry.

 

[NancyS]

But no, staging a burglary is not the same as actually breaking trhough the window. What is exposed and inconvenient to a burglar, might be convenient and less exposed for a stager.

I believe the window was chosed by excluding the ones that were "exposed" and less convenient from the point of view of someone inside the house, a person who has a story about being inside the apartment. The other otpions were the window in Amanda's room, easier to climb in, but much more "exposed", she may have to "ransack" her own room and she would have to "notice" that and call the police immediately quite early in the morning.
The same goes for the windows on the balcony and the kitchen window (those actually convenient for a burglar, through which all real break ins occurred), but these would be extremely exposed to the visitor's view. She could not tell about any "mop and shower story" (she needed to tell the mop-and-shower story in the event someone noticed her walking across the city with a mop in the morning).

If you stage a burglary you don't actually clim throuigh a window. You may even do that from the inside. So nobody would catch you while climbing, thus the window is not actully exposed if you don't intend to actually climb through there.

The window was also half closed and there are many other physical elements about the staging besides its being an "illogical" point of entry, btw.

Are you sure you're not secretly working for the defence - the arguments are so bizarre that I can't help thinking they're satirical

 

[Strozzi]

Boy are you giving Mignini too much credit. Mignini is at least 2 and half bills if he's a pound.

What, Mignini is at least 250 lbs.? That fat slob! 8 years at Capanne will do him good! Andrea Vogt tricked me. She wrote that he was 210 lbs. I guess I can't trust Andrea.

I take back what I wrote earlier about it being difficult for Mignini to climb up, but not Rudy. Now we're going to need a crane to get Mignini in that window!

 

[NancyS]

What, Mignini is at least 250 lbs.? That fat slob! 8 years at Capanne will do him good! Andrea Vogt tricked me. She wrote that he was 210 lbs. I guess I can't trust Andrea.

I take back what I wrote earlier about it being difficult for Mignini to climb up, but not Rudy. Now we're going to need a crane to get Mignini in that window!

I think Andrea Vogt's reporting is compatible with her having the hots for a certain portly prosecutor

 

[moodstream]

The urgency may have been undermined because Amanda's actions/statements may have been inconsistent from the point where she entered the cottage that morning to the discovery of Meredith's body later that day. This inconsistency may be the reason the police became suspicious of her.

For example in the email she writes that Meredith's door being closed meant Meredith was probably sleeping. When Amanda gradually becomes uncomfortable about the condition of the cottage (while showering, drying her hair, etc.) she writes she got the mop and left. Did she knock on Meredith's or Filomena's doors or try to open both before leaving to see if they were in their rooms, especially if a closed door might mean Meredith was sleeping (not sure what a closed Filomena's door might mean)?

I think there were a lot of reasons why she was suspected by the police early on. All of them were is the subjective form of the police's interpretation of her behavior, plus what can only be called an incompetent , idiotic, premature conclusion that the break in had been staged. The only excusing factors in my opinion are 1) there are few murders in perugia and so presumably the crime scene was a shock to the responders, making it easy for them to act unprofessionally, 2) the background of the 'beast of satan' murders, allowing the police to frame the crime in their minds in a way such that erstwhile innocents like AK + RS could have committed such a heinous act, and 3) lack of clear other suspects and 4) public pressure.

I understand why they were suspected. I don't understand why Patrick wasn't investigated before being arrested ( would you arrest someone solely on they say so of your prime murder suspect), why the police would use a notoriously flawed overnight interrogation technique on AK + RS, and far more so, why the police did not demand that either give them hard information about the crime during the interrogation that clearly linked them to the crime scene ( I heard a scream doesn't make it), and finally and far above the rest, when the police finally got back evidence of the real killer ( and why did that take so long btw?) the police were to cowardly, incompetent, and unprofessional to admit their clear and obvious mistake, preferring instead to drag AK+RS as well as all the world watching, through years of expensive endless litigation, only to end up, it seems, finally at the EU highest court where it will be tossed out almost without a mention ( the real evidence being non existent).

 

[moodstream]

I think Andrea Vogt's reporting is compatible with her having the hots for a certain portly prosecutor

She's got the hots for a trade secrets lawyer now!

 

[acbytesla]

I think Andrea Vogt's reporting is compatible with her having the hots for a certain portly prosecutor

Andrea is a renowned chubby chaser.

 

[Bill Williams]

I think there were a lot of reasons why she was suspected by the police early on. All of them were is the subjective form of the police's interpretation of her behavior, plus what can only be called an incompetent , idiotic, premature conclusion that the break in had been staged. The only excusing factors in my opinion are 1) there are few murders in perugia and so presumably the crime scene was a shock to the responders, making it easy for them to act unprofessionally, 2) the background of the 'beast of satan' murders, allowing the police to frame the crime in their minds in a way such that erstwhile innocents like AK + RS could have committed such a heinous act, and 3) lack of clear other suspects and 4) public pressure.

I understand why they were suspected. I don't understand why Patrick wasn't investigated before being arrested ( would you arrest someone solely on they say so of your prime murder suspect), why the police would use a notoriously flawed overnight interrogation technique on AK + RS, and far more so, why the police did not demand that either give them hard information about the crime during the interrogation that clearly linked them to the crime scene ( I heard a scream doesn't make it), and finally and far above the rest, when the police finally got back evidence of the real killer ( and why did that take so long btw?) the police were to cowardly, incompetent, and unprofessional to admit their clear and obvious mistake, preferring instead to drag AK+RS as well as all the world watching, through years of expensive endless litigation, only to end up, it seems, finally at the EU highest court where it will be tossed out almost without a mention ( the real evidence being non existent).

IIRC correctly, when Amanda was asked to search her imagination for any memory of a scream, she said no. They then asked her, "How could you be there and not hear a scream?" That's when she said she probably had her hands over her ears.

The whole narrative shows how Amanda was led through this process of imagining things; all buttressed by a translator, Anna Donnino, who acted as a mediator (by her own testimony), who suggested to Amanda that trauma could blank out memories.

The whole thing is an exercise in "leading the witness", punishing non-compliance with their theories and rewarding compliance with encouragement to imagine things.

The only crime Knox committed was convincing herself in the midst of this exhaustion that her imaginings could possibly be helping the police solve this crime.

At the end of the day though, it's, "She cracked and told us what we already knew to be true".

This is not a complex case of police incompetence.

 

[acbytesla]

IIRC correctly, when Amanda was asked to search her imagination for any memory of a scream, she said no. They then asked her, "How could you be there and not hear a scream?" That's when she said she probably had her hands over her ears.

The whole narrative shows how Amanda was led through this process of imagining things; all buttressed by a translator, Anna Donnino, who acted as a mediator (by her own testimony), who suggested to Amanda that trauma could blank out memories.

The whole thing is an exercise in "leading the witness", punishing non-compliance with their theories and rewarding compliance with encouragement to imagine things.

The only crime Knox committed was convincing herself in the midst of this exhaustion that her imaginings could possibly be helping the police solve this crime.

At the end of the day though, it's, "She cracked and told us what we already knew to be true".

This is not a complex case of police incompetence.

They were competent enough to get a twenty year old girl who barely spoke the language to crack. Impressive. As for investigating a murder. Well that's another story.

 

[JREF2010]

We've been around THIS block 1000 times.

The window off the balcony, on the other side of the cottage, was the most exposed to the road and the most well lit, as the curvature of the road shows, and as the street lamp directly across from it shows.

You just cannot repeat stuff like this when it has been long shown false.

At least Amanda and Raffaele are not sitting in prison anymore, while they repeat this stuff.

 

[Briars]

What, Mignini is at least 250 lbs.? That fat slob! 8 years at Capanne will do him good! Andrea Vogt tricked me. She wrote that he was 210 lbs. I guess I can't trust Andrea.

I take back what I wrote earlier about it being difficult for Mignini to climb up, but not Rudy. Now we're going to need a crane to get Mignini in that window!

Fat jokes,seriously stronzi

 

[acbytesla]

Fat jokes,seriously stronzi

Yea. Just imagine Mignini's big butt bending over to pick up the soap in Campanne Prison. Horrible thought.. But I don't think that fat slob has to worry about being gang raped in the shower. On the other hand, he might have put a fe of those guys there, so maybe he should be worried.

 

[NancyS]

Fat jokes,seriously stronzi

Better than the prosecution's poo jokes