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

[acbytesla]

Hummm first I heard this. So not RG neighbor watch or apartment? Or am I reading it wrong. Perugia apartment, Perugia watch, discovered during his arrest....errr detainment in Milan?

DO the police do reports in Italy? Anyone?

No, I think Charlie..is making a mistake on this. He's entitled.

It's clear he meant Perugia. Rudy was found in Milan and they found in his napsack, the laptop which was stolen from the Law office in Perugia, a knife and a lady's gold watch. It was Rudy's neighbor on Via Cannerino that there was a burglary and fire on October 23rd. She reported that her deceased mother's gold watch was stolen.

 

[RWVBWL]

Meredith screamed later, Guede's got his time wrong in The Skype Call...

Here's a new tip for everyone, apparently overlooked,
because we know that Meredith arrived at home around 9:00pm:

Rudy Guede in his Skype call to Giacomo says this:

R: So we went in, and I think it was about eight‐thirty, or eight‐twenty, they're saying that she told her friends she was tired and wanted to go home. But in fact no, we were supposed to see each other, we had made an appointment the evening before during the Halloween party, at the Spanish kids' house, and I can
also say, well I don't know the street but I can say where it was.
<snip>
G: Like...in the newspapers it says that...well, you must have done something with her if...
R: Yes but in fact, I'm telling you we did just ...oral stuff. Nothing, no penetration, because I didn't have a
condom, we didn't do anything. And so it's all crap according to me that they said they found
my...sperm...male sperm. Then I, that... it's not mine because we didn't do anything.
<snip>
G: Okay
R: so for me it was...it could have been anyone for me, see?
G: Sure, sure.
R: It could have been Amanda, it could have been... anyone.
G: So you were calmly taking a ****, I get it.
R: I was in the bathroom, so for me, well, I didn't worry about it, because anyway in the end we were going
to be seeing each other and...

R: I was in the bathroom, in the bathroom maybe five minutes. So, I really had to take this ^^^^, but then I heard a scream, but let me tell you, a really loud scream, so loud that according to me, if anyone was passing by, nearby, they would have heard this scream, because she screamed so loud...and then, then, I got a bit worried and I got out of the bathroom right away, without even putting my pants back on, they
were practically falling down, I was wearing just my underwear and my pants were falling around my...
G: But if I understand, I mean like where was this...I mean, what time do you think this happened, I don't
know...
R: Around nine, nine twenty or so, because in the meantime we had gotten to talking and all.
G: I see.
R: I think nine‐twenty, nine‐thirty, around then, and then, when I heard the scream, let me tell you she
screamed so loud that you could hear it even in the street, Giacomo, she screamed really loud. When I
came out, it was in semi‐darkness, I came out and I saw him.....
<snip>


Link:
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/documents/perugia/guedeskypeconversationtranslation.pdf


The Scream happened about a half an hour later, around 9:50 or 10:00pm.
Right before those cell phones were tossed in Lana's garden...
L8, RW

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

The law firm was burglarized on October 13

On October 23 Rudy's next door neighbor on Via Cannerino Mrs. Madu Diaz was burglarized and her home was set fire to. Her jewelry box was cleaned out including a gold watch that belonged to her mother. There was extensive damage to her home and her cat that died in the fire.

Rudy was found by Maria Del Prato in her nursery with a ladies gold watch, a laptop and and a knife taken from the nursery's kitchen on October 27. No one knows what happened to the watch.

This is all in Nina Burleigh's The Fatal Gift of Beauty. Pages 127 through 130.

Ah, somehow I thought the burglary with the fire took place in Milan.

I first heard about this in 2010, when I went over there to Perugia. At that time Graham had done a lot of investigating, but he hadn't published anything about it. So I may well have gotten some details wrong.

 

[RWVBWL]

Mom's...

Heya AC,
Ms Mandu-Diaz did own a womans gold watch,
apparrently her deceased Mothers.

As such,
it surely held much more sentimental value than if she had went to a store and bought and wore it herself, dig?
I'm sure you do...

As my Mom died suddenly back in 1994 at age 51 of a brain annuersim ,
well i too hold any of HER personal possesions dearly...

My Mom died 7 months to the day after her 51st B-day.
And my Dad is dead also...

I, being the eldest of 4 kids, yikes(!) at the ripe old age of 51,
am just 2 days away from my Mom's death date.

Before I die,
I still wanna swim, once again,
with the Great White Sharks that are hangin' near shore right now in L.A.!
And of course I will get massively drunk, and maybe even stoned on the 10th!
As I remember My MOM!!!

Life is short:
Live, Luv, +Laugh, a lot!!!

Wouldn't you too care significently if you believed that your deceased Mother's personal jewelry was stolen by a scum-bag neighbor who also left his DNA inside a beautiful, young foreign gal, who came to your splendid lil' town to simply study, and whose murder terrifed your local community?
Of course you would.
Enough said!...

 

[LondonJohn]

Wadda you think?



It seemed you were cherry-picking. We were discussing BAC which Lalli had at .043. While you accept his duodenum analysis you reject his BAC work, whereas I'm willing to accept both.

I find the lack of chyme in the duodenum to be on the high end of time for that to occur. This is from online research and comments made here.



Marginal BAC? I think not. That's what I was talking about? Apparently some prosecution witness challenged the duodenum work and no one challenged the BAC work (think Maresca) yet BAC is marginal.

You narrow the drinking to in the cottage and I'm not sure we know that there was no container from which alcohol could have been consumed. She could have gone downstairs and had a shot from the bottle she bought Giacomo. She might have had something at the pizza party. She could had a few drinks before going to the party delaying digestion.

It's not that Lalli was potentially incompetent in his measurement of BAC. It's that it's possible that a correctly-measured BAC in post-mortem blood might not accurately reflect the true BAC at the point of death.

So none of this is about suggesting that Lalli was competent in some areas but incompetent in others (although he was without doubt incompetent by omission by not weighing the body). And in any case, it wasn't Lalli who measured BAC. He would have merely drawn the blood. A phlebotomy lab would have been the entity doing the testing and measuring.

But if you prefer set up a false dichotomy on this issue. and/or you prefer to carry on chuckling about "airline pilots" in the misguided and scornful belief that the broad principles discussed in that paper were not relevant to our case, then please carry on at your own pleasure.......

 

[LondonJohn]

By the way, the venous blood showed a BAC of 0.43g/l, but liver blood showed a BAC of 0.2g/l - less than half the BAC of the venous blood.

How would Grinder care to explain that anomaly? Perhaps the blood lying in the non-functioning liver mysteriously dissipated alcohol more quickly than the blood lying in the veins (hint: that's not possible)?

Or perhaps post-mortem blood decomposition had started more quickly in the veins than in the liver, meaning that the decomposition by-product of alcohol had grown in the venous blood compared with the liver blood?

Either way, something must have happened eh, Grinder? Because blood that is circulating normally round the body very quickly attains a consistent concentration of toxins such as alcohol, owing to it being mixed up in the blood and liver on a constant basis. So we can be absolutely certain that at the point of death, Meredith's BAC would have been the same wherever in the body it was drawn from.

So back to the question: why was the liver blood BAC less than half the amount of venous blood BAC? Grinder? Anyone?

 

[LondonJohn]

I dont have any citations yet. I thought I would start by asking health professionals, then trying to find supporting infomation in the literature.

I have asked professionals, and have posted about this before.

The connection between alcohol ingestion and slowed gastric motility is almost entirely due to the presence of alcohol in the stomach. Not the presence of alcohol in the blood.

In other words, if you drink alcohol either just before, during or just after eating, the presence of alcohol in the stomach and upper intestines has an effect upon the lining of the stomach/intestine. It's this which causes the slow-down in motility.

This cannot be the case here though. Meredith provably had no alcohol during or after her meal, up until at least 9pm (unless she was secretly drinking at her friends' house, which I am happy to discount for now). Therefore, there cannot have been any alcohol whatsoever in her upper GI tract (including her oesophagus and stomach) between 6pm and 9pm. Indeed, the autopsy found 0 BAC in the stomach.

Even if we accept the venous BAC of 0.43g/l as accurately reflective of true BAC at the point of death, this low level of alcohol in the blood (and none in the GI tract, remember) would have had a totally negligible effect on the rate of gastric motility. We can effectively discount alcohol as a slowing factor in motility.

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>I, being the eldest of 4 kids, yikes(!) at the ripe old age of 51,
am just 2 days away from my Mom's death date.

Before I die,
I still wanna swim, once again,
with the Great White Sharks that are hangin' near shore right now in L.A.!
And of course I will get massively drunk, and maybe even stoned on the 10th!
As I remember My MOM!!!

Life is short:
Live, Luv, +Laugh, a lot!!!

You inspire me, RWVBWL.

 

[acbytesla]

Heya AC,
Ms Mandu-Diaz did own a womans gold watch,
apparrently her deceased Mothers.

As such,
it surely held much more sentimental value than if she had went to a store and bought and wore it herself, dig?
I'm sure you do...

As my Mom died suddenly back in 1994 at age 51 of a brain annuersim ,
well i too hold any of HER personal possesions dearly...

My Mom died 7 months to the day after her 51st B-day.
And my Dad is dead also...

I, being the eldest of 4 kids, yikes(!) at the ripe old age of 51,
am just 2 days away from my Mom's death date.

Before I die,
I still wanna swim, once again,
with the Great White Sharks that are hangin' near shore right now in L.A.!
And of course I will get massively drunk, and maybe even stoned on the 10th!
As I remember My MOM!!!

Life is short:
Live, Luv, +Laugh, a lot!!!

Wouldn't you too care significently if you believed that your deceased Mother's personal jewelry was stolen by a scum-bag neighbor who also left his DNA inside a beautiful, young foreign gal, who came to your splendid lil' town to simply study, and whose murder terrifed your local community?
Of course you would.
Enough said!...

Absolutely. But it wouldn't be wrong to say the watch belonged to Mrs. Diaz.

 

[Dan O.]

By the way, the venous blood showed a BAC of 0.43g/l, but liver blood showed a BAC of 0.2g/l - less than half the BAC of the venous blood..

So back to the question: why was the liver blood BAC less than half the amount of venous blood BAC? Grinder? Anyone?

Alcohol dehydrogenase is an enzyme that acts as a catalyst to metabolize the alcohol. It exists mostly in the cells of the liver and stomach. The Alcohol in the liver will have mobility to diffuse through the cell walls so can come in contact with the enzyme. The other ingredient necessary to complete the reaction should be oxygen. This would be carried by blood flowing through the liver. The limiting factor will be the volume of oxygen available in the liver at the time of death unless another source exists from decomposition.

 

[Grinder]

In the liver too a very slight quantity had been detected, equal to 0.2, which was comparable from the pharmacokinetic point of view with the 0.43 verified by Dr. Lalli at the Institute of Forensic Medicine.

 

[Grinder]

Tesla,

One of the maddening aspects of this case can be exemplified by the gold watch. There seems to be no doubt that Rudy had such a watch in his backpack when caught in Milan. Beyond that we have one source that I know of telling the story of his next door neighbor. I don't really doubt that her house burned and that she had a gold watch that went missing.

To me and I think most, it makes no sense that the police wouldn't assume that everything of value in the backpack was stolen and at least take possession of those items until they had time to check into it.

We can't even determine if the lawyers recovered their laptop from the police or Rudy.

 

[acbytesla]

Tesla,

One of the maddening aspects of this case can be exemplified by the gold watch. There seems to be no doubt that Rudy had such a watch in his backpack when caught in Milan. Beyond that we have one source that I know of telling the story of his next door neighbor. I don't really doubt that her house burned and that she had a gold watch that went missing.

To me and I think most, it makes no sense that the police wouldn't assume that everything of value in the backpack was stolen and at least take possession of those items until they had time to check into it.

We can't even determine if the lawyers recovered their laptop from the police or Rudy.

Well, according to Nina, they did.

I would agree with your contention that this is maddening and about everything in the backpack should have been considered stolen.given the circumstances. I would think that at least have recorded a description of those items in the police officers report of the incident. You would think that the officer even in 2007 might have taken photos of those items at least.

I think I have mentioned it before. My closest friend is a Seattle Police Officer. Most officers have smartphones today which of course come with prerequisite camera...although my buddy doesn't carry a cell phone..he's a little bit of a Luddite. But I know that his squad car comes complete with a digital camera. They take pictures of suspects, car accidents, etc. I went on a ride along with him a couple of years ago and he used the camera three times in that one day.

 

[Strozzi]

Tesla,

One of the maddening aspects of this case can be exemplified by the gold watch. There seems to be no doubt that Rudy had such a watch in his backpack when caught in Milan. Beyond that we have one source that I know of telling the story of his next door neighbor. I don't really doubt that her house burned and that she had a gold watch that went missing.

To me and I think most, it makes no sense that the police wouldn't assume that everything of value in the backpack was stolen and at least take possession of those items until they had time to check into it.

We can't even determine if the lawyers recovered their laptop from the police or Rudy.

I am curious what police in Milan would do with stolen property. Would they seize it from Rudy? Then store it in a property locker? The laptop was identified as stolen and the lawyer/owner is known. Do they notify the police in Perugia to notify the laptop owner that the laptop is being held in a property locker at a police station in Milan? Does he have to go in person to recover it?

What about the gold watch that Rudy had in his knapsack? Do the police seize it, too, as possible stolen property? Or do they set Rudy free at the behest of someone in the Perugia police and allow Rudy to leave with his knapsack and lady' gold watch?

 

[Strozzi]

I am still interested in knowing if there is any good sourcing such as lawyer's testimony about the break-in of the lawyer's office. I read in one of the many books written about this case that the burglar threw a rock through an upper window or door and then, once inside, placed several pieces of glass on a desk or table, as if assembling them back together. Odd behavior, indeed. A unique MO. If this is true, it tells me something about my #1 suspect's mental state and urgency to get in and out quickly.

Any authoritative testimony on this odd behavior?

 

[acbytesla]

I am curious what police in Milan would do with stolen property. Would they seize it from Rudy? Then store it in a property locker? The laptop was identified as stolen and the lawyer/owner is known. Do they notify the police in Perugia to notify the laptop owner that the laptop is being held in a property locker at a police station in Milan? Does he have to go in person to recover it?

What about the gold watch that Rudy had in his knapsack? Do the police seize it, too, as possible stolen property? Or do they set Rudy free at the behest of someone in the Perugia police and allow Rudy to leave with his knapsack and lady' gold watch?

You and me bub. I would love to at least read a translated copy of the police officer's report that handled that incident.

Notice the difference between the professionalism of the Seattle Police Officer who issued Amanda a noise citation and the Milan police where no one has seen anything about this incident except the info from the Nursery lady Maria Del Prato?

 

[Briars]

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.

I realize the topic has moved on from here but I would like to add another point about pedestrian traffic on San Antonio. Pedestrians exiting from the car park both from the lower and upper park are directly across from the cottage gate. It is a strategic point to cross and enter the park .Further along either way there is no shoulder and crossing the winding road is difficult. Filomena's window is visible from the gate. This choice for a break-in around 8:40 makes no sense. Rudy would have no idea who was going to exit the car park heading into town precisely as he smashed the window or was making one or two climbs. People crossing the road would look in either direction it is a dangerous stretch,the white wall of the cottage stands out even at night. Rudy had no way of timing his climb and be certain no one leaving or returning to the garage could see him.

 

[Bill Williams]

I realize the topic has moved on from here but I would like to add another point about pedestrian traffic on San Antonio. Pedestrians exiting from the car park both from the lower and upper park are directly across from the cottage gate. It is a strategic point to cross and enter the park .Further along either way there is no shoulder and crossing the winding road is difficult. Filomena's window is visible from the gate. This choice for a break-in around 8:40 makes no sense. Rudy would have no idea who was going to exit the car park heading into town precisely as he smashed the window or was making one or two climbs. People crossing the road would look in either direction it is a dangerous stretch,the white wall of the cottage stands out even at night. Rudy had no way of timing his climb and be certain no one leaving or returning to the garage could see him.

Sure he did. This is not rocket science. It would have taken all of ten seconds to get in the window. And if the rock crashing through the window had not attracted attention, there'd be a reasonable surmise that suspicion was not there to be attracted.

This is far, far better than being out in the open on the deck - a deck which is fully exposed to the road, and lit by a street light. At least at Filomena's window if Rudy had been spotted, he could simply jump down into the darkness below where there is plenty of cover.

Second storey people know the risks.... the problem with the talk about the break-in, from both sides, is that we are analysing to death what Rudy would have done by instinct, knowing that there's always the possibility of getting caught.

He would have broken the window with the rock, taken a brief look around, and been up and in the window before any of us are finished typing our own speculations here.....

 

[acbytesla]

Sure he did. This is not rocket science. It would have taken all of ten seconds to get in the window. And if the rock crashing through the window had not attracted attention, there'd be a reasonable surmise that suspicion was not there to be attracted.

This is far, far better than being out in the open on the deck - a deck which is fully exposed to the road, and lit by a street light. At least at Filomena's window if Rudy had been spotted, he could simply jump down into the darkness below where there is plenty of cover.

Second storey people know the risks.... the problem with the talk about the break-in, from both sides, is that we are analysing to death what Rudy would have done by instinct, knowing that there's always the possibility of getting caught.

He would have broken the window with the rock, taken a brief look around, and been up and in the window before any of us are finished typing our own speculations here.....

There are risk burglarizing homes, but most burglaries don't happen at night, they actually happen during the day while most people are at work. And they are wham bam thank you mam. They kick open a door, break a window and they are in. Very very few burglaries are "caught in the act". Burglars might take a quick look around and that's it.

I think it interesting that Briars says that Rudy could be "seen from the gate. So? A he noted there isn't really a walkway there. Other than one of the residents living at the house, there is little reason for someone to be standing at that gate. In the channel 5 documentary, it took the guy climbing the wall all of ten seconds to go from the ground to sitting on the window sill. Assuming that Rudy through the rock from the parking lot through the window and then went down below the window where he couldn't have been seen climbing up the wall until he was at the window. Rudy would have been in view breaking for 15 or 20 seconds tops. Ever have to break into you own home, because you locked yourself out? I've broken into my own home at least 4 of 5 times because of this. I've also broken into friends houses under similar circumstances. NOT once has anyone ever called the police because they saw someone breaking in.

 

[Bill Williams]

There are risk burglarizing homes, but most burglaries don't happen at night, they actually happen during the day while most people are at work. And they are wham bam thank you mam. They kick open a door, break a window and they are in. Very very few burglaries are "caught in the act". Burglars might take a quick look around and that's it.

I think it interesting that Briars says that Rudy could be "seen from the gate. So? A he noted there isn't really a walkway there. Other than one of the residents living at the house, there is little reason for someone to be standing at that gate. In the channel 5 documentary, it took the guy climbing the wall all of ten seconds to go from the ground to sitting on the window sill. Assuming that Rudy through the rock from the parking lot through the window and then went down below the window where he couldn't have been seen climbing up the wall until he was at the window. Rudy would have been in view breaking for 15 or 20 seconds tops. Ever have to break into you own home, because you locked yourself out? I've broken into my own home at least 4 of 5 times because of this. I've also broken into friends houses under similar circumstances. NOT once has anyone ever called the police because they saw someone breaking in.

I'm not sure why guilters feel even the need to argue a nonexistent difficulty of Rudy going through that window.

The evidence of the breakin's staging is supposed to be overwhelming. Oh wait, there is no evidence of a staging, other than Battistelli's comment about the condition of Filomena's room, "this is no burglary," and that the original "case closed" suspect, Lumumba couldn't have managed a climb in - thus needing Knox's key.

But where's all this overwhelming evidence of a staging? All this is bizarre.

And note we're now arguing this now that it is proven Mignini is going to trial in January for abuse of office. Personally i think the poster claiming that Jan 15 was only a preliminary was lied to by Mignini.