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

[acbytesla]

I am 56, in good physical condition but by no means an athlete, and I have accomplished climbing feats more prodigious than that window in the past 6 months.

Well, you are better man than me Charlie. At 25, I don't think I had an extra pound on me. I KNOW I could have done it very easily. But I'm 53 now, I can still drive a golf ball and kick most people butts in golf, but my present weight would probably prevent me from making that climb.

Let thy known self be true and that's an honest assessment of me today. Most of the guys I know have also put on a few pounds where that might be too difficult. But I know guys like you who could do it easily.

 

[acbytesla]

I'm not here to "argue".

I just want the truth.

I assume (I hope) that better minds than mine might bequeath it to me.

bequeath it to you? I don't see it as to who is right and who is wrong. If he didn't grab the bars in the longer version, second time around, then he didn't grab the bars. OK, you win...

 

[Supernaut]

I am 56, in good physical condition but by no means an athlete, and I have accomplished climbing feats more prodigious than that window in the past 6 months.

It's amusing.

When I was 20 I reckon I might well have equalled or surpassed Guede athletically.

The only guy who ever out-ran me in my youth was a Nigerian (French-speaking) guy called Tyrone Giraud - his Dad was a warden in Richmond Park, the family lived in an idyllic lodge near the Isabella Plantation.

We were fast friends. He and Christopher Royal were even-stevens as the best football (soccer) players in school, but Tyrone's effortless, loose-limbed speed was a thing to behold.

But, whatever - I think back to that time, and that climb and break-in to Meredith's flat would have been a piece-of-piss for me, as it undoubtedly was for Guede.

 

[Supernaut]

bequeath it to you? I don't see it as to who is right and who is wrong. If he didn't grab the bars in the longer version, second time around, then he didn't grab the bars. OK, you win...

Truth is truth.

Truth does not contradict truth.

etc'.

 

[Grinder]

Briars, I think you make some good points. What it really comes down to, though, is not what any of us think is the most wise or logical, but what Rudy was comfortable doing. He may have been smart about it and measured his exposure - perhaps even throwing the rock through the window and moving away for a while to see if anyone emerged into view from from the garage or along the road - or he might have been very stupid about it and taken few precautions and just broke the window, waited for one minute to see that no inside light went on - and climbed down from the car park to the lower window and commenced his climb. None of us know how smart or careless. Those of us who think Rudy committed the crime alone realize that Rudy broke in the way he did because he was comfortable doing it there.

And there is the other side of this which is why did the stager pick the wrong window? It's not like the stager had to do it in an instant and the stager would have to go outside for the rock and throw it from the outside. I know Briars says it was thrown from the inside but everything points to it coming from the outside - dent in the inner shutter or frame, the glass fragments thrown throughout the room etc.

As I have said many a time the door to the balcony could have been left unlocked and the shutters open. The little window from the balcony to the kitchen could easily have been smashed out of sight of the roadway.

I would say the same amount of due diligence should be allowed for the stagers as the a real burglar.

So perhaps we can agree that nothing happened to the window because neither a burglar nor a stager would have picked that window.

 

[Grinder]

The link here shows exactly what the channel five programme put out. (I have just compared on my laptop with my sky plus recording which I still have!). I would have thought the key point was at the 1.11 moment when they describe the shutter problem and how it doesn't make a difference (they don't really highlight the bar problem but they do reference it as still being possible). The stuff that went on before is irrelevant (except as I say that it showed how easy it was to get to the lower window). We don't actually, unfortunately see the full process of the climber getting through the window for the obvious reason that he wouldn't have been allowed to! (and because of the bars). The C5 documentary would have done a favour by making sure the climber never used the bars on the top window as it was an unnecessary distraction.

I found the most interesting thing about the video is that the climber could reach the sill with his feet on the bottom of the lower window. It is a pity as you say that they didn't spend the money to put the window back to the condition as it was 11.1.07.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Well, you are better man than me Charlie. At 25, I don't think I had an extra pound on me. I KNOW I could have done it very easily. But I'm 53 now, I can still drive a golf ball and kick most people butts in golf, but my present weight would probably prevent me from making that climb.

Let thy known self be true and that's an honest assessment of me today. Most of the guys I know have also put on a few pounds where that might be too difficult. But I know guys like you who could do it easily.

I benefit from living in a place where I have to exert myself. Turning up the thermostat involves a chain saw and a maul...

 

[Grinder]

I agree with Supernaut. On the second go-around he does not use them, and the presence of the bars becomes a hindrance, not a help.

Chris when he goes back down to show that the shutters can be opened, if that's what you are referring to, the camera cuts away and then he is there on the sill sitting sideways holding on the bar in the version linked above.

Is that the version you are watching? If not, give yours.

 

[Bill Williams]

Back up Briars, back up a bit. Who said that anything "will come of the charges against Mignini"?

Please at least track the discussion. There was word on Nov 22 that Mingni was sent over for an abuse of office trial on Jan 15, 2014. Machiavelli denied this, saying that the Jan 15 thing was to be the preliminary, at which all the charges would be dropped - or words to that effect.

Then Oggi magazine reports that Jan 15 IS the trial date for abuse of office. Now you are bringing up Frank Sfarzo! What on earth does Frank Sfarzo have to do with the abuse of office charges against Mignini which relate back to the Monster of Florence case? If you didn't want to talk about that, just say so.
Once again, all you do is assert - that nothing with come of the charges against Mignini.... I guess you're entitled to your opinion. Why do you think Oggi reported otherwise?

Please at least track the conversation!

Oggi is pretty well tabloid and Frank writes for them.

So, if I am tracking your rationale properly here.... please correct me where I'm not following you....

I asked about the Jan 15 trial for Mignini on abuse of office charges. You say it won't amount to anything, Andrea Vogt writes that Jan 15 will bring "a verdict".

When I ask why you think Oggi reports that Jan 15 is a trial for both Mignini and Michele Giuttari your reply is that.....

Oggi is a tabloid....

and that Frank Sfarzo writes for them. Both of those things very well could be true.... but......

Ok. I am no further along, then, in understanding why you (and Machiavelli) claim the exact opposite as what's been reported - even by Vogt!?

I guess I'll just have to live with this particular vacuum in my understanding of things... why you will not answer the question.

 

[codyjuneau]

.
Wow, nice diversion Briars!

What lady neighbor of Rudy's. What ladies gold watch? What lawyers office? What lawyer's laptop? What school in Milan? What kitchen knife? What police reports? What phone call from Milan police to Perugian police?

A bit too easy though.
.

 

[acbytesla]

I benefit from living in a place where I have to exert myself. Turning up the thermostat involves a chain saw and a maul...

Good for you Charlie. I like to cook too much and spend far too much time on the computer and on the phone. I haven't had to do anything physical for a living since I was 25. Before that I worked on construction every summer. But since, it has been sales and 95 percent over the phone.

 

[Samson]

Odd.

There is, apparently, a clip on yootoob edited from the C5 doco broadcast a couple of months ago, which is being viewed by several people here.

it would appear that it omits the footage where the climber lowers himself back to shoulder-height with the window-ledge and then re-ascends, using only his fore-arms and hands on the ledge, NOT using the new bars on the window, and ends up sitting on the ledge.

Why would some-one post such an edit of this footage?

Judge Massei. Hows he sleeping these days?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

bars or no bars

Chris when he goes back down to show that the shutters can be opened, if that's what you are referring to, the camera cuts away and then he is there on the sill sitting sideways holding on the bar in the version linked above.

Is that the version you are watching? If not, give yours.

I have been having trouble viewing some videos on my computer today, for some reason. From what I recall, your description is accurate, but the two advocates were there when he went down and went back up. IIRC they asked him if the lack of bars was a problem, and he said that it was not a problem. It seems to me that the bars get in the way of grabbing the window frame and also of sitting on the sill.
ETA
Around 1:47 he pushes up with his arms. My impression is that he could have gotten in at that point, if the bars were not in the way.

 

[Poppy1016]

Thank you for sharing, Halides1. How did I get this far in life without knowing that word???

I'll have to remember that word in a future scrabble game.

 

[Poppy1016]

Briars - for your memory, here's what Oggi reported:



Even Andrea Vogt suggests a verdict can come as early as that day. The use of the word "verdict" suggests that even Vogt believes that this is a trial....

Vogt is an approximate reporter.

 

[Poppy1016]

I'm not here to "argue".

I just want the truth.

I assume (I hope) that better minds than mine might bequeath it to me.

I saw the video where he first used the bars, then repeated the climb without using them.

 

[Bill Williams]

Briars - for your memory, here's what Oggi reported:



Even Andrea Vogt suggests a verdict can come as early as that day. The use of the word "verdict" suggests that even Vogt believes that this is a trial....

Vogt is an approximate reporter.

LOL!!!

Machiavelli proved that he'd throw Barbie Nadeau under a bus, by calling her (upthread) an approximate reporter! But Barbie is the only one who is really successfully monetizing this, by selling the rights to her book to Winterbottom.

Makes me wonder if Vogt and Nadeau are now talking at all.... all for Meredith, I guess... Nadeau is making a tidy sum with a book and a film....

 

[Samson]

And there is the other side of this which is why did the stager pick the wrong window? It's not like the stager had to do it in an instant and the stager would have to go outside for the rock and throw it from the outside. I know Briars says it was thrown from the inside but everything points to it coming from the outside - dent in the inner shutter or frame, the glass fragments thrown throughout the room etc.

As I have said many a time the door to the balcony could have been left unlocked and the shutters open. The little window from the balcony to the kitchen could easily have been smashed out of sight of the roadway.

I would say the same amount of due diligence should be allowed for the stagers as the a real burglar.

So perhaps we can agree that nothing happened to the window because neither a burglar nor a stager would have picked that window.

Elegant argument. Irrefutable.

 

[Samson]

LOL!!!

Machiavelli proved that he'd throw Barbie Nadeau under a bus, by calling her (upthread) an approximate reporter! But Barbie is the only one who is really successfully monetizing this, by selling the rights to her book to Winterbottom.

Makes me wonder if Vogt and Nadeau are now talking at all.... all for Meredith, I guess... Nadeau is making a tidy sum with a book and a film....

Maybe Nadeau should watch her back, surprising what triggers violence in the fairer sex.

 

[Dan O.]

It's interesting to see Brairs come here and boldly redefine reality to make his point.

Though he may be right that Filomena's window can be seen from the gate, you have to step down from the road in order to stand in front of the gate where the window is visible.

Also, in 2007 there were pedestrian crossing marking and signs putting the crossing point at the end of the ramp to the upper level matching up with where the sidewalk on that ramp is.

But don't just take my word on this. Look it up in street view on Google Maps.