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

[MichaelB]

Witness: Antonella Monacchia

Mignini

Lives in Via Pinturicchio 58 and on her way can see the cottage.

There was a party at the cottage in July/August and called the police at 3am because she couldn't sleep.

Went to bed at 10pm on Nov 1 and woke up hearing a male and female arguing in Italian but doesn't know what time it was. She heard a loud scream and opened the window.

QUESTION - You stated in the minutes of 8th November 2008 that "came from, I believe, from the house of the street Pergola number 7. "

REPLY - Maybe, but I can not say with certainty.

Saw nothing at the cottage and it was dark with lights out. She closed the window and went downstairs to her parents to ask if they heard anything but they hadn't.

PACELLI

Didn't report this to police or anyone before giving her statement to the prosecutor November 8, 2008

Didn't know Amanda and had never spoken to her.

MAORI

Didn't report hearing the scream for 1 year because she didn't think it was relevant but the journalists came to see her and Fois accompanied her to the prosecutors office.

Didn't see any parked cars.

ROCCHI

Doesn't know what time she woke up.

The journalists pressured her and she was a little anxious going to Mignini and might have said something different.

Two female cops went to see her parents who didn't confirm her version.

THE WIDOW

She's heard noises from the car park before. Gets her to mark on a map where the cottage and her house is.

Fois drove her to the prosecutors office.

Mignini

Heard about the murder around 3pm on Nov 2 and she noticed the police and people in white suits.

 

[Poppy1016]

Well, I understand all positions expressed. I think they offer legitimate interpretations. However, they are also subjective.
Those thinking their interpretation (for example of the "square" drop, or blade orientation) is obvious and absolute, are not applying logic completely.
There are several other small drops and marks, as well as their alignement, which may be "happy to be explained"; and the "squared" mark might be not "representing" something as some people may guess, but has maybe some other "geometric" explanation.

When I say that believing some interpretations ot be absolute is a lack of "complete" logic, here "complete logic" I think could mean "an explanation that tends to explain all marks", or most.

It is not granted that the blade must have one particular orientation and position. It might have other orientations.

My speculation: is just a guess about kind of knife, blade orientation etc. not intended to be "absolute", I mean it's not necessarily the correct one. However I think it is possible, that it is plausible. I think there is something interesting in considering this hypotheses, because it explains a pretty good number of marks and drops.
And it shows why I think the stain could be considered "compatible" with the kitchen knife.
The superimposition picture shows how I think our specific knife can be considered compatible with the bed sheet print.

Below is how I envision the superimposition.

Is the knife print compatible with any kitchen knives from the cottage?

 

[Dan O.]

DEFENSE - AVV. THE WIDOW Who is this?

Carlo Dalla Vedova

 

[Grinder]

Is the knife print compatible with any kitchen knives from the cottage?

Already asked and not answered

This really seems to be a significant cultural difference.

Throwing spaghetti on the wall is how you know spaghetti is fully cooked. If it sticks to the wall, you have cooked it long enough. It it does not stick, you need to cook it more. The real problem with this technique is that overcooked spaghetti sticks to the walls too!

They really believe close is good enough. Pieces of evidence should pass the reasonable doubt test and more but not in Italy. According to the PGP if you get enough compatibles, that's it. Witnesses need to be believed unless they don't present well. Testimony that doesn't fit is adjusted by the judges. If the chain of custody is broken or protocol not followed, it is the duty of the defense to prove that something went wrong.

 

[acbytesla]

Already asked and not answered

This really seems to be a significant cultural difference.

Throwing spaghetti on the wall is how you know spaghetti is fully cooked. If it sticks to the wall, you have cooked it long enough. It it does not stick, you need to cook it more. The real problem with this technique is that overcooked spaghetti sticks to the walls too!

They really believe close is good enough. Pieces of evidence should pass the reasonable doubt test and more but not in Italy. According to the PGP if you get enough compatibles, that's it. Witnesses need to be believed unless they don't present well. Testimony that doesn't fit is adjusted by the judges. If the chain of custody is broken or protocol not followed, it is the duty of the defense to prove that something went wrong.

If it was compatible with a cooking knife, it would be compatible with a knife found in more than half the kitchens in Italy. But it isn't compatible Grinder, period.

This one flabbergasts me. Machiavellii is measuring to a top line of the knife print that isn't there. He is taking liberties and he is totally ignoring the dots in the middle that are probably the handle. Which means the knife is far shorter than the cooking knife.

This is not the bathmat print, which I concede is close enough to Raffaele's and Rudy's footprint that I can't rule either out, so I think it is fair for Mach to say Raff's foot is compatible. I couldn't rule him out from that print.

This is like the prosecution counting the rings on a shoe print...but doing it in the closing arguments.

 

[JREF2010]

Well, the reality is the width isn't what Mach says it is as well. Mach really is doing is creative Photoshop work. In particular the top line he draws the top of the knife. There isn't a distinct line at the top where he is drawing the line only a few blood drops.

What is far more telling is the point and curve of the knife blade is very different and inside the Yummi's artwork.

Below is the knife stain left on the Meredith's bed. The dark line around the outside is the arbitrary line drawn by Machiavelli. I put little yellow dots around the actual knife edges. As you can see the knife is much, much smaller.

[qimg]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1Ls_Mz43xv4/UrtjAZljOCI/AAAAAAAAALE/5__XqzOwdtc/s1600/Knife+stain3.jpg[/qimg]

With my mind I can make up 4 or 5 knives in that picture easily. Maybe 6 knives some laying on top of each other. Maybe even a spoon and a fork if I draw some lines on the picture. geeez..

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

"Yes, I meant to say persecuted."

Ho ho ho... I have spent my Christmas binging on crime stories, including this 48 Hours episode about the David Camm travesty:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/david-camm-walking-free/

The plot will be familiar to all who have followed the Knox/Sollecito thread. The cops jumped to the wrong conclusion. They cooked up bogus evidence after making a public accusation. They did their utmost to ignore evidence pointing to the real killer. When they finally had to face that evidence, they tried to say the real killer was Camm's accomplice.

Unlike Amanda and Raffaele, Camm had eleven rock-solid alibi witnesses. Not that they did him any good... he was convicted twice. Finally he was acquitted this year.

I also watched this one, which is an interesting story but completely irrelevant to our discussion - EXCEPT for the part about luminol:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/love-hate-obsession-the-murder-of-lanny-horwitz/

In this case, the defense tried to claim the luminol meant something, and the prosecution said it was meaningless. Which it was.

 

[acbytesla]

With my mind I can make up 4 or 5 knives in that picture easily. Maybe 6 knives some laying on top of each other. Maybe even a spoon and a fork if I draw some lines on the picture. geeez..

OK. But my point is that Raffaele's large cooking knife does not work.

 

[davefoc]

Well, the reality is the width isn't what Mach says it is as well. Mach really is doing is creative Photoshop work. In particular the top line he draws the top of the knife. There isn't a distinct line at the top where he is drawing the line only a few blood drops.

What is far more telling is the point and curve of the knife blade is very different and inside the Yummi's artwork.

Below is the knife stain left on the Meredith's bed. The dark line around the outside is the arbitrary line drawn by Machiavelli. I put little yellow dots around the actual knife edges. As you can see the knife is much, much smaller.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1Ls_Mz43xv4/UrtjAZljOCI/AAAAAAAAALE/5__XqzOwdtc/s1600/Knife+stain3.jpg

LJ believed the line lower line in Machiavelli's drawing corresponded to the outline of the knife before it shifted upwards and rested in its final position on the sheet. It looked like he might have been right to me.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9712890&postcount=918

 

[acbytesla]

LJ believed the line lower line in Machiavelli's drawing corresponded to the outline of the knife before it shifted upwards and rested in its final position on the sheet. It looked like he might have been right to me.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9712890&postcount=918

I think that is a possibility as well. But I think the knife not only shifted, but flipped to the other side of the knife.

 

[snook1]

After all these years, PGP are still having meltdowns over the knife. I really thought they would give it up. They didn't after C&V, fair enough, but to have them spewing nonesense after the RIS report, is beyond delusional.

As people said previously, not even the idiotic prosecution did what Macchiavelli's trying to do now. They knew the kitchen knife wasn't "the knife".

 

[Strozzi]

Is the knife print compatible with any kitchen knives from the cottage?

Allow me to add to Poppy1016's question above. Is the knife print compatible with any other knife used in the murder and never found?

 

[Strozzi]

Allow me to add to Poppy1016's question above. Is the knife print compatible with any other knife used in the murder and never found?

I'll answer my own question, above. Yes, the bloodstain is a plausible match for another knife used in the murder that was never found. Not only is it plausible, it is compatible.

Someone with another knife that was never found committed the murder. Get me Rudy! Case closed!

 

[GreyFox]

If you look very closely I think they caught her right in the middle part of a cartwheel in this photo (imagine a clockwise motion). But perhaps she is simply doing a headstand...hard to tell since her arms are so short... because, she may be doing an actual hand stand which is much harder...(looks like a one-hander too) Why is she smiling? What is she hiding under that scarf?

I wonder why Rita Fucara thought cartwheels were somehow inappropriate but then she felt that striking someone (twice) in the head is perfectly OK? Do Italians regularly physically assault each other? Is that so routine that the police feel no compunction at utilizing corporal punishment as a normal behavior during interrogation?

This undeniably has to be the truth since even 6 years later no one in Italy has even bothered to investigate this physical attack. In fact a reporter asked the prosecutors office if they would be investigating this crime (the police brutality) and oddly they said no and then in what has to be the stupidest most corrupt action possible the prosecutors office proceeded to charge the victim with a crime, meanwhile ignoring obvious police abuse...to not even investigate??? What are they doing in Italy?

Aaarrrgghhh .... I just realized she isn't wearing any clothes !!!

 

[GreyFox]

I'll answer my own question, above. Yes, the bloodstain is a plausible match for another knife used in the murder that was never found. Not only is it plausible, it is compatible.

Someone with another knife that was never found committed the murder. Get me Rudy! Case closed!

I'm surprised they even agree that it's a knife print and aren't trying to say it's another one of Amanda's foot prints. Doh

Shoot...probably just gave them their next argument.

 

[Strozzi]

Aaarrrgghhh .... I just realized she isn't wearing any clothes !!!

That confirms it. Massei was right. He wrote in his motivation report that Amanda and Raffaele were naked when they committed the crime because they got no blood on their clothes.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

mixed blood/DNA in the Horwitz case

I also watched this one, which is an interesting story but completely irrelevant to our discussion - EXCEPT for the part about luminol:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/love-hate-obsession-the-murder-of-lanny-horwitz/

In this case, the defense tried to claim the luminol meant something, and the prosecution said it was meaningless. Which it was.

Charlie,

I agree about the luminol evidence in this case, and I think that a positive result for luminol by itself should not make it into a court without supporting evidence. I also found this passage interesting:

"The state says the mystery DNA is meaningless.

"The smudge on the post has Lanny's blood on it and the DNA of someone else who did not match anyone in that house. Isn't that your killer?" Van Sant asked McRoberts.

"No," she replied. "When they swab the gate to get the blood off of it, it picks up the underlying DNA of anyone that ever touched that gate since the last time it was ever cleaned, which could be countless numbers of people.""

So in the Horwitz case (in contrast to the Knox/Sollecito case) we have blood plus DNA from a second individual being seen as unimportant by the prosecution. I think that they are probably right. My only reservation is a general one. The prosecution has to be honest about taking reference profiles from everyone. Then if unknown DNA shows up it either indicates a stranger is involved in the crime, or it is simply DNA deposition that is unrelated to the crime.

 

[Grinder]

Remember when the bookkeeper and the Anglo hating legal secretary said that the interest in the case had waned?

A 95 minute long documentary about the Meredith Kercher case, will be aired tonight at 21.55 (9.55 pm) Rome-Berlin time (GMT +01) on DER SPIEGEL TV-Wissen.

The documentary is in German.

It will be aired again on the night between Dec. 27. and 38. at around 3.am Rome-Berlin time.

Courtesy of Yummi.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Charlie,

I agree about the luminol evidence in this case, and I think that a positive result for luminol by itself should not make it into a court without supporting evidence. I also found this passage interesting:

"The state says the mystery DNA is meaningless.

"The smudge on the post has Lanny's blood on it and the DNA of someone else who did not match anyone in that house. Isn't that your killer?" Van Sant asked McRoberts.

"No," she replied. "When they swab the gate to get the blood off of it, it picks up the underlying DNA of anyone that ever touched that gate since the last time it was ever cleaned, which could be countless numbers of people.""

So in the Horwitz case (in contrast to the Knox/Sollecito case) we have blood plus DNA from a second individual being seen as unimportant by the prosecution. I think that they are probably right. My only reservation is a general one. The prosecution has to be honest about taking reference profiles from everyone. Then if unknown DNA shows up it either indicates a stranger is involved in the crime, or it is simply DNA deposition that is unrelated to the crime.

The luminol and the mystery DNA in that case are typical red herrings that pop up all the time at crime scenes. The cops could always find "evidence" to prop up a crazy theory, if that was their agenda. Usually they are interested in what really happened, so they filter out the red herrings.

The Horwitz case involved a dysfunctional family of American gun nuts where the worst happened, and the authorities had no reason to dispute the obvious. It was left to the defense to make something of unexplained details in an attempt to instill doubt.

 

[Samson]

I see The Machine is saying again Kercher and Knox blood is mixed together on the bathroom tap. Of all his points this is the only remotely unexplained one, was it conclusively determined either way?