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

[Strozzi]

The devil just fired you for being a lousy advocate.

There is absolutely nothing in the credible record that indicates Filomena and her boyfriend didn't have rock solid alibis. They had the next day off and were celebrating a birthday. They were in their twenties and in Italy so it is highly probable that they weren't finished eating before 10 pm. They weren't withing walking distance.

Could you give details on the firm being well connected? What did she do to 'lawyer up"? Did she just call an associate about the lease situation? Did she need him when she took her computer to the police station?

Not to be too harsh but you have recently given 'facts' that were in fact not correct. Nara didn't awaken to the scream and I have yet to see proof that Rudy was 'desperate' for rent money.

Until Bill proves that Filomena didn't have a real alibi or rummaged (not from Follain) in her room without police permission before supporting this ridiculous theory.

Of course I don't believe Filomena was involved in the crime. I'm trying to underscore how any alleged factoid can be interpreted, twisted, or ignored to try to support a storyline using a suspicious mind (confirmation bias).

For example, if you look at Filomena's cell phone tower records there could be unusual tower connections on some days but not on others. With Amanda or Raffaele similar connection anomalities are interpreted as possibly sinister, whereas if you see similar cell tower changes in Filomena's cellular history it would be taken as normal for a city with high wall stone walls and narrow, twisting lanes.

For the record, I agree the proper verb is that Filomena "retrieved" her laptop from her room (not "swiped" it).

 

[Grinder]

Of course I don't believe Filomena was involved in the crime. I'm trying to underscore how any alleged factoid can be interpreted, twisted, or ignored to try to support a storyline using a suspicious mind (confirmation bias).

But if Amanda and Raf had witnesses to their being at home there would be no case.

For example, if you look at Filomena's cell phone tower records there could be unusual tower connections on some days but not on others. With Amanda or Raffaele similar connection anomalities are interpreted as possibly sinister, whereas if you see similar cell tower changes in Filomena's cellular history it would be taken as normal for a city with high wall stone walls and narrow, twisting lanes.

My guess is that her calls were checked. They probably pretty much matched what she said and she had an alibi.

For the record, I agree the proper verb is that Filomena "retrieved" her laptop from her room (not "swiped" it).

Thanks Bill has used 'swiped' for years to an attempt to create a fog of nonsense. It seems to be an attempt at PR.

I see no value in saying that there is no evidence. I see less value in saying that Filomena is just as much a suspect.

Here is a segment of Filomena's testimony:

We went first to lunch at the home of Luke and we
stayed there for most of the afternoon , because of
friends, was the birthday and then we went out and we
went to Luna Park , the rides down to Pian di
Massiano , we were there a good bit ' because we
fact that there were various games , however, were a
Group of friends gambling at the target, so these things and
around 10 more or less , at about 22.00 pm
drove home ...
R.G. 8/ 08 - 07/02/2009 c / MARIE AMANDA KNOX + 1
30
QUESTION - From Marco?
ANSWER - Yes, we accompanied Luca and Paola in the car.
QUESTION - Marco sorry lives ?
ANSWER - In Blankets Sources in Perugia .
QUESTION - So then you're back home in the night between 1 and 2 ? ANSWER - Yes, yes we got home , we phoned later also a friend of Mark to find out if we went out , but we were tired so we stayed at home.

 

[Strozzi]

But if Amanda and Raf had witnesses to their being at home there would be no case.



My guess is that her calls were checked. They probably pretty much matched what she said and she had an alibi.



Thanks Bill has used 'swiped' for years to an attempt to create a fog of nonsense. It seems to be an attempt at PR.

I see no value in saying that there is no evidence. I see less value in saying that Filomena is just as much a suspect.

Here is a segment of Filomena's testimony:

We went first to lunch at the home of Luke and we
stayed there for most of the afternoon , because of
friends, was the birthday and then we went out and we
went to Luna Park , the rides down to Pian di
Massiano , we were there a good bit ' because we
fact that there were various games , however, were a
Group of friends gambling at the target, so these things and
around 10 more or less , at about 22.00 pm
drove home ...
R.G. 8/ 08 - 07/02/2009 c / MARIE AMANDA KNOX + 1
30
QUESTION - From Marco?
ANSWER - Yes, we accompanied Luca and Paola in the car.
QUESTION - Marco sorry lives ?
ANSWER - In Blankets Sources in Perugia .
QUESTION - So then you're back home in the night between 1 and 2 ? ANSWER - Yes, yes we got home , we phoned later also a friend of Mark to find out if we went out , but we were tired so we stayed at home.

Now, the really pressing question I want to ask is in late 2007 was Marco Filomena's boyfriend or was he her "fiance"?

 

[Strozzi]

But if Amanda and Raf had witnesses to their being at home there would be no case.

Amanda had a witness. It is Raffaele. Mignini had him arrested to destroy his ability to be her witness.

 

[Poppy1016]

Amanda had a witness. It is Raffaele. Mignini had him arrested to destroy his ability to be her witness.

I still believe Patrick was involved with Rudy. I'm not buying his alibi.

 

[Strozzi]

I still believe Patrick was involved with Rudy. I'm not buying his alibi.

Nov 1 was a slow night in Perugia because it was All Souls Day. Not much night life going on.

Patrick had multiple witnesses confirm his alibi that he was at his bar, Le Chic, and it was open that evening. He was there and open for business, just did not have enough business at about 8 - 8:30 pm to warrant having Amanda come in that evening.

What is more interesting is that when the police and Mignini needed to justify holding Lumumba they found a witness who would say that the bar was closed that evening - inferring that Lumumba was not at work as he said he was. If you are the Perugia police with leverage over some of the people, you can find and prompt a witness to say your version of events.

You can also count on your forensic police scientists find what is needed to save your case when you desperately need forensic proof. Need to connect the bathmat blood stain to Raffaele? Just hire a currently-serving senior police forensic scientist as a paid private consultant and he will mis-measure enough to claim the print must be Raffaele's rather than Rudy's. Need to find evidence connecting the knife to the murder victim. You can count on the police forensic scientists to adjust it until she finds proof. "Too low, too low?" - no problem. We'll just keep adjusting this until we get an image or artifacts that we can claim means something.

 

[lane99]

What have U been smoking?

"Crowder testified that, although she had been drinking "quite a bit" and smoking crack cocaine, she was "confident" that she saw Thomas get into the vehicle." link. Gregory Taylor was convicted of the murder of Ms. Thomas on the basis of this testimony...among other things...

Not only in Perugia are drug-addled witnesses considered reliable...

Do you even read these articles before you climb up on that high horse? That testimony is not even from his murder trial. In fact, Crowder was never even called as witness in the trial that convicted him.

Emphasis on "among other things", I suppose. Of which, indeed, there was no shortage.

...Dr. Bevel went on to say...

Since when is Bevel a doctor? He's a doctor like Stefanoni (the "forensic expert" in the Knox case) is a doctor. IOW, nothing at all like a doctor.
.
.

 

[Poppy1016]

Do you even read these articles before you climb up on that high horse? That testimony is not even from his murder trial. In fact, Crowder was never even called as witness in the trial that convicted him.

Emphasis on "among other things", I suppose. Of which, indeed, there was no shortage.




Since when is Bevel a doctor? He's a doctor like Stefanoni (the "forensic expert" in the Knox case) is a doctor. IOW, nothing at all like a doctor.
.
.

Stephony is only compatable with being a doctor.

 

[Grinder]

I still believe Patrick was involved with Rudy. I'm not buying his alibi.

I'll grant that he is much more likely to have been involved than Filomena.

He switched out Sim cards the next day and tell was a ping on his phone in the neighborhood of the murder.

Using the techniques of many posters here, I will now make up stuff about him. His witnesses were all drunks that he had bought many a drink for and in fact he disappeared from the bar for over a half hour.

The Swiss professor was not a professor but only a grad student and the phone number of Schick Shadel Hospital‎ was found on his speed dial!!!!

He was well connected and had many influential friends in the police force and even higher.

 

[Grinder]

You can also count on your forensic police scientists find what is needed to save your case when you desperately need forensic proof. Need to connect the bathmat blood stain to Raffaele? Just hire a currently-serving senior police forensic scientist as a paid private consultant and he will mis-measure enough to claim the print must be Raffaele's rather than Rudy's. Need to find evidence connecting the knife to the murder victim. You can count on the police forensic scientists to adjust it until she finds proof. "Too low, too low?" - no problem. We'll just keep adjusting this until we get an image or artifacts that we can claim means something.

Do you, by any chance, have a source for your claim?

Now we come to the topic of the technical investigations entrusted to Dr Lorenzo Rinaldi (Engineer, Principal Technical Director of the State Police, director of the three sections which compose the Identity Division of the ERT), and to Chief Inspector Pietro Boemia of the ERT in Rome, the aim of which was to compare the shoe prints found and photographed during the course of the crime scene examination by Forensics [Polizia Scientifica] at the cottage at Via della Pergola 7 between 2 and 5 November 2007, with several pairs of shoes present in the bedrooms, respectively, of Amanda Knox and Meredith Kercher, as well as footwear seized at the residences of Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guede.
[355]Responsibility for the examinations [consulenza] was entrusted to Dr Rinaldi and Chief Inspector Boemia by the Prosecutor as of 9 January 2008.
At that time, the Prosecutor’s Office was already working with a consultant (Ippolito-Mainieri, dated 7 November 2007) who had concluded that a particular shoe print was attributable to the accused Sollecito. It was left by the deposit of haematic substance and discovered in the English student’s *=Meredith’s+ room near the body, pointing towards the door leading out of the room.

 

[davefoc]

Dave, if you can spare an hour, watch this link I posted last night:

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

Here the authorities actively collaborated with the real killer to frame the innocent guy they had already accused, and they got him to testify.

This happens a lot. Once the authorities make a public accusation in a high-profile case, they will do anything rather than admit they were wrong.

I read through the article and I agree that there are several significant parallels to the Kercher murder case (I think I'd heard about this case from watching the TV program already). And perhaps I am letting my imagination run a bit open loop when I think about a wider conspiracy in the Kercher murder.

However, it strikes me as strange how little Mignini got from Guede in return for so much. If Mignini really believed Guede was involved in this murder with Knox and Sollecito why did Guede get his sweetheart deal without needing to provide specifics of his relationship with Knox and Sollecito? If Mignini had so much to offer Guede why did he settle for so little from him?

I think Machiavelli's theory on this is that Guede's sentence reductions happened without Mignini's involvement. If this were true it suggests the possibility of a wider conspiracy to me. Sixteen years for rape and murder, especially when there is a history of other criminal behavior sounds a bit like the fix was in to me.

 

[Samson]

I read through the article and I agree that there are several significant parallels to the Kercher murder case (I think I'd heard about this case from watching the TV program already). And perhaps I am letting my imagination run a bit open loop when I think about a wider conspiracy in the Kercher murder.

However, it strikes me as strange how little Mignini got from Guede in return for so much. If Mignini really believed Guede was involved in this murder with Knox and Sollecito why did Guede get his sweetheart deal without needing to provide specifics of his relationship with Knox and Sollecito? If Mignini had so much to offer Guede why did he settle for so little from him?

I think Machiavelli's theory on this is that Guede's sentence reductions happened without Mignini's involvement. If this were true it suggests the possibility of a wider conspiracy to me. Sixteen years for rape and murder, especially when there is a history of other criminal behavior sounds a bit like the fix was in to me.

The simplest answer is provided by the innocence hypothesis.
For six years A and R have had nothing to hide so they have told everything.
In the same time Guede has had everything to hide so he has told nothing.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

I read through the article and I agree that there are several significant parallels to the Kercher murder case (I think I'd heard about this case from watching the TV program already). And perhaps I am letting my imagination run a bit open loop when I think about a wider conspiracy in the Kercher murder.

However, it strikes me as strange how little Mignini got from Guede in return for so much. If Mignini really believed Guede was involved in this murder with Knox and Sollecito why did Guede get his sweetheart deal without needing to provide specifics of his relationship with Knox and Sollecito? If Mignini had so much to offer Guede why did he settle for so little from him?

I think Machiavelli's theory on this is that Guede's sentence reductions happened without Mignini's involvement. If this were true it suggests the possibility of a wider conspiracy to me. Sixteen years for rape and murder, especially when there is a history of other criminal behavior sounds a bit like the fix was in to me.

I have always worried that someday Guede might come through with the story the court wants to hear, and I am somewhat surprised he has never done so.

Charles Boney, the real perp in the Camm case, is exceptionally poised and articulate, he is a hardened criminal, and he is utterly lacking in conscience. He looked Camm straight in the eye when he testified against him.

I don't think Guede is like that. I have a feeling everyone realizes Guede would not hold up well if he were to testify.

Plus, Boney was not identified and arrested for several years. When police first interviewed him, they were able to line out what they wanted his role to be, and it was an accessory role that very much served Boney's interest. Guede was only arrested after he was on record with a story.

 

[Grinder]

However, it strikes me as strange how little Mignini got from Guede in return for so much. If Mignini really believed Guede was involved in this murder with Knox and Sollecito why did Guede get his sweetheart deal without needing to provide specifics of his relationship with Knox and Sollecito? If Mignini had so much to offer Guede why did he settle for so little from him?

I think Machiavelli's theory on this is that Guede's sentence reductions happened without Mignini's involvement. If this were true it suggests the possibility of a wider conspiracy to me. Sixteen years for rape and murder, especially when there is a history of other criminal behavior sounds a bit like the fix was in to me.

30 years for murder. Shortened by six years for the same sort of mitigation given to Raf and Amanda and then a third off for the fast track trial equals 16. Then their system gives time off for good behavior etc.

They don't have plea deals so no deals can be cut, supposedly.

 

[Bill Williams]

For the record, I agree the proper verb is that Filomena "retrieved" her laptop from her room (not "swiped" it).

Thanks Bill has used 'swiped' for years to an attempt to create a fog of nonsense. It seems to be an attempt at PR.

I see no value in saying that there is no evidence. I see less value in saying that Filomena is just as much a suspect.

Calling this "PR" is a wee bit of a canard. The fact it that she retrieved it from behind police tape. Just like Knox's underwear which if she'd been able to have retrieved, it would have spared the other canard about Knox buying underwear later on..... the fact is at the time the laptop did not belong to Filomena. It belonged to the State of Italy.

Choose the word you like.... but also abandon any hope of claiming that Filomena's room was in any condition to be proven one way or the other of having been "staged" to hide a murder.

 

[Grinder]

Calling this "PR" is a wee bit of a canard. The fact it that she retrieved it from behind police tape. Just like Knox's underwear which if she'd been able to have retrieved, it would have spared the other canard about Knox buying underwear later on..... the fact is at the time the laptop did not belong to Filomena. It belonged to the State of Italy.

Choose the word you like.... but also abandon any hope of claiming that Filomena's room was in any condition to be proven one way or the other of having been "staged" to hide a murder.

Can't wait for an in situ and how the entire room was spoiled for any evidence because she 'rummaged" through it.

It did not belong to the state. They didn't own it. It could have been evidence and might have had an important print on it.

The fact that she grabbed it because it had work information is no indication of any untoward behavior.

Why don't you find some proof that she didn't have a rock solid alibi instead of pushing your swiping theory.

It's pretty obvious to most all that they didn't try to prove it was staged from physical evidence.

non furtum facies omnia

 

[Ogantai]

Ogantai, were the plants that the guys downstairs growing in a closet a significant or valuable quantity? Could Rudy have smelled their presence?

There were 5, and late autumn is usually harvest time. I've only seen photos so it's hard for me to estimate the height, or how many plants were male vs female (cannabis is a sexually dimorphic plant and the males are of little value), or the particular cultivar involved (which would give a hint as to the amount of THC present). All I say is it could be a lot, a little, or anything in between. Usually a competent grower operating indoors would discard any males as soon the seeds germinated, but either the PLE didn't bother investigating the world's most obvious burglary motive or the information just hasn't been translated into English because I can't find it.

 

[Bill Williams]

Can't wait for an in situ and how the entire room was spoiled for any evidence because she 'rummaged" through it.

It did not belong to the state. They didn't own it. It could have been evidence and might have had an important print on it.

The fact that she grabbed it because it had work information is no indication of any untoward behavior.

Why don't you find some proof that she didn't have a rock solid alibi instead of pushing your swiping theory.
It's pretty obvious to most all that they didn't try to prove it was staged from physical evidence.

non furtum facies omnia

I will as soon as I can find the proper Latin term for it!

One of the reasons why RS and AK were jailed for a year prior to trial was that they might "tamper with evidence". If AK and RS had left the scene with something, you can bet your booties the guilters would be all over that like a cheap suit that it was "tampering with evidence".

And it's a good thing they didn't try to prove it was a staged crime scene from physical evidence, because first of all there was no physical evidence ever collected or presented in court (other than off the cuff remarks from people who did not yet know it had been a murder) and.... no wait, there was actually no evidence so there is no "and".

You should be reading over at PMF... one poster there, hardly a friend to innocence, is saying that Filomena and Marco were in the room for up to 15 minutes. Heck, I don't even believe that....

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

There were 5, and late autumn is usually harvest time. I've only seen photos so it's hard for me to estimate the height, or how many plants were male vs female (cannabis is a sexually dimorphic plant and the males are of little value), or the particular cultivar involved (which would give a hint as to the amount of THC present). All I say is it could be a lot, a little, or anything in between. Usually a competent grower operating indoors would discard any males as soon the seeds germinated, but either the PLE didn't bother investigating the world's most obvious burglary motive or the information just hasn't been translated into English because I can't find it.

I doubt the weed had anything to do with Guede's motive, assuming he even knew about it. The video showed a small indoor setup for personal use. The plants were a good 6-8 weeks from maturity.

 

[Grinder]

You should be reading over at PMF... one poster there, hardly a friend to innocence, is saying that Filomena and Marco were in the room for up to 15 minutes. Heck, I don't even believe that....

They were in her room WITH the police. They didn't know someone was murdered in the room down the hall. The police don't usually seal off a room in a house that was burgled. They don't usually take prints here and never DNA.

Not the Latin but some credible report that she had no more of an alibi than Amanda and Raf.