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

[Bill Williams]

OMG, the rebuttal is back on the 211 call.

I guess that's smart prosecution. The kids sure do look guilty if you argue they didn't call the Carabinieri until after the postal police arrived. The only problem with that argument is: it's false.

Concrete proof the prosecution haven’t been following this thread.

On Bruce Fishers' site are about 8 or ten cases which have been since proven to be wrongful convictions, meaning that the relevant upper courts have reversed a lower court's wrongful conviction.

In pretty much each of them posters anticipated relevant points that eventually decided the matter. What I've learned through all this, is that this is not rocket science. It's also perhaps the reason that most legal systems impanel lay-juries who have no particular expertise, save for (let's hope) common sense.

In fact, if the "law" and its officers cannot present a case in plain-speak, ideas and theories accessible to all, what good are they?

Back to Florence - it doesn't take a rocket scientist to speculate that if the rebuttal is bringing back the timing of the 112 call, then the person making the rebuttal does not understand this case; either that or has a sinister agenda. The person has either not read the convicting judge's motivations report, Massei's, or read it and did not understand it; or simply doesn't care and is going for a conviction regardless. Although Massei is less than clear, it is plain - Raffaele called the Carabinieri BEFORE the postal police arrived.

Still.... the ISC quashed acquittals, not with the 112 call in mind!!!!! So why does this third trial even raise it? I thought it was a slam dunk that they were guilty?

Judges in our country know that their decisions had better be just-decisions, but more importantly must also inspire the confidence of the populace that they are the right decisions arrived at by sound reason.

The basis for this is a quote from Junius, which is still the motto of Canada's Globe and Mail newspaper... the motto for the editorial page is, "The subject who is truly loyal to the Chief Magistrate will neither advise nor submit to arbitrary measures."

Blind bending to authority simply because it is the authority, turns out to be disloyalty to that same authority......

So it is, yes, if Crini is bringing up the 112 calls at this time, he's a horsehair's ass, and all of us are witnessing the mechanics of a wrongful conviction in the raw.

Submit to that at your peril.

 

[JREF2010]

I could not agree more. It seems quanity is more important than quality over there, and crini just keeps pouring it on. Meanwhile, I don't think the defense has done a good job of bonding with the jury nor of delivering a strong forceful convincing defense.

The collective logic that the Supreme Court is so found of hinges on the necessity of a staged break in and tod. Each of these could have been smashed by the defense, but they were not.

AV tweet- now #sollecito lawyers up for rebuttal, but both his principal lawyers had to leave early

this case just never stops being the most bizarre, a Reality Show Nightmare, the principal lawyers had to leave? really? this case, for a few hours isn't that important?

 

[Paninaro]

It is not logical that they would call Amanda's phone for directions 8 minutes after they got there, but some people continue to believe because somehow they just want to.

Crini claims according to Machiavelli that "Battistellli arrives on foot ten minutes earlier than postal police car."

Is that correct?

 

[JREF2010]

Crini claims according to Machiavelli that "Battistellli arrives on foot ten minutes earlier than postal police car."

Is that correct?

Crini can claim anything he wants, this is about convincing the Judges not the truth. A barrage of garbage is what the courtroom walls get to hear.

If a judge like Massei can add that it was Raffaele who went outside and grabbed the rock from the driveway, then anything can be said or created.

Creative Legal Presentations 101... be a Dr. in Italy in 8 months online course!

 

[Strozzi]

Crini claims according to Machiavelli that "Battistellli arrives on foot ten minutes earlier than postal police car."

Is that correct?

If Machiavelli said it, it must be so. Battistelli was still dressed in his Halloween costume as a wandering troubadour. He was conducting undercover surveillance of the crime scene. They hadn't found the body yet, but were already on it.

 

[moodstream]

AV tweet- now #sollecito lawyers up for rebuttal, but both his principal lawyers had to leave early

this case just never stops being the most bizarre, a Reality Show Nightmare, the principal lawyers had to leave? really? this case, for a few hours isn't that important?

Very sad.

 

[Dan O.]

One reason I don't see a break-in is that, to me, Filomena's bedroom looks like it has had a rock thrown in the window but it doesn't look like it has been gone through. Who walks through a room in the middle of a burglary and leaves a shopping bag that is right in his path? Meredith's laundry is on top of the part of the curtain that is on the ground, meaning the curtain wasn't moved. Other people will say that is not her laundry, that is clothing Rudy pulled out of the cupboard and onto the top of the curtain.

Filomena's room looks like it was always a mess. But look at the drawer on the table beside the bed. The bedding is trapped in the drawer as if somebody searched the drawer. The owner would be sure to clear the bedding lest it get ripped when she tries to pull down the covers.

I don't see that much motivation in Rudy for breaking into the girls' apartment. Why not break into the boys'? Why not just kick the door down instead of climbing in a window? Why be out wandering around at the time of night when a lot of young people are just thinking about getting social and hitting the streets? To burglarize, or to be social? Once you get sociable with other people, you can usually bum or lift some cash, if you are so inclined. What time did his other burglaries take place? I think Rudy may have been wandering around to see if any of his friends wanted to hang out, and he crossed paths with Meredith at her house. He was an opportunist and asked if he could use the bathroom. She may not have wanted him to but didn't have the confidence to turn him down.

The way Rudy tells it, they were into hot heavy petting when Meredith broke it off because neither of them had a condom. Do you believe Rudy thought he had a date and didn't come prepared? In Rudy's story the need to use the bathroom doesn't come up until after the oral sex, after Meredith discovers here cash is missing, after she shows Rudy where Amanda keeps her money in an imaginary drawer and after Rudy steals a drink from the juice jar in the fridge. If Rudy came into the cottage because he had to use the bathroom, why doesn't he just say that? Of course, there's that little inconvienient bit about Rudy's DNA being found inside Meredith.

If Rudy were in the house when Meredith walked in, why attack her instead of just lying low, waiting a while, then exiting out the same window he had entered? I can see if he were sitting at the kitchen table and she saw him, or they suddenly met face-to-face, how he might panic, but still, why not just leave and hope for the best? The fact that she didn't drop her books as she came in suggests there was nothing troubling her until after she got to the bedroom. I think if Rudy was motivated to sexually assault Meredith (which he obviously was) it would be more likely to have developed over the course of some interaction between them rather than from panic, unless Rudy was high on some aggression-producing drug.

To reach any exit from the large bathroom you must cross the line that is visible from Meredith's room. Rudy may have tried to sneak out and was seen. Alternatively, Rudy pulls up his pants and holding them up with one hand tiptoes out of the bathroom only to discover Meredith in the kitchen with a knife in hand and the last piece of a mushroom she was slicing in her mouth. Rudy indicates he was attacked in the kitchen by a stranger with a knife while his pants were falling down to his ankles. He might not be making all of this up.

 

[JREF2010]

So it is, yes, if Crini is bringing up the 112 calls at this time, he's a horsehair's ass, and all of us are witnessing the mechanics of a wrongful conviction in the raw.

Submit to that at your peril.

at your own peril...

true. my gut hunch is not good for the defense. nothing to do with innocence or not. its party loyalty most likely.

Nencini motioning to accept the prosecutions request to arrest immediately, was a action that supports a guilty verdict. Why else would he make a display of that request specifically? To me the answer seems to be he is setting up his judges for the 30th.
I hope Im wrong, but the prosecution ahs been allowed far too much already in this trial.

 

[Mary_H]

Concrete proof the prosecution haven’t been following this thread.

Courage, interesting. Well I’ll answer a question in the manner of my choosing, pretty like everyone else here.

I have always drawn a distinction between the ongoing discussion here and how evidence is presented or dealt with in court. Indeed, the discussion adheres to the memberships rules essentially and as such has little to do with Italian court procedure. Sadly, winning an argument here doesn’t necessarily translate to what happens in court, I do not understand why Amanda and or Raffaele defence aren’t arguing the points being raised here, do you?

No, I don't, and I wholeheartedly agree, Coulsdon. This has basically been THE major stumbling block. The internet has hosted hundred of minds working on specific problems over the course of five years, coming up with essential arguments that haven't been used in court.

ETA: I just reread this post and realized it sounds like I might be trying to be ironic and not serious, but I am perfectly serious. If I were having trouble winning a case that I knew a lot of other people were interested in, I would look wherever I could for help in coming up with ideas.

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>Isn't this what girls do, in the middle of having oral sex they excuse themselves so they can check that their rent money is still in the drawer with their lingerie?

Yes.

This part of Rudy's story was already there in the Skype call from before Rudy was arrested. Nobody would have known that the money was there except the thief that took it unless you accept Rudy's story that he was invited into the cottage to have oral sex with Meredith.

It's not hard to guess somebody would keep their money in their drawer. Rudy guessed Amanda did, too, but now you say she didn't have a drawer.

Are those not socks in the drawer I showed the picture of?

Believe it or not, I forgot to look at the picture.

 

[toto]

It suggests the photo given to the Daily Mail didn't just come from the case file, it was given to the reporter by police just as the story said:



For years the bunnies claimed the mistake/lie here was the Daily Mail's and police had nothing to do with this story suggesting the bathroom was a bloody mess, which certainly made Amanda's story of taking a shower there and not being immediately alarmed sound like she was crazy.

Even better, Dan-O found in the crime scene videos where it shows a 'short fat perp' taking a picture of the bathroom from a low angle like the one in the Mail article.

OK Thanks!
Still going to be hopeful about the upcoming verdict but am somewhat anxious, as everyone is I suppose.

 

[Mary_H]

Originally Posted by Mary_H: Several questions come to mind. Why was Meredith looking for money while Rudy was there? Does Meredith's family think she was given to language like, "That whore of doper?"
Rudy may have written in his "diary" that Meredith said this but I find it impossible to be true as Rudy spoke no English and Meredith's Italian was elementary. How would Meredith know how to say in beginner Italian anything like "That whore of doper?" It is just more fabrication from Rudy and probably involves evidence fabrication under direction of his attorney.<snip>

Oops, looks like I left out the word "a." That gets another embarrassment smiley.

I have to admit, one of the first questions that occurred to one when I read that comment was why Rudy said Meredith called Amanda "that whore of a doper" instead of "that doper of a whore."

(I thought I had heard that Rudy did speak English; does anyone know for sure?)

 

[JREF2010]

Very sad.

So it seems the Defense will finish up on the 30th, which was probably known already by the court. So them leaving was probably a small deal, knowing they will be presenting the 30th.

I hope that's the case....geez, if they would have waited around less than an hour it would have been the full day. I wonder if a Judge is insulted when lawyers walk out mid-day?

 

[Strozzi]

Battistelli photographed arriving at 1 pm.

Police Officer Battistelli was photographed by the parking garage camera walking from the parking garage towards the cottage at 12:59:52 pm (8 seconds before 1 pm).

You can see it and Judge Massei's finding on the timing of the Postal Police offircers' arrival at:
https://docs.google.com/document/edit?id=19m0jTj5sd8wgZ0ENwUjUFty_-kZyL3UTpMcxGEeJ9NU&hl=en&pli=1

 

[codyjuneau]

Originally Posted by Barbie Nadeau 11/14/07 ""Initially the American gave a version of events we knew was not correct," Perugia police chief Arturo de Felice told reporters. "She buckled and made an admission of facts we knew were correct and from that we were able to bring them all in. They all participated but had different roles."
I am stunned by this. I have read repeatedly of Police Chief de Felice saying she told us what "we knew were correct" but I do not recall previously reading the initial part: "Initially the American gave a version of events we knew was not correct,".

This means that de Felice's police interrogated the American girl to get her to change her statement to conform to what the police desired it to be. No wonder the tapes are missing.

This should be shouted from the rooftops.

.
Besides the "events we knew to be correct", the statement includes "They all participated but had different roles". What was Lumumba's role? What was Amanda's role? What was Raffaele's role? Where did this information come from?

The police also declared the case closed and gave themselves medals. One would think they would at least wait until the courts decided whether the accused were guilty or not.
.

 

[Matthew Best]

I wonder if a Judge is insulted when lawyers walk out mid-day?

I don't know the answer to that, but I don't think I'd take the chance myself.

 

[Grinder]

I agree completely with you that nudging things 1.5 minutes this way or 3 minutes that way doesn't really change the sequence of events. The Postal Police were indisputably on the property before Sollecito phoned 112. There were ample opportunities for Knox and Sollecito to duck out of sight and make their calls.

from a great mind at PMF.

Do these people really think that in that small space upstairs in the cottage the kids would call the police pretending to be making the first call? Do they not understand that Raf asking Amanda for information as recorded on the 112 tape (they must have a large budget) could have easily been overheard?

Nuts!

 

[snook1]

I agree completely with you that nudging things 1.5 minutes this way or 3 minutes that way doesn't really change the sequence of events. The Postal Police were indisputably on the property before Sollecito phoned 112. There were ample opportunities for Knox and Sollecito to duck out of sight and make their calls.

from a great mind at PMF.

Do these people really think that in that small space upstairs in the cottage the kids would call the police pretending to be making the first call? Do they not understand that Raf asking Amanda for information as recorded on the 112 tape (they must have a large budget) could have easily been overheard?

Nuts!

They don't think at all, I would say. It's pointless, really, to be looking for any sign of logical thinking amongst the guilters when it comes to Amanda Knox.

I'm more worried than ever. I think the outcome will be bad. Hopefully, they will fight this.

 

[GreyFox]

Crini claims according to Machiavelli that "Battistellli arrives on foot ten minutes earlier than postal police car."

Is that correct?

The defense has had way more than enough time to throw this Bologna out and yet 6 years later here we are...sigh

They should have the court laughing at these idiots for bringing this stuff up.
Remind them of Crinis skid mark motive and all the past motives.

Maybe Curt's behind on payments to the defense ? What a circus.

 

[Mary_H]

Filomena's room looks like it was always a mess. But look at the drawer on the table beside the bed. The bedding is trapped in the drawer as if somebody searched the drawer. The owner would be sure to clear the bedding lest it get ripped when she tries to pull down the covers.

That is not the case in the picture on IA. Do you have a different picture?

The way Rudy tells it, they were into hot heavy petting when Meredith broke it off because neither of them had a condom. Do you believe Rudy thought he had a date and didn't come prepared? In Rudy's story the need to use the bathroom doesn't come up until after the oral sex, after Meredith discovers here cash is missing, after she shows Rudy where Amanda keeps her money in an imaginary drawer and after Rudy steals a drink from the juice jar in the fridge. If Rudy came into the cottage because he had to use the bathroom, why doesn't he just say that? Of course, there's that little inconvienient bit about Rudy's DNA being found inside Meredith.

No, I don't believe they had a date. He could have used the bathroom, then helped himself to the juice, at which point Meredith might have suggested he was welcome to move along for the evening. On the other hand, he may not have asked to use the bathroom; he may have asked for a drink, and then had to use the bathroom, implying he would leave when he was finished.

To reach any exit from the large bathroom you must cross the line that is visible from Meredith's room. Rudy may have tried to sneak out and was seen. Alternatively, Rudy pulls up his pants and holding them up with one hand tiptoes out of the bathroom only to discover Meredith in the kitchen with a knife in hand and the last piece of a mushroom she was slicing in her mouth. Rudy indicates he was attacked in the kitchen by a stranger with a knife while his pants were falling down to his ankles. He might not be making all of this up.

It is probable he combines elements of reality with elements of his imagination in his account of what happened. Wouldn't there be signs of a struggle in the kitchen or hallway, though, if anything happened there?

Rudy had to become sexually aroused at some point, in order to have left his calling card. The question is whether he was aroused at the thought of getting with Meredith and then tried to make it happen, or did he attack Meredith and that aroused him?