Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.
The first two camera boys had silver cameras. Imagine my surprise to discover a third perp with a pocket camera on an official visit to the crime scene. This is the original "short fat perp". Notice his stature in relation to the mountain of a man behind him.
This perp enters in the beginning of the part 1 video and immediately starts snapping. Notice also the quite different mask with the square breather where the previous perps had round ones. This mask is similar to the one warn by the doctor in the green head cover.
ETA: Added unmasked photo of short fat perp entering cottage
Look also at the color and apparent thickness of the gloves that "camera boy" is wearing. They are distinctive and may be different that what most others are wearing. He may have drawn his gloves and mask from a different agency's supply and this might help ID him.
Personally I am against life without parole (it is also unconstitutional in Italy). I am favourable to leniency towards the guilty as general rule. I don't believe a retributive concept of justice. But this is a matter of personal beliefs and preferences.
Personally I am against life without parole (it is also unconstitutional in Italy). I am favourable to leniency towards the guilty as general rule. I don't believe a retributive concept of justice. But this is a matter of personal beliefs and preferences.
I wonder if you would feel the same if you were an 11 year-old female child with a 60 year-old man's penis inside of you. Or perhaps if you were that child's father? Or perhaps if you were the father of a dead girl who was murdered by a man already known to be a criminal? How about if you found out this scumbag was going to be out walking the streets just 7 years later?
Machiavelli, please also remember that Rudy doesn't make wise and rational choices the way you, I, or others might. He is an athlete trained to reach up, jump up, throw a ball (rock) and hit a target with it. He was youthful, may have had an image of himself as a climber, slender with strong shoulders. He decided what entry point worked for him and since he knew the property and neighborhood may have been comfortable with the escape route from beneath Filomena's window downhill through vegetation or trees.
A week earlier when he was caught in the school in Milan he had a tool with him - the little hammer carried on buses to break window glass in case of accident. So we know he was not a stranger to tools used for breaking windows. I am not suggesting that he had a little hammer with him at the cottage, but maybe he was prepared in another way to deal with glass. I am referring to gloves. If he did in fact have gloves. No cuts, no fingerprints around thw window.
Machiavelli, you know details much better than I. What exactly did the police do in inspecting the window area, glass, shutters, and outer wall for signs of entry? Fingerprints, ground inspection, soil or paint scrape samples from the outer wall? They appeared to miss the loose soil? material left in two shoeprints - one is a shoeprint on the bottom of the window's long drape where it looks as if it was stepped on by the intruder as he came through the window. The other is a shoeprint on two overlapping cloth articles on the floor next to the torn bag where the rock is found. Both those areas show traces of loose material (soil traces?) that fell off a shoe.
Yes. She also placed further evidence against Sollecito (remeber the "blood on hands") said she actually has mamories of Patrick entering her apartment and further testimony against him (maybe it's true, maybe not, who knows, "the only truth is I don't know what the truth is" and this open possibility about Patrick is "the best truth I can think about"). She said the only thing she was sure about was that she had lunch very late (like 10pm) and this was proven false, and that maybe she did every possible thing (writing e-mails etc) that night but maybe not, maybe she did something else, anything out from a universal array of changing nebulous options. She also wrote again "I did not lie".
Fish blood is evidence of murder in Italy? Crap!
Imaginations when the police ask you to imagine is evidence? Crap!
Remember, it was the police that introduced Patrick in that interrogation. Listen to the tape and you will see. Otherwise, if you can't pull the tape out right now, you have to accept the only contemporaneous written account and that is what Amanda wrote in the following days. That and the testimonies of the interpreter and some of the officers involved.
Where was the 10PM dinner proven wrong? That would be right after Naruto finished playing. You think they ate earlier? Have you shown your timeline for this theory? Sure, I would have put the meal between Amalie and Naruto but then the computer is in Raffaele's bedroom where they probably had other priorities after Amelie ends and Amanda received the text that she didn't have to work and after Jovana says that she doesn't need Raffaele to drive her to the station. Two lovers alone with a bed, turn off the phones, dinner can wait.
Never caught committing any burglary. It won't change much actually, but that is, for the record.
Sleeping inside a school is not a burglary.
Possession of weapon is actually something about Sollecito, he was the man caught carrying a weapon inside a police station.
It's like saying that Machiavelli has never been caught telling lies.
Rudy was caught. He was found in possession of stollen property. He had a knife stollen from the nursery. He was caught and processed, just never prosecuted.
Machiavelli, you know details much better than I. What exactly did the police do in inspecting the window area, glass, shutters, and outer wall for signs of entry? Fingerprints, ground inspection, soil or paint scrape samples from the outer wall? They appeared to miss the loose soil? material left in two shoeprints - one is a shoeprint on the bottom of the window's long drape where it looks as if it was stepped on by the intruder as he came through the window. The other is a shoeprint on two overlapping cloth articles on the floor next to the torn bag where the rock is found. Both those areas show traces of loose material (soil traces?) that fell off a shoe.
Just in case Machiavelli is unsure which area we are talking about, it's this area under Filomena's window that the officers were using as a break area smoking cigarette and wandering in the grass while talking on cell phones.
It is ironic that commentators on this board are occasionally accused by PGP of not remembering Meredith. The people on this board certainly do remember her and know that she would not want innocent friend and acquaintance to be falsely accused of participating in her murder. Remember the horror she experienced when Rudy burst in her room and cornered her in two or three seconds at her bed. He was on her in a flash, the same way a basketball player charges at an opponent with his arms outstretched to contain the opponent and with a spring/coil in his step to move instantly sideways or up and down to contain her. And his knife in his hand. The knife he would have pulled out of his pocket and had in his hand ready to thrust forwards when he was sitting on the toilet and heard someone (several?) coming in the front door.
Mignini made a terrible mistake in assuming that multiple people were involved, and that mistake allowed Rudy on the run in Germany to portray himself as an innocent bystander sitting on the toilet listening to tunes when persons unknown broke in and in 2-3 minutes killed Meredith. Mignini's mistake took the heat off Rudy and let him plead to be an innocent bystander and that enabled Mignini to treat Rudy as an accessory, resulting in a light sentence for a crime so horrible.
You're right Humanity. As of this moment it would go to the US Federal Western District court at 700 Stewart Avenue in Seattle and then it would be appealed to the 9th Circuit court in San Francisco and then to the US Supreme Court.
No it is not compatible with an alibi. In order to be compatible with an alibi, they should have declared that they spent the evening sitting on that wall in that piazza.
Just in case Machiavelli is unsure which area we are talking about, it's this area under Filomena's window that the officers were using as a break area smoking cigarette and wandering in the grass while talking on cell phones.
By using logic they had worked out that there could not have been a burglary there. Accordingly, it followed there could be no risk of destroying or missing evidence if this became the Designated Smoking Area that the Human Resources (Staff Welfare) section of the scenes of crime procedure manual stipulates.
Actually, although it was meant to be funny (successful or not) that is painfully close to the truth
no arguements with most of that except you are confining your arguement to the past. Nothing wrong with that, but I'm also concerned with future actions such as Rudy being out there free. What kind of programs do they have in place to keep track of him? Or, is he able to go about without any constraints?
Is that constructive enough for you? I'd be interested to know the answers to those, for starters... Do you know anything about that or know where I can go to find out?
Would you consider me a stalker if I wanted to keep tabs on the guy?
If it were me, I'd want to get Rudy drunk or high, get him talking details, and record the conversation. When he is let out on work release, they better as someone here suggested have him work as a janitor at the police station so they can watch him. I know an apprentice journalist in Perugia who gets disoriented, lonely, or attention-seeking people to remember things eight months later that they didn't know they knew earlier.
What I think is strange about the process is that if Italy applies for extradition, a US attorney for the State Department will press the case for the Italians in the 9th circuit. (At least that is how I understand the process).
Thank you for pointing that out! My neighbor who lives across the street from me here in Washington DC is a senior attorney in the legal office in the State Department. My daughter was his kids' babysitter when she was in high school. We've nodded to each others for years as we go to our cars. He did a tour in Europe handling legal issues. Maybe I'll go have a beer with him! We could talk about the Seattle Seahawks and then about other Seattle related issues.
You think I'm kidding. I'm not kidding. I'm serious.
But No! Because, the way this case was prosecuted, has lead to the sentencing of Rudy Guede to 30 year imprisonment.
This is where the way the case was prosecuted brougt Rudy Guede, until the other two co-accused managed to obtain generic mitigation on very vague grounds.
Prior to this event, Guede did not obtain any mitigation.
Guede, Sollecito and Knox roles in the murder were identical before the law. There is no difference between "primary" and "secondary" roles. This was seen as a gang-crime. It is the effect of group dynamic. None of the perps, taken alone, would have been capable of committing the murder. All three of them were necessary to the occurrence of the crime.
This is the way the crime has been prosecuted.
That sort of idiocy is exactly what I'm talking about. There's evidence of one person all over the murder room, utterly nothing of Amanda Knox and no reliable evidence of Raffaele and that which was adduced was 'found' six weeks later after the scene had been trashed beyond recognition. Even if you wanted to include them in the crime there's utterly no basis to pretend anyone but Rudy was involved in the physical and sexual violence. As a result of that decision made in defiance of the evidence Rudy Guede got off easier.
Incidentally how come the 'staged break-in' and thefts weren't considered a 'group crime' and only Raffaele and Amanda had additional time added to their sentences for those charges?
For what, for imaginary burglaries? What are those imaginary burglaries? You are talking about the only witness, Christian Tramontano, who did not report any burglary to the police, told a story after the Kercher murder and he was not sure about Guede's identity (and found unreliable by judge Micheli). This is the alleged burglary?
No, that's the least of them! Incidentally, Tramontano knew who Rudy was and had him banned from two bars, Merlin and Domus. Independently Victor Oleinikov confirmed that Rudy had been banned from entering Domus Tramontano also did report it to police, Monica Napoleoni, but when he went down there he found that filing a complaint would take too long and as he'd caught him before anything was taken he decided it wasn't worth it. He recognized him in the paper because he knew the man who had pulled a knife on him, Rudy Guede.
What I'm mostly talking about is the nursery school in Milan where he tried to steal a knife and some money and was caught with stolen goods, notably the computer which belonged to an office in Perugia which had been broken into two weeks earlier by someone throwing a rock into a window and accessing it on the second story by means of climbing a metal grill protecting the door below (sound familiar?). There was also the women's gold watch he had in his bag with the other stolen goods. It just so happened a few days prior his next door neighbor, Maria Mandu Diaz who was out of town, had been contacted by police who'd found her place and been broken into through the window and the result was a dead cat, a lot of fire damage and items stolen, including a women's gold watch. Someone also helped themselves to the fridge, just like the one who'd burgled the office and grabbed some Fanta, and the fruit juice by Rudy the night he murdered Meredith. When Rudy was caught in the nursery the kitchen had been plundered as well.
Had there been an actual investigation into these crimes with police and prosecution powers, there might well be more evidence for those and other crimes.
I'll put the section on this from Massei in spoiler brackets for aesthetic purposes. Additional supporting details were from "A Fatal Gift of Beauty" by Nina Burleigh, a collection of excerpts can be found here.
Massei PMF 45-46 said:
At the hearing of June 27, 2009, the witness Maria Antonietta Salvadori Del Prato Titone testified that on the morning of October 27, 2007, a Saturday, as she entered the nursery school at via Plinio 16, Milan, of which she was the principal, she noticed coming out of her office a person whom she didn't know, later identified as Rudy Guede. There were no signs of a break-in. There was some money missing from the money box, but just small change. Rudy Guede had a backpack inside which was a computer. Called at once, the police made him open the backpack, in which they found a 40cm kitchen knife. She recalled that there were other objects in the backpack: a bunch of keys, a small gold woman's watch, and a tiny hammer of the type found in buses to smash windows. The police told her that the computer had been stolen from a law office in Perugia. The witness stated that she was with her six year old son, with a smith [fabbro] who was there to do some work, and with a rep.
Rudy Guede justified his presence by saying that he had asked at the central train station of Milan where he could spend the night, and that this nursery school had been indicated to him after he had paid 50 euros to his informant. The witness stated that the knife came from the kitchen; the kitchen door was not locked and Rudy Guede must have taken it from there.
The witnesses Paolo Brocchi and Matteo Palazzoli, lawyers, testified on the subject of the burglary of their legal office, located in via del Roscetto 3, Perugia, on the night between Saturday October 13 and Sunday October 14, 2007. The thief or thieves had entered through a window whose panes had been smashed with a rather large stone; the glass was scattered around, and they had found some of their clothing on top of the glass (p. 10, hearing June 6, 2009). From the first inventory they did, they found that a computer, a cell phone, USB keys and a portable printer were missing. On October 29, a colleague in the law office had called the lawyer Paolo Brocchi to tell him that in the corridor was a person who said that he had been found with some goods in Milan, goods that had been declared stolen by the lawyer Brocchi, but which he claimed to have purchased legitimately in Milan. Later, the lawyer Paolo Brocchi recognised this person as Rudy Guede (p. 20, hearing of June 6, 2009).
The lawyer Palazzoli, who testified at the same hearing, and who was a colleague in the same law firm as Brocchi, declared that the broken window was "a French window opening onto a small balcony overlooking the inner courtyard of the building; beneath it, corresponding precisely to our window, there is a door equipped with a metal grille..." (p. 41, hearing of June 26, 2009). He also stated that he had been notified that the computer which had been stolen from him had been found in Milan.
Cristian Tramontano, whose brief deposition the subject of July 1, 2008 was acquired at the hearing of June 6, 2009, testified about an [attempted] robbery in his home, carried out by a young man who, seeing that he had been observed, tried to exit the house and, finding the door locked, pulled out a jackknife with which he threatened Tramontano, who was following him to make him leave the house. Tramontano declared that he believed he recognised that the thief was Rudy when he saw his picture published in the newspapers.
And definitely, NO, he could NOT be put behind bars for longer. He could not even be sentenced for alleged offences within any useful time. You forget he would ever serve time for those, or that the opening of prosecution cases against him for other offences could influence his murder trial. There would be no legal chance for that. It's impossible. If he had criminal records, previous sentences, that could have been used. But start proceedings ex novo as a way to prosecute him, that is impossible.
They could have waited until his murder trial was over then, I cannot believe that someone on a crime spree in Italy gets away with all but one automatically.
How come Mignini had no problem charging Amanda with calunnia twice when she was on trial for murder? Mignini found a way to prefer charges for those, he could have found a way to investigate and charge Rudy for all the crimes he may have committed.
No, it would not be damned difficult to find out that the break in was staged, because it was obviously staged.
No, it wasn't 'obviously staged' and the two main reasons police jumped to that conclusion just indicate just how incompetent they were. I've quoted Profazio as saying it would require a superhuman or somesuch to do it, when it isn't difficult at all as was shown here. The other being that little was taken seems to be an inability to understand that when interrupted by someone that leads to murder occasionally the burglar decides it's better off not to have much in the way of items that might tie them to that far more serious crime and they might just be in a hurry to leave.
And if you want to play this game, you could as well claim that it would have been difficult to pretend that Amanda Knox had no contacts with drug dealers in Piazza Grimana, had the drug dealers exchanging phone calls with her being investigated and tried before.
I don't know that Amanda Knox ever exchanged a call with a drug dealer. All I've seen is a report from 2011 that a number which called her phone in 2007 was held by someone who was up on drug charges. How did that case turn out BTW, has there been any further information? Did they ever release a name or detail what the charges and circumstances were?
We do it because we feel bad for the victim and two innocent people who we know got framed and need help. We want the killer (Guede) held fully accountable for his actions.
You on the other hand are just stalking a young woman because it arouses you . Much like your leader PQ. The Ballerina stalker. Or are you a member of Atlan the other site who's leader claims to be the Messiah who for a small fee can stop earthquakes and Hurricanes ?
LOL!!! Yeah, gibberish might impress the CTers, but not critical thinkers like you and I.
It wasn't me, I didn't do it! (even though I did) it was because of the Italians and their justice system!!!11!!!1 It was the black guy! I'm a pretty white girl, I couldn't have done it!
I don't know that Amanda Knox ever exchanged a call with a drug dealer. All I've seen is a report from 2011 that a number which called her phone in 2007 was held by someone who was up on drug charges. How did that case turn out BTW, has there been any further information? Did they ever release a name or detail what the charges and circumstances were?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
- arrested for drugs? Did he call Amanda too or just Meredith's phone?