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

[Strozzi]

Duplicate

 

[NancyS]

Thanks Nancy

I didn't see anything in there about fugue states. What mental state do you think Guede was in when attacking Meredith Kercher? Tramontano and the Milan school person describe a very cool customer. Someone behaving normally in an abnormal situation. Do you have a mental picture of what may have happened when he followed her to her room?

It's really difficult to know - and I agree that he seems to have acted calmly when caught in other places. I would be interested to know who suggested he had a history of dissociating and fugue states. If this was assessed by a psychiatrist, would it be possible that he had diminished responsibility? Although he seemed to be acting fairly rationally afterwards by locking the door and leaving town - and obviously recalled being at the cottage.

I did a little bit of forensic psychiatry as a student and went to Broadmoor and interviewed a few people who had done horrendous things. I remember commenting to the psychiatrist afterwards how pleasant they had seemed - her thoughts were that in many ways they were 'normal' people, however, if someone made them angry at a time of great stress, they couldn't control their emotions and anger, which led to something horrific happening.

People who dissociate, will likely also experience episodes of hyperarousal - someone may appear calm, but they are like a coiled spring - if I was going to guess what happened, Meredith did something to anger Guede by screaming or resisting and he was unable to control his anger.

This is all a complete guess though and I'm no forensic psychiatrist - although may have some further training in the future and might then offer more insight

 

[Desert Fox]

I don't think this is a fair comparator.

The Zamora/Graham murder a crime of passion and jealousy, with strong sexual undertones. In contrast, there was no indication whatsoever that Knox was sexually jealous of Meredith Kercher, nor that she ever felt that Meredith was competing for Sollecito's attention (and far less that Sollecito had ever had sexual interaction with Meredith).

In addition, it seems that the Zamora/Graham case was one of those instances of a strong, dominant female and a weak, compliant, pliable male who was desperate for attention and for the affirmation of the female's affection for him.

In addition, Zamora and Graham had been romantically involved for around four months by the time the murder was conceived and executed. What's more, their relationship had apparently been extremely intense, since they already had plans to marry. The combination of time and intensity would have created sufficient conditions for the necessary bonds of trust and loyalty that are precursors to any group crime of a serious nature.

In contrast, Knox and Sollecito had been romantically involved for a mere six days, and there was no indication that they were thinking in terms of a longer-term commitment: it appears that for both of them this was nothing more than a university romance.

I can think of another, probably better argument -
If Knox and Sollecito had done it themselves and not involved a third party, make it much more likely.

Other factors is that Zamora and Graham were athletic in a way that Knox and Sollecito do not seem to be. One also soon blabbed, not kept quiet about it for many years.

 

[Strozzi]

It's really difficult to know - and I agree that he seems to have acted calmly when caught in other places. I would be interested to know who suggested he had a history of dissociating and fugue states. If this was assessed by a psychiatrist, would it be possible that he had diminished responsibility? Although he seemed to be acting fairly rationally afterwards by locking the door and leaving town - and obviously recalled being at the cottage.

I did a little bit of forensic psychiatry as a student and went to Broadmoor and interviewed a few people who had done horrendous things. I remember commenting to the psychiatrist afterwards how pleasant they had seemed - her thoughts were that in many ways they were 'normal' people, however, if someone made them angry at a time of great stress, they couldn't control their emotions and anger, which led to something horrific happening.

People who dissociate, will likely also experience episodes of hyperarousal - someone may appear calm, but they are like a coiled spring - if I was going to guess what happened, Meredith did something to anger Guede by screaming or resisting and he was unable to control his anger.

This is all a complete guess though and I'm no forensic psychiatrist - although may have some further training in the future and might then offer more insight

Nancy, several books or articles point to Rudy being the perpetrator of the break-in and fire in his neighbor's house and the break-in and theft of a computer and cell phone at the office of the lawyer in Perugia. That was a second-story break-in with a rock through the window. Although it was not proved that he was the burglar, Rudy was found in possession of the stolen computer and cell phone from the lawyer's office. He was also in possession of a woman's gold watch and it is noted that a woman's gold watch was stolen from his neighbor's house.

The perpetrator of each of the break-ins - the house and the lawyer's office - is alleged to have done some unusual things. It appeared that in the house break-in the perpetrator may have taken a nap in an upstairs bed. He prepared and cooked a hot meal - a fireman is alleged to have used the Italian word for feast to describe the kitchen counter scene.

In the lawyer's office break-in it is alleged that the burglar assembled (pieced together) several pieces of broken window glass on a desk or table, as if assembling a jigsaw puzzle.

The times of the above crimes suggest that the burglar did not expect anyone coming back soon. The house was broken in during the day and Rudy had observed the house's owner, a neighbor lady, loading her car for a trip to the country. The lawyer's office was entered at night.

In the Milan nursery school break-in where Rudy was caught, he had spent the night, cooked (not just eaten but cooked) a meal, and was the next morning (a Saturday) at 8 am using the director's desktop computer. He had disconnected the cable to connect it directly to his (actually, the lawyer's stolen) laptop.

What does that suggest to you about Rudy's state of mind when he is inside someone else's property?

 

[anglolawyer]

It's really difficult to know - and I agree that he seems to have acted calmly when caught in other places. I would be interested to know who suggested he had a history of dissociating and fugue states. If this was assessed by a psychiatrist, would it be possible that he had diminished responsibility? Although he seemed to be acting fairly rationally afterwards by locking the door and leaving town - and obviously recalled being at the cottage.

I did a little bit of forensic psychiatry as a student and went to Broadmoor and interviewed a few people who had done horrendous things. I remember commenting to the psychiatrist afterwards how pleasant they had seemed - her thoughts were that in many ways they were 'normal' people, however, if someone made them angry at a time of great stress, they couldn't control their emotions and anger, which led to something horrific happening.

People who dissociate, will likely also experience episodes of hyperarousal - someone may appear calm, but they are like a coiled spring - if I was going to guess what happened, Meredith did something to anger Guede by screaming or resisting and he was unable to control his anger.
This is all a complete guess though and I'm no forensic psychiatrist - although may have some further training in the future and might then offer more insight

Very possible. I imagine something weird like this. He might have wandered along the corridor and ventured some creepily normal opening line, got an extremely startled response that then activated something, like when a mouse moves and makes a seemingly uninterested cat pounce.

 

[NancyS]

Nancy, several books or articles point to Rudy being the perpetrator of the break-in and fire in his neighbor's house and the break-in and theft of a computer and cell phone at the office of the lawyer in Perugia. That was a second-story break-in with a rock through the window. Although it was not proved that he was the burglar, Rudy was found in possession of the stolen computer and cell phone from the lawyer's office. He was also in possession of a woman's gold watch and it is noted that a woman's gold watch was stolen from his neighbor's house.

The perpetrator of each of the break-ins - the house and the lawyer's office - is alleged to have done some unusual things. It appeared that in the house break-in the perpetrator may have taken a nap in an upstairs bed. He prepared and cooked a hot meal - a fireman is alleged to have used the Italian word for feast to describe the kitchen counter scene.

In the lawyer's office break-in it is alleged that the burglar assembled (pieced together) several pieces of broken window glass on a desk or table, as if assembling a jigsaw puzzle.

The times of the above crimes suggest that the burglar did not expect anyone coming back soon. The house was broken in during the day and Rudy had observed the house's owner, a neighbor lady, loading her car for a trip to the country. The lawyer's office was entered at night.

In the Milan nursery school break-in where Rudy was caught, he had spent the night, cooked (not just eaten but cooked) a meal, and was the next morning (a Saturday) at 8 am using the director's desktop computer. He had disconnected the cable to connect it directly to his laptop.

What does that suggest to you about Rudy's state of mind when he is inside someone else's property?

It does make me think that there was far more to his past than we know about - and there was more to his breaking in to properties than just wanting to steal. Perhaps that is why he chose a second story window - you can pull the outer shutters closed and nobody would know you were in there, whereas if you smash the front door (as pro-guilt people are always stating was the easiest way to get in), it will be instantly obvious to anyone walking by and you would want to leave again as soon as possible. It was not Guede's aim to be in and out of the property as quickly as possible, which would likely be more typical of a classic burglary where theft is the only motivation

Mostly, it all seems to suggest a very troubled young man

 

[Strozzi]

Very possible. I imagine something weird like this. He might have wandered along the corridor and ventured some creepily normal opening line, got an extremely startled response that then activated something, like when a mouse moves and makes a seemingly uninterested cat pounce.

I see three very different types of possible discovery dynamics:

1. Rudy is discovered by Meredith who perceives him as a burglar. In fact, she may have detected that there was a burglar in the flat without actually seeing or recognizing him.
2. He approaches and tries to communicate with her in a manner that he intends to be conciliatory or friendly. Maybe all he wants is to say is, oops, I shouldn't be here and I need the key to open the door to leave, or 2) Hey beautiful, let's have some quality time together.
3. She does not know anyone else is there and suddenly Rudy bursts into her room with knife in hand to corner or attack her.

 

[Strozzi]

If readers have not seen it, please watch the YouTube video interviewing the owner of the Milan nursery school who discovered Rudy Guede in her office on a Saturday morning six days before the murder. I suspect that she believes Knox and Sollecito are innocent and have been railroaded, but in Italy you can't say that aloud.

The video is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfA7rrmfedE

 

[Chris_Halkides]

a feckless report from the CSC

In the photograph I have seen, the glove is split at the end of the thumb. The tip of the thumb and the thumbnail (which has some random dirt under it) are bare and are touching the clasp. That should be enough to have that evidence disallowed.

Rolfe.

Rolfe,

"...properly documented reporting activities carried out under the eyes of the consultants that had nothing to detect, in a clean laboratory environment, activities conducted according to methods tested..."

The way that I read this passage from motivations report, the Court of Supreme Cassation has perhaps adopted the view that standards of evidence collection don't matter: the defense has to prove contamination. They had ample evidence of the improper methods of evidence collection from the Conti-Vecchiotti report, which they willfully ignored. How the defense teams are supposed to do without full release of all files, such as machine logs, contamination logs, standard operating procedures, and the electronic data files was not made clear. We also know (perhaps Kaosium was first to post it), that one consultant did object.

 

[Dan O.]

What I've never understood is the pro-guilt theory which would make those spots in Filomena's room incriminating. As I understand it, the spots were blobs rather than footprints. If that's true (not having seen a picture of them) then surely that would necessarily mean the DNA from Amanda and Meredith had to have been deposited at different times - unless, of course, it was inadvertently transferred there by a third party.

We can look from the other angle: what does it mean to have DNA transferred simultaneously? The obvious solution of with mixed blood. But it tested negative for blood so that should be out. Blood of one being tracked on the bottom of the others feet: Apart from there being no detectable trace of blood, it presumes that DNA is being shed by the feet themselves. No mechanism is presented that makes this shedding of DNA dependent on the presence of foreign blood so if you accept the premiss of DNA being shed with blood you must also accept that DNA is shed without blood. That means every bare foot step is shedding DNA. Therefore it can be expected that every square inch of the floor where those two girls walked barefoot in their rooms, in the hall and in the bathroom would be covered with their DNA. And then they would be stepping on the DNA of the other in the common areas and tracking it into their own rooms.


Then there is the Luminol testing. ILE had the Luminol weeks earlier when they tested Raffaele's apartment. But they didn't decide to test the cottage until AFTER they learned that Amanda had been walking barefoot through the hall after stepping on the bloodied bathmat. We already know through the exercise above that there is a high likelihood of finding DNA from both girls in the common areas of the cottage. Add that to a high likelihood of finding bare footprints made by Amanda's feet in Meredith's blood and you have a recipe for instant conviction.

ILE was in the cottage on December 18 specifically looking for tracts of bare footprints. We know that is what they were looking for because that is all they took pictures of. We know there were at least two bloody shoe prints in that hall that would have lit up with the Luminol but they did not photograph them. This is confirmation bias with criminal intent. The entire crew should be locked up along with the prosecutors and judges that support them.

 

[Kestrel]

What I've never understood is the pro-guilt theory which would make those spots in Filomena's room incriminating. As I understand it, the spots were blobs rather than footprints. If that's true (not having seen a picture of them) then surely that would necessarily mean the DNA from Amanda and Meredith had to have been deposited at different times - unless, of course, it was inadvertently transferred there by a third party.

For example, take Machiavelli's theory that Meredith's DNA was transferred there from the bloody towels. If that were true, then unless Amanda's DNA were also transferred from the towels (not impossible since she'd certainly used them) this means her DNA had to have been left at a different time. Even if just by a matter of minutes earlier/later, we know it can't have been left simultaneously. Since we therefore know for sure (again, barring third party transfer) her DNA was left at a different time to Meredith's DNA, how can we possibly be certain it's linked to the murder? Had Amanda really never been into Filomena's room in the two or so months she'd lived at the cottage? Hell, maybe she snuck in there from time to time and stole from Filomena's pot stash.

The point is that even according to pro-guilt theories, Amanda's DNA being in the same spot as Meredith's is pure coincidence. The question isn't whether their DNA being in the same spot is incriminating, but whether Amanda's DNA being in Filomena's room is incriminating. And given that they lived together - Amanda was in Filomena's room that very morning, after all, when she discovered the break-in - it's very hard to see how it can be.

People tend to view trace evidence as something that is only left when a crime occurs. It's not unique to this case, I recall a child abduction case some years back where a fingerprint found in the victims kitchen was used to connect the suspect to the crime. The fact that the suspect was a neighbor who routinely visited that kitchen was ignored by the jury.

This misunderstanding probably comes from watching TV crime dramas where fingerprints and DNA are always connected to the crime.

 

[Grinder]

The Cartwheels thread started at the end of the Massei trial. As soon as his report was complete and being translated the fact that his time of death was impossible became a big issue, as you may recall. The infallibility of the Italian Court System was at issue and some took up the argument that those skeptical of that 11:45 ToD were wrong, as at issue was Curatolo who, among other things, was the 'witness' who broke the alibi. He was 'certain' he saw Raffaele and Amanda standing outside from ~9:27 until just before midnight, when the disco buses that didn't run that night left for the last time.

I believe if you read his testimony and what Massei did with it, you will find that Curatolo said he left just before midnight and the disco buses were still there, but Massei moved the time to 11:30 because the disco buses always were gone by that time.

In other words Massei decided that Curatolo was correct that the buses were still there when he left, but wrong about the time. I don't believe that after the fact that the disco buses weren't running was shown that this official interpretation has ever been corrected.

Curatolo's testimony should make it impossible for a TOD before 12:15 am.

 

[Grinder]

I quite agree...nothing about Yummi/Machs posts is beneficial for anything at all except to perhaps get a glimpse of an illogical dysfunctional thought process in argument style of the typical Italian.

If you cant dazzle them with brilliance then baffle them with BS would be the metaphorical equivalent here.

I think he has given us an insight into how differently the Italian mind works than the Anglo mind. He sincerely believes that a number of compatibles equals a match. He believes that the witnesses can't be questioned because they only came forward after long encouragement by Fois and because they seemed credible. He believes one can only doubt a witness on their performance and that they must be believed unless they have an obvious motive to lie.

He certainly has had the best record here of predicting what the courts would do in all the cases followed.

 

[Grinder]

I'm not sure how much anybody can rely on the State Department. To a large degree State's idea of a "fair trial" is that a country treats an American the same way it would treat one of its own citizens, that an American isn't being singled out for unusual treatment (or mistreatment). It doesn't mean that a trial in another country meets American standards regarding legal representation, juror selection, admissibility of evidence, etc., etc. There are Americans around the world doing long hard time on drug charges that might not have looked pretty shaky in the U.S. Amanda and Raffaele were convicted by an eight-person jury that included two judges; that alone is wildly different from the American system. But it's "fair" in Italy; it's how the Italian system works.
http://studentsabroad.state.gov/emergencies/arrestedabroad.php

I'd say you nailed it.

 

[Dan O.]

3) Guede entered the cottage alone, by breaking in through Filomena's window, with the initial intent of stealing money and valuables. Meredith then came home, locking the front door behind her. Guede probably tried unsuccessfully to escape via the front door, then confronted Meredith. The situation escalated as Guede's physical altercation turned to a sexual/power motive, and culminated in Guede stabbing Meredith in the neck.

This was indeed the theory before we knew the full story of the shoe prints. I find it quite unlikely that Guede would have forgotten so soon that the encounter with Meredith resulting in her death was specifically because the front door was locked and he was trapped inside the cottage. With the new information derived from the bloody trail it makes it more likely that Guede encountered Meredith in the kitchen area before he could reach the front door and chased her into her room where he murdered her. Afterwards he tried to walk out and discovered the door locked with a key. He returned to Meredith's room, retrieved her keys and left locking her door on the way out but leaving the front door unlocked.

 

[toto]

If readers have not seen it, please watch the YouTube video interviewing the owner of the Milan nursery school who discovered Rudy Guede in her office on a Saturday morning six days before the murder. I suspect that she believes Knox and Sollecito are innocent and have been railroaded, but in Italy you can't say that aloud.

The video is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfA7rrmfedE

Any reason why this video can't be seen in the UK? "This video is not available in your country" . Is there a transcript somewhere?

 

[Grinder]

It also does not help that in many cases they are elected positions especially in the south. When I voted for Commonwealth Attorney for my home city, I had to base my vote on a couple of factoids.

You based your vote on false information? Sad.

 

[Bill Williams]

I'm madly searching for the cite which says that Quintavalle is now saying that Rudy and Raffaele were also in his store on the morning of Nov 2.

This case certainly redefines making things up as you go.

I'm dying to add that Quintavalle is also claiming to see me and Machiavelli in his store arguing whether or not Massei debunked psychopathology in AK and RS.... That's too much to hope for I suppose.

 

[Kestrel]

This was indeed the theory before we knew the full story of the shoe prints. I find it quite unlikely that Guede would have forgotten so soon that the encounter with Meredith resulting in her death was specifically because the front door was locked and he was trapped inside the cottage. With the new information derived from the bloody trail it makes it more likely that Guede encountered Meredith in the kitchen area before he could reach the front door and chased her into her room where he murdered her. Afterwards he tried to walk out and discovered the door locked with a key. He returned to Meredith's room, retrieved her keys and left locking her door on the way out but leaving the front door unlocked.

As we learn more, the details fall into place.

Your analysis of Guede's shoe print trail needs to be consolidated and put where it can be referenced.

 

[Grinder]

Ok. But it didn't survive an appeals court in Italy, either.
.
.

Well it has this latest time. The appeals here are completely different.


What do you think of Garofano? Novelli?