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

[Dan O.]

The environmental intercept at Lumumba's pub was testified to by Stefano Buratti (a.k.a. Tumblers):

PROSECUTOR - DOCTOR COMFORTABLE
QUESTION - You could make a list of telephone numbers that are been submitted to operations of interception on decree of Public Ministry as part of the murder Meredith, do you have the list?
ANSWER: - Look here at the moment I do not have, all the interceptions made?
PRESIDENT - Of the users yes.
ANSWER - I'm pretty, I believe 83 Rit, which is call Rit, Rit then each corresponds to a user or to un'ambientale, of these 83, 5 are environmental, which 3 are environmental in prison, which was an environmental made to the police station and the other environment was at the Pub Lumumba.

 

[RoseMontague]

Here's a post from the dark side today:

The lack of physical evidence is not evidence.

Eg if you dont find someones dna, or saliva or blood in a given room, you cant conclude they werent there.

There is the footprint, compatible with AK, and the knife outline compatble with the kitchen knife with ak an mk dna on it. Im not a foensic expert, however.​

Of course this is another person that doesn't understand Locard.

The Machine is ranting as well that the shoe print on the duvet is compatible with Amanda but not Meredith shoe size (which I don't believe could be determined) which raises an issue. Where are the other woman's shoe prints? We know that the print was a partial left by Rudy which explains the "missing" small shoe prints but is this proof strong enough to over come the PG mistake?

I would like one of our PG people to explain how Amanda left a shoe print on the duvet or pillow, didn't leave another shoe print anywhere and left bare footprints in the hall.

Apparently the knife that didn't match the outline or the wounds for 5 years now does.

Amazing is that print has the same sort of circular patterns as RS and RG tennis shows. There is no evidence Amanda owned such shoes even if the say the size is compatible. It is pretty stupid really. Look at Vinci's report.

 

[Briars]

Here is the question for you Briars. If you knew that Raffaele was innocent. Or if Raffaele was innocent, is is it really a vile intrusion for Raffaele to visit her grave? Even if her parents wouldn't have wanted him to?

This is a serious question.

At the time of the visit he was/still is a defendant in the ongoing trial. It absolutely was a vile intrusion. He barely knew her, his visit strikes me as disrespectful and odd . He visited with a person who writes for the defendants and makes disparaging remarks against the Kerchers. We will never know how they behaved at the grave or what was said thankfully,

 

[Bill Williams]

That is a question that I really don't have enough information about.Do you have cite that diaputes a search of his home?I know Lumumba's bar was closed and I presume searched.
Amanda told a story of running into Lumumba and returning with him to the cottage. The cottage knives were searched and Amanda was brought back to view the drawer.
If you are also suggesting the police had the name Lumumba and wanted to frame him that is absurd. I listened to the recent recording of how she came to name Lumumba. It is completely consistent with the police acting on new information from RS that she went out. She is told we know you went out , we have this message on your phone, who did you meet?. She provides the name Lumumba . A person never considered before by the police is now the main suspect. In fact the police must have been certain they had their man from what Amanda said. Amanda told them what they now knew to be true that she had gone out ,met someone caso chiuso. An unfortunate but understandable comment.
Amanda was not threatened , she no doubt was told she was a liar because they now knew she went out. She tells Mignini in jail she was stressed tired it was the middle of the night and they called her a liar. Big deal she normally was up till after 2am, and she had had the entire day off. A midnight confession after a brief interview does not justify her lying about Lumumba. Fear that her accomplice in the other room was spilling the beans made her jump on the name on her phone.
The creepy coincidence of meeting at court where Guede hung out, the sexual assault , the black man the banging noise in the room and the terrible scream all fit. Mignini said she covered her ears when looking at the cottage knives and had an emotional reaction the sound may haunt her.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste or as Dan Quayle said "What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is."

There is no record of any knife being tested that came from the cottage, Patrick's bar or apartment. Hard to prove negatives but we have no reports of sealing his home and the family being moved out.

The coincidence of meeting at the nearest public place to the cottage, not significant. The rest of the stuff isn't really surprising. Loud noises, screaming (I think it was Nara a year later that said it was terrible) and having an anxiety attack when shown knives that police thought might have killed her roommate. Yes damning.


They knew she went out hmmmmm, how would that be? Her naming Patrick had nothing to do with Raf but only the text message that they thought was the connection.

If she thought Raf was going to spill the beans, which would mean incriminating himself, why wouldn't she say that Rudy and Raf raped and killed Meredith and said she'd be next if she talked.

Do you think that she thought if Raf spilled the beans some story about Patrick would save her?

Briars please reread Grinder's post. It lays out the absurdity of Knox's conviction for calunnia; but more important, completely invalidates its usefulness in ascribing guilt to Knox.

Some further issues draw from your post above.

• Would you seriously entertain abandoning your guilt position if it could be demonstrated that Lumumba's house was never searched?
  
• You only "presume" the bar was searched. Would you entertain abandoning your guilt position if it could be demonstrated it wasn't?
  
• Re: the police framing Lumumba: if it could be shown that the PLE was tapping Lumumba's phone from well before the night of the interrogation, would you change sides?
  
• If the police were "acting on new information" what was the information before this that implicated Knox in murder? Kissing? Sitting on Raffaele's lap? Making faces at Raffaele? Eating a pizza? Saying "oopla"? Can anyone anywhere cite any expert who would call that behaviour anything more than immature... rather than an indication of murder? So: how is it that the PLE suspected Amanda of anything prior to the Lumumba SMS message, which the PLE obviously misinterpreted?
  
• Re: a person "never considered a suspect" until Knox's "confession". Is that confused statement by Knox, even if spontaneous, enough to arrest Lumumba? Really? Really!!????
  
• Are you really hanging this case on the "hearing of a scream"? Even Crini said the crime could have been committed early, eg. 9:30 am. What does that and stomach contents do to the significance of a scream...?

Read all of this again, and think on the two word phrase, "reasonable doubt".

 

[Bill Williams]

At the time of the visit he was/still is a defendant in the ongoing trial. It absolutely was a vile intrusion. He barely knew her, his visit strikes me as disrespectful and odd . He visited with a person who writes for the defendants and makes disparaging remarks against the Kerchers. We will never know how they behaved at the grave or what was said thankfully,

Ok... which is it... that's quite the territory you cover. Is "vile" or merely "odd"?

Why would you want to imply they might have acted at the grave inapproproately, with your comment, "Would you seriously entertain abandoning your guilt position if it could be demonstrated"?

However, it is fully consistent with the character assassination of Raffaele where the guilters trot out logic like, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

Shouldn't it be up to those who allege misconduct to provide evidence of misconduct before implying such things?

Apparently not in this case.

 

[Briars]

A mind is a terrible thing to waste or as Dan Quayle said "What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is."

There is no record of any knife being tested that came from the cottage, Patrick's bar or apartment. Hard to prove negatives but we have no reports of sealing his home and the family being moved out.

The coincidence of meeting at the nearest public place to the cottage, not significant. The rest of the stuff isn't really surprising. Loud noises, screaming (I think it was Nara a year later that said it was terrible) and having an anxiety attack when shown knives that police thought might have killed her roommate. Yes damning.


They knew she went out hmmmmm, how would that be? Her naming Patrick had nothing to do with Raf but only the text message that they thought was the connection.

If she thought Raf was going to spill the beans, which would mean incriminating himself, why wouldn't she say that Rudy and Raf raped and killed Meredith and said she'd be next if she talked.

Do you think that she thought if Raf spilled the beans some story about Patrick would save her?

They knew she went out because RS just told them !! Big news big break. She was lying why? lThey look at her phone and messages around that time. Amanda would not to name Guede who could fill them in as to what she was up to. She panicked and picked the name on her phone. They knew she went out remember ! Then as I recall she wonders what proof they had that she was there at the cottage?? Better to at least admit to being in the kitchen. She never recanted in any clear way. It was dreamlike I'm not sure of the veracity of my statements blah blah. She still was not sure what evidence they had on her so admit to being in the kitchen and let Lumumba sit it jail. Better choice then Guede at that point. When the switch was made to Guede RS was worried he might tell the cops strange stories about him. That says it all why she didn't name Guede but picked someone Guede like. Naming Lumumba sure sent the cops in a safer direction. I wonder what they told RS about what she had said about Lumumba that night and what his immediate reaction was?

 

[RoseMontague]

They knew she went out because RS just told them !! Big news big break. She was lying why? lThey look at her phone and messages around that time. Amanda would not to name Guede who could fill them in as to what she was up to. She panicked and picked the name on her phone. They knew she went out remember ! Then as I recall she wonders what proof they had that she was there at the cottage?? Better to at least admit to being in the kitchen. She never recanted in any clear way. It was dreamlike I'm not sure of the veracity of my statements blah blah. She still was not sure what evidence they had on her so admit to being in the kitchen and let Lumumba sit it jail. Better choice then Guede at that point. When the switch was made to Guede RS was worried he might tell the cops strange stories about him. That says it all why she didn't name Guede but picked someone Guede like. Naming Lumumba sure sent the cops in a safer direction. I wonder what they told RS about what she had said about Lumumba that night and what his immediate reaction was?

Have you been following the thread in the last few days?

 

[Briars]

Ok... which is it... that's quite the territory you cover. Is "vile" or merely "odd"?

Why would you want to imply they might have acted at the grave inapproproately, with your comment, "Would you seriously entertain abandoning your guilt position if it could be demonstrated"?

However, it is fully consistent with the character assassination of Raffaele where the guilters trot out logic like, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

Shouldn't it be up to those who allege misconduct to provide evidence of misconduct before implying such things?

Apparently not in this case.

He should not have been at the gravesite , and knew it would upset the Kerchers period. Nigel Scott posts unpleasant things against the Kerchers Are you defending this ? Surprising lack of understanding that a defendant still accused of the murder should visit the site of a young woman he barely knew.

 

[Diocletus]

They knew she went out because RS just told them !! Big news big break. She was lying why? lThey look at her phone and messages around that time. Amanda would not to name Guede who could fill them in as to what she was up to. She panicked and picked the name on her phone. They knew she went out remember ! Then as I recall she wonders what proof they had that she was there at the cottage?? Better to at least admit to being in the kitchen. She never recanted in any clear way. It was dreamlike I'm not sure of the veracity of my statements blah blah. She still was not sure what evidence they had on her so admit to being in the kitchen and let Lumumba sit it jail. Better choice then Guede at that point. When the switch was made to Guede RS was worried he might tell the cops strange stories about him. That says it all why she didn't name Guede but picked someone Guede like. Naming Lumumba sure sent the cops in a safer direction. I wonder what they told RS about what she had said about Lumumba that night and what his immediate reaction was?

Interesting story. Too bad they didn't get Knox a lawyer like they were obligated to.

 

[Desert Fox]

Naming Lumumba sure sent the cops in a safer direction. I wonder what they told RS about what she had said about Lumumba that night and what his immediate reaction was?

That really makes no sense

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Can the mode of DNA transfer be inferred?

"The experimental data reviewed herein shows that nether the quantity of DNA recovered nor the quality of DNA profile obtained can be used to reliably infer the mode of transfer by which the DNA came to be on the surface of interest."
Georgina Meakin, Allan Jamieson, "DNA transfer: Review and implications for casework" Forensic Science International: Genetics Volume 7, Issue 4, July 2013, Pages 434–443.

I am just starting to read this article, but the quotation above is pertinent to the clasp, and so I thought it was worth highlighting. Here is another quote (one that might be pertinent to the knife): "More recent published research has also shown that transfer of DNA can occur between different sites of an item within packaging during its transport between the crime scene and the laboratory."

 

[JREF2010]

Allow me to predict what the motivation will say. It will say that while 36I sample did not provide any additional incriminating evidence it did not demonstrate that sample 36B was tainted. The defense is responsible to prove that there was contamination involved as was required by the ISC.

(Never mind, that even the RIS said that multiple tests are needed to confirm initial incriminating results.)

yes , that seems very possible. follow the ISC directives.

yes, it all fits well for maintaining the status quo too.... Nencini keeps his job! The System is proven right again! The ISC is proven right about Rudy Guede verdict!

the poop motive won a guilty verdict...I'm still in awe.

 

[acbytesla]

At the time of the visit he was/still is a defendant in the ongoing trial. It absolutely was a vile intrusion. He barely knew her, his visit strikes me as disrespectful and odd . He visited with a person who writes for the defendants and makes disparaging remarks against the Kerchers. We will never know how they behaved at the grave or what was said thankfully,

While Raffaele barely knew Meredith, he had to to feel connected to her in a way that you or I can't possibly fathom. This young man wrongfully spent 4 years of his life in prison because of that young woman. Raffaele knows that he didn't kill Meredith, but he knows his life revolves around this tragedy, like it or not.

As for it being an vile intrusion. BS. That is nonsense. It is not like he pissed on her grave.

What if Rudy after being released visited her grave? Would that be a vile intrusion? I KNOW that Rudy killed Meredith and I still don't believe that alone would be an intrusion.

This is just fake indignation on your part. An excuse to vilify Raffaele.

 

[Bill Williams]

He should not have been at the gravesite , and knew it would upset the Kerchers period. Nigel Scott posts unpleasant things against the Kerchers Are you defending this ? Surprising lack of understanding that a defendant still accused of the murder should visit the site of a young woman he barely knew.

What I know is that guilters specialize in no win scenarios for Knox and Sollecito. If they cry they're being manipulative. If they don't cry they're being cold. If they visit a grave they're being vile, if they don't they are callous towards the victim.

 

[Dan O.]

She provides the name Lumumba . A person never considered before by the police is now the main suspect. In fact the police must have been certain they had their man from what Amanda said. Amanda told them what they now knew to be true that she had gone out ,met someone caso chiuso. An unfortunate but understandable comment.

When do you think that they put the bug in Patrick's bar?

Amanda was not threatened

You don't think that telling someone they could spend the next 30 years in prison is threatening?

 

[acbytesla]

What I know is that guilters specialize in no win scenarios for Knox and Sollecito. If they cry they're being manipulative. If they don't cry they're being cold. If they visit a grave they're being vile, if they don't they are callous towards the victim.

Exactly, Major Major. Remember what every one said about them missing an impromptu memorial?

 

[Briars]

Ok... which is it... that's quite the territory you cover. Is "vile" or merely "odd"?

Why would you want to imply they might have acted at the grave inapproproately, with your comment, "Would you seriously entertain abandoning your guilt position if it could be demonstrated"?

However, it is fully consistent with the character assassination of Raffaele where the guilters trot out logic like, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

Shouldn't it be up to those who allege misconduct to provide evidence of misconduct before implying such things?

Apparently not in this case.

When do you think that they put the bug in Patrick's bar?





You don't think that telling someone they could spend the next 30 years in prison is threatening?

They told her she no longer had an alibi, that was the threat. Why didn't she cry out that's not true why did R say that it's not true .Any innocent percent would have just repeated that . Instead she confusedly remembers meeting this bad man and bringing him home in a short time. Really? Believe what you will.Her statements fit with evidence she was there. Believe the footprints were turnip juice coming out of the bedroom , I'm getting back to the Olympics and the Canadian women's great game!

.

 

[Desert Fox]

They told her she no longer had an alibi, that was the threat. Why didn't she cry out that's not true why did R say that it's not true .Any innocent percent would have just repeated that . Instead she confusedly remembers meeting this bad man and bringing him home in a short time. Really? Believe what you will.Her statements fit with evidence she was there. Believe the footprints were turnip juice coming out of the bedroom , I'm getting back to the Olympics and the Canadian women's great game!

You have partial information from the police at best as far as interrogation.

 

[kwill]

Why didn't she cry out that's not true why did R say that it's not true. Any innocent percent would have just repeated that.

Surely you know better than this?

In about 25% of DNA exoneration cases, innocent defendants made incriminating statements, delivered outright confessions or pled guilty.

source

25%! Innocent people do not just repeat the truth, especially not when their interrogators are working hard to confuse them, inviting them to imagine how it might have happened, and composing nonsensical statements for them to sign.

 

[Desert Fox]

One should look at the confession of Michael Crowe as one of the worst examples

Edit: An argument from a documentary is that when somebody uses a knife, odds are excellent you will have cut marks yourself.