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

[Chris_Halkides]

12:47 in Perugia, and 4:47 in Seattle

Charlie,

Comodi specifically refers to the records, yet misrepresents their contents. And when Amanda gets the time difference wrong (usually 9 but in this case 8 hours), Comodi does not correct Amanda's mistake. Yet Comodi must have known this as well. Comodi is the epitome of mendacity.

NancyS,

The reason that you don't understand it is that it makes no sense. What was Amanda supposed to be talking about with her mother, anyway? How to effect the perfect clean-up? Even pro-guilt reporter Barbie Nadeau conceded that Edda believes Amanda is innocent.

 

[NancyS]

Here is Comodi's question on June 13, 2009:

But from the records, we see that you called your mother -- not only from the records but also the pings that you first called your mother at 12. At midday. What time is it at midday? What time is it in Seattle, if in Perugia it is midday?

From the records, we see that Comodi lied through her teeth to establish a false premise, which Amanda could not correct because she didn't have the records in front of her.

That is simple.

Obfuscating that fact is not simple. Hence the gibberish to which you are responding.

And shouldn't this be a time when a decent legal team would jump in and correct the mistake?

 

[kwill]

You know, I've just realised why that creeps me out. My initials are also MK.

(Oh and English girls don't have "Moms".)

As you were....

Rolfe.

Okay, I'll fix it in the name of cross-cultural sensitivity. Anybody know if Italian boys have "Dads"?

 

[AmyStrange]

Amanda Marie Knox

-

You know, I've just realised why that creeps me out. My initials are also MK.

(Oh and English girls don't have "Moms".)

As you were....

Rolfe.

-

so are Amanda's (well, almost the same), Amanda Marie Knox, or AMK,

d

-

 

[anglolawyer]

Here is Comodi's question on June 13, 2009:

But from the records, we see that you called your mother -- not only from the records but also the pings that you first called your mother at 12. At midday. What time is it at midday? What time is it in Seattle, if in Perugia it is midday?

From the records, we see that Comodi lied through her teeth to establish a false premise, which Amanda could not correct because she didn't have the records in front of her.

That is simple.

Obfuscating that fact is not simple. Hence the gibberish to which you are responding.

And her lawyers? Did they object? Presumably not because Amanda still seems unaware of the trick. Amazing.

ETA Ninja'd by Nancy!

 

[anglolawyer]

I've never really understood the whole guilty argument about the phone call to her mother - if Amanda was supposed to be up all night and the argument is that Amanda had to speak to her mother due to the stress of killing Meredith, wouldn't she have been more likely to call when she knew her mother would be awake - maybe at the same time she was supposedly buying the mythical bleach?

Oh, don't spoil it Nancy! Platonov was just thinking up a reason why, even if it were true (which it isn't) that Amanda called her mother 'before anything happened' would be incriminating.

 

[platonov]

More retrocausality or just confusion

Dan O answered that question. I can't look his reply up right now, but basically it sounds like Raffaele, having access post-conviction to his own laptop (not the machine they used for Amelie) presented evidence about the 9:26 activity (a Manga cartoon) during the appeal of the first guilty verdict.

Judge Hellman didn't need it to acquit them, so it's not mentioned in the motivations for that appeal.

But it was presented, and has not been disputed.

If you look closely at Dan O's post you will see a piece dated 2008.

This is because the 9.26 issue was presented in court in 2008 * before Micheli ? by the RS's defence and refuted by the forensics guys as being p2p and not human interaction.

As to why AK or RS never mentioned it in their alibi tales in court – well you don’t have to be a genius to figure that one out.

To be fair to RS it was not a major omission given his reticence on a more serious issue.

*This a basic piece of information about the case but it has only been pointed out ~ 128 times and thus is easily forgotten - perhaps an overview or read through of the threads would answer many of the Q's you guys have.

 

[Dan O.]

I asked earlier and did not receive a response... Or at least one I can find. What is the story of the RS computer activity at 9:26pm? How is it known?

My reply in the previous thread is here.

 

[Grinder]

I've never really understood the whole guilty argument about the phone call to her mother - if Amanda was supposed to be up all night and the argument is that Amanda had to speak to her mother due to the stress of killing Meredith, wouldn't she have been more likely to call when she knew her mother would be awake - maybe at the same time she was supposedly buying the mythical bleach?

And if she did call why did she deny it even to her mother and after it was clear she had? Anglo makes the point that her defense must not have gone over details with her. It is possible that they didn't have privacy as they knew using retrocausality that this case would make Mignini illegally tap phones in the MOF case and therefore could jump back to the future and listen in on their conversations with Amanda.

The idea that a very upset 20 year old would worry what time it was in Seattle is just lame. Clearly a moment of drama Comodi had salivated over in preparation.

Had she murdered Meredith, why would she wait more than 15 hours to call and what would she be asking or telling? "I just killed my roommate with Harry Raffaele and a guy named The Baron Rudy and we can't find any bleach, what should we do?"

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

And shouldn't this be a time when a decent legal team would jump in and correct the mistake

Sure. I brought this to her attention - get the time of your phone call right. She just doesn't remember it correctly.

But none of this trivia bears on the facts of the crime or the so-called evidence against her.

I'm looking at the latest onslaught of malice on her blog. I see someone has quoted a summary of the financial transactions I posted years ago, and they want her to explain the source of the deposit, as if it could possibly matter. Then they ask if she was blowing her money on drugs.

There is no way to reason with morons like that, and it is pointless to try. They are just harassing her.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the source of the harassment

There is no way to reason with morons like that, and it is pointless to try. They are just harassing her.

Paraphrasing Mary_H, they are not looking for information but for ammunition. By perusing the web, one can find the likely source of the people harassing her.

 

[platonov]

Straight from the horses mouth

So what does it mean? Why, in your opinion, did she call her mother before anything had happened?

Well if you can convince CW that 2007 precedes 2009, which might not be as easy as it sounds, he could ask Amanda directly why she forgot (and then remembered/invented and then forgot again)– straight from the horses mouth and all that.

Also if she or her mother remember the mind control episode from 2007 which caused the forgetfulness/ perplexity?

 

[Strozzi]

Okay, I'll fix it in the name of cross-cultural sensitivity. Anybody know if Italian boys have "Dads"?

I know that Italian men don't have girlfriends who spend the night with them. They are called "fiancées"! And if you pass your English fiancée while walking to class with your buddies, pretend you don't know her. Right, Glaucoma? What a courageous man!

 

[kwill]

the 9.26 issue was presented in court in 2008 . . . by the RS's defence and refuted by the forensics guys as being p2p and not human interaction.

Dan O quoted from Massei on it:

Indeed, searching with Spotlight in version 10.4.10 was detected at least one file "Naruto ep 101.avi" which is not present in advice of the police post, but whose date of last opening is Thursday 1 November 2007 at 21:26 (ie in the period examined by the police Postal: 1st November 2007 18:00 - November 2, 2007 8:00 am).

And then went on to say this:

. . . the postal police inspection of the hard drive content using Encase forensic tools could only look at the file system timestamps: creation time, last access time, last modification time.

The creation time was before the time period in question and since this file was in the peer to peer sharing folder it could be accessed from the Internet at anytime until the computer was unplugged on the 6th.

The Spotlight metadata is stored in a separate database and records the last time the file was opened by the user.

So, please help this noob understand. Doesn't that quote from Massei say that Spotlight found that Naruto had been opened at 9:26? Isn't that also what that last sentence in the quote from Dan O means?

And while you're not busy, any thoughts on time of death?

 

[RoseMontague]

Dan O quoted from Massei on it:

And then went on to say this:

So, please help this noob understand. Doesn't that quote from Massei say that Spotlight found that Naruto had been opened at 9:26? Isn't that also what that last sentence in the quote from Dan O means?

And while you're not busy, any thoughts on time of death?

From Raffaele's appeal (Google translation)

The judgment of First Instance based its considerations on interactions on the MacBook -Pro Raffaele Sollecito on advice produced by the police post.
This activity technique, however, as has been demonstrated by defense counsel , can not be considered methodologically sound because:
1 . is based on prior selection of some files through the EnCase software that operates using only three dates ( among the five present in the Mac ) , and a subsequent investigation of some of the info file resulting from this selection using the " Spotlight" and / or Finder , ie the graphical user interface of the operating system (eg, see survey on " the Amazing World of Amelie ").
2 . Not analyzed information outside the period 1 November 2007 18:00 - November 2, 2007 8:00 am, then there are no possible causes of alteration of the information relating to the period of interest, and likewise there are no subsequent events caused by actions occurred in the period of interest.
3 . Log analysis is limited to logs Fastweb, other logs are ignored ( eg log of the keyboard that indicate the beginning and the end of the activities of the computer) .
4 . No mention is a process of listening to music took place between the hours of 5:41 and 6:38 .
5 . There is no mention of opening a business media "Naruto episode 101" took place on Thursday 1 November 2007 at 21:26 hours .

Looks like the computer frying experts missed some music for the same reason.

 

[Grinder]

Sure. I brought this to her attention - get the time of your phone call right. She just doesn't remember it correctly.

But none of this trivia bears on the facts of the crime or the so-called evidence against her.

I'm looking at the latest onslaught of malice on her blog. I see someone has quoted a summary of the financial transactions I posted years ago, and they want her to explain the source of the deposit, as if it could possibly matter. Then they ask if she was blowing her money on drugs.

There is no way to reason with morons like that, and it is pointless to try. They are just harassing her.

They are having a party about this at PMF as well. When they go on for years about this, it was started by Capealadin a few years ago, I do think producing a week or two of bank records to set the record straight would be worth it. While I wouldn't respond to every new meme, after a time some would be worth it.

Imagine if the clear history could be posted right now, how stupid it would make them look.

This is a little like an election. Even though most elections are over a week before the final day candidates work until the last minute holding up signs at intersections until after dark the day of the vote.

Amanda and family are caught in this and they need to go after every vote until this is over.

 

[platonov]

Dan O quoted from Massei on it:

And then went on to say this:

So, please help this noob understand. Doesn't that quote from Massei say that Spotlight found that Naruto had been opened at 9:26? Isn't that also what that last sentence in the quote from Dan O means?

And while you're not busy, any thoughts on time of death?

You snipped most of my short post - note the bolded part..

If you look closely at Dan O's post you will see a piece dated 2008.

This is because the 9.26 issue was presented in court in 2008 * before Micheli ? by the RS's defence and refuted by the forensics guys as being p2p and not human interaction.

As to why AK or RS never mentioned it in their alibi tales in court – well you don’t have to be a genius to figure that one out.

To be fair to RS it was not a major omission given his reticence on a more serious issue.

*This a basic piece of information about the case but it has only been pointed out ~ 128 times and thus is easily forgotten - perhaps an overview or read through of the threads would answer many of the Q's you guys have.

 

[Grinder]

One phone call that means nothing or at least no one can put a solid reason why Amanda would even lie about. Her mother recalled it immediately and with the lawyers present told Amanda who still didn't remember it. As I asked upthread, why would she lie about it? Why if she killed Meredith would she call 15 hours later? Why didn't she call at 5 am or 3 am or 8 am?

What is more interesting is that Mignini asked Amanda on the 5/6th why she hadn't given Patrick's name a number of interviews he listed by time and date. Since she thought he was the mayor of Perugia at the time, he clearly wasn't the one interviewing her on those earlier dates. Did he read transcripts? Did they have recordings of those earlier interviews? When did they bug Patrick? Since they had looked at Amanda's phone records how could they have missed tracing the texts around murder time?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Crini and Naruto

"E quindi, diciamo, perché – ripeto - è rilevante questo argomento? E’ rilevante perché questo approfondimento fatto dal consulente D’Ambrosio, dove poi a confutazione si chiarisce anche come l’interazione Naruto delle 21:26 e qualche cosa, mi pare, che praticamente si sostanzia in nulla sul piano dei tempi, e quindi evidentemente non esclude niente dal punto di vista della tempistica, ecco, questa produzione, diciamo così, questo approfondimento di consulenza è l’importante lavoro, l’importante integrazione rispetto a che cosa?" link to the pseudo-wiki here. Some have interpreted this passage to mean that Crini accepted Naruto. I will leave it to those fluent in Italian.

 

[AmyStrange]

Advice?

-

If you look closely at Dan O's post you will see a piece dated 2008.

This is because the 9.26 issue was presented in court in 2008 * before Micheli ? by the RS's defence and refuted by the forensics guys as being p2p and not human interaction.

As to why AK or RS never mentioned it in their alibi tales in court – well you don’t have to be a genius to figure that one out.

To be fair to RS it was not a major omission given his reticence on a more serious issue.

*This a basic piece of information about the case but it has only been pointed out ~ 128 times and thus is easily forgotten - perhaps an overview or read through of the threads would answer many of the Q's you guys have.

-

Maybe you should take your own advice and then you won't have to dumb anything up or down?

-