Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Numbers]

Exactly, they saw the print, but they didn't have a print analysis about that yet.

The police lacked a ruler to measure the dimensions of the knife print on the sheet?

 

[Diocletus]

Exactly, they saw the print, but they didn't have a print analysis about that yet.

Oh, you mean they were too dumb to measure the print themselves or even to hold up a couple of knives to see what the size was.

 

[Samson]

Exactly, they saw the print, but they didn't have a print analysis about that yet.

They should have deduced one knife of that outline was used, not several knives with different outlines. Your own analysis of the knife outline was done to retrofit it to the big kitchen knife, but you might admit that if you were first on the scene your interest would be to find a knife that cleanly fitted the strongest pattern. Then there are those bruises where the hilt stopped to further refine it.
In fact Diocletus got you fair and square, at least be reasonable and logical.

 

[Diocletus]

I strongly suggest (as I believe others have) that when the police heard Raffaele's statements during his interrogation that the police interpreted as his dropping of Amanda's "alibi", both Amanda and Raffaele became suspects according to the ECHR and required lawyers and she a neutral, fair translator. They also should have been informed of their right to remain silent.

It seems to me that when you are asking about someone's alibi, they are a suspect. You're basically asking them to prove why theyvshould not be a suspect.

 

[Desert Fox]

You mean they didn't have a clue, except for the image of the knife printed in blood in the murder room. Other than that, I suppose they would have been clueless

I have a strange question. . . .Might it be good to have a partial gag order on the police for say 72 hours (possibly more) on both crime scene investigations and when they arrest a suspect.

I also find it interesting how Amanda was effectively kept away from her family because something very similar was done with Jason Baldwin where his mother could not get in contact with him once arrested.

 

[Machiavelli]

They should have deduced one knife of that outline was used, not several knives with different outlines. Your own analysis of the knife outline was done to retrofit it to the big kitchen knife, but you might admit that if you were first on the scene your interest would be to find a knife that cleanly fitted the strongest pattern. Then there are those bruises where the hilt stopped to further refine it.
In fact Diocletus got you fair and square, at least be reasonable and logical.

The fact that the my analysis shows a perfect match of the knife with the outline shows the diametrical opposite of what you and Diocletus say. There was a fundamental disagreement between us among the lenght of the blade, and even about its orientation. A ruler wouldn't help much more than our subjective feeling. Some people here "felt" that a blood mark represented a handle. What you and Diocletus do is kind of praise a prejudicial approach.
It's wrong. The correct approach was the police approach: random. Every knife that could have a potential compatibility.
Something I think is interesting, is that some of you (for example, Strozzi) in the past expressed complaint based on exactly the opposite reason, suggesting the police had picked a knife based on their subjective assessment about how it looked. Now some suggest they should have done exactly that, chose a knife based on their subjective assessment of what a print looked like. Deduce an outline before and then pick only knives that fit their conclusion. This series of double criticism is nonsense.

 

[Diocletus]

The fact that the my analysis shows a perfect match of the knife with the outline shows the diametrical opposite of what you and Diocletus say. There was a fundamental disagreement between us among the lenght of the blade, and even about its orientation. A ruler wouldn't help much more than our subjective feeling. Some people here "felt" that a blood mark represented a handle. What you and Diocletus do is kind of praise a prejudicial approach.
It's wrong. The correct approach was the police approach: random. Every knife that could have a potential compatibility.
Something I think is interesting, is that some of you (for example, Strozzi) in the past expressed complaint based on exactly the opposite reason, suggesting the police had picked a knife based on their subjective assessment about how it looked. Now some suggest they should have done exactly that, chose a knife based on their subjective assessment of what a print looked like. Deduce an outline before and then pick only knives that fit their conclusion. This series of double criticism is nonsense.

I don't think that at all. I think they picked the knife because of where they found it.

Incidentally, did they investigate the knives in the downstairs apartment?

 

[Samson]

The fact that the my analysis shows a perfect match of the knife with the outline shows the diametrical opposite of what you and Diocletus say. There was a fundamental disagreement between us among the lenght of the blade, and even about its orientation. A ruler wouldn't help much more than our subjective feeling. Some people here "felt" that a blood mark represented a handle. What you and Diocletus do is kind of praise a prejudicial approach.
It's wrong. The correct approach was the police approach: random. Every knife that could have a potential compatibility.
Something I think is interesting, is that some of you (for example, Strozzi) in the past expressed complaint based on exactly the opposite reason, suggesting the police had picked a knife based on their subjective assessment about how it looked. Now some suggest they should have done exactly that, chose a knife based on their subjective assessment of what a print looked like. Deduce an outline before and then pick only knives that fit their conclusion. This series of double criticism is nonsense.

I regarded your knife analysis as confirmation bias unfortunately. It is wrong to suggest experts are needed for any part of this case. You may disagree, but the photographic evidence is excellent for reconstructing everything with common sense.
If you know the date or post number for that knife discussion I will go back and show a few people to get more opinions. For interest.

 

[Desert Fox]

The fact that the my analysis shows a perfect match of the knife with the outline shows the diametrical opposite of what you and Diocletus say. There was a fundamental disagreement between us among the lenght of the blade, and even about its orientation. A ruler wouldn't help much more than our subjective feeling. Some people here "felt" that a blood mark represented a handle. What you and Diocletus do is kind of praise a prejudicial approach.
It's wrong. The correct approach was the police approach: random. Every knife that could have a potential compatibility.
Something I think is interesting, is that some of you (for example, Strozzi) in the past expressed complaint based on exactly the opposite reason, suggesting the police had picked a knife based on their subjective assessment about how it looked. Now some suggest they should have done exactly that, chose a knife based on their subjective assessment of what a print looked like. Deduce an outline before and then pick only knives that fit their conclusion. This series of double criticism is nonsense.

I think most us have argued that the forensics investigators should have taken every knife.

 

[RWVBWL]

An Italian Translation, please...

I don't have the time...
<snip>

Machiavelli,
It seems you are busy,
BUT knowing that you speak Italian fluently, and knowing that you know this horrible murder case better than many, can you find the time to listen and translate what an Italian Female Crime Scene Investigator is laughing about as a camera operator films Meredith's sneakers and then more of her life's blood, laying nearby, which is smeared on the floor?

It's right before and at 19:27:46,
in The Crime Scene Video filmed on 2 Nov. 2007.

Linked here:
https://mega.co.nz/#!O4Zh3QxY!MLLxQsnTnxYs-zyAwlsjoak4-yw9QIPILsefu8ZDq08

The links works,
I tried it again a moment ago
+
It's easy to view, and listen too.
Just download and save, watch a few times,
turn up the volume and listen, maybe even use headphones like I did and tell me, and everyone else, what is so funny that has this female Italian Crime Scene Investigator laughing a bit during this horrible scene being filmed by other police officers in the room and flat where Meredith Kercher was raped and murdered.

 

[moije2]

The fact that the my analysis shows a perfect match of the knife with the outline shows the diametrical opposite of what you and Diocletus say. There was a fundamental disagreement between us among the lenght of the blade, and even about its orientation. A ruler wouldn't help much more than our subjective feeling. Some people here "felt" that a blood mark represented a handle. What you and Diocletus do is kind of praise a prejudicial approach.
It's wrong. The correct approach was the police approach: random. Every knife that could have a potential compatibility.
Something I think is interesting, is that some of you (for example, Strozzi) in the past expressed complaint based on exactly the opposite reason, suggesting the police had picked a knife based on their subjective assessment about how it looked. Now some suggest they should have done exactly that, chose a knife based on their subjective assessment of what a print looked like. Deduce an outline before and then pick only knives that fit their conclusion. This series of double criticism is nonsense.

I don't think the second high lighted part is a fair or logical result. It is a fact that an outline existed. Rational investigation would have included a search for a knife of such even rough dimensions. Not pick such knives only. The first high lighted part is a starting part at least in an investigation. Certainly you applied a ruler later in time, and you then arrived at a conclusion that can be argued was designed to fit the "found knife".

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

Machiavelli,
It seems you are busy,
BUT knowing that you speak Italian fluently, and knowing that you know this horrible murder case better than many, can you find the time to listen and translate what an Italian Female Crime Scene Investigator is laughing about as a camera operator films Meredith's sneakers and then more of her life's blood, laying nearby, which is smeared on the floor?

It's right before and at 19:27:46,
in The Crime Scene Video filmed on 2 Nov. 2007.

Linked here:
https://mega.co.nz/#!O4Zh3QxY!MLLxQsnTnxYs-zyAwlsjoak4-yw9QIPILsefu8ZDq08

The links works,
I tried it again a moment ago
+
It's easy to view, and listen too.
Just download and save, watch a few times,
turn up the volume and listen, maybe even use headphones like I did and tell me, and everyone else, what is so funny that has this female Italian Crime Scene Investigator laughing a bit during this horrible scene being filmed by other police officers in the room and flat where Meredith Kercher was raped and murdered.

It sounds like they are talking about something in the bathroom, but I suck at Italian, especially listening to it. Whatever it is, I'm not sure it has to do with what is being filmed at that exact moment. The male and the female are discussing something. IMO.

 

[js202]

Now some suggest they should have done exactly that, chose a knife based on their subjective assessment of what a print looked like. Deduce an outline before and then pick only knives that fit their conclusion. This series of double criticism is nonsense.

As usual, your observation of what is and is not nonsense is 180 degrees from what those of us who live opposite the March Hare's side of the looking glass typically assess. Given that the knife print in blood was a piece of evidence for the police to observe, and from which to deduce, *before* they came to Sollecito's apartment and randomly selected a chef's knife that does not match the print, there is no need, whatsoever, for subjectivity here. As usual, there is plenty of real-world data - upon which rational parties can agree with a minimum of equivocation and expostulation - which proves what you believe to be false.

According to his own testimony, the chef's knife was selected by the officer because he had an intuition or instinct about it. It makes not a bit of sense that this kitchen knife would have been carted over to the cottage by Knox to commit a bloody, impromptu murder. The knife does not fit the print.

 

[RWVBWL]

Marijuana will effortlessly create a mentally confused person and an unreliable witness, especially when 96 hours have passed since its use.
That is precisely why it is important to find elements that are consistent, and regard these as the anchors from which every other account orbits.
So we have Popovich Amelie and Naruto, as well as the phones off, the 6 30 awakening and so on. We also have CCTV footage to propose absence from the crime scene. These combine to afford an alibi which is far more important than the verbal attempts 96 hours after the murder.

Hi Samson,
I seem to recall that Raffaele was, what was the term, "smoked" when he went to The Questura that night of Nov. 5, 2007. Stoned and about to be interrogated by cops who also probably interrogate Mafia suspects, esh...
See ya, RW

 

[RWVBWL]

It sounds like they are talking about something in the bathroom, but I suck at Italian, especially listening to it. Whatever it is, I'm not sure it has to do with what is being filmed at that exact moment. The male and the female are discussing something. IMO.

Much has been made of how Amanda Knox did not let the phone ring long enough when she called Meredith out of concern, ate pizza, bought underwear because she had none, swiveled her hips when she put on booties, went to class 3 days after the murder, did yoga to stretch, all trying to cope with life after her friend was raped and murdered.

Yet no one has made a fuss of some female cop laughing
while inside of the "House of Horrors", as they called it in the press.

I happen to find it lame,
even it might have been done, as Desert Fox noted on IA, to cope.
Or maybe that female cop is laughing about the tiny toy keychain vibrator that Madison gave Amanda,
wasn't that found in the nearby bathroom?

Whatever,
a professional cop should not be laughing at jokes
at a place where a woman was raped and murdered hours earlier.
My opinion only.
RW

 

[Samson]

Hi Samson,
I seem to recall that Raffaele was, what was the term, "smoked" when he went to The Questura that night of Nov. 5, 2007. Stoned and about to be interrogated by cops who also probably interrogate Mafia suspects, esh...
See ya, RW

RWVBWL, there is plenty in wiki on this memory thing, and it is highly relevant to this case, and the discussion of alibis.
Just one of many sections

Episodic memory[edit]Episodic memory is the ability to consciously remember a past event, even after a distraction filled delay, without continuous and active maintenance of information between the study time and test time.[47] Episodic memory relies upon the frontal cortex and hippocampus, which are both heavily saturated with cannabinoid receptors that are activated by THC.[47] Using recognition tests that evaluate episodic memory, researchers, Ilian, Smith, and Gevins, tested participant recognition of words studied 5–10 minutes earlier.[47] Those participants that were under the influence of cannabis, were more likely to identify false distractor words as being studied previously.[47] An earlier study by Curran, showed that those under the influence of THC were found to have impaired performance on explicit memory tasks, compared to control subjects.[49] It was found that impairment of episodic memory and learning varied depending on the size of an oral THC dose.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_and_memory

I am not clear whether alcohol was also involved during the period in question.

 

[Dan O.]

The police lacked a ruler to measure the dimensions of the knife print on the sheet?

Where are they going to get a ruler from? This is after all a crime scene investigation not a science project.

 

[kwill]

The fact that the my analysis shows a perfect match of the knife with the outline shows the diametrical opposite of what you and Diocletus say. There was a fundamental disagreement between us among the lenght of the blade, and even about its orientation. A ruler wouldn't help much more than our subjective feeling. Some people here "felt" that a blood mark represented a handle. What you and Diocletus do is kind of praise a prejudicial approach.
It's wrong. The correct approach was the police approach: random. Every knife that could have a potential compatibility.
Something I think is interesting, is that some of you (for example, Strozzi) in the past expressed complaint based on exactly the opposite reason, suggesting the police had picked a knife based on their subjective assessment about how it looked. Now some suggest they should have done exactly that, chose a knife based on their subjective assessment of what a print looked like. Deduce an outline before and then pick only knives that fit their conclusion. This series of double criticism is nonsense.

You are suggesting that one of these things is true:
1. Amanda Knox habitually carried the knife in question around with her.
2. Amanda Knox packed the knife in question with her on the evening of Nov 1 for the purpose of . . . ??? when she left Raffaele's flat in order to . . . ????
3. Amanda Knox chose to carry the knife in question on that night for obscure reasons of her own which will never be known.

Just curious which you're leaning towards.

For the record, I think the evidence shows clearly that she never left Raffaele's flat that night and that the knife in question was not the murder weapon.

 

[Diocletus]

Where are they going to get a ruler from? This is after all a crime scene investigation not a science project.

But that's in centimeters!

 

[Dan O.]

Machiavelli would never be permitted to admit that the statement elicited from Raffaele in the November 5/6 interrogation is factually crap. This is purely a consequence of the interrogation technique used and not an attempt on Raffaele's part to be deceitful. He had already given the factually verifiable version in previous interviews but the police saw a different version of events printed in Kate Mansey's article and started jumping up and down all excited.