Continuation Part 18: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Numbers]

I think this describes the issue.

We have a description of black fibres (hairs). We do not have any further description. We do not know if they were straight, wavy, or kinky. If they were head hair or pubic hair. If the hair was dyed or natural in colour. I seem to remember there is a comment about length, but it is unclear how accurate this is, if it represents the longest hair or an average. There is no record of formal (microscopic) analysis. We do not even know if the hairs were human (as opposed to wool, cat, dog, or even artificial fibre).

There is a wish for them to be 'African', to explain the focus on an 'African' as a suspect early in the investigation. This may be true it may not, we just do not have the facts for this to be any more than a supposition.

Planigale,

Thank you for this post.

Is anyone aware of any credible documentation, such as images or detailed laboratory examination of the fibers or hairs in question? The mere mention of the hairs by Stefanoni should not be considered credible; consider the many misstatements from her and other police and prosecution authorities in this case.

 

[Numbers]

For those interested in the legal aspects of the Amanda Knox - Raffaele Sollecito case:

ECHR case: PARRILLO v. ITALY [GC] 46470/11 27/08/2015

While the matter at issue in the above case has no relevance to the AK - RS case, there are statements from the ECHR in the judgment that are important to that case and to other cases in Italy. Here are some:

1. The Italian Constitutional Court (which is an entirely separate body from the CSC, the Supreme Court of Cassation) in its judgments nos. 348 and 349 of 24 October 2007 ruled that the European Convention of Human Rights was in a position above ordinary Italian laws but below the Italian Constitution. Therefore, it was incumbent on the judges of the ordinary courts to interpret domestic law in a manner compliant with the Convention on Human Rights and the Court’s case-law. The Italian Constitutional Court stated that where such an interpretation was impossible or the ordinary court had doubts as to the compatibility of domestic law with the Convention, it was bound to raise a question of constitutionality before it. (para. 88-89)

2. Regarding the possibility of an applicant bringing an appeal on the constitutionality of a law or (by my extension) an action of Italian authorities to the Constitutional Court (an argument used by the Italian government to claim that the applicant had not exhausted domestic remedies, as required by the Convention), the ECHR stated that it observes that generally litigants are not entitled to appeal directly to the Constitutional Court. Therefore, such an application cannot be a remedy whose exhaustion is required under the Convention (para. 101).

Perhaps the big issue for the AK - RS case from the above is the failure of the ordinary Italian courts to have interpreted Italian law and the actions of Italian authorities with respect to the Convention, as required by Italian Constitutional Court judgments nos. 348 and 349 of 24 October 2007.

 

[Ken Dine]

Takes two to tango have a pissing match. Tesla he claimed that both Meredith have never lived away from home and later that West Seattle is just around the corner from the UW and then that Edda's house was only 14 minutes from downtown apparently not realizing that the UW is mile further from downtown. I don't see this as being precise just mildly accurate.

It only takes one to NIT-PICK! I read that Amanda and Paxton's apartment was in downtown Seattle, which is only 6.4 mile's from mom's home (a 14 min drive), as reflected on this map:

To give you the benefit of the doubt, the first map I posted was from the U of Washington, which was a tad farther from mom's home. You obviously can't be appeased!

In my view, 14 miles is living very close to her mom's home.

Btw, Tesla, where do think the idea they never left home before came from? Why wouldn't he just admit that he was totally wrong, because he was and is. They both lived away from home for 3 years and Amanda spent time in Japan.

Once a mea culpa has been issued it's considered bad form to keep regurgitating your winning point.

BTW - if you want to keep regurgitating stuff, you originally and confusedly had claimed that West Seattle wasn't just around the corner from Eda's house, when Edda's house in in South West Seattle, right?

 

[Grinder]

Thank you for your answer which is a scientific explanation of the differences between hair of three racial types. Of course, to examine a hair closely so as to evaluate its physical characteristics one would normally use a microscope. I need to refresh my memory. Did eagle-eye Stefanoni examine the hairs under a microscope? Does she know of the scientific explanations you cited above? Or did she jump to a conclusion after eyeing some curly black hair? How tightly curled are Italian hairs compared to African hairs? What happens to such hairs when damp as could occur during a bad hair day?

Both of your posts on this are spot on and get down to the short hairs. Some of the early hair reports apparently turned into fibers (no cite just memory) and with all of her and the rest of the ICSI to get anything right it is easier to believe in incompetence than the opposite. Note the hairs were never identified as being Rudi's only assumed to be his.

I think this describes the issue.

We have a description of black fibres (hairs). We do not have any further description. We do not know if they were straight, wavy, or kinky. If they were head hair or pubic hair. If the hair was dyed or natural in colour. I seem to remember there is a comment about length, but it is unclear how accurate this is, if it represents the longest hair or an average. There is no record of formal (microscopic) analysis. We do not even know if the hairs were human (as opposed to wool, cat, dog, or even artificial fibre).

There is a wish for them to be 'African', to explain the focus on an 'African' as a suspect early in the investigation. This may be true it may not, we just do not have the facts for this to be any more than a supposition.

From early leaks they were looking for someone at the Halloween party and since Patrick and Rudi were not at the party and the only two blacks in Perugia, they couldn't have been looking for a black

Yes it DOES take two. You just have this approach to resolving discrepancies that results in 20 pages of pissing on the other person. Not exactly from Dale Carnegie's book "How to win friends and influence people".

While I agree that Ken was wrong, (sorry Ken) it's ticky tacky nonsense, not worth the dialog.

Tesla I understand your criticism - things that are incorrect such as the recent points I should ignore them because they weren't important in the place but only part of theory or assertion that everybody knows isn't valid. The only person currently posting that deserves to be corrected on every point is Vixen, correct?

 

[acbytesla]

Tesla I understand your criticism - things that are incorrect such as the recent points I should ignore them because they weren't important in the place but only part of theory or assertion that everybody knows isn't valid. The only person currently posting that deserves to be corrected on every point is Vixen, correct?

On the contrary Grinder. I am not saying that the discrepancy shouldn't be resolved, just that your approach to resolving them could be better. For example, instead of saying "you don't know what you're talking about". Maybe you could say "I'm sorry Ken I'm pretty sure you're mistaken" and then cite the evidence.

I don't expect you to change your approach Grinder. That wouldn't be you. After all, everyone loves you just the way you are.

 

[anglolawyer]

Let's have a passing contest on who is responsible for all the pissing contests! I mean, we want to be taken seriously, don't we?

 

[Ken Dine]

Thank you for your answer which is a scientific explanation of the differences between hair of three racial types. Of course, to examine a hair closely so as to evaluate its physical characteristics one would normally use a microscope. I need to refresh my memory. Did eagle-eye Stefanoni examine the hairs under a microscope? Does she know of the scientific explanations you cited above? Or did she jump to a conclusion after eyeing some curly black hair? How tightly curled are Italian hairs compared to African hairs? What happens to such hairs when damp as could occur during a bad hair day?

I think this describes the issue.

We have a description of black fibres (hairs). We do not have any further description. We do not know if they were straight, wavy, or kinky. If they were head hair or pubic hair. If the hair was dyed or natural in colour. I seem to remember there is a comment about length, but it is unclear how accurate this is, if it represents the longest hair or an average. There is no record of formal (microscopic) analysis. We do not even know if the hairs were human (as opposed to wool, cat, dog, or even artificial fibre).

There is a wish for them to be 'African', to explain the focus on an 'African' as a suspect early in the investigation. This may be true it may not, we just do not have the facts for this to be any more than a supposition.

How many times do I need to keep posting this:

Dr. Stefanoni Genetic Test, SAL report, Dr. Stefanoni slide presentation

4. 7 hairs were black in color. 6 of these were 4 cm long or less, and so likely Guede’s hair. 4 of these were on the duvet and 1 was on the mattress cover, both in Ms. Kercher’s room.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Evidence_List#Hairs

If they found 5 hairs in Meredith’s bedroom that Stefanoni testified were “likely Guede’s hairs,” then it can safely be assumed that those 5 hairs were as kinky and obviously as African as the hairs on Guede’s body were.

You probably wouldn’t need to examine those 5 hairs under a microscope to determine that they were African hairs, but since those hairs would have been key evidence in a rape/murder, the Italians would have surely examined those hairs thoroughly before Nov 5th.

Amanda was seen by Detective Rita Ficarra in the waiting room talking to officers from the SCO around 10:30-11pm on Nov 5th.

Ficarra approached Amanda and asked for the names of people who had been to the cottage or that Meredith knew, and they went into a room to make a list.

Amanda told Ficarra about Patrick Lumumba and a South African guy she remembered being in the downstairs apartment [Guede], but she didn’t know his name or phone number. Amanda also gave Ficarra the names of several other men, all dark-skinned men, and since Amanda likely knew many men of all skin shades, Ficarra had obviously asked Amanda a pointed question about the dark-skinned men Amanda knew in Italy.

The police were clearly already focused in on an African suspect by Nov 5th.

 

[Bill Williams]

On the contrary Grinder. I am not saying that the discrepancy shouldn't be resolved, just that your approach to resolving them could be better. For example, instead of saying "you don't know what you're talking about". Maybe you could say "I'm sorry Ken I'm pretty sure you're mistaken" and then cite the evidence.

I don't expect you to change your approach Grinder. That wouldn't be you. After all, everyone loves you just the way you are.

Too true. It's like learning to love an old Chevy Chevelle LS6 because it was your first car, but now has a lot of quirks and unavailable spare parts.

 

[Bill Williams]

Let's have a passing contest on who is responsible for all the pissing contests! I mean, we want to be taken seriously, don't we?

It's way too late for that!

 

[anglolawyer]

Too true. It's like learning to love an old Chevy Chevelle LS6 because it was your first car, but now has a lot of quirks and unavailable spare parts.

Poor ole Grinder. I even air-brushed him out of my sig today.

 

[Bill Williams]

Poor ole Grinder. I even air-brushed him out of my sig today.

I noted that. When the punters saw it, my phone rang off the hook and now the odds of you disappearing favour 25 days rather than 30.

This is all part of Marriott's misdirection to mask the orchestrated nature of the continuing PR campaign. Appendix IV of the PR-manual mandates that we go all squirrelly once successful in the Italian courts; so that we won't be seen as something to be taken seriously.

One guy is actually counting the number of pedal turns across the Alaska viaduct. Another has put a big wad of gum on his "Y" key, lest he mistakenly spell Rud**I**'s name with a "Y".

Skeptics call it silly season - nothing to do until a motivations report comes out.

Those of us truly in the know (this message will self-destruct 5 seconds after you read it) know it is part of the plan. The Marasca/Bruno court obviously took the likes of you and me very seriously, obviously.

Now it's time to act like complete knuckleheads to mask our effectiveness.

What do you want!? The Marriott-manual translated into a language you'll understand? Sheesh! I was told it was you who went all funny on us because the manual spells "color" without the "u". You even grieved it to the union.

In any event, good luck with your new sig. You are a punters' delight if nothing else.

 

[Grinder]

On the contrary Grinder. I am not saying that the discrepancy shouldn't be resolved, just that your approach to resolving them could be better. For example, instead of saying "you don't know what you're talking about". Maybe you could say "I'm sorry Ken I'm pretty sure you're mistaken" and then cite the evidence.

I don't expect you to change your approach Grinder. That wouldn't be you. After all, everyone loves you just the way you are.

I can answer that. Both of the older Italian gals thought their younger English-speaking roommates were BOTH slobs, so shortly before the murder the two older Italian gals instituted rules and a cleaning schedule for their younger roomies to follow, complete with a system of fines.

Apparently, one of the new rules was to not leave wet clothing in the washing machine, so that is what Filomena was referring to.

As far as I know, Filomena and Laura got along fine as roomies since they had been doing that for awhile and they were both good friends, but the older Italian gals had to both crack the whip on the two new younger gals since for Amanda & Meredith, this was their first experience living away from their mothers' homes.

Due to Filomena & Laura's nagging, the murder scene had been recently cleaned fairly well before the murder.

Ken I think you are just making stuff up. For sure Amanda had lived away from home for some time.

How long had Laura and Filomena been roomies?

Laura had made a schedule of chores. Where do you get the idea of fines?

Where do you get the idea the "murder scene" had been cleaned "fairly well"? Did they use bleach? Does that mean the "foot prints" had to be very recent?

I would say my initial response was more gentle than most given to Vixen.

First Ken says HE can answer some question and then writes false and questionable statements. Does someone have a cite that validates the "older" (about Raf's age) women thought BOTH students were slobs. We have one cite from pro prosecution Laura testimony that says a system of chores had been set up (doesn't say the two did it and Amanda doesn't mention fines and I only asked where he got the idea which unfortunately someone else answered with the vague testimony)and seemingly she said if 10 chores were missed (Google) a 5 Euro fine would be levied. Amanda in her book talks about her shock at the testimony of her former roommates as she couldn't recognize what they were talking about.

Laura and Filomena had moved into the cottage in August - the students took their rooms in September IIRC.

The biggest deal was the "Due to Filomena & Laura's nagging, the murder scene had been recently cleaned fairly well before the murder" which would change the possibility that the footprints were from rust etc. left at another time.

Then there was the previous claim that Amanda called Filomena the first time as she arrived at the fair and told her about the broken window but that wasn't true because Amanda only discovered it on her return. Then rather than admit he had it wrong he says 26 minutes later is just arriving because parking is difficult at fairs. As we all know 26 minutes is very significant vis-a-vis the calls to the police.

This followed claims based on some highly inaccurate article that Rudi had been arrested and the arrest suppressed.

Anyway, you all can jump on Vixen et al. for every error, ten at once, and I feel the other POV mistakes need to be addressed.

 

[Grinder]

Poor ole Grinder. I even air-brushed him out of my sig today.

Will Deeney be airbrushed as well?

 

[Grinder]

Too true. It's like learning to love an old Chevy Chevelle LS6 because it was your first car, but now has a lot of quirks and unavailable spare parts.

Come on I've seen you and your first car must have been a model 'T'

 

[Bill Williams]

Come on I've seen you and your first car must have been a model 'T'

This is a pic of the guy you met, and it was not a Model T. It was a "J"! But it explains your error as the Italian alphabet also has no "J"!!!! Do I have to explain everything?

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/06/20/article-2005940-0CA7368900000578-536_634x339.jpg
I'm on the left.

 

[acbytesla]

I would say my initial response was more gentle than most given to Vixen.

First Ken says HE can answer some question and then writes false and questionable statements. Does someone have a cite that validates the "older" (about Raf's age) women thought BOTH students were slobs. We have one cite from pro prosecution Laura testimony that says a system of chores had been set up (doesn't say the two did it and Amanda doesn't mention fines and I only asked where he got the idea which unfortunately someone else answered with the vague testimony)and seemingly she said if 10 chores were missed (Google) a 5 Euro fine would be levied. Amanda in her book talks about her shock at the testimony of her former roommates as she couldn't recognize what they were talking about.

Laura and Filomena had moved into the cottage in August - the students took their rooms in September IIRC.

The biggest deal was the "Due to Filomena & Laura's nagging, the murder scene had been recently cleaned fairly well before the murder" which would change the possibility that the footprints were from rust etc. left at another time.

Then there was the previous claim that Amanda called Filomena the first time as she arrived at the fair and told her about the broken window but that wasn't true because Amanda only discovered it on her return. Then rather than admit he had it wrong he says 26 minutes later is just arriving because parking is difficult at fairs. As we all know 26 minutes is very significant vis-a-vis the calls to the police.

This followed claims based on some highly inaccurate article that Rudi had been arrested and the arrest suppressed.

Anyway, you all can jump on Vixen et al. for every error, ten at once, and I feel the other POV mistakes need to be addressed.

We were very gentle with Vixen for a long time. The difference is that almost every single post is a lie with her. She says Amanda killed Meredith and then repeats the same tired lies.

There are pro innocent falisties as well, I grant you. For example this whole discussion about finding African hairs is not based on court records just speculation and some news reports While I think it is possible the police were looking for an African man based on some hairs found at the scene, there is no credible proof of that. And frankly, I don't find speculation to be all that valuable.

I respect your correcting the mistakes. I would have corrected Ken on his mistake as well.

 

[Strozzi]

We were very gentle with Vixen for a long time. The difference is that almost every single post is a lie with her. She says Amanda killed Meredith and then repeats the same tired lies.

There are pro innocent falisties as well, I grant you. For example this whole discussion about finding African hairs is not based on court records just speculation and some news reports While I think it is possible the police were looking for an African man based on some hairs found at the scene, there is no credible proof of that. And frankly, I don't find speculation to be all that valuable.

I respect your correcting the mistakes. I would have corrected Ken on his mistake as well.

I have reviewed the comments posted here in the last several days. They range from a heated discussion on travel and traffic conditions in West Seattle to what happens to a curly hair from "down south" on a damp bad hair day. Vixen is probably sitting back, watching these discussions, and chuckling over the deterioration in debate that she instigated with her 2,000 posts. Is this what is meant by "look, a squirrel !"

I hope the motivation report is issued soon, for our own sanity.

 

[acbytesla]

I have reviewed the comments posted here in the last several days. They range from a heated discussion on travel and traffic conditions in West Seattle to what happens to a curly hair from "down south" on a damp bad hair day. Vixen is probably sitting back, watching these discussions, and chuckling over the deterioration in debate that she instigated with her 2,000 posts. Is this what is meant by "look, a squirrel !"

I hope the motivation report is issued soon, for our own sanity.

Can I have an Amen?

 

[Ken Dine]

I would say my initial response was more gentle than most given to Vixen.

First Ken says HE can answer some question and then writes false and questionable statements. Does someone have a cite that validates the "older" (about Raf's age) women thought BOTH students were slobs.

Since this is apparently the NIT-PICKING season, as I recall, Raffaele was around 24 y/o, and the two older Italian gals were around 27 y/o.

Believe it or not, I got into this case many years ago and read extensively about it back then, so a lot of what I post is from memory, thus details may be skewed at times. No one, other than you, is perfect ...but, I'll wager the two Italian gals are several years older than Raffaele, so you weren't so perfect about that, eh?

Or, in your view, is 24 pretty much the same as 27 in the grand scope of things?

We have one cite from pro prosecution Laura testimony that says a system of chores had been set up (doesn't say the two did it and Amanda doesn't mention fines and I only asked where he got the idea which unfortunately someone else answered with the vague testimony)and seemingly she said if 10 chores were missed (Google) a 5 Euro fine would be levied.

I had read it somewhere before, and then someone else provided the citation where I apparently had read it.

However, I don't recall a 5 Euro fine per 10 missed chores? Are you positive about that? I thought it was a 5 Euro fine per each missed chore?

Amanda in her book talks about her shock at the testimony of her former roommates as she couldn't recognize what they were talking about.

I agree that all the police leaks claiming they had forensic proof that Amanda was guilty had skewed all the later testimony against Amanda, not only from Filomena and Laura, but also from Meredith's English friends, the guys downstairs, as well as others.

Even so, how could that bias against Amanda cause Filomena and Laura to make up a story about having set chores enforced by fines?

BTW - as I recall, the set chores and fines were new and hadn't actually been used before the murder, which is why I had said that the older gals' nagging likely had caused the younger gals to clean their spaces more prior to the murder.

In my mind, if the older gals had set up a system of fines, then that must have been preceded by some nagging about cleaning, but I'm reading between the lines with that speculation.

Laura and Filomena had moved into the cottage in August - the students took their rooms in September IIRC.

Amanda may have leased her room in September, but then she went back to Germany for several weeks, so she didn't actually live there until late September or early October.

Laura and Filomena were both the same age and they were both pursuing identical career paths, and they both lived and worked in a small town, so they likely had more of a history than just meeting in September 2007.

Even if they did meet in September 2007, the older Italian gals appeared to be united in insisting that the younger gals pitch in more to help clean the cottage.

Seriously, other than you, who really cares about all these details?

The biggest deal was the "Due to Filomena & Laura's nagging, the murder scene had been recently cleaned fairly well before the murder" which would change the possibility that the footprints were from rust etc. left at another time.

Why? As I recall, the non-blood footprints found with luminol were along the wall, so they may have been older prints since Amanda and Meredith may have concentrated their mop cleaning in the center of the hallway?

Those footprints weren't found to be related to the crime, so other than you, who really cares?

Then there was the previous claim that Amanda called Filomena the first time as she arrived at the fair and told her about the broken window but that wasn't true because Amanda only discovered it on her return. Then rather than admit he had it wrong he says 26 minutes later is just arriving because parking is difficult at fairs. As we all know 26 minutes is very significant vis-a-vis the calls to the police.

Filomena testified that at Amanda's 12:08 call to her she was still trying to park her car at the fair. Do you know how long it took Filomena to park the car?

Do you feel in that 26 minute span, that Filomena had parked and entered the fair, while Filomena was also calling Amanda back 3 times during those minutes?

Filomena may have never left the car before calling her boyfriend to tell him to meet her at the cottage? Do you have any proof otherwise?

Other than for the sake of your pissing contest, other than you, who really cares about all these trivial details?

Seriously, how could what Filomena did during that 26 minutes affect the timing of the call between Marco and Luca, which happened at 12:45 pm (as proved by a posted phone bill), which is what we were discussing before you decided to nit-pick?

This followed claims based on some highly inaccurate article that Rudi had been arrested and the arrest suppressed.

Am I to be blamed for your claim of inaccuracies in an early UK article?

Other than the fact that the UK media had published tons of other nonsense leaked to them by the police, do you have any actual proof that the UK article's reporting about Guede having been arrested for a knife fight, that this was entirely bogus?

Presumably, the police did release the info about Guede's knife-fight to the press, so whether it's true or not, who can say?

Anyway, you all can jump on Vixen et al. for every error, ten at once, and I feel the other POV mistakes need to be addressed.

For someone who makes as many errors here as you do, and speculates as much as you do over many things not even in evidence, you'd think you would be more tolerant of others since you live in a glass house.

 

[moije2]

duplicate