Continuation Part 20: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Grinder]

The garage camera , the cell ping and Rudy's diary. Yes, Koko may have been there to help Rudy in some way. Rudy says he arrived at the cottage and says that a drug dealer friend of his is parked at the cottage gate with its lights on and sure enough thegarage camera captures Rudy's arrival and there is a car there with its lights on. And it's not there when Meredith came home.

You have a link to these picture from the CCTV camera?

 

[Vixen]

Problem is, the inside of the purse wasn't tested for DNA, except for some: "materiale granulare di colore giallo-marrone":
[qimg]http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/PSslideMKpurse.jpg[/qimg]
So your (and Guede's btw) argument is a non-argument...

Come on, Methos. Rudy was either an opportunist thief or he was not. If he was, he would have just ran off with the whole bag.

The facts are:

1. a long blonde hair was found across the top of the bag.
2. the bag was placed on the bed after the murder, suggesting scene setting.
3. looking through the keyhole, it is what is seen
4. the people who undressed and posed Mez' body, at leisure, are the same people who designed the rape scene
5. they are the same people who carefully staged the burglary in Filomena's room. A shard of glass from there is found in here. The trail of blood into Filomena's room, is from Amanda.
6. paper scattered over the flat as part of the fake burglary, is also scattered over the duvet which covers the body, proving it happened after the murder.
7. the setting up of two different scenes (burglary and rape, as evidenced by bruising) indicates the perps had plenty of time on their hands, unlike a real burglar/rapist who would flee ASAP, as Rudy did.
8. the beneficiary of such a scene would be an insider aiming to divert suspicion away from themself.
9. that the aim was victimisation of Mez alone, is indicated by the fact Amanda's rent money was not touched, nor Filomena's gold jewellery and two laptops lying around.


Cui bono, Methos, cui bono from making the scene appear to police as though some external party broke in and murdered Mez, with the apparent motive of uncontrollable lust? Who had motive to victimise Mez?

That gives you the clue as to who did it.

 

[acbytesla]

The breakdown car did happen between 22:00 and 22:30 1st Nov 2007. One car contained, a man, woman and child. A car mechanic reported seeing a dark car parked inside the cottage drive.

Phone records show Kokomani was in the region on both 31st October and 1st November. (See attached.)

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.c...-Report-police-Latella-Kokomani-phone-use.pdf

He recounted to police details of the breakdown car which ATT was unknown to the public.

As a cocaine smuggler, he almost certainly was there to supply illegal drugs.

his phone shows him there at 8 pm ...not later than that. As for whether the car breakdown was known to the public I don't buy that. Can you prove that? Nope.

 

[acbytesla]

You have a link to these picture from the CCTV camera?

I'll find it. I have to search again.
CCTV Images Of White Car
The images below are from Sant’Antonio Car Park CCTV across the street from the cottage. They show a white car that was parked outside the cottage for about 20 minutes around 8pm on November 1, 2007. The car then starts up and enters the Sant’Antonio car park. In Rudy Guede’s German prison diary he writes about heading to the cottage and seeing a white car with headlights on as he arrived, a detail only he could have known because he was there. In other words, he didn’t get it from the media. The driver of the car has never officially been identified and is a witness to Rudy Guede going to the cottage just like he said he did around 7.51pm while Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were watching Amélie at Sollecito’s apartment.

Rudy Guede prison diary: [1]

As I arrived in front of the house, I noticed a white car with headlights on, and a Drug-Dealer I often saw on Garibaldi Avenue, but I didn’t make much of this, and I went into the yard
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/cctv-images-of-white-car/

 

[Vixen]

Koko departed for Albania shortly after the murder. He came back and with a lawyer went to see Mignini. He was part of the burglary with Rudi and maybe a third man. He knew his phones were pinged and wanted to be sure he took the first step.

It's possible he killed Meredith but more likely Rudi other accomplice - the same guy that broke into the lawyers' office and fronted the loot to Rudi. A member of the Albanian gang trained as a commando and used his training to put a knife through Meredith's neck.

There's a pro and a con to this argument, Grinder. The pro is the stab to the neck is similar to a halal butchering (AIUI Albanians are Muslim).

The con? No way would a commando botch up the fatal wound so badly. The victim died in more agony than a farmyard animal.

 

[Vixen]

his phone shows him there at 8 pm ...not later than that. As for whether the car breakdown was known to the public I don't buy that. Can you prove that? Nope.

Only because he didn't use his phone or receive a call/message in the next couple of hours.

He claimed to take a photo of Raff IIRC threatening him, which is why Raff chased after in a rage. He claimed to show it around a bar, but deleted it, Kokomani claims, "because it was too dark".

Mignini said Kokomani was a good witness as he knew details of the scene that only someone there would have been able to describe. His eye-witness account is not only visual, it is also aural (hearing the thuds).

Just because others may not have heard it, means nothing. Some people are more aural than others.

 

[acbytesla]

Only because he didn't use his phone or receive a call/message in the next couple of hours.

He claimed to take a photo of Raff IIRC threatening him, which is why Raff chased after in a rage. He claimed to show it around a bar, but deleted it, Kokomani claims, "because it was too dark".

How convenient.

Mignini said Kokomani was a good witness as he knew details of the scene that only someone there would have been able to describe. His eye-witness account is not only visual, it is also aural (hearing the thuds).

Just because others may not have heard it, means nothing. Some people are more aural than others.

Oh give me a break Mignini is a moron and he's desperate. The encounter Kokomani describes is absurd. His testimony was ridiculous. He was laughed out of court.

 

[Vixen]

Ah yet more scientific illiteracy from a pro-guilt ARGUMENT!

1) Digestion and motility (or "intestinal transit") are two different things. Digestion refers to the process related to the breakdown and absorbing of food; motility is the passage of food through the gastrointestinal system.

2) Motility of food from the stomach into the duodenum (and beyond) is usually COMPLETE within 5 hours. That is to say, a meal eaten at 12pm has usually entirely exited the stomach (such that the stomach itself would be totally empty, provided that no other food had been consumed since) by 5pm. But that's entirely irrelevant to our case: the time period we're interested in is the time when food first STARTS to exit the stomach. A medium sized meal can typically take 1-3 hours from start to finish to exit the stomach. In Kercher's case, none of her meal had yet started to leave her stomach, let alone all of it.

3) Motility is only very loosely related to tolerance or inability to process certain proteins (e.g. gluten intolerance or lactose intolerance). Tolerances etc are a DIGESTION issue, not a motility issue. If a person with gluten intolerance eats, say, a slice of bread, that bread is still broken down and liquefied in the stomach in the normal way, and passed through to the duodenum and small intestine in the normal way, but the small intestine is then unable to process the gluten (which then passes out of the body in excrement).

4) Motility through and beyond the stomach has little or nothing to do with glycaemic indices of carbohydrates. All carbohydrates are simpler molecular structures than proteins or fats, and all carbohydrates are thus processed more quickly by the stomach (and exit the stomach first). Simple sugars in liquid form (e.g. a can of coke) will be processed very quickly owing to the suspension of the sucrose in water, but so will a more complex carbohydrate in liquid or semi-liquid form such as porridge. In short, glycaemic indices have pretty much nothing to do with this discussion, and it's an illustration of the illiteracy of the ARGUMENT that they were ever brought up at all.

5) If ARGUMENTS are going to be made on medical/physiological issues in relation to this case, please could they be based on proper scientific facts and knowledge, and with the commensurate level of intellectual rigour? Thank you in advance for your cooperation and adherence to those principles, pro-guilt commentators.

You have failed to factor in the effect of extreme danger. Mez was targetted from circa 20:45 (when the kids switched off their phones), were likely lying in wait for her as she arrived home. She probably put up a superb act of playing along with the interlopers deranged with drugs, eating and dining with them, but only managing one mushroom that stuck in her gullet in her fright. Her digestion stopped immediately, as she went into hypervigilence desperately figuring out ways to extricate herself from the esclating threat of the jeering taunting maniacs.

quote: Dr. Herbert M. Shelton once described an experiment performed on a cat that had just finished eating. The cat’s stomach was observed with X rays, and digestion was proceeding normally. A dog was then brought into the room and the cat took notice. Immediately all digestive processes in the cat halted. Its stomach ceased moving and the digestive juices stopped secreting. When the dog was removed, the cat’s digestion resumed.

Food cannot be digested or assimilated in the presence of fear. If we eat when we are worried, depressed, tense or fearful, the digestive system cannot handle the food properly. It may be only partially digested and lay fermenting or putrefying in the stomach.


Read more at http://www.rawfoodexplained.com/nut...f-diet-and-digestion.html#8I4llocf7HzSfkDH.99

 

[Bill Williams]

Mignini said Kokomani was a good witness as he knew details of the scene that only someone there would have been able to describe. His eye-witness account is not only visual, it is also aural (hearing the thuds).

Just because others may not have heard it, means nothing. Some people are more aural than others.

Once again, you have to dismiss Judge Massei's own evaluation of Kokomani as a witness. This is yet another example of something asserted by Mignini that even the convicting judge did not believe.

To uphold the thesis of non-acquaintance (Sollecito's defence team) pointed to the unreliability of witnesses Gioffredi and Kokomani, and this Court considers reasonable what they highlighted on this point: the activity on Raffaele Sollecito’s computer makes an encounter with him in the time-span indicated by Gioffredi scarcely plausible; also the red coat which Amanda apparently wore at that time, a coat of which there was no other evidence, does not allow [us] to consider as believable the circumstances related by Gioffredi, and according to which he allegedly also saw Rudy accompanied by Raffaele, as well as by Amanda and by Meredith.

The inconsistencies in Kokomani’s statements are even more obvious. It is enough to think of the black bag which then revealed itself to be two people and of the throwing of olives and of a mobile phone which had allegedly been used to make a video which was subsequently shown to others and, furthermore, the time he had seemingly seen Amanda, a time predating her arrival in Italy and the mention of an uncle of Amanda’s of whose existence no one was able to supply confirmation.​

I suppose this is another crumb that Judge Massei threw to the defence!? LOL!

 

[Bill Williams]

You have failed to factor in the effect of extreme danger. Mez was targetted from circa 20:45 (when the kids switched off their phones), were likely lying in wait for her as she arrived home. She probably put up a superb act of playing along with the interlopers deranged with drugs, eating and dining with them, but only managing one mushroom that stuck in her gullet in her fright. Her digestion stopped immediately, as she went into hypervigilence desperately figuring out ways to extricate herself from the esclating threat of the jeering taunting maniacs.

Factoid built on factoid built on factoid. The drug K and RS used that night was marijuana. Your 20:45 time barely gives time for Raffaele's friend to see Amanda at Raffaele's door.

You are suggesting something with no evidence that this happened this way, other than your hyperbole and a well placed, it was "likely".

Here you now have developed an as-yet-unknown theory of the crime:

"A dinner-game gone wrong."

 

[Vixen]

Once again, you have to dismiss Judge Massei's own evaluation of Kokomani as a witness. This is yet another example of something asserted by Mignini that even the convicting judge did not believe.

​

I suppose this is another crumb that Judge Massei threw to the defence!? LOL!

Bill, as you are perfectly aware, Kokomani deliberately botched his testimony. He even claimed he had been offered €100K in a witness tampering scenario. Bongiorno has never sued him, or Aviello, who made the same claim, for libel or calunnia.

 

[acbytesla]

Factoid built on factoid built on factoid. The drug K and RS used that night was marijuana. Your 20:45 time barely gives time for Raffaele's friend to see Amanda at Raffaele's door.

You are suggesting something with no evidence that this happened this way, other than your hyperbole and a well placed, it was "likely".

Here you now have developed an as-yet-unknown theory of the crime:

"A dinner-game gone wrong."

Amanda thinks she has to work and Rudy is about to do a neighbor a favor. His good deed for the day and is told at 8:40 his services are not needed. And Amanda says "Honey, don't you think Amelie was a sweet movie? Since we now have time, let's go murder my roommate.....turn your phone off".

Seriously.

 

[Vixen]

Problem is, the inside of the purse wasn't tested for DNA, except for some: "materiale granulare di colore giallo-marrone":
[qimg]http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/PSslideMKpurse.jpg[/qimg]
So your (and Guede's btw) argument is a non-argument...

As you can see, if Rudy was the "only perp", he left a lot of blood on the inside handle of the door. There is no sign of any blood inside the bag/purse.

 

[Vixen]

Factoid built on factoid built on factoid. The drug K and RS used that night was marijuana. Your 20:45 time barely gives time for Raffaele's friend to see Amanda at Raffaele's door.

You are suggesting something with no evidence that this happened this way, other than your hyperbole and a well placed, it was "likely".

Here you now have developed an as-yet-unknown theory of the crime:

"A dinner-game gone wrong."

Not a factoid, Bill. This is all available evidence in the court documents.

You know as well as I do, a lot of street marijuana is adulterated - "skank" - or laced with acid or PCP.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/11/06/skunk-cannabis-top-10-fac_n_4226260.html

Both Amanda and Raff - separately - vowed in writing they would never take drugs again.

 

[Bill Williams]

Not a factoid, Bill. This is all available evidence in the court documents.

You know as well as I do, a lot of street marijuana is adulterated - "skank" - or laced with acid or PCP.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/11/06/skunk-cannabis-top-10-fac_n_4226260.html

Both Amanda and Raff - separately - vowed in writing they would never take drugs again.

You've invented a factoid of a "dinner-game gone wrong," because you cannot account for the digestion evidence.

That's the way you work. Make it up as you go.

 

[acbytesla]

You've invented a factoid of a "dinner-game gone wrong," because you cannot account for the digestion evidence.

That's the way you work. Make it up as you go.

Who thinks like this? If the evidence and facts aren't on my side, make them up?

She still dismisses the antenna evidence about the 10:13 phone call because Massei is smart and he knows how to understand data communications but ignores what he has to say about Kokomani. She says that Kokomani deliberately screws up for some bizarre made up reason....

The real reason is she doesn't like that his testimony was absurd and she doesn't like that.

 

[acbytesla]

Delete

 

[Grinder]

You have failed to factor in the effect of extreme danger. Mez was targetted from circa 20:45 (when the kids switched off their phones), were likely lying in wait for her as she arrived home. She probably put up a superb act of playing along with the interlopers deranged with drugs, eating and dining with them, but only managing one mushroom that stuck in her gullet in her fright. Her digestion stopped immediately, as she went into hypervigilence desperately figuring out ways to extricate herself from the esclating threat of the jeering taunting maniacs.

quote: Dr. Herbert M. Shelton once described an experiment performed on a cat that had just finished eating. The cat’s stomach was observed with X rays, and digestion was proceeding normally. A dog was then brought into the room and the cat took notice. Immediately all digestive processes in the cat halted. Its stomach ceased moving and the digestive juices stopped secreting. When the dog was removed, the cat’s digestion resumed.

Food cannot be digested or assimilated in the presence of fear. If we eat when we are worried, depressed, tense or fearful, the digestive system cannot handle the food properly. It may be only partially digested and lay fermenting or putrefying in the stomach.


Read more at http://www.rawfoodexplained.com/nut...f-diet-and-digestion.html#8I4llocf7HzSfkDH.99

Is that why people under extreme danger **** themselves?

Let's move on from cats. Obviously you couldn't find a better study.

Not to mention if your precious birds were telling the truth, the digestion, emptying the stomach, should have been half over.

 

[Vixen]

Who thinks like this? If the evidence and facts aren't on my side, make them up?

She still dismisses the antenna evidence about the 10:13 phone call because Massei is smart and he knows how to understand data communications but ignores what he has to say about Kokomani. She says that Kokomani deliberately screws up for some bizarre made up reason....

The real reason is she doesn't like that his testimony was absurd and she doesn't like that.

From Massei (summary by Catnip TJMK):

22:13:19 In her last call for the day, Meredith’s English phone does a 9-second GPRS connection to IP address 10.205.46.41, via cell 30064, covering Via della Pergola and which does not cover Via Sperandio (p337, p350). This might have been an MMS message from its size, 4708 bytes received, 2721 bytes sent; alternatively, it may have been a brief WAP Internet connection, but, based on the byte traffic, with no fruitful interaction occuring; alternative three, it was an unintended WAP connection with a delayed disconnection. Since the MMS was not stored in the phone’s memory, the Court inferred that Meredith simply deleted it without opening it (p351, p352, p353)

 

[Vixen]

You've invented a factoid of a "dinner-game gone wrong," because you cannot account for the digestion evidence.

That's the way you work. Make it up as you go.

Not only did Mignini bring it up (IIRC before Micheli), but so did Raff’s diary written in prison which talks of a dinner of stir fry mushrooms and vegetables.