7/16 to 8/5

[kelloggirl]

A Newsweek video today mentioned they'll close arguments around Sept. and could take a month.

This weekend is the last Defense testimony's, as I understand it.


September, holy crap! And then a month after, wow. That is a looong way away.

Thank you for the info though.

[Jester]

I personally don't take much account of the personal behavior because I think its too subjective. jmo.
As I often say I think the interrogation was corrupt. Based off the fact it wasn't filmed was intentional.
Does anyone read her Nov 4th email before the "interrogation"?
It aligns exactly with what she said on the stand ...in public, and on film. The real fact is she changed her story very little, it was the interrogation that was the Lie.

recent article. I think this is very true and well stated for this case.
(and is why they will be found guilty.)

It is not uncommon in Italy to give equal weight to circumstantial evidence, especially in cases where the defendants have been caught making false statements. Knox, during an interrogation days after the murder, admitted to being in the house when Kercher was killed, and then accused Patrick Lumumba, her former boss, of the murder (he was later cleared).

Only from the media and police interrogation reports has everyone created their impression of her being a liar. very strange.
If we are to believe that then why can't we believe the Nov 4th email before the interrogation, which matches her public statement that was filmed and not taken in a very suspicious room?

Is it just me or does anyone else smell foul play on the police intentionally not filming this damning interrogation?


:biggrin:
but all this comes from my agreeing with the perspective that Rudy did this alone! :smile: Like Migninni.....we can all create things to match our theory.:thumbsup:


Yes, then there's Rudy.

Rudy was the one looming around in the dark, knocking on the doors at 8:30pm when no one was home, then coming back for his "date" with Meredith, he said they had intimate conversations and heavy sexual petting.

instead of cartwheels, this type of witness testimony is more interesting imo....


In the statement to police, Tramontano said he and his girlfriend were awakened by noises in their apartment early on Sept. 1 or 2, 2007. When Tramontano looked down from his loft bed, he saw a young man going through his belongings. Tramontano chased the man downstairs as he tried to escape, but the front door was locked. The thief -- who Tramontano identified as Guede -- first used a chair to keep Tramontano at a distance, and then pulled out a switchblade knife. Guede, who escaped, had stolen a 5 euro bill and three credit cards.

profiling 101?

I don't think it is possible to conclude that because something is not videotaped, there must be something to hide. It's more likely that the police did not expect anything of significance to be presented during questioning with Amanda so they did not videotape the questioning.

Do you have a link to the Nov 4 email that you mention?

Regarding the validity of circumstantial evidence in Italy, it is no different in the US. Circumstantial evidence has always been considered to have equal weight, especially prior to the use of DNA.

Amanda's reputation as a liar comes from her false accusations against Patrick, the bar owner. No one forced her to falsely accuse anyone, and it was her choice to point the finger at Patrick. She continued to stand behind that lie until Patrick was able to prove his alibi. Two weeks after Patrick was arrested, he was released and, only then, did Amanda admit that she lied about Patrick. It is neither media nor police interrogations that resulted in Amanda's reputation as a liar, but her own voluntary written statement and words that ruined her reputation.

Rudy has been convicted of the crime, and I don't think anyone is disputing his involvement (other than Rudy). This does not imply that Amanda or Raffaele are innocent. According to some investigators, there appeared to be more than one person involved in the murder. According to Amanda, she was in the house at the time of the murder and heard a scream. The scream has been confirmed by the neighbor. According to witnesses, more than one person was heard running from the murder scene at the time of the murder.

[CHITCHAT]

My gosh this case has gone on forever...Even if she gets 20yrs she'll be out after the trial as time served...Let this be a lesson. never do a crime or get close to a crime or witness a crime in a european country.

[Debb]

SlickLime, Which inappropiate layout by the sisters are you referring to in your post?

[Jester]

SlickLime, Which inappropiate layout by the sisters are you referring to in your post?

The question wasn't addressed to me, but I believe this is the reference: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1199111/Revealed-Foxy-Knoxys-sisters-posing-happily-macabre-photos-house-Meredith-Kercher-died.html

[KnoxCase]

I don't think it is possible to conclude that because something is not videotaped, there must be something to hide. It's more likely that the police did not expect anything of significance to be presented during questioning with Amanda so they did not videotape the questioning.

Do you have a link to the Nov 4 email that you mention?

Regarding the validity of circumstantial evidence in Italy, it is no different in the US. Circumstantial evidence has always been considered to have equal weight, especially prior to the use of DNA.

Amanda's reputation as a liar comes from her false accusations against Patrick, the bar owner. No one forced her to falsely accuse anyone, and it was her choice to point the finger at Patrick. She continued to stand behind that lie until Patrick was able to prove his alibi. Two weeks after Patrick was arrested, he was released and, only then, did Amanda admit that she lied about Patrick. It is neither media nor police interrogations that resulted in Amanda's reputation as a liar, but her own voluntary written statement and words that ruined her reputation.

Rudy has been convicted of the crime, and I don't think anyone is disputing his involvement (other than Rudy). This does not imply that Amanda or Raffaele are innocent. According to some investigators, there appeared to be more than one person involved in the murder. According to Amanda, she was in the house at the time of the murder and heard a scream. The scream has been confirmed by the neighbor. According to witnesses, more than one person was heard running from the murder scene at the time of the murder.

i've a different perspective on the interrogation.

1) All of this "Patrick" "liar" media hanging, accusations occurred from the interrogation.
As you say, Amanda was in the house hearing a scream...this is from the same interrogation. It goes on and on...the media "Amanda being at the cottage" articles were all from the same Interrogation.

One has to decide if you believe Amanda or the police about the interrogation.

for some reason, i believe Amanda's story on this one subject.

Jus my perspective....

1) I have heard first hand these type of pressured behind closed door interrogations.

1a) My son's been thru these type interrogations in the US, threatened to be beaten, whopped side of the head, threatened to be sexually molested in jail by the police's "insiders'...all to gain evidence, to solve their case. They never really carried out any of this to the kids back then, and the police are generally great guys and its just a tactic to get an answer. Intimidate= Answers.

Would you film this? Of course not!

Amandas interrogation story sounded all too familiar.

Especially she said it wasn't they beat her, it was a tap on the head, but the pressure the crayz good cop/bad cop game....and this was about muder! not some teens on beer being interrogated.

2) The Interrogation wasn't important enough to film?

She'd been speaking with the police for 2 to 3 days, the Nov 2, the Nov 2 evening, then the tour of the cottage and then she went back again that night and then called in again then later.....then late in the evening she was made a suspect, after interviews after interviews.

They definitely, knew she had something they wanted due to her "odd and suspicious behavior", and the pressure to get this case solved quickly was most likely very intense, as it should be.

2a) red-flag-
The Forensics scenes are filmed, the courts are filmed, the CCTV film.....the Interrogation was most likely, imo, NOT filmed intentionally.
It should have been filmed, they knew it was important.
This wasn't their first case. red-flag.

3) Another red-flag-
is the professional interrogators knew she should have a defense attorney present. They should have gotten one for her.

4) red-flag-
and we laugh at corruption, conspiracy people and shun them in denial...but proof is in all the leaks to the media that it is going on all the time in this case. There's a mountain of evidence of the leaks, all one has to do is read the internet!! Both sides guilty of this!!

so again the interrogation was very damning to the accused, unfairly imo.

PART 2: :thumbsup:

That doesn't mean there isn't a lot of evidence the accused have to explain away.
There's a lot of very damning evidence.
Like the mixed blood in the bathroom, footprints, circumstantial issues.

example- Micheli was very sold on the witness too, as you said..the witness had heard the running. he mentions in detail his belief in this witness so much, due to her living there for a long time and knowing the sounds. The Witness was not paid money and probably had no personal gain.
Circumstantial?- The cellphones off, the witnesses seeing them, the long list of abnormal "reports" of what they said.

But leaving the Interrogation out of the equation-

I give the accused full benefit of a chance to speak and a person can allow this easily. Amanda spoke up, no doubt there. She said her "alibi".

Ok!!! It was great to hear it fomr her instead of the media!! not the police!, not the prosecution!, not a closed door interrogation media leak!! from Amanda herself.

but new questions arise.

She said there was no blood in the bathroom the day before the Nov 2 shower.

So that puts a question up, how did Amandas blood get mixed with Merediths in the bathroom then, I wonder? :confused:

This to me is the beauty of a case thats working to find the truth.

BTW- Amanda's Nov 4 email, is several places on the internet.
search: amanda knox nov 4 email, its the same on almost all sites pro and con.

I think of all the evidence, that really bugs me is the interrogation and the bra-clasp.

the rest of it seems fair game to debate....

[KnoxCase]

i don't see the defense play as the route I would be going?

a call from a cousin, is that as powerful as debating dna on the knife in more depth? the knife is her main damning murder connection/ issue.
the blood spots probably second, and then the footprints.

the behavior and circumstantials, should be a lower priority, imo.

the single murderer theory went by too.
the entire prosecution case is based on the multiple murderer theory. I mean, if Lalli had said "it was a solo attacker..."
Mignini wouldn't have been out looking for multiple murderers. obviously.
(maybe I'm wrong on this..)
Shouldn't the defense be spending a lot more time on the solo-attacker theory, convincing the jury?

I'm no lawyer.....maybe the defense feels the "character" witnesses is huge in this case.

the charges are only important if A) murder is beat. the rest are lal theft, staging, etc..

I'd be beating down the "motive" path too... shooting holes in the "motive" theory of the Mignini.

a cousin's phone call? for the finale of the defense? :confused:
can anyone enlighten me on the defenses strategy?

[n/t]

i don't see the defense play as the route I would be going?

a call from a cousin, is that as powerful as debating dna on the knife in more depth? the knife is her main damning murder connection/ issue.
the blood spots probably second, and then the footprints.

the behavior and circumstantials, should be a lower priority, imo.

the single murderer theory went by too.
the entire prosecution case is based on the multiple murderer theory. I mean, if Lalli had said "it was a solo attacker..."
Mignini wouldn't have been out looking for multiple murderers. obviously.
(maybe I'm wrong on this..)
Shouldn't the defense be spending a lot more time on the solo-attacker theory, convincing the jury?

I'm no lawyer.....maybe the defense feels the "character" witnesses is huge in this case.

the charges are only important if A) murder is beat. the rest are lal theft, staging, etc..

I'd be beating down the "motive" path too... shooting holes in the "motive" theory of the Mignini.

a cousin's phone call? for the finale of the defense? :confused:
can anyone enlighten me on the defenses strategy?


Yah...the cousin's testimony is a doozer. Amanda was scared that there was a killer murdering girls but yet wanted to remain in Italy. What a gal.

Maybe the defense encountered some problems...from the link

The trial began in January and the 80 prosecution witnesses finished giving evidence in May, while the defence had less than half that number and several have failed to appear.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/5857474/Amanda-Knox-feared-a-killer-on-loose-after-Meredith-Kercher-murder-court-told.html

[Jester]

i don't see the defense play as the route I would be going?

a call from a cousin, is that as powerful as debating dna on the knife in more depth? the knife is her main damning murder connection/ issue.
the blood spots probably second, and then the footprints.

the behavior and circumstantials, should be a lower priority, imo.

the single murderer theory went by too.
the entire prosecution case is based on the multiple murderer theory. I mean, if Lalli had said "it was a solo attacker..."
Mignini wouldn't have been out looking for multiple murderers. obviously.
(maybe I'm wrong on this..)
Shouldn't the defense be spending a lot more time on the solo-attacker theory, convincing the jury?

I'm no lawyer.....maybe the defense feels the "character" witnesses is huge in this case.

the charges are only important if A) murder is beat. the rest are lal theft, staging, etc..

I'd be beating down the "motive" path too... shooting holes in the "motive" theory of the Mignini.

a cousin's phone call? for the finale of the defense? :confused:
can anyone enlighten me on the defenses strategy?

It does seem like the majority of evidence has not been addressed, or at least it has not been convincingly negated. It's still possible that the point raised by Raffaele's lawyer will save the day. That is, the phones were disposed of with a time line such that it was impossible for Raffaele to have been on the computer, go to the house, commit murder, and make the calls to the bank outside of the house. He has also said that Amanda was with him. If that is given proper consideration, they should both be released. However, the time line versus the DNA evidence, the mixed blood, the footprints, and Amanda's voluntary statement ... hard to say. It's also possible for a computer IT guy like Raffaele to monkey with the time stamp on a computer, so the computer time factor may be given less weight.

[Jester]

Yah...the cousin's testimony is a doozer. Amanda was scared that there was a killer murdering girls but yet wanted to remain in Italy. What a gal.

Maybe the defense encountered some problems...from the link

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/5857474/Amanda-Knox-feared-a-killer-on-loose-after-Meredith-Kercher-murder-court-told.html

It is very surprising that half of the defense witnesses failed to show up. I wonder if they were weak witnesses with little to contribute to the facts of the case, or what happened.

[Jester]

Here's another link: http://www.komonews.com/news/local/51025942.html

This describes Amanda's cousin as the first witnesses, not the last:

"The defense began by calling Knox's second cousin, Dorothy Nair to the stand."

Her cousin gave her excellent advice on what to do when associated with a crime in a foreign country. It's too bad Amanda didn't listen.

"When her roommate's body was discovered, her cousin called Amanda several times trying to convince her either to come to Germany to be with her, to go home to Seattle, or to go to the American Embassy where she would be safe. "

Why would Amanda say she discovered the body, and if she was frightened that the killer was still on the loose, why didn't she go to Germany, Seattle, or the embassy?

"She said she had been with her boyfriend Rafaelle Sollecito, and that she came home in the morning to take a shower. When she discovered Kercher's body, Knox said she was shocked and frightened that the killer was still on the loose."

note: phone calls between Amanda and cousin were taped

[KnoxCase]

i just went thru all the hearing articles i could find, in short, its obvious each judge found them guilty, and continued the prison holding and eventually to this trial with these charges.

whats odd to me is the judges didn't really agree with each other's "recreation", for example Judge Mateini stating Raffaele 3.3inch knife was the murder weapon etc...Patrick was a deranged wanna be rapist or something. Riccarelli, the Supreme Court....then Michelia throwing out Mignnini's "satanic comic book motive"...but still keeping the mulitpl murder scenario as his "bible".

JMO, over all, in summary, the courts seem to uphold 100% of the Prosecutions Forensic work and the Multiple Murderer theory.

What I deem as not important is not very productive, which is the personality thing, the behavioral aspect. Seems the Judges all are supicious of the "story changes or lack of details being remembered" that were presented to the court. Again the Prosecutions story.

I read numerous pages of Amanda's testimony on the interrogation. Its sickening and hopefully the police will be put under investigation for this. I didn't realize Raffaele story change was also during his interrogation in the other room....supposedly? I mean we didn't hear it first hand. But the police came to Amanda and told her Raffaele changed his story...so the court only heard it from the Prosecution, so of course the believe it.

And hopefully someday they'll pass a law that all interrogations must be filmed with defense representation present.
But its too late for this case.

Raffaele was really looking good, footprints were argued as blobs of course, most of them are Rudys. He didn't have anything at the murder scene.....until the bra clasp and the murder knife was form his place.

Maybe its just me but the defense, for example, the burglary-staged, did the professional ever climb in the window? or did they just throw rocks thru the window? I mean, why wouldn't he climb on thru? to prove a point?
how Lame a defense? on charge E. How will the prosecution determine who staged the break-in, or just say Raffaele and AManda did it? without fingerprints, just circumstantial I suppose....they were there (if found guilty of Murder). Amanda and Raffaele are up for looting and stealing credit cards and cash...it just doesn't fit. Charge D.

Rudy was found NOT guilty of Robbery by Micheli...even though he is the only one who was a burglar? what a bizarre court case.

The interrogation again is Charge F for Amanda only. If the interrogation is accepted she'll be found guilty of this too.
If the jurors believed her testimony, she'll get off this.
I wonder if the Jurors slept thru her testimony ? I doubt it.
I might have had her testify last to leave a strong impression, the best witnesses, or the infamous Torre Forensic expert.

in a good way for the jurors, they will get a break. come back refreshed.

they'll be able to go read everything on the internet on this case.

:confused:

[Jester]

Defense (Raffaele) testifies DNA on bra clasp contaminated

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hUwNJptZbnCIsu90VqOzxS7S2fzQD99H0V701

Newsweek Overview:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/206765

The Newsweek article is worth a read as it addresses what is appropriate in Italy when on trial for murder.

[Jester]

From the Newsweek article, it sounds like Amanda has a big problem on at least two fronts. The stories that she and Raffaele gave police are contradicted by fact. For example, they claim they woke up at 10 in the morning, but cell phones were turned on at 6. That's a problem. There's also the grocer who claims Amanda bought bleach at the time when Amanda says she was sleeping and cell phones say she was not. There's the receipt for bleach that was in Raffaele's apt. from the same grocer. That, with several other claims they made that are contradicted by facts, detracts from their credibility.

Secondly, the mixed blood in the bathroom is a big problem. Although it is conceivable that the blood could have been mixed at any time prior to the murder, Amanda testified that there was no blood in the bathroom the day before the murder. That would have been a good time to lie, because if she had said that there could have been blood in the bathroom the day earlier, the prosecution could not irrefutably conclude that the mixed blood occurred at the time of the murder.

[KnoxCase]

Defense (Raffaele) testifies DNA on bra clasp contaminated

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hUwNJptZbnCIsu90VqOzxS7S2fzQD99H0V701

Newsweek Overview:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/206765

The Newsweek article is worth a read as it addresses what is appropriate in Italy when on trial for murder.

a rule book of sorts would help...but they had expensive lawyers that should have kept them better informed of "local ways" and dress codes.

I liked this line from the article...so true.

Even if the defense satisfies every unanswered question this Friday and Saturday, it's hard to say what it will mean to the jury.

[Jester]

a rule book of sorts would help...but they had expensive lawyers that should have kept them better informed of "local ways" and dress codes.

I liked this line from the article...so true.

Even if the defense satisfies every unanswered question this Friday and Saturday, it's hard to say what it will mean to the jury.

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with the "rule book" or lawyer to keep them informed. If you've traveled anywhere in Italy, you've probably been drawn into any of the beautiful churches. There's always a huge sign at the entrance to the church making it clear that proper dress is required. If proper dress is required to be a tourist in a church, it's fair to conclude that proper dress is required to attend church or court. Keep in mind that church and state have been intertwined for centuries, so it's fair to assume that formality levels are the same for both. Many restaurants, everywhere in the world, have the same signs about proper dress. It's not possible to wander into a nice restaurant in most places without dressing for the occasion, and the same goes for court. Even in Seattle, when attending court people are unlikely to show up without careful consideration for what to wear.

[KnoxCase]

From the Newsweek article, it sounds like Amanda has a big problem on at least two fronts. The stories that she and Raffaele gave police are contradicted by fact. For example, they claim they woke up at 10 in the morning, but cell phones were turned on at 6. That's a problem. There's also the grocer who claims Amanda bought bleach at the time when Amanda says she was sleeping and cell phones say she was not. There's the receipt for bleach that was in Raffaele's apt. from the same grocer. That, with several other claims they made that are contradicted by facts, detracts from their credibility.

Secondly, the mixed blood in the bathroom is a big problem. Although it is conceivable that the blood could have been mixed at any time prior to the murder, Amanda testified that there was no blood in the bathroom the day before the murder. That would have been a good time to lie, because if she had said that there could have been blood in the bathroom the day earlier, the prosecution could not irrefutably conclude that the mixed blood occurred at the time of the murder.

not to say, others have found this very critical in their character to be a "liar" or "trustworthy" which means everything, but what people say and remember is very subjective to me. in the middle of a chaotic situation people remember little bits, sometimes not much. Even in calm normal life, does a person remember what they ate for lunch, if they called their friend at 12am or 5pm?
too much subjectivity to reading into things is possible.

the blood evidence is really an issue they should have worked on, and maybe they still can? but I never studied it that much.
There's a certain number of samples. The multiple DNA is always questionable, I read, as its like a tainted sample, its mixed.

Did they look for other peoples DNA? What was the defense doing? Why didn't they look and possibly find Lauras or Filomenas DNA?
Maybe it would cost too much?

The prosecution gets theirs done for government money. So they can test or not test, its all up to them.

The defense has no say, as I see it. They said there were no Amanda fingerprints, but that was a lie, they didn't look. The fingerprints were all over the home, guitar, the room...etc...

again the Prosecution has full upper hand on whats to be tested and whats not to be tested.

I wonder about the following witnesses, and the Mother Knox mentioing in an article they gave the Proisecution all the time they wanted and their hurrying the defense. I hope this isn't the truth.

The courts can't deny them time for witnesses can they? Its not a soccer game with a timed game is it?

I would hope they get all the time they need for witnesses.

but then again there has to be some time line? I guess the Judge determines if its relevant or not...

[KnoxCase]

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with the "rule book" or lawyer to keep them informed. If you've traveled anywhere in Italy, you've probably been drawn into any of the beautiful churches. There's always a huge sign at the entrance to the church making it clear that proper dress is required. If proper dress is required to be a tourist in a church, it's fair to conclude that proper dress is required to attend church or court. Keep in mind that church and state have been intertwined for centuries, so it's fair to assume that formality levels are the same for both. Many restaurants, everywhere in the world, have the same signs about proper dress. It's not possible to wander into a nice restaurant in most places without dressing for the occasion, and the same goes for court. Even in Seattle, when attending court people are unlikely to show up without careful consideration for what to wear.

not been to italy.

but their clothes look very average to me anyway. actually around here, I would consider what the Knox girls are dressed in these pictures very conservatively.

the new fashions are showing down to the pubic lines, having your thong showing and mid waist available for all to see. (i left out Tattoo's and earrings everywhere you can imagine). lol...


maybe they should have worn black robes?

this has nothing to do with the case does it..I hope not.

[Jester]

not been to italy.

but their clothes look very average to me anyway. actually around here, I would consider what the Knox girls are dressed in these pictures very conservatively.

the new fashions are showing down to the pubic lines, having your thong showing and mid waist available for all to see.

maybe they should have worn black robes?

Would you show up in court, with a relative on trial for murder, wearing that? I don't think I would ... not here, not there.

[Jester]

Interview with Amanda's best friend, where she tries to set the record straight about Amanda's character.

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/05/14/crimesider/entry5013544.shtml

[Jester]

not to say, others have found this very critical in their character to be a "liar" or "trustworthy" which means everything, but what people say and remember is very subjective to me. in the middle of a chaotic situation people remember little bits, sometimes not much. Even in calm normal life, does a person remember what they ate for lunch, if they called their friend at 12am or 5pm?
too much subjectivity to reading into things is possible.

the blood evidence is really an issue they should have worked on, and maybe they still can? but I never studied it that much.
There's a certain number of samples. The multiple DNA is always questionable, I read, as its like a tainted sample, its mixed.

Did they look for other peoples DNA? What was the defense doing? Why didn't they look and possibly find Lauras or Filomenas DNA?
Maybe it would cost too much?

The prosecution gets theirs done for government money. So they can test or not test, its all up to them.

The defense has no say, as I see it. They said there were no Amanda fingerprints, but that was a lie, they didn't look. The fingerprints were all over the home, guitar, the room...etc...

again the Prosecution has full upper hand on whats to be tested and whats not to be tested.

I wonder about the following witnesses, and the Mother Knox mentioing in an article they gave the Proisecution all the time they wanted and their hurrying the defense. I hope this isn't the truth.

The courts can't deny them time for witnesses can they? Its not a soccer game with a timed game is it?

I would hope they get all the time they need for witnesses.

but then again there has to be some time line? I guess the Judge determines if its relevant or not...

If we accept that stress caused Amanda to remember less than she should, how does that account for her stating that Patrick committed the murder, and not correcting that statement at any time later. Patrick was only released because he proved an alibi. It was only then that Amanda admitted that she knew Patrick was not involved. No amount of stress could explain that 2-3 week gap in facts.

I think the defense should have attacked the mixed blood sample on the toilet. It should have been clarified whether the mixed sample was visible or required luminol for identification. If Amanda didn't see it, it doesn't mean it wasn't there. Amanda and Meredith shared the bathroom so it's conceivable that the blood could have gotten there through other means. Furthermore, the blood should have been tested to determine what type of blood it is.

Testimony by Raffaele's defense made a strong argument that the bra clasp DNA sample was contaminated, particularly since the sample was picked up, put back down, and picked up again. I do wonder what Raffaele's DNA was doing in Meredith's bedroom, since there's no evidence that he was in the room at any time. Is the defense suggesting that Raffaele's DNA traveled from Amanda's bedroom to Meredith's bedroom on it's own, or were the gloves put on when the investigators went into the house, did they touch many things throughout the house, and then go into Meredith's room? If contamination occurred at the house, as defense says, where did the DNA come from?

[KnoxCase]

I just came across this on Raffaele's Nov 3rd 2007 interview with Kate Mansey.

<snip> Raffaele talking...
"But when she went into the bathroom she saw spots of blood all over the bath and sink. That's when she started getting really afraid and ran back to my place because she didn't want to go into the house alone. So I agreed to go back with her. When we walked in together, I knew straight away it was wrong. It was really eerily silent and the bathroom was speckled with blood like someone had flicked it around, just little spots. <Raffaele Nov 3 interview with Kate Mansey.>

strange what little comments are out there that pop up over time.

tiny little spots, the pictures show it was very clean,.....all this "how could she take a shower in a Bloody room!" was greatly misinformed.
I doubt the jurors are so ill informed.
http://www.tgcom.mediaset.it/fotogallery/fotogallery3634.shtml?9http://www.tgcom.mediaset.it/fotogallery/fotogallery3634.shtml?9


Yes, I was reading a bit about DNA tonight. Its easily transferred and this was from a world reknowned person. I forget his name but it was on Nova talking about DNA and tracking Killers. There's plenty of room for error and human "bias" too. I didn't know that. Total different impression than Stefano gave about it not being easily transferred.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sheppard/courtroom2.html

aaahhh........The bra-clasp, thats one of my pet peeves! lol.....I think its more the fact it laid around forever,6 weeks to 46 days or so... and miraculously put Raffaele there. just my gut instinct. the witrness today said dust, some said the police walking around....

but I see the point, how was Raffaele DNA put there?

But its also been media-ized, there was numerous people on the infamous clasp? I wonder which it is, one article said Rafaele and Rudy, some said Raffaele and Amanda?

The defense today said "DUST!!! carried it!!!!"....thats for the juror.

the bra clasp was almost too perfect, for my skeptical self. But we're not accusing the prosecution henchmen of any wrong doings. :biggrin:


btw.Jester.....I re-read Knox's translated testimony and she mentions her pc hardrive was at the cottage, and all that was on it was pictures. and nothing to prove she had pc activity at Raffaele's Nov 1.
I forget which page it was on. Amandas hardrive was a no-show nothing issue, wonder why she wanted it enough to ask the Judge for it in her appeal? I'll stretch and guess it was Meredith pics and her smiling.. in other words nothing.

[KnoxCase]

i know I harp on the interrogation....:rolleyes:

but, here's an old clip.

Police testimony later revealed that nearly all members of Sollecito's immediate family also had their phones tapped.

When family members and friends came to visit Knox in prison, interpreters joined a police officer in an adjacent room hooked up with live audio and video.

They have all this, and there was much much more surveillence going on...

and they couldn't film and tape their own Interrogation?

I have to give the Interrogation yet another <red flag>......

[KnoxCase]

yes, Jester...to your question.

No, I don't dress casually to a court hearing or trial.

Actually most courts I been to have a balif, the balif refuses entrance if dressed "below standards".

I actually saw a person sent home to change clothes.

[KnoxCase]

i was just going back in time on this case....wondering how it started this direction.

Dr. Lalli. the planter of the "seed" of this case.
His report set the stage for the Investigation direction. His autopsy is the best evidence for this entire case for the prosecution, in addition to the blood drops in the bathroom. imo. (a pro- "lone wolf" theorist)

Dr, Luca Lalli and his findings of the multiple attacker? What specifically made him lean to multiple attackers, I wondered?

best I could get was this: Specifically, Maresca said Lalli pointed to the nature of the multiple wounds afflicted -- more than 23 to her cheeks, neck, legs and palms of her hands -- consistent with strangulation, bruising and stab wounds.

this is why they felt, to the best of their unbiased knowledge, it was multiple attackers. but what "if" they'd said a solo attacker, now that there's so much more information known. what "if" they had known Meredith was a kick boxer, a fighter, and Rudy's MO, and somewhat athletic.

what "If" ?

Lalli had said one attacker, Rudy would be obviously it. His DNA, his running away to Germany, the bloody murder knife pattern on the bedsheet (that was never found).

We know, Migninni's crew would have had the whole case built around one murderer, with Rudy a easy case.

the fingerprints which were matched to his recent burglary was perfect and traceable, the footprints, the DNA inside and outside Meredith, his DNA in her purse. His MO of burglary, high windows ability, rock/windows, his recent visits to the house with solid witnesses from the guys downstairs, his waste left in the toilet, his own stories once pieced together by Micheli, his own testimony he was there, before the murder, during, and possibly afterwards (he didn't flee to Germany right away)...credit cards, theft again his MO.

Its highly believable the murder was extremely physical as Merediths family said she'd fight to the end. And Rudy was somewhat athletic....yes, a violent scene with a non accommodating victim.

I do think Dr. Luca Lalli had no motives, so he is the prosecutions best witness, yes. Even "lone wolf theory" people tend to listen openly to Dr. Lalli.:wink:

He has been around and gave his knowledgable diagnosis of the murder and recreation of the murder.

but Dr. Lalli said he leaned it was multiple attackers, but it could have been one attacker.

snips >
Dr Luca Lalli, the pathologist who conducted the original autopsy, said he saw no need for a second post-mortem.

Dr Lalli said he had carefully recorded the original autopsy with photographs and video.

However, it has emerged that Dr Lalli was only able to get access to Miss Kercher's corpse more than 24 hours after the crime was committed.

Consequently, the time of her death had to be guessed from the remains of food in her digestive system.

The request for a second autopsy was made by lawyers of Patrick Diya Lumumba, a Congolese bar owner, who has now been freed but remains a suspect.

Snip>
However Dr Lalli said that there did appear to be evidence of "some form of sexual activity" and that he could not rule out that she had been forced to take undergo a sex act "under the threat of violence."


Lalli also told the court the victim's body did not have the usual signs indicating a rape, but he did not rule out the fact that the young woman could have been forced to have sex under threat. He said Lalli told the court there were indications that Kercher had had sex not long before she was killed, and that, based on the bruises on the victim's body, the sex "was not consensual."

Nov 4, 2007

Autopsy article-
Italian media have reported that authorities suspect Kercher may have known the killer, but are not ruling out any possibilities -- including a burglary gone wrong.

April 3, 2009

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/404590_knox03.html
Lawyers emerging from the closed session reported a pivotal moment toward the end of arguments when the presiding judge asked the then-coroner, Dr. Luca Lalli, if, after looking at all of the facts before him, he believed Kercher's wounds were inflicted by more than one person.

He responded affirmatively.

Under cross-examination, defense attorneys asked if he could exclude the possibility that she was killed by a single attacker, and he said he could not.

can a case be unwound? put in rewind? Dr. Lalli couldn't rule it out that it was a Lone - Wolf murderer, but all those bruises and knife wounds, such a physical murder, its hard to comprehend one murderer doing so much damage. He leaned to the multiple attackers theory.

[Jester]

i was just going back in time on this case....wondering how it started this direction.

Dr. Lalli. the planter of the "seed" of this case.
His report set the stage for the Investigation direction. His autopsy is the best evidence for this entire case for the prosecution, in addition to the blood drops in the bathroom. imo. (a pro- "lone wolf" theorist)

Dr, Luca Lalli and his findings of the multiple attacker? What specifically made him lean to multiple attackers, I wondered?

best I could get was this: Specifically, Maresca said Lalli pointed to the nature of the multiple wounds afflicted -- more than 23 to her cheeks, neck, legs and palms of her hands -- consistent with strangulation, bruising and stab wounds.

this is why they felt, to the best of their unbiased knowledge, it was multiple attackers. but what "if" they'd said a solo attacker, now that there's so much more information known. what "if" they had known Meredith was a kick boxer, a fighter, and Rudy's MO, and somewhat athletic.

what "If" ?

Lalli had said one attacker, Rudy would be obviously it. His DNA, his running away to Germany, the bloody murder knife pattern on the bedsheet (that was never found).

We know, Migninni's crew would have had the whole case built around one murderer, with Rudy a easy case.

the fingerprints which were matched to his recent burglary was perfect and traceable, the footprints, the DNA inside and outside Meredith, his DNA in her purse. His MO of burglary, high windows ability, rock/windows, his recent visits to the house with solid witnesses from the guys downstairs, his waste left in the toilet, his own stories once pieced together by Micheli, his own testimony he was there, before the murder, during, and possibly afterwards (he didn't flee to Germany right away)...credit cards, theft again his MO.

Its highly believable the murder was extremely physical as Merediths family said she'd fight to the end. And Rudy was somewhat athletic....yes, a violent scene with a non accommodating victim.

I do think Dr. Luca Lalli had no motives, so he is the prosecutions best witness, yes. Even "lone wolf theory" people tend to listen openly to Dr. Lalli.:wink:

He has been around and gave his knowledgable diagnosis of the murder and recreation of the murder.

but Dr. Lalli said he leaned it was multiple attackers, but it could have been one attacker.

snips >
Dr Luca Lalli, the pathologist who conducted the original autopsy, said he saw no need for a second post-mortem.

Dr Lalli said he had carefully recorded the original autopsy with photographs and video.

However, it has emerged that Dr Lalli was only able to get access to Miss Kercher's corpse more than 24 hours after the crime was committed.

Consequently, the time of her death had to be guessed from the remains of food in her digestive system.

The request for a second autopsy was made by lawyers of Patrick Diya Lumumba, a Congolese bar owner, who has now been freed but remains a suspect.

Snip>
However Dr Lalli said that there did appear to be evidence of "some form of sexual activity" and that he could not rule out that she had been forced to take undergo a sex act "under the threat of violence."


Lalli also told the court the victim's body did not have the usual signs indicating a rape, but he did not rule out the fact that the young woman could have been forced to have sex under threat. He said Lalli told the court there were indications that Kercher had had sex not long before she was killed, and that, based on the bruises on the victim's body, the sex "was not consensual."

Nov 4, 2007

Autopsy article-
Italian media have reported that authorities suspect Kercher may have known the killer, but are not ruling out any possibilities -- including a burglary gone wrong.

April 3, 2009

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/404590_knox03.html
Lawyers emerging from the closed session reported a pivotal moment toward the end of arguments when the presiding judge asked the then-coroner, Dr. Luca Lalli, if, after looking at all of the facts before him, he believed Kercher's wounds were inflicted by more than one person.

He responded affirmatively.

Under cross-examination, defense attorneys asked if he could exclude the possibility that she was killed by a single attacker, and he said he could not.

can a case be unwound? put in rewind? Dr. Lalli couldn't rule it out that it was a Lone - Wolf murderer, but all those bruises and knife wounds, such a physical murder, its hard to comprehend one murderer doing so much damage. He leaned to the multiple attackers theory.

Rudy also claimed there was another person at the house at the time of the murder. DNA and footprint evidence supports the theory that more than one person was involved so, although the multiple assailant theory was put forth by one person, it is supported by evidence.

You suggest "Consequently, the time of her death had to be guessed from the remains of food in her digestive system." Not so. Stomach contents are typically unreliable for determining time of death and (IIRC) can only narrow time to a 4-6 hour time period. I think the time of death has been based on the time that Meredith was walked home after dinner and movie, Rudy's testimony, the scream heard by the neighbor, and cell phone pings from the nearby lot.

[Jester]

I've been reading about Terri Lynne McKitrick and Michael Rafferty, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Solicito. Paul and Karla Homolka.

Does the profile fit?

[KnoxCase]

Rudy also claimed there was another person at the house at the time of the murder. DNA and footprint evidence supports the theory that more than one person was involved so, although the multiple assailant theory was put forth by one person, it is supported by evidence.

You suggest "Consequently, the time of her death had to be guessed from the remains of food in her digestive system." Not so. Stomach contents are typically unreliable for determining time of death and (IIRC) can only narrow time to a 4-6 hour time period. I think the time of death has been based on the time that Meredith was walked home after dinner and movie, Rudy's testimony, the scream heard by the neighbor, and cell phone pings from the nearby lot.

True. thats a good point. with Rudys stories one has to look for the consistency's, or repeated subjects/mentions.

He did say in nearly every article I read there was another person. It changed from an Italian man and Amanda not there, to other storys...eventually, pointing the finger to Amanda and Raffaele.

The DNA is not believable to me on the bra clasp. The footprints would mean more to me against Raffaele...Jmo.

Of course the Judges are buying it all, and I will be surprised if they aren't found guilty.

The Court has refused anything but guilty, when the defense has gone against the Forensic team and tainted evidence.
The Court has found them both guilty 4 times already, with the same defense more or less.

Judge Matteini-Guilty
Judge Riccareli Guilty
Supreme Court- Guilty
Judge Micheli- Guilty....

now the Judge Massei? gee! what are we to guess the outcome will be?

but I'll always believe their innocent.

I didn't suggest "consequently", that was the Dr. Luca Lalli stating "consequently". The bolds were snips from articles.
The time of death moved around a bit in the beginning, and then they somehow moved it to the current because of the girls stating they ate at 6pm. That was when it shifted to 9pm-11pm (and stayed). as I understand it.

I didn't understand at first articles, Dr. Lalli thought the dinner was eaten at 9pm so the autopsy placed the time of death much much later.

no one will really ever know, except Rudy....imo. (being a lone-wolf theory fan):biggrin:

[KnoxCase]

I've been reading about Terri Lynne McKitrick and Michael Rafferty, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Solicito. Paul and Karla Homolka.

Does the profile fit?

Paul and Karla Homolka story was sickening. Paul had a life-long history of rape and issues. ... the couple. geeez...it went on forever, years.

not sure how this applies here in this case? the Knox/Sollecito case doesn't have any planning or history, as far as I can see. But I can possibly be open to the correlation of certain aspects...of possibilities the couple, the young, looking normal.

The Paul Bernando showed he had a long long life full of rape/abuse issues though. Long before murder even, which was an accident supposedly by Karla.


In this case, there were no records of violence of either party. No previous accusations at all, quite the opposite.
Amanda and Raffaele have a clean record of 21 yrs. and many normal friends ..and then all of a sudden they are "murdering liars"?
(after the Nov 5th-6th Prosecution Interrogation. )

I been wondering about Leaks..........
Its against the law to leak information until trial, so I was told.
It was said this interrogation information wasn't released until after Judge Matteini report was released Nov 9th 2007.(first hearing)

Yet, as the article here on Novembre 7, 2007 shows.....the interrogation info. was leaked to the press before Judge Matteini report was released, how?
Which most likely insinuates it was received by the reporting journalist before being released on the 7th of Nov. maybe Nov 6th.


http://www.corriere.it/english/articoli/2007/11_Novembre/07/perudia_murder.shtml

I wonder why the defense didn't bring this up? Maybe it holds nothing to them. I'm sure their aware of it.

what "if" the entire interrogation was the Lie? Would it have changed anything?

Yes, the infamous changing of stories would have never happened.
The damning admission to being there at the cottage wouldn't have occurred for Amanda. Amanda wouldn't have been a "liar"? Patrick wouldn't have been accused due to a text message.

as many say "we have no reason to not believe the prosecution and police." but I beg to differ in this case. why not?

could it have been a rush to build a case quickly? "multiple attacker" per Dr. Lalli theory satisfied......case closed!

but from a defense strategy I don't know what good it would do to pursue the interrogation?

so what if the interrogation was found to be as Amanda said?
would it matter?

or would it be another dead end, like the pc hardrive?

[KnoxCase]

Dr. Torre- (Defense)
When asked if there could have been two knives involved, a theory put forth by the prosecution when it had to admit that the smaller wounds could not have been made by the big kitchen knife, Torre replied, "It would be the first time in history that a murder was done with two knives."

Is this true? 1st time in history?

Prosecutions, Dr. Lalli, stated the murder weapon was a "pen knife" in a Nov 4 article. (small knife)??
(Prosecution has a 6.5" knife as the murder weapon)


??????
the small knifes don't match the mattress knife pattern in blood, neither did the prosecutions 6.5" blade.

Where is the murder weapon?
(IMO Rudy tossed the knife in Germany with his tennis shoes...he admitted the shoes were tossed, but not the missing knife.)
>>Torre, a professorial type with unruly white hair, also said the knife had an unusual "regularity" to the top edge of the blade that also seemed to have a notch on it similar to a "survival" knife of the kind used by a "Rambo."

snip>
According to Maresca, the pathologist indicated that the bruising on Kercher's body indicates that more than one person was involved. Bongiorno countered that while Lalli did not rule it out, the injuries were "modest" compared to those you would find in a group killing.

Torre said he felt Kercher was murdered when she was on her back, her head lifted "a palm and a half off the floor." Francesco Introna, Sollecito's consultant, told the court last month that Kercher was knifed from behind, a lone killer holding her chin with one hand and the knife in the other. The prosecutors also believe she was attacked from behind, but think she was held by Sollecito and Guede, with Knox wielding the knife.

Torre said it was "more logical to think" that she was killed from the front, and that "it seems difficult that it was from behind," but did not totally discount the idea.

[KnoxCase]

it's odd both sides seem to ignore the pattern of the murder weapon on the bloody bed sheet.

they go on their way, describing a knife, and guessing at depths of wounds etc.. unbelievable non-blood dna smaples argued etc.. how did it get to the murder scene etc.. why didn't the murderer just use one fomr the drawer at the cottage..etc.. Raffaele was a knife carrying person, so was Rudy caught carrying knife's etc...

but neither the defense nor the prosecution says "and our knife matches the bloody pattern on the bed sheet!!!"


the bloody knife pattern on the bedsheet is like a pink elephant in the room.

Its a long looking knife to me, not a small pocket knife.

jmo.

I'd like to see more pictures of the pattern I only keep finding the same one or two that get repeated around the net.

[dgfred]

Well I even wonder if it IS a impression of a knife... you know how totally different things can be seen by different people... and made by something quite different than what the form looks like. But it does look like a large knife :confused: .

[KnoxCase]

this is wierd?

NOV 5
Luca Lalli said autopsy evidence showed "....... He also said the weapon used to kill Ms Kercher was a penknife.

Nov 9
Judge Matteini first hearing.... Guilty verdict....
This objective fact cannot but represent a grave indication of guilt on the part of Sollecito Raffaele which is deepened further if combined with the removal from his person of a flick knife with an 8.5cm blade, (3inch) defined by the pathologist as compatible with the possible murder weapon.

Nov 30, 2007- Judge Riccarelli...(knife changed size contradicting the Dr, Lalli? 6.5 inches??)

A knife found in Sollecito's house contained DNA from Knox on the handle and from the victim on the blade.

April 1, 2008 Supreme Court- Guilty verdict (the knife changed sizes somehow, but it's not reallymentioned it doesn't align with the autopsy? how strange?)

Supreme Court:
Even if your DNA is not on your kitchen knife,(6.5inches) this cannot only be used against Amanda insofar as it has been certified that the knife came from your house and Meredith never went to your house. Therefore, until we have proof to the contrary, we are assuming that this knife was under your control at all times and that it was used at Meredith's house.


Francesco Maresca, who represents the family of Meredith Kercher- Dr. Bacci told the court that whoever attacked Kercher first tried to strangle her, and then stabbed her in the throat, possibly with two different knives.
>Bacci said that the knife the prosecutors believe is the murder weapon is compatible with the largest and deepest cut in Kercher's throat but is not compatible with another, smaller wound. This is the first time a witness for the prosecution has mentioned the possibility that more than one knife might have been used.



Carlo Torre-Defense renowned forensic consultant in Italy and has worked on a number of high-profile cases. (but now the Defense is agreeing with the Prosecutions Autopsy!!???? back to the 3 inch knife!!.But the Prosecution doesn't agree with their own Autopsy??.?)

"The smaller wound is absolutely incompatible with the knife in question," he testified. "For the larger wound, I cannot rule it out, but it could have been made by a myriad of knives," he added in reply to a question from the prosecutor. "Everything leads me to believe that that is not the murder weapon," he said, referring to the knife found in Sollecito's home.
> he believes the three cuts to Kercher's throat were made by a smaller knife, with a blade that was, at most, 3 inches long. He feels the the big wide slash to her throat was made by the sawing action of the smaller knife.

Judge Micheli's Report- Guilty Verdict
Rudy- Nov 1, after leaving the cottage and eating Kabob and returning,

>Returning to Via della Pergola, the G. Returning to Via della Pergola, (the Guede). he knocked again and again had no answer, in a few minutes, however, had actually arrived Kercher., who had asked how long waiting for her.
R. had replied that there was only one minute, even if they had passed some more, the girl had smiled, took the key from the bag and both were entered into the house. More or less, it was 21:00.
> <he said the Itlian Man had killed Meredith while he was pooping, after having consensual sex with Meredith..>

to his address with a knife he held in his left hand, which did not indicate the length or other characteristics
> other story> Rudy- just before the person with the knife, which had forced him to back up to fall to the ground when he was back in the living room he had taken a chair against tirargliela and try to move it away from himself, corrected the first, a po 'hasty and implausible, in reference to the time of that species colluttazione defining "sudden" an attack in December that he considered it lasted five minutes or more.
>
Pressed by investigators with the description of the knife, especially with regard to the possibility that it was Raffaele Sollecito, the Guede. stated that he was a 'put up for seeing pictures and photographs
>Finally, speaking of the conversation via skype with the B., the accused claimed to have responded to requests to G., sometimes a little 'in a hurry and so influenced by the situation: when the friend had asked if it was A. to kill M., had said no, because in those times stated that his mind was focused only on the male figure with a knife.
> successive comparisons led one to bring the fingerprints in question to footwear indicated by G., the accused claimed that he had thrown in a box while in Germany.
>Poorly significant, all wanting to give, it is the contribution of the medico-legal advisors of Defense S. about the mark of a knife on the mattress, those experts who wish to print a double, almost parallel, apart from the relief that the blade of the knife elusive would be around 13-14 cm., (13 centimeters are 5 inches)

Judge Michaeli on Rudy-
the accused claimed that he had thrown in a box while in Germany.

(so Rudy admits to throwing his tennis shoes into a "box" in Germany, box a dumpster........I suspect the knife was with the bloody tennis shoes.? who knows.)


Dr. Lalli and Torre agree on the smaller knife.
The prosecution disagrees with them both? thats odd?

[Jester]

it's odd both sides seem to ignore the pattern of the murder weapon on the bloody bed sheet.

they go on their way, describing a knife, and guessing at depths of wounds etc.. unbelievable non-blood dna smaples argued etc.. how did it get to the murder scene etc.. why didn't the murderer just use one fomr the drawer at the cottage..etc.. Raffaele was a knife carrying person, so was Rudy caught carrying knife's etc...

but neither the defense nor the prosecution says "and our knife matches the bloody pattern on the bed sheet!!!"


the bloody knife pattern on the bedsheet is like a pink elephant in the room.

Its a long looking knife to me, not a small pocket knife.

jmo.

I'd like to see more pictures of the pattern I only keep finding the same one or two that get repeated around the net.

In the US, and Italy, a murder weapon is not required to prove murder, but it's nice if you have it. It is a bit irrelevant whether the prosecution has produced a murder weapon, isn't it? Rudy could easily have taken the murder weapon on the train, and ditched it. The blood pattern on the bed sheet indicates that the murderer put the knife down at some point during the murder ... before or after Meridith's throat was slashed? ... and then picked up the knife and fled the scene. Maybe the murderer was in the bathroom while the knife sat on the bed.

[Jester]

this is wierd?

NOV 5
<respectfully snipped for space>
Judge Michaeli on Rudy-
the accused claimed that he had thrown in a box while in Germany.


How is the murder weapon relevant?

It's not exactly a make it or break it in the case since a murder weapon is not required for conviction ... anywhere.

[Jester]

Well I even wonder if it IS a impression of a knife... you know how totally different things can be seen by different people... and made by something quite different than what the form looks like. But it does look like a large knife :confused: .

Sure ... maybe it's a handprint or someone spilled their dinner in the bedroom murder scene ... but not likely. The bedsheet blood pattern is most likely the imprint of the murder weapon ... something that was most likely disposed of between Italy and Germany by Rudy ... on the train.

[KnoxCase]

yes, it sounds logical if one can make any logic of Rudy's story.

I was reading as much of his tales as possible. Judge Micheli mentions sevaral of Rudys storys and how pieces have to be deciphered from his bs.

His first tale was a Italian man only did it.

Then on his return he was interrogated by Stephni and Mig....and then it was Raffaele and Amanda. But Raffaele did the murder, Amanda was at the door way.

Then the third tale was similar but he added the Italian man details and the fact Rudy was himself forced back into the living room where he grabbed a chair for protection... and as the murderer fled he saw Amanda running away...

I'm not real detailed on his story, but its something like this...

The fact Rudys footprints were in the living room, makes me wonder if he wasn't trying to explain away things. And the oddity he used a "chair for protection" comment, exactly as the burglary he committed where the person whose home he broke into used a chair to protect himself from Rudy holding the knife, ....makes me wonder. Rudy is probably a spider-web of deceitful thinking. A few years on the Psychiatrist bed might get some truth.


It's an interesting case.

I still find one thing hard to explain.
This is such a violent murder, touching grabbing, holding, close distance, sloppy, amateurish... one could say.....

there is no Amanda DNA anywhere in the murder room/scene.

And the Prosecution putting her as the brain child, murderess, main knife person, they surely spent extra effort to find Amandas DNA, more so than anyone, I would think?...yet they didn't find any.

this fact of evidence, or non-evidence, makes me think she wasn't in the room. it also in an odd way gives credibility to the Prosecutions Forensic team......because the Forensic team, or someone with access, surely could have put Amandas DNA in the room, if they truly were corrupt.

could Rudy's story be true.....Amanda was in the doorway during the murder?

someone give Rudy some truth serum.

[KnoxCase]

I agree the Dual-DNA Knife is the only thing placing Amanda in the crime scene- the bedroom.

Compare Amanda to Rudy, with his DNA very obvious.
And the only person admitting to being there is Rudy, who said consistently Amanda was not in the bedroom.


So without the prosecutions knife, all the other evidence against Amanda, would only contribute to the other charges of staged break-in, theft etc..

But there is no charge against anyone for a clean-up. Not sure why? It seems the prosecution made a huge interest from Nov 2 on

A) Murder
B) Transporting the Knife
C) Violent Sexual Assault
D) Theft
E) Staged Break-In

F) Amanad's-Slander to Patrick aka..the Interrogation...or as Monty Python skit...the Spanish Inquisition!

[KnoxCase]

Amanda hasn't been found guilty yet for charge (F).
was it Amanda or the police interrogators who mentioned Patrickls name first? This is the deciding point, imo.

Amanda said they shuved the phoine in her face and said who was this, etc...

the police said they gave her crumpets and tea and washed her feet.


the whole arguing point about the interrogation is that it wasn't filmed, nor was there a defense lawyer brought in. Then add in the odd letter "gift" she gave the police, which just keeps the bizarre stuff going in this case...and arguing over interpretations.

This is one issue, I side with Amanda/Defense on , almost due to a "default" because the police failed to film it, and failed to have her any kind of representation. There would be no question about it had it been correctly filmed.

The police are held to a higher standard, especially with a 20 something kid who has never been in a jail before and is a foreigner.


we'll see...and then there can be the Appeals Trial as I was told. So if they lose they appeal.

Don't you imagine, Patrick already has million dollar book deals or movie consultant offers?

[JD1974]

I have been reading here for a long time, just rarely post. To me the reason there is no Amanda DNA is because she wasn't in the room. I think she was telling the truth when she said she was outside of the room with her ears plugged at the time of the murder. Funny, Rudy mentions Amanda was outside of the room also.

I think she is guilty of being there while the murder happened (which IIRC makes her guilty of murder) but didn't actually participate in the murder itself.

[KnoxCase]

yes as much as I think of the lone wolf theory as my "bet"....or getting my vote.

the possibility she was there seems to kind of fit. but raffaele was more the main attacker/final wound if this theory is followed, right?

but it seems to kind of fit, and would answer the odd odd stories, so many...like raffaele saying "i poked meredith with that knife!" or some crazy crap like that. and people not remembering.....and early on I read the police were interrogating everyone Nov 2,3,4...and they wanted males, because the knife wound aligned with a strong slash/mark of a male.

but then I don't believe Rudy was innocent at all and I don't believe his DNA inside meredith was consensual....which always leads me back to the Lone Wolf theory.

[KnoxCase]

interesting.

So do you think she left at 9:10pm approx and returned at 1am?
Or was it the story where Raffaele and Amanda left the cottage and then he went home and she stayed downtown?

You got me reading Raffaele stuff.

Here's a good old one... Nov 9 2007

>In fact, the checks by the forensic police, under the duvet that covered the body of Meredith show three footprints of which one, the only one which it was possible to analyze because of the others where indefinite, shows itself to be compatible in shape and dimensions with the sole of the shoe taken from Sollecito Raffaele.

Clearly it is possible to contest that Sollecito Raffaele, in the audience with judge, affirmed that he passed the entire night between November 1 and 2 with Knox Amanda.[…]

The presence of Sollecito in Meredith's room can be confirmed by the footprint found underneath the duvet which her body was covered with. […]

This objective fact cannot but represent a grave indication of guilt on the part of Sollecito Raffaele which is deepened further if combined with the removal from his person of a flick knife with an 8.5cm blade, defined by the pathologist as compatible with the possible murder weapon.

So again this was Judge Matteini, making decisions 1st Hearing, based off Dr. Lallis and of course greatly influenced by Mignini's theory too.

I'm going to look at the footprint but it was found to be Rudys as I understand it.

I will assume after grueling DNA searches the small flick knife was clean, as the 3inch knife vanished from the Prosecutions Evidence, and the 6.5 inch knife became their new proof. (very odd, imo?)

anyway.... the tennis shoe footprint. I think it turned out to be Rudy's too?

So yes the bra-clasp is the only evidence and it should have been thrown out imo....its too marginal, too old, too subjective to be THE big evidence against him.

Rudy says it was Raffaele! geeez :rolleyes:

[KnoxCase]

whats your scenario on the Nov 1 evening of the crime?

yes, Nov 2 is where all the stories started going into the "red flag" zone, all the odd little things brought about a lot of attention.
to put a persons life under a microscope like this case is interesting.
every little thing magnified.

look at the character damage to Raffaele from the innocent website picture of him in the toilet paper and butcher knife. Its easy for a human mind to create their own impression by the media and pictures.
He collects knifes!!! He must be the murderer!!
Judge Matteini really had Raffaele in a horrific bad light.
If he is innocent what a complete nightmare it would be?

[KnoxCase]

yes, its very different in Itlay...its not 911.

I always thought everyone made too big an issue of Rafaeles phone call to his sister being after the postal police arrived, the time stamp showing he called the 112 after the police arrived.....it wasn't a small issue with Judge Micheli, he perceived it as lying.

but I always think about this "scene", :mellow:
The Police already are there...
so wouldn't that postpone Raffaele calling his sister/police, a high up in the Police/ Carabinieri,?? It would me...I mean why call the police if the police are already there!!???

But these "cell phone" police are of a different type. They refused to kick down the door of the bedroom, it wasn't in their "authority".

So maybe Raffaele calls his sister after he realizes these guys aren't going to do much, He calls his sister ,in the Military Police/Carabineri, for advice! (I don't see what is so strange about that?)
She tells him to call 112 right away....he does.

I just looked up some Wikipedia....kind of confusing.

In Italy there are five police forces: Polizia di Stato, Arma dei Carabinieri, Guardia di Finanza, Polizia Penitenziaria and Corpo Forestale dello Stato.

Police, with the cell phones= Postal Police
Post and telecommunications

The Polizia Postale investigates all crimes that use communications as part of its modus operandi such as computer hacking, online child pornography, credit card fraud, spreading computer viruses or software copyright violations are areas that the Polizia Postale would investigate. <aka Postal Police>

The others are...

Safety
Questura (central police headquarters) 075 56891
Police 113
Carabinieri (military police) 112
Highway Police 075 506751
Fire Brigade 115
Emergency Roadside Service ACI 116

[KnoxCase]

But the procescution was trying to make it relevant. That was their evidence to tie Amanda and Rafaelle to the murder. They are saying the murder weapon is that knife found with the DNA at Rafaelle's. If that ISN'T the murder weapon, then you cannot use that as evidence tying them to the murder. That is one less thing pointing to Amanda and Rafaelle.

It appears that now it is clear that it isn't the murder weapon it is deamed irrelevant to their guilt. It is totally relevant. It has been part of their supposed damning evidence to tie them to the murder. But it isn't the murder weapon??? It's no longer relevant? Sure it is. It is relevant in the fact that it is no longer available to use as evidence against them. One less tie to the crime.

If you keep deeming evidence as irrelevant then eventually what do you have? No evidence. So with no evidence tying them to the murder what do you have? Not guilty.

I am sorry, but I find this crazy. It is typical behavior of conspiracies. You prove something that the conspiracy believer believed was evidence, as not evidence, they deem it irrelevant. "ahh....well a murder weapon is not necessary to prove a crime." well, it was important enough before when you thought it WAS the weapon tying Amanda and Rafaelle to the murder. Now that it isn't the murder weapon just pretend it is not relevant. No. That isn't how it works.

It is now just one more piece of evidence that has been disproved.

wiki-
Italy is also the EU-15 country ranked the lowest in the Corruption Perceptions Index,[4] indicating a high degree of perceived corruption among public officials.[5]

[Emerald]

It is my opinion AK was in the home when the murder occurred. She did not participate.

It is also my opinion RS was not.

Although, I have to say my information on this case is very sparse. Others can receive the same information and process it differently.

[KnoxCase]

Raffaele is a hot topic this week....

from the Solecito Defense, CCTV. It also includes the cell phone logs.
it shows a very plausible scenario of the time of police arrival, moving the timeframe away fomr the prosecutions "info".
(I think the main plug is that the prosecution used only one <frame> to show the Postalk POlice arrive at 12:36- before Raffaeles call...but the CCTV shows/as some see it...the car arrives at 12:36 and drives on by then backs up and arrives again. Supposedly they couldn't find the cottage and took awhile. The time stamp, with this passing the cottage etc.. puts the postal police arriving after Raffaele phone call to 112.

So he possibly wasn't lying as Judge Micheli accused. He did call the Carabinieri before the Postal Police arrived...




http://lnx.giovinazzo.it/images/postale.pdf

I translated the summary....


Raffaele Sollecito has telephoned to Carabinieri to 12:51:40


Carabinieri are arriving at 13:32


Postal Police arrive at 12:58:55


Raffaele Sollecito has telephoned to Carabinieri at 12:51:40


and 12:54:39, therefore before the arrival Polizia Postale

[Jester]

But the procescution was trying to make it relevant. That was their evidence to tie Amanda and Rafaelle to the murder. They are saying the murder weapon is that knife found with the DNA at Rafaelle's. If that ISN'T the murder weapon, then you cannot use that as evidence tying them to the murder. That is one less thing pointing to Amanda and Rafaelle.

It appears that now it is clear that it isn't the murder weapon it is deamed irrelevant to their guilt. It is totally relevant. It has been part of their supposed damning evidence to tie them to the murder. But it isn't the murder weapon??? It's no longer relevant? Sure it is. It is relevant in the fact that it is no longer available to use as evidence against them. One less tie to the crime.

If you keep deeming evidence as irrelevant then eventually what do you have? No evidence. So with no evidence tying them to the murder what do you have? Not guilty.

I am sorry, but I find this crazy. It is typical behavior of conspiracies. You prove something that the conspiracy believer believed was evidence, as not evidence, they deem it irrelevant. "ahh....well a murder weapon is not necessary to prove a crime." well, it was important enough before when you thought it WAS the weapon tying Amanda and Rafaelle to the murder. Now that it isn't the murder weapon just pretend it is not relevant. No. That isn't how it works.

It is now just one more piece of evidence that has been disproved.

Meredith had 23 separate injuries. Whether the knife was 3.5" or 6"? There's some disagreement on that. There's also disagreement as to whether the evidence was handled correctly, and whether the evidence was contaminated.

It's possible that Amanda is completely innocent, that her confession was coerced, that her subsequent voluntary statement was a lie, that she couldn't keep her story straight because she smoked pot, that she couldn't keep her story straight because she was confused, that she couldn't help but accuse Patrick because ... well ... just because. The problem of keeping the story straight is a bigger problem for Amanda than the murder weapon. Roman law is not as forgiving of confusions and untruths as American law. Unfortunately for Amanda, it is not just the evidence that is considered, but her demeanor, her actions, her statements, and her apparent greater interest in sex with Raffaele after the murder, than grief. She also has the other problem of being able to describe the actual scene of Meredith on the floor under some coverings when the police state that the door was forced open and immediately closed while Amanda was not near the door. That is, she was able to describe the inside of the room without anyone being able to corroborate that she could have seen it in the time the door was quickly opened and closed. I think these are the problems that could convict Amanda ... not just one knife that may or may not be the murder weapon - depending on which testimony you believe.

[Jester]

It is my understanding from testimony and the phone records, Rafaelle called his sister before the postal police arrived.

Called sister, called police (aka 911), postal police arrived, then regular police arrived.

From what I have read, they were surprised how fast the police got there after they had called, until they realized it wasn't the actual police, but the postal police.

It is my impression that are using these things to try to convince the jury/judge that AK and RS are lying. Since the evidence isn't working for them, try to catch them in a lie to make them look guilty. They seem to focus more on these aspects than the actual physical evidence. The strategy is to show them as liars. Liars = guilt, regardless if the evidence doesn't support the theory.

It is kind of going on here on the boards. People focus on things that aren't really evidence. Behavior, what she said during her interrogation, the cell phones being turned off, etc.

For example. The cell phones being off. They focused in court about AK's reasoning for turning them off. The prosecutor made it seem like she was telling two different stories. Making her look like a liar. Yet, her defense brought up that it wasn't two different stories. She used both excuses (1. not getting called back by Patrick and 2. Saving battery time) at once. They had transcripts of the interrogation where she specifically said both. It wasn't a story change, she used both reasons for turning off the phone. Yet in court, the prosecution makes it seem like she was CHANGING her story, to make her look like she is lying. If she looks like a liar, it helps the prosecution. Why does she need to lie about her phone being off, if she isn't guilty? Well, she didn't lie. Her story didn't change, they left a significant part of the detail out of it.

Then they go on to nitpick why she deletes the incoming texts, but not the outgoing. Again, this is to try to make her look like she is lying. What is the relevance? Really? They can get cell phone records of what the texts actually said. There isn't anything incriminating. But instead of showing cell phone records that are incriminating (because they don't have any) they try to make up stuff.

For example:
(these are not actual quotes, just the drift of it....)
"You deleted your incoming messages."
"yes"
"why?"
"To make room"
"but you didn't delete your outbox."
"no"
"why?"
"I didn't think about it, or didn't know how (can't remember exactly)"

It doesn't matter. There weren't any texts that made her look guilty. But they are putting the idea in the jurors mind that there are, but she deleted them. There is absolutely no evidence to support it.

Also, it doesn't matter. The texts were between her and Patrick. Patrick isn't guilty, he's been cleared. So what the heck does it matter what she said to Patrick? It doesn't. But it certainly is confusing isn't it? It is completely irrelevant. If she were communicating with Rudy it would be one thing. But there is no communication whatsover between her and Rudy. No cell phone calls, no texts, no emails. Ahh but she deleted them from the inbox....riiiiiiight. do you see where this is going? There is no evidence to any texts, so suggest that some might exist. Even though they do NOT exist.

Police records and cell phone records indicate that the neighbor called police about the two cell phones. Police retrieved the cell phones and determined they belonged to Meredith. Police went to Meredith's home to return the cell phones. Raffaele and Amanda were outside, and surprised that the police were there. They then phoned the police. Raffaele claims he called police first, but that cannot be corroborated by actual evidence.

The point is not entirely why Amanda turned off her cell phone ... but the fact that both Amanda and Raffaele, completely out of character, turned off their cell phones at the same time in the evening and then turned them on again at 6 in the morning ... but claimed that they slept until 10. The grocer claims that Amanda was in his shop buying bleach that morning, which Amanda denies, yet a receipt and supplies were found in Raffaele's apt. The grocer's evidence and receipt contradict Raffaele and Amanda's statements.

It's possible to believe Raffaele and Amanda, but why does evidence contradict their claims ... and not just some of their claims, but most of them?

[Jester]

Raffaele is a hot topic this week....

from the Solecito Defense, CCTV. It also includes the cell phone logs.
it shows a very plausible scenario of the time of police arrival, moving the timeframe away fomr the prosecutions "info".
(I think the main plug is that the prosecution used only one <frame> to show the Postalk POlice arrive at 12:36- before Raffaeles call...but the CCTV shows/as some see it...the car arrives at 12:36 and drives on by then backs up and arrives again. Supposedly they couldn't find the cottage and took awhile. The time stamp, with this passing the cottage etc.. puts the postal police arriving after Raffaele phone call to 112.

So he possibly wasn't lying as Judge Micheli accused. He did call the Carabinieri before the Postal Police arrived...




http://lnx.giovinazzo.it/images/postale.pdf

I translated the summary....


Raffaele Sollecito has telephoned to Carabinieri to 12:51:40


Carabinieri are arriving at 13:32


Postal Police arrive at 12:58:55


Raffaele Sollecito has telephoned to Carabinieri at 12:51:40


and 12:54:39, therefore before the arrival Polizia Postale

It does seem to come down to whether the defense or the prosecution is presenting accurate information ... just like any trial anywhere.

[Emerald]

The defense and prosecution can present the same information. From different perspectives. It is the perception of those deciding the fate which is important.

Has AK been sentenced in the libel case involving the bar owner Patrick L?

[KnoxCase]

do you see where this is going? There is no evidence to any texts, so suggest that some might exist. Even though they do NOT exist.

yes, it seems this is normal legal "plays"....create doubt, do whatever it takes, say whatever it takes to win your case.

both sides are doing this, imo.

and according to some articles, forums......the jurors fall asleep, the people on the panel are burnt out and not listening closely to the testimonys at times.

imagine your on trial for life, and you look at your jurors and their sleeping thru testimony!!!:scared:

[Emerald]

What is the jury deliberation process in Italy? Do they adjourn to a room after all the evidence has been submitted, discuss the case and come to an immediate consensus?

[KnoxCase]

emerald,
no verdict on charge (f) for amanda yet.

your right what matters in the end is the votes in the courtroom.

i see this case and its so interesting some hold the lies as # 1 to them, other's hold footprints and dna, others hold past history as # 1 proof of guilt or innocence. etc..etc...

i'm not sure at all how this court verdict will be made. someone said this is not that important a trial, its the next one the Appeals that is the final trial? I don't know.

Amanda and Raffaele have been found guilty or turned down for all the preceding trials. The defense argues all the same and to date, the courts haven't ruled in their favor. imo...

In the US this "past hearings" would mean a lot, maybe in Italy it doesn't?

Mignini is up for his own trial for Abuse of power/corruption whatever...and many say it's no big deal. Its routine for Judges to be on trial them self. IDK?

I'm curious who and how many are the real "votes" in this courtroom.
What info do they get to see? and does the Judge reprimand them if they fall asleep during testimony?:huh:

[dgfred]

It is a 8 judge panel for jurors right? Not a jury of 'peers' like here.