Judge Massei Sentencing Report     The Meredith Kercher Fund     The Murder Of Meredith Kercher Wiki     True Justice For Meredith Kercher     Judge Nencini Sentencing Report 


Last visit was: Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:41 am
It is currently Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:41 am
All times are UTC

Forum rules

VII. MAIN DISCUSSION, Feb 28 - April 09, 09

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


 Page 9 of 11 [ 2519 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next
Author Message

Offline Ferret


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:21 am

Posts: 101

Location: Hidden Hills, CA

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 5:24 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Hey Ferret,
I don't want to get into a debate about Louise Woodward. It was a long time ago and I'm sure you're more up to speed on it than I am or ever was.
I just remember reading about it from afar and thinking there was more to the case than met the eye. Isn't there always?


I am not trying to get into a debate about the Louise Woodward trial, I am just pointing out the similar set up of PR tactics used by Woodward and Knox's camp, and the main point of both defendants' legal and PR camps is to obfuscate evidence. The PR campaign will continue long after the trial of Knox and Sollecito is over. Their sole purpose is to raise doubt. period. full stop.

I also find it interesting that many people who think Knox is guilty, think that Louise Woodward was innocent. Always beware of Italian Woman at the Table with vested interests, or anyone for that matter.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 5:54 pm   Post subject:    

From Catnip's post.

Commenting on the evidence given by Nara Capezzali:

Quote:
Luca Maori (Sollecito team)
- “unreliable” (11, 18)
- “if there was a scream, it’s from 31 October and not 1 November” (11, 18)


Everyone else found her pretty convincing, even if the detail was a bit hazy.

So why should Luca Maori have a problem with Nara's testimony?

Is it simply because she mentions two or three people running away?

Why should he doubt there was a scream? Why should he have reason to believe it was on the 31st October?

Nara hasn't pointed any finger at his client.

Is a "lone wolf" Rudy that important to his case?

Even Frank is suggesting the possibility that Rudy wasn't on his own. That maybe others were with him. Just that he believes those others weren't RS and AK.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:07 pm   Post subject:    

Ferret wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Hey Ferret,
I don't want to get into a debate about Louise Woodward. It was a long time ago and I'm sure you're more up to speed on it than I am or ever was.
I just remember reading about it from afar and thinking there was more to the case than met the eye. Isn't there always?


I am not trying to get into a debate about the Louise Woodward trial, I am just pointing out the similar set up of PR tactics used by Woodward and Knox's camp, and the main point of both defendants' legal and PR camps is to obfuscate evidence. The PR campaign will continue long after the trial of Knox and Sollecito is over. Their sole purpose is to raise doubt. period. full stop.

I also find it interesting that many people who think Knox is guilty, think that Louise Woodward was innocent. Always beware of Italian Woman at the Table with vested interests, or anyone for that matter.



I agree with Skep, there isn't much point in revisiting this case. I do remember friends and family whooping and cheering when the verdict arrived and thinking how vulgar and inappropriate it seemed, given that a baby was dead. Not very British, and certainly not respectful towards the baby's parents. I think we have seen similar vulgarity from Mr Mellas. Interesting that he has disappeared. Off home to take a chill pill I hope...
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:11 pm   Post subject: Re: No barefeet   

Fast Pete wrote:
Jools wrote:
Raffaele Sollecito was certainly NOT a "piedi nudi" (no barefeet) when arrested on 6th November and taken to Capanne as he said in his spontaneous statement in court.


Hi Jools,

I had the impression the barefoot experience began during the interrogation and he had to walk back to Garibaldi shoeless?

I took that to mean that he was picked up again from home the next day, whereas AK was held from that night on.

Pete


Hi Pete,

From what I understood, Sollecito goes to police station on the 5th wearing his Nike, he becomes a suspect, police take his shoes away, (because they were not incompatible with the shoe print found at the cottage) gets arrested and sent straight to Capanne prison (he was never taken home at this point) morning of the 6th , he obviously was not wearing his Nike shoes when living the station and you can see it in the picture as he is getting into the police car, but it doesn’t mean he was barefooted like was reported by some media. I reckon that he was given paper shoes to wear over his socks, and that is far from being ‘piedi nudi’.

RS spontaneous statement:
«Mi hanno lasciato a piedi nudi sino al girono dopo». Sollecito ha cominciato la sua dichiarazione spontanea dicendo di non volere fare accuse ma di avere sentito «cose non precise. Riferendosi sempre alla notte tra il 5 e il 6 novembre ha sostenuto di «avere fatto presente alla polizia di voler contattare mio padre sul cellulare o su altre utenze, ma mi hanno negato questo». «Durante l'interrogatorio mi hanno chiesto di togliermi le scarpe e sono stato lasciato a piedi nudi, scalzo. Sono stato lasciato così fino alla mattina successiva».

http://tinyurl.com/ddzlk9
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:19 pm   Post subject:    

Just a useful resource people might like to use. It is a newspaper reporting website which has topics covered in all the main news services. I am posting the page about the Meredith Kercher murder, which is a 'Featured Topic', and has all the recent headlines. Sorry if this is old hat to people, but I do find it a useful site!

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/Featured+Top ... rder+Trial

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:35 pm   Post subject:    

FinnMacCool wrote:
As things stand at the moment, there are still problems with the prosecution case. The biggest one, I think, is the one people have alluded to above - how did these three people get together? The defense could answer that one very simply (ie, "they didn't") provided they can come up with some kind of explanation for the weight of forensic and circumstantial evidence against their clients. So far, there doesn't seem to be any coherent way for them to do this.


You're right.

That is why I believe that the prosecution used Kokomani's evidence. It may be garbled and the dates and details are uncertain, But the prosecution can place Kokomani near the cottage from his mobile phone records and Kokomani places the 3 of them together.

If nothing else, Kokomani's evidence amounts to the fact that he had seen the 3 together AT SOME TIME.

Same with the red coat witness. His evidence relates to the 30th October. It's relevence is seemingly only to suggest that the 3 knew each other.

(I say seemingly - cos he saw them with Meredith walking from the gate to the downstairs apartment - I've got Raffaele and car parking on my mind - why would the four of them come from the downstairs apartment? Commmunal plant watering?).

Rudy maintains he doesn't know Raffaele.

Raffaele claims he doesn't know Rudy.

Amanda knew them both and they both knew Amanda.

I too am starting to wonder about Rudy's role in all of this. How "together" were these people?

Frank won't respond when I ask him any question about the subject of Giacomo's keys but the fact remains that on the 14th Nov 2007 frank stated that those keys had been found in Amanda's room.

Rudy put a tempter in his German diary when out of the blue he asked of Amanda, "Was it all of you downstairs?"

If I'm honest, I think I may be back to cars and dope plant robbery.

Rudy wanted to hire Kokomani's car?????

Maybe Raffaele agreed to transport them for Rudy?

Maybe Amanda gave the keys to Rudy?

Maybe AK and RS went to the PiaZZa while Rudy was meant to do the business.

Maybe Meredith heard Rudy downstairs.

Maybe that was the argument which was overheard

Maybe AK and RS took part in a drug deal/theft which went wrong?
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:48 pm   Post subject: It's all about timing   

Brian S. wrote:
So why should Luca Maori have a problem with Nara's testimony?


It has to do with giving Raffaele a valid alibi. You can bet Maori is going to try to make the case that Meredith was murdered in a time frame convenient to Raffaele's attempt at an alibi - such as earlier in the evening rather than later. The time (and date) of the scream are a problem if you don't have a valid alibi for your whereabouts at that specific time.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:17 pm   Post subject:    

Brian S. wrote:
FinnMacCool wrote:

Same with the red coat witness. His evidence relates to the 30th October. It's relevence is seemingly only to suggest that the 3 knew each other.




Just a quick question: Has anyone ascertained whether Amanda HAS the red coat described by this witness??? The witness gives a very detailed description of it. I am surprised Amanda did not make a denial at the time - especially with RS standing up and denying it at the end of his spontaneous statement. It would have been the perfect time for her to pipe up and say 'I can confirm that I do not possess a coat like the one described, so this witness is mistaken'. Perhaps she DOES have one. But in that case, it would have helped the prosecution to actually produce the coat in question. It is so distinctive by the description it would have firmed up the witness testimony hugely.

Anyone heard anything about it? Does it or does it not exist? The flatmates would know...
Top Profile 

Offline bobc


Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:23 pm

Posts: 69

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:30 pm   Post subject:    

Ferret wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Hey Ferret,
I don't want to get into a debate about Louise Woodward. It was a long time ago and I'm sure you're more up to speed on it than I am or ever was.
I just remember reading about it from afar and thinking there was more to the case than met the eye. Isn't there always?


I am not trying to get into a debate about the Louise Woodward trial, I am just pointing out the similar set up of PR tactics used by Woodward and Knox's camp, and the main point of both defendants' legal and PR camps is to obfuscate evidence. The PR campaign will continue long after the trial of Knox and Sollecito is over. Their sole purpose is to raise doubt. period. full stop.

I also find it interesting that many people who think Knox is guilty, think that Louise Woodward was innocent. Always beware of Italian Woman at the Table with vested interests, or anyone for that matter.


Frankly, what you write about the Louise Woodward case is in fact bullshit.

I think the prosecution's PR campaign got to YOU. ;)
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:32 pm   Post subject: Kokomani   

Here a picture of Kokomani arriving in court to testify:


Top Profile 

Offline Professor Snape


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:53 pm

Posts: 247

Location: Seattle. WA

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:46 pm   Post subject: Re: No barefeet   

Fast Pete wrote:
Fly by Night wrote:
Fast Pete wrote:
I had the impression the barefoot experience began during the interrogation and he had to walk back to Garibaldi shoeless?


I thought the police drove him home and he had to suffer the indignity of walking from the car into his flat with no shoes.


Hi FBN how are you. This is what we posted on 13 March

Quote:
Also [updated from another report] Sollecito explained why he was not wearing any shoes [this seems new public information] after his interrogation. He said they were removed for testing and he had no shoes on “until I went back to my own house.” He said. “I walked back barefoot in the street and ... nobody gave me a pair of shoes. “


That was from a translation emailed to me.


The Bard, Owl on surfboard, and Lightening Boy:

my deflated $0.02 -
I, too, recall reading about Sollecito catching a ride with the police. I remember because I thought it was odd we were hearing he had to walk. Getting a ride seemed more practical considering the situation.

Either way I could care less if he had to walk home and better yet on his hands. :twisted: On sharp rocks. - Snape

_________________
"Wizard of Healing Potions and Alibis"
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:46 pm   Post subject:    

Some info on the two interpreters/ translators appointed by the President of the Court Giancarlo Massei:

"An interpreter who knows five languages"

A Curiosity : Who are the interpreters called in to carry out the work during the hearings?

An interpreter who knows five languages

Perugia - The two interpreters and translators, nominated by the President of the Court of Assizes, Giancarlo Massei, to follow the whole trial, are from Perugia.
Sworn in to undertake the delicate assignment are, Dr. Anna Fronticelli Baldelli, who will always be seated next to the accused, Amanda Marie Knox, and have everything that will be said in court translated to her to enable the student from Seattle to be fully aware of what is happening around her, and Dr. Paula Giannoni, the latter nominated as translator for the civil part (that is John Leslie Kercher and Arline Carol Mary Lara Kercher, father and mother of the victim, and John Ashley, Lyle and Stephanie, siblings of the victim).

The lawyers, Francesco Maresca and Serena Perna, defending family Kercher, upon request by the President of the Court of Assizes, have been engaged to inform the interpreter, with a few days’ anticipated notice, when the offended parties will be in Perugia, both to give testimony (they have been subpoenaed by the accused) and to assist, as their right, to the trial.


A curiosity regarding Dr. Fronticelli Baldelli who even knows four languages (obviously apart from Italian) that is, English, French, German and Chinese. Precisely for the knowledge of the latter language – she returned from China six months ago – she has already been engaged by the judges at the law courts in Perugia to assist Chinese citizens who are under trial. Yesterday morning, Dr. Fronticelli Baldelli was convoked by Judge Carla Maria Giangamboni to act as translator during the trial of a couple of Nigerians who were arrested and found in possession of 280 grams of cocaine (the two are being defended by Dr. Donatella Panzarola).

Translators/interpreters in a city such as Perugia, where foreigners from every country live, work and carry out crimes (or, however, are victims of crimes), are particularly sought after. Among these are also, obviously, translators from Arab into Italian and vice versa.
http://tinyurl.com/ccwqok

"Dr. Anna Fronticelli Baldelli, who will always be seated next to the accused, Amanda Marie Knox"
Top Profile 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:07 pm   Post subject: candace blog   

This is posted it too soon... its not april 1st yet.

Candace Dempsey Blog - March 31st
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:54 pm   Post subject: Re: candace blog   

stewarthome2000 wrote:
This is posted it too soon... its not april 1st yet.

Candace Dempsey Blog - March 31st


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Funny how the cook after always criticizing tabloid journalism, she is now praising gossip magazines like Gente and Oggi and their respective reporters Giancarlo Sulas and Stefano Nazzi. Let’s see how long this love affair will last!
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:12 pm   Post subject:    

Jools wrote:

Quote:
stewarthome2000 wrote:
This is posted it too soon... its not april 1st yet.

Candace Dempsey Blog - March 31st




Funny how the cook after always criticizing tabloid journalism, she is now praising gossip magazines like Gente and Oggi and their respective reporters Giancarlo Sulas and Stefano Nazzi. Let’s see how long this love affair will last!


I'm not sure I'll get to this today. I have to clean out my sock drawer and stuff. But isn't it funny that the other great tabroid hater - Chris Mellas - goes to Italy and gets page space from the peep-hole press?

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:59 pm   Post subject:    

Hi see people have been going over Frank's blog very carefully (new study: Frankology?).

I remember it was a year ago, Frank published a very funny April Fools Joke on the case. How long ago it was ! As the Brits say, Frank was taking the piss out of Amanda whining about being in jail (calmly pointing out that someone had died, and if she didn't do it, the little inconvience of Amanda's stay was no big deal, considering she had her whole life ahead of her, whereas Meredith, the poor dear.......He also ironized about heck, what is she complaining about? She came to Italy to learn to learn the language right? And How Amanda was flourishing with all her new ambitious studies.

But the April Fools entry was really funny, he wrote about Spike Lee flying to Rome with a script held under wrap of La volpe to be shot in Prison, and how Lee was paying the Prison for her acting by giving money for a softball field (or something like that). I must have it saved somewhere. (And I even half to admit, not remembering the day, I was exclaiming 'this wackky case is going to far....' - little did I know.)

Also, when I heard about the Seattle Preston charges (I had read about this saga a year earlier, surely in an article by Preston himself- who else would care?), and their was no rebuttal....and (apologies) knowing a tincy wincy bit about Italian Justice system, I wrote Frank asking what were all this Preston Mignini charges about....and he wrote me back pooh-poohing Preston and his story, saying the guy was questioned for a few hours ('Big Deal'), which completely took the air out of all the Bad-Police scenarios I had begun to imagine. I don't remember his email exactly, but the tone I came away with, was that these Preston types were a bunch of crying wackos, no point in even thinking about them. He also was merciless on RS, and his team, ridiculing him as Dad's Boy, and imaging how RS was adjusting to his new life.

So, THE ONLY thing I CAN POSSIBLY IMAGINE that has happened in the intervening time- And I have thought about this A lot, maybe even over one whole lunch, was that Frank must have stumbled upon the truth of this Police Conspiracy, like Tom Cruise does in Eyes Wide Shut, or how the pre-managa characters do in Scoobie-Doo, and suddenly stumbling upon this dark blasphemous ceremony, maybe in the hall of justice at night, and seeing Curatolo, Nara, Mignini, micheli, the alimenation store man, all writhing in a demonatic daisy-chain presided over by Kokomani, and moaning 'Amanda must pay, Amanda must pay', as they dousted one another with Ms. Kerchers blood - Frank had only two choices: he could run as far as he could and hope that Mignini and his followers wouldn't get their hands on him, or Start a Blog and EXPOSE THE TRUTH !

Alas, Frank can't tell the story about how he came upon this satanic judicial orgy (I have no idea why he can't, my lunch was about over, but some story would do- he is protecting the people who brought him there?? to work on....), but he can point out the figures behind the machinations, like a terrorist hostage secretly gesticulating to the police officer that, despite appearances, he is being held hostage.....

That's how I see Frank, as that gesticulating hostage, after all he does have to live under Mignini's reign, and will after the trial, that is unless he can apply for Political aslyum. But I am degressing.

So this is why I think Frank has Open His Eyes Up about the Injustice that is being done. There can be No other reason, that I can possibly imagine. (Aside from being paid by RS, and getting to suck up to Ms. Bongiorno, serviteur to the great, and imaging hey maybe there might be a future for that boy too? I mean, like what would Mignini do for him for Frank's good words? ---Of course I am being sarcastic here, Italy doesn't work this way. Every on know only scandanavian countries- like Denmark or Norway do.)

By the way, there is a funny case Ms. Bongiorno won- big football match. Star spits into the face of an adversary. He is red carted and disqualified for the big game. Bonjiorno argued it was a tv set-up, because the tv cameras were on their faces, thus a form of entrapment ! And won. Yes, she wins this stuff, and keeps a more or less straight face! Berlusconi needs people like this, many many more.....I'm not saying Frank would possibly condescend to accept some low-life work like this.......I would never think so low of him........
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:01 pm   Post subject:    

I would never think so low of him........

but other people might.
Top Profile 

Offline Ferret


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:21 am

Posts: 101

Location: Hidden Hills, CA

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:07 pm   Post subject:    

bobc wrote:
Ferret wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Hey Ferret,
I don't want to get into a debate about Louise Woodward. It was a long time ago and I'm sure you're more up to speed on it than I am or ever was.
I just remember reading about it from afar and thinking there was more to the case than met the eye. Isn't there always?


I am not trying to get into a debate about the Louise Woodward trial, I am just pointing out the similar set up of PR tactics used by Woodward and Knox's camp, and the main point of both defendants' legal and PR camps is to obfuscate evidence. The PR campaign will continue long after the trial of Knox and Sollecito is over. Their sole purpose is to raise doubt. period. full stop.

I also find it interesting that many people who think Knox is guilty, think that Louise Woodward was innocent. Always beware of Italian Woman at the Table with vested interests, or anyone for that matter.


Frankly, what you write about the Louise Woodward case is in fact bullshit.

I think the prosecution's PR campaign got to YOU. ;)


This will be my last post about this... given this is getting off topic, and I will get banned if I continue this and ignore being on topic with Knox and Sollecito trial.. So tell me why this article is wrong..


http://tinyurl.com/dhpo5a

The prosecution's case didn't get to me, the science got to me... I also know a little of Barry Scheck, who is brilliant but has to be one of the most disingenuous legal minds out there.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:22 pm   Post subject:    

Skep wrote:
"Chris Mellas - goes to Italy and gets page space from the peep-hole press?"

Yep, probably thanks to Frank Sfarzo, hope his commission is worth it. I wonder if Frank has become their Road Manager? :lol:


BTW on the Sollecito walking home barefoot I been looking back at Italian Articles and it seems that all media except ANSA reported that they took his shoes during the interrogation on the night of the 5 to 6 November and he was shoeless until the following day (6th., nothing about him made to walk to his house) when police and his lawyer went to his house and brought him a pair. ANSA seems to be the only possible one to have made the mistake this is what they reported "fino a quando andammo (the mistake is in the andammo word but the sopralluogo -search- gives a hint that it is not him doing the search) casa mia per un sopralluogo" and of course NO PRIZES FOR GUESSING WHICH OF THE MEDIA THE COOK CHOSE TO QUOTE WHEN REPORTING ON THE TORTURE SOLLECITO SUFFERED combined with her impecable translation skills, that quote become "until we went to my house for a visit."
Yeah, right, as if they would let Sollecito 'visit' his house right after he was charge. :lol:
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:31 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Ferret, I have to suggest that science has moved a bit further since 1997. Many doctors have changed their minds about this- and in England there are some notorius cases with mothers being sent to jail on bad science on exactly this issue.

Also, the prosecuter's Doctor's witness reversed his opinion in the intervening years. This is a start, but there are others, check on Dr Patrick Barnes, who was the prosecutions doctor. But there has been a sea-change in knowledge since then. And, without knowing too much the details, the first thing doctors speculated on with Ms Richardson is that she might have had an undiagnost pre-fracture which could have made a simple fall leathal. Doctors see it more often than not.


http://www.aupairclearinghouse.com/node/112

(I was in Boston at this time- depressing case, all around. As the desire for vengence always is. )
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:34 pm   Post subject:    

Here is a Boston Globe article on this issue from 2007.

THE BOSTON GLOBE

It is controversial, but more than reasonable doubt.



(MODERATOR EDIT: Michael - Shortened url)
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:38 pm   Post subject:    

Exactly Jools, a young woman has been savagely raped and murdered and what still rankles RS - a year and half later! - is that they took his shoes ! The awful humiliation of which he will never get over.

But then we know what a clothes horse he is. And the saying, "it is the clothes that make......"
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:39 pm   Post subject:    

Did anyone see my question earlier about Amanda's red coat? It's bothering me!

Thanks

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline Ferret


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:21 am

Posts: 101

Location: Hidden Hills, CA

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:07 pm   Post subject:    

Blaise wrote:
Here is a Boston Globe article on this issue from 2007.

THE BOSTON GLOBE

It is controversial, but more than reasonable doubt.


I already posted that link, and the "new science" is as subjective a science is tended to be. Science isn't absolute. Peer review journals have the most validity, but the recent studies on SBS are far conclusive.



(MODERATOR EDIT: Michael - Shortened url in quote)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:09 pm   Post subject:    

Ferret wrote:

Quote:
bobc wrote:
Ferret wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Hey Ferret,
I don't want to get into a debate about Louise Woodward. It was a long time ago and I'm sure you're more up to speed on it than I am or ever was.
I just remember reading about it from afar and thinking there was more to the case than met the eye. Isn't there always?


I am not trying to get into a debate about the Louise Woodward trial, I am just pointing out the similar set up of PR tactics used by Woodward and Knox's camp, and the main point of both defendants' legal and PR camps is to obfuscate evidence. The PR campaign will continue long after the trial of Knox and Sollecito is over. Their sole purpose is to raise doubt. period. full stop.

I also find it interesting that many people who think Knox is guilty, think that Louise Woodward was innocent. Always beware of Italian Woman at the Table with vested interests, or anyone for that matter.


Frankly, what you write about the Louise Woodward case is in fact bullshit.

I think the prosecution's PR campaign got to YOU.


This will be my last post about this... given this is getting off topic, and I will get banned if I continue this and ignore being on topic with Knox and Sollecito trial.. So tell me why this article is wrong..


http://tinyurl.com/dhpo5a

The prosecution's case didn't get to me, the science got to me... I also know a little of Barry Scheck, who is brilliant but has to be one of the most disingenuous legal minds out there.



You certainly won't be banned! I just think it is (a) one of those cases that divide folks years later, and (b) complex enough to warrant an entire board or at least a thread. But if it helps to understand this case, go for it!

To the Bard: As far as I know, the red coat never came up until the witness gave testimony last week. I have not seen any posts or press articles quoting the family where its existence is confirmed or denied. This doesn't mean such a coat exists. I think we'll have to wait until that information is provided somewhere.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2306

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:14 pm   Post subject:    

The Bard wrote:
Did anyone see my question earlier about Amanda's red coat? It's bothering me!

Thanks


Hi Bard,

There have been no reports about it in the media. The police will have taken all the clothes that Knox had at the cottage, so they will know whether she had such a coat in her wardobe. Knox didn't make a spontaneous statement, refuting this testimony at the trial and her family haven't denied that she owned such a coat either. She could have borrowed a red coat from Sollecito. Eyewitnesses can remember details which aren't actually true.

The most important witness is the silent witness. The forensic evidence places Knox, Sollecito and Guede at the cottage on the night of the murder. There were three sets of different sized bloody footprints, which match the foot sizes of Knox, Sollecito and Guede, at the crime scene. Knox's DNA was on the handle of the double DNA knife and Meredith's DNA was on the blade. Sollecito's and Knox's DNA was on Meredith's bra. The possibility of contamination has been categorically excluded by the forensic experts from the scientific police.
Top Profile 

Offline petafly


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:08 pm

Posts: 278

Location: Switzerland/Germany

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:30 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Machine,
you forgot to mention the cover-up, the most telling evidence i see. I'm very excited, and also a bit concerned, about the upcoming cover-up reports in court (mop, bucket, sink, temperature in the house, chemical-residues on the floor, smell, clothes in the washing machine ...). We know nothing about that yet. I hope the prosection feels not to sure about the DNA to hop over these things...


Last edited by petafly on Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:30 pm   Post subject:    

The Machine wrote:
The Bard wrote:
Did anyone see my question earlier about Amanda's red coat? It's bothering me!

Thanks


Hi Bard,

There have been no reports about it in the media. The police will have taken all the clothes that Knox had at the cottage, so they will know whether she had such a coat in her wardobe. Knox didn't make a spontaneous statement, refuting this testimony at the trial and her family haven't denied that she owned such a coat either. She could have borrowed a red coat from Sollecito. Eyewitnesses can remember details which aren't actually true.

The most important witness is the silent witness. The forensic evidence places Knox, Sollecito and Guede at the cottage on the night of the murder. There were three sets of different sized bloody footprints, which match the foot sizes of Knox, Sollecito and Guede, at the crime scene. Knox's DNA was on the handle of the double DNA knife and Meredith's DNA was on the blade. Sollecito's and Knox's DNA was on Meredith's bra. The possibility of contamination has been categorically excluded by the forensic experts from the scientific police.



Thanks Skep and Machine.

Machine, I know you have great faith in the DNA evidence, and I would like to know more about it. Some questions come to my mind, and I have been trying to search for answers on various boards without luck. Maybe you could help as this is something you know a lot about. Forgive me if these questions are naive, but I am just a layperson.

1. Do the police have the shoes that Amanda was wearing that night?
2. I know the police confiscated Sollecito's shoes, but do we know whether they have found any blood on them?
3. Why did they not take Amanda's shoes at the same time?
4. Was a thorough forensic search made of all areas around the cottage for evidence of clothes and shoes being discarded. I recall
when the Maddie search was on the police searched dustbins and rubbish tips in case items had been thrown away. Has anything
been found, and if not where on earth are the murders' clothes? Was there any blood staining on the clothes in the washing
machine?
5. I don't quite understand what Luminol is or what it does. It seems to show up footprints that have been sluiced away with bleach, is that right? Wow. Impressive. And they know that these footprints are made in blood? Is it that flourecent light we see in police thrillers?

If there is anywhere you can direct me for answers to these questions I would be most grateful.

Bard
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:31 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Ferret,

yes, I don't want to kick this subject to death (and sorry I didn't read the woodward posts until the end, so I missed your post). But, you're right, science changes from country to country. I live in France- have lived in the states, England, some other countries, and I can't help but say it is funny going from a doctor or system in one, to that of another. So often they are completely different ! And you think, but this is medicine- a science, so shouldn't it be like universal ? (ok perhaps physics and chemistry are......but even with biology it begins to get tricky and nationalist)

When lady Di died, there was endless discussion of the Anglo-American system of critical accidence Ambulance procedure vs. Franco-continental......The english accused the French of letting her needlessly die, because in their system.....

I mean you would think, for gosh sake, for something as simple as that there would be a basic universal procedure, right? So with sudden baby death, in France, as far as I understand, is far more sensitive to the idea that sudden baby deaths happen, and not to victimise the parents when there is no other evidence. In England, mothers were being imprisoned on statistical models, such as it was not possible for two crib deaths, but then a lot of the research has been changed recently.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:36 pm   Post subject:    

Just had the brain wave of simply Googling Luminol and found this site. WOW. Now I see why the forensics are so strong in this case. Would you look at that photo! Can they get toe-prints? Presumably they are the same as finger prints.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/luminol1.htm

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2306

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:49 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Petafly,

You're right, the cover up e.g. the staging of the break in and the clean up implicates Knox and Sollecito, and not Guede. Why would Guede have returned to the cottage to clean away Knox's and Sollecito's bloody footprints, but leave his own bloody footprint in Meredith's room? Why would Guede have carried out such an extensive and thorough clean up that there wasn't a single one of Knox's fingerprints in her own room and yet not flush his own faeces, which was so visible in the toilet? Why would Guede have staged the break in to make it look like an outsider had broken in and killed Meredith? Why would Guede have gone back to the cottage to remove Meredith's bra some time after she had been killed? The cover up would have only benefited Knox and Sollecito.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2306

PostPosted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Bard,

Check out Kermit's excellent powerpoint presentations on the bloody footprints. They are essential viewing.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:13 am   Post subject:    

Blaise wrote:

Quote:
I mean you would think, for gosh sake, for something as simple as that there would be a basic universal procedure, right? So with sudden baby death, in France, as far as I understand, is far more sensitive to the idea that sudden baby deaths happen, and not to victimise the parents when there is no other evidence. In England, mothers were being imprisoned on statistical models, such as it was not possible for two crib deaths, but then a lot of the research has been changed recently.


I think it is basically true that the approach to/treatment of certain "life accidents" differs from one country to the next, and we can even detect a continental approach as opposed to an Anglo-Saxon one. Crib death (as it used to be called, now I guess we call it SIDS for Suddent Infant Death Syndrome) is one such life accident. What I have noticed in the Anglo-Saxon world is that the approach to it is very "statistical", with a lot of emphasis on such things as whether sleeping on the back or the stomach increases the chance of infant survival. And the answer seems to change over time! The term used in French - unless this has changed - is mort "subite" - expresses the notion that it's one of those things that just happen "suddenly", without warning and without us really knowing why.

Bringing the subject around to this case (and the Woodward case), I think that a lot of the criticism coming from the US about the investigation and processing of the crime scene stems from two things: one is lack of familiarity with how these things are really done, as opposed to how they are done on television; the other is an inability to grasp the simple notion that there may be more than one right way to do things.

I personally think that Anne Bremner was out of her depth from the get-go, but that she made matters worse by assuming certain things about how the investigative and criminal processes work, which were based on her own frame of reference and which she implied is the only valid frame of reference.

Underlying all of this is the more primitive assumption: of course they f*cked things up, they're Italian.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 4:19 am   Post subject:    

ragazza americana has created a new topic.

As she said earlier in this thread, it is a summary of all the spontaneous statements made to date by RS and AK.

It seems to illuminate two points for me:




1/ I have long wondered how the defendants can be allowed to make these statements without being subject to cross-examination. In short, what is the difference between these statements and giving evidence from the stand. Now I think I know, although I'd be glad if someone better versed in Italian law confirms my thought.

I believe that they may only make spontaneous statements directly related to the evidence which has just been heard. That they are not allowed to introduce any new point which hasn't just been covered by the evidence in court. In short there are rules which govern the subject matter of spontaneous statements.

eg.

Amanda explained about her "pink rabbit" which had been introduced as evidence by the preceding witness(s).
She explained about her housekeeping relationship with Meredith after the other flatmates had given evidence that it was a cause of friction between the two.

Raffaele has said that he was shoeless all night. But the evidence which had previously been heard recounted that his shoes had been taken from him to compare with the footprint. It was given as one reason for his arrest.
He's said that he'd never seen Amanda in any red coat following witness evidence which said that he had been seen with her dressed like that.

The treatment of both defendants had been examined by the court as the events of the night 5th/6th November and the resulting statements given were produced as evidence.
The defenses claimed various things such as harrassment, bad language and name calling. They complained that neither was afforded the opportunity to contact a lawyer, lack of food and drink etc etc.

RS and AK were fine as long as their spontaneous statements related directly to the evidence and discussions which had just been heard in court.




2/Enter CHRIS MELLAS.

He is the one with a bee in his bonnett about Amanda being hit about the head. But Amanda's lawyers never claimed this to be the case in the testimony they have given and the questions they asked of the witnesses. It was never part of the court discussion about their treatment on the night. Outside court at the pre-trial, Amanda's lawyer, Luciano Ghirga explicitly said:

"The police didn't hit her. There was pressure yes, but they didn't hit her. We've never said they hit her."

Up swaggers Chris to the media. In his own words "Before the court session, I told Amanda to speak up for herself"

What did she do? I believe with Mellas's encouragement but without the knowledge of her lawyers she adds to the end of her spontaneous statement. "I was hit, I'm sorry, but I was"

Major foul. Nowhere in the preceding court sessions had anyone suggested that Amanda was hit. Certainly not her own lawyers. The subject was simply never mentioned.

Up jumps Mignini "Slander!! I want an inquiry into Amanda's allegations." The court agrees. Amanda's lawyers are powerless to prevent it. She broke the rules governing spontaneous statements and introduced a new element into the trial.

Chris Mellas is immediately sent off the field of play. He takes an early trip to the changing room and an early bus back to Seattle. FOA is wound down before they can do any more damage to Amanda's position in Italy.


EDIT to add:

Amanda's lawyers have used her treatment when she made the statement accusing Patrick as a defense against the slander charge. That she was coerced into naming him.

In the big scheme of things, they know this is minor.

Amanda isn't going to be found innocent of murder and get sent down for slander. It won't happen

Amanda's accusation against Patrick plays no part in the actual murder case apart from the fact that it demonstrates she told an untruth.

She has already retracted that evidence. She says she was at Raffaele's apartment despite the fact that Raffaele claimed she wasn't the last time he spoke on the record.
Top Profile 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:57 am   Post subject:    

Quote:
" ... Mellas, who is taking his turn in the family rotation for the next few weeks, is
also a father figure. People close to the family say his relationship with Amanda,
who is only 14 years younger, was complicated and tenuous at times." (Barbie Nadeau 13-03-09)


Indeed, it seems that after Chris Mellas was deployed to Perugia for a stationing of several weeks, he was suddenly un-employed and whisked out of there under the cover of night (btw, did he take a set of cutlery in his luggage?).

Between telling Amanda to "speak up for herself ... when someone is up on the stand and ... they are lying, she needs to stand up and say it" and almost immediately getting her landed with a potential new slander charge for her collection, describing himself as Amanda's "father" to Peter Popham (who lapped it all up), and courting Frank with new "bogus" (as per Candace's definition of the word) interviews with Amanda in prison, in just a few days in Perugia he achieved kicking up a lot of dust. The poor guy was as out of place in Perugia as a Clint Eastwood western character (The Good? The Bad? The Ugly?) in a Fellini film. I can imagine him walking up Corso Vannucci bow-legged in his spurs, dusty chaps, and ten-gallon hat, trigger-happy with his six-shooter in hand.

Chris' Houdini disappearance act coincides with the Friends of Amanda association deciding that they will go into cocoon mode.

I think that between Curt and David Marriott they decided that the shotgun approach to winning people's hearts (the theory is that one of those hundreds of divergent pellets is bound to hit the target ... ) is not working. In fact it has been totally and wildly counterproductive. And Ghirga has surely insisted that the FOA initiative and uncontrolled agents like Chris, cease and desist. It would be strange and embarrassing at this point were Amanda's Italian legal team to stand up and quit.

(Another theory is that the Italian justice discretely suggested to Chris that he should leave, otherwise he could find himself with his own legal problem, having stated to the world sometime ago that one of the two female police agents who were photographed escorting Amanda on 6 November 2007 is the one who he accuses of hitting Amanda.)

In any case, on the FOA side, the "Pro's" like Bremner, Paul the PI and Joe the Sleuth had been getting more and more silent of late. I think they have examined their Return-On-Investment and decided that the Railroad to Hell was too slow a train for them (I couldn't contain my smile when Sra. Nara described Paul as bloody rude). It wasn't improving their lot. In the FOA farewell speech, Anne Bremner says that their objective was to raise awareness of Amanda's plight. I think they've outdone themselves on that, in a totally negative way.

When I read that ("so long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, goodbye .... exit stage left .... run!"), I admit that for a nanosecond I felt sorry for them all (I immediately came to my senses). And in that brief moment I thought of another Superstar and his message which wasn't getting out right. Poor Dave Marriott isn't getting the recognition he deserves.

(music, please ... sorry to all the youngsters who aren't familiar with the rock-opera Jesus Christ Superstar, the lyrics of which I've only had to make a handful of adjustments to)

"P., R., Superstar -
Dave's Lamentation
" *

PR Superstar (to Mellas):
Get out! The plane's waiting! Get out! It's waiting!
Oh! It's waiting for you!

Mellas:
Everytime I look at you I don't understand
Why you let the things you did get so out of hand
You'd have managed better if you'd had it planned -
Ah --- ah

The Entourage:
Look at all my trials and tribulations
Sinking in a gentle pool of wine
What has Candace said? it's gone to my head
Till this evening is this morning life is fine

Always hoped that I'd be on C.B.S.
Knew that I would make it if I tried If I tried
Then when we retire we can write our novels
So they'll still talk about us when we've died


PR Superstar (spoken):
Will no one stick around with me?
Bremner?
Paul?
Joe?

Will no one evangelise with me?
Bremner?
Paul?
Joe?


PR Superstar (sung):
I only want to say
If there is a way
Take this FOA away from me
For I don't want to taste its poison
Feel it burn me,
I have changed I'm not as sure
As when we started
Then I was inspired
Now I'm sad and tired
Listen surely I've exceeded
Expectations
Tried for two years
Seems like twenty
Could you ask as much
From any other man?

.....
(Seattle Garden and The Arresting of Operations)

The Entourage:
What's the buzz
Tell me what's happening
What's the buzz
Tell me what's happening

Hang on Dave
We're gonna fight for you
Hang on Dave
We're gonna fight for you

PR Superstar:
Put away your words
Don't you know that it's all over
It was nice but now it's gone
Why are you obsessed with spinning?
Stick to fishing from now on


*(to the music of Gethsemane and The Arrest from "Jesus Christ Superstar")
============

I hope that no one amongst Meredith's family or friends - if any are following this discussion - will find this satire offensive. My purpose is quite the opposite, to underline the shaky stance of the people who try to paint unreal and inexistent realities into this case and its suspects.

Let the trial continue. There are a lot more witnesses to be heard and evidence to be presented.
Top Profile 

Offline Anastasia


Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 5:13 pm

Posts: 47

Location: Seattle, WA

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 7:14 am   Post subject:    

The Bard wrote:
Brian S. wrote:
FinnMacCool wrote:

Same with the red coat witness. His evidence relates to the 30th October. It's relevence is seemingly only to suggest that the 3 knew each other.




Just a quick question: Has anyone ascertained whether Amanda HAS the red coat described by this witness??? The witness gives a very detailed description of it. I am surprised Amanda did not make a denial at the time - especially with RS standing up and denying it at the end of his spontaneous statement. It would have been the perfect time for her to pipe up and say 'I can confirm that I do not possess a coat like the one described, so this witness is mistaken'. Perhaps she DOES have one. But in that case, it would have helped the prosecution to actually produce the coat in question. It is so distinctive by the description it would have firmed up the witness testimony hugely.


Anyone heard anything about it? Does it or does it not exist? The flatmates would know...


Hello Bard

I was wondering...maybe it was Meredith's coat? and she let Amanda borrow it? In all honesty I see a coat of that style and color looking way more flattering with Meredith's striking dark hair and olive skin, than Amanda's pale skin and hair. Just my opinion, and so when Raff said Amanda doesnt own a coat like that...well she doesnt, she may have just borrowed it.
But this is just a thought, I dont have any evidence yet to back it up.
Anastasia ;)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 7:16 am   Post subject: the vaseline issue....   

petafly wrote:
Something i missed completely:
Is the vaseline considered a piece of evidence or is it just a mundane jar of vaseline? All i can find about this are reports for the sheer sensation...

ThX!


In the UK, they have a different idea what VASELINE is when one hears the name. It not just petroleum jelly, or a lubricant etc. It's a skin moisturiser as well. Vaseline has a whole series of products for skin care that many British women have in their bathroom- much more popular than in the US. It seems everyone is assuming its petroleum jelly, when it may be just skin moisteriser, like Oil of Olay. Somewhere I recall just reading jar of Vaseline ( a news article maybe), but over here that can mean anything so I did not think much of it. Where did it say petroleum Jelly? Other Vasline products come in jars and bottles not just PJ.

In addition I do not think the medical report has shown any use of a lubricant in Meredith. Hence, unless it has RS and AK prints on it, no biggie.
This may be yet another misinterpretation from Italian to English... boh? Does anyone have more details?

Vaseline Homepage UK
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline MikeMCSG


Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:14 am

Posts: 207

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:46 am   Post subject:    

[quote="The Bard

I agree with Skep, there isn't much point in revisiting this case. I do remember friends and family whooping and cheering when the verdict arrived and thinking how vulgar and inappropriate it seemed, given that a baby was dead. Not very British, and certainly not respectful towards the baby's parents. I think we have seen similar vulgarity from Mr Mellas. Interesting that he has disappeared. Off home to take a chill pill I hope...[/quote]

Hi Bard

Your memory is slightly faulty in that the verdict was guilty of murder which they would not have been cheering. They would have been cheering the sentence - effectively time served - which allowed Louise to return home.

I think you're a bit harsh on the friends and family in comparing them to Mellas. Mrs Eappen at least was a shrill dislikeable woman who had clearly pre-judged the case (unlike the Kercher family) and, given the earlier injury defense theory, an alternative suspect. I think that accounts for the disrespect. Mellas has no similar excuses.

I have actually wondered if some of the FOA animus against Italian justice is influenced by the negative British coverage of the Boston authorities in the Woodward case but have never read a direct comparison up to now.
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:58 am   Post subject:    

Four excellent late night comments in a row!

Kermit your JS superstar meets FOA musical is Brilliant (oh my, this might even work staged, would there be a possible venue in Seattle?). - and true, it is sad our adversaries are fleeing the field. Come back! We were just beginning to enjoy this game!

Think you are Dead On Brian with the Mellas evacuation story. Interesting to imagine, this case being so immersed in pyscho-dynamics, that it would be exactly Amanda's need to lie for her family's, and her own self ("I am not a racist") image, will probably end-up removing the last fig-leaf of deniability, and adding more years to her sentence. ((And Anastasia, I can only say wow, you women never cease to amaze me with your subtility. I'm just a guy. I just thought that if there were a red coat somewhere it will be found. If RS is like me, AK probably has a bright red coat with funny buttons and just didn't remember!))
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:45 am   Post subject:    

Skep, once again we seem to be on the same page (à faute à la langue française?).

I think one of the problems I keep running into is the idea, "I personally think that Anne Bremner was out of her depth from the get-go...."

Watching this case this year, really makes me feel that people have such different adjendas, it is like mixing apples and oranges. We might assume these people are interested in the truth, and for some inexplicable reason continue to miss it, over and over again. It is frustrating. Why can they not just read what we say -One More Time- and simply say, 'You are right' For crying out loud !

Maybe Bremner is an idiot out of her depth (I wouldn't put it past her), but more to the point seems she is in TV crime/PR, and the case wouldn't be especially telegenic, if there were not an innocent jesuit girl Railroaded from Hell in Paradise. (And the heroic struggle of her family to save her!). What would be the alternative story? One of our
hypocritical young college freaks went to italy and within weeks raped and killed her roommate? It is a 'no brainer' (love this expression: it is so American!) as to which story to go with. And besides, how much money would she make repeating the Prosecutor's accusations? Drama is the name of the game.

Ditto Frank, and the ulgly pushy (' gruff but big hearted') tv detective banging with tv cameras on old ladies doors in the middle of the night (by the way, doesn't Nara tend to go to sleep around 9 pm or so? He wouldn't have come knocking on her door so late to play gotta, would he?).

At first, as in my earlier post, I used to assume these entities (I almost wrote 'people'), were interested in the truth- but they are only concerned with spin and their careers. Now the Knox crowd are sunk in the same delusions that Amanda has bathed and breathed in these past 20 years, which is another story altogether. The Frank, Bremner, Ciccio guy (and Bongiorno) seem just the cynical career parasites who are feeding off (by exacerbating) others misery.

Not that everyone doesn't know this. It is just easy to fall into the trap of taking what they say literally. And then wondering, 'how can they say that ??!!'

Are Bremner and Cicci Guy out of their depth? I thought of writing CBS (I've a very very powerful person. hahaha), reminding them of Ciccio's detectiving debacle on their dime, but what would they care? No one will remember this, or does, and they got their story about a young girl unjustly accused and the gruff big hearted detective who 'cares'. When she is sentenced, no one will remember the guy's stupid Bullsh+t.

So probably to Bremner and this guy, they did absolutely fine, got paid, and will move (with their image of engaged caring people). Bremner stupid tape of police kicking in doors? She probably know what it was, but heck, it looked good on tv for her pr spin. Point to her.

I remember someone sent the Cicci Guy Kermit's absolutely Brilliant Powerpoint about spiderman's window. And He wrote back (!!) and damningly insulting and revealing note, calling Kermit a loser who lives in his mother's basement. For him, only losers care about such stupid things - he gets paid. Get it, loser?! Same for Frank (remember his post, what was it? oh yea 'I get paid loser').

They probably feel it is an insult to their intelligence to take them at their word. Their response is 'oh give me a break, what is wrong with you people?? of course they are guilty, but what do you care? I'm doing my job, so f++koff'

So I don't read frank's blog, any more than I would try to engage in an involved arguement with a crazy person. They are in a completely different game; as for the FOA crowd, some are desperately protecting their narcissistic illusions by running to the otherside of psychosis; and some are just too innocent and good to imagine that Amanda might be otherwise.

Of course, I am saying the obvious, but as I said, one of the interesting aspects of this case is I find myself saying the bleeding obvious as they were Eureka discoveries. Funny that.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:21 am   Post subject:    

MikeMCSG wrote:
[quote="The Bard

I agree with Skep, there isn't much point in revisiting this case. I do remember friends and family whooping and cheering when the verdict arrived and thinking how vulgar and inappropriate it seemed, given that a baby was dead. Not very British, and certainly not respectful towards the baby's parents. I think we have seen similar vulgarity from Mr Mellas. Interesting that he has disappeared. Off home to take a chill pill I hope...


Hi Bard

Your memory is slightly faulty in that the verdict was guilty of murder which they would not have been cheering. They would have been cheering the sentence - effectively time served - which allowed Louise to return home.

I think you're a bit harsh on the friends and family in comparing them to Mellas. Mrs Eappen at least was a shrill dislikeable woman who had clearly pre-judged the case (unlike the Kercher family) and, given the earlier injury defense theory, an alternative suspect. I think that accounts for the disrespect. Mellas has no similar excuses.

I have actually wondered if some of the FOA animus against Italian justice is influenced by the negative British coverage of the Boston authorities in the Woodward case but have never read a direct comparison up to now.[/quote]


Hi,

I think I'd appear shrill and dislikeable if my baby had died whilst in the care of my nanny! To be honest I don't have a very clear recall of the case, but I really do remember the cheering and celebrating by Louise's family and friends - yes, probably because she could come home. I think a lot of people found it inappropriate and a bit stomach churning. I am sure Mellas would be throwing one huge big party for Amanda if she is found not guilty!

On another note though, I have been watching some interviews on You Tube with Knox's parents, and Curt does express his deep feelings of sadness for the Kercher family. And in another clip Edda was in tears about it saying 'I just cannot imagine what that poor family are going through'. So I feel better about those two having seen that. Mellas/Goofy have been disrepectful to Meredith and for me this is the height of ignorance and vulgarity. It is sub-human behaviour. Mellas has shown himself to be pretty dim all in all (agree with Brian S's scenario above) and I think he's been put back in the box too.

The Woodward case was horrible - I do remember Louise. What a sad little dumpling she was. Way out of her depth, far, far too young and inexperienced to be doing that job. I do recall thinking that I would never have left her in charge of a little baby. Far too young. I should think his mother felt awful.

Incidently, my sister-in-law (who is American!) has just suffered a small stroke or bleed in the brain after returning from a skiing trip (shades of poor Natasha). Luckily she will recover, but they said it could have been an earlier fall, or a skiing fall that weakened a blood vessel. She has no memory of any traumatic impact, so it could have been quite minor. Some people just have weaknesses in the blood vessels in the brain that is genetic. A friend recently lost his wife in a day age 52 from a brain hemorrhage. Fainted at work and was dead seven hours later. The doctors said it could have happened at any time. It just goes to show how fragile life is. And maybe neither Louise or anyone else did anything wrong...
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:39 pm   Post subject:    

I thought I remembered a red coat from somewhere (and not the Little Red Riding Hood one either).

But it was just my memory of some maroon or dark brown clothing in a suitcase:



I (re-)came across a photo I had forgotten about that I downloaded back on 19-Jan-2009 :
Curatolo's men-in-white and what looks like the bra strap (the dating, 18-Dec-2007, is right for when the bra-strap fragment was collected and catalogued; and it is made of metal and cloth).





And the first instalment of the 10,000 pages of evidence (imagine being a lawyer and having to read all that!)




About people knowing what happened to Meredith: Filomena found out by lip-reading (as she testified), or others just observing (like newspaper reporters) - but from this photo, you couldn't definitely conclude that "she bled to death" (as Amanda told her friends at the police station while they were waiting), could you? Logically, it could be argued that Amanda made a good guess, I suppose, so the evidentiary weight of those words would probably not be all that great.


Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:59 pm   Post subject:    

OT for translators:


In Albanian red (crimson, scarlet) is "kuq" (think English cocchineal).
Interestingly, "keq" (think English cack) has a swag of meanings: crummy, nasty, naughty, evil, mean, lousy, horrible, and so on. Sounds like a pretty handy word.

Even if a crummy-coat-wearing, knife-wielding person (who was initially mistaken for a bag of trash) sounds appealing from a plot-plausibility/drama/creative writing point of view, it's actually unlikely that Kokumani was mis-heard or mistranslated, though.

Albanian online dictionary.
Top Profile 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 2:09 pm   Post subject: Re: the vaseline issue....   

stewarthome2000 wrote:
petafly wrote:
Something i missed completely:
Is the vaseline considered a piece of evidence or is it just a mundane jar of vaseline? All i can find about this are reports for the sheer sensation...

ThX!


In the UK, they have a different idea what VASELINE is when one hears the name. It not just petroleum jelly, or a lubricant etc. It's a skin moisturiser as well. Vaseline has a whole series of products for skin care that many British women have in their bathroom- much more popular than in the US. It seems everyone is assuming its petroleum jelly, when it may be just skin moisteriser, like Oil of Olay. Somewhere I recall just reading jar of Vaseline ( a news article maybe), but over here that can mean anything so I did not think much of it. Where did it say petroleum Jelly? Other Vasline products come in jars and bottles not just PJ.

In addition I do not think the medical report has shown any use of a lubricant in Meredith. Hence, unless it has RS and AK prints on it, no biggie.
This may be yet another misinterpretation from Italian to English... boh? Does anyone have more details?

Vaseline Homepage UK



On the vaseline:

It was found on the desk in Meredith's room.

From Amanda's Nov4th 2007 email: - i have to get this off my chest because its
pressing down on me and it helps to know that someone besides me knows
something, and that im not the one who knows the most out of everyone.
at the house they asked me very personal questions about meredith's
life and also about the personalities of our neighbors. how well did i
know them? pretty well, we are friends. was meredith sexually active?
yeah, she borrowed a few of my condoms. does she like anal? wtf? i
dont know. does she use vaseline? for her lips?
...


From Filomena's questioning at the trial: - Filomena described Meredith.
Mez tells her that she came to Perugia for studying, not for hanging up with boys. And that's obvious.
But the rest of the description is helpful to our purpose (understand the mind of the witness): Meredith was not interested in sex or drugs. With Giacomo it was only a friendship with no sex involved. She was always early at home...
Filomena as a saint biographer obviously didn't read Giacomo's interrogations. And she's probably the only one in the world who doesn't know of the nights Mez was spending in the clubs, just like any other student. Totally normal things, but unspeakable for the moral values of this witness, for the good manners of her facade.
She doesn't know, obviously, what's the vaseline for....
- Perugia-Shock


I can also remember that Meredith's friends were also asked about the vaseline.


In context from snippets I have picked up over the last year or so:

The jar of vaseline was on the desk in Meredith's room.

The investigators have shown a definite interest in it and it is known to be an item of evidence which was taken from the cottage.

None of Meredith's friends or the girls from the cottage can ever remember seeing vaseline in Meredith's room, nor can any of them remember her ever using it.

Lalli will obviously know if it was used for a sexual purpose when Meredith was attacked but I don't recall any mention of vaseline from his report.

I believe the police questioning about vaseline and anal sex was an attempt by them to rule it out as being there for that purpose.

Amanda Knox gets cold sores on her lips and suffered a graze to her neck apparently on Nov 1st. I bet it was sore. I think the police suspect that Amanda left the vaseline in Meredith's room before she locked the door on Nov 2nd. I bet that store sells vaseline as well as bleach.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 2:40 pm   Post subject:    

Raffaele's denial lyrics, Jesus Christ Superstar (if we start rehearsing now, we'll be ready to perform by Easter!)*

*Suggested Musical Title: Amanda Knox, Superstar


Maid by the Fire (Sra Nara)
I think I've seen you somewhere
I remember
You were with that girl
They took away
I recognize your face

Peter (Raffaele Sollecito)
You've got the wrong man, lady
I don't know her
And I wasn't where
She was that night
Never near the place

Soldier (Kokomani)
That's strange
For I am sure I saw you with her
You were right by her side
And yet you deny it?

Peter (RS)
I tell you
I was never ever with her

Old Man (University researcher/unemployed guy)
But I saw you too
It looked just like you

Peter (RS)
I don't know her!!!

Mary Magdalene (Edda)
Raffe, don't you know what you have said
You've gone and cut her dead

Peter (RS)
I had to do it
Don't you see?
Or else they'd go for me

Mary Magdalene
It's what she told us you would do
I wonder how she knew?

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.


Last edited by Skeptical Bystander on Wed Apr 01, 2009 2:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Viv


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:28 am

Posts: 105

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 2:48 pm   Post subject:    

Hullo. I think I know what the vaseline was. If you look at this Oggi picture, you can see a small blue/white round thing on Meredith's desk, to the front left of the computer:
http://i44.tinypic.com/nmb86q.jpg

It's identifiable by the colours on its sides - solid blue on the lower half, bi-colour blue and white on the top.

I've got one of those - it's the Vaseline 'lip therapy' pot and I've used it for years, tho I prefer the green aloe vera variety. Lives in my bag or pocket. It's used by millions of people here. We get these cold winds from the Urals blowing off the North Sea, especially in July...
http://www.vaseline.co.uk/Product.aspx? ... LipTherapy

As for the popularity, I offer you a link from everyone's favourite 'roid. Vaseline lip therapy topped a poll of 2000 women. This article also has the benefit of a side-view photo of the pot, showing you the colour pattern I detect in the object on Meredith's desk:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... thout.html

I'm just identifying the product. Of course the police might well have very good reason to be interested in a pot of innocuous and widely-used lip balm.

The standard Vaseline petroleum jelly comes in squarish pots like this
http://www.vaseline.co.uk/Product.aspx? ... oleumJelly
That's what I'd call a 'tub' of vaseline. A friend with bad eczema sometimes uses it as a barrier when bathing.

Sorry in haste or i'd have TinyURLed the links.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:10 pm   Post subject:    

It is interesting to look at what Frank had to say about Antonio Curatolo nearly a year ago. Here are some excerpted passages from his original post. Curatolo seems to have handled Frank as well as he handled Bongiorno. Thanks to Blaise's post above, I got to thinking about the parallels between the enterprise that is Perugia Shock and the enterprise that is Paul Ciolino. Paul Ciolino made a similar impression on Sra Nara (see the next post here, also from Perugia Shock).

Frank's Perugia Shock
April 18, 2008

Quote:
Today, I just happened to meet the super witness during his working hours.
He was searching in a dumpster and he found a lot of interesting things, lots of almost-new shoes and clothes and even 20,000 lire. Yes, 20,000 lire, even 8 years after they went out of circulation! His reaction was "Look, can you believe what people throw away?!"

Curatolo Antonio, aka Toto, the "super witness" in the Meredith Kercher case, lives like this. He's not a teacher or a member of the liberal professions, as they tried to present him. His roof is the sky and his salary is--when he gets lucky--a few unusable banknotes. The police says they tried everything with him, but there has been nothing to do, he keeps leaving in the street and dealing with pushers, they don't even arrest him anymore.
Toto found also a huge blanket, which was very heavy because it was wet. He couldn't carry it by himself, so I carried it for him to his favorite bench. His way of thanking me was to call the director of Corriere dell'Umbria and the police to have me arrested for asking him what he really saw that night.

The director of Giornale dell'Umbria was too busy to take my three calls today. But for Toto, he is immediately available and tells him not to move, he'll be there straight away. Of course, Toto is somebody.

Sorry Toto, if I made fun of you before. I was just kidding. Who knows, maybe you are the perfect witness.
You showed me you have the quick reflexes to cover your face; you move fast around the cottage, even when carrying all your bags. Your brain works much better than mine and maybe you have got the truth.
Now I'm busy. Get me arrested some other time.
By the way, about the facts, what Antonio Curatolo told me is that that night he didn't see anyone at the basketball court. But what counts is what he told the police and to the police he said to have seen Amanda and Raffaele out of the cottage. After all he's an expert witness. Already in 2001 he testified against a a Tunisian (who allegely killed his girl by the swimming pool) and he got him condemned.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:15 pm   Post subject:    

Paul Ciolino goes after a witness; not to be outdone, Frank Sfarzo tracks down the same witness. Both are basically told to sod off.


TUESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008
A Long Way From Truth
48-hour mystery train to Perugia
By Margaret Ganong


First of all, I have a confession to make—a true confession. I did not see the CBS 48-hours show. That’s not quite true: I saw the last 20-minute segment, which included a long commercial break.

So I did what any self-respecting journalist would do. I read the transcript. The show was about whether or not Amanda Knox should be in jail. A private investigator from America thinks she’s being railroaded.

The first part of the program was all about Amanda—her early years, her education, how she worked to save money for her trip to Europe. If you saw the ABC 20/20 show in February, you know this part.

We heard about events leading up to Amanda Knox’s arrest, including the famous 14-hour interrogation session. Paul the PI says all the evidence points to Rudy, who was the last person with Meredith before she died. He noted that when a dead body turns up it is usually the last guy to see it alive who did it. And that guy was Rudy.

About Rudy, we learned that Paul the PI talked to the owner of the Merlin bar, who said Rudy had been banned from there for threatening a bartender with a knife. But we heard nothing about Raffaele’s knife collection.

Basically, it seems to come down to this: who do you believe?

The lead investigator says the case is solid against all three.

Paul the PI says all the evidence points to Rudy.

Paul the PI says police hit Amanda during questioning.

The lead investigator says this is not so.

Paul the PI says that people with a Catholic upbringing and Jesuit education do not participate in orgies and murders.

Paul the PI says that Rudy and Raffaele might try and pin the whole thing on Amanda.

Paul the PI got an interpreter and camera and went to talk to Nara Cappezalli, the lady who said last December on television that she heard people running from the crime scene. Her initial fifteen minutes of fame must have been enough, because she refused to open her shutters—even when Paul told the interpreter Julia to tell Nara it was important. They asked her about talking to the police and from behind closed shutters she said she never talked to the police. For Paul, this means the police must have learned about her testimony on television because never interviewed her. Can you believe it?

After Nara’s confession from behind closed shutters, Paul the PI decided to conduct an experiment from an apartment above Nara’s. He wanted to see if the sound of footsteps could be heard through closed windows. He got some local kids to run. Maybe he told them they would be on television. With the windows closed, you couldn’t hear much. Maybe Paul should have gotten Nara to open those shutters. Then he might have seen whether or not she was pulling his leg.


Amanda did not make an appearance, either, but Edda Mellas and Curt Knox did. Edda was almost too distraught to speak. When asked if she believed Amanda was innocent, she replied that she believed what her daughter had written and said. What mother would not? If any more shows like this are in the works, my advice to the networks is this: Leave the poor woman alone, already. She has been through a lot. There is something sick about exploiting her motherly instincts in this way.

And last but not least, Paul the PI said if it were up to him he would get in his car, go to that prison right now, get those two kids out of there and take them home to their parents.

I guess he didn’t realize that they aren’t being held at the same prison.

In the run-up to the show, Paul the PI visited some locally-hosted blogs and pretty much told everyone to just shut up and watch the show. He said we were going to see and hear stuff that would knock our socks off. He said he had spent more time on this case than anyone, including the PM, the GIP and the investigators in Italy. Why don’t they hire him?

Speaking of which, I wonder who’s paying this guy. I posted that question on one of the blogs he visited, but I never got an answer to my post. So I went to his website, where I learned that he specializes in wrongful convictions. So I’m thinking, maybe this guy knows something about this case that we don’t. Too bad he didn’t share that with us on the show. Then it really would have been explosive. In fact, it seems to have fizzled, at least as far as public opinion is concerned. And as for Mignini, Matteini and the investigators, I doubt they watched it. They apparently have already seen Nara on television.

The online comments following the local Seattle PI article hyping the show were overwhelmingly negative. Of course, some were stupid and distasteful, as anonymous posts tend to be. But many people who read the Seattle PI believe that the Italians actually know what they’re doing and should be allowed to complete the investigation and present their findings without interference from CBS, ABC and NBC. One poster suggested that Seattleites boycott Italian food until Amanda is released, but I think she was kidding. I hope so anyway.


Update on the Nara, the Mystery Lady. Our man in Perugia caught up with her early this week. Here’s a transcript of their conversation:


Q: Are you sure you heard that scream coming from the cottage?
A: Oh my God, I still have it in my ears, a terrible scream.

Q: But how could you hear it from your place, with the windows closed?
A: I don't know, maybe because it was night. And we should know if their windows were closed. But at night, when there's silence, you can hear everything.
Q: How can you say there were people fleeing right after?
A: I'm on the ground floor. You can hear the steps very clearly here. Because when someone walks on the iron stair, it makes noise. On the other side there's gravel and you can tell right away when someone steps there.
Q: You don't know what time it was?
A: I have no idea about that. It's not that I got up because I was waiting for my daughter or I had something to do. I just got up because I had to go to the toilet and I heard those noises. But I couldn't imagine it was something like that.
Q: Then how did you realize what happened?
A: I saw it the next day on television.
Q: And what did you do? Did you call the police?
A: No.
Q: How did they hear about your testimony?
A: Because I told my neighbors. Then I went to see the cottage and there were journalists there. They asked me and I told them. But why are you asking me again after so long?
Q: Because your interview behind the shutters was aired and you said that the police and judges did not hear you. Is that true?

A: I can't remember that.
Q: You remember everything else so well and your testimony never changed one iota in several months. How is it possible that you don't remember if you were interviewed by the police? I was told by a reliable source that you had been heard on November 27.

A: If you have that information... I can't answer this question.
Q: Why? You already answered it. You said on American television that you were not interviewed by the police.
A: I don't know. I was busy. One was speaking, another one was translating.
Q: So, is it true that you were not heard?
A: I'm sorry, I can't speak about that.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 844

Location: New York

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:27 pm   Post subject:    

Those steel steps certainly clang like a broken bell. They are quite new and still unpainted.

There seems to be something wrong with their construction. With all the clanging, it is quite a self-conscious experience to walk up and down them. Anybody need to see a shot? I have some, if you havent seen them.

The gravel has always puzzled me. There are only two places with gravel that I can think of. One is in Meredith's driveway (Nara could hear that for sure) and the other in the park under the trees (around the corner and I think much too far to be heard).

If RS and AK approached the park from the street up top, that suggests to me they were the ones that ran up the steel stairs. Guede was seen (bumpoed into) of course running up the stone steps.

When do we believe all the luminol footprints were laid down? Immediately, or in the early part of the cleanup? As at least one fits Guede, which suggests immediately - unless he returned.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2306

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:41 pm   Post subject:    

Fast Pete wrote:
When do we believe all the luminol footprints were laid down? Immediately, or in the early part of the cleanup? As at least one fits Guede, which suggests immediately - unless he returned.


Guede must have left his bloody footprint immediately. Knox's and Sollecito's bloody footprints were made in bare feet. The prosecutors allege that they stripped off before they carried out the clean up to avoid getting blood on their clothes. It's clear that Knox's and Solecito's bloody footprints which were revealed by luminol were laid down in the early part of the clean up.
Top Profile 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 844

Location: New York

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:52 pm   Post subject:    

Corriere seems to have made the first mention of the vaseline.

They called it "un vasetto di vaselina" which I believe means a tub or jar of Vaseline.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 4:10 pm   Post subject: Vergogna!   

At the cooks table:
I found this comment from Lingua Mignon very funny in response to the cook's 'Bad week for the prosecution' this poster has had comments in the past deleted I guess her latest will not be there for long.

Posted by Lingua mignon III at 4/1/09 5:27 a.m.
"If that was a bad week for the prosecution I'd hate it for Amanda's when they have a good week."

This other comment is disgusting. What kind of person writes things like this and what kind of blogger famous for over using the delete key, lets such an offensive comment stand? :shock:
Comportamento vergognoso Candace Dempsey!


Posted by Harry R. Wilkens at 3/31/09 3:19 p.m.
"How can the Meredith legal (and also the Meredith family?) be so stubborn or, better: malevolent? Like Mignini and Micheli and the jurors they KNOW that Amanda and Raffaele are innocent.
For me there remains just the question about the guilt of Rudy. Frankly, this should be examined by somebody who - like me - spent a lot of time running this case thru his/her brain. Isn't there anybody ready, willing and able to do this?"


Last edited by Jools on Wed Apr 01, 2009 4:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline disinterested


User avatar


Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:34 pm

Posts: 236

Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 4:13 pm   Post subject: The Red Coat   

About the mysterious coat (I'm staying out of the Vaseline) that RS says AK never wore... RS himself has a very red parka type coat he's worn at least twice to court



which could certainly look "60's" with its stand up collar. Maybe Amanda borrowed it? However, no "big red buttons" and those would be hard to just imagine.

Reminds me of the Nicholas Roeg film "Don't Look Now" where the gothic "red dwarf" (not as in astronomy) disappears in and out of the alleyways of Venice.



Didi
Top Profile 

Offline Ferret


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:21 am

Posts: 101

Location: Hidden Hills, CA

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 4:14 pm   Post subject:    

MikeMCSG wrote:
Hi Bard

Your memory is slightly faulty in that the verdict was guilty of murder which they would not have been cheering. They would have been cheering the sentence - effectively time served - which allowed Louise to return home.

I think you're a bit harsh on the friends and family in comparing them to Mellas. Mrs Eappen at least was a shrill dislikeable woman who had clearly pre-judged the case (unlike the Kercher family) and, given the earlier injury defense theory, an alternative suspect. I think that accounts for the disrespect. Mellas has no similar excuses.

I have actually wondered if some of the FOA animus against Italian justice is influenced by the negative British coverage of the Boston authorities in the Woodward case but have never read a direct comparison up to now.


Let me ask you this... who here hasn't "pre-judged" the murder of Meredith Kercher? Given the overwhelming evidence against Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito, and Rudy Guede? How the evidence doesn't divert focus on other potential suspects, and it only solidifies what exactly happened to Meredith Kercher on the night of Nov. 1st.

I just find it fascinating that people who can see the BS from FOA PR offensive, were slurping up the same BS as a truth elixir when Louise Woodward's PR offensive were using the same tactics. The LW PR offensive was more effective because they didn't worry about the language barrier. FOA has repeated their objective numerous times... minimize the evidence against Amanda, raise doubt on direct evidence, especially the knife found at Raffaele's aparment, and that Amanda's is in her present situation from Police bumbling.

I think Mrs. Eappen can definitely pre-judge the case against Louise Woodward, given as an ophthalmologist, she examine her son after he was rushed into ER, and saw the damage and intercranial pressure that the skull fracture caused.


Last edited by Ferret on Wed Apr 01, 2009 7:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 4:18 pm   Post subject:    

Viv wrote:
Hullo. I think I know what the vaseline was. If you look at this Oggi picture, you can see a small blue/white round thing on Meredith's desk, to the front left of the computer:
http://i44.tinypic.com/nmb86q.jpg



I have one of those tins too! It's good for all kinds of things - protects skin when dying hair etc. From the notes I imagined a big pot of the stuff! Well spotted

AND IS THAT A RED COAT I CAN SEE ON THE BED??????? IN THE SAME PICTURE???? ANYONE?
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 4:23 pm   Post subject:    

How would Sollecito know whether la Knox had a red coat or not?
They only knew each other for 7 days, out of those seven days AK stayed over the night at his place I guess many times wearing the same clothes as the night /day before. So is 7 days long enough for a just barely boyfriend to know all the clothes the just about girlfriend owns?
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 4:39 pm   Post subject: Re: The Red Coat   

disinterested wrote:
About the mysterious coat (I'm staying out of the Vaseline) that RS says AK never wore... RS himself has a very red parka type coat he's worn at least twice to court



which could certainly look "60's" with its stand up collar. Maybe Amanda borrowed it? However, no "big red buttons" and those would be hard to just imagine.

Reminds me of the Nicholas Roeg film "Don't Look Now" where the gothic "red dwarf" (not as in astronomy) disappears in and out of the alleyways of Venice.



Didi


Brilliant! What eagle eyes! And of course if AK had borrowed his coat that day he was not perjuring himself by suggesting she hasn't 'got' one....
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:16 pm   Post subject:    

On the video shown by Telenorba:

"Meredith’s body on Telenorba. The conclusion of the investigation has been notified.

It 'been notified by the public prosecutor of Perugia, the notice of completion of investigations to Raffaele Sollecito four family members and two journalists of the TV Telenorba the investigation started from the transmission of part of a movie of forensics where the body of Meredith Kercher was shown.



No comment was issued by Luca Maori, one of the Sollecito family lawyers.
In the conclusion of investigations (usually a prelude to the request for trial) are identified in various ways, the crimes of defamation, invasion of privacy, publication of arbitrary acts of investigation and publication of gruesome acts. According to the reconstruction of the prosecutor of Perugia, the father and sister of Rafaele, who had legitimately availability of the scientific survey filmed of the police, would provide it to Telenorba.



The images of the naked body of Kercher, transmited March 31 of 2008, have publicly insulted the reputation of the young girl. The notice of termination sees also a journalist and the editor of Panorama for the publication of an article in which they reported that Kercher’s blood in which doctors had found an alcohol concentration above the legal norm (and thus would have been drunk when she was killed). Circumstance then denied - according to the prosecutor in Perugia - from the tests made at the disposal of the GIP.
The investigation was launched following a complaint against Panorama and Telenorba submitted by the family Kercher, lawyers Francesco Maresca and Serena Perna."

http://tinyurl.com/d9nqqw
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:42 pm   Post subject:    

There is a precedent for doing a rock opera treatment of this story. Do you all remember American figure skater Tonya Harding? Her story and the rock opera it inspired are recapped below:


Quote:
Oregon’s most famous bad girl may be finally embracing her own legend.

“Tonya and Nancy: The Rock Opera” opened in Portland Thursday night -- and Tonya Harding herself was in the audience.

"Wow. Did my life really look that bad?" Harding said after the show. "But you know what? They did a really great job."

In 1994, the Portland-born skater Harding was competing for a spot on the U.S. Olympic figure skating team when a club-wielding assailant hit competitor Nancy Kerrigan in the knee, forcing her out of the competition. Video showed Kerrigan grabbing her knee and wailing "Why me, why me?"

The rock opera was put together by Elizabeth Searle, Michael Tioli and artistic director Don Teoli, of Arlington, Virginia. It follows Harding and Kerrigan through their careers from before and since the infamous knee-whacking.

Searle said she did not consult the two skaters about the opera, but it was pieced together from news, tabloid reports and actual quotes from the two skaters. It debuted with a run on the East Coast before the Portland shows at the World Trade Center theater were announced.


Since Portland was launched into the international media spotlight during the case, Harding has also been in the news on several occasions, including a sex video of her and former husband Gilooly on their 1990 wedding night, an assault arrest in 2000 where she attacked a boyfriend with a hubcap and a drunk driving conviction and subsequent parole violation.

In 2007 Harding told police four men and a woman tried to break into her car and steal it. In his report, the deputy wrote that Harding's account was "very implausible," and her odd behavior was blamed on a new prescription medication she was taking.

But there were positive moments too -- like the time Tonya was given credit for helping get medics to the scene when a fellow video poker player suffered a medical condition at a Southwest Washington tavern. And the time Tonya punched Paula Jones’ lights out at a celebrity boxing match on television in 2002.

Harding's ex-husband, Jeff Gillooly, was accused of hatching the original plan. The investigation also eventually netted convictions of Shane Stant, the actual attacker, and Stant's uncle, Derrick Smith, who drove the getaway car.

For her part, Harding has always said she didn't know of the plan. She pleaded guilty to conspiracy to hinder an investigation into the assault and was banned from U.S. Figure Skating Association competitions for life.

The International Committee of the U.S. Figure Skating Association went on to grant Kerrigan a spot and she recovered in time to win a silver medal at the winter Olympics. She also went on to act as a spokesperson for Disney.

Songs such as "Whip Her Butt", and “Estacada” (Sample lyrics: “When you wake up sleeping in your car in Estacada, cause your house is surrounded by reporters and the FBI…) lead some reviewers to call it Portland’s own “Blades of Glory.” The events in this case, however are all true.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:49 pm   Post subject:    

This is Il Messaggero take on the story of the vido shown by Telenorba. Looks like the Sollecito's and some journalists could possibly be sent to trial. Well done Maresca!!!

"PERUGIA - Eight people, including some journalists of Telenorba and relatives of Raffaele Sollecito, are on the threshold of the sending to trial for the shown movie of the room and the corpse of Meredith Kercher transmitted by the pugliese. In fact to the eight, prosecutors Manuela Comodi and Giuliano Mignini have sent the notice of completion of investigations in which they assume, among other, the offenses of spreading horrific images and invasion of privacy. They were, for the prosecution, the relatives of Sollecito, on trial along with Amanda Knox for the murder of British student, to give the movie to Telenorba. The Order of Journalists began disciplinary inquiries about the incident."
Top Profile 

Offline petafly


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:08 pm

Posts: 278

Location: Switzerland/Germany

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:52 pm   Post subject:    

This video is still on youtube. Don'T watch it, it gives you some real bad dreams...

Is it possible to get it removed somehow?
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:06 pm   Post subject:    

petafly wrote:
This video is still on youtube. Don'T watch it, it gives you some real bad dreams...

Is it possible to get it removed somehow?


Hi petafly,

I think it has been removed long ago, what is there still is the one shown by the Knox/Mellas I mean the one Anne B. called the Fellini forensics. :lol:
Top Profile 

Offline petafly


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:08 pm

Posts: 278

Location: Switzerland/Germany

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:10 pm   Post subject:    

I think you're wrong Jools: look edit:somewhere

BE quick. I' ll remove this link in 15 minutes!


Last edited by petafly on Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline justlooking


User avatar


Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 6:45 pm

Posts: 314

Location: England

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:24 pm   Post subject:    

I think that video has been around for a while petafly, and on lots of websites. What I find most curious about it is who released it initially. The consensus from what I've read is that it was released by the defence - maybe as some 'viral' campaign to show the supposedly poor quality of the Perugia CSI investigation.

_________________
Paul
Top Profile 

Offline nicki

Forensics Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:27 am

Posts: 847

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:30 pm   Post subject: Re: The Red Coat   

disinterested wrote:
About the mysterious coat (I'm staying out of the Vaseline) that RS says AK never wore... RS himself has a very red parka type coat he's worn at least twice to court



which could certainly look "60's" with its stand up collar. Maybe Amanda borrowed it? However, no "big red buttons" and those would be hard to just imagine.

Reminds me of the Nicholas Roeg film "Don't Look Now" where the gothic "red dwarf" (not as in astronomy) disappears in and out of the alleyways of Venice.



Didi

Didi,
Sharp eye! It does look "60's", in Italy this is called the "Montgomery coat", or simply "Il Montgomery", very popular in the late 60's and early 70's. A trendy look last year... I agree that there are no big buttons but if it is a Montgomery-style, it could be quite easy to mistake those fasteners for large buttons...Bingo? :idea:
PS "Don't look now", one of the scariest movies I've ever seen...
Top Profile 

Offline nicki

Forensics Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:27 am

Posts: 847

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:36 pm   Post subject:    

Jools wrote:
On the video shown by Telenorba:

"Meredith’s body on Telenorba. The conclusion of the investigation has been notified.

It 'been notified by the public prosecutor of Perugia, the notice of completion of investigations to Raffaele Sollecito four family members and two journalists of the TV Telenorba the investigation started from the transmission of part of a movie of forensics where the body of Meredith Kercher was shown.



No comment was issued by Luca Maori, one of the Sollecito family lawyers.
In the conclusion of investigations (usually a prelude to the request for trial) are identified in various ways, the crimes of defamation, invasion of privacy, publication of arbitrary acts of investigation and publication of gruesome acts. According to the reconstruction of the prosecutor of Perugia, the father and sister of Rafaele, who had legitimately availability of the scientific survey filmed of the police, would provide it to Telenorba.



The images of the naked body of Kercher, transmited March 31 of 2008, have publicly insulted the reputation of the young girl. The notice of termination sees also a journalist and the editor of Panorama for the publication of an article in which they reported that Kercher’s blood in which doctors had found an alcohol concentration above the legal norm (and thus would have been drunk when she was killed). Circumstance then denied - according to the prosecutor in Perugia - from the tests made at the disposal of the GIP.
The investigation was launched following a complaint against Panorama and Telenorba submitted by the family Kercher, lawyers Francesco Maresca and Serena Perna."

http://tinyurl.com/d9nqqw


Excellent! Thank you Jools, for providing us with the news
Top Profile 

Offline petafly


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:08 pm

Posts: 278

Location: Switzerland/Germany

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:37 pm   Post subject:    

Quote:
I think that video has been around for a while petafly, and on lots of websites

No! In this video they show her open throat. And some other things. It's only on youtube, nowhere else. And it should be removed!
Top Profile 

Offline disinterested


User avatar


Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:34 pm

Posts: 236

Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:45 pm   Post subject: Candace, et al...   

I've been avoiding Candace's table altogether since last fall, when I became just too depressingly disgusted by the persistent manipulativeness of some of her posts and commenters, at a time when I was looking for unbiased information (good luck, hey?) and there was so little coverage to be had here in the USA. Strangely, I've only recently come across PMF and find it quite curative, so thank you all. (I think I confused you previously with P. Shock.)

But JOOLs post earlier today made me go back to the table to see if Harry had really said this thing:

"How can the Meredith legal (and also the Meredith family?) be so stubborn or, better: malevolent?", etc.

I couldn't find it. Was it in the comments to "Bad Week for the Prosecution?".

I also have to hand it to Finn McCool for his ability to maintain such an Obama-esque calm and...Cool!...in his comments there. More than I could manage...but it's good someone tries to keep'em honest.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:47 pm   Post subject:    

petafly wrote:
I think you're wrong Jools: look here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dpZheBIhQs

BE quick. I' ll remove this link in 15 minutes!


If still there I see you need to sign up unlike before that it was available to anyone whether you were a sign up member of youtube or not. I am not a member therefore can't view, nor that I want to anyway.
Top Profile 

Offline justlooking


User avatar


Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 6:45 pm

Posts: 314

Location: England

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:54 pm   Post subject:    

Petafly - if it's on youtube then it's effectively everywhere. I agree, it should be removed.

_________________
Paul
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:56 pm   Post subject: Re: Candace, et al...   

disinterested wrote:
I've been avoiding Candace's table altogether since last fall, when I became just too depressingly disgusted by the persistent manipulativeness of some of her posts and commenters, at a time when I was looking for unbiased information (good luck, hey?) and there was so little coverage to be had here in the USA. Strangely, I've only recently come across PMF and find it quite curative, so thank you all. (I think I confused you previously with P. Shock.)

But JOOLs post earlier today made me go back to the table to see if Harry had really said this thing:

"How can the Meredith legal (and also the Meredith family?) be so stubborn or, better: malevolent?", etc.

I couldn't find it. Was it in the comments to "Bad Week for the Prosecution?".

I also have to hand it to Finn McCool for his ability to maintain such an Obama-esque calm and...Cool!...in his comments there. More than I could manage...but it's good someone tries to keep'em honest.


Hi Disinterested! I guess that comment was finally deleted. Let's hope so.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 7:16 pm   Post subject: Re: Candace, et al...   

disinterested wrote:
I've been avoiding Candace's table altogether since last fall, when I became just too depressingly disgusted by the persistent manipulativeness of some of her posts and commenters, at a time when I was looking for unbiased information (good luck, hey?) and there was so little coverage to be had here in the USA. Strangely, I've only recently come across PMF and find it quite curative, so thank you all. (I think I confused you previously with P. Shock.)

But JOOLs post earlier today made me go back to the table to see if Harry had really said this thing:

"How can the Meredith legal (and also the Meredith family?) be so stubborn or, better: malevolent?", etc.

I couldn't find it. Was it in the comments to "Bad Week for the Prosecution?".

I also have to hand it to Finn McCool for his ability to maintain such an Obama-esque calm and...Cool!...in his comments there. More than I could manage...but it's good someone tries to keep'em honest.


Hi disinterested,

Yes that comment I posted was on page 1 of the "Bad week for the prosecution" it has now been deleted but as usual scatty brain cook has forgotten to delete another post by Wilkens that reffers to the same:

***Posted by Harry R. Wilkens at 3/31/09 5:40 p.m.
DelD: One MUST be malevolent to maintain accusations against innocent people! It seems that without the Kercher legal's action against Amanda and Raffaele, they would be out of jail, at least according to what I heard...
I am more and more in favor of the Gabrielle Carlizzi theory, i.e. that ALL 3 jailed are just fall-guys, and the murder(s) is/are still free!***
Top Profile 

Offline Ferret


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:21 am

Posts: 101

Location: Hidden Hills, CA

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 7:41 pm   Post subject:    

petafly wrote:
This video is still on youtube. Don'T watch it, it gives you some real bad dreams...

Is it possible to get it removed somehow?


It is just an internal police video, showing how they collected evidence and went around the crime scene. The problem with the video is that it can be construed in a myriad of ways by all sides in this drama.

On the nightmare part, it is interesting how images can scar the conscious more than words at times. I guess seeing Meredith dead, takes away from all the photos of her in press smiling. The images are disturbing, but this was always a pretty disturbing case, a defenseless woman stabbed and bled to death by her housemate.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 7:44 pm   Post subject: Here's what happened to the FOA   

petafly wrote:
Edit: Äääätschh: Fly by Night was faster. Tell me, how's Hawaii?


Flying by night is always faster! Hawaii has been particularly cold and windy/cloudy/showery in recent months/weeks - barely 80 in the days and down into the 60's at night (26 to 18, Celsius). Even the ocean is cold - 79F/26C. Absolutely miserable - we are all waiting for summer to arrive.

But back to the so-called demise of the FOA - I'm thinking that a big part of the departure of some of the big-hitters (i.e. Bremner) may have had something to do with coming to the realization that the infamous "wardrobe doors" (a topic that O8, in particular, froths at the mouth over) were NOT going to be the central element, if an element at all, in the courtroom drama. Although I'm sure those doors were included in the 10,000 page investigative report, this case is apparently instead going to focus primarily on eyewitness statements and oh-so impartial forensic evidence. So, without an opportunity for sensationalistic headlines the big hitters are simply not going to waste their time - after all, their biggest paycheck comes from making appearances in the media, not from the defendants' interests.

Looking back, it seems clear to me that the FOA were gearing themselves and the major media outlets up all along for a dramatic multi-front attack on The Grand Master Mignini and his Insane Theater of Madness. But apparently they failed to take into consideration that Knox might easily be convicted simply on the basis of routine police work. That is a major oversight and I doubt Dave Marriott will be highlighting his work with the Knox family as part of his business solicitation portfolio.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 7:58 pm   Post subject:    

Ferret wrote:
petafly wrote:
This video is still on youtube. Don'T watch it, it gives you some real bad dreams...

Is it possible to get it removed somehow?


It is just an internal police video, showing how they collected evidence and went around the crime scene. The problem with the video is that it can be construed in a myriad of ways by all sides in this drama.

On the nightmare part, it is interesting how images can scar the conscious more than words at times. I guess seeing Meredith dead, takes away from all the photos of her in press smiling. The images are disturbing, but this was always a pretty disturbing case, a defenseless woman stabbed and bled to death by her housemate.


Ferret,

While I agree with you that is an internal police video, the police didn't recorded for it to be shown to the public on a television progamme. Due to Sollecito's family and Telenorba, this was possible and believe me it is a horrific disturbing video, it shows Meredith's corpse in the NUDE. It absolutely did nothing to help the Sollecito's cause.
Hopefully thanks to Maresca acting on behalf of the victim and her family these people will be sent to trial and justice will be served.
There are no words to describe the things the family of the accuse are capable of doing!
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:14 pm   Post subject:    

Michael,

Or should I call you Micheli junior? :lol: :lol:

Can you please put Wilkens out of his misery once and for all since he is doing the rounds in both kitchen and shock blogs and confirm to him that judge Micheli is your papa?

HW wrote:
in Perugia Shock I never got an answer to it: Is the Mignini's blog "Michael" the son of judge Micheli?
I find that both questions are paramount...
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:16 pm   Post subject:    

FBN wrote:

Quote:
But back to the so-called demise of the FOA - I'm thinking that a big part of the departure of some of the big-hitters (i.e. Bremner) may have had something to do with coming to the realization that the infamous "wardrobe doors" (a topic that O8, in particular, froths at the mouth over) were NOT going to be the central element, if an element at all, in the courtroom drama. Although I'm sure those doors were included in the 10,000 page investigative report, this case is apparently instead going to focus primarily on eyewitness statements and oh-so impartial forensic evidence. So, without an opportunity for sensationalistic headlines the big hitters are simply not going to waste their time - after all, their biggest paycheck comes from making appearances in the media, not from the defendants' interests.

Looking back, it seems clear to me that the FOA were gearing themselves and the major media outlets up all along for a dramatic multi-front attack on The Grand Master Mignini and his Insane Theater of Madness. But apparently they failed to take into consideration that Knox might easily be convicted simply on the basis of routine police work. That is a major oversight and I doubt Dave Marriott will be highlighting his work with the Knox family as part of his business solicitation portfolio.


Are you implying that FOA did not disband due to the intimidation tactics and stalking of a handful of PMF posters at the last fundraiser? :shock: I thought we had scared the living daylights out of them! :lol:

On a more serious note, I think the failed effort to paint Mignini as an Evil Madman may indeed have been a factor.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:18 pm   Post subject:    

The author of Piss Talk writes he is coming around to the 'Gabriella Carlizzi theory', which thread I didn't find in the forums. Searching the internet (bad habit, avoid it if you can!) I found an article by the ubiquitous and loquacious Peter Popham which explains:


"Mr Mignini decided only a few days after Meredith died that the murder was the culmination of an orgy in which Amanda, Raffaele and one other person were involved. And in court on 19 October he explained in more detail what he meant.

The murder, Il Tempo newspaper reported him telling the court, “was premeditated and was in addition a ‘rite’ celebrated on the occasion of the night of Hallowe’en. A sexual and sacrificial rite ... In the intention of the organisers, the rite should have occurred 24 hours earlier” – on Hallowe’en itself – “but on account of a dinner at the house of horrors, organised by Meredith and Amanda’s Italian flatmates, it was postponed for one day. The presumed assassins contented themselves with the evening of 1 November to perform their do-it-yourself rite, when for some hours it would again be the night of All Saints.”

" In a blog posted last August, Gabriella Carlizzi, a prolific Roman blogger, claimed that Meredith’s murder had been ordered by the dark masters of an esoteric Masonic sect, the Order of the Red Rose, to which she thinks both Meredith and Amanda may have belonged.

“This is just my personal opinion,” she begins modestly, “and it may have no value to the investigators, but my research in America and England has reinforced my idea that this case must be interpreted from an esoteric point of view.”

Meredith and Amanda went to two universities, Leeds and Seattle, which “have become recruitment bases for Masonic orders, both deviant and non-deviant, and of Esoteric Schools,” she claims. These Schools brainwash their initiates into believing that it is right to offer “even the sacrifice of their own lives in a secret ritual, sacrifices often made voluntarily”.

Death, for these sad dupes, is no problem: they have become convinced “that life goes on after physical death, a barrier which, once overcome, allows them to cross the threshold of ‘mystery’ and ascend to the ‘superior ranks’ which rule humanity from beyond.”

Presuming that Leeds and Seattle host such secret organisations – Leeds is immediately suspect because of its rose symbol, even though it’s the wrong colour – and presuming also (because there is no evidence for it) that the two women belonged to them, the murder is easily explained: one of them had to die and the other had to kill, in a ritual of sacrifice. “It matters little which dies and which stays alive,” she explains. “What is of fundamental importance is the single motivation that both of them have ‘obeyed’ and of which both then become ‘victims’.”

Meredith’s murder, she concludes, is “a crime which has all the characteristics of a ritual culminating in human sacrifice, to which the victim may have submitted voluntarily.” Daringly, she also drags Meredith’s bereaved father into the scenario. “I ask myself if someone in Meredith’s family was aware of the presumed membership of the girl to the Esoteric School of the Red Rose.” Why so? Because “on the eighth day (you see the esoteric symbolism) after the death of his daughter... he left a single red rose (in her memory) in the cloister of Perugia cathedral.”"

Very, very interesting. The author of Pig's Hell seems to be sniffing out truffles here.
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:19 pm   Post subject:    

Forgot: here Popham gives her CV:

Gabriella Carlizzi

Ms Carlizzi has posted a complicated and seemingly highly unlikely conspiracy surrounding Meredith’s demise involving Masonic sects, symbols and life beyond death. Mr Mignini and Ms Carlizzi have previously worked together and at one point convinced a senior Italian police officer to examine a conspiracy theory about the identity of the Monster of Florence, one of Italy’s most notorious serial killers.

A prolific writer on the internet and an all-round conspiracy |theorist, Ms Carlizzi has been giving unsolicited advice to criminal investigations up and |down Italy for many years. The wealthy, religious Roman believes a priest who died in 1984 lights her up with illuminations which she uses as a starting point for her investigations into some of Italy’s most heinous crimes. Her postings on Meredith Kercher’s murder, which she starts by saying are just her personal opinion, claim to be based on research in both America and England and conclude by suggesting Meredith’s death was a human sacrifice.
Top Profile 

Offline justlooking


User avatar


Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 6:45 pm

Posts: 314

Location: England

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:20 pm   Post subject:    

Jools wrote:
Michael,

Or should I call you Micheli junior? :lol: :lol:

Can you please put Wilkens out of his misery once and for all since he is doing the rounds in both kitchen and shock blogs and confirm to him that judge Micheli is your papa?

HW wrote:
in Perugia Shock I never got an answer to it: Is the Mignini's blog "Michael" the son of judge Micheli?
I find that both questions are paramount...


I think we need a DNA sample of both Michael and Mignini, though that is unlikely to be sufficient for the FOA faithful.

While we're at it, I would suggest sectioning both Wilkens and Turtle under the relevant mental health act of their respective countries. They are truly bonkers beyond recognition.

_________________
Paul
Top Profile 

Offline mojo


Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:31 pm

Posts: 225

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:33 pm   Post subject:    

what is it with europe and the masons?? behind almost everything there seems to be some masonic connection. just last week here in france there was a big woo hoo expose about all the masons in the government.
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:37 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Are you implying that FOA did not disband due to the intimidation tactics and stalking of a handful of PMF posters at the last fundraiser? :shock: I thought we had scared the living daylights out of them! :lol:


Looking at that Diller-of-a-Hairdo, I think YOU successfully scared the living daylights out of them all on your lonesome, Skep. Keep up the good work! :lol:
Top Profile 

Offline ragazza americana


User avatar


Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 4:27 pm

Posts: 17

Location: New York

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:37 pm   Post subject: Re: The Red Coat   

disinterested wrote:
About the mysterious coat (I'm staying out of the Vaseline) that RS says AK never wore... RS himself has a very red parka type coat he's worn at least twice to court



which could certainly look "60's" with its stand up collar. Maybe Amanda borrowed it? However, no "big red buttons" and those would be hard to just imagine.

Reminds me of the Nicholas Roeg film "Don't Look Now" where the gothic "red dwarf" (not as in astronomy) disappears in and out of the alleyways of Venice.



Didi



You do not need to look so far as the dwarf - Buongiorno has an identical coat - look at the photo of her on this site under Cast of Characters/Sollecito Defense Team. RS did not say that Amanda did not have a red coat but only that *he* never saw her wear such a coat, ie, that he could not have been with her under the circumstances the witness was claiming.

I think there is much to be made of the impromtu declarations in court by the defendents. RS seems to be doing a much better job of defending himself there than AK, who has only mentioned the rabbit vibrator, cleaning disputes with roomies, and police treatment. She worried enough to speak up about the rabbit vibrator but did not care to dispute being seen in the cleaning section of the Conad store first thing in the am????? Silence can speak words.
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:49 pm   Post subject:    

"what is it with europe and the masons?? behind almost everything there seems to be some masonic connection. just last week here in france there was a big woo hoo expose about all the masons in the government." mojo writes.....

uhhh, Perhaps it is because the Masons run everything here?
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:54 pm   Post subject:    

Mojo wrote:

Quote:
What is it with Europe and the Masons?? Behind almost everything there seems to be some masonic connection. just last week here in France there was a big woo hoo expose about all the Masons in the government.


And not just in government! Oh, the stories I could tell you about the Masons in France. Ever been to Rue Cadet? There's a Masonic lodge there. Check it out. Several years ago (back in the 80's), someone I know lost his business because a jealous Mason reported that his associate was a Scientologist, which was in fact true. The company had won some contracts with the government, and the Mason -- who was secretly working in sales for this company and a competitor at the same time (!) -- contacted the media to say that the Church of Scientology was infiltrating government. It led to a huge scandal. The associate resigned and the company never recovered. Half of their business was with the French government and they were suddenly blacklisted.

Behind the scenes, Masons who had graduated from Polytechnique ("les X") were jealous of other Polytechnique grads who had become Scientologists.

I would love to give you the names of some big wigs in France who are Masons, but I would probably get whacked. They have secret handshakes and everything!!!!

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:54 pm   Post subject:    

More seriously, it is a very strong (secret) club, open to industrialists, aristocrates, lawyers, judges.......I suppose in the states we play Golf in clubs, right? Well, in France the aristos don't play golf, they tend to join masonic societies and hunt. Go Figure. Each to their own.

One direct thing of interest here though, is because it is a secret society, there is a direct possiblity of conflict. Say if the judge is a member of the same masonic order as....the defence lawyer, or why not? the defendant.

Not to mention government-industrial contracts. etc. You get the picture. Plus, because it is secret, it probably seems vaster and more influencial than it is. Or not.
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:56 pm   Post subject:    

Wow Skep. But you can tell us, can't you? It is not as if the Masons read forums on line......do they?
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:00 pm   Post subject:    

Scientology, Freemasons, The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church are like so many Cats taken in at different times.....
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:03 pm   Post subject:    

Saw a video online of Meredith, Amanda, and Ashley (?) singing together, which creeped me out more than any pictures so far. Does anyone know about this? For one thing, which is Amanda? Who is Ashley?

and Meredith, I"ve never seen her in video, doesn't look like I imagined - though it is 30 seconds. Perhaps it is a fake? If it is real though, then I am creeped out.
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:06 pm   Post subject:    

It is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MlPoerFRwQ

sorry, I don't know how to make them tiny. It comes up under Amanda Knox, and she is mentioned in the comments.......
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:08 pm   Post subject:    

Blaise wrote:
Saw a video online of Meredith, Amanda, and Ashley (?) singing together, which creeped me out more than any pictures so far. Does anyone know about this? For one thing, which is Amanda? Who is Ashley?

and Meredith, I"ve never seen her in video, doesn't look like I imagined - though it is 30 seconds. Perhaps it is a fake? If it is real though, then I am creeped out.

Blaise :lol: :lol: :lol:

That's just a video of girls with the same name nothing to do with Knox or Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:17 pm   Post subject:    

Blaise wrote:

Quote:
Wow Skep. But you can tell us, can't you? It is not as if the Masons read forums on line......do they?
Scientology, Freemasons, The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church are like so many Cats taken in at different times.....


They are everywhere! The thing is, as you point out, membership is secret. The only reason I know certain people are Masons is because "rumor has it". In one company I work for, they say you can tell the Masons by the way they dress. In fact, they dress that way so that "they" know who's who.
You know that jacket Mingini likes to wear? The gentlemen's hunting jacket? They say that is what Masons in business wear, which of course doesn't mean anyone who wears one is a Mason. I've always thought of them as Versailles jackets because so many men who work in Paris but live in Versailles wear them (or wore them - fashions change).

I tend to agree with your comparison of being a mason with being the member of a golf club. Or any club for that matter. These clubs take care of their own more than anything else. It is a real problem when they become too powerful. The reason the Scientologists became a problem in France is because they were seen as a threat to the power of the Masons, the Catholics, les X, even the less formal group of homosexuals in high places.

Do you remember Janine Tavernier, who joined a group called Unadfi in the mid-80's, when her husband joined a religious sect called Écoovie?

She went on to serve as President of the organization, during the period where France Inter seemed to devote one Le Téléphone Sonne out of two to the problem of sects. She was everywhere. This was during the heyday of sect massacres the world over (Jonestown was a precursor). At some point, Scientology got on the radar, which surprised many of my American friends. They thought it was just a wacky church that counted Tom Cruise and John Travolta among its adepts.

Anyway, Janine left the association in 2001, in part because she felt it was going after groups she did not think of as sects. One of them was l'AMORC (Ancien et Mystique Ordre des Rose-Croix).

But she was certainly criticized for taking this benevolent view of l'AMORC and even for not seeing most religions as sprouting from sects.

I don't know what the situation is in France today, but at the very least there was an interesting public debate about the very definition of sects and the place of religion and corporatism in society.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2306

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:18 pm   Post subject: Re: The Red Coat   

ragazza americana wrote:
I think there is much to be made of the impromtu declarations in court by the defendents. RS seems to be doing a much better job of defending himself there than AK, who has only mentioned the rabbit vibrator, cleaning disputes with roomies, and police treatment. She worried enough to speak up about the rabbit vibrator but did not care to dispute being seen in the cleaning section of the Conad store first thing in the am????? Silence can speak words.


It doesn't really matter if Raffaele Sollecito speaks or stays silent in court. He has already destroyed his own credibility by giving three alibis and lying repeatedly to the police. He admitted to the police that he had lied to them and he was given another opportunity to tell the truth. However, he chose to deliberately and repeatedly lie again. The judges and jury will rightly not trust anything he says because he's a compulsive liar. He still doesn't have a credible alibi for the night of the murder and he'll never have one because he was at the cottage with Knox and Guede.

Sollecito didn't do himself any favours by taking his knife to the police station or threatening to drive over the head of one of the female police officers. The fact that his family have attempted to interfere with the judicial process by trying to get certain police officers removed from the investigation will not have helped his cause and suggests that his family know that he will be found guilty.


Last edited by The Machine on Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:28 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Blaise wrote:

Quote:
Wow Skep. But you can tell us, can't you? It is not as if the Masons read forums on line......do they?
Scientology, Freemasons, The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church are like so many Cats taken in at different times.....


They are everywhere! The thing is, as you point out, membership is secret. The only reason I know certain people are Masons is because "rumor has it". In one company I work for, they say you can tell the Masons by the way they dress. In fact, they dress that way so that "they" know who's who.
You know that jacket Mingini likes to wear? The gentlemen's hunting jacket? They say that is what Masons in business wear, which of course doesn't mean anyone who wears one is a Mason. I've always thought of them as Versailles jackets because so many men who work in Paris but live in Versailles wear them (or wore them - fashions change).

I tend to agree with your comparison of being a mason with being the member of a golf club. Or any club for that matter. These clubs take care of their own more than anything else. It is a real problem when they become too powerful. The reason the Scientologists became a problem in France is because they were seen as a threat to the power of the Masons, the Catholics, les X, even the less formal group of homosexuals in high places.

Do you remember Janine Tavernier, who joined a group called Unadfi in the mid-80's, when her husband joined a religious sect called Écoovie?

She went on to serve as President of the organization, during the period where France Inter seemed to devote one Le Téléphone Sonne out of two to the problem of sects. She was everywhere. This was during the heyday of sect massacres the world over (Jonestown was a precursor). At some point, Scientology got on the radar, which surprised many of my American friends. They thought it was just a wacky church that counted Tom Cruise and John Travolta among its adepts.

Anyway, Janine left the association in 2001, in part because she felt it was going after groups she did not think of as sects. One of them was l'AMORC (Ancien et Mystique Ordre des Rose-Croix).

But she was certainly criticized for taking this benevolent view of l'AMORC and even for not seeing most religions as sprouting from sects.

I don't know what the situation is in France today, but at the very least there was an interesting public debate about the very definition of sects and the place of religion and corporatism in society.


One clue about what Masons wear... suit and tie, the suits are usually tailored made but the clue is in the sleeves, look at the set of buttons and buttons holes all the buttons should be in their holes except for the last one, the one closest to the hand that one should be unbuttoned. :lol:
Top Profile 

Offline disinterested


User avatar


Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:34 pm

Posts: 236

Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:38 pm   Post subject: Re: credibility   

[quote="The Machine"]

It doesn't really matter if Raffaele Sollecito speaks or stays silent in court. He has already destoyed his own credibility by giving three alibis and lying repeatedly to the police. He admitted to the police that he had lied to them and he was given another opportunity to tell the truth. However, he chose to deliberately and repeatedly lie again.


"In my previous statement I told a load of rubbish because Amanda had convinced me of her version of the facts and I didn't think about the inconsistencies."
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:38 pm   Post subject: Trial dress code   

Since we are talking about clothes here is pic of what AK was wearing at last week trial session:


:lol:
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:45 pm   Post subject:    

Wow (with which once again I begin a post)-

Janine Tavernier, don't know of her. I only came to France in 2000 (Bush Oblige), but do try to book-up of the culture- being an amateur cultural anthropologist as one is living elsewhere. But thanks for the tip. Only thing I remember seeing on the télé was how Princess Grace was a member of the Soleil something sex sect that sucided itself. Didn't believe it really, but with all the secret testimony by blackened out figures- it sure was compelling!

Thanks for the clothing clue. If you have anymore, would love to hear it. (alas, i am not in business here so don't get to see the real France; I was running a small study-abroad program- for American girls mostly, and funny thing, often from Washington state, which is what perked my interest in this case. So Amanda Knoxs we have, at least one, sometimes two (guess what? they don't get along), Three at most, every semester.

Though as time has gone on, and I have followed the case more closely, I am coming to the conclusion that in reality, Amanda is very very special. A star waiting to be born. - I mean of the millions of American-20-year-old-girls-away-from-home-in-Europe-for-the-first-time, this is a first. Though all the elements are always there: the local boyfriend, the dangerous marginal -excitement, excitement! - the goody two-shoes who is annoyed....always the identical dynamic. Though in Perugia, they are only missing the 'host family.' And all the conflictual fun there. I agree that there were very peculiar psycho-dynamics involved, and each by himself, this would not have happened. And yet, Amanda is truly special. I am waiting for a real in-depth psychological portrait to come out - because au fond- the Seattle people are right: Normal happy college girls don't go to Europe and rape and murder their roommate in the first few weeks. Alas, Amanda is not a normal girl. I also suspect she didn't get this way without a lot of help from her family.)

Thanks Jools! I am less creeped out now !
Top Profile 

Offline Blaise


Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:54 pm   Post subject:    

That Butt-patch- I had no idea they allowed those in Prison !
Top Profile 

Offline jodyodyo


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:02 am

Posts: 257

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:03 pm   Post subject:    

Blaise wrote:

Quote:
That Butt-patch- I had no idea they allowed those in Prison !


Hey Blaise,

I've enjoyed reading your posts. I think the butt-patch looks like a prison hobby to me! ;)
I guess they trust her with a sewing needle.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:14 pm   Post subject:    

Blaise wrote:
That Butt-patch- I had no idea they allowed those in Prison !


Prisoners wear their own clothes in prison.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:33 pm   Post subject:    

Blaise wrote:

Quote:
Janine Tavernier, don't know of her. I only came to France in 2000 (Bush Oblige), but do try to book-up of the culture- being an amateur cultural anthropologist as one is living elsewhere. But thanks for the tip. Only thing I remember seeing on the télé was how Princess Grace was a member of the Soleil something sex sect that sucided itself. Didn't believe it really, but with all the secret testimony by blackened out figures- it sure was compelling!



That could be the famous Ordre du Temple Solaire, a Franco-Swiss-Canadian sect. A bunch of its members were found dead in Switzerland in the mid-90s. They were found in a burned up place but had been shot. It was all quite mysterious. Somehow, I find it hard to believe that Princess Grace was a member. But anything is possible!

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ferret


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:21 am

Posts: 101

Location: Hidden Hills, CA

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:37 pm   Post subject:    

Jools wrote:
Ferret wrote:
petafly wrote:
This video is still on youtube. Don'T watch it, it gives you some real bad dreams...

Is it possible to get it removed somehow?


It is just an internal police video, showing how they collected evidence and went around the crime scene. The problem with the video is that it can be construed in a myriad of ways by all sides in this drama.

On the nightmare part, it is interesting how images can scar the conscious more than words at times. I guess seeing Meredith dead, takes away from all the photos of her in press smiling. The images are disturbing, but this was always a pretty disturbing case, a defenseless woman stabbed and bled to death by her housemate.


Ferret,

While I agree with you that is an internal police video, the police didn't recorded for it to be shown to the public on a television progamme. Due to Sollecito's family and Telenorba, this was possible and believe me it is a horrific disturbing video, it shows Meredith's corpse in the NUDE. It absolutely did nothing to help the Sollecito's cause.
Hopefully thanks to Maresca acting on behalf of the victim and her family these people will be sent to trial and justice will be served.
There are no words to describe the things the family of the accuse are capable of doing!


I saw the video and the graphic images of Meredith. It was silly of the Italian TV Show to broadcast it.

I guess it is in the eye of the beholder whether the internal police video can help Raffaele. I see it more that Raffaele's defense can extrapolate the video to whatever meaning they want it to be. Mainly, "sloppy" crime scene evidence gathering, and "cross contamination". Releasing the video could also help the Sollecito family with the media, given the Italian. Of course you could be very right that the video could backfire badly on Raffaele and his family, but at this point, they have nothing to lose...
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:10 pm   Post subject:    

Totally OT, but I have just seen the BBC news video of President Obama and Michele arriving at Buckingham Palace and meeting the Queen! We luuuuuuurve Obama....

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline Viv


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:28 am

Posts: 105

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:27 pm   Post subject:    

Quote:
Viv wrote:
Hullo. I think I know what the vaseline was. If you look at this Oggi picture, you can see a small blue/white round thing on Meredith's desk, to the front left of the computer:
http://i44.tinypic.com/nmb86q.jpg



I have one of those tins too! It's good for all kinds of things - protects skin when dying hair etc. From the notes I imagined a big pot of the stuff! Well spotted

AND IS THAT A RED COAT I CAN SEE ON THE BED??????? IN THE SAME PICTURE???? ANYONE?


Hullo Bard!

Thanks. I'm glad I'm not the only one who's a fan of Vaseline lip balm - perhaps it's a UK thing? I've never thought of using it to protect skin while drying hair - that's nifty! I have an over-generous gob so have to force myself to remember to protect it. Esp. on days like today - strong winds and dry Tube trains / offices make for very unhappy skin. I'm not surprised it was voted Tops. I also use it when (for example) fixing shelves. Stick some lip vaseline on the screws and you save a lot of effort.

We always had a standard tub (as in the last link I posted: Vaseline company website) at home when I was little - useful for chapped skin or grazes. The last time I bought an industrial sized version was for a shoot where we had to scuff up some statues with paint effects. The vaseline stopped the paint from permanently staining the figures. Sure, it's a versatile ointment.

That's a good spot you made of the red thing on the bed. I'd not noticed. I'm not sure it is a coat though - could it be bed linen piled up? Perhaps taken out of the wardrobe? Hard to tell. I liked Disinterested's post and photo pointing out Sollecito's parka. If that is a coat he's had for a while, and isn't something bought recently for court, then I can just imagine him lending it to his new girlfriend on a chilly night out. Boys are often very gallant about lending their kit to their girls until - speaking from experience - they become used to the girls and get fed up with missing clothes!
Top Profile 

Offline Viv


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:28 am

Posts: 105

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:56 pm   Post subject:    

Quote:
Totally OT, but I have just seen the BBC news video of President Obama and Michele arriving at Buckingham Palace and meeting the Queen! We luuuuuuurve Obama....


OT2...
I saw it. There's also an hilarious vid of everyone chittering awkwardly over wine in the BP picture gallery. It's not until she's next to Michelle Obama that you realise how tiny the Queen is. Did you see the one of Obama's jalopy attempting a three-point-turn, veeeerrry cautiously, in Downing St? Those Georgians - they might have built wonderfully OTT vulgar palaces for drinks parties, but they were crap at designing limo-friendly streets.

Continuing the Georgian theme - if the protesters today were hoping to outdo the Gordon Riots, they chalked up an Epic Fail. People just don't riot properly any more... sic transit the vaunted British Heritage. ;)
Top Profile 

Offline Anastasia


Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 5:13 pm

Posts: 47

Location: Seattle, WA

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 5:15 am   Post subject: Re: Trial dress code   

Jools wrote:
Since we are talking about clothes here is pic of what AK was wearing at last week trial session:


:lol:


HMMM..
Mature dress sense :lol:
I had a pair of jeans like those when I was 10 years old!! I stopped wearing them when I was around 12, plus they were worn out by then, and never considered getting another pair, I had grown out of that style.
sad really
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline jodyodyo


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:02 am

Posts: 257

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 6:38 am   Post subject:    

Re AK's jeans,

"Yoohoo, Mr. Cameraman, see my ass? Did you get a photo? Did I hold the pose long enough? Shall I do a downward dog for you?"
Top Profile 

Offline MikeMCSG


Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:14 am

Posts: 207

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:52 am   Post subject:    

Ferret wrote:
Let me ask you this... who here hasn't "pre-judged" the murder of Meredith Kercher? Given the overwhelming evidence against Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito, and Rudy Guede? How the evidence doesn't divert focus on other potential suspects, and it only solidifies what exactly happened to Meredith Kercher on the night of Nov. 1st.

I just find it fascinating that people who can see the BS from FOA PR offensive, were slurping up the same BS as a truth elixir when Louise Woodward's PR offensive were using the same tactics. The LW PR offensive was more effective because they didn't worry about the language barrier. FOA has repeated their objective numerous times... minimize the evidence against Amanda, raise doubt on direct evidence, especially the knife found at Raffaele's aparment, and that Amanda's is in her present situation from Police bumbling.

I think Mrs. Eappen can definitely pre-judge the case against Louise Woodward, given as an ophthalmologist, she examine her son after he was rushed into ER, and saw the damage and intercranial pressure that the skull fracture caused.


Hi Ferret

Actually I think we're all pretty fair-minded here; we have preconceptions of course but are willing to amend them as Stewart's reports come in on the evidence presented and tested in court.

Are you sure the Woodwards actually hired PR in the same way as FOA ? As I recall they set up a fund to help meet Louise's legal costs and took advantage of media interest that was already there to raise money for it and publicise the defence case that the lawyers were actually running in court. There was nothing to compare with the attacks on Mignini or Mellas's outbursts.

Perhaps Mrs Eappen was qualified to pre-judge but she showed poor taste in sharing those thoughts on TV. Doubtless the Kercher family does already have a view on the defendants' culpability but they have the dignity to avoid that.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:34 am   Post subject:    

Viv wrote:
Quote:
Totally OT, but I have just seen the BBC news video of President Obama and Michele arriving at Buckingham Palace and meeting the Queen! We luuuuuuurve Obama....


OT2...
I saw it. There's also an hilarious vid of everyone chittering awkwardly over wine in the BP picture gallery. It's not until she's next to Michelle Obama that you realise how tiny the Queen is. Did you see the one of Obama's jalopy attempting a three-point-turn, veeeerrry cautiously, in Downing St? Those Georgians - they might have built wonderfully OTT vulgar palaces for drinks parties, but they were crap at designing limo-friendly streets.

Continuing the Georgian theme - if the protesters today were hoping to outdo the Gordon Riots, they chalked up an Epic Fail. People just don't riot properly any more... sic transit the vaunted British Heritage. ;)


I loved seeing all those leaders chatting away! Obama's so relaxed and Michelle is just gorgeous. Take a look at her and Sarah Brown making tea at the cancer charity today - Michelle gives one of the children a huge hug. She is such a star. AND the Queen put her arm round her. This is massive breach of her own protocol! No-one but no-one touches the monarch. For the monarch to put her arm round a guest is unprecedented. She really liked her and was heard to say 'Now we've met please keep in touch'. The Obamas have extraordinary charisma.

Agree about the riots. They were rubbish. In my day we had proper riots. There were more photographers than rioters at RBS. And the idiots were throwing missiles at medics trying to save someone's life (he died). Clever.

But anyway, just wanted to tell our American friends how much we love the Obamas. Back to the case....
Top Profile 

Offline mojo


Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:31 pm

Posts: 225

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:51 am   Post subject:    

who'da thunk that hester prynne lives in capanne prison. :D
Top Profile 

Offline Anastasia


Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 5:13 pm

Posts: 47

Location: Seattle, WA

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:27 am   Post subject:    

jodyodyo wrote:
Re AK's jeans,

"Yoohoo, Mr. Cameraman, see my ass? Did you get a photo? Did I hold the pose long enough? Shall I do a downward dog for you?"


:lol: :lol: :lol: EXACTLY
Oh Mr. DeMille......I'm ready for my closeup now........... :roll:
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:47 am   Post subject:    

Just in (10 minutes ago):

Maresca and Perna, representing the victim's family, have requested the next two days' hearing be behind closed doors, to "safeguard the memory and dignity" of the English student.

Friday's testimony is the medico-legal and gynaecological experts, and Saturday is Rudy.

Unione Sarda
Top Profile 

Offline GreenWyvern


User avatar


Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:41 pm

Posts: 252

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:06 pm   Post subject:    

Catnip wrote:
Just in (10 minutes ago):

Maresca and Perna, representing the victim's family, have requested the next two days' hearing be behind closed doors, to "safeguard the memory and dignity" of the English student.

Friday's testimony is the medico-legal and gynaecological experts, and Saturday is Rudy.

Unione Sarda


I was expecting this, and it seems reasonable that Friday's hearing should be closed. I will be surprised if they don't grant this request.

Hopefully we will still get to hear any new vital points which may emerge.

However, I hope that Rudy's testimony on Saturday won't be closed. I assume that his story will be the same as the current one he is sticking to for his appeal, but it would be nice to see what happens when he is cross-examined, and his version is challenged.
Top Profile 

Offline MikeMCSG


Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:14 am

Posts: 207

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:13 pm   Post subject:    

GreenWyvern wrote:
Catnip wrote:
Just in (10 minutes ago):

Maresca and Perna, representing the victim's family, have requested the next two days' hearing be behind closed doors, to "safeguard the memory and dignity" of the English student.

Friday's testimony is the medico-legal and gynaecological experts, and Saturday is Rudy.

Unione Sarda


I was expecting this, and it seems reasonable that Friday's hearing should be closed. I will be surprised if they don't grant this request.

Hopefully we will still get to hear any new vital points which may emerge.

However, I hope that Rudy's testimony on Saturday won't be closed. I assume that his story will be the same as the current one he is sticking to for his appeal, but it would be nice to see what happens when he is cross-examined, and his version is challenged.


I don't think Rudy will say anything at all; it makes much more sense for him to keep his powder dry for his appeal.
Top Profile 

Offline ragazza americana


User avatar


Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 4:27 pm

Posts: 17

Location: New York

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:30 pm   Post subject:    

mojo wrote:
who'da thunk that hester prynne lives in capanne prison. :D


hysterical :lol:
Top Profile 

Offline ragazza americana


User avatar


Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 4:27 pm

Posts: 17

Location: New York

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:36 pm   Post subject: Re: The Red Coat   

The Machine wrote:
ragazza americana wrote:
I think there is much to be made of the impromtu declarations in court by the defendents. RS seems to be doing a much better job of defending himself there than AK, who has only mentioned the rabbit vibrator, cleaning disputes with roomies, and police treatment. She worried enough to speak up about the rabbit vibrator but did not care to dispute being seen in the cleaning section of the Conad store first thing in the am????? Silence can speak words.


It doesn't really matter if Raffaele Sollecito speaks or stays silent in court. He has already destroyed his own credibility by giving three alibis and lying repeatedly to the police. He admitted to the police that he had lied to them and he was given another opportunity to tell the truth. However, he chose to deliberately and repeatedly lie again. The judges and jury will rightly not trust anything he says because he's a compulsive liar. He still doesn't have a credible alibi for the night of the murder and he'll never have one because he was at the cottage with Knox and Guede.

Sollecito didn't do himself any favours by taking his knife to the police station or threatening to drive over the head of one of the female police officers. The fact that his family have attempted to interfere with the judicial process by trying to get certain police officers removed from the investigation will not have helped his cause and suggests that his family know that he will be found guilty.


Machine- Agreed, but I was thinking of the trial per se - RS's changeable alibis have not been presented there, have they? On the otherhand, he has spoken up about his innocence on several occasions in court, most notably in my view, he has twice claimed that he had never met Rudy. I believe there is a significant missing piece/person somewhere.
Top Profile 

Offline Viv


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:28 am

Posts: 105

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:48 pm   Post subject:    

Quote:
But anyway, just wanted to tell our American friends how much we love the Obamas. Back to the case....


Cheers for the Obama info, Bard! I'll look that up. Sweet! :)

And agree re the idiot brick-throwers. Prats.
Top Profile 

Offline MikeMCSG


Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:14 am

Posts: 207

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:05 pm   Post subject: Re: The Red Coat   

ragazza americana wrote:
The Machine wrote:
ragazza americana wrote:
I think there is much to be made of the impromtu declarations in court by the defendents. RS seems to be doing a much better job of defending himself there than AK, who has only mentioned the rabbit vibrator, cleaning disputes with roomies, and police treatment. She worried enough to speak up about the rabbit vibrator but did not care to dispute being seen in the cleaning section of the Conad store first thing in the am????? Silence can speak words.


It doesn't really matter if Raffaele Sollecito speaks or stays silent in court. He has already destroyed his own credibility by giving three alibis and lying repeatedly to the police. He admitted to the police that he had lied to them and he was given another opportunity to tell the truth. However, he chose to deliberately and repeatedly lie again. The judges and jury will rightly not trust anything he says because he's a compulsive liar. He still doesn't have a credible alibi for the night of the murder and he'll never have one because he was at the cottage with Knox and Guede.

Sollecito didn't do himself any favours by taking his knife to the police station or threatening to drive over the head of one of the female police officers. The fact that his family have attempted to interfere with the judicial process by trying to get certain police officers removed from the investigation will not have helped his cause and suggests that his family know that he will be found guilty.


Machine- Agreed, but I was thinking of the trial per se - RS's changeable alibis have not been presented there, have they? On the otherhand, he has spoken up about his innocence on several occasions in court, most notably in my view, he has twice claimed that he had never met Rudy. I believe there is a significant missing piece/person somewhere.


But those "changeable alibis" are now evidence in this trial whether he wants to revisit them or not. I very much doubt he'll advance that stupid story about Meredith pricking her finger but the prosecution can refer to it. Machine's right; he's just digging a bigger hole for himself.
Top Profile 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 5:12 pm   Post subject: HEARING....   

Catnip wrote:
Just in (10 minutes ago):

Maresca and Perna, representing the victim's family, have requested the next two days' hearing be behind closed doors, to "safeguard the memory and dignity" of the English student.

Friday's testimony is the medico-legal and gynaecological experts, and Saturday is Rudy.

Unione Sarda


I happen to see Mignini walking in the center not more than 30 min ago and asked him about the trial. He said that it has not yet been decided about the hearing tomorrow. They may have it closed or the may just allow audio in the upstairs room, or it may be open. They will decide, in classic italian style, domani mattina...tomorrow morning.

At the very least I hope to hear the audio in the press room.
vediamo....
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline beckie


Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 7:13 pm

Posts: 14

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 5:41 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Stewart,
It is great to know we will hear from you this weekend... thanks for the post on Toto ...Frank had me believing that he was truly laughed off the stand. (did you get a good look at Mignini?... does he look like this? :twisted: Just asking :roll: )
Top Profile 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 6:04 pm   Post subject:    

beckie wrote:
Hi Stewart,
It is great to know we will hear from you this weekend... thanks for the post on Toto ...Frank had me believing that he was truly laughed off the stand. (did you get a good look at Mignini?... does he look like this? :twisted: Just asking :roll: )


I hope to be able to report...
How did you know Mignini looked like that?!... we picked up the garlic cloves that sprang from the ground he walked on too.
LOL
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline mojo


Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:31 pm

Posts: 225

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:41 pm   Post subject:    

Stewart - thank you so much for all the reporting that you've done and if you are able to attend tomorrow. Good wishes go with you, as this is likely to be quite harrowing.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2306

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:43 pm   Post subject:    

There are some pieces worth checking out on other sites:

Jools has written her first piece for TJMK:

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php

Miss Represented has written a quick rundown of the witnesses and their testimony from last weekend’s trial dates:

http://missrepresented.wordpress.com/

Charles Mudede has written a short piece called Perugian Gothic on the Stranger website:

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archiv ... ian-gothic
Top Profile 

Offline disinterested


User avatar


Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:34 pm

Posts: 236

Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:55 pm   Post subject: Curatolo   

Does anyone know off hand when Mr. Curatolo first went to the police? (Exact date not necessary.) I know it's been stated but don't know where to find it easily. Thanks!
Top Profile 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 9:06 pm   Post subject: Re: Curatolo   

disinterested wrote:
Does anyone know off hand when Mr. Curatolo first went to the police? (Exact date not necessary.) I know it's been stated but don't know where to find it easily. Thanks!


He made his statement on Feb 2,2008.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline thoughtful


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:48 pm

Posts: 1225

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 9:25 pm   Post subject: Unresolved questions   

Hello.
I have been following this discussion closely for a long time. But I never posted before. I'm not even sure I am clicking on the right buttons, but I suppose I will soon find out.

So many unanswered questions are raised here, that are really important; some of them could hold keys to the solution, such as Amanda having or not having a red coat, or how the door to Meredith's room was locked and what became of the keys? Or how often Antonio Curatolo actually saw the couple in the basketball court between 9:30 and midnight. He says he looked up every 15-20 minutes -- but the observers of his testimony stress that he did not say he saw them each time. But this seems to be the main question, so why was he not asked this specifically? Then there is the question of the scream, and why Curatolo did not hear it, even though he was not inside any building at the time, and why the young woman who bumped into someone running up the stone stairs didn't hear it, if that person was presumed to have been fleeing moments after the crime. It seems extremely difficult to create a scenario that really fits with a reasonable timing (not having the murder hastily accomplished within a few minutes, in a quick dash to the cottage between sitting in the basketball court. It seems so unlikely! But then, why all the mad alibi lies?

Kermit deserves thanks for the extraordinarily interesting powerpoint presentations, particularly on the footprints. On this subject, I have another question. Am I the only one to think that there is much more to a footprint than its size? Footprints of the same size belonging to different people can look so different from each other; people often have very characteristic toes. It seems to me that measuring the width of the ball of the foot and observing the shape of the toes can lead to a much more convincing identification than just the length measurement. For example, it seems to me that the footprints E and F in Kermit's presentation must belong to the same person, because they both bear that characteristic trait of having the right big toe pointing quite definitely to the right (girls with feet like this often like to wear pointy shoes), whereas the footprint C definitely does not have this trait, but instead has the little toe more to the left than usual; this is particularly noticeable when the average foot is superimposed over it.
Maybe I am exaggerating, and of course some deformations can be due to smudging (although footprints C and F do not look at all smudged), but it seems to me that if one could see Amanda's and Raffaele's footprints one could be fairly sure that these were or were not the same feet, particularly if they show those characteristic traits.

It seems strange to me that so much time was spent in court analysing Amanda's behaviour (inappropriate and peculiar to the point of autism though it certainly is!) instead of examining questions such as these. The most interesting posts on this forum are those that try to fill in the blanks in our knowledge either by adding information, or by sensible guessing. The least interesting posts are the ones referring to Candace Dempsey and FOA.
Those tend to be mocking, acidic and very repetitive (not unlike Candace herself). They really should form a different topic.

Anyway, thanks to all those who contribute for not letting the public completely lose sight of a terrible event which cries out for at least some attempt to understand what happened (if not why it happened, perhaps impossible, as has been pointed out here).
Top Profile 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 9:48 pm   Post subject: WHAT THE MECHANIC COULD HAVE SEEN . . .   

Brian S. wrote:
Sometime just after 10:30pm a car broke down outside the driveway entrance to Via della Pergola. A dark coloured car was in the driveway.

The driver called the breakdown truck at about 10:40, the mechanic arrived 15/20 minutes later. He says he wasn't there long(I seem to recollect 10 minutes from earlier information). I think the breakdown event was over and the 5 people involved in that were on their way perhaps by 11:15pm.


I know that this trial is costing the Italian taxpayer a lot of money, but it would be of interest for Mignini and Comodi to do a reconstruction exercise with the tow-truck driver / mechanic.

My suggestion would be to park a dark coloured Audi A3 in the ramp to the cottage gate (pointing towards the gate or towards the road??). Take the man there in the evening and see if he remembers something, in particular if his memory is jogged and he can state that it was an A3 (or maybe a Volkswagen Polo ... they could try with that model too).

Audi A3's are quite common in Europe. They have an easily distinguishable profile, and as seen from the front, clearly show the 4-ring Audi logo. Someone like a mechanic would recognise that model immediately.

If you ask me any day at noon, what model of car I parked beside in the morning, I wouldn't be able to tell you, but as I approach my car at the end of the day, in the last few metres, I remember, hey it was a Mercedes or Ford or whatever. And when I get to my car, voilà!

Here's a photo-montage of what the mechanic could have seen ...

Top Profile 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 9:58 pm   Post subject: Re: Unresolved questions   

thoughtful wrote:
Am I the only one to think that there is much more to a footprint than its size? Footprints of the same size belonging to different people can look so different from each other; people often have very characteristic toes. It seems to me that measuring the width of the ball of the foot and observing the shape of the toes can lead to a much more convincing identification than just the length measurement.


Welcome to the discussion, Thoughtful!

I don't have time to write a long reply regarding the footprints. I should say that I am not a forensic specialist of any type, just a Powerpoint user. In that sense, my objetive with the Footprint presentation was in fact to concentrate only on the size of the footprints, to demonstrate that there was more than one size, and that probably none of the barefoot footprints belonged to Rudy.

In one of the courtroom photos that someone posted above, we see a shot looking over Raffaele's shoulder as he studies a document with colour photos which quite clearly are dealing with exactly what you are referring to: specific traits, forms, spaces, etc. withing the footprints.

I'm sure that there is much much more information to be ascertained from the barefoot luminol images than what we know or have discussed.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 9:58 pm   Post subject:    

Thoughtful wrote:

Quote:
Maybe I am exaggerating, and of course some deformations can be due to smudging (although footprints C and F do not look at all smudged), but it seems to me that if one could see Amanda's and Raffaele's footprints one could be fairly sure that these were or were not the same feet, particularly if they show those characteristic traits.


Thoughtful, welcome to the board.

It has been reported that the footprints are "compatible", but in fact they have yet to be discussed during this trial. My guess is that more information will be provided in due course.

Thoughtful added:
Quote:
It seems strange to me that so much time was spent in court analysing Amanda's behaviour (inappropriate and peculiar to the point of autism though it certainly is!) instead of examining questions such as these.


One thing to bear in mind is that the trial is in its early phase. There is lots still to be examined.

Thoughtful added:

Quote:
The most interesting posts on this forum are those that try to fill in the blanks in our knowledge either by adding information, or by sensible guessing. The least interesting posts are the ones referring to Candace Dempsey and FOA.
Those tend to be mocking, acidic and very repetitive (not unlike Candace herself). They really should form a different topic.


Your point is well taken, but it probably won't happen. One reason is that we don't like to police discussions or steer them in any particular way. If someone wants to discuss the latest spin by Dempsey or FOA, it is a valid topic insofar as both have inserted theselves into the story. It is also important at times to correct some of their most egregious errors and falsehoods, and that is only possible here - elsewhere, such heretic comments get deleted.

Readers of this board are free to skip over any posts that don't interest them.

As for your other questions - about the red jacket, for instance - I wonder why Knox's lawyers did not clear this up immediately. Or why Knox did not exercise her right to speak after the testimony. I find it interesting that not a word has been said since about it.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:04 pm   Post subject:    

The Machine wrote:
Hi Bard,

The bruising on Meredith elbows and right forearm indicate Meredith was being restrained from behind whilst she was being attacked from the front with the knife. Meredith had cut marks on her right hand as she tried to fend off the knife blows from somebody in who was standing in front of her. Meredith was also held below her chin.

The police concluded that Meredith was on her knees or crouching down in front of the wardrobe when she was fatally stabbed because her blood sprayed onto the wardrobe at a low height. It seems Meredith right arm was being restrained when the fatal blow was inflicted because there is blood on her left hand, but none on her right hand. After she was stabbed she managed to bring her left hand up to the wound, but not her right hand. It appears that her right arm was being held until she fell onto the floor.

Meredith was also sexually assaulted by Rudy Guede during the attack. Amanda Knox's DNA is on the handle of the double DNA knife and Meredith's DNA is on the blade of the double DNA knife, which is why the prosecutors believe that Knox inflicted the fatal blow. There is a woman's bloodied shoe print, which fits Knox's foot size, on a pillow which was found under Meredith's body. An abundant amount of Sollecito's DNA was found on Meredith's bra, which places him in Meredith's room that night, but some time after Meredith was killed. Sollecito's forensic experts claim that Knox's DNA was also on Meredith's bra.

There were three sets of different sized bloody footprints at the crime scene. The footprints match the foot sizes of Knox, Sollecito and Guede.

Judge Paolo Micheli concluded from the numerous wounds to Meredith's body and the forensic evidence, which linked all three to the crime scene that they all at the cottage on 1 November and were all involved in Meredith's murder.


Machine, thank you for this concise but harrowing account. I wonder if this is the evidence that the family want kept out of the press/open court. It certainly is very damning, as there is no way just one person could have inflicted these injuries as you describe it. This has to be the beginning of the end for this charade.
Top Profile 

Offline wvgirl


User avatar


Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 6:52 am

Posts: 12

Location: Almost Heaven

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:13 pm   Post subject:    

That was a wonderful post, Thoughtful. I've had some of the same questions, but could never have posted as well as you did.

Thank you to everyone who provides all the discussion/info about this horrific crime.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:29 pm   Post subject:    

Thoughtful wrote:

Quote:
Then there is the question of the scream, and why Curatolo did not hear it, even though he was not inside any building at the time, and why the young woman who bumped into someone running up the stone stairs didn't hear it, if that person was presumed to have been fleeing moments after the crime.


I don't have a definitive answer to your questions, but here is what I have put together. First of all, the distance between Nara's window and the cottage is about 40 meters, and she is straight across from it with no obstructions (trees, other buildings, etc.)

As for Piazza Grimana, where Antonio Curatolo was sitting, here is what Fast Pete wrote yesterday. Pete went to Perugia last summer and took hundreds of photos.

Quote:
Good questions. I took the shots. My guess is that any scream from the house would not carry quite as far as the piazza which is

(1) maybe three times the distance from the house that the apartments above the parking facility are,

(2) slightly blocked by the building on the east side of the intersection below the steps where the cars park,

(3) a busy and noisy place in itself, with cars exiting the old city by three routes and many buses going by.


As for the witness Formica, it is possible that she was inside the restaurant eating when the scream was emitted. After all, assuming Rudy was still at the cottage, we know that he did not leave immediately, because he left a deposit of sorts. So Formica could have been inside a noisy restaurant. It is also important to keep in mind that she said she did not think the black man was Rudy.

I know these answers are speculative only, but I don't think we can do much better at this point. At least I can't. :)

It has also occurred to me that one other person claims to have heard Meredith scream, and that is Amanda Knox herself. In her false accusation of Patrick Lumumba, she says she covered her ears to drown out the sound. I don't know how reliable a witness Amanda Knox is, and it is entirely possible that she invented the detail about the scream to lend credence to her story. I just wonder if the scream Nara heard, which has haunted her ever since, and the scream that Amanda Knox "invented" could possibly intersect somewhere.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.


Last edited by Skeptical Bystander on Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline petafly


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:08 pm

Posts: 278

Location: Switzerland/Germany

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:30 pm   Post subject:    

Nice Photomontage Kermit, you've got a good eye for proportions. But are you sure the car wasn't parked the other way round?

I looked at a "AUDI A3" car a lot the last days since one parks in my street right now. It's quite an ugly and unbalanced car (imho)! It's neither fish nor fowl, not a big car, not a small car. The mighty front is typical AUDI while the back looks like a mediocre Volkswagen Golf (Volkswagen Rabbit in the States) after an hefty accident. IF the car was parked halfway into the open gate (front ahead) one would only see it's rather small VW-Ass (sorry) and think it's just a lousy VW Golf or Rabbit. What i'm trying to say: When you only see the rear half of the car it appears smaller than it is (not really small, especially to italian standards, but not like an expensive AUDI).

Just look at it:
http://berlin.campusanuncios.com/picanu ... 015938.JPG
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2306

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:33 pm   Post subject:    

Hi Thoughtful,

I don't think the question whether Amanda Knox had a red coat or not is anywhere near as important as a question like: is the DNA on blade of the double DNA knife Meredith's DNA? According to Patrizia Stefanoni and Dr. Renato Biondo from the forenisc police, it IS Meredith's DNA. This is crucial evidence. The eyewitness who reported that Knox was wearing a red coat may have recalled something that is not true. This is a recognised phenomenon in eyewitness testimony. Perhaps, Knox was wearing one of Solelcito's coats.

It is quite clear that Antonio Curatolo didn't claim that he was observing Knox and Sollecito the whole time from 9.30pm to midnight. We shouldn't expect eyewitnesses to remember the exact times that they saw something. It is possible that Curatolo saw Sollecito and Knox some time after 10pm.

I completely disagree that it is very difficult to create a scenario that fits with reasonable timings. Curatolo didn't give exact times for when he saw Knox and Sollecito and it's also possible that Curatolo didn't actually see Knox and Sollecito. You have a very rigid interpretation of his testimony.

Knox, Sollecito and Guede could have first attacked Meredith from anytime from approximately 9.20pm to 10.15pm. That would still fit in with Curatolo's testimony. As I have previously pointed out, human memory is not like a videotape or DVD, accurately recording everything.

It's not just the "mad alibis" that implicate Knox and Sollecito. There are 13 separate pieces of forensic evidence that link them to Meredith's murder. The possibilty of contamination has been categorically excluded by Patrizia Stefanoni and Dr. Renato Biondo. The cover up e.g. the staging of the break in and clean up also directly implicates Knox and Sollecito. Their DNA was found on Meredith's bra, which had been removed some time after she had been killed.

Candace Dempsey is a key player from the FOA and has deservedly come in for some very justified criticism. She has deleted the posts of numerous members from this forum and, in some cases, she has had them banned them from posting on the Seattle Post-Intelligencer website, myself included. She has also insulted, mocked and lied about a number of PMF posters.

To make matter worse, she allowed offensive comments by pro-Knox posters about Meredith and her family to remain on her blog, including comments by Kelly13, who said that the Kerchers were not nice people, comments by someone called Tufa, who said that Meredith might have been a drug dealer and comments about Harry Wilkens, suggesting that Meredith's family are malevolent and should support the campaign to free Amanda Knox.

Yes, Candace Dempsey gets criticised and mocked on PMF and TJMK and she deserves every bit of it.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:38 pm   Post subject: Stepfather with an acid soul   

From Il Messaggero today.

PERUGIA -
The first truth ended well, the next will bring them before the judge in court because they have helped to spread a horrifying movie, the third who knows. Call it mother’s love, father’s courage, or family bitterness, but never so much attention has been dedicated to offsprings, defendants in the trial for the murder of Meredith Kercher. Never so many arms were made to work, never so many voices been so poisonous. When there was only an investigation, they were those who spoke with the General and Secretaries. Even with the Minister of Justice, that Clemente Mastella that ended up resigning a few weeks after the conversation. There is one who only takes notes, scrutinizes jurors and informs the lawyers. But no one surrenders. Nobody wants to give up to investigators and to Justice their children, who are named Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito and especially as they are accused of having killed with a knife Meredith, twenty years old English student, for an erotic game that ended badly, the indictment says.

Two days ago the family of Raffaele was announced the process for having provided to TeleNorba the scientific police video in which it lingers on Meredith’s body. They did so to demonstrate that the Sciencetific police had worked badly. But the effect was a long lingering almost a minute of the wound on Meredith’s neck and the pain for another family, that of the English student.

The Sollecitos will be prosecuted also for insults to the police (complaints party) and the value of its investigators. It was obvious: from the first
days in jail, Franco Sollecito, Raffaele’s father, consults second wife, Mara, his brother Giuseppe and sister in law Sara Achille and studied every paper, every clue, every indiscretion to validate his son’s theory on the the night of the murder.
Raffaele knows and the last time he spoke in courtroom had sent a clear message: "I Raffaele Sollecito, charged, it is difficult for me to describe the situation where I’m in an unreal situation. Unrelated to all of this, have nothing to do with me." It seems almost to hear
his father Franco talk, always a doctor, private investigator for just over a year. So the Sollecito the clan, despite the
recommendations by lawyers Marco Brusco and Luca Maori, to be prudent, has always worked to demolish each clue. Up until he got to request intervention action against the police investigators, and then exposing to a tightening of relations. Yet with the shoe is not being discussed: that shoeprint is not Raffaele’s, but Rudy’s, the third defendant, the Ivorian already sentenced to thirty years in prison. The discovery of the different shoe is also due to them. Eventually, the clan was right. And now would want to do the same with the DNA of Raffaele on the hook of Meredith’s bra. But here seems it’s impossible. Already in Rudy’s trial judge Paolo Micheli that proof was considered valid to show that Raffaele was not at home as told, but was at the place of crime to kill Meredith or to help the murderess (or murderers). Even before the Court of Assizes the President Massei nothing was granted.

Kurt Knox is the father of Amanda. He is not among the witnesses as her mother is and can then follow all the hearings and it does so carefully, without never getting distracted. Several private investigators have offered to work for him to prove the innocence of his daughter. But for him so far did not accept. Takes notes, does not miss a single word, then comments and suggests to his daughter what to say. Amanda hears and in recent hearings has always responded to the allegations of witnesses, but with calmness. Curt Knox says, "I said if she wanted to go home in United States immediately after the crime, but she said no. She was quiet and did well to stay, respect the decision." Chris Mellas has a round face and an acid soul, he is the stepfather of Amanda, second husband of mother Edda. He takes on every body: sarcastic with journalists guilty of speaking not much of his little step daughter (but where has he been so far?), fierce with the Italian justice. But does never go beyond no words. Mother love call Edda: "Amanda coping well with the process. I brought books, her CD’s”. She was close to her daughter. That's it. Soon trial process enters the dungeon of the evidence through DNA.

The hook for Raffaele, Amanda for the knife. The Sollecito clan is ready for their dna ending there by chance. Or worse. And here is throughout the game to a process that can maybe end in any way.
http://tinyurl.com/dayfyp
Top Profile 

Offline Professor Snape


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:53 pm

Posts: 247

Location: Seattle. WA

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:38 pm   Post subject: Something to laugh about in Seattle.   

jodyodyo wrote:
Re AK's jeans,

"Yoohoo, Mr. Cameraman, see my ass? Did you get a photo? Did I hold the pose long enough? Shall I do a downward dog for you?"


This was really funny! Thanks jodyodyo, we all got a good laugh from that today. 8-)

_________________
"Wizard of Healing Potions and Alibis"
Top Profile 

Offline Kermit


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:37 am

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:59 pm   Post subject:    

petafly wrote:
But are you sure the car wasn't parked the other way round? I looked at a "AUDI A3" car a lot the last days since one parks in my street right now. It's quite an ugly and unbalanced car (imho)!


Hi Petafly, real quick:

We don't have any information as far as I know concerning the orientation of the car. However, we understand it was "parked" there for some time (15-30 minutes or so). I made the supposition, perhaps incorrectly, that the car didn't enter the grounds of the cottage (that is, it wasn't leaving the grounds, having been parked earlier inside the gate).

In general when I park, and especially in a difficult parking space (such as "the cliff" entrance to the cottage gate), I always back in, to avoid having to back out when I depart. If the "dark car" was Raffaele's (or anyone else's), the driver would have a dangerous departure going reverse uphill, turning at the same time, and having a blind control over traffic.

As for your observations on the esthetics of the Audi A3, you're right, it has a distinct form. That's why I think / hope that were the mechanic to see one in the cottage ramp, it could jog his memory.
Top Profile 

Offline Bess


Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:41 pm

Posts: 69

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:47 am   Post subject:    

Nick Pisa's take on this weekend's proceedings: Kercher trial photos 'are too shocking' to be seen in public, says family:

http://tinyurl.com/d9z9e2

I hope the Kercher family wins this battle to keep the hearing private. Although, I would very much like to hear about the testimonies of Lumumba and Guede. I have a feeling they will both have much to say that could shed a lot of light on many unanswered questions.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:02 am   Post subject:    

Bess wrote:

Quote:
I hope the Kercher family wins this battle to keep the hearing private. Although, I would very much like to hear about the testimonies of Lumumba and Guede. I have a feeling they will both have much to say that could shed a lot of light on many unanswered questions.


Yes and yes. Thanks for the link. According to Pisa, in addition to Lumumba and Guede, we will alos be hearing testimony this weekend from Carlo Maria Scotto di Rinaldi, the owner of the shop where Knox and Sollecito were filmed on CCTV as they bought lingerie or replacement undies (depending on your preference) a couple of days after Meredith was killed.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Bess


Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:41 pm

Posts: 69

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:19 am   Post subject:    

Skep, to me, the lingerie shopping is a sad episode, but once again, it vaguely goes towards her behaviour, as much as the evidence to date has. I would like to hear something more "concrete" from someone who knew her fairly well. I think Lumumba has much to offer in his testimony in regards to AK's response to her demotion (?) and Meredith's hiring, and who knows what else. Not to mention, he will be "loaded for bear" (as we say here in the north).

Guede is a question mark, but an interesting one. IMO, if he has good lawyers, he'll come clean, just to beat the "Lone Wolf" theory which does not bode well for him.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline disinterested


User avatar


Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:34 pm

Posts: 236

Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:43 am   Post subject:    

In regard to "what is important" to focus on in seeking truth in this very compelling case (compelling I think because some of us fear that justice may not be served), we can only really know the evidence that is presented in the press, on video, or from the court proceedings, limited forensic evidence, statements from witnesses that can be thrown into doubt due to human error, bias, questionable sanity or motivation--then try to sort out the logic and probability in all this, without knowing the intentions or strategy of the defense team. Being presented with so much more evidence than we might be in an ongoing American trial, for instance, makes it all the more confusing or frustrating that we can't lay hands on all of it.

But we're all free to speculate, for example, on the apparent psychological profiles of the defendants, somewhat as Miss Represented has done quite well, in the light of whatever facts we do seem to have (like who had easy access to the scene, the obvious cover up, the conflicitng time lines, the lack of alibis). Such as the compulsion of an attention-seeking, narcissistic young woman to wrongly accuse (and never exonerate) the man who is her boss, a father/authority figure perhaps, whom she probably knew was getting ready to fire her at any moment, possibly to hire an attractive, "wholesome," popular young woman she may have seen as a rival. That could be intolerable, at the right time, in the wrong frame of mind. And her involvement with a boyfriend of less than two weeks--attracted to weapons, pornography, violent comics, just having lost his virginity to a very sexually oriented, assertive, driven girl--who might follow her. Throw in Rudy the wild card. Motive, means and opportunity, as good old Sherlock said, are in there somewhere. (Or maybe not.)

Anyway, I'm really grateful to you folks who do go after the facts. There's a lot to think about if you can tolerate the ambiguity!

Didi
Top Profile 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:52 am   Post subject:    

Quote:
Francesco Maresca, the Kercher's Italian lawyer, said: ''I have requested that the judge hear parts of the next two hearings in private without any media present.

''The evidence will be of a very personal nature and will involve description of her injuries and this will be very traumatic for the family - even though they will not be present.

''They have already suffered when the images were broadcast on Italian TV earlier this year and it would not be right for them to have to go through that again.....

Bar owner Patrick Lumumba, 38, who Knox tried to frame for the murder will also give evidence as will Ivory Coast drifter Rudy Herman Guede, 21, who was jailed for 30 years for murder and sexual assault last October.

Mr Maresca added that his request did not cover evidence due to be heard from these other witnesses but purely only those who would describe Meredith's injuries.


Nick Pisa on Sky
Top Profile 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 2:07 am   Post subject:    

Skep wrote:
According to Pisa, in addition to Lumumba and Guede, we will alos be hearing testimony this weekend from Carlo Maria Scotto di Rinaldi, the owner of the shop where Knox and Sollecito were filmed on CCTV as they bought lingerie or replacement undies (depending on your preference) a couple of days after Meredith was killed.


I think there is wriggle room for Amanda here. I predict a spontaneous statement.

It is a fact that she was without most of her clothes. That's why in the days following she had to wear Raffaele's coat. Even her college lecturer said Amanda was embarrassed by the "overalls" she wore into class on the Monday. Her "class room" letter didn't so much express a "desire to go "shopping"" with her mother as a "desire to go shopping for clothes" with her mother. I think Amanda was probably down to just a couple of pairs of knickers and not much more than the clothes she was standing in. Everthing else was impounded at the cottage.
Top Profile 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 2:28 am   Post subject: Refresher please?   

I've again misplaced my list of respected media outlets in Italy. Could somebody please refresh my memory about the reputation of IL TAM TAM? :oops:

Thanks!

Also, could one of our Italian experts tell us if this article is saying that Rudy's "mystery blonde" has been found? Google on this one is really ridiculous!

IL TAM TAM
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 2:33 am   Post subject:    

Brian wrote:

Quote:
Skep wrote:
According to Pisa, in addition to Lumumba and Guede, we will alos be hearing testimony this weekend from Carlo Maria Scotto di Rinaldi, the owner of the shop where Knox and Sollecito were filmed on CCTV as they bought lingerie or replacement undies (depending on your preference) a couple of days after Meredith was killed.


I think there is wriggle room for Amanda here. I predict a spontaneous statement.

It is a fact that she was without most of her clothes. That's why in the days following she had to wear Raffaele's coat. Even her college lecturer said Amanda was embarrassed by the "overalls" she wore into class on the Monday. Her "class room" letter didn't so much express a "desire to go "shopping"" with her mother as a "desire to go shopping for clothes" with her mother. I think Amanda was probably down to just a couple of pairs of knickers and not much more than the clothes she was standing in. Everthing else was impounded at the cottage.


This is exactly why I gave both options. Pisa talks about buying "lingerie" and, while my local Nordstrom's also uses the term to ply its wares, the tabloid twist on the knickers made me uncomfortable. Certainly, Knox's clothes were unavailable to her and she needed stuff to wear. Probably, she and Sollecito were behaving like a couple of teenagers in the store. Apparently, this did not sit well with the shopowner.

Personally, I find this episode one of the saddest and least important. It may reveal some unattractive things about the immaturity and personality of both suspects but it is not incriminating with regard to the murder of Meredith Kercher. On the one hand, it is tempting to say "why no footage of Laura or Filomena buying undies with their boyfriends?" Surely, they too were without access to their personal affairs. On the other hand, it feeds prurient interest and is perfect tabloid fodder. Too perfect.

It is true, however, that these images shocked people. I can understand why, even though I think they were taken out of context and ultimately reflect badly on the media that chose to run with them.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DLW


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:41 pm

Posts: 623

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 2:54 am   Post subject:    

Bess wrote:

‘Guede is a question mark, but an interesting one. IMO, if he has good lawyers, he'll come clean, just to beat the "Lone Wolf" theory which does not bode well for him.’


Yes, Guede is a big question mark. Most journalist are saying he will be a no show. His lawyers aren’t saying much, if anything. Apparently both sets of defense teams want a piece of Rudy if he comes to trial, so they can make their clients look good compared to this so called ‘drifter‘. I don’t think it’s a battle either side wants . If he does show up, then it will mean he’s ready to do some giving and taking. Right now Rudy and his lawyers seem more preoccupied with finding a girl with long blond hair, who ’saw’ Rudy talking to Meredith, than anything related to this trial.

Note: Tara I can’t make any sense of the Tam Tam article either. Even if translated I doubt it would make any sense.
Top Profile 

Offline disinterested


User avatar


Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:34 pm

Posts: 236

Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 2:57 am   Post subject: Amanda's clothes   

I'm not understanding the situation about clothes available to Amanda since her arrest--or detention. I gather she wasn't allowed to go back into the house to retrieve her things, now part of the crime scene. Her mother stated that she had to go through channels to even give her some socks in prison. So did some "shopping" get done? I'm wondering, not for the first time, how she came by the "All You Need Is Love" T-shirt. No one seems to feel that was an advisable garment to wear--from where did she get it? And the embroidered jeans. Any theories or knowledge anyone? (I do understand that if you're buying "lingerie" you'd get what you normally would get, not just suddenly switch to granny knickers. But that's still classified as arguably meaningfully inappropriate behavior, caught on tape, even if Amanda has wriggle room to say it was a necessity. I wouldn't think she'd want to get into it.) Raffaele obviously has a full wardrobe available to him. I guess the question is really more about Edda's difficulty with the socks...and not really vital to the proceedings.

Didi
Top Profile 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 2:59 am   Post subject: Tam Tam   

DLW wrote:
Quote:
Note: Tara I can’t make any sense of the Tam Tam article either. Even if translated I doubt it would make any sense.


Hi DLW! :)

You crack me up! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Maybe Tam Tam uses a very "special" type of Italian language - good call!
Top Profile 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:35 am   Post subject:    

disinterested wrote:
I'm wondering, not for the first time, how she came by the "All You Need Is Love" T-shirt. No one seems to feel that was an advisable garment to wear--from where did she get it?



Amanda Knox sauntered into the court in Perugia yesterday, where she is on trial for murder, wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with the words: "All you need is love", and flashed Judge Giancarlo Massei a broad smile. Later her father, Curt Knox, said the shirt was a present he had brought her from the United States. She wore it yesterday because it was St Valentine's Day, he added...

The Independant

I have also read this elsewhere.

I think it was a present that day from Dad, but I'm not sure he actually expected her to pull it on before she went into court.

It was pulled on over her other clothes and she did take it off at some stage during the proceedings.

Just another Amanda-ism, I guess, but I'm becoming more sure that her lawyers are encouraging her to play up her eccentricities in order to maybe undo some of the damage her perceived "strange behaviour" caused in the days immediately following Meredith's murder.

Re. Amanda's clothes in prison.

She wears her own clothes. I'm sure there are rules and procedures for obtaining these but I have no idea how difficult that makes things. Maybe Amanda's mother didn't clear the socks through the correct channels before she tried to give them to Amanda. I don't suppose for a minute you are allowed to just hand them over during a visit. I'm sure you would have to give them to the prison authorities. They would search and check the items before themselves giving them to Amanda. I suspect such things have to be "officially logged in" etc. etc. and I suspect there are limits to the size of wardrobe inmates are allowed to keep.
Top Profile 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:52 am   Post subject: Life as an offender in Washington State   

Here are the rules and regulations for personal property in Washington State Correctional Facilities. I wonder if the rules are similar in Italy?

LIFE AS AN OFFENDER - PERSONAL PROPERTY

Life as an Offender - Personal Property

The Department of Corrections provides offenders with all of the necessities they need while incarcerated. Offenders are issued suitable clothing that is presentable, durable, and acceptably fits the offender and the climate. As needed, offenders assigned to special work details are issued appropriate protective clothing and equipment. However, offenders may receive new/approved property items. This section provides guidelines that must be followed in order to avoid unnecessary costs to the offender or his or her family.

What property can be sent to an offender?

Each offender is provided with a Maximum Allowable Personal Property Matrix (MAPPM) which identifies the types, value, and amount of personal property authorized for offender retention at the different security levels. Offenders are responsible for ensuring that the value of the property in their possession is no greater than the dollar values identified on the MAPPM.

NOTE: Each institution has its own property policy that may be more restrictive than what is listed in this booklet. Offenders have access to that policy, and they need to be aware of the regulations. To be sure of what you can or cannot send, please request this information from the offender.

What happens if the property is not authorized?

Offenders are allowed to dispose of their excess or unauthorized personal property by shipping it to a non-incarcerated person, at the offender’s expense. Offenders have 30 days to accomplish this disposition.

If the offender is without funds, refuses to pay the required postage, or refuses to designate an individual to receive the property, the items will be donated to a charitable organization or destroyed by staff.

How do offenders get personal property other than what is provided by the facility?

Offenders may acquire personal property only through the following sources:

Facility offender stores.
Purchasing items directly from an approved vendor.
Quarterly package received from family or friends.
Educational or religious programs.
Offenders in work release are allowed personal property that supports finding and maintaining employment.

What is a Quarterly Gift Package and when can I send one?

Quarterly packages are a gift package you may send to an offender that includes those items that are otherwise not available to an offender through the facility store or any other purchasing outlet provided by the facility. In order to send an offender a quarterly package, most institutions require that the offender send you a Quarterly Package Authorization form.

An offender may receive one gift package (not to exceed 15 pounds in weight including packing materials) on a quarterly basis. Quarterly periods consist of December through February; March through May; June through August; and September through November. Newly admitted offenders shall not receive a package(s) while assigned to the Reception Center at Washington Corrections Center.

An offender is not allowed to trade, sell, buy, barter, loan or give away personal property to another offender, another offender’s family and/or friends or to staff members. Please keep this in mind, as sending in anything of value to any offender other than your family member or friend is strictly prohibited.

In the event a package contains unauthorized items, it will be rejected and the offender will be held responsible for the shipping costs to mail the item(s) out of the facility. If a package contains contraband that is subject to criminal prosecution, the entire package will be turned over to the appropriate law enforcement agency. Packages containing contraband not subject to criminal prosecution shall have the contraband removed and rejected, and the remainder of the package will be delivered to the offender.

The following restrictions and guidelines apply:

Prices listed on the Quarterly Package Authorization form are the maximum purchase price allowed.
Price tags must remain on the clothing items and a store sales slip must be included in the package along with the Quarterly Package Authorization form if required by the institution.

All clothing must be machine wash and dry. No dry clean, hand wash or hang to dry items will be allowed.
Do not gift wrap items. Gift wrap will be destroyed upon package inspection.

What happens to an offender’s property when he/she is moved to another housing area in the same facility or transferred to another facility?

The offender’s property is moved with him or her as long as he or she is not placed in a restricted housing unit and as long as it meets the guidelines of 2 boxes which do not exceed 25 pounds and are 10” X 12” X 18”. The offender is responsible for the shipping costs of any property in excess of the 2 box limit. If an offender is placed in restricted housing such as segregation or medical, the property will be stored.

****************************************************************************************

In addition, there is a list of unauthorized property detailing what colors are unacceptable:

PAGE 6 UNAUTHORIZED PROPERTY

B. The following types of clothing are prohibited:

1. Black, burgundy, dark green, navy blue, red and dark colored, with the exception of black shoes and black
belts.

2. Camouflage or clothing that resembles the color or style of custody staff uniforms, including coveralls and jumpsuits.

3. Hooded clothing and SKI MASKS. :lol:

4. Patches, writing, and graphics which are sewn, glued, stitched or appliqued onto material in a design that is not part of the material except logos associated with the brand name of the manufacturer if no larger than 2" X 2".

5. Leather garments, including gloves.


There are SO many rule pages! I read somewhere on the site (I lost the page!) that pants must only have a certain number of pockets - I think 4 max, so NO cargo pants or pants that have that little coin pocket! Certainly no fashion statements in Washington prisons!
Top Profile 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:03 am   Post subject: Friday in PG   

Well as expected a portion of the trial is behind closed doors today, and perhaps tomorrow.

Everyone was allowed to enter the courtroom, to hear the decision. Avv. Maresca, as we know requested a closed hearing, but was not opposed to audio delivered outside the courtroom. The judge however decided that not only would be a closed hearing, but that neither video (of course) nor audio of the medical report would be made available to the public, at this time. Hence, when Luca Lalli was called into the courtroom, everyone except the prosecution, defense and jury left the room. It is about 11:50am and Lalli is still testifying.

Originally the owner of the lingerie store was to testify in open court, but he did not have is attorney and was postponed. We are supposed to hear from Lumumba, but that may not take place till tomorrow. It seems it may be a long day of closed testimony oggi. Tomorrow Rudy may also grace us with his presence.

In court we saw a number of medical experts for the defense - at least three for each AK and RS. Among them was medical examiner Dott. Torre who prepared the defense document having examined the body. He is a strong supporter of a one person assailant, and is said to have shown that the knife sequestered is simply too large, through repeated simulations. He is of course hired by the defense.

I had an opportunity to speak with some Italian journalists, who (through inside info) stated that the trial is just going through the motions as the prosecution has gone too far to stop, but that everyone knows (including Mattei, Mignini, Police, and etc.) that AK and RS are totally innocent. I laughed and asked if he was the same guy who wrote, Berlusconi is dead and the Prodi government would last for 10 years. There is a long way to go still...vediamo.


Last edited by stewarthome2000 on Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:23 am   Post subject: Frank's Shock   

Another confusing entry over at Frank's. Is he actually in the courtroom? SH2000, do you ever see him there? He can't even get basic facts like dates and times correct!

An exhausting read:
FRANK's SHOCK BLOG
Top Profile 

Offline thoughtful


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:48 pm

Posts: 1225

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:06 am   Post subject:    

Translation of the TAMTAM article:

The woman who saw Rudy Guede with Meredith Kercher has perhaps been found?

With a "shadowed" face, TG5 showed a woman who was being sought by Rudy
Guede's lawyers to prove that the Ivorian knew the British student
before the fatal night.

His lawyers were looking for her up hill and down dale. To find her, the
lawyers were even thinking of making a video and broadcasting it on Internet.
But TG5 got there first, broadcasting yesterday images of a young girl
who according to Rudy Guede saw him dancing with Meredith Kercher in a
disco in Perugia the evening before the murder of the English student.
However, the face of the woman, who according to the Ivorian is a foreigner,
maybe a blond, blue-eyed Spanish girl, was shown covered by a kind of
shadow effect. This woman could be the one who could convince the judges
that Rudy knew Kercher and had an appointment with her for the following
evening.
Top Profile 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:35 am   Post subject:    

The court where the Meredith Kercher trial is being held has ruled that graphic evidence of her murder will be given in private. The court in Perugia, where Meredith died, is being shown gruesome photographs of her body taken at her autopsy by pathologist Luca Lalli.

They show how her throat was cut in three places and they will also describe injuries to her body which prosecutors say are consistent with a sex attack. Francesco Maresca, the Kerchers' Italian lawyer, requested that the judge exclude the media while the evidence is heard.

He said it would be "very traumatic" for Meredith's family, even though they would not be present.

''They have already suffered when the images were broadcast on Italian TV earlier this year and it would not be right for them to have to go through that again," he said.

''It was in very poor taste for these images to be broadcast and the family were very upset.

"That's why, with them, I... made this request to preserve Meredith's memory and dignity.''

Besides Mr Lalli, the court will hear from other medical experts, who will explain the wounds that led to Meredith's death through blood loss and choking on her own blood.

It is due to re-open to the public when Carlo Maria Scotto di Rinaldi, the owner of an underwear shop where Knox was seen buying lingerie with Sollecito shortly after Meredith was killed, takes the stand.....


Sky News
Top Profile 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:35 am   Post subject:    

stewarthome2000 wrote:
The Bard wrote:
The Machine wrote:
Hi Bard,

The bruising on Meredith elbows and right forearm indicate Meredith was being restrained from behind whilst she was being attacked from the front with the knife. Meredith had cut marks on her right hand as she tried to fend off the knife blows from somebody in who was standing in front of her. Meredith was also held below her chin.

The police concluded that Meredith was on her knees or crouching down in front of the wardrobe when she was fatally stabbed because her blood sprayed onto the wardrobe at a low height. It seems Meredith right arm was being restrained when the fatal blow was inflicted because there is blood on her left hand, but none on her right hand. After she was stabbed she managed to bring her left hand up to the wound, but not her right hand. It appears that her right arm was being held until she fell onto the floor.

Meredith was also sexually assaulted by Rudy Guede during the attack. Amanda Knox's DNA is on the handle of the double DNA knife and Meredith's DNA is on the blade of the double DNA knife, which is why the prosecutors believe that Knox inflicted the fatal blow. There is a woman's bloodied shoe print, which fits Knox's foot size, on a pillow which was found under Meredith's body. An abundant amount of Sollecito's DNA was found on Meredith's bra, which places him in Meredith's room that night, but some time after Meredith was killed. Sollecito's forensic experts claim that Knox's DNA was also on Meredith's bra.

There were three sets of different sized bloody footprints at the crime scene. The footprints match the foot sizes of Knox, Sollecito and Guede.

Judge Paolo Micheli concluded from the numerous wounds to Meredith's body and the forensic evidence, which linked all three to the crime scene that they all at the cottage on 1 November and were all involved in Meredith's murder.


Machine, thank you for this concise but harrowing account. I wonder if this is the evidence that the family want kept out of the press/open court. It certainly is very damning, as there is no way just one person could have inflicted these injuries as you describe it. This has to be the beginning of the end for this charade.



One would think right?
Well as we have heard from Skep (or was it Michael) many times, this is no "slam dunk".
I was fortunate enough to meet and speak with one of the attorneys and reviewed the detailed medical reports both for and against. There are compelling arguments against the knife and the bruises and the blood path, supporting the one attacker version detailing how the wounds were made by one person only. One misconcenption, is that we will most likely see her bra was off when she was killed or minutes thereafter, and picked up residual blood. In addition, the footprints in the room are conclusive to Rudy, but not the others. That is perhaps in size, and that is not even certain. Then there is a detailed explaination of the luminol prints, finger prints, blood prints and etc. Even the supposed "clean up" is in doubt. In short, this is far from conclusive. But as I have said before, if they are not involved, given the copious evidence circumstantial or not, they must be the unluckiest people alive. But as we know, there is no crime for being unlucky....or if they get off, perhaps very lucky indeed, vediamo.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:12 am   Post subject: Re: Frank's Shock   

Tara wrote:
Another confusing entry over at Frank's. Is he actually in the courtroom? SH2000, do you ever see him there? He can't even get basic facts like dates and times correct!

An exhausting read:
FRANK's SHOCK BLOG


Actually this is one of the few reports that I read from Frank that recounts the facts pretty well.
He has obviously been reading my abbreviated accounts, which were much shorter for obvious reasons, and decided to post a lengthy belatedly report of his own.
You will note that I said in my account that it was Lumumba that passed out the fliers more so than Rudy...he adds that little observation of mine in his report.
I think we have finally had some impact on his, dare I say, journalism.
In so many words, that is what was recounted in the court room. He gets the SH2000 stamp of approval for accuracy on that one. Bravo!


Last edited by stewarthome2000 on Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:09 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:13 am   Post subject:    

I've never been shy of a bet.

I've never been to a casino in my life and the only cards I have played have been with friends and aquiantances.

I'm about evens with Damian at the moment.

I'm about to make another bet. Tomorrow everyone will know whether I have lost or won.

Even as a 60 year old I'd never risk my balls on the track but:

I think Rudy will testify tomorrow.

I think his story will remain exactly the same.

Why?

A few weeks ago his attorneys suggested that he wouldn't testify because he thought everyone would take the same attitude as Judge Micheli. ie. Who can belive a word he says. He's a liar. What is the point of testifying if that belief as square one? Why bother?

Then I began to think about the defenses of RS and AK. Essentially, if you look at the witness list and theory they are proposing, it isn't so much a defense of theiir clients they will put forward, it is more a prosecution case against Rudy Guede.

And so from the point of view of all the defences it has become "him or them".

Because RS and AK defenses will prosecute Rudy Guede when their turn comes, I belive he can put one up on them.

Because Raffaele is not prepared to say at trial that he was with Amanda, their defenses have a problem with both giving evidence.

The prosecution only has to ask that direct question of Raffaele.

Will he or won't he support Amanda??????

Rudy's defence team explained their earlier reason why Rudy wouldn't give evidence??? Is it Rudy's choice or theirs?? Is it strategy or a real feeling on Rudy's behalf?? etc. etc etc.

The defendants at THIS trial are AK and RS, not Rudy.

If he sticks to his story rigidly I think he is more scared of the prosecution that the defences. He can just deny anything the defense may suggest. No. no. no. He heard Amanda talking and she was outside the front door .

His defense has just issued an appeal for a witness at Domus to come forward. They are going for "timing publicity".

I think Rudy will testify. I don't think his story will change and I'm not prepared to pay out if I lose the bet.

Ya boo sucks. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Top Profile 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:43 am   Post subject:    

Around and around we go....

Photo and TV coverage of the trial has focused on Knox's calm demeanor, her chats with the interpreter during breaks and in one case even her fashion sense, when she wore a bright T-shirt with "All You Need Is Love" scrawled in large pink letters on Valentine's Day.

In contrast, co-defendant Sollecito, 25, has appeared more tense and kept a lower-profile; he faces the cameras only when briefly waving to his family sitting in front of them.

Italian and European reports have buzzed with remarks.

"She is defiant and he, fearful," summarized Italy's respected daily Corriere della Sera the day after the opening hearing....

"Her behavior has never been adequate, given the seriousness of what happened," lawyer Francesco Maresca, who represents Kercher's family, said Wednesday. "I criticize a superficial and inappropriate behavior. There's a girl who died brutally, we could use some respect."

However, criminologist Saverio Fortunato says Knox's apparently carefree behavior could be a psychological "reaction to the pain" of being involved in a murder case.

"It could be a sign of malaise and confusion," Fortunato said. "Facing the wounds of a trial can push you to adopt a certain behavior to fight off the fear, which can be interpreted from the outside as inappropriate."...


Reuters


I really do want to tell Reuters and the paps bollocks.

It isn't they.

They're worse than useless when explaining world issues. When it comes to personal, intimate stuff they're lost.

Fuck says The Guardian, an expletive says the Times, bad language say's the Sun.

I think all newspapers "SUCK "BIG TIME".

It ain't just to do with this case.

Anything, anytime, anywhere you look into what they do???

What do you do for your salary???
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:57 am   Post subject:    

The first wave of Friday reports for the late morning editions have started appearing.

Briefly,

Luca Lalli testified on the autopsy photos in a closed court session.
Even the audio to the press room was pulled.

"Strong images" projected onto the screen;
- Amanda kept her head lowered the whole time.
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:58 am   Post subject:    

http://www.tgcom.mediaset.it/cronaca/ar ... 5976.shtml

The trial proceeds behind closed doors.

Rape evidence is inconclusive.


"Foto autopsia mostrate in aula
Le fotografie dell'esame autoptico sul corpo di Meredith Kercher sono state mostrate in aula durante la deposizione del medico legale Luca Lalli, consulente dell'accusa nel processo che vede imputati Raffaele Sollecito e Amanda Knox. Si tratta di immagini forti cui Raffaele a volte avrebbe rivolto lo sguardo al contrario di Amanda, rimasta per tutto il tempo della loro proiezione a testa bassa. "

Autopsy fotos were shown, Raffaelle sometimes had to turn his head while Amanda was hanging down her had all the time.

Rudy's lawyers are trying to find a girl (possibly spanish according to Rudy) who saw them dancing with Meredith.
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:40 am   Post subject:    

Quote:
Brian wrote:
"I think Rudy will testify tomorrow. "


Looks like he will, "regularly", but in all likelihood he will use his right to silence.

"Intanto i difensori di Rudy Guede hanno riferito che il giovane ivoriano domani sarà regolarmente in aula per testimoniare nel processo a Sollecito e alla Knox, ma che con ogni probabilità si avvarrà della facoltà di non rispondere essendo già stato condannato per il delitto."
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:04 pm   Post subject:    

The Sollecito family (father, the carabinieri sister) are also on the way to get indicted.

Quote:
"Meredith/ Ombre inquietanti su famiglia Sollecito. Procura di Perugia chiude indagine su video morte Mez
"Dobbiamo scuoiare la Mobile di Perugia": la frase è frutto di una intercettazione telefonica messa in atto dalla Procura di Perugia a riguardo di alcuni numeri di telefono dei parenti di Raffaele Sollecito, il ragazzo pugliese accusato di essere uno dei killer di Meredith Kercher.

"Se riusciamo a toglierci dai piedi - continua l'intercettazione pubblicata da La Nazione Umbria - il capo della omicidi e quell'altro siamo a posto". La telefonata fa parte del faldone del Pm Giuliano Mignini che ha concluso le indagini sul video degli investigatori trasmesso da Tele Norba sulla morte di Meredith. Sotto accusa Francesco Sollecito, la figlia (tenente dei carabinieri) e altri familiari.

La diffusione di immagine sul corpo straziato e privo di vita di Meredith Kercher, diffuso da Tele Norba, secondo il Pm Giuliano Mignini sarebbe stato un atto finalizzato a creare impunità nei confronti di Raffaele Sollecito. Nelle indagini - chiuse ieri - la Procura ha individuato che sia la sorella di Raffaele Sollecito e che il padre erano impossesso di questo video che faceva parte del fascicolo dell'inchiesta sulla morte della ragazza inglese. Si voleva colpire sulla reputazione della giovane vittima. Da qui è collegata anche l'atto di accusa (arbitraria pubblicazione di atti di un procedimento penale>) rivolta al cronista Antonio Rossitto e al suo direttore Maurizio Belpietro (Panorama) per l'articolo sulla presunta ubriachezza di Meredith. Il dato era stato spiegato dai periti che era incoerente. E secondo la Procura fu provocato da una contaminazione in sede di laboratorio"



Francesco Solelcito could be the "Man Of The Year" for he Association of Italian Lawyers.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:20 pm   Post subject:    

Short video of suspects and their lawyers arriving at court this morning:

http://tinyurl.com/dapekf
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:22 pm   Post subject:    

Lalli puts the time of death as between from around 8pm 01 November to around 4am the following day, with 11pm being the midpoint, and not more than 2 to 3 hours after her last meal; and cause of death was the blood got into her lungs and she suffocated.

[ AGI ]


Question: If it is closed court, how are these reports getting out?
Top Profile 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 844

Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:30 pm   Post subject: Re: WHAT THE MECHANIC COULD HAVE SEEN . . .   

Back to the var in the drive for a moment.

Kermit wrote:
Here's a photo-montage of what the mechanic could have seen ...


Nice work with the image Kermit. I guess that barrier thing you show this side of the car is some temporary thing that was there when the shot was taken.

The driveway space between the street and the gate is a sharp dip down, and if a car did reverse in and stop just there, the driving skills would be good.

The one reason I can think of for wanting to do that manouever (rather than simply open the gate it was was closed, and drive right is face-forward) is to load something in the car by the lift-up door at the back of the car (an A3 has one) and get out of there in a hurry.

Or perhaps not load something in - but still be out of there in a hurry. Premeditation (again) anyone?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:37 pm   Post subject:    

Catnip wrote:
Lalli puts the time of death as between from around 8pm 01 November to around 4am the following day, with 11pm being the midpoint, and not more than 2 to 3 hours after her last meal; and cause of death was the blood got into her lungs and she suffocated.

[ AGI ]


Question: If it is closed court, how are these reports getting out?


I think you may be wrong when you say "closed court".

Maybe the gruesome details are hidden but I don't think the intention was ever to present news about the basics getting out

I don't think anyone wanted a playback of Meredith's body being "pushed over by the foot" by an investigator, a close up of the wound to her neck, but at the same time how can it be hidden that she was killed????
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:38 pm   Post subject:    

From Corriere della Sera:

The lingerie shop owner.

http://tinyurl.com/ccom4n
'The witness also the proprietor of a lingerie shop where Amanda and Raffaele had gone a few days after the crime before being arrested. The witness has the assistance of an attorney because Sollecito brought a libel lawsuit against him.'
Top Profile 

Offline thoughtful


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:48 pm

Posts: 1225

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:40 pm   Post subject:    

Hello

Hello

Maybe I took the wrong tone with my remark about the messages concerning FOA. Of course it's right to set the record straight. I was only bothered by the occasional lowering of tone to a level equivalent to theirs. The trouble with mockery is that it isn't convincing to the undecided, only to the decided.

Machine, to answer your observation about the DNA, of course I agree that the DNA is liable to end up being much more important than the red coat. But I was talking about what is actually happening in the trial, where no DNA evidence has yet been presented. Already it seems a little strange that the trial has started with less important questions, but presumably everything will be covered eventually. However, I am surprised that those things which are covered don't always seem to be explored in full. The red coat is an example; it was mentioned at the trial, so why not pursue the question of its existence to the end? As you say, eyewitness testimony is rather dangerous, and therefore material confirmation of it is always to be hoped and sought. The trouble is that if you decide to discount this or that detail given by an eyewitness on the grounds that they are not perfectly accurate, then what can you choose to keep? It becomes very arbitrary. This is sometimes unavoidable, but whenever material confirmation can be found, surely it should be a priority (and knowing whether the four, or three of the four, knew each other before the day of the murder is not such a detail). For the same reason, it is also very surprising to me that a reconstruction like what Brian S. suggests with the parked dark car was not done. I would have said that recalling the position of the car and maybe something about the size of the car (how much it was sticking out onto the road) not even to mention the make of the car would be very important information, and that as he said, actually seeing a reconstruction could easily trigger an "oh, it wasn't shaped like that at all" type of memory from one of the observers.

The leaks we have all heard and read about the DNA evidence, the footprint evidence, and the medical evidence, sound very damning for Amanda and Raffaele. But it may very well be that their force pales in court as various experts challenge each other's findings. If so, all the other details gain in importance.

A small PS, obviously trivial compared to what is happening in the courtroom
today.

Recently this image of a paper being held in the courtroom was linked here:

http://www.imageposter.com/uploads/get/621695

The translation is:

With reference to Amanda's mobile telephone: can messages be deleted only by human intervention or is it possible that certain types of telephone don't keep them in the memory?
Top Profile 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 844

Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:42 pm   Post subject:    

Names of those to be charged with facilitating the Telenorba video showing Meredith on the floor have been published in Italy.

In addition to Sollecito’s father Dr Francesco Sollecito, they apparently include Sollecito’s sister Vanessa Sollecito, who is an officer in the Carabinieri in Rome, and Sollecito’s stepmother Mary (known as Mara), and an aunt, Rosaria Achilles.

The names of the Telenorba staff to be charged are apparently the director Enzo Magistère and the reporter Anthony Procacci.

Those on the Panorama staff who published the lies about the alcohol content of Meredith’s blood were apparently director Mauritius Belpietro and columnist Anthony Rossitto.

Jools did a great post on this sad, sick, incriminating affair yesterday on TJMK. No media outside of Italy seems to have picked up on the story as yet.

Who knows? One day, Doc Sollecito could be occupying the cell right next to the apple of his eye there... And Vanessa, Mara and Rosario could be snug as bugs in a rug with AK.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:42 pm   Post subject:    

Catnip wrote:
Lalli puts the time of death as between from around 8pm 01 November to around 4am the following day, with 11pm being the midpoint, and not more than 2 to 3 hours after her last meal; and cause of death was the blood got into her lungs and she suffocated.

[ AGI ]


Question: If it is closed court, how are these reports getting out?


The press is walking around in the court house, in the press room and outside the court house. Every once in a while and attorney or someone leaves the court room and they get swamped by questions. I saw Brusco leave to get a coffee and give some details. This is how much of the news of todays hearing will be released. The attorneys and hired medical professionals will come out and some will give us some insight and answer specifics questions. When asked what it all means,and one side will say one thing and the other something else. Lalli is still testifying...
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Brian S.


Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:53 pm

Posts: 1115

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:45 pm   Post subject:    

fast pete wrote:
The one reason I can think of for wanting to do that manouever (rather than simply open the gate it was was closed, and drive right is face-forward) is to load something in the car by the lift-up door at the back of the car (an A3 has one) and get out of there in a hurry.

Or perhaps not load something in - but still be out of there in a hurry. Premeditation (again) anyone?


The best I can think of is stealing the guy's plants from downstairs.

We've talked about the value of the plants on this board before.

Defintely a few hundred euro if they were anywhere near mature. (they were grown under lights).

I'm sure they'd fit in the boot(trunk) of a car.
Top Profile 

Offline MikeMCSG


Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:14 am

Posts: 207

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:49 pm   Post subject:    

Fast Pete wrote:
Names of those to be charged with facilitating the Telenorba video showing Meredith on the floor have been published in Italy.

In addition to Sollecito’s father Dr Francesco Sollecito, they apparently include Sollecito’s sister Vanessa Sollecito, who is an officer in the Carabinieri in Rome, and Sollecito’s stepmother Mary (known as Mara), and an aunt, Rosaria Achilles.

The names of the Telenorba staff to be charged are apparently the director Enzo Magistère and the reporter Anthony Procacci.

Those on the Panorama staff who published the lies about the alcohol content of Meredith’s blood were apparently director Mauritius Belpietro and columnist Anthony Rossitto.

Jools did a great post on this sad, sick, incriminating affair yesterday on TJMK. No media outside of Italy seems to have picked up on the story as yet.

Who knows? One day, Doc Sollecito could be occupying the cell right next to the apple of his eye there... And Vanessa, Mara and Rosario could be snug as bugs in a rug with AK.


Pete, is it a criminal or civil offence ?
Top Profile 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 844

Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:52 pm   Post subject:    

Agree with you Brian. Most of the press prefer to be in the press room watching the live feed, because they can tape quotes to get them right and also they can work on their computers.

Today the video feed was off for the autopsy photographs (which some in the media have seen previously through an official process - and were really disturbed by) and the audio feed has been off for shorter periods. No members of the public are around.

Added: I just saw Stew's post above straight from the court. Stew talks about them surrounding the door! Kinda like exiting customs at an airport, making it through that scrum.

I would also add that there is a lot of autopsy detail in the report of Judge Micheli, as Brian too well knows. Nicki posted on that this morning.

Brian S. wrote:
I think you may be wrong when you say "closed court".

Maybe the gruesome details are hidden but I don't think the intention was ever to present news about the basics getting out


Last edited by Fast Pete on Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 844

Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:53 pm   Post subject:    

Criminal. See Jools' post for the charges. They are serious.

MikeMCSG wrote:
Pete, is it a criminal or civil offence ?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline MikeMCSG


Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:14 am

Posts: 207

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:13 pm   Post subject:    

Fast Pete wrote:
Criminal. See Jools' post for the charges. They are serious.

MikeMCSG wrote:
Pete, is it a criminal or civil offence ?


Thanks Pete. I wonder if the doc will try and take the rap for the rest of the family ?
Top Profile 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:21 pm   Post subject: Re: Frank's Shock   

stewarthome2000 wrote:
Tara wrote:
Another confusing entry over at Frank's. Is he actually in the courtroom? SH2000, do you ever see him there? He can't even get basic facts like dates and times correct!

An exhausting read:
FRANK's SHOCK BLOG


Actually this is one of the few reports that I read from Frank that recounts the facts pretty well.
He has obviously been reading my abbreviated accounts, which were much shorter for obvious reasons, and decided to post a lengthy belatedly report of his own.
You will note that I said in my account that it was Lumumba that passed out the fliers more so than Rudy...he adds that little observation of mine in his report.
I think we have finally had some impact on his, dare I say, journalism.
In so many words, that is what was recounted in the court room. He gets the SH2000 stamp of approval for accuracy on that one. Bravo!



Hi SH2000!

Thanks for being there this weekend! :)

OK, so here's YOUR report, which coincides with other press reports:

Quote:
2) Fabrizio Giofreddi

He was also a pretty good witness, confident and unwavering in his testimony. He stated that on October 30th he parked his car right at the junction where Via Della Pergola begins and the street leads up to the piazza Grimana, which he described as being across from the pub “contropunto”.

He was sure of the date because when he was leaving he scratched the car next to him and left a note for the driver of the other car and wrote down the information (license plate etc.) and the date and time. He said that he arrived and parked around 5:00pm and saw four people coming from the driveway of the house walking on to the road.



And here's what Frank, the sadly mistaken and lonely writer states:
Quote:
Fabio knows it was exactly October 31 of 2007 at about 17:30 because that day, while moving his car (at via della Pergola and via S.Antonio, just at the bottom of the stairs) he bumps into another car.

He adds:

He said he was looking at them with the natural light. But on October 31 the sunset is at 17:06 and at 17:30 is already dark.


A rather important detail to get wrong me thinks! But I see his devoted followers believe he should be nominated for a Pulitzer! Oh, nevermind. Someone was joking! :lol:
Top Profile 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 844

Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:34 pm   Post subject:    

MikeMCSG wrote:
Fast Pete wrote:
Criminal. See Jools' post for the charges. They are serious.

MikeMCSG wrote:
Pete, is it a criminal or civil offence ?


Thanks Pete. I wonder if the doc will try and take the rap for the rest of the family ?


Welcome Mike. Yeah the charges are not actually made yet. He might wanna take the fall, I guess. (I doubt he really ends up in a cell.)

It is not yet clear what the roles of the three women were. The sister might have to be suspended from the Carabinieri if a charge is laid against her.

Seems to me that this is the third great shot across the bows of the defense supporters by Miugnini.

1) Suit against Seattle newspaper for reporting the hate-fest at Saltys (as did Skep and Snape - objectively!).

2) Charge against AK for claiming she was beaten, this is/was a main FOA talking point.

3) And now this. the whole Sollecito family on ice.

The guy does not lack for chutzpah. Very New Yorkish! I can see why Doug Preston (who I believe lives in Maine) has this thing about him.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:40 pm   Post subject: Re: Frank's Shock   

Tara wrote:
Hi SH2000!
Thanks for being there this weekend! :)

OK, so here's YOUR report, which coincides with other press reports:
Quote:
2) Fabrizio Giofreddi

He was also a pretty good witness, confident and unwavering in his testimony. He stated that on October 30th he parked his car right at the junction where Via Della Pergola begins and the street leads up to the piazza Grimana, which he described as being across from the pub “contropunto”.

He was sure of the date because when he was leaving he scratched the car next to him and left a note for the driver of the other car and wrote down the information (license plate etc.) and the date and time. He said that he arrived and parked around 5:00pm and saw four people coming from the driveway of the house walking on to the road.



And here's what Frank, the sadly mistaken and lonely writer states:
Quote:
Fabio knows it was exactly October 31 of 2007 at about 17:30 because that day, while moving his car (at via della Pergola and via S.Antonio, just at the bottom of the stairs) he bumps into another car.

He adds:

He said he was looking at them with the natural light. But on October 31 the sunset is at 17:06 and at 17:30 is already dark.


A rather important detail to get wrong me thinks! But I see his devoted followers believe he should be nominated for a Pulitzer! Oh, nevermind. Someone was joking! :lol:



Ha! Tara you're sharp! I missed that detail. Grosso modo as we say (which in Italian means "in general"), he was pretty on the mark. I went to my notes - the few I keep - and I had written that Giofreddi stated that he parked his car "intorno alle 5"..which was around 5:00pm, and he defintely said 30th of October, and it was when he was leaving much later that he bumped into the car and left a note. Good catch !!!
Two demerits Frank, but overall good job.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline MikeMCSG


Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:14 am

Posts: 207

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:57 pm   Post subject:    

Fast Pete wrote:
MikeMCSG wrote:
Fast Pete wrote:
Criminal. See Jools' post for the charges. They are serious.

MikeMCSG wrote:
Pete, is it a criminal or civil offence ?


Thanks Pete. I wonder if the doc will try and take the rap for the rest of the family ?


Welcome Mike. Yeah the charges are not actually made yet. He might wanna take the fall, I guess. (I doubt he really ends up in a cell.)

It is not yet clear what the roles of the three women were. The sister might have to be suspended from the Carabinieri if a charge is laid against her.

Seems to me that this is the third great shot across the bows of the defense supporters by Miugnini.

1) Suit against Seattle newspaper for reporting the hate-fest at Saltys (as did Skep and Snape - objectively!).

2) Charge against AK for claiming she was beaten, this is/was a main FOA talking point.

3) And now this. the whole Sollecito family on ice.

The guy does not lack for chutzpah. Very New Yorkish! I can see why Doug Preston (who I believe lives in Maine) has this thing about him.


He certainly seems to relish a scrap !

Re the Sollecitos ; how could they ? Curt and Edda look saintly by comparison. There's no doubt where their lad's callousness and arrogance come from. It makes me wonder if they actually care whether he's guilty or not, just put it down to youthful folly in falling for a "wrong 'un" and don't let it spoil his golden future. What does a dead girl matter in the scheme of things ?

Not that the TV people should get off lightly -what were they thinking of ?
Top Profile 

Offline stewarthome2000


User avatar


Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:47 am

Posts: 152

Location: Perugia, Italy

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:57 pm   Post subject: Lumumba...   

Lalli finished..Lumumba is going to testify now.
Gotta head back...cheers!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:01 pm   Post subject:    

So the godly Amanda is hiding her face in her hands as graphic images of this crime are displayed for all the court to see poor dear.
No grinning and Cheshire cat smiling today?
Why not I wonder.
Would that be inapropriate?

I guess it must be tough to look at ones handiwork and the sole reason why one is on trial for murder.
Skunkweed is a bitch don't you think Amanda?
What's that? one shot? one and a half?
Yeah sure. Lying like you always do.

Histrionics sometimes backfire.
It's a shame she hasn't got her supporting cast with her in court providing us with a chorus of angels for every act and movement she makes.
If I had been imprisoned and put on trial for something I hadn't done I would be damn well interested to see and know what I am actually accused of.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline mojo


Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:31 pm

Posts: 225

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:14 pm   Post subject:    

one cannot help wonder if this may not be the latest tactic in the Knox charm offensive.....emphasis on offensive. :( :(

US suspect's court demeanor in the spotlight

PERUGIA, Italy (AP) — She grins and chats. On Valentine's Day, she sported a T-shirt that read "All You Need Is Love." And one of the first things she said in court was about a rabbit shaped sex toy.

Amanda Knox faces life in prison if convicted of killing Meredith Kercher, a British exchange student who was her roommate in this picturesque university town. However, her breezy behavior in hearings over the last three months has set tongues wagging in Italy and abroad.

Knox's family insists she has always been respectful in court and knows full well the weight of the charges against her.

........On Friday, coroner Luca Lalli confirmed his earlier findings by testifying that the Briton died from a stab wound to the neck. He said it cannot be determined if she was raped, though bruises and cuts on her face, neck, hands and legs suggest violence during intercourse.

Maresca said video footage of the autopsy was shown during the closed-doors session and Knox "looked away, while Sollecito occasionally looked up."
Top Profile 

Offline MikeMCSG


Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:14 am

Posts: 207

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:17 pm   Post subject:    

DeathFish 2000 wrote:
So the godly Amanda is hiding her face in her hands as graphic images of this crime are displayed for all the court to see poor dear.
No grinning and Cheshire cat smiling today?
Why not I wonder.
Would that be inapropriate?

I guess it must be tough to look at ones handiwork and the sole reason why one is on trial for murder.
Skunkweed is a bitch don't you think Amanda?
What's that? one shot? one and a half?
Yeah sure. Lying like you always do.

Histrionics sometimes backfire.
It's a shame she hasn't got her supporting cast with her in court providing us with a chorus of angels for every act and movement she makes.
If I had been imprisoned and put on trial for something I hadn't done I would be damn well interested to see and know what I am actually accused of.


In all fairness Death Fish if she'd stared her way through them and made notes it would be just as easy to damn her as cold and emotionless. She couldn't win either way today.
Top Profile 

Offline mojo


Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:31 pm

Posts: 225

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:18 pm   Post subject:    

Richard Owen of the Times

Graphic images shown at Amanda Knox trial for Meredith Kercher death

Jurors at the Perugia court where Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are being tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher were today shown graphic photographs and video footage of the post mortem on Ms Kercher's body.

Lawyers at the session, which was held in camera, said that Ms Knox, 21, Ms Kercher's American flatmate, had refused to look at the footage, keeping her head down and at times burying it in her folded arms on the table in front of her. Mr Sollecito, 25, Ms Knox's former Italian boyfriend, occasionally glanced at the screen in the courtroom.

The film and photographs were shown as Dr Luca Lalli, the pathologist who conducted the post mortem, gave evidence. Francesco Maresca, the lawyer for the Kercher family, asked for the media to be excluded from the hearing to "preserve Meredith's memory and dignity". He said the testimony and images would be "very traumatic" for Ms Kercher's relatives.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:40 pm   Post subject:    

Mike wrote:

Quote:
DeathFish 2000 wrote:
So the godly Amanda is hiding her face in her hands as graphic images of this crime are displayed for all the court to see poor dear.
No grinning and Cheshire cat smiling today?
Why not I wonder.
Would that be inapropriate?

I guess it must be tough to look at ones handiwork and the sole reason why one is on trial for murder.
Skunkweed is a bitch don't you think Amanda?
What's that? one shot? one and a half?
Yeah sure. Lying like you always do.

Histrionics sometimes backfire.
It's a shame she hasn't got her supporting cast with her in court providing us with a chorus of angels for every act and movement she makes.
If I had been imprisoned and put on trial for something I hadn't done I would be damn well interested to see and know what I am actually accused of.


In all fairness Death Fish if she'd stared her way through them and made notes it would be just as easy to damn her as cold and emotionless. She couldn't win either way today.


I think this is a classic lose-lose situation. One can look on without emotion, look away, break down in tears, whatever. No matter what the reaction, it will be found wanting. In addition, there is no way to have a spontaneous reaction to something you know is coming. So any reaction will also appear contrived.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline mojo


Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:31 pm

Posts: 225

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:42 pm   Post subject:    

her situation today may have been lose - lose, but it is a striking contrast to her demeanor on the day the police broke the door down and later at the police station.
Top Profile 

Offline GreenWyvern


User avatar


Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:41 pm

Posts: 252

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:47 pm   Post subject:    

Update from Richard Owen at the Times:

Kercher was attacked by more than one person, Amanda Knox trial told
Quote:
Multiple injuries suffered by Meredith Kercher, the British student sexually assaulted and murdered in Italy, prove that she was attacked by more than one person, a police pathologist testified today.

Jurors at the Perugia court where Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are being tried for the murder of Ms Kercher were shown graphic photographs and video footage of the post mortem on Ms Kercher's body, conducted by Dr Luca Lalli, the area's police pathologist.

Giuliano Mignini, the chief prosecutor, said the wounds identified by Dr Lalli backed up the prosecution case that Ms Kercher was killed after refusing to take part in a drug-fuelled sex game in which Ms Knox, 21, Ms Kercher's American flatmate, and Mr Sollecito, Ms Knox's former Italian boyfriend, took part with Rudy Guede, an Ivory Coast immigrant. He was given a 30-year prison sentence for the crime last October.

Defence lawyers deny the charges and claim that Ms Kercher was attacked by a lone burglar, indicating that this was Mr Guede.

However, Mr Mignini said that Dr Lalli's evidence showed Ms Kercher was assaulted by three people. "One forced her head back, one stabbed her in the throat and the third strangled her," he told The Times outside the court.

Dr Lalli said that he found 23 cuts and bruises on Ms Kercher's body. He said there was evidence of "non consensual" sexual activity, though not sexual violence. Prosecutors said that what had occurred amounted to sexual intercourse under threat.

...

The court returned to open session today to hear Carlo Maria Scotto di Rinaldi, the owner of a lingerie shop, who said that he saw Ms Knox buying "sexy underwear" with Mr Sollecito the day after Ms Kercher was killed. He said the pair were kissing and cuddling and he heard them talking about having "hot sex".

During the evidence Ms Knox, in a striped coloured sweater, sat stony-faced.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:50 pm   Post subject:    

SH2000 wrote:

Quote:
Ha! Tara you're sharp! I missed that detail. Grosso modo as we say (which in Italian means "in general"), he was pretty on the mark. I went to my notes - the few I keep - and I had written that Giofreddi stated that he parked his car "intorno alle 5"..which was around 5:00pm, and he defintely said 30th of October, and it was when he was leaving much later that he bumped into the car and left a note. Good catch !!!
Two demerits Frank, but overall good job.


On one of the earliest haloscans, there is a link (I think I provided it, or Brian did) to a website that shows sunset times for every day of the year, in every part of the world, as well as the time lapse between sunset and darkness. In any case, if the sunset on that date was at 5:06 pm and Giofreddi was where he said he was at around 5:00 pm, it would not have been dark at that time. He would have been able to see. In addition, I don't know about Perugia but lights that are timed to go on at dusk are quite common, so there may have been artificial light as well.

I realize that witness testimony of this kind can vary enormously in terms of reliability and is of limited value at best. But I am having a hard time understanding this systematic attack on credibility because it begs a basic question: why would any of these people lie? They might be mistaken with regard to certain details, and their motivation might not be part of the official story, but I personally wonder why they would be motivated to lie.

One could make the argument that the various members of LE might lie to protect one another or to protect their own reputation. Even for this argument to fly, it would be necessary to believe they have all colluded in some way. I find it hard to believe. Again, they may misremember certain details, but lying means taking a potentially huge risk. I don't see why a rational agent would accept the risk of being called out for perjury in exchange for.... what exactly?

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 4:13 pm   Post subject:    

Thoughtful wrote:

Quote:
Maybe I took the wrong tone with my remark about the messages concerning FOA. Of course it's right to set the record straight. I was only bothered by the occasional lowering of tone to a level equivalent to theirs. The trouble with mockery is that it isn't convincing to the undecided, only to the decided.


I understand your concern. I personally would not make some of the comments posted here (no names or posts mentioned), since they go further or lower than I would go. But insofar as they are not libelous and reflect the opinion of the poster, then there is no reason to delete them. The one thing I would say is that I have not seen comments on this board that match those made by two individuals in particular (one posting as anon at times), not here but elsewhere. I'm talking about comments that are intensely personal, about the alleged sexual orientation of posters, not to mention outing people or spreading vicious rumors (that my house was foreclosed on, for example, or that I weigh 345 pounds and lied on my CV, etc.). We have made it clear that comments of that type and outing posters will not be tolerated here.

But I agree that mockery is an insider thing. It's also a good way of letting off steam on occasion, but only when used in moderation.


Thoughtful also wrote:

Quote:
Machine, to answer your observation about the DNA, of course I agree that the DNA is liable to end up being much more important than the red coat. But I was talking about what is actually happening in the trial, where no DNA evidence has yet been presented. Already it seems a little strange that the trial has started with less important questions, but presumably everything will be covered eventually. However, I am surprised that those things which are covered don't always seem to be explored in full. The red coat is an example; it was mentioned at the trial, so why not pursue the question of its existence to the end? As you say, eyewitness testimony is rather dangerous, and therefore material confirmation of it is always to be hoped and sought.


I am still wondering why Knox did not address this issue by making a spontaneous statement, similar to the one made about the vibrator. We have no confirmation that this red coat exists, but are left with the question because it was not substantiated by either side. Why not take advantage of the right to make spontaneous statements, especially when doing so has the power to erode the testimony against you.


With regard to this statement, translated from the typed statement held up in court:

Quote:
With reference to Amanda's mobile telephone: can messages be deleted only by human intervention or is it possible that certain types of telephone don't keep them in the memory?


Thanks for translating it. Do we know who the author is?

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 4:33 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Mike wrote:

Quote:
DeathFish 2000 wrote:
So the godly Amanda is hiding her face in her hands as graphic images of this crime are displayed for all the court to see poor dear.
No grinning and Cheshire cat smiling today?
Why not I wonder.
Would that be inapropriate?

I guess it must be tough to look at ones handiwork and the sole reason why one is on trial for murder.
Skunkweed is a bitch don't you think Amanda?
What's that? one shot? one and a half?
Yeah sure. Lying like you always do.

Histrionics sometimes backfire.
It's a shame she hasn't got her supporting cast with her in court providing us with a chorus of angels for every act and movement she makes.
If I had been imprisoned and put on trial for something I hadn't done I would be damn well interested to see and know what I am actually accused of.


In all fairness Death Fish if she'd stared her way through them and made notes it would be just as easy to damn her as cold and emotionless. She couldn't win either way today.


I think this is a classic lose-lose situation. One can look on without emotion, look away, break down in tears, whatever. No matter what the reaction, it will be found wanting. In addition, there is no way to have a spontaneous reaction to something you know is coming. So any reaction will also appear contrived.


So would you think grinning and smiling your way through a sexual assault and murder you are being tried for is not contrived?
I would say it's downright disrepectful to say the least.
The grinning and smiling has raised the eyebrows of a lot of people who haven't been following the case like we have.
Why no smiling laughing and grinning today? She is still at her murder trial isn't she?
It must have been stressful for her (poor dear) for these images to be displayed in court - but no humming, singing, cartwheels, yoga or back stretches on show evidently.
The point I am trying to make is that this is more histrionics from our Diva on trial.

Sorry about the grammer and sbelling.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 4:33 pm   Post subject:    

Jools wrote:
From Corriere della Sera:

The lingerie shop owner.

http://tinyurl.com/ccom4n
'The witness also the proprietor of a lingerie shop where Amanda and Raffaele had gone a few days after the crime before being arrested. The witness has the assistance of an attorney because Sollecito brought a libel lawsuit against him.'


Also from the article cited by Jools:

The autopsy images have destroyed the good humor displayed by Amanda Knox in recent days. Without reading anymore into it, this is the take-away for the day: it has been rare to see Knox display a mood other than serene or carefree - there are situations that her "Let it Be" life-mantra cannot lift her above.

And according to Lalli, the body of Meredith did not reveal any signs of external trauma that clearly indicated a rape itself, but he could not exclude the eventuality of a possible psychological coercion that can have prompted Meredith to undergo an unwanted relationship. Lalli found that the bruising on the body are consistent with a sexual relationship, perhaps hasty, which occurred shortly before death. The take-away for the day: the knife wounds and brusies on Meredith's body tell a clear story of intimidation and rape by means of psychological coercion and physical restraint.

I'm left wondering if it can also be conclusively concluded that more than one person participated in the rape. Perhaps Saturday we will hear more about that when more doctors testify. And apparently we're going to hear more from the lingerie shop staff where Amanda and Raffaele shopped. But no one knows for sure if Rudy Guede will show up because, apparently, he can still make use of the option not to reply to the prosecutor's request to testify.
Top Profile 

Offline Shirley


Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:48 pm

Posts: 376

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 4:37 pm   Post subject: Re: Lumumba...   

stewarthome2000 wrote:
Lalli finished..Lumumba is going to testify now.
Gotta head back...cheers!



Stew, you're a doll! Thank you so much for your live reporting. It gives life to all the newspaper articles. Cheers!

And cheers to everyone else too. I'm so impressed and grateful for everyone's research and attention to detail.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 4:50 pm   Post subject:    

DeathFish 2000 wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Mike wrote:

Quote:
DeathFish 2000 wrote:
So the godly Amanda is hiding her face in her hands as graphic images of this crime are displayed for all the court to see poor dear.
No grinning and Cheshire cat smiling today?
Why not I wonder.
Would that be inapropriate?

I guess it must be tough to look at ones handiwork and the sole reason why one is on trial for murder.
Skunkweed is a bitch don't you think Amanda?
What's that? one shot? one and a half?
Yeah sure. Lying like you always do.

Histrionics sometimes backfire.
It's a shame she hasn't got her supporting cast with her in court providing us with a chorus of angels for every act and movement she makes.
If I had been imprisoned and put on trial for something I hadn't done I would be damn well interested to see and know what I am actually accused of.


In all fairness Death Fish if she'd stared her way through them and made notes it would be just as easy to damn her as cold and emotionless. She couldn't win either way today.


I think this is a classic lose-lose situation. One can look on without emotion, look away, break down in tears, whatever. No matter what the reaction, it will be found wanting. In addition, there is no way to have a spontaneous reaction to something you know is coming. So any reaction will also appear contrived.


So would you think grinning and smiling your way through a sexual assault and murder you are being tried for is not contrived?
I would say it's downright disrepectful to say the least.
The grinning and smiling has raised the eyebrows of a lot of people who haven't been following the case like we have.
Why no smiling laughing and grinning today? She is still at her murder trial isn't she?
It must have been stressful for her (poor dear) for these images to be displayed in court - but no humming, singing, cartwheels, yoga or back stretches on show evidently.
The point I am trying to make is that this is more histrionics from our Diva on trial.

Sorry about the grammer and sbelling.


Do you mean that she is displaying none of the behaviours her supporters have suggested are her way of dealing with stress? I think that is a fair point.
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 4:53 pm   Post subject: New from the Today Show   

A new report from Keith Miller on NBC's Today Show. Miller describes Knox and Sollecito as being serious, nervous, and on-edge in court today. He mentions that there will be upcoming testimony from the lingerie shop staff regarding the demeanor of Knox and Sollecito one day after the murder.

Miller found an American lawyer working in Italy who tells him that because there are 200 witnesses on the prosecution's witness list it means the prosecutor's case lacks hard evidence and that none of these witness statements are likely to change the outcome of the trial. Yet Miller goes on to say that the prosecution may be concealing key evidence such as trace DNA found in Meredith's room, a bloody fingerprint on Meredith's bra strap , and a knife with DNA on it.

Miller concludes by again quoting the Knox family as saying they believe Knox will eventually be set free, but only after having already served 2 long years in prison.
Top Profile 

Offline GreenWyvern


User avatar


Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:41 pm

Posts: 252

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 4:59 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
I am still wondering why Knox did not address this issue by making a spontaneous statement, similar to the one made about the vibrator. We have no confirmation that this red coat exists, but are left with the question because it was not substantiated by either side. Why not take advantage of the right to make spontaneous statements, especially when doing so has the power to erode the testimony against you.

Maybe because she does have a red coat? :)

Perhaps at some later stage the prosecution will present evidence of a red coat which was found in the cottage, or something similar.

A general point that I think we should all keep in mind:

We are not yet seeing the prosecution's actual argument. We are only seeing isolated facts being brought forward one by one. It's still very early days in this case, and at some later stage Mignini will no doubt spend a lot of time connecting all the dots and making his argument. For the moment we are just being presented with the dots themselves, and no picture is yet visible.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 4:59 pm   Post subject:    

DF2K wrote:

Quote:
So would you think grinning and smiling your way through a sexual assault and murder you are being tried for is not contrived?
I would say it's downright disrepectful to say the least.
The grinning and smiling has raised the eyebrows of a lot of people who haven't been following the case like we have.
Why no smiling laughing and grinning today? She is still at her murder trial isn't she?
It must have been stressful for her (poor dear) for these images to be displayed in court - but no humming, singing, cartwheels, yoga or back stretches on show evidently.
The point I am trying to make is that this is more histrionics from our Diva on trial.


Personally, I get the feeling that most of Knox's behavior as described by witnesses and as seen in the courtroom shows an incredible disconnect from the reality of the situation. I also get the feeling, as Brian suggested, that Knox has perhaps been counseled to continue to display the breezy lack of concern that so shocked others after her flatmate was murdered, as a way of suggesting to the judge and jurors that this is just who she is, inappropriate reactions and all.

As for reports of her demeanor at today's hearing, if true I see a continuation of the pattern: a disconnect from reality. But your point is an interesting one. If yoga, cartwheels and humming form Knox's usual coping repertoire when confronted with stress, then why were they absent today?

One possible answer: people don't always behave in exactly the same way under stress.

Another possible answer: Knox's inappropriate behavior at the police station was not due to stress.

But going back to the images displayed today: how is anyone supposed to react to them? I have heard from people who have seen them that they are haunting, disturbing, unbearable. If reports are true, then Knox refused to look at them.

So the question is, what does that signify? What does a refusal to look signify? Maresca was quoted as saying she "looked away". Other reports say she had her head in her arms on the table.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:09 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
DF2K wrote:

Quote:
So would you think grinning and smiling your way through a sexual assault and murder you are being tried for is not contrived?
I would say it's downright disrepectful to say the least.
The grinning and smiling has raised the eyebrows of a lot of people who haven't been following the case like we have.
Why no smiling laughing and grinning today? She is still at her murder trial isn't she?
It must have been stressful for her (poor dear) for these images to be displayed in court - but no humming, singing, cartwheels, yoga or back stretches on show evidently.
The point I am trying to make is that this is more histrionics from our Diva on trial.


Personally, I get the feeling that most of Knox's behavior as described by witnesses and as seen in the courtroom shows an incredible disconnect from the reality of the situation. I also get the feeling, as Brian suggested, that Knox has perhaps been counseled to continue to display the breezy lack of concern that so shocked others after her flatmate was murdered, as a way of suggesting to the judge and jurors that this is just who she is, inappropriate reactions and all.

As for reports of her demeanor at today's hearing, if true I see a continuation of the pattern: a disconnect from reality. But your point is an interesting one. If yoga, cartwheels and humming form Knox's usual coping repertoire when confronted with stress, then why were they absent today?

One possible answer: people don't always behave in exactly the same way under stress.

Another possible answer: Knox's inappropriate behavior at the police station was not due to stress.

But going back to the images displayed today: how is anyone supposed to react to them? I have heard from people who have seen them that they are haunting, disturbing, unbearable. If reports are true, then Knox refused to look at them.

So the question is, what does that signify? What does a refusal to look signify? Maresca was quoted as saying she "looked away". Other reports say she had her head in her arms on the table.



It suggests to me that she has a heart, somewhere. It suggests that she is not as disconnected from reality as it may have seemed up to now. Why would you not look? Because it is repulsive and disturbing. Perhaps this is the moment Amanda connects. I think Amanda should look. Calmly and seriously. She should be taking notes.

I agree. If it was me on trial for something I did not do I would look very carefully at everything. And I think no-one would comment so much if my behaviour before now had been respectful and reflected the seriousness of the situation.

I don't know what to make of her reaction. I don't know what to think about this case any more.
Top Profile 

Offline Professor Snape


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:53 pm

Posts: 247

Location: Seattle. WA

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:19 pm   Post subject:    

DeathFish 2000 wrote:
The point I am trying to make is that this is more histrionics from our Diva on trial.

Sorry about the grammer and sbelling.


No need to apologize for anything, DF2K.

Rather, it is I who aplogizes that Seattle created the monster.

_________________
"Wizard of Healing Potions and Alibis"
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:22 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
But going back to the images displayed today: how is anyone supposed to react to them? I have heard from people who have seen them that they are haunting, disturbing, unbearable. If reports are true, then Knox refused to look at them.

So the question is, what does that signify? What does a refusal to look signify? Maresca was quoted as saying she "looked away". Other reports say she had her head in her arms on the table.


A qualified analyst could draw conclusions from observing courtroom behavior. That would not be me, but I am left thinking about Meredith's body, covered by the duvet as it was. I don't think it can be considererd typical rapist behavior to cover the body of someone they had just raped and murdered; Sollecito took uncertain looks at the images today, but Amanda would not; I do think there's something to that.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2306

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:26 pm   Post subject:    

Fly by Night wrote:
A qualified analyst could draw conclusions from observing courtroom behavior. That would not be me, but I am left thinking about Meredith's body, covered by the duvet as it was. I don't think it can be considererd typical rapist behavior to cover the body of someone they had just raped and murdered; Sollecito took uncertain looks at the images today, but Amanda would not; I do think there's something to that.


Excellent point FBN. The Bard please take note.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:28 pm   Post subject:    

I'm having a 'she couldn't have done it' day. Does anyone else swing like this? I think it is the savagery of the injuries. I have difficulty believing that ANYONE could do something like that, but more men have done similar than women. And someone so young too. Both AK and RS so young and no previous violence. The injuries, the time it must have taken, the suffering, the grossness of it, the devilry in it. It is unthinkable. Could kids this young and inexperienced in life really have done something so depraved. Yes, I know about the gang mentality thing. I know about the precendents. I...just...can't....imagine.....it.

I wish we could get onto the DNA evidence.

I think today has been a day of reality for lots of people.

Even as I write my mind is wandering back to Venebles and Thompson (UK posters know this case) Two little boys. No-one would ever have thought it possible for two innocent children to do what they did. But one broke down and confessed when his mother cuddled him close and said 'We'll still love you whatever you did'. Then the child broke. Perhaps this is what Amanda needs. She needs parents that love her that much.

Sorry.

Very upset by evidence today.

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline GreenWyvern


User avatar


Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:41 pm

Posts: 252

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:35 pm   Post subject:    

The Bard wrote:
It suggests to me that she has a heart, somewhere. It suggests that she is not as disconnected from reality as it may have seemed up to now. Why would you not look? Because it is repulsive and disturbing. Perhaps this is the moment Amanda connects. I think Amanda should look. Calmly and seriously. She should be taking notes.


I'm reminded of Josef Fritzl, the Austrian who kept his daughter imprisoned for 24 years in his basement. At his trial he had to watch 11 hours of his daughter's videotaped testimony, and when she quietly came in and sat in court, it finally brought home to him what he had done.

From The Guardian:

Quote:
Josef Fritzl has apologised for his "sick" crimes against his daughter Elisabeth in a dramatic courtroom confession which took even his own lawyer by surprise.

"I noticed that she was here, in the courtroom. I finally turned to the gallery and looked and saw her myself. I was suddenly so ashamed," Fritzl was said to have told the lawyer. "I could hardly stand to hear what she was saying, I wanted the severest punishment ... I understood finally the suffering I caused to my family."

I don't think we are going to see anything similar from Amanda or Raffaele, but... just maybe... seeing the autopsy has made them realize something of the horror of what they did, We can hope so, anyway.
Top Profile 

Offline Professor Snape


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:53 pm

Posts: 247

Location: Seattle. WA

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:36 pm   Post subject:    

The Bard wrote:
I'm having a 'she couldn't have done it' day. Does anyone else swing like this?


no.

_________________
"Wizard of Healing Potions and Alibis"
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:36 pm   Post subject:    

The Bard wrote:

Quote:
And someone so young too. Both AK and RS so young and no previous violence.


To be fair, RG should be included here. He is younger than RS and has no criminal record or previous history of violence against women. I sometimes think - and I do not mean to single you out - it is easier to "imagine" RG as a perpetrator simply because he is a man and a black. It is hard to fight against this subliminal prejudice.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:44 pm   Post subject:    

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
The Bard wrote:

Quote:
And someone so young too. Both AK and RS so young and no previous violence.


To be fair, RG should be included here. He is younger than RS and has no criminal record or previous history of violence against women. I sometimes think - and I do not mean to single you out - it is easier to "imagine" RG as a perpetrator simply because he is a man and a black. It is hard to fight against this subliminal prejudice.


I agree, it is easy to forget him in the whole thing. I don't think it is prejudice, I think it is just that everyone is so focussed on the events unfolding. I was thinking of him too - he comes across as gentle and respectful in his diary. No history of violence. I find it just as hard to imagine him doing it. I do imagine him being older than the others tho. I don't know why. Maybe because we hear so little about him, just about his difficult early life. Oddly I feel more sympathy towards him than the other two, which is totally irrational. I think it sounds like he had a tough start. No excuse, for sure. But then there never is.
Top Profile 

Offline mojo


Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:31 pm

Posts: 225

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:45 pm   Post subject:    

Professor Snape wrote:
The Bard wrote:
I'm having a 'she couldn't have done it' day. Does anyone else swing like this?


no.



yes, but then all the lies kick in. i have a hard time getting past that.
Top Profile 

Offline DeathFish 2000


User avatar


Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:53 pm

Posts: 340

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:47 pm   Post subject:    

Edda (most probably through a veil of tears) lost no time with this positive spin opportunity for her perfect daughter:

"The images upset her too much and she didn't watch them."

I dont believe any of it. Perhaps I am growing a cynical attitude now with these people but as the case develops I can't help it.
I try to be objective but in the face of what they project it is just obvious to me evrything they say is a sham.

As for the question:
What does that signify? What does a refusal to look signify?
I think it is the same type of thing when you wake up in the morning with a raging hangover after a night on the tiles and you've knocked over the litter tray and the budgie is clinging to the curtains.

_________________
R.I.P
Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline Lancelotti


Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:09 pm

Posts: 378

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:48 pm   Post subject:    

The Bard wrote:
Even as I write my mind is wandering back to Venebles and Thompson (UK posters know this case) Two little boys. No-one would ever have thought it possible for two innocent children to do what they did. But one broke down and confessed when his mother cuddled him close and said 'We'll still love you whatever you did'. Then the child broke. Perhaps this is what Amanda needs. She needs parents that love her that much.


Perhaps you would like to read up on the boys' family background:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/nov/0 ... ationships
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:49 pm   Post subject:    

Professor Snape wrote:
The Bard wrote:
I'm having a 'she couldn't have done it' day. Does anyone else swing like this?


no.


:D :D :D :D :D :D
Top Profile 

Offline Shirley


Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:48 pm

Posts: 376

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:49 pm   Post subject:    

Fly by Night wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
But going back to the images displayed today: how is anyone supposed to react to them? I have heard from people who have seen them that they are haunting, disturbing, unbearable. If reports are true, then Knox refused to look at them.

So the question is, what does that signify? What does a refusal to look signify? Maresca was quoted as saying she "looked away". Other reports say she had her head in her arms on the table.


A qualified analyst could draw conclusions from observing courtroom behavior. That would not be me, but I am left thinking about Meredith's body, covered by the duvet as it was. I don't think it can be considererd typical rapist behavior to cover the body of someone they had just raped and murdered; Sollecito took uncertain looks at the images today, but Amanda would not; I do think there's something to that.




I'm reminded of that thing little kids do when they cover their eyes and say- you can't see me.
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:50 pm   Post subject:    

The Seattle Times has a new AP article by Marta Falconi concerning Knox's behavior. Kercher lawyer Francesco Maresca is quoted as saying, "her behavior has never been adequate, given the seriousness of what happened. I criticize a superficial and inappropriate behavior. There's a girl who died brutally, we could use some respect." However, criminologist Saverio Fortunato says Knox's apparently carefree behavior could be a psychological "reaction to the pain" of being involved in a murder case.

There is also more information regarding the lingerie shop testimony. Carlo Maria Scotto di Rinaldi testified he saw Knox and Sollecito kissing and hugging in his lingerie shop the day after Kercher's body was found and that Knox bought "a top and a G-string" and the couple talked about having "hot sex" once they got home.

Not exactly "utility" underware.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:57 pm   Post subject:    

Lancelloti wrote:

Quote:
The Bard wrote:

Even as I write my mind is wandering back to Venebles and Thompson (UK posters know this case) Two little boys. No-one would ever have thought it possible for two innocent children to do what they did. But one broke down and confessed when his mother cuddled him close and said 'We'll still love you whatever you did'. Then the child broke. Perhaps this is what Amanda needs. She needs parents that love her that much.



Perhaps you would like to read up on the boys' family background.


This case led to a huge and ultimately unanswerable debate on the role of parenting and families. There is simply no easy causal relationship between parenting and subsequent crime, which is not to say there is no relationship. The Guardian article puts it very well:

Quote:
But can such guilt be so neatly apportioned? There are many families where the parents are struggling to cope, where the children have behavioural problems. Parents are invariably ordinary people with problems of their own. They should instill values and principles in a child but they cannot be there all the time - as Denise Bulger (now Fergus) learned at a terrible cost.

The Venables and Thompson families were at very different places on the spectrum of "dysfunctional" families: if the chain of causality between parental failings and juvenile homicide were so straightforwardly simple how many families should be regarded as pathological - potential producers of more child childkillers?
The parents themselves are not murderers, but whatever blame attaches to them has been abundantly punished. Thompson and Venables moved away from Liverpool after their sons' convictions eight years ago. They took on new identities, tried to create new lives. Yet these are haunted by the fear of being found and blamed all over again. For they themselves will always feel guilty.

As David James Smith, who interviewed Thompson, observed: "Ann lives in terror of being discovered by neighbours or anyone who might recognise her when she is out shopping. It is as if she thinks of herself walking around with a sign above her head: Mother of Bulger Murderer."


In other words, happy families are all alike and every unhappy family is different in its own way. And the dirty secret is that there aren't that many happy families.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:58 pm   Post subject:    

Lancelotti wrote:
The Bard wrote:
Even as I write my mind is wandering back to Venebles and Thompson (UK posters know this case) Two little boys. No-one would ever have thought it possible for two innocent children to do what they did. But one broke down and confessed when his mother cuddled him close and said 'We'll still love you whatever you did'. Then the child broke. Perhaps this is what Amanda needs. She needs parents that love her that much.


Perhaps you would like to read up on the boys' family background:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/nov/0 ... ationships



Thanks, but I can't bear to. If the article suggests that the parents were not loving then I take your point. They were horribly deprived emotionally, I recall, and one had brothers that bullied him. It was just all so horrific. Three little victims. Even today I cannot bear to think of it. Again, not all the details were released, but I had a friend in the police who filled me in on some stuff not generally known. It defied belief.

My point really was more that maybe people need the help of their family before they feel they can confess. I don't think the Knox tribe are helping with this. Look how much is invested in her being innocent. They have given everything. She can never come clean, even if she wants to.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:02 pm   Post subject:    

Mojo wrote:

Quote:
Professor Snape wrote:
The Bard wrote:
I'm having a 'she couldn't have done it' day. Does anyone else swing like this?

no.

Yes, but then all the lies kick in. I have a hard time getting past that.



I believe this is the rub for most disinterested people (ie not family, not friends and not fameseekers). The explanations provided by FFF (family, friends, fameseekers) fail to satisfy because they sound contrived and are subject to constant change as new facts emerge (that electronic object is a toothbrush - oops, a vibrator, but a joke, etc.).

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:06 pm   Post subject:    

More on today's testimony and attorney reactions from ABC's Ann Wise.

Francesco Maresca, the Kercher's attorney, told reporters that Knox kept her head down and never looked at the large screen on which the autopsy photos were shown. Sollecito, Knox's former boyfriend, did look at them occasionally, Maresca said. Giulia Bongiorno, an attorney for Raffaele Sollecito told reporters simply that rape had been ruled out from a biological point of view, however, according to Maresca, the pathologist indicated that the bruising on Kercher's body indicates that more than one person was involved, 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. Bongiorno countered that while Lalli did not rule it out, the injuries were modest compared to those you would find in a group killing. Bongiorno concluded once again that "The prosecutor's scenario is starting to crumble."


Last edited by Fly by Night on Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline mojo


Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:31 pm

Posts: 225

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:06 pm   Post subject:    

The Bard wrote:
Look how much is invested in her being innocent. They have given everything. She can never come clean, even if she wants to.


agreed
Top Profile 

Offline Lancelotti


Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:09 pm

Posts: 378

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:12 pm   Post subject:    

The Bard wrote:
My point really was more that maybe people need the help of their family before they feel they can confess. I don't think the Knox tribe are helping with this. Look how much is invested in her being innocent. They have given everything. She can never come clean, even if she wants to.


or maybe she would have confessed a long time ago if there had been anything to confess.. ;)
Top Profile 

Offline disinterested


User avatar


Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:34 pm

Posts: 236

Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:13 pm   Post subject: Question.   

It seems to me that, no matter what any of us may suspect or feel about Amanda Knox, she has certainly been through so much by now that she is likely to demonstrate any number of responses to something as horrendous as graphic evidence of a brutal murder (e.g., burying her head in her arms without looking)--personally involved or not. Also, I don't think we know what she has actually been able to see of the visual evidence heretofore. Although, I gather Raffaele was able to watch television. No internet? Newspapers?

Speaking of Raffaele and prison/TV/etc., I just for the first time (having somehow missed it) read his prison diary entries. I felt sad, disturbed and even doubtful, until I got to the part where he provides his answer to why Meredith's DNA was on the knife (cooking together, accidently pricked her finger, etc.) and I just shook my head. How can he not have been involved--to feel the need to explain something unexplainable? Why has he never just said, "No way! I am being framed!" The fear of the innocent who feels trapped?

Anyway, my question is Why did the Sollecito clan give the gruesome, disrespectful photos to the press? Is there some advantage to their case, or just monetary gain? What am I missing here? Motivation isn't made clear (to me) in the reports I've read.

Awaiting more trial leakage/reportage with bated breath. Thank you StewartH2000...

Didi
Top Profile 

Offline mojo


Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:31 pm

Posts: 225

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:13 pm   Post subject:    

anyone care to comment on this -- from the ABC article posted by FBN -- how does she get this?? -- the injuries were "modest" compared to those you would find in a group killing.


Quote:
Maresca told reporters that the pathologist basically confirmed what he wrote in his final report, in which he estimated Kercher's time of death at around 11 p.m. on Nov. 1.

According to Maresca, 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."

Giulia Bongiorno, an attorney for Raffaele Sollecito told reporters simply that rape had been ruled out from a biological point of view.

The defense lawyers of both Knox and Sollecito maintain that the murder was committed by one person only, possibly a thief who broke into the house.

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.

"The prosecutor's scenario is starting to crumble," Bongiorno said today.
Top Profile 

Offline Shirley


Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:48 pm

Posts: 376

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:19 pm   Post subject:    

The Bard wrote:
I'm having a 'she couldn't have done it' day. Does anyone else swing like this? I think it is the savagery of the injuries. I have difficulty believing that ANYONE could do something like that, but more men have done similar than women. And someone so young too. Both AK and RS so young and no previous violence. The injuries, the time it must have taken, the suffering, the grossness of it, the devilry in it. It is unthinkable. Could kids this young and inexperienced in life really have done something so depraved. Yes, I know about the gang mentality thing. I know about the precendents. I...just...can't....imagine.....it.

I wish we could get onto the DNA evidence.

I think today has been a day of reality for lots of people.

Even as I write my mind is wandering back to Venebles and Thompson (UK posters know this case) Two little boys. No-one would ever have thought it possible for two innocent children to do what they did. But one broke down and confessed when his mother cuddled him close and said 'We'll still love you whatever you did'. Then the child broke. Perhaps this is what Amanda needs. She needs parents that love her that much.

Sorry.

Very upset by evidence today.



Hi Bard,

Something I've learned following this case is that innocence too requires evidence. They let Patrick go because of the lack of evidence of him at the crime scene and because he had evidence of his alibi (receipts, witnesses). The opposite seems to be the case of the defendants.

IF (big IF) they are innocent, I think they know more than they've said.

Murderers cause the victim and their families so much pain it's painful to see silence and lies on top of that. I'm reminded of a murder a few years ago. They caught the guy pretty quick and he sat in jail for four and a half months while her friends and family were out looking for her body in the snow drifts and bitter cold of North Dakota. I've always thought he was guilty, not just of murder but of not telling where her body was.
Top Profile 

Offline justlooking


User avatar


Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 6:45 pm

Posts: 314

Location: England

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:22 pm   Post subject:    

The Bard wrote:
Lancelotti wrote:
The Bard wrote:
Even as I write my mind is wandering back to Venebles and Thompson (UK posters know this case) Two little boys. No-one would ever have thought it possible for two innocent children to do what they did. But one broke down and confessed when his mother cuddled him close and said 'We'll still love you whatever you did'. Then the child broke. Perhaps this is what Amanda needs. She needs parents that love her that much.


Perhaps you would like to read up on the boys' family background:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/nov/0 ... ationships



Thanks, but I can't bear to. If the article suggests that the parents were not loving then I take your point. They were horribly deprived emotionally, I recall, and one had brothers that bullied him. It was just all so horrific. Three little victims. Even today I cannot bear to think of it. Again, not all the details were released, but I had a friend in the police who filled me in on some stuff not generally known. It defied belief.

My point really was more that maybe people need the help of their family before they feel they can confess. I don't think the Knox tribe are helping with this. Look how much is invested in her being innocent. They have given everything. She can never come clean, even if she wants to.


I'm not sure if there's anything to learn from the Bulger tragedy - certainly in relation to this case. I remember when it happened (at the time I lived less than a mile from where the child was abducted). The whole city was in a state of shock. There were essentially lynch mobs targeting homes of innocent people due to feverish rumours. I don't think the kids had a particularly troubled upbringing. It was (and still is) a pretty rough town and in almost every household could be found evidence of the less than perfect family. I think too much analysis is based on our own preconceptions - e.g. how could someone who is so 'perfect' (at least in public life) have committed such brutal and perverted crimes? 99% of the time that may be a valid argument, but thankfully in a court of law we aren't judged only on perception.

_________________
Paul
Top Profile 

Offline disinterested


User avatar


Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:34 pm

Posts: 236

Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:27 pm   Post subject:    

The Bard wrote:
I'm having a 'she couldn't have done it' day. Does anyone else swing like this?


yes. no. no. yes. yes. no.


Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2306

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:33 pm   Post subject:    

The Bard wrote:
I'm having a 'she couldn't have done it' day. Does anyone else swing like this?


No. The evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito is overwhelming.

You should go back to the very beginning...

The postal police arrived at the cottage at 12.35pm and found Knox and Sollecito outside. Knox and Sollecito told officers they had already called the police and were waiting for them. They told two lies from the very beginning. You have to ask yourself: why would they do this? The answer is really very simple.

Knox and Sollecito went on to tell the police lie after lie. One of the reasons Judge Paolo Micheli thought that Knox and Sollecito were guilty was they had given triple alibis, tried to cover for each other and had lied repeatedly.

Please read the piece, Lies, Damned Lies… And More Damned Lies, I wrote on TJMK on Saturday October 25, 2008 for more details about Knox's lies:

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/P160/

More of Knox's lies have come to light since the trial started as evidenced by her e-mail to friends shortly after Meredith's murder. She has been flatly contradicted by numerous witnesses: the postal police, officers from the Perugia Flying Squad, the Murder Squad, the Narcotics Squad, the police interpreter, Meredith's English friends and the Italian housemates, Filomena and Laura. Not to mention, several prosecution witnesses who testified last weekend.

You know what some of the forensic evidence is:

Knox's DNA was on the handle of the double DNA knife and Meredith's DNA was on the blade.

An abundant amount of Sollecito's DNA was on Meredith's bra clasp. Sollecito's lawyers claims that Knox's DNA is also on Meredith's bra. We know that Meredith's bra was removed some time after she had been killed. Judge Micheli concluded that the only people who could have returned to thhe cottage and done this were Knox and Sollecito.

There were three sets of different sized bloody footprints, which match the foot sizes of Knox, Sollecito and Guede, at the crime scene.

A bloody shoe print, which matches Knox's foot size, was found on a pillow under Meredith's body.

Knox's blood was found mixed with Meredith's blood in the small bathroom.

You seem to have forgotten so much of the known evidence. Knox admitted she was the cottage when Meredith was killed when she found out that Sollecito was no longer providing her with an alibi. She made no attempt to contradict Solllecito because she knew she was there. Knox's confession that she was at the cottage on the night of the murder was accepted as evidence by Judge Massei despite Knox's lawyers' best attempts to have it thrown out.

Judge Paolo Micheli couldn't believe that Knox took a shower in a blood spattered bathroom. Judge Micheli also pointed that Knox and Sollecito knew precise details about Meredith's body and death. Knox very tellingly refused to answer Mignini's question how she knew about these details and exercised her right to silence.

Sollecito knew that Meredith's DNA was on the double DNA knife found at his apartment, which is why he tried to justify the presence of it by saying that he had accidentally pricked Meredith's hand whilst cooking.

Perhaps, you'd like to answer some of the many questions I have:

Why isn't there a single one of Knox's fingerprints in her own bedroom ansd just one of her fingerprints in the entire cottage?

What was Knox's lamp doing in Meredith's room?

Why was the washing machine still warm when Filomena arrived at the cottage on 2 November?

Why Knox took the bucket and mop from the cottage to Raffaele' Sollecito apartment the day after Meredith's murder?

Why Knox and Sollecito turned off their mobiles phones at approximately the same time shortly before Meredith was murdered?


Last edited by The Machine on Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:49 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline petafly


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:08 pm

Posts: 278

Location: Switzerland/Germany

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:34 pm   Post subject:    

Quote:
Bongiorno countered that while Lalli did not rule it out, the injuries were "modest" compared to those you would find in a group killing.

:shock: THis is so cynical! I'm literally booming of bitter hatred. Meredith wasn't bruised that much obviously because SHE'D GOT A KNIFE I FRONT OF HER FACE AND DIDN'T DARE TO FIGHT. Such an A(abusive language)hole!
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:37 pm   Post subject:    

Lancellotti wrote:

Quote:
or maybe she would have confessed a long time ago if there had been anything to confess


Well, she did confess to being in the kitchen when Meredith was being killed. She said she covered her ears to block out the scream. And yet, she did not say she was afraid that the killer would do the same thing to her. This confession of sorts, which is really a false accusation of Patrick Lumumba, is a troubling item in this case, whether or not it is admissible as evidence. It is made more troubling by the written statement that followed, which is not an unambiguous retraction, and by the fact that no real retraction came until Patrick had been released - for lack of evidence and because 26 witnesses came forward to vouch that he was in his bar that night.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:58 pm   Post subject: Ladies and Gentlemen: Please Check Your Timelines   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Lancellotti wrote:
Quote:
or maybe she would have confessed a long time ago if there had been anything to confess

Well, she did confess to being in the kitchen when Meredith was being killed. She said she covered her ears to block out the scream...


So, was Knox actually the first witness to mention hearing a scream that night?
Top Profile 

Offline mojo


Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:31 pm

Posts: 225

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:09 pm   Post subject: Re: Ladies and Gentlemen: Please Check Your Timelines   

Fly by Night wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Lancellotti wrote:
Quote:
or maybe she would have confessed a long time ago if there had been anything to confess

Well, she did confess to being in the kitchen when Meredith was being killed. She said she covered her ears to block out the scream...


So, was Knox actually the first witness to mention hearing a scream that night?


good thought....was she??
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:19 pm   Post subject:    

The Machine wrote:
The Bard wrote:
I'm having a 'she couldn't have done it' day. Does anyone else swing like this?


No. The evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito is overwhelming.

You should go back to the very beginning...

You know what some of the forensic evidence is:

You seem to have forgotten so much of the known evidence.




In reply I will copy an email I sent about this recently:


"It's strange how difficult this case is to reconcile. It's like a jigsaw that doesn't go together. I think that is where the conflict arises in me. I know the evidence, I believe what I read intellectually. But emotionally I haven't caught up. Despite what I read something in me is willing them (AK especially) to be innocent. I don't know if it is a maternal thing, a protective thing. And then the evidence today. I can't help imagining the suffering. I cannot put that savagery down to ANY of them in my head. It just doesn't work. All the photos of Amanda I have seen show a happy, carefree, smiley young girl. Your heart won't accept it.

What really made me think today was Stewart's comment about the medical evidence being in no way a 'slam dunk' for multiple assailants. He is sounding notes of caution. He also said he had spoken with an Italian journalist today who'd heard from insiders that everyone (judges/police and lawyers) know they are innocent, but it has gone so far they cannot stop the trial. I could be classed as 'journalist' gossip, [I know several and they are notorious for it] but the two things together just nudged me back over to the unaccepting side again. I think I just cannot, perhaps refuse, to imagine Amanda being a part of this. I know I am being irrational, but it gets all mixed up in your heart and your head. Today is just a 'She couldn't have done it' day."


I think it is perfectly acceptable to have doubts, especially given how early in the trial this is. I don't 'know' the forensic evidence as I have not seen it and heard a detailed professional assessment of it (i.e by the scientists who analysed it). It is incredibly complex science. Nikki's powerpoints are brilliant, but left me feeling 'Ok, I need to leave this to the experts'. I am not a scientist, but I trust the scientists that the Italians are using. I want to hear their evidence. I know that the existing evidence was enough to send them for trial. Now we are having that trial, and we all have a right to argue, discuss and have doubts and certainties as and when they arise. That is what this forum is about, as I understand it! As above, intellectually there are many, many things that are very damning. Emotionally some of us struggle a bit more than others, clearly. This trial is touching off emotions in all of us. Let us try to remain accepting of the emotions and feelings of others as the trial progresses. Up days and down days. Shades of grey. You might not have 'em. But I do!
Top Profile 

Offline Bess


Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:41 pm

Posts: 69

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:19 pm   Post subject:    

More information of today's proceedings from Seattle PI with more from Lumumba's testimony.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Professor Snape


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:53 pm

Posts: 247

Location: Seattle. WA

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:24 pm   Post subject:    

The Machine wrote:
Why isn't there a single one of Knox's fingerprints in her own bedroom ansd just one of her fingerprints in the entire cottage?


They cleaned the cottage with bleach.

The Machine wrote:
What was Knox's lamp doing in Meredith's room?


It was dark. They were looking for something.

The Machine wrote:
Why was the washing machine still warm when Filomena arrived at the cottage on 2 November?


They were washing their dirty clothes in a hurry using the warm rinse cycle. If they had any smarts they would have washed in cold water to get the blood out because hot sets it into the clothes; warm water flows the quickest into machine and should have been used. However, if they aren't so smart they may have used the cold cycle thus taking more time - alas! The discovery of the warm machine. Could be it had just stopped spinnin'.

The Machine wrote:
Why did Knox take the bucket and mop from the cottage to Raffaele' Sollecito apartment the day after Meredith's murder?


They probably needed to clean the bleach out of the mop along with the little bits of evidence they tossed into the bucket.

The Machine wrote:
Why did Knox and Sollecito turned off their mobiles phones at approximately the same time shortly before Meredith was murdered?


They didn't want their parent's to interrupt them because they planned to share themselves intimately together. In their plain briefs. :shock:

_________________
"Wizard of Healing Potions and Alibis"
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:27 pm   Post subject:    

Bess wrote:

Quote:
More information of today's proceedings from Seattle PI with more from Lumumba's testimony.



Some questions cleared up in Lumumba's testimony:


Quote:
The last witness, Diya "Patrick" Lumumba, told jurors the harrowing tale of his false arrest in early morning hours as he was warming up milk for his infant son.

"They said 'Police! Police! Open the door.' They were agitated," recalled Lumumba. "They took me in front of my son, handcuffed me and wouldn't tell me anything, they just said 'You know what you did.' I was not beaten, but it was a hard situation."

Lumumba said that he was later stripped of his clothes at a certain point and left nude facing a wall in police headquarters. The window was open, he said, and it was cold.

Lumumba was arrested after Knox pinned the blame on him during the all-night police interrogation that led to her arrest. He spent 14 days in jail before being cleared of any involvement in the crime. Knox now faces slander charges for falsely accusing him.

On the stand Friday, he told jurors that he and Knox had a good personal relationship, though she was not the best employee. He hired her for 5 euros an hour to work as a waitress, but eventually limited her role to handing out fliers and doing publicity.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:30 pm   Post subject: Re: Ladies and Gentlemen: Please Check Your Timelines   

mojo wrote:
Fly by Night wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Lancellotti wrote:
Quote:
or maybe she would have confessed a long time ago if there had been anything to confess

Well, she did confess to being in the kitchen when Meredith was being killed. She said she covered her ears to block out the scream...


So, was Knox actually the first witness to mention hearing a scream that night?


good thought....was she??


Yes, she was the first and the only one to say it came from Meredith.
Top Profile 

Offline Professor Snape


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:53 pm

Posts: 247

Location: Seattle. WA

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:31 pm   Post subject:    

stewarthome2000 wrote:
Catnip wrote:
Lalli puts the time of death as between from around 8pm 01 November to around 4am the following day, with 11pm being the midpoint, and not more than 2 to 3 hours after her last meal; and cause of death was the blood got into her lungs and she suffocated.

[ AGI ]


Question: If it is closed court, how are these reports getting out?


The press is walking around in the court house, in the press room and outside the court house. Every once in a while and attorney or someone leaves the court room and they get swamped by questions. I saw Brusco leave to get a coffee and give some details. This is how much of the news of todays hearing will be released. The attorneys and hired medical professionals will come out and some will give us some insight and answer specifics questions. When asked what it all means,and one side will say one thing and the other something else. Lalli is still testifying...

_________________
"Wizard of Healing Potions and Alibis"
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:40 pm   Post subject: Re: Ladies and Gentlemen: Please Check Your Timelines   

mojo wrote:
Fly by Night wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Lancellotti wrote:
Quote:
or maybe she would have confessed a long time ago if there had been anything to confess

Well, she did confess to being in the kitchen when Meredith was being killed. She said she covered her ears to block out the scream...


So, was Knox actually the first witness to mention hearing a scream that night?


good thought....was she??


I think so. At the time Guede was not in the picuture, though much he later described being in the bathroom when he heard Meredith's terrible scream. And, true or not, according to Ace PI Paul Ciolino, the police only first saw Nara Capezzali talking about the scream on television, some time later. Do we know when Capezzali was first interviewed by police?

How did Knox know about this key piece of evidence - the horrific scream - before anyone else reported it?
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:42 pm   Post subject: Matching pictures to headlines?   

Re this article posted by FBN ABC's Ann Wise..

Interesting ABC choosing this particular Amanda Knox picture, are they perhaps implying that is from today’s trial session, or are trying to suggest to readers this is la knox looking concern as a result of the autopsy photos? This picture is from the 13 March court date.
Link to Franco Origlia photos for March 13. Scroll down to first pic third row down:
http://tinyurl.com/dydum2

Here is a pic from today:
http://tinyurl.com/dep3k6
Top Profile 

Offline Rhonda


Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 6:23 pm

Posts: 44

Location: Northern California

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:56 pm   Post subject:    

Jools,

I believe that AK is just wearing the same shirt as she did on the 13th. Her hair is down in the April 3rd pictures and almost looks like it was styled.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:00 pm   Post subject:    

The Machine wrote:
The Bard wrote:
I'm having a 'she couldn't have done it' day. Does anyone else swing like this?


No. The evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito is overwhelming.



I'd just like to reference Steward's comments, which I read on TJMK. (Hope this is ok Stewart) :

'I must respectfully disagree that “the medical findings unequivocally indicate that the murder was committed by multiple aggressors”. Based on what we have seen thus far from the prosecution that seems to be the case. But we have yet to see that the defense have equally convincing, and more detailed, medical interpretations to the contrary. There has been a lot of prosecutorial information presented and leaked out thus far. The defense has yet to be heard, and there is much less “leaked” info in circulating around. From what I have privately seen with attorneys involved in the case, there is a strong defense, particularly in this area and other on-site evidence details. So much so, that it may explain Amanda’s demeanor, and Ghirga’s seemingly laissez-faire attitude. I cannot repeat enough the words of our friends at PMF, very few things are conclusive, and this is no “slam dunk” for either side. '
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:04 pm   Post subject:    

Lancelotti wrote:
"or maybe she would have confessed a long time ago if there had been anything to confess.. "

Sure, she chose to accuse Lumumba just for the thrill.

(I know, I know, in the Guy Fawkes case the police persuaded him to imagine exploding the Parliament and later used it as a confession)
Top Profile 

Offline mojo


Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:31 pm

Posts: 225

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:09 pm   Post subject:    

Andrea Vogt's article from today's Seattle PI

Expert in Knox trial: More than one attacker in Kercher's death

The first hard forensic evidence to emerge in the Meredith Kercher murder trial -- testimony of the coroner who autopsied the slain young Briton -- was debated behind closed doors here Friday.

Lawyers emerged to say a forensic expert believes that more than one person may have attacked the British college student.

The decision to close the courtroom -- prohibiting the public and press from both viewing video or hearing audio of the crucial testimony -- came as a large international conference of journalism was being held just a few blocks away.
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:19 pm   Post subject:    

mojo wrote:
Andrea Vogt's article from today's Seattle PI

Expert in Knox trial: More than one attacker in Kercher's death

The first hard forensic evidence to emerge in the Meredith Kercher murder trial -- testimony of the coroner who autopsied the slain young Briton -- was debated behind closed doors here Friday.

Lawyers emerged to say a forensic expert believes that more than one person may have attacked the British college student.

The decision to close the courtroom -- prohibiting the public and press from both viewing video or hearing audio of the crucial testimony -- came as a large international conference of journalism was being held just a few blocks away.


Interesting that Vogt reports this as 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.

The wounds to Meredith are just one aspect of the multiple-attacker question. There is much more to come on this.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2306

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:33 pm   Post subject:    

The Bard wrote:
What really made me think today was Stewart's comment about the medical evidence being in no way a 'slam dunk' for multiple assailants. He is sounding notes of caution. He also said he had spoken with an Italian journalist today who'd heard from insiders that everyone (judges/police and lawyers) know they are innocent, but it has gone so far they cannot stop the trial. I could be classed as 'journalist' gossip, [I know several and they are notorious for it] but the two things together just nudged me back over to the unaccepting side again. I think I just cannot, perhaps refuse, to imagine Amanda being a part of this. I know I am being irrational, but it gets all mixed up in your heart and your head. Today is just a 'She couldn't have done it' day."


Where did Stewart mention insiders? I don't want appear to rude or impolite, but the bit about the judges, police and lawyers knowing they're innocent is complete and utter bullshit. What planet do you live on? All the judges who have been involved in the case: Judge Claudia Matteini, the judges at the Italian Supreme Court, judge Massimo Riccarelli, and judge Paolo Micheli thought there were serious indications of Amanda Knox's and Raffaele Sollecito’s guilt and refused to grant them bail. You seriously need to start reading actual court documents and the official judges' reports rather gullibly believing an anonymous source on the Internet.

Numerous police officers: from the postal police, the Perugia Flying Squad, the Murder Squad and the Narcotics Squad have already testified for the prosecution and not one of them said that they thought Knox and Sollecito were innocent.

Have you actually listened to one word the Kercher's lawyer, Marseca, has said? He's NEVER said that he thinks Knox and Sollecito are innocent. I hate to break this to you, but the defence lawyers are paid to say Knox and Sollecito are innocent. Forgive me, for me being a little cynical.

There has been a concerted effort to manipulate and mislead the general public about the case. You should read the piece, Knox PR Campaign: Have The Talking Points Now Become A Trap?, I wrote for TJMK on Wednesday, February 11, 2009:

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/P40/

The Bard wrote:
Now we are having that trial, and we all have a right to argue, discuss and have doubts and certainties as and when they arise. That is what this forum is about, as I understand it!


I agree that this forum gives us the opportunity to argue, discuss and have doubts, but you're not giving me the opportunity to discuss the case with you because you still haven't answered any of my questions:

Why isn't there a single one of Knox's fingerprints in her own bedroom ansd just one of her fingerprints in the entire cottage?

What was Knox's lamp doing in Meredith's room?

Why was the washing machine still warm when Filomena arrived at the cottage on 2 November?

Why di dKnox take the bucket and mop from the cottage to Raffaele' Sollecito apartment the day after Meredith's murder?

Why did Knox and Sollecito turn off their mobiles phones at approximately the same time shortly before Meredith was murdered?

Why did Knox and Sollecito give triple alibis and lie repeatedly?

Please don't say they didn't do it because they're so young and don't look the type; it makes you sound like an airhead. Before you get teary-eyed over Amanda Knox, ask yourself why does the Kerchers' lawyer, Maresca, believe that Knox and Sollecito are guilty. He has made this crystal clear on several occasions. You should start listening to what he has got to say.

In case you've forgotten: Meredith Kercher is the victim of this shocking murder and Amanda Knox is the prime suspect.
Top Profile 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:44 pm   Post subject:    

I personally believe that Amanda's refusal to look at pictures of Meredith's body in Court today is just another phony act, probably directed and choreographed by her Attorneys and/or the FOA crew, or even possibly StepDaddy Mellas.

Consider how her act today compares with her her actions before the trial started.

Robin Butterworth, one of Meredith's friends stated about her meeting with Amanda:
"She kept talking about how she found Meredith, and seemed proud of being the first to find her. She behaved as if she was not upset"
"I remember one thing that really upset me. [Ms Kercher's friend] Natalie said, 'I hope she wasn't in too much pain.' Amanda said, 'What do you think? She f***ing bled to death.' At that point no one had told us how Meredith died."

Does that seem like the same person who is now too upset to look at a picture of Meredith ??
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2306

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:47 pm   Post subject:    

stint7 wrote:
Consider how her act today compares with her her actions before the trial started.

Robin Butterworth, one of Meredith's friends stated about her meeting with Amanda:
"She kept talking about how she found Meredith, and seemed proud of being the first to find her. She behaved as if she was not upset"
"I remember one thing that really upset me. [Ms Kercher's friend] Natalie said, 'I hope she wasn't in too much pain.' Amanda said, 'What do you think? She f***ing bled to death.' At that point no one had told us how Meredith died."

Does that seem like the same person who is now too upset to look at a picture of Meredith ??


Excellent point stint7. I was going to use the same quote, but then I got side-tracked.
Top Profile 

Offline Lancelotti


Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:09 pm

Posts: 378

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:51 pm   Post subject:    

bolint wrote:
Lancelotti wrote:
"or maybe she would have confessed a long time ago if there had been anything to confess.. "

Sure, she chose to accuse Lumumba just for the thrill.


Well, from what I heard Lumumba was suggested to her and she went with it. Of course that was incredibly stupid nevertheless. But she is so young and eccentric and American ....things happen :lol:
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2306

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:58 pm   Post subject:    

Lancelotti wrote:
Well, from what I heard Lumumba was suggested to her and she went with it. Of course that was incredibly stupid nevertheless. But she is so young and eccentric and American ....things happen :lol:


The police officers and the police interpreter testified at the trial that Amanda Knox claimed that Diya Lumumba had killed Meredith of her own volition. Lumumba name wasn't suggested by anyone else and Knox didn't retract her accusation the whole time he was in prison.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:07 pm   Post subject:    

From Newsweek-Barbie Nadeau-

"The Evidence, Please
Theatrics aside, the Amanda Knox trial comes down to forensics."

http://www.newsweek.com/id/192370
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:17 pm   Post subject:    

From that Barbie Nadeau article this about Cicciolino

Whatever he makes of the CSI efforts, Ciolino does have a prediction. "As it stands today, I believe that the likelihood of Amanda being convicted is very high," he says, blaming the media for poisoning the jury. "I think that Sollecito will probably be found not guilty."
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:17 pm   Post subject:    

Lancelotti wrote:
Well, from what I heard Lumumba was suggested to her and she went with it. Of course that was incredibly stupid nevertheless. But she is so young and eccentric and American ....things happen :lol:


It would be very helpful if you were to provide information regarding where your information comes from. And if it is merely your personal opinion, just say so. In addition, there pages upon pages of resources associated with the Perugia Murder File site that can help you formulate better-informed statements.
Top Profile 

Offline Lancelotti


Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:09 pm

Posts: 378

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:24 pm   Post subject:    

The Machine wrote:
Lancelotti wrote:
Well, from what I heard Lumumba was suggested to her and she went with it. Of course that was incredibly stupid nevertheless. But she is so young and eccentric and American ....things happen :lol:


The police officers and the police interpreter testified at the trial that Amanda Knox claimed that Diya Lumumba had killed Meredith of her own volition. Lumumba name wasn't suggested by anyone else and Knox didn't retract her accusation the whole time he was in prison.


of course they say that NOW.

in november 2007, when they were so proud that they had solved the case, it sound a bit different:

"Initially the American gave a version of events we knew was not correct," Perugia police chief Arturo de Felice told reporters. "She buckled and made an admission of facts we knew were correct and from that we were able to bring them all in. They all participated but had different roles."

Mr De Felice said: "She crumbled. She confessed. There were holes in her alibi. Her mobile phone records were crucial."

He said Knox's claims that she was elsewhere had been demonstrated to be false. The police found text messages on her phone from Lumumba, fixing a meeting between them at 8.35pm on the night Miss Kercher died."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... droom.html
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:25 pm   Post subject:    

Lancelotti wrote:
bolint wrote:
Lancelotti wrote:
"or maybe she would have confessed a long time ago if there had been anything to confess.. "

Sure, she chose to accuse Lumumba just for the thrill.


Well, from what I heard Lumumba was suggested to her and she went with it. Of course that was incredibly stupid nevertheless. But she is so young and eccentric and American ....things happen :lol:



Well Lancelotti, I think you 'heard' things rather wrong. A couple of the detectives decided to present Amanda with a few informal questions in the public waiting area (just as they'd almost certainly done so with her several times before). They asked her who'd she'd called/had called her on the night of the murder and she offered them her phone so they could have a look. When they saw her message to Patrick they asked her about it and showed it to her and it was at that point she reacted 'strangely' to say the least, saying 'it was him' and 'he's bad'. At around the same time, messages had been passed over to them that Sollecito had withdrawn his alibi for Amanda. It doesn't sound like it took much 'suggesting' to me and a question does not constitute a suggestion in any case.


Lancelotti wrote:
or maybe she would have confessed a long time ago if there had been anything to confess..



In which case, applying the same logic, do we extend the exact same argument to Rudy Guede who also has 'never' confessed to any culpability, aside from leaving Meredith instead of getting help? However, as others have pointed out already, Amanda did indead, at least partly, confess.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES


Last edited by Michael on Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 9 of 11 [ 2519 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

  

Judge Massei Sentencing Report     The Meredith Kercher Fund     The Murder Of Meredith Kercher Wiki     True Justice For Meredith Kercher     Judge Nencini Sentencing Report 


28,890,391 Views