Amanda Knox New Motivation Report RE: Meredith Kercher Murder #1 *new trial ordered*

[Chris_Halkides]

AK has had NO shortage of coverage by the U.S. News Media, which IMO is "mind boggling" considering she accused an INNOCENT AFRICAN (black) MAN of the murder of Meredith, let him sit in jail for 2 weeks, and AK never said a word to help poor Mr. Lumumba ...

Testimony:
"GM: I see. All right. I take note of what you're saying. Now, let's talk
about your memorandum from the 7th, still written in total autonomy, without
anyone around you. You wrote: 'I didn't lie when I said that I thought the
murderer was Patrick. At that moment I was very stressed and I really did
think that it was Patrick.' Then you add 'But now I know that I can't know who the murderer is, because I remember that I didn't go home.' Can you explain these concept to me?"
(bolding mine)

 

[Chris_Halkides]

My transcription of Follain’s version of the second memoriale (pp. 152-153)

“Oh my God! I’m freaking out a bit now because I just talked to a sister (nun) and I finally remember. It can’t be a coincidence. I remember what I was doing with Raffaele at the time of the murder of my friend! We are both innocent! This is why…[I am like Amelie] because I’m a bit of a weirdo in that I like random little things, like birds singing, and these little things make me happy.” Amanda received the text message from Patrik, and she recalled the broken pipes and Raffaele’s rolling a joint. They had a talk about Raffaele’s mother, among other things. “After our conversation I know we stayed in bed together for a long time. We had sex and then afterwards we played our game of looking at each other and making faces…We fell asleep and I didn’t wake up until Friday morning.” She also wrote, “I’m sorry I didn’t remember before and I’m sorry I said I could have been at the house when it happened. I said these things because I was confused and scared…I was very stressed at the time and I really did think he was the murderer. But now I remember I can’t know who was the murderer because I didn’t return back to the house.”

Follain closes this chapter with a passage from Amanda’s diary where she recalls how this memory came back to her in a flood. Then he opens the next chapter (23; 8 November 2007): “Mignini lost all hope of Amanda ever cooperating again with him as soon as he saw her in the Perugia law courts at a hearing held to decide whether or not she should stay in prison.” Hello? What was writing the second memoriale if not cooperating?

 

[sherlockh]

Thanks. Not that I necessarily agree with their conclusions but that's another kettle of fish. It sounds like it's the cell phone that clinched the TOD for them. That seems sort of weird to me, I would have thought the phone activity would probably have happened a while after the actual death. Surely he would have had other things to worry about immediately after?

Thank you for taking the time to explain this clearly.

ETA: hang on - this is such an iffy translation I think I just got confused again! Are they saying that Rudy's conversation clinched it or the mobile phone activity? It could read as either in the translation.

It is not the translation. It is the Appeal Court's report itself that makes it unclear. That is why it is part of the Galati appeal to the SC. They don't explain exactly how long the attack was or when it started. Why 10:15pm based on an incoming message at 10:13pm that doesn't require any human interaction? Why not 10:20 or 10:30pm? What was Rudy doing in the house for an hour before he suddenly decided to go to Meredith's bedroom and kill her? Galati is even a bit sarcastic when he says the 10:15pm isn't really based on anything.

Was the Court not aware that its own solution – the 10:15 PM timing – was also not anchored to any certain data?

If we take Rudy's word for it, he admitted (to the police) that his original timing was off and that he stayed in the house for just minutes after Meredith was attacked and left at around 10:30pm so this could somewhat support the 10:15pm but the Appeal Court does not explain this anywhere. The 9:30pm from his Skype Call does not support the 10:15pm timing without the explanation that his timing was at least half an hour off. The lack of explanation given by the Appeal Court is what makes this whole thing confusing.

 

[Allusonz]

It is not the translation. It is the Appeal Court's report itself that makes it unclear. That is why it is part of the Galati appeal to the SC. They don't explain exactly how long the attack was or when it started. Why 10:15pm based on an incoming message at 10:13pm that doesn't require any human interaction? Why not 10:20 or 10:30pm? What was Rudy doing in the house for an hour before he suddenly decided to go to Meredith's bedroom and kill her? Galati is even a bit sarcastic when he says the 10:15pm isn't really based on anything.

If we take Rudy's word for it, he admitted (to the police) that his original timing was off and that he stayed in the house for just minutes after Meredith was attacked and left at around 10:30pm so this could somewhat support the 10:15pm but the Appeal Court does not explain this anywhere. The 9:30pm from his Skype Call does not support the 10:15pm timing without the explanation that his timing was at least half an hour off. The lack of explanation given by the Appeal Court is what makes this whole thing confusing.

This is a misrepresentation of factual and scientific evidence.

In order for the TOD which has been presented by the prosecution, it would mean that Meredith Kercher had to of been at minimum in transit or at the area of the garden when she was murdered based on the pings off of the cell phone towers as referenced in the appeal of RS. This would mean that her body would NOT of been found in the cottage. PLE were dishonest in their presentation of the cell phone pings.

It totally falls apart based on the T(lag) which forensic pathologists testified to as referenced not only in one of my last posts, but in the published recognized medical studies Chris has repeatedly cited specific to the TOD, and the specific argument regarding T(lag) which are being ignored even with the specific request for a link to back up arguments to the contrary as requested.

The median T(lag) is 82 minutes, and I was extremely conservative in my estimation of the 75th percentile in my previous post.

Based on the testimony of the pathologists, the testimony regarding the time the meal started, what it consisted of, the absence of abnormal pathology, the absence of alcohol with the meal, and the fact the autopsy was videotaped to ensure the ligatures were applied properly to prevent slippage of the stomach contents into the duodenum, (NOTE: This is not the same as gastric emptying let us stop traversing this route), it would be SCIENTIFICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for the TOD to be 10:15 pm.

These two facts alone completely nullify not only the estimated TOD by the Mignini to the Italian Supreme Court, but the place this occurred. There is a reason that Judges study law not pathology.

Let me also note that for all intents and purposes there was not a trial as Rudy Guede plead guilty, thus he waived his right to present a defense.

 

[Allusonz]

I think Rudy did it alone but met Koko outside the cottage an hour before Meredith arrived home. How and why they met up and who covered it up is the mystery. Probably a drug deal, it might explain Guede's violence?

He as well left the country shortly after for some time prior to returning.

ETA Koko that is.

 

[Allusonz]

Great article from the Italian newspaper editor for the Umbria Journal, again confirming that the police suspected and planned to arrest Amanda and Raf by the the night of the November 5th. A reminder, this was before any forensic evidence was in. Why is this important? Because it dispels a long-standing talking point that the two were not suspects and the police were taken by surprise when they broke each other's alibi.

(Google translation)

"The first turning point came on 4 November. Well Francesca and Luca Fiorucci come to the office with the news, received from sources close to the investigation, that "Meredith knew his killers." The two reporters of the Journal Umbria, in the afternoon session was completed, the investigators say they do not see clearly the role of Amanda and Raffaele. Half news,
rumors, but qualified. Fois meanwhile piantona the area of ​​mad Grimana
in search of evidence. The next day we go out with the title "Meredith knew who killed her." Let's take into account that the investigation relied on a North African (the indiscretion can
have been leaked on purpose to mislead the investigators, or it was
of confusion on the nationality of Lumumba). Along the same lines the evening news on local television and other newspapers with editorial offices in Umbria
(Courier Umbria, The Nation, The Messenger). The impression is that the
circle is tightening. Arrests are expected. Meanwhile wrecked any attempt to interview Amanda and Raffaele."

http://www.archiviopenale.it/joomla/images/stories/dossier/2012_albertario_castellini.pdf

I particularly find interesting that the police had apparently warned the press not to interview Amanda and Raf, as their arrests were imminent (if I'm reading that correctly).

Thanks for this Malkmus as I had not seen it. Guess I will have to see how rusty my Italian has become!

 

[Malkmus]

As I showed about 3 times now, 'no later than 10:13' relates to the start of the aggression, and 10:15pm relates to TOD. The aggression could have started a bit earlier than 10:13pm but not much since the judge says that death occurred shortly after. That is why I said according to the Appeal Court the attack started between 10pm (approx) and 10:13pm. 9:15pm is not shortly before 10:15pm so you are contradicting the Appeal Courts time-line.

Okay, Sherlock, for the moment I'll put aside my opinion that the appeal court is simply referring to 10:13 as the latest time the attack could have happened (a valid point based on their wording "no later than").
Let's say you are correct that they are arguing a TOD of 10:15, what exactly is your issue with this? If anything, everything you've argued beforehand indicates that you also think it happened around this time, since you think Rudy was referring to a murder around 10:20 since he was off by an hour.
What is Hellman being dishonest about and what does this have to do with the first court's ruling that the murder had to have happened at 11:30?

 

[Malkmus]

(Snip)
AK has had NO shortage of coverage by the U.S. News Media, which IMO is "mind boggling" considering she accused an INNOCENT AFRICAN (black) MAN of the murder of Meredith, let him sit in jail for 2 weeks

Again, I ask you what Mr. Lumumba's skin color has to do with this. Since the text message was interpreted to be a rendez-vous with him, that is what was cause for suspicion, not his skin color. If he had been white, do you think the police would have correctly interpreted the text message?

 

[Malkmus]

Thanks. I am not even sure if that is the argument. There shouldn't be any discussion about where the Appeal Court puts the TOD. They say it clearly and the Galati appeal document mentions it many times. It is just that some people would like to push their own theories about earlier TOD's and therefore try to confuse by mixing up statements from the court documents (and don't want to admit that they actually disagree with the Appeal Court). Just stick to the official court documents

From the Galati appeal:

Sherlock, obviously I am not the only one who sees a problem with interpreting the TOD as being exactly 10:15 when the court document doesn't say it could not have happened earlier and specifically says the attack happened "no later than 10:13". I am perfectly content with saying that if their position really is a 10:15 TOD that I am in disagreement with that and think it happened earlier. How this makes AK and RS guilty, I have no idea. You yourself seem to be more in agreement with the Hellman TOD.

 

[sherlockh]

Okay, Sherlock, for the moment I'll put aside my opinion that the appeal court is simply referring to 10:13 as the latest time the attack could have happened (a valid point based on their wording "no later than").
Let's say you are correct that they are arguing a TOD of 10:15, what exactly is your issue with this? If anything, everything you've argued beforehand indicates that you also think it happened around this time, since you think Rudy was referring to a murder around 10:20 since he was off by an hour.
What is Hellman being dishonest about and what does this have to do with the first court's ruling that the murder had to have happened at 11:30?

It is not just your opinion. That is exactly what they say and what I have been explaining all along. It is the attack that happened before 10:13. Meredith died within minutes at 10:15pm. This is not my theory. It is theirs.

The issues I have is their dishonesty about what Rudy exactly said (Rudy was off by half an hour) and how he told many other things in his Skype call (explained in the Galati Appeal) that they disregard, their lack of argumentation (why 10:15 and not later?), posters that hang on to their own theories as if these are facts and still on the table. The Galati Appeal makes it perfectly clear that the fixed TOD of 10:15pm is what is on the table now.
http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=568

 

[Sonata]

It is not just your opinion. That is exactly what they say and what I have been explaining all along. It is the attack that happened before 10:13. Meredith died within minutes at 10:15pm. This is not my theory. It is theirs.

Can anyone direct me to Hellman's report (the one they are contesting)? I can see that the Galati appeal clearly states this but I would like to check out the findings in the Hellman report to see the original source.

Sorry - I know this will have come up already here.

 

[Footwarrior]

Can anyone direct me to Hellman's report (the one they are contesting)? I can see that the Galati appeal clearly states this but I would like to check out the findings in the Hellman report to see the original source.

Sorry - I know this will have come up already here.

An English translation of the Hellman-Zanetti report can be found here.

 

[Sonata]

An English translation of the Hellman-Zanetti report can be found here.

Thanks Footwarrior! I love this forum - you get a helpful response so quickly!

So, looking at the Hellman report I see nothing that places the TOD at 10.15, and therefore have no idea why this is stated in the Galati appeal. It clearly states:

"So it follows that it is more consistent with the intentions professed by the young woman and with the oddities of the above-mentioned phone calls, to hypothesize that actually the aggression, and hence the death shortly thereafter, occurred much before the time supposed by the Corte di Assise of first level: certainly not later than 10:13 pm."

In fact a search for 10:15 brings up nothing.

 

[Allusonz]

I must correct an error I made (thank you Chris).

Rudy Guede chose a fast track trial which in Italy he receives a 1/3 reduction in time served.

It still does not negate the point I was trying to express in which he waives the right to present defense arguments contrary to what is presented by the prosecutor.

I do apologize for forgetting this aspect of the Italian system.

 

[Malkmus]

Thanks Footwarrior! I love this forum - you get a helpful response so quickly!

So, looking at the Hellman report I see nothing that places the TOD at 10.15, and therefore have no idea why this is stated in the Galati appeal. It clearly states:

"So it follows that it is more consistent with the intentions professed by the young woman and with the oddities of the above-mentioned phone calls, to hypothesize that actually the aggression, and hence the death shortly thereafter, occurred much before the time supposed by the Corte di Assise of first level: certainly not later than 10:13 pm."

In fact a search for 10:15 brings up nothing.

Sonata, it is in the conclusion section of the report:

this is the case with the time of death, established by the first-level Corte di Assise as after 11 pm and identified by this Court as around 10:15 pm

But as you have noticed, when he goes into more detail as in the section you quoted, it is apparent that he is saying the attack and TOD could have happened earlier. This is exemplified in several other sections:

1. Hellman states that Rudy points to a time of attack between 9 and 9:30, and elaborates to say that if Rudy's timing is off it wouldn't be anywhere close to the first court's timing of 11:30.
2. Hellman notes that it was unlikely that Meredith would have waited more than a few minutes to call her mom back once she got home and the attack likely is what prohibited her from doing so.
3. Nowhere is a time of attack/death earlier than 10:15 ruled out.
4. In referencing the odd cell phone activity he notes that by 10:15 the phones must have been in the attacker's hands, hence the "not later than 10:13" statement.

If Hellman were truly saying the the attack happened exactly at and only at 10:13 then there would be no point in him noting the above points in his judgement.

 

[Allusonz]

Whoa ... regarding the "title" or "subtitle" of this book "Waiting to be Heard" :

AK has been HEARD, loud and clear, for the past 5 years, particularly here in the U.S.A. ...

AK has had NO shortage of coverage by the U.S. News Media, which IMO is "mind boggling" considering she accused an INNOCENT AFRICAN (black) MAN of the murder of Meredith, let him sit in jail for 2 weeks, and AK never said a word to help poor Mr. Lumumba ... then Rudy Guede, another African (black) man's DNA and prints were found in Meredith's room, which is the only reason Mr. Lumumba was released by the LE in Italy, but NO thanks to AK ...

Ah ... what Amanda did reminds me Susan Smith, who also accused a "black man" of killing her children when SHE did it ... another one is Casey Anthony, who accused an Hispanic woman of "kidnapping" her child, when SHE did it ! What AK, SS and CA did was absolutely DESPICABLE to accuse INNOCENT people of the crimes they themselves committed ...

Amanda has been heard all right ... BUT it has NOT been the TRUTH ...

MOO JMO MOO ...

I must clarify something here.

Amanda Knox was not heard during the time she spent in prison as she was not allowed to give interviews.

There were others that spoke out with respect to the case. That is not the same as her actually "speaking".

Huge difference, as one can choose to read/watch articles/programs related to same.

 

[Malkmus]

It is not just your opinion. That is exactly what they say and what I have been explaining all along. It is the attack that happened before 10:13. Meredith died within minutes at 10:15pm. This is not my theory. It is theirs.

I've elaborated on this in my reply to Sonata above.

The issues I have is their dishonesty about what Rudy exactly said (Rudy was off by half an hour)

They say he could have been off, so there's no disagreement there.

and how he told many other things in his Skype call (explained in the Galati Appeal) that they disregard,

I'll have to read that section to see what you're talking about.

their lack of argumentation (why 10:15 and not later?),

Because, as Hellman explains, due to the odd phone activity her phones were by that time in her killer's hands.

posters that hang on to their own theories as if these are facts and still on the table.

no idea what this means or how it factors in your reasoning that Hellman is dishonest, but it sounds rather petty.

The Galati Appeal makes it perfectly clear that the fixed TOD of 10:15pm is what is on the table now.
http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=568

Galati's issue is Hellman pushing the time back much sooner than what the first court concluded. If he is going to argue to the SC that Hellman is strictly arguing a 10:15 TOD he is going to have a hard time reconciling that with the points I referenced from the report indicating that it could have happened earlier. For instance, at one point Galati notes that Hellman agrees with Rudy's timing of the attack.

Galati writes: "The Court holds that in order to determine the time of death, the Skype call between
Rudy and his friend Benedetti is usable: this conversation had been intercepted by
the Police."

 

[Malkmus]

(snip)
The issues I have is their dishonesty about what Rudy exactly said (Rudy was off by half an hour) and how he told many other things in his Skype call

Okay I found the relevant passage:

If the Court held the Ivorian citizen to be sincere in the tele-conversation with his friend Benedetti, then why not also believe him when he denies having broken in, or when he recounts Meredith having it out with Amanda, or when he says that he had been at the latter’s place ‚many times‛?

Well let's break these down:

1. "why not also believe him when he denies having broken in?"

This seems fairly obvious. Why on earth would he tell the truth about breaking in if he did? he's trying to paint himself as a victim to his friend.

2. "or when he recounts Meredith having it out with Amanda?"

Another self-serving lie. Galati can't seem to understand that when one lies its purpose is to make oneself look better. Also, the missing money was in the press which we know Rudy was following.

3. "or when he says that he had been at the latter’s place ‚many times‛?"

Rudy only says he was at the boy's downstairs place when he met Amanda once, then only one time after that he saw her at Patrick's pub. If we're talking about dishonesty, this seems like a good example of one.

Anyway, back to Hellman's point about the time Rudy says he was at the cottage. Rudy has no reason to lie about it, where he does have plenty of reason to lie about the other things pointed out by Galati. His argument isn't very convincing.

 

[sherlockh]

Sonata, it is in the conclusion section of the report:

But as you have noticed, when he goes into more detail as in the section you quoted, it is apparent that he is saying the attack and TOD could have happened earlier. This is exemplified in several other sections:

1. Hellman states that Rudy points to a time of attack between 9 and 9:30, and elaborates to say that if Rudy's timing is off it wouldn't be anywhere close to the first court's timing of 11:30.
2. Hellman notes that it was unlikely that Meredith would have waited more than a few minutes to call her mom back once she got home and the attack likely is what prohibited her from doing so.
3. Nowhere is a time of attack/death earlier than 10:15 ruled out.
4. In referencing the odd cell phone activity he notes that by 10:15 the phones must have been in the attacker's hands, hence the "not later than 10:13" statement.

If Hellman were truly saying the the attack happened exactly at and only at 10:13 then there would be no point in him noting the above points in his judgement.

Number 3 is wrong. By specifying the TOD at 10:15pm, he rules out an earlier TOD. The whole talk about 10:13pm is about the attack. He is not clear about the length of the attack. This discussion is about showing that 'pinpoint' (identify, fix, whatever) actually means 'not later than' and that Galati doesn't understand his own language. It is getting really silly IMO.

 

[Malkmus]

Number 3 is wrong. By specifying the TOD at 10:15pm, he rules out an earlier TOD. The whole talk about 10:13pm is about the attack. He is not clear about the length of the attack. This discussion is about showing that 'pinpoint' (identify, fix, whatever) actually means 'not later than' and that Galati doesn't understand his own language. It is getting really silly IMO.

Sherlock, I've just quoted Galati as saying that Hellman uses Rudy's 9-9:30 timing for the TOD. You're interpretation of "not later than 10:13" does not make sense and others here have explained in earnest why "not later than 10:13" is not the same as saying the attack happened "at 10:13". There's really no other way to interpret that.