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

[sherlockh]

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.

Galati is perfectly right to point out the lack of argumentation with respect to Rudy's Skype call. The Appeal Court jumps from one time to another without explaining that Rudy is actually off by at least half an hour.

I never said the attack was at 10:13pm. The attack was no later than 10:13pm. Nobody disagrees with that. That is exactly what the Appeal Court said. But you can't draw conclusions from that without taking into account the specified TOD of 10:15pm in the conclusions, and this is what you are trying to do. You continue to ignore the conclusion that the TOD was specified at 10:15pm and instead try to push your own conclusions from the statements made about the attack being before 10:13pm.

If you want to understand the timeline of the Appeal Court you need to start at the timing of 10:15pm since this is a fixed timing and take it from there.

 

[Malkmus]

Galati is perfectly right to point out the lack of argumentation with respect to Rudy's Skype call. The Appeal Court jumps from one time to another without explaining that Rudy is actually off by at least half an hour.

I never said the attack was at 10:13pm. The attack was no later than 10:13pm. Nobody disagrees with that. That is exactly what the Appeal Court said. But you can't draw conclusions from that without taking into account the specified TOD of 10:15pm in the conclusions, and this is what you are trying to do. You continue to ignore the conclusion that the TOD was specified at 10:15pm and instead try to push your own conclusions from the statements made about the attack being before 10:13pm.

If you want to understand the timeline of the Appeal Court you need to start at the timing of 10:15pm since this is a fixed timing and take it from there.

So, Meredith was attacked anytime before 10:13 and died "around 10:15". What's the problem?

Let's reference your initial statement which started this entire discussion:

(snip)
The appeal court is very dishonest when they say that Rudy said he is in the cottage between 9-9:30pm. Rudy said Meredith arrived at 8:30pm so he is off by half an hour. He basically states that Meredith was killed after an hour which would be 10pm. Rudy of course is lying as he minimizes the length of the attack so (based on his words) TOD must have been some time after 10pm.

Still not seeing what the disagreement is. What is the dishonesty in that argument that Galati is going to use to establish a later TOD of 11:30?

 

[sherlockh]

So, Meredith was attacked anytime before 10:13 and died "around 10:15". What's the problem?

Let's reference your initial statement which started this entire discussion:

Still not seeing what the disagreement is. What is the dishonesty in that argument that Galati is going to use to establish a later TOD of 11:30?

Exactly. Galati is not so much defending the TOD of 11:30pm from the first trial I think. Remember, even the prosecution during the appeal stated that the phones were in the hands of the attackers by 10:13pm IIRC. So they seem to have come off that late TOD a bit. He is objecting to the logic (or lack of) of the Appeal Court.

Time of death of Meredith Kercher. – deficiency or manifest illogicality of the reasoning in contrast to the other court documents of the case. [Article 606 paragraph 1(e) Criminal Procedure Code]

The Skype Call
I agree that this isn't the strongest part. He could have mentioned a few other things. One sentence that was specifically mentioned in Rudy's SC Sentencing Report was:

One significant sentence pronounced by Guede to B: «I was scared that they would say I was the only guilty person».

Other things Rudy mentioned that someone else undressed Meredith after he left, and it were R and A that must have washed Meredith's clothes. Someone came back after he left. Galati doesn't mention these things and IMO he should have.

Meredith's Phones
Personally I agree with the Appeal Court that the calls at 9:58 and 10pm taken together are suspicious activity. Galati makes the point that the phone activity doesn't really prove anything and that Meredith not calling back her parents could have other reasons. Here he also points out that the Appeal Court suddenly jumps from Rudy's 9-9:30 to 10:15 without explanation. I agree that the 10:13pm message on Meredith's phone doesn't prove anything since this doesn't require any human interaction yet this is used by the Appeal Court to prove the cut off point for the attack.

Equally unlikely is the hypothesis with respect to the 10:13 PM connection, made without human interaction, formulated solely to make the attack coincide with a time – 10:15 PM – different from that determined by the trial judgment.

Galati doesn't really mention it but the Appeal Courts reasoning about the 9:58 is really silly. The call not followed through at 8:56 must have been Meredith, and the call not followed through at 9:58 must have been somebody else because Meredith would never cut off a call. How is that logic?

The testimony of the 3 women
The Appeal Court rejected all of them because they couldn't tell the exact time, and the Appeal Court calls their testimony ambiguous. Galati is right to object to this. There is no confusion about the scream. Especially Capezalli was very specific about the scream, and Galati is clever to mention that Amanda mentioned screaming before anybody else did. However, he forgets to mention that Rudy also was very specific about this scream.

On a side note, even though the witnesses weren't looking at the clock when they got out of bed, the witness Monacchia was sure that she went to bed at 10PM. So even when she wasn't sure how long after 10PM she heard the scream, we at least know that it was sometime after 10PM which narrows down the time frame for the TOD.

Last but not least, Galati concludes with the objection that the Appeal Court not even bothered to look at the thanatological data. They don't even mention the coroner in their report which is unheard of in any murder case.

 

[sherlockh]

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.

Just for the record. I am not ignoring anything, but it is the Appeal Court's timeline you claim to be IMPOSSIBLE so fine by me As for the cell phone pings theory. That is theory #4 (from the last few pages of this thread) that the Appeal Court 'forgot' to mention.

The T(lag) thing might be interesting if you want to use it to prove that Meredith ate something after she arrived at the cottage. But then, we already knew that from the mushroom.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

The T(lag) thing might be interesting if you want to use it to prove that Meredith ate something after she arrived at the cottage. But then, we already knew that from the mushroom.

One, you have not shown any evidence that consuming something at a later time affects t(lag) from an earlier meal. The fact that the stomach passes food differentially in time into the duodenum suggests otherwise. Two, no testing was done to show whether or not the food in the esophagus was a mushroom or something else. Three, we know from testimony that Meredith ate something containing apples.

 

[sherlockh]

One, you have not shown any evidence that consuming something at a later time affects t(lag) from an earlier meal. The fact that the stomach passes food differentially in time into the duodenum suggests otherwise. Two, no testing was done to show whether or not the food in the esophagus was a mushroom or something else. Three, we know from testimony that Meredith ate something containing apples.

I admit I at first misunderstood about the 2-3 hours mentioned by dr Lallie, as I thought this was the starting time for the stomach to begin to process to the duodenum but as you explained it is the end of the emptying of the stomach. The starting time is much shorter than that. 82 Minutes is stretching it. I read other sources that give shorter times.

the upper limit of normal for the lag phase is approximately 45 min

http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72757/1/j.1572-0241.2007.01636.x.pdf

So if Meredith ate a few bites of pizza at 5:30pm-6:30pm then this must start to process to the duodenum lets say an hour later. So it is absolutely impossible that by 9pm this was not in the duodenum. Probably by 9pm this bit of pizza already completely left the stomach and by the time she got killed it had left the duodenum. After all before 9pm everything was still normal and probably no stress factors are applicable.

Where else did the contents of the small intestine come from if not from the pizza?

In the autopsy, Dr. Lalli noted the following: "... oesophagus containing a fragment apparently a piece of mushroom ... stomach containing 500 cc alimentary bolus, green brown in which were recognizable caseosis (mozzarella?) and vegetable fibre ... empty duodenum, small intestine containing digested material in the last loop ...‛ .

So now the discussion is not about the pizza but when exactly the apple was eaten (probably after 8pm), and if the apple in the stomach (no scientific test needed suddenly) was the same apple as from the apple crumble they ate, and if that apple should have been in the duodenum, and if..and if.... But since we know there was some mushroom and cheese then we know she ate again after she arrived at home, and then it is after 9pm so the stress factor does apply.

My best guess is that she took some leftover pizza home and ate it later, but that is just a guess based on the statements of her friends that she didn't finish her pizza.

 

[Treyson]

What I've laid out below isn't sourced and is my admittedly crude attempt at adding to the discussion.

It seems to me the pro-guilt side has a legitimate position with respect to T(lag) based on the scant amount of research that is readily available via google search.

While some studies do list examples of extended T(lag) times, all I've found were arrived at using Breath Analysis which is apparently accurate for total emptying but overestimates T(lag) and T(1/2). This has been demonstrated using scintigraphy which is the best method (albeit more expensive/resource intensive) for accurately measuring gastric emptying. All of the studies I've seen using scintigraphy would suggest T(lag) outside of 60 minutes is rare.

However, it also seems very unlikely that the food in the last loop of Meredith's small intestine is the pizza meal/apple crumble. It's my understanding that while T(lag) is reached within the first hour of digestion, it's normal for food to take between 6-8 hours to pass the small intestine. Not only that but as other posters rightly point out when food reaches the end of the small intestine there is still food in the stomach that has to take the hours long journey through the small intestine.

Therefore, the idea that the apple crumble Meredith ate around 8PM was fully digested by the stomach and had traveled all the way through the small intestine but for a small bit at the end appears to be very unlikely given the timeline.

The fact that recognizable pieces of apple were in her stomach is an indication that the pizza meal/apple crumble were in fact still in her stomach, the pizza mostly broken down. But how do we reconcile what seems to be an impossible T(lag)?

Is it possible that the BAC indicated that Meredith had been drinking heavily and well into the morning on the 31st? Given the likelihood that Meredith was attacked upon arrival and there being no indication of drinking that day or night, it seems plausible the BAC was residual. Being so hungover could certainly be a factor in extending T(lag) on the 1st. Could it also be that they started eating a bit later than reported?

The answer to this question is really whether or not T(lag) at 150 minutes is unreasonable as the research seems to suggest I suppose.

 

[MichaelSmith]

Exactly. Galati is not so much defending the TOD of 11:30pm from the first trial I think. Remember, even the prosecution during the appeal stated that the phones were in the hands of the attackers by 10:13pm IIRC. So they seem to have come off that late TOD a bit. He is objecting to the logic (or lack of) of the Appeal Court.


The Skype Call
I agree that this isn't the strongest part. He could have mentioned a few other things. One sentence that was specifically mentioned in Rudy's SC Sentencing Report was:

Other things Rudy mentioned that someone else undressed Meredith after he left, and it were R and A that must have washed Meredith's clothes. Someone came back after he left. Galati doesn't mention these things and IMO he should have.

Meredith's Phones
Personally I agree with the Appeal Court that the calls at 9:58 and 10pm taken together are suspicious activity. Galati makes the point that the phone activity doesn't really prove anything and that Meredith not calling back her parents could have other reasons. Here he also points out that the Appeal Court suddenly jumps from Rudy's 9-9:30 to 10:15 without explanation. I agree that the 10:13pm message on Meredith's phone doesn't prove anything since this doesn't require any human interaction yet this is used by the Appeal Court to prove the cut off point for the attack.

Galati doesn't really mention it but the Appeal Courts reasoning about the 9:58 is really silly. The call not followed through at 8:56 must have been Meredith, and the call not followed through at 9:58 must have been somebody else because Meredith would never cut off a call. How is that logic?

The testimony of the 3 women
The Appeal Court rejected all of them because they couldn't tell the exact time, and the Appeal Court calls their testimony ambiguous. Galati is right to object to this. There is no confusion about the scream. Especially Capezalli was very specific about the scream, and Galati is clever to mention that Amanda mentioned screaming before anybody else did. However, he forgets to mention that Rudy also was very specific about this scream.

On a side note, even though the witnesses weren't looking at the clock when they got out of bed, the witness Monacchia was sure that she went to bed at 10PM. So even when she wasn't sure how long after 10PM she heard the scream, we at least know that it was sometime after 10PM which narrows down the time frame for the TOD.

Last but not least, Galati concludes with the objection that the Appeal Court not even bothered to look at the thanatological data. They don't even mention the coroner in their report which is unheard of in any murder case.

The 10.13pm message does prove something and that's the phone was no longer at the cottage. It came through via the Strada Vicinale Ponte Rio Monte la Guardia tower 1.8km away which serviced Rudy's apartment and the garden instead of the Piazza Lupatelli tower which serviced the cottage.

 

[Treyson]

There was one call in the Massei report made from the cottage that didn't use the Lupatteli tower. It was one of the calls RS made to the police dispatch, but it didn't use the cell the 10:13 used either.

ETA: Correction two of the calls from Raf that day went through Via dell'Aquila 5-Torre dell'Acquedotto sector 1 cell.

 

[Malkmus]

Exactly. Galati is not so much defending the TOD of 11:30pm from the first trial I think. Remember, even the prosecution during the appeal stated that the phones were in the hands of the attackers by 10:13pm IIRC. So they seem to have come off that late TOD a bit. He is objecting to the logic (or lack of) of the Appeal Court.


The Skype Call
I agree that this isn't the strongest part. He could have mentioned a few other things. One sentence that was specifically mentioned in Rudy's SC Sentencing Report was:

Other things Rudy mentioned that someone else undressed Meredith after he left, and it were R and A that must have washed Meredith's clothes. Someone came back after he left. Galati doesn't mention these things and IMO he should have.

Meredith's Phones
Personally I agree with the Appeal Court that the calls at 9:58 and 10pm taken together are suspicious activity. Galati makes the point that the phone activity doesn't really prove anything and that Meredith not calling back her parents could have other reasons. Here he also points out that the Appeal Court suddenly jumps from Rudy's 9-9:30 to 10:15 without explanation. I agree that the 10:13pm message on Meredith's phone doesn't prove anything since this doesn't require any human interaction yet this is used by the Appeal Court to prove the cut off point for the attack.

Galati doesn't really mention it but the Appeal Courts reasoning about the 9:58 is really silly. The call not followed through at 8:56 must have been Meredith, and the call not followed through at 9:58 must have been somebody else because Meredith would never cut off a call. How is that logic?

The testimony of the 3 women
The Appeal Court rejected all of them because they couldn't tell the exact time, and the Appeal Court calls their testimony ambiguous. Galati is right to object to this. There is no confusion about the scream. Especially Capezalli was very specific about the scream, and Galati is clever to mention that Amanda mentioned screaming before anybody else did. However, he forgets to mention that Rudy also was very specific about this scream.

On a side note, even though the witnesses weren't looking at the clock when they got out of bed, the witness Monacchia was sure that she went to bed at 10PM. So even when she wasn't sure how long after 10PM she heard the scream, we at least know that it was sometime after 10PM which narrows down the time frame for the TOD.

Last but not least, Galati concludes with the objection that the Appeal Court not even bothered to look at the thanatological data. They don't even mention the coroner in their report which is unheard of in any murder case.

Since the 10:13 call has been addressed for its significance by someone else I won't comment on that. However, if you're saying the prosecution agreed the phones were in the attacker's hands by that time I can't really see how a scream at 11:30 plays into their theory either (not to mention this is questioning the judge and jury's judgement, not arguing the law). But above all, none of Galati's points mentioned above have anything to do in implicating AK and RS in the murder (I suppose that's where his argument against the independent experts comes in).

Rudy's Skype comments have the benefit of knowing who the suspects were from the media frenzy, so it's no wonder he shifts the blame off himself and indirectly on to the two people already incarcerated.

 

[sherlockh]

What I've laid out below isn't sourced and is my admittedly crude attempt at adding to the discussion.

It seems to me the pro-guilt side has a legitimate position with respect to T(lag) based on the scant amount of research that is readily available via google search.

While some studies do list examples of extended T(lag) times, all I've found were arrived at using Breath Analysis which is apparently accurate for total emptying but overestimates T(lag) and T(1/2). This has been demonstrated using scintigraphy which is the best method (albeit more expensive/resource intensive) for accurately measuring gastric emptying. All of the studies I've seen using scintigraphy would suggest T(lag) outside of 60 minutes is rare.

I agree it is rare. And a stretch to somehow come to the conclusion that 150 minutes would be normal. 150 Minutes would indicate a digestion problem, and if there is such a problem then who is to say how long the delay would be?

However, it also seems very unlikely that the food in the last loop of Meredith's small intestine is the pizza meal/apple crumble. It's my understanding that while T(lag) is reached within the first hour of digestion, it's normal for food to take between 6-8 hours to pass the small intestine. Not only that but as other posters rightly point out when food reaches the end of the small intestine there is still food in the stomach that has to take the hours long journey through the small intestine.

Therefore, the idea that the apple crumble Meredith ate around 8PM was fully digested by the stomach and had traveled all the way through the small intestine but for a small bit at the end appears to be very unlikely given the timeline.

An apple gets digested much faster than a pizza as it is mostly just water and there are natural sugars that don't need any digestion. Digestion time for an apple is about 30 minutes with pretty much no lag time. The apple was probably waiting for that pizza so we can forget about the apple and just concentrate on the pizza. If you take the 6-8 hour range (which could be shorter I think) then 6 hours after 6PM is midnight, so it is not so strange that at Massei's TOD of 11:30PM there is still something left in the small intestines. In this scenario you must conclude that the stomach contents was something Meredith ate at a later time.

The fact that recognizable pieces of apple were in her stomach is an indication that the pizza meal/apple crumble were in fact still in her stomach, the pizza mostly broken down. But how do we reconcile what seems to be an impossible T(lag)?

Is it possible that the BAC indicated that Meredith had been drinking heavily and well into the morning on the 31st? Given the likelihood that Meredith was attacked upon arrival and there being no indication of drinking that day or night, it seems plausible the BAC was residual. Being so hungover could certainly be a factor in extending T(lag) on the 1st. Could it also be that they started eating a bit later than reported?

The answer to this question is really whether or not T(lag) at 150 minutes is unreasonable as the research seems to suggest I suppose.

I pretty much agree with your analysis. The T(lag) time makes it seem impossible, so either there is a digestion problem or you follow through on the shorter T(lag) times and must conclude that Meredith ate again after she got home. Either way, you can't draw any conclusions on the timing of the attack based on the stomach/duodenum analysis.

 

[sherlockh]

Since the 10:13 call has been addressed for its significance by someone else I won't comment on that. However, if you're saying the prosecution agreed the phones were in the attacker's hands by that time I can't really see how a scream at 11:30 plays into their theory either (not to mention this is questioning the judge and jury's judgement, not arguing the law). But above all, none of Galati's points mentioned above have anything to do in implicating AK and RS in the murder (I suppose that's where his argument against the independent experts comes in).

Rudy's Skype comments have the benefit of knowing who the suspects were from the media frenzy, so it's no wonder he shifts the blame off himself and indirectly on to the two people already incarcerated.

I don't have much to say on the phone calls either. Give me a list of her last 100 calls or so, not just 5. I agree that the phone could have been taken by 10:13PM but who is to say how far it exactly moved? There is a crazy witness that puts them all outside on the street at that moment. The cell covers the area of the cottage. It could be in the kitchen, in the hall way, in the garden, on the street, etc... You can't specify how far that phone would have moved.

The witnesses on the scream weren't looking at the clock. It is even mentioned on the innocent site that they weren't exactly sure on the timing which is not so strange I think if you just wake up.

During Rudy's trial, testimony states that the scream occurs from 22:30 to 22:40. During Amanda's trial it is testified that the scream is heard at around 23:30.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.com/Appeal.html

 

[sherlockh]

The 10.13pm message does prove something and that's the phone was no longer at the cottage. It came through via the Strada Vicinale Ponte Rio Monte la Guardia tower 1.8km away which serviced Rudy's apartment and the garden instead of the Piazza Lupatelli tower which serviced the cottage.

The Appeal Court forgot to mention this?

 

[Allusonz]

What I've laid out below isn't sourced and is my admittedly crude attempt at adding to the discussion.

It seems to me the pro-guilt side has a legitimate position with respect to T(lag) based on the scant amount of research that is readily available via google search.

While some studies do list examples of extended T(lag) times, all I've found were arrived at using Breath Analysis which is apparently accurate for total emptying but overestimates T(lag) and T(1/2). This has been demonstrated using scintigraphy which is the best method (albeit more expensive/resource intensive) for accurately measuring gastric emptying. All of the studies I've seen using scintigraphy would suggest T(lag) outside of 60 minutes is rare.

However, it also seems very unlikely that the food in the last loop of Meredith's small intestine is the pizza meal/apple crumble. It's my understanding that while T(lag) is reached within the first hour of digestion, it's normal for food to take between 6-8 hours to pass the small intestine. Not only that but as other posters rightly point out when food reaches the end of the small intestine there is still food in the stomach that has to take the hours long journey through the small intestine.

Therefore, the idea that the apple crumble Meredith ate around 8PM was fully digested by the stomach and had traveled all the way through the small intestine but for a small bit at the end appears to be very unlikely given the timeline.

The fact that recognizable pieces of apple were in her stomach is an indication that the pizza meal/apple crumble were in fact still in her stomach, the pizza mostly broken down. But how do we reconcile what seems to be an impossible T(lag)?

Is it possible that the BAC indicated that Meredith had been drinking heavily and well into the morning on the 31st? Given the likelihood that Meredith was attacked upon arrival and there being no indication of drinking that day or night, it seems plausible the BAC was residual. Being so hungover could certainly be a factor in extending T(lag) on the 1st. Could it also be that they started eating a bit later than reported?

The answer to this question is really whether or not T(lag) at 150 minutes is unreasonable as the research seems to suggest I suppose.

:welcome:


You have brought up a theory of mine regarding the T(lag). IIRC she had drank a fair amount of alcohol, combined with being out , as she slept late as per the testimony.

I am not convinced with respect to the alcohol levels testified to as being accurate.

This I believe would slow down the T(lag). There are a few other things that come to mind as well which I have considered.

 

[Allusonz]

Just for the record. I am not ignoring anything, but it is the Appeal Court's timeline you claim to be IMPOSSIBLE so fine by me As for the cell phone pings theory. That is theory #4 (from the last few pages of this thread) that the Appeal Court 'forgot' to mention.

The T(lag) thing might be interesting if you want to use it to prove that Meredith ate something after she arrived at the cottage. But then, we already knew that from the mushroom.

Then one would have to jump another set of hurdles with respect to why she was found in the cottage rather than enroute or at the garden as per the cell phone pings.

I guess one could take on Mignini's favourite "double" body theory.

 

[MichaelSmith]

The Appeal Court forgot to mention this?

Not forgot. Hellmann didn't seem interested in a lot of things the defence wanted to raise in the appeal.

This is how Massei cheats to make his Meredith playing on the bed with the phone theory hold together.

Page 313

"The Polizia Giudiziaria carried out the [signal] detection sensing exclusively on the outside of the cottage, re-positioning the instrument’s antennae with extensions."

 

[sherlockh]

Not forgot. Hellmann didn't seem interested in a lot of things the defence wanted to raise in the appeal.

This is how Massei cheats to make his Meredith playing on the bed with the phone theory hold together.

Page 313

"The Polizia Giudiziaria carried out the [signal] detection sensing exclusively on the outside of the cottage, re-positioning the instrument’s antennae with extensions."

The witness Kokomani placed them all 3 outside around that time and indicated that Meredith was still alive but already attacked and locked up. If we could establish for sure (which I doubt) that the phones were outside then it would give some credibility to his story. Taking her phones would be the first thing they did. Other then that I don't know what this is supposed to prove. How can you ever establish the exact location of the phones, and how can you know for sure that that phone never connected to that cell before if we not even have a list?

 

[Sonata]

If we could establish for sure (which I doubt) that the phones were outside then it would give some credibility to his story

:floorlaugh:

I totally see your point and am not contesting it or mocking you; I just love the notion of Kokomani's testimony having any credibility!

 

[sherlockh]

Then one would have to jump another set of hurdles with respect to why she was found in the cottage rather than enroute or at the garden as per the cell phone pings.

I guess one could take on Mignini's favourite "double" body theory.

The hurdle is stretching a T(lag) time from half an hour to an impossible 3 hours and still call that normal. The fantasy about alcohol only shows that you need a delay. It is impossible to determine that the delay would stretch to 3 hours and not to 4 or 5 hours. It doesn't fit and it doesn't prove anything.

 

[MichaelSmith]

The witness Kokomani placed them all 3 outside around that time and indicated that Meredith was still alive but already attacked and locked up. If we could establish for sure (which I doubt) that the phones were outside then it would give some credibility to his story. Taking her phones would be the first thing they did. Other then that I don't know what this is supposed to prove. How can you ever establish the exact location of the phones, and how can you know for sure that that phone never connected to that cell before if we not even have a list?

Please....

How can you even mention that nutcase and take anything he says seriously?? He's part of the mystery of what really happened......

IMO he's the one sitting in the car outside the cottage at 8pm that Rudy mentions in his diary.