Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#10

[aa9511]

I'm sorry you feel that way. All I can say is that a "theory" of a clean-up is very different from "evidence" of a clean-up, evidence which I do not see in my online research outside of this forum.

But isn't the whole point of a clean-up, to not leave any evidence of guilt?

 

[Amber29]

I didn't speculate that he threw away the shoes in Germany, I read it. The empty shoe box for shoes matching the prints was found in his apt. in Perugia, but the shoes were disposed of in Germany.

The Boston bomber's effects were not found because of cameras, they were found by searching trash. They were thrown away by friends of his who were not suspects at the time.

I don't want to get off subject here talking about the Boston bomber, but trash cans were suspected of placement for the bombs of course they were searching them. Again no comparison in a bombing in a city and a murder investigation.

Is it RG who says he threw his shoes away in Germany?

 

[Katody]

Well I don't think her floor was mopped, I do think theres a source behind the bathmat print and prints missing leading to it that are missing.

By missing you mean cleaned up, correct? Do you think that source was in the bathroom or are there cleaned up Raffaele's prints leading from the corridor, kitchen, Filomena's room?

 

[Amber29]

I think it's possible that a very small amount of dried blood on the qtip container could have been there from before the murder. Likewise a small amount of blood on the drain in the bidet (considering Meredith was menstruating at the time.)

Do we know this, I can't remember reading that?

Either way I don't think it was ever said to be menstrual blood except by AK in her email to friends and family.

 

[aa9511]

Yes let's talk about what people say to the media.

I actually have asked MULTIPLE times for a logical reason RS would add 5hours to the arrival time at the police station for questioning in an interview with the media contrary to evidence.

RS also gave a very interesting interview to Kate Mansey days after the murder.

Seems Quintivalle isn't the only one who speaks to the media when he shouldn't.

I have not seen the interview with Kate Mansey, hopefully it is on youtube so I can watch it.

 

[Amber29]

Apparently I misunderstood. I'm sorry. So you do agree the window was broken already when they alerted Filomena.

I understand for some reason it was insufficient to tell about the window? For example: "there is a window broken, I'm going now to fetch Raffaele". But didn't the information about the window prompt Filomena to come to the villa immediately?

I don't really understand your point here sorry.

 

[Amber29]

By missing you mean cleaned up, correct? Do you think that source was in the bathroom or are there cleaned up Raffaele's prints leading from the corridor, kitchen, Filomena's room?

I think they were successful in eliminating some print evidence. I do not know how they left some prints not fully cleaned.

Either way even saying the luminol reacted to something else, there isn't a trail of prints. So do you suppose they just do a terrible job of mopping all the time? Or they hop around with something on the bottom of one foot?

I think there was a partial unsuccessful cleanup of prints in the corridor.

 

[Amber29]

I have not seen the interview with Kate Mansey, hopefully it is on youtube so I can watch it.

Sadly it was only an article written but it can be googled.

 

[Katody]

I don't really understand your point here sorry.

I'm returning to the question of SMK that started the exchange:

I had always wondered why the bathmat print and sink smears would have been left after a clean up.

I know some have said these signs were left so there would be an excuse to alert others. But to my thinking, the broken window in Filomena's room ought to have been enough.

There was a broken window to alert about, why not clean up all the blood evidence?

 

[Nova]

Yes, I believe his explanation. He didn't blabber. His testimony was consistent and precise when he came forward with the story about Knox. He never showed any doubt nor did he change his story. He testified under oath and spent time in court when he had a business to run. This is not something people do for fun. It is too bad that he didn't mention it at first, but in the end this does not really matter. It happens all the time. There is no expiration date on witnesses. I am pretty sure that this witness testimony will be accepted. It fits with the other evidence. JMO.

Do you honestly think the store owner's memory was as clear a year later as it was in the days following the murder?

Let's keep in mind that the media had been covering the murder for that ensuing 12 months and so the shop owner had seen AK and heard Mignini's account of the murder repeatedly during that year.

And you think all that coverage had no effect on the owner's memory?<modsnip>

 

[Katody]

I think they were successful in eliminating some print evidence. I do not know how they left some prints not fully cleaned.

Yes that's intriguing. Actually I wondered about the bathmat footprint. Raffaele stepped in blood somewhere but not in the murder room, right? But there were no pools of blood anywhere but in the murder room?

I think there was a partial unsuccessful cleanup of prints in the corridor.

You mean something like mopping, with a mop or rag and a cleaning solution?

 

[Amber29]

I'm returning to the question of SMK that started the exchange:



There was a broken window to alert about, why not clean up all the blood evidence?

Amanda wanted to use the shower story, which would give her an excuse for being there to make any discovery.

How does she discover the poo if not for the shower?

The window was discovered with RS but there needed to be a reason to alert RS.

IMO had the window been discovered first thing the cops would've needed to be called right away not 2.5 hours later (Hence the broken window placed behind the only door it could be)

There had to be an excuse to be there and not notice it in case someone came home while she/they were there. Once they were ready and no one had come home, they alerted Filomena and got the ball rolling.

Why didn't Amanda stand outside Merediths door and call her phones if she was so concerned about her?

 

[Katody]

Amanda wanted to use the shower story, which would give her an excuse for being there to make any discovery.

How does she discover the poo if not for the shower?

The window was discovered with RS but there needed to be a reason to alert RS.

IMO had the window been discovered first thing the cops would've needed to be called right away not 2.5 hours later (Hence the broken window placed behind the only door it could be)

There had to be an excuse to be there and not notice it in case someone came home while she/they were there. Once they were ready and no one had come home, they alerted Filomena and got the ball rolling.

Yes, but the actual question was why were the highly incriminating blood traces not cleaned up?

Consider a story like this:

coming home, shower, hair drying, poo discovery,
checking Filomena's room, broken window, call to Filomena, going to alert and fetch Raffaele ( Amanda can't call the police on her own). Filomena calls the police, arrives shortly, done.

All of your requirements are satisfied, no need for leaving blood traces or footprints.

 

[Amber29]

Yes, but the actual question was why were the highly incriminating blood traces not cleaned up?

Consider a story like this:

coming home, shower, hair drying, poo discovery,
checking Filomena's room, broken window, call to Filomena, going to alert and fetch Raffaele ( Amanda can't call the police on her own). Filomena calls the police, arrives shortly, done.

All of your requirements are satisfied, no need for leaving blood traces or footprints.

How would Amanda know the blood was incriminating? She thought she covered those bases with speculating about her ears and "touching" the blood in the sink and saying maybe Meredith was on her period.

Going over the morning and coming up with what they could've done differently doesn't change what they actually did or my opinion of why they did it.
Yes it would've made sense for Amanda to check Filomenas door and window before leaving the cottage but she didn't.

I've explained my reasoning behind some of their decisions.

 

[Katody]

How would Amanda know the blood was incriminating? She thought she covered those bases with speculating about her ears and "touching" the blood in the sink and saying maybe Meredith was on her period.

Going over the morning and coming up with what they could've done differently doesn't change what they actually did or my opinion of why they did it.
Yes it would've made sense for Amanda to check Filomenas door and window before leaving the cottage but she didn't.

I've explained my reasoning behind some of their decisions.

Yes I understand, that in your view they left the blood traces and footprints intentionally.

It's just that the story I came up with in like 30 seconds is better and much less complicated than leaving blood traces and explaining them in a way that seems suspicious to many. It's hard to swallow that they were able to concoct something so complicated and the obvious solution eluded them.



Also, the bloody bathmat print is baffling, because they took care of the trail leading to it. It's hard to think they were no aware it's a print and it may contain Raffaele's DNA. You think they were not aware of the DNA risk?

BTW it's interesting that there is no Raffaele's DNA in bathroom blood traces.

 

[Amber29]

Yes I understand, that in your view they left the blood traces and footprints intentionally.

It's just that the story I came up with in like 30 seconds is better and much less complicated than leaving blood traces and explaining them in a way that seems suspicious to many. It's hard to swallow that they were able to concoct something so complicated and the obvious solution eluded them.



Also, the bloody bathmat print is baffling, because they took care of the trail leading to it. It's hard to think they were no aware it's a print and it may contain Raffaele's DNA. You think they were not aware of the DNA risk?

BTW it's interesting that there is no Raffaele's DNA in bathroom blood traces.

Yes it's easy to look at the situation and come up with something simpler but they were in the moment. I'm sure Jodi Arias regrets not taking Travis's camera with her in hindsight too but it seemed like a good idea to her to delete the incrimating pictures and leave it for some reason.

Yes no RS DNA in the bathroom is as interesting as no RG DNA there yet he was to have used every bathroom fixture. Why do you suppose RGs DNA isn't in the footprint you attribute to him?

 

[redheadedgal]

Personally I think there's a lack of blood in the bathroom. For a bloody murderer to have made multiple trips in there, he sure was careful in his "clean up".
Why would 1 person cleaning up use every fixture in the bathroom?
All while leaving no bloody water splashes on the tile, being careful only to step on the mat?

Meredith's outside of her door was clean. Some want to take RGs word, yet forget he said he washed his hands when he got home because they were covered in blood.
No blood on outside of Meredith's door, the cottage door, or cell phones.

Yes we suppose Amanda's lamp that was on the floor below Merediths bed was used to see something on the floor maybe and left accidentally.

The knife back in the drawer doesn't concern me.

Did the cops have an inventory list of all their clothes, to know what was missing? Is there any witness testimony to what they were wearing?

i can see this from a guilt standpoint -- thanks, amber, for answering

 

[redheadedgal]

There were also many cameras going in Boston at the time of the bombing, no comparison.

How do you know he wore his shoes to Germany? That's speculation, he spent the the whole next day in Perugia and went clubbing in the nights following the murder. Do you also believe he kept the murder weapon until Germany?

That is not my theory. I think they were done and the alarm had been sounded.
Nothing was perfect including their stories.

i read an article a few days ago (of course i have no idea where to find it now) about the cameras perugia does have... to fight/deter crime. it's too bad NONE of them cover the area/streets b/w the cottage and RS's apartment...

 

[aa9511]

RS had a car, there's no telling where it could've gone. Perugia has a population of 163k that's alot of trash to look through I'd say. My city only has about 35k and I can't imagine trying to look through every dumpster.

Murderers are often able to dispose of things used in their crime, that goes on to never be found by police.

There lots of things RG as a lone wolf would've successfully disposed of.

bbm

Good point.

 

[aa9511]

AK didn't know about the broken window in her shower story. Would you scape a blood spot on your sink with your fingernail finding it dried and leave it or wash it away?

AK never described the blood on the mat as a footprint, personally I don't think they thought it could be identified as a footprint and otherwise it went along with someone being in there.

If it were RG in the bathroom alone, what do you think he used the Qtips for?

bbm

BINGO. In her "story," lone Amanda in the cottage hadn't seen the broken window. The "discovery" of the broken window didn't happen until after Raffaele "came back" with her.

So without any broken window, she still needed "signs" to alert her to some trouble in the cottage. But the signs conveniently had to be small so as to allow her to "take a shower" and do other things to put herself in the cottage after the murder, to account for any fingerprints, etc. they found of her. So that she could conveniently be in a "puzzled" state about these signs - not sure....?? Trouble, no trouble?? I JUST DON"T KNOW!!!! I'M SO CONFUSED!!!! HELP!!!!

Of course, if she had seen the broken window on "Trip 1," well, even Amanda would not have been able to claim "confusion" about that.