Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#11

[MichaelSmith]

Are there sources for this article, IMO reporters often run with stories wanting to be first with "breaking news" using unnamed sources. All it takes is little tid bits and its ran with.

The paper is of 7th November, Giornale dell'Umbria but no indication of the time. However, it starts by saying, with the day being discussed as 6th November "The news comes in at 7.33. 6 lines from ANSA, read out then by the TV news at 8: 'a few people, but it's not known how many, have been taken to the police station of Perugia in the investigation of the murder of the English Student Meredith Kercher. The operation is still in action. At the moment, they are keeping maximum secrecy'. These few words are enough, again, to rouse the media. And Perugia, through all of yesterday [6th], is again inundated by journalists from all of Italy and from England. The Questura, after 8, is besieged as they wait for the first official declarations. And after the press conference held by the Questore Arturo De Felice at 11:30, the convoy of media moves in search of statements in the heart of Perugia".

Further on it's indicated that Patrick was picked up at 6:30am of the 6th.

All of this stuff is reported by the various Giornale dell'Umbria journalists. No quotes from Mignini or other cops - just De Felice.

Also

"It didn't suffice to remove, from the doorbell of his apartment, the name tag with his first and second name. Patrick had felt the air that was becoming heavy for him. But to think that it was enough to remove his name from the entrance to the 6 storey building where he lived to exonerate himself, is a behaviour that is, goes without saying, clumsy."

 

[MichaelSmith]

The first link wouldn't play for me.

In the second link, all I could see were shadows.

If you look closely, it's quite obvious that someone is crossing the street and heading directly to the cottage gates. The time, 9.01pm, lines up nicely with when Meredith said bye to Sophie and would have arrived home.

 

[aa9511]

Apparently some do. A few months I posted a link to a book about burglars using the toilets of the place they're robbing. I'll try and find that link.

A quick google search shows plenty of similar cases where it happens.

Used toilet paper, feces, leads to burglary arrest

http://kfor.com/2013/10/03/used-toilet-paper-feces-leads-to-burglar-arrest/

Burglars take showers, use toilet

http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20100930/NEWS13/100939943/1066/NEWS03

Cops Find Burglary Suspect On Toilet

http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/Cops-Find-Burglary-Suspect-On-Toilet-185460342.html

:facepalm: Gotta wonder what the world is coming to.

I guess what I don't get is why he would be so careful and "burglar-like" iin some areas, and yet not so in others? The burglars in the link seem to me to be the kind who made themselves at home, ate food, took showers, etc..

I was responding to a post by TorisMom, where she said Rudy could have had a flashlight and so he might not have turned on any lights. But seems to me like these types who go for #2 and showers, etc., they wouldn't really care about a light or two on. Either they know the homeowners won't be back for some time, or they obviously don't care and they choose to take the time to get full satisfaction by raiding the fridge and taking showers. So why would he be all sneaky with the flashlight, yet then go and take a #2?

Also, why would he be so careful as to turn off Filomena's light and close her door after he rummaged through it? Because he would have had to rummage through her room before the poo and the murder, right? Is the innocence theory that he rummaged through Filomena's room before or after the murder?

I feel like, when it fits in with the theory for their innocence, Rudy is very professional-like, and when it doesn't, then he is sloppy and......like the people described in your links.

BTW, how come Rudy did not raid the fridge at the cottage?

 

[aa9511]

i said (and implied) no such thing re: both bolds. i was merely brainstorming as someone recently suggested.

imo this is one more example of trying to read too much into things, much like buying underwear and not attending a memorial means amanda is uncaring, selfish and not a true friend.


does anyone believe it's possible meredith grabbed ahold of the lamp to use it as a weapon? did she throw it at guede? or maybe he grabbed it?




thanks, but it wasn't all me. i amalgamated info from a few sites and added my own points.

Yes, brainstorm away! Where is that emoticon........
:websleuther::findinglink::idea:

 

[Amber29]

:facepalm: Gotta wonder what the world is coming to.

I guess what I don't get is why he would be so careful and "burglar-like" iin some areas, and yet not so in others? The burglars in the link seem to me to be the kind who made themselves at home, ate food, took showers, etc..

I was responding to a post by TorisMom, where she said Rudy could have had a flashlight and so he might not have turned on any lights. But seems to me like these types who go for #2 and showers, etc., they wouldn't really care about a light or two on. Either they know the homeowners won't be back for some time, or they obviously don't care and they choose to take the time to get full satisfaction by raiding the fridge and taking showers. So why would he be all sneaky with the flashlight, yet then go and take a #2?

Also, why would he be so careful as to turn off Filomena's light and close her door after he rummaged through it? Because he would have had to rummage through her room before the poo and the murder, right? Is the innocence theory that he rummaged through Filomena's room before or after the murder?

I feel like, when it fits in with the theory for their innocence, Rudy is very professional-like, and when it doesn't, then he is sloppy and......like the people described in your links.

BTW, how come Rudy did not raid the fridge at the cottage?

I wonder if RG had his back pack with him or something and if so why he didn't start stashing things from Filomenas room before the bathroom.

I guess now we are to assume that burglars carry flashlights but police don't.

 

[MichaelSmith]

:facepalm: Gotta wonder what the world is coming to.

I guess what I don't get is why he would be so careful and "burglar-like" iin some areas, and yet not so in others? The burglars in the link seem to me to be the kind who made themselves at home, ate food, took showers, etc..

I was responding to a post by TorisMom, where she said Rudy could have had a flashlight and so he might not have turned on any lights. But seems to me like these types who go for #2 and showers, etc., they wouldn't really care about a light or two on. Either they know the homeowners won't be back for some time, or they obviously don't care and they choose to take the time to get full satisfaction by raiding the fridge and taking showers. So why would he be all sneaky with the flashlight, yet then go and take a #2?

Also, why would he be so careful as to turn off Filomena's light and close her door after he rummaged through it? Because he would have had to rummage through her room before the poo and the murder, right? Is the innocence theory that he rummaged through Filomena's room before or after the murder?

I feel like, when it fits in with the theory for their innocence, Rudy is very professional-like, and when it doesn't, then he is sloppy and......like the people described in your links.

BTW, how come Rudy did not raid the fridge at the cottage?

He said he took a drink from the fridge. Just like at law offices of Paolo Brocchi where he helped himself to soft drink from the fridge. At the first break-in at the nursery someone (guede) cooked up food, pasta and frozen spinach.

At Maria Mandu Diaz's house which was burnt down, the burglar cooked up food in her kitchen and a gold watch was missing. Then he's caught in the nursery and was found with a gold watch. What happened to the watch is a mystery just like why the stolen computer wasn't returned to Paolo Brocchi.

 

[aa9511]

I don't think you're arguing with anything I said. I don't think he rummaged through Filomena's room at all or switched the light on in it. He pulled the shutters in to cover the broken window. Meredith entered, probably called if anyone's home and went straight to her room to change.



No, I don't think so. :facepalm:

You're arguing with the facts now, not with me.


You really need to look at the pictures of the blood evidence in the bathroom. That would clarify a lot.

Both is possible.

Filomena's room does't look trashed. There's a broken window and some clothes fell of the shelf. Everything else is in order.

He raped her and killed her with a knife. The rape is a motive. Cutting throat with a knife is horrible but not especially unusual. By my understanding it's a way to kill, not to torture.

So did he rummage through her room after the murder, then? Because he would have needed light to see what to look through in Filomena's room.

To close the shutters to hide the broken window, that would indicate to me that he was expecting someone to come home and he wanted to hide it. Why would he go to take a #2 if he felt like someone might come home, and that's why he went through the trouble of closing the shutters and also turning off any lights he had turned on?

I'm sorry, facepalm doesn't write anything, and so if you are using it to elaborate on your point, I am not getting it. You said "no, I don't think so." Why don't you think so? What are the reasons?

I can't ask you what you think about the logic? What was the logic behind putting the duvet over her like she was dead, but still stealing the phones in case she got back up again? Or going through the trouble of going back and forth locking doors, yet not flushing the poo.

I think the bathroom as a whole looks relatively clean.

We disagree on the state of Filomena's room, as I've said before. The clothes didn't fall off the shelf, someone pulled them off of the shelves. The wardrobe was not tipped to an angle so that clothes would have "fallen out." It was someone supposedly coming in through a window, not an earthquake happening.

I still think there were easier ways to kill her, such as choking/strangling, even suffocating with a pillow. What would be the point of choking her, but then switching to a knife, as someone on here suggested earlier? Why wouldn't he just have kept squeezing until dead?

 

[aa9511]

He said he took a drink from the fridge. Just like at law offices of Paolo Brocchi where he helped himself to soft drink from the fridge. At the first break-in at the nursery someone (guede) cooked up food, pasta and frozen spinach.

At Maria Mandu Diaz's house which was burnt down, the burglar cooked up food in her kitchen and a gold watch was missing. Then he's caught in the nursery and was found with a gold watch. What happened to the watch is a mystery just like why the stolen computer wasn't returned to Paolo Brocchi.

Ok, so what it sounds like to me, is that Rudy did the break-ins as a way of kind of "making himself at home," and in the meantime if he saw something he liked, he took it.

I kind of think he did the break-ins for the main purpose of I guess helping himself to the comfort of other places....kind of like some mental disorder. Like the people clinically addicted to shopping, where it's an actual disorder (I'm not saying that's mental, just a disorder).

So that leads me to believe that he would not have rummaged through Filomena's room first, in the dark no less. And there is no evidence left of him in there to show that he rummaged through it afterwards.

I believe he would have been more interested in first going to see what kind of food he could make, making himself at home, maybe watching some TV and going #2, etc..

So why was Filomena's room rummaged-through, before any of that?

 

[MichaelSmith]

This was the book that talks about burglars using the toilet in the places they're robbing.

Amazon.com: Burglars On The Job eBook: Gilbert Geis, Scott H. Decker, Richard T. Wright: Kindle Store

 

[Katody]

So did he rummage through her room after the murder, then?

Already answered. Read again please.

To close the shutters to hide the broken window, that would indicate to me that he was expecting someone to come home and he wanted to hide it.

I don't share your opinion.

I'm sorry, facepalm doesn't write anything, and so if you are using it to elaborate on your point, I am not getting it. You said "no, I don't think so." Why don't you think so? What are the reasons?

Simple. I find what you suggest not probable at all. Unlikely he would retrace his own prints and even more unlikely any "disturbance" would be discernible, given the already partial nature of the prints. It's ok if you disagree

I can't ask you what you think about the logic? What was the logic behind putting the duvet over her like she was dead, but still stealing the phones in case she got back up again? Or going through the trouble of going back and forth locking doors, yet not flushing the poo.

It was a logic of an rather unsuccessful burglar and first time murderer, probably panicked and possibly drugged.

I think the bathroom as a whole looks relatively clean.

Agreed.

We disagree on the state of Filomena's room, as I've said before. The clothes didn't fall off the shelf, someone pulled them off of the shelves. The wardrobe was not tipped to an angle so that clothes would have "fallen out." It was someone supposedly coming in through a window, not an earthquake happening.

I agree that it wasn't tipped. It was overstuffed and shaken. The outer stack of clothes fell. The clothes fallen below the shelf are still folded. Nothing else in the room is disturbed. Not the table, not the boxes, not the drawers. No one 'rummaged' there.

I still think there were easier ways to kill her, such as choking/strangling, even suffocating with a pillow. What would be the point of choking her, but then switching to a knife, as someone on here suggested earlier? Why wouldn't he just have kept squeezing until dead?

There was no choking.

 

[Katody]

So I guess he cleaned the shower after washing all the blood off not leaving bloody splashes, was careful and mindful of only getting bloody water on the mat.

I think if there were traces in the cabin similar to those in the sink they were lost when Amanda took shower there in the morning.

I don't know how RG managed to only leave a drop here and there.

Whoever did it, left only a drop here and there, isn't it?

Lucky him he managed to wash up his hands with out leaving any DNA mixed with those drops. He must of left all his loose DNA in Meredith's room.

In your scenario doesn't Raffaele clean up there yet leave no DNA? It does seem that simply washing hands will not necessarily leave ones DNA.


I hope you didn't miss my post:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10104682&postcount=164

 

[Annella]

Ok, so what it sounds like to me, is that Rudy did the break-ins as a way of kind of "making himself at home," and in the meantime if he saw something he liked, he took it.

I kind of think he did the break-ins for the main purpose of I guess helping himself to the comfort of other places....kind of like some mental disorder. Like the people clinically addicted to shopping, where it's an actual disorder (I'm not saying that's mental, just a disorder).

So that leads me to believe that he would not have rummaged through Filomena's room first, in the dark no less. And there is no evidence left of him in there to show that he rummaged through it afterwards.

I believe he would have been more interested in first going to see what kind of food he could make, making himself at home, maybe watching some TV and going #2, etc..

So why was Filomena's room rummaged-through, before any of that?

If you look at other break ins Guede is allegedly connected to ( I have no doubt he was, but for some reason he was NEVER prosecuted) they all display the very same traits as the break in at the cottage.
Closing the shutters would be exactly what I would expect him to do as leaving them open with lights on OR using a flashlight would have shown the broken window to anyone looking that direction. Never mind someone returning home to the cottage.

The fact Guede admitted to drinking apricot juice from the refrigerator is interesting to me. If a guest in a home, you ask for, or are offered a drink. Both Amanda and Meredith came from respectable homes where I am sure certain 'manners' were upheld. You would be offered a drink and either of the two would have poured a glass, not directed a first time guest to the refrigerator as Guede said happened ( Meredith) Guede admitted to drinking from the bottle.
Ponder on that.

Watching TV? I think that is a little OTT.

As Michael Smith has mentioned, using bathroom for #2's is not uncommon for burglars.

And he used the bathroom close to where he broke in, next to the ktchen with apricot juice in the refrigerator. Not the bathroom Meredith or Amanda as hosts would have directed him to.

Then Meredith came home whilst he was 'bopping' on the loo.

Rest is, sadly...history.

ETA: I checked Guede's account of drinking the juice and it was from a bottle, not carton. In the interests of keeping things factual, not fantasy...I changed my mistaken 'carton' to bottle.

 

[redheadedgal]

I feel like, when it fits in with the theory for their innocence, Rudy is very professional-like, and when it doesn't, then he is sloppy and......like the people described in your links.

but, hasn't the same thing been said about amanda... that she was like a "master, professional criminal" b/c she/they left few traces of themselves everywhere (especially MK's bedrm), allegedly cleaned up evidence, left bits of evidence on purpose, didn't have had a care in the world if someone unexpectedly came back home while they were there cleaning up ( b/c they apparently weren't scared they'd get caught), didn't leave as quickly as possible (they stayed to clean up, AK returned home to shower, and both returned to the cottage after amanda went to get RS), and thought ahead regarding what to do/not do and what to say/not say, but then they are sloppy and simply forgot to throw away the bathmat, return the lamp, etc ?


aa-- i know i have a tendency to "pick apart" your posts so i do want to also give you a compliment... i know i just said things get overthought sometimes, but i do appreciate your ability to do this as well as your desire/talent to brainstorm possibilities. kudos, friend

:drumroll::drumroll::drumroll:

 

[Annella]

Has anyone considered the possible repercussions of Guede's sexual assault of Meredith and the non tested alleged semen stain?
That he DID sexually assault her cannot be denied given his epithelial cells ( either digital or penile cannot be determined) were found inside her body.

IF Guede ejaculated over/beside this dying woman one has to wonder just what he is likely to do in the future to get that same arousal. And if it were proven to be Guede's semen, aroused he must have been! That anybody could possibly be aroused at the sight he must have been confronted with, and IMO Merediths demise was by his own hand, is horrendous! For me, this is but one of the reasons that stain should have been tested. Without doing any concerted research I can safely say that amongst psychologists this would be a HUGE warning sign.

In case anybody is considering where the rest of any ejaculate arrived we have to remember towels Guede admitted using ( AND collecting from bathroom which is why AK had to do a bathmat boogy to her room as there were none left) to 'try' to stem the flow of blood from her neck were likely at hand. And worse....could not be tested later as they had deteriorated to the point the blood etc was considered 'rotted'. Vis a vis the jacket Meredith did NOT have time to remove when she arrived home. Although in the case of the jacket, Guede's DNA was discovered on a sleeve.

God help any young women around this man when he is released.

 

[Amber29]

I think if there were traces in the cabin similar to those in the sink they were lost when Amanda took shower there in the morning.


Whoever did it, left only a drop here and there, isn't it?


In your scenario doesn't Raffaele clean up there yet leave no DNA? It does seem that simply washing hands will not necessarily leave ones DNA.


I hope you didn't miss my post:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10104682&postcount=164

Well I don't believe AK had a shower that morning, but convenient that her shower cleaned away traces of RG cleaning up there.

Yes the difference being RG had no reason to be so tidy while washing up in there. The clean up wasn't perfect in there but there certainly was one.

Right but I don't have RS using every fixture in the bathroom. How do you think those spots of blood got on the toilet and bidet? The bidet spot being mixed with water around the drain.

 

[SMK]

I think all of these traits of Guede's - the making himself at home, helping himself to the fridge, taking items, carrying a knife, using a rock to break a window, using the bathroom - do mark him as having the traits of a lone wolf. He certainly had a history of going where he was not welcome or legally allowed. No one can dispute this.

This is why, as I have said before, that for police, prosecution, and all who believe in the guilt of these defendants, or are at least as I am willing to entertain it, the essential thing is to ask:

How is it possible that this lone wolf was up to his same old business, but in this case, that Knox and Sollecito were somehow part of this, and for what reasons? It's not easy, because Guede's history is always there as a temptation to place him at the crime scene alone, and to make him solely responsible, which cannot be written off or dismissed until other factors are brought into play.

This is why I had initially (trying to tie in AK and RS) pondered the idea that they had given him access to the cottage, making themselves accomplices and in some way becoming culpable and wanting to disguise the fact that Guede had been there with their permission.

Crini claimed in his summation that all the DNA evidence could be thrown out, and still there is enough there to believe Knox and Sollecito were involved. I do wish though that as Massei conceded that the shoe print on the pillow case was not Amanda's, that he still would not try and drag that in. Seems bad form to me.

 

[SMK]

I think Rudy arrived the first time around 7.51pm

http://www.oggi.it/video/notizie/2012/03/05/caso-di-perugia-il-video-mai-visto-di-rudy-guede/

And Meredith got home at 9.01pm while the lovebirds were watching Ameile.

Meredith Kercher's arrival home at 9:01 p.m. Nov 1, 2007 - YouTube

So MK had some sort of light colored coat, with the hood up? And that does fit Rudy's small stature, although when the face turns to the right, it might be a white guy.

 

[SMK]

This was the book that talks about burglars using the toilet in the places they're robbing.

Amazon.com: Burglars On The Job eBook: Gilbert Geis, Scott H. Decker, Richard T. Wright: Kindle Store

Yes, it is a known trait of burglars, apparently:

Man who forgot to flush arrested for burglary

OKLAHOMA CITY, Oct. 3 (UPI) -- An Oklahoma man was arrested on burglary charges after police matched his DNA to used toilet paper found at the scene of the crime, police said.

Charles Marqull Williams, 20, was charged Wednesday with burglary in Oklahoma County District Court for allegedly stealing from an area home, The (Oklahoma City) Oklahoman reported.

Police said the suspect broke into the home, took several items, and used the bathroom before taking off.

Unflushed feces and a used piece of toilet paper on the floor were found at the scene. Police matched DNA found in the messy bathroom to Williams.

http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2013/10...ush-arrested-for-burglary/UPI-37101380830670/

 

[Katody]

Well I don't believe AK had a shower that morning, but convenient that her shower cleaned away traces of RG cleaning up there.

Of course, I was presenting a scenario in which she is innocent and have no reason to lie about it.

Yes the difference being RG had no reason to be so tidy while washing up in there. The clean up wasn't perfect in there but there certainly was one.

I'm not sure what do you mean by "not perfect". Didn't they leave only the traces they wanted to stay and perfectly cleaned up the rest, i.e. the floor and additional blood on fixtures and walls? They cleaned footprints leading to the bathroom and in it so well that no trace was detectable even with luminol. Don't you agree?

Right but I don't have RS using every fixture in the bathroom. How do you think those spots of blood got on the toilet and bidet? The bidet spot being mixed with water around the drain.

This one I already explained in my post to aa, above. What do you think did Raffaele use in the bathroom? It seems he washed and scrubbed himself there head to toe, isn't it?

What is your explanation for the blood streak in the otherwise perfectly clean bidet? they cleaned it and than put some blood on top to dribble from the edge down to the drain?

About Amanda's blood: You say you doubt she realized the blood was hers. Does it mean you think she hadn't noticed that she was bleeding from her neck?

 

[Katody]

So MK had some sort of light colored coat, with the hood up? And that does fit Rudy's small stature, although when the face turns to the right, it might be a white guy.

I don't think there's a hood. The head is considerably darker then the jacket which ends at shoulder line. No hood.

It's quite well established what Meredith was wearing on the way home.