Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#12

[otto]

Maybe police took one look at the direction of the glass and another look at the direction of the rock and knew right there and then that it was staged.

 

[otto]

Some of the glass did "go left" along with the rock. There are two pieces of glass in the following photo.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/PhotoGallery3.html

If the rock was thrown from outside the window, the glass hit the shutter first, and supposedly was propelled into the room towards the door. The rock hit the shutter second and turned left.

Please explain that, as it makes no sense to me. If the glass was strong enough to open the shutter and propel into the room, surely the much stronger rock would have followed the same trajectory.

 

[TorisMom003]

Maybe police took one look at the direction of the glass and another look at the direction of the rock and knew right there and then that it was staged.

And have they explained the freshly damaged inner shutter? The same shutter that has a piece of glass inbedded in it? Perhaps if the police had investigated further, like dusted for prints on the window sill, they would have known that the killer (RG) entered there.

MOO

 

[TorisMom003]

If the rock was thrown from outside the window, the glass hit the shutter first, and supposedly was propelled into the room towards the door. The rock hit the shutter second and turned left.

Please explain that, as it makes no sense to me. If the glass was strong enough to open the shutter and propel into the room, surely the much stronger rock would have followed the same trajectory.

I have been explaining things, yet when I ask questions they are largely ignored. I didn't break the window, didn't throw the rock, so I am simply explaining things as how I see them. It would be nice if the same was done in return. It is extremely difficult to believe in a staging of the broken window if one major component is being ignored. If one can't tell how the interior shutter was freshly damaged during a staged burglary, then there is a major flaw in one's opinion of the broken window.

And with that, my laptop battery is dying so I must place it on the charger for the night. Hopefully by tomorrow when I return I will find answers to the damaged shutter here.

MOO

 

[otto]

And have they explained the freshly damaged inner shutter? The same shutter that has a piece of glass inbedded in it? Perhaps if the police had investigated further, like dusted for prints on the window sill, they would have known that the killer (RG) entered there.

MOO

So there is no explanation for why the glass that hit the shutter opened the shutter and was propelled forward (same path as the rock), into the room towards the door, and the much heavier rock stopped, turned left, jumped into the top of a bag four feet away, tipped the bag over, and ended up under the desk?

Why would anyone assume that the window was not checked for evidence?

 

[otto]

And have they explained the freshly damaged inner shutter? The same shutter that has a piece of glass inbedded in it? Perhaps if the police had investigated further, like dusted for prints on the window sill, they would have known that the killer (RG) entered there.

MOO

The dent in the shutter does not mean that the rock was thrown from outside. That damage could have easily been a result of the rock being thrown from inside the room. It would also correspond with the rock rebounding and ending up under the desk, near the tipped over bag.

 

[otto]

It seems to me that there are bigger problems with the break in through the window than scaling a shear wall in the dark when glass travels in one direction and a 9 pound rock following the glass travels in a different direction.

 

[quesarita]

Yes, I will be the first to admit I am almost dyslexic with figuring out puzzles and physical and logistical things. I hear what you're saying, but cannot visualize it.

Well, darn. That kind of 3D visualization actually is my area of expertise. I have no problem "seeing" it but apparently some trouble explaining it. :facepalm:

 

[otto]

Well, darn. That kind of 3D visualization actually is my area of expertise. I have no problem "seeing" it but apparently some trouble explaining it. :facepalm:

Maybe it would be helpful to do a diagram.

 

[quesarita]

Maybe it would be helpful to do a diagram.

I'd want everything to be to scale, and I don't have that information.

Have you ever played pool? If you imagine the cue ball as the thrown rock and a colored ball as the shutter, the cue ball's trajectory will change when it knocks into the colored ball. If the colored ball gets knocked to the right, the cue ball trajectory will move to the left.

 

[otto]

I'd want everything to be to scale, and I don't have that information.

Have you ever played pool? If you imagine the cue ball as the thrown rock and a colored ball as the shutter, the cue ball's trajectory will change when it knocks into the colored ball. If the colored ball gets knocked to the right, the cue ball trajectory will move to the left.

That information is available. What do you need?

Pool balls are equal in weight. They have spin, are round, and depending on what part of one ball hits one part of another ball, the balls will go in various directions.

In this case, we have a wooden shutter. A rock hits the glass, which hits the shutter and the glass is then propelled into the bedroom towards the door. That is, the glass continues traveling in the same direction as the original direction of the rock. This tells us that the shutter is now open. Why would the rock then change direction by 90 degrees when hitting the shutter that is already open? Wait, it can't be open based on the damage to the shutter. So how did the glass travel into the room if the shutter wasn't open until after the rock hit the shutter? Why wouldn't the glass travel in the same direction as the rock, or the rock travel in the same direction as the glass?

 

[quesarita]

That information is available. What do you need?

Pool balls are equal in weight. They have spin, are round, and depending on what part of one ball hits one part of another ball, the balls will go in various directions.

In this case, we have a wooden shutter. A rock hits the glass, which hits the shutter and the glass is then propelled into the bedroom towards the door. That is, the glass continues traveling in the same direction as the original direction of the rock. This tells us that the shutter is now open. Why would the rock then change direction by 90 degrees when hitting the shutter that is already open? Wait, it can't be open based on the damage to the shutter. So how did the glass travel into the room if the shutter wasn't open until after the rock hit the shutter? Why wouldn't the glass travel in the same direction as the rock, or the rock travel in the same direction as the glass?

I'm on my phone so I can't attach the photo now, but Hendry (I think) points out some small marks on the outside of the glass that look like someone hit the glass after the rock was thrown to make a larger opening to be able to unlatch the window. Those shards would not follow the trajectory of the rock; they would likely travel straight into the room because the inside shutter would be pushed aside.

 

[otto]

I'm on my phone so I can't attach the photo now, but Hendry (I think) points out some small marks on the outside of the glass that look like someone hit the glass after the rock was thrown to make a larger opening to be able to unlatch the window. Those shards would not follow the trajectory of the rock; they would likely travel straight into the room because the inside shutter would be pushed aside.

If Guede was going to hit the glass with something after throwing the rock, why didn't he just break the window once after he scaled the wall? Why a rock and a second tool, while he's perched on the window ledge, to break the window again? That's starting to sound like quite an elaborate plan.

 

[quesarita]

If Guede was going to hit the glass with something after throwing the rock, why didn't he just break the window once after he scaled the wall? Why a rock and a second tool, while he's perched on the window ledge, to break the window again? That's starting to sound like quite an elaborate plan.

Not really. Throw the rock through the window and see if anyone raises an alarm or turns on lights. If not, proceed to the window and make a larger opening, maybe with the little glass breaking hammer found in Rudy's backpack a week earlier.

 

[MichaelSmith]

Filomena testimony about the window.

http://www.amandaknox.com/wp-conten...li-Battistelli-v-Altieri-Altieri-v-Grande.pdf

(page 25)
I complained to the Estate Agents immediately, from the moment I rented the apartment, because I would have preferred that my window had, I mean, I would have liked that the owner of the house could have installed… at least change the window lock, the windows themselves, or put bars, because it really wasn’t manageable and it didn’t give me a sense of security, they were old, they were old shutters, and so the glass was very thin and it didn’t give me an idea of security, in fact I personally complained a lot with the agency.

and later: (page 68)
Mauri: So on 3rd December you said to the police on page 24 to have closed the windows, to have drawn the shutters without latching them, to have closed only the right blind [internal shutter] and not the left one because (unheard) – do you remember this?
Filomena: in all honesty, seeing as I said that in the immediacy of the crime I can confirm because it was fresh in my mind.

 

[Katody]

I must say I find it quite funny that the trajectory of the rock is deemed impossible here.

The reconstruction created by officer Pasquali Shows exactly the same trajectory and same broken glass pattern.

The inner shade takes the energy of the rock, making it fall down and to the right, while the small pieces of glass are propelled forward and spread all over the room.

 

[Harmony 2]

There are some interesting tidbits in the following article. For instance, I was not aware that the law offices Guede broke into were only a couple of blocks from where Meredith was killed. Moreover, the article states that Knox had a hickey but no other cuts and bruises were documented. Rudy, according to the article, also had no cuts or bruises when arrested 9 days later.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2009/06/27/at-knox-trial-the-killer-speaks.html

From Massei:

Page 46
The witnesses Paolo Brocchi and Matteo Palazzoli, lawyers, testified on the subject of the burglary of their legal office, located in via del Roscetto 3, Perugia, on the night between Saturday October 13 and Sunday October 14, 2007.

The lawyer Palazzoli, who testified at the same hearing, and who was a colleague in the same law firm as Brocchi, declared that the broken window was "a French window opening onto a small balcony overlooking the inner courtyard of the building; beneath it, corresponding precisely to our window, there is a door equipped with a metal grille..." (p. 41, hearing of June 26, 2009).

I googled the address for the lawyer's office and went to street view. The address plaque has the number 3 (red arrow) on it:

http://goo.gl/maps/3HF9O

It looks very different from the photo I have seen online:

link

Does the inner courtyard emerge from that side street where the motorcycles are? I was wondering if the balcony the lawyer referred to in testimony could be the one the blue arrow points to.

I suppose I could have done it incorrectly but when hovering over the image on the google map, the street name shows up and it is the same as the one in Massei.

 

[SMK]

I guess Andrea Vogt really is still publishing articles in magazines, this is her latest:

Andrea Vogt

Amanda Knox’s fugitive fears:
she’s right to be worried
More than six years after Meredith Kercher’s death, Amanda Knox is about to discover her fate

Column LAST UPDATED AT 12:35 ON Thu 16 Jan 2014

FLORENCE – Is the writing on the wall for Amanda Knox? Apparently even she thinks so. The 26-year-old American currently appealing her conviction for the 2007 murder of Meredith Kercher recently told an Italian journalist half-jokingly that she was prepared to become a fugitive if there's a conviction on 30 January.

Sources close to defence lawyers confide that they, too, fear it may not go their way.

It didn’t help that Knox ignored her lawyers’ pleas to travel from Seattle and attend court in Florence - she sent an email instead - nor that she repeatedly requested to meet the Kerchers, only to be sternly rebutted by their lawyer, who suggested she act more like a defendant.

Then she started a new blog and began blithely responding to comments – most recently posting an admission that she had once faked a break-in as an April Fool’s prank before she left for Italy (a staged burglary is a key part of the case against her).

Have the wheels come off Knox’s public relations machine now that she’s safe in Seattle? She may need them again soon, because this appeal differs radically from the first one in 2011 which resulted in her acquittal, but which was harshly criticised and eventually annulled by Italy’s Supreme Court earlier this year.

There are three good reasons why this trial is different – and why Knox has reason to be nervous:

Cont. @ link:

http://www.theweek.co.uk/europe/ama...ve-fears-she-s-right-be-worried#ixzz2qZfRK0KM

 

[quesarita]

There are some interesting tidbits in the following article. For instance, I was not aware that the law offices Guede broke into were only a couple of blocks from where Meredith was killed. Moreover, the article states that Knox had a hickey but no other cuts and bruises were documented. Rudy, according to the article, also had no cuts or bruises when arrested 9 days later.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2009/06/27/at-knox-trial-the-killer-speaks.html

From Massei:



I googled the address for the lawyer's office and went to street view. The address plaque has the number 3 (red arrow) on it:

http://goo.gl/maps/3HF9O

It looks very different from the photo I have seen online:

link

Does the inner courtyard emerge from that side street where the motorcycles are? I was wondering if the balcony the lawyer referred to in testimony could be the one the blue arrow points to.

I suppose I could have done it incorrectly but when hovering over the image on the google map, the street name shows up and it is the same as the one in Massei.

It's hard to say. The wall finish is different in the two photos. From the overhead map view, you can see a small rectangle with no roof that could be the inner courtyard (to the left of the 'A'). The courtyard could have the stucco finish shown in the linked photo (WindowLawyersOffice). The balcony with the blue arrow looks very hard to climb to - the bars are only on the small window above the door.

I can't see the '3' on the door plaque with the red arrow, but I can see a '7' on the plaque next to this door (blue arrow).

That other picture is so small, but at the back it looks like there's a very small balcony above a tall opening completely fitted out with bars.

 

[quesarita]

I guess Andrea Vogt really is still publishing articles in magazines, this is her latest:



Cont. @ link:

http://www.theweek.co.uk/europe/ama...ve-fears-she-s-right-be-worried#ixzz2qZfRK0KM

Hmph! "Knox's PR machine..." ! Below the story there's a link with a bad photo of Amanda and the headline "Seven Signs Knox is a Psychopath". Clink on the link and all you get is a compilation of all articles by that author.

The reason I became interested in this whole story in the first place was the output of the enormous PR machine dedicated to not only proving this one woman guilty but destroying her, and her family.