Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #10

[wasnt_me]

Interesting thought ... I don't think anyone has speculated that Rudy lost a shoe before ... at least not that I've read.

Only problem with the bath mat print is that it's too short and wide to be Rudy's print.

Thanks, we'll agree to disagree on the print because in the doubt camp, there are extensive explanations about why the measurements are inaccurate.

I'm just guessing because I'd like to know what happened to the other shoe print both inside MK's room and on the way out the door. The only answer I got is that it didn't come in contact with blood because it flew off. Or he was stepping on her but she'd have track marks on her. I don't know. Gotta study the floor patterns in Mk's room more to come up with that.

Last thing, I want to know what happend to MK's footprints too. I guess no blood got under her either bare feet or her shoes. and they said no scrapings under her nails. I find those things odds given this fight.

 

[claudicici]

How would she know there was a murder case, if the door was locked and she hasn't seen the body?

I believe she saw the body and locked the door.

 

[otto]

Thanks, we'll agree to disagree on the print because in the doubt camp, there are extensive explanations about why the measurements are inaccurate.

So you think the experts are mistaken, and people that monkeyed with an electronic image on the internet know better?

 

[claudicici]

It would not surprise me if AK and RS really do not remember much of what happened that night.I think that would fit with the way they acted after wards.Xanax for example only stays in your system for a couple of days I think so I don't think they would have detected something like that.I just feel like they were really wasted that night.
What makes me so angry about AK is her fake confession.I don't care whether or not they beat it out of her she accused someone that's innocent and added little unnecessary tidbits like she was afraid of PL.That makes me think she is pretty racist.For some reason I doubt she would have thrown a white man under the bus even under the amount of pressure she claimed there was.That 's why I also highly doubt she was so chummy with RG ,whom she barely knew that she plotted a murder with him or that they did anything social together for that matter.

 

[SMK]

It would not surprise me if AK and RS really do not remember much of what happened that night.I think that would fit with the way they acted after wards.Xanax for example only stays in your system for a couple of days I think so I don't think they would have detected something like that.I just feel like they were really wasted that night.
What makes me so angry about AK is her fake confession.I don't care whether or not they beat it out of her she accused someone that's innocent and added little unnecessary tidbits like she was afraid of PL.That makes me think she is pretty racist.For some reason I doubt she would have thrown a white man under the bus even under the amount of pressure she claimed there was.That 's why I also highly doubt she was so chummy with RG ,whom she barely knew that she plotted a murder with him or that they did anything social together for that matter.

OK, so you think it may have had racist overtones that she named PL. On the other hand, are you saying that she was not involved in the murder? Actually, if AK were racist, an argument could be made that this would encourage her to involve RG (i.e., black men will do these things). I don't think this occurred, but it could be argued.

 

[claudicici]

I don't think she was involved in the murder.I think she locked MK's bedroom,I think she was possibly the one that covered the body with the blanket.
I think she took a shower because she could not deal with what she saw.I think she did not remember much of what happened that night .
I don't think she was involved because RG would have told on her and RS.What reason did he have to cover for them?

 

[SMK]

I don't think she was involved in the murder.I think she locked MK's bedroom,I think she was possibly the one that covered the body with the blanket.
I think she took a shower because she could not deal with what she saw.I think she did not remember much of what happened that night .
I don't think she was involved because RG would have told on her and RS.What reason did he have to cover for them?

Yes, I have often wondered if RS and AK could possibly be involved in tampering with the scene, but not with the murder. You make some good points. Why indeed would Guede not immediately implicate them both when he was arrested? In your thinking, what do you think caused AK and RS to be involved with the scene, but not the murder? Sorry if we have covered this before. It just comes into my mind from time to time.

 

[SMK]

In any case, it would mean the real charges ought to have been obstruction and tampering, but i suppose we will never know...

 

[jjenny]

In any case, it would mean the real charges ought to have been obstruction and tampering, but i suppose we will never know...

That is not necessarily true. For instance, someone who hasn't actually killed anyone can be charged with murder, such as gateway driver in a bank robbery, etc.

 

[jjenny]

I don't think she was involved in the murder.I think she locked MK's bedroom,I think she was possibly the one that covered the body with the blanket.
I think she took a shower because she could not deal with what she saw.I think she did not remember much of what happened that night .
I don't think she was involved because RG would have told on her and RS.What reason did he have to cover for them?

What reason would AK have to locking the bedroom, covering up the body, etc, etc, if she was not involved in murder (in whatever way)?
People normally don't try to cover up crime scenes unless they are involved in a crime, I presume. I fail to see any reason for AK to be covering up crime scenes if she just showed up there in the morning having nothing to do with the crime.

 

[jjenny]

I believe she saw the body and locked the door.

Why would someone do that? Why not immediately call the police? Keep in mind AK is by all appearances is a person with normal mental capacities. So, what reason could she possibly have to do something like that?

 

[OldSteve]

I don't think she was involved in the murder.I think she locked MK's bedroom,I think she was possibly the one that covered the body with the blanket.
I think she took a shower because she could not deal with what she saw.I think she did not remember much of what happened that night .
I don't think she was involved because RG would have told on her and RS.What reason did he have to cover for them?

I agree that this is what most likely happened.... she did not know how to deal with what she saw, went into a state of metal overload putting off how to deal with it, and then she got caught up it in all. If she were guilty, I think she would have fled.

 

[SMK]

Why would someone do that? Why not immediately call the police? Keep in mind AK is by all appearances is a person with normal mental capacities. So, what reason could she possibly have to do something like that?

The only thing that has ever crossed my own mind, is that AK and RS may have felt somehow responsible for Rudy being there. It is only conjecture, of course, but I had thought perhaps they half-jokingly told Rudy to go get some money at the cottage, because no one would be home. Maybe in anger said something against MK. Then when they found the crime scene, were horrified and felt responsible? of course this is just speculation. . . maybe they were afraid to call 112 for fear it would come out that they had told Rudy no one would be at home. . .

 

[SMK]

There was witness testimony that MK would not just let a stranger into the house, where with AK it was known that she had brought several guys into the house and therefore it would be more suspicious that she was the one letting in RG.

Yet MK was a sweet person, and if she had seen Rudy downstairs, might consider him a "friend" of her new boyfriend, or certainly someone known to "the boys downstairs". If he asked to use the bathroom, she may have considered it a collegey friendly thing to do.

 

[sherlockh]

Yet MK was a sweet person, and if she had seen Rudy downstairs, might consider him a "friend" of her new boyfriend, or certainly someone known to "the boys downstairs". If he asked to use the bathroom, she may have considered it a collegey friendly thing to do.

Yah, but that was not the issue. The issue as explained on p60 of the Motivations report was why AK decided to break a window. Only MK and AK could have opened the door. Even if it is possible that MK would have opened the door then still AK would have come under suspicion as well since she was the only other candidate for opening the door that night.

 

[SMK]

Yah, but that was not the issue. The issue as explained on p60 of the Motivations report was why AK decided to break a window. Only MK and AK could have opened the door. Even if it is possible that MK would have opened the door then still AK would have come under suspicion as well since she was the only other candidate for opening the door that night.

OK, I see.

 

[SMK]

I find this uncanny, how they describe RG's relationship to the residents of that cute little cottage:

The house at via della Pergola 7 was thus, for Rudy Guede, a friendly house, and so it must have appeared to him: it was inhabited by friends and girls with whom he could socialise, and in one of whom he was actually interested; in that house he could find easy hospitality, as shown by the fact that on one Sunday in the middle of October he went there to watch the Formula 1 races, and in that house he could spend a lot of time having fun (as shown by the episode recalled earlier in which, returning from a round of the pubs at around two in the morning, he went to the house and spent all night sleeping on the toilet), received by friends as a friend. Motivation, 42.

Sounds like the beginning of a horror movie, if you ask me. But I thought RG had been there uninvited for the races and that the boys found RG on their toilet, but he hadn't been invited to stay?

I fail to see why they press this point in the Motivation report. If they are implying that because Rudy had fun in this cottage, he would not think of robbing it when all were out, they were born yesterday. Robbers can easily rob friends' homes at which they have received kindness and hospitality, and I know this for a fact.

 

[SMK]

In case anyone is interested, I have been reading a blog piece on some of the bad deduction and inference located within the Motivation report, regarding Rudy's entrance to the cottage, and Amanda's inconsistencies. It is located at, http://amandaknoxappealforum.blogspot.com/p/motivation-report-in-focus.html


"THE STAGED BREAK-IN"
The judges firmly believe that there was no real break-in, and that Amanda and her boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito tried to fool the police into thinking that someone- the murderer- broke in through a window to gain entry. The judges believed that Amanda broke the window herself or Raffaele and Amanda together.

Here is the judges reasoning on the matter:
They do go into quite a bit of detail as anyone can see reading pages 48-55. They nail it down to two things basically- The way the glass fell from the window, and the rock that was found on the floor inside the room. This was Filomena Romanelli's room- the window which was elevated from the ground 3.5m.

Now, the judges came up with 3 different ways the window was broken (the numbering 1,2,3, is mine) 1. The rock was thrown through the window by a person standing on the ground. 2. The rock was carried up to the window and use to break the glass- but this one they did not consider as they said that could not be done. 3. The rock was thrown against the window from the inside of the house.
Now the report goes on to show that because of the pattern of fallen glass (which was just on the window sill and inside the room and none hit the ground outside) that the rock was not thrown from the ground- and they give several other reasons why the rock was not thrown from the ground. So this left the judges to go into detail about the 3rd choice- that the rock was thrown from the inside of the room

. And they came up with that Amanda or Raffaele broke the window from the inside with the shutters closed and that's why no glass hit the ground outside. They did this- according to the report, to fake a break-in and make the police think that someone broke into the house and killed Meredith. And according to the report- the judges are certain this was the case- that Amanda and Raffaele staged the break-in to cover their own tracks.

Well now that all seems logical- at a glance. In the report the judges are using Rudy Guede as the one who would break into the house and kill Meredith- as the defense for Amanda had put forth at the trial. In the end though the judges decided against the possibility of Rudy breaking-in through the window. Instead, they decided that Amanda and Raffaele staged the break-in. I suppose that is the only thing that made sense to them. However, the judges did in fact choose to ignore one important point and by limiting the possibilities came up with a faulty conclusion.

As noted above- #2. That he carried the rock up with him. This the judges ignored and as stated in the report concerning this they said "It seems impossible to accept that he actually made the climb while carrying the large rock..." Well, it is actually more than possible that is exactly what happened- it is even probable.
Rude Guede was experienced in breaking into places. It is a known fact that he carried a knapsack with him (he was caught with one after the school break-in). The judges were probably thinking of him carrying a rock in one hand while trying to climb up to the window with the other. There would be no need to do that.
All Rudy had to do was to pick a large stone and put it in his knapsack and strap the pack to his back and climb up to the window. Once up there he could just swing the pack with the rock in it at the window, thus breaking it, muffling the noise, and as a result block the glass from coming back at him- and this would also explain why none was found on the ground. The backpack would effectively block the glass and you would end up with a pattern such as was found- with the glass on the window sill and inside the room, and none on the ground. He could have used the rock in that fashion, or, once at the window, taken the rock out and thrown it against the window- again the backpack would act as a shield when held in front of him to prevent glass from flying back at him- Either way, the glass pattern would be similar to the glass pattern as it was found the next day. Since Rudy was experienced at breaking and entering, he would no doubt come prepared, and with the 'tools of the trade' at hand.

As can be seen above, the judges left out a key possibility and as a result did not consider it in their evaluation of the matter, other than to say it was "impossible to accept". Therefore they came up with what they thought was the only logical conclusion when in reality there were other, more rational possibilities to consider. There were other points the judges touched on in the report as concerns the break-in, but the above issue of the breaking of the window and the glass pattern was the primary point the judges had to make and they went into great detail on this one particular issue. Yet in the end, it proves not to be conclusive and an error of omission.

There was also the 'glass on top of the clothes' issue, but since glass can adhere to clothes particularly things like sweaters, that if they were kicked around a bit and flipped over- what was on the bottom could end up on the top. Also the glass on top of the clothes was not a cut and dried issue in the report- with conflicting testimony and photographs at trial.
I have addressed the key point in the report that the judges made about the break-in above.

 

[SMK]

The above, by the way, is only one example of why I find the Massei Report unconvincing. I don't know about anyone else, but I was really excited when I first downloaded it, because I expected to really be fully convinced of the guilt of AK and RS. It was with a sinking feeling of disbelief that I began to see really, really sloppy logic and inference. Hasty deduction. Conjecture and musing. NOT what I expected.

 

[otto]

The above, by the way, is only one example of why I find the Massei Report unconvincing. I don't know about anyone else, but I was really excited when I first downloaded it, because I expected to really be fully convinced of the guilt of AK and RS. It was with a sinking feeling of disbelief that I began to see really, really sloppy logic and inference. Hasty deduction. Conjecture and musing. NOT what I expected.

I think the jury excluded the possibility of Rudy carrying a rock up the wall because he needed his hands to hold onto something (not sure what) while attaching himself to the flat, vertical wall. He couldn't have climbed the wall with the 9 pound rock in hand. To suggest he put the rock in a backpack, and smashed that pack into the window would also require some interesting manoeuvring ... risky in the sense that he would need both hands and feet to cling to the wall. Even if he did use the pack to break the window, glass would fall to the ground below. This seems obvious because in smashing the glass with the pack, some glass would attach to the pack and the pack would be put back on his shoulder ... thus giving a high probability that some glass would fall to the ground. Furthermore, gravity would cause glass to fall on the outer window ledge. In order to hoist himself in through the window, at least some glass would fall onto the ground below.

It seems that most people agree that some glass should have fallen on the ground below, so the explanation for the absence of glass is to accuse police of not properly investigating the ground below the window. According to the jury, the ground below the window was investigated, and there was no evidence of broken glass (they did find a dinner knife that was not connected to the murder), or of anyone having stood on the damp ground. Furthermore, since the ground was damp, anyone that walked along that narrow path beside the house would have had some dirt, leaves, or grass on their shoes. There was no evidence in Filomina's bedroom of any debris from the ground outside the window.

There were many reasons for ruling the break in staged, and that presented a very serious problem for Amanda and Raffaele.