Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #17

[wasnt_me]

There remains the possibility that he tried the boys downstairs, saw no one was home, rang the bell, and got no answer. After a while, realizing no one was home, he used the rock to break in.

There also still remains the possiblity that he just threw the rock without ringing anyone's doorbell. It can't be dismissed just because someone else doesn't like the theory.

He could have rang the bell, he could have not rang the bell, but that doesn't change the fact that he did indeed throw a rock through the window.

 

[SMK]

There also still remains the possiblity that he just threw the rock without ringing anyone's doorbell. It can't be dismissed just because someone else doesn't like the theory.

True. Quite true....

 

[wasnt_me]

What matters is this:

RG was there before ANYONE else. He stated it himself on the skype call, before he even got arrested. What he did between the time he got there and roamed around and returned, we only have his word for. We know for a fact that MK arrived next. It's indisputable, since at 842pm, AK was at least a 5-7 minute walk from there, talking to RS's friend about the suitcases.

Considering that it took time for AK to talk to the friend, and she probably was in no hurry---IF---she were returning to the house, we can glean from that little bit of information is what is the most reasonable theory. That is, RG was there, somewhere, when MK arrived home and it was just the two of them.

Any other scenerio causes AK to rush the conversation with RS's friend, fly out the door and rush home to somehow meet RG right outside her house at the same time MK arrived home. It would then cause AK to have to change her plans of whatever she'd come home to do and decide she was just going to chill with RG, a man she NEVER chilled alone with before, instead of say, getting her clothes to return to RS's. Surely she didn't tell him see ya tomorow because they'd spent every night together at his house.

So logic tells us that it's not reasonable to assume AK returned home from the murder, saw RG in her yard or at the basketball courts, or anywhere else and up and decided to change her entire night's plan without calling RS. Logic tells us that they were not planning to spend the night at the cottage because they'd spent each night at RS's house.

So I don't see the scenerio, given that RG has already informed us that he'd been lurking around that house. He'd been lurking around that house before AK even knew she had the night off. Why is that? Surely he wasn't meeting RS alone. They didn't even know each other.

This is one of the main things I don't understand about any guilty theory. According to 90% of the evidence, MK died before 10pm. So what's the logical scenerio that gets AK and RS involved in it between 9pm and 10pm, (I'm giving SK 18 minutes to talk to the friend, confer with RS and walk home by 9pm.)

 

[SMK]

What matters is this:

RG was there before ANYONE else. He stated it himself on the skype call, before he even got arrested. What he did between the time he got there and roamed around and returned, we only have his word for. We know for a fact that MK arrived next. It's indisputable, since at 842pm, AK was at least a 5-7 minute walk from there, talking to RS's friend about the suitcases.

Considering that it took time for AK to talk to the friend, and she probably was in no hurry---IF---she were returning to the house, we can glean from that little bit of information is what is the most reasonable theory. That is, RG was there, somewhere, when MK arrived home and it was just the two of them.

Any other scenerio causes AK to rush the conversation with RS's friend, fly out the door and rush home to somehow meet RG right outside her house at the same time MK arrived home. It would then cause AK to have to change her plans of whatever she'd come home to do and decide she was just going to chill with RG, a man she NEVER chilled alone with before, instead of say, getting her clothes to return to RS's. Surely she didn't tell him see ya tomorow because they'd spent every night together at his house.

So logic tells us that it's not reasonable to assume AK returned home from the murder, saw RG in her yard or at the basketball courts, or anywhere else and up and decided to change her entire night's plan without calling RS. Logic tells us that they were not planning to spend the night at the cottage because they'd spent each night at RS's house.

So I don't see the scenerio, given that RG has already informed us that he'd been lurking around that house. He'd been lurking around that house before AK even knew she had the night off. Why is that? Surely he wasn't meeting RS alone. They didn't even know each other.

This is one of the main things I don't understand about any guilty theory. According to 90% of the evidence, MK died before 10pm. So what's the logical scenerio that gets AK and RS involved in it between 9pm and 10pm, (I'm giving SK 18 minutes to talk to the friend, confer with RS and walk home by 9pm.)

You make a very good point. By his own admission, Guede was lurking about , waiting for Meredith. He likely had heard that her boyfriend and the rest of the boys would be away for some days. He may well have thought it was his big chance. He also spoke of the way Meredith smiled at him and laughed, at the bar, when she was in her vampire costume. She was being friendly, but he may have thought she was expressing interest. She had not been dating Giocomo for very long. Guede might have been trying to win her.

ETA: Or at least seduce her. Things may have escalated and she may have accused him of attempted rape. TOD, yes, is very important too in this scenario.

 

[wasnt_me]

Yes, TOD and what RG was saying to cover his own lies. He probably didn't even know AK had a BF at the point, so to say he and RS and AK did something together cannot occur to RG to say in the skype call. He might have read about the two in the papers, but he didn't know enough about them or it to lie that they were with him. In fact, he says AK wasn't there.

He had a pattern of explaining away his own guilt. We saw him do it with the laptop and cell phones. We saw him do it with why he was in the nursery. He tells lies that weave in and around the truth. Why? Because those are more believeable lies.

He cannot say he arrived at the house with RS and AK because he doesn't not know that they have solid proof or not of where they were at the time. Say they had bar receipts for the time he says he arrived at the house. if he tells the police he arrived with them, the AK and RS pull out these receipts, RG is in trouble. That is why he doesn't say he was with the two of them. He does not know their true alibi.

If they had indeed been with him or he'd somehow known they didn't have an alibi at the time of the skype call, I bet a million dollars, he would have included them in the scenerio. As the case unfolded and he learned that their alibi was in question, all of a sudden, he starts to "see them" in the house. That's BS.

He also has ZERO reason to lie about arriving at the time he said he arrived. It is in fact, not even in his best interest to place himself there, alone, at the time he did, so he must be telling the truth about it. He was not coerced to say that he was there at that time, so what is the reason for that lie? We know the reason for the lie about someone else doing the stabbing, but what is the reason for the lie about the time of his arrival?

We know the reason he's lying about making a date with MK. Because he's not trying to get blamed for rape. But what reason does he tells us he's lurking around the house before MK's arrival? Because he probably knows the camera recording is true and he probably thinks someone saw him at the basketball courts or somewhere else around there.

He talks about Mk's scream heard round the word at 920pm. Why? two reasons. he thinks she was heard by someone or two, he's trying to explain how he didn't hear any commotion but then rushed out the bathroom to find the murder in progress.

We just have to go through each detail he gives, find a reason for the lie or the truth, and that's how you know what happened.

We know there's no way MK got home beteren 854pm and 9pm and all the stuff RG says happened actually occured before a 920pm scream. So why is he telling us it happened between 920 and 930pm? Because he thinks someone outside the house heard it. Which is probably the reason he left MK by the waredrobe, bleeding, closed the door and went back into RF's room to look out her window and see if anyone was out there.

I might be using too much imagination, but there's a reason RG tells his story the way he does. You just have to unravel it.

 

[SMK]

@ wasnt_me

He tells lies that weave in and around the truth. Why? Because those are more believeable lies.

Yes. This is often the case with liars. It was said to be true of Casey Anthony as well.

And yes, your other points, such as his placing himself there earlier against his own self-interest are very good.

We know the reason he's lying about making a date with MK. Because he's not trying to get blamed for rape. But what reason does he tells us he's lurking around the house before MK's arrival? Because he probably knows the camera recording is true and he probably thinks someone saw him at the basketball courts or somewhere else around there.

He talks about Mk's scream heard round the word at 920pm. Why? two reasons. he thinks she was heard by someone or two, he's trying to explain how he didn't hear any commotion but then rushed out the bathroom to find the murder in progress.

We just have to go through each detail he gives, find a reason for the lie or the truth, and that's how you know what happened.

We know there's no way MK got home beteren 854pm and 9pm and all the stuff RG says happened actually occured before a 920pm scream. So why is he telling us it happened between 920 and 930pm? Because he thinks someone outside the house heard it. Which is probably the reason he left MK by the waredrobe, bleeding, closed the door and went back into RF's room to look out her window and see if anyone was out there.

I might be using too much imagination, but there's a reason RG tells his story the way he does. You just have to unravel it.

YES, 3 x yes......

 

[wasnt_me]

I also found AK's laundry testimony. She said MK was doing laundry. She'd possibly moved some clothes off the rack and put in a load, from what I gathered. If I'm right, then the clothes rack in the hallway ought to be empty. The way AK made it sound, she did not distinguish clothes from linens or towels, though.

So MK apparently was not like me. If I'd been out till 530am and woke up later in the afternoon, I'd personally say screw it to the laundry that day. But maybe her doing it means she could have returned home and went to that other bathroom to remove her load and that's when she discovered RG dumping his "load." He could have been doing it with the door open or closed, which would be cause for a scream heard round the world.

I'm assuming if it was dark in the cottage, he had the bathroom light on. There was a door to the toilet and shower, separating the laundry part, right? I would venture to guess he had the door open, or he could have closed it upon hearing her keys in the lock. but I'm thinking she saw the light from under the door and whether she was doing laundry or not, I'm thinking she thought that light being on was strange, so she investigated or just went over there to turn it off and that's how everything escalated.

I imagine that she opened that door, saw him on the toilet, screamed and ran. He said it was dark in the house, per his skype call. So it makes sense that she went to the bathroom door first thing. I'm guessing he scrambled to get off the pot and chased her. Then slammed the door to her room behind him after he chased her in there--or he closed the door after leaving the room from stabbing her to check to see if anyone else was outside. I think that because there is only blood on the inside handle and on the side of the door that fits into the frame.

I'm guessing he went into FR's room to check out the driveway for cars or something. Then he returned and dragged her over to the pillow to rape her. That's could be how the piece of glass wound up in the room, his trip to look out FR's window. He got blood on his shoes and stepped all over the pillow while movig her. Then as he tried to rape her, he realized that he'd fatally stabbed her and he stopped the rape and probably commenced to trying to help her.

I think he used the towels to either help her for real or just to clean up the footprints and stuff over by the waredrobe. I say that because there's evidence of someone wiping up stuff over there, there are no footprints over there, not even MK's that we know of. I think he decided that a clean up was impossible, so he removed his shoes, which had the blood on them and went to the bathroom to at least rinse some of the blood off himself, his pants or whatever, which made the bloody footprint on the mat, returned to the room to locate her purse and go through her white bag. I think he then dumped the contents of the entire purse into his backpack, which would be her wallet, keys, phone, makeup, whatever was in there but never found in her room, put his shoes back on and left the faint blood traces out the door.

Something like this.

I reject AK and RS being the ones to clean up anything because I believe the idea of a cleanup actually started in MK's room and RG just realized there was too much blood and not enough towels or sheets to do it with and he didn't see his footprints on the pillow because MK was already on the pillow, and he didn't see his own faint footprints, as it took PLE hours to spot them as well. I think RG thought he'd removed enough traces of himself and he just didn't realize that he still had blood on his shoes, even if he did dunk them in the bidet, I don't think he realized all the blood didn't come off and he was still making watery prints.

I think he did not take laptops, ipods, etc because he'd just murdered someone, and he'd learned from the Office break-in that people can trace that stuff back to the owners. I don't think he wanted to be caught fencing the items from the cottage. I think taking her phones was just incidental, since he'd dumped her whole purse into his bag. Once he realized he had her phones, he probably dumped them for the same reason that he didn't take the laptops.



Just my imaginings.

 

[wasnt_me]

I really think he did not ransack FR's room. I think what happened in there happened as a side affect of the TV cord tightening when he stepped on it, causing items to fall out of her wardrobe. I think FR was messy, she'd been in a hurry to get herself ready to spend the night with her BF and make it to that party, so in an effort to find and pack clothes, she probably did leave some stuff laying around in the room. There is evidence that RG stepped on the clothes that were under the window, so they had to already be there. when he climbed in.

Where did that dirt come from? the bottom or RG's shoe. Where did he get it from? the outside wall.

In this pic, you see that the gucci bag is beneath the window, where someone might have to step if climbing in.

This picture shows how far the glass sprayed, but what you don't see is any glass on top of her stuff:

My question is, how do you put the glass pane in the open position, which faces the waredrobe and wall, throw a 9lb rock at it while standing inside the room, and get glass all the way backward to the door of the room? Common sense even goes against throwing the rock, because all you have to do is hold it in your hand and hit it against the glass while standing over there by the window. And low impact hits like that would not make the glass fly.

Really, logically, does it make sense to stand a distance from the swinging pane and throw the rock from inside the room? Or does it make sense just to hit the window with the rock while standing closer to it?

 

[Sonata]

Just wanted to say thank you to wasnt_me for your wonderfully committed posts. Really great stuff.

 

[SMK]

Just wanted to say thank you to wasnt_me for your wonderfully committed posts. Really great stuff.

I second that - great work, W_M!!!:great:

 

[wasnt_me]

One question I'd like answered is where the rock came from.

If AK and RS did select this rock, I doubt they went very far to find it. There should have been a ground impression somewhere around there. I'm not sure I'm believing RG carried around a 9lb rock, just in case, either, so did investigators find where this rock came from?

 

[Sonata]

One question I'd like answered is where the rock came from.

If AK and RS did select this rock, I doubt they went very far to find it. There should have been a ground impression somewhere around there. I'm not sure I'm believing RG carried around a 9lb rock, just in case, either, so did investigators find where this rock came from?

Good point.

I also find it a bit odd that in the staged break in scenario they actually left the rock in FR's room... I'm not entirely sure why I find that odd... but I just fell like I would have been so paranoid in that situation that I'd want to get rid of it in case it could implicate me...

 

[SMK]

One question I'd like answered is where the rock came from.

If AK and RS did select this rock, I doubt they went very far to find it. There should have been a ground impression somewhere around there. I'm not sure I'm believing RG carried around a 9lb rock, just in case, either, so did investigators find where this rock came from?

No, never heard anything definitive about where the rock came from.

It is possible that Rudy carried it with him, or simply saw it outside.

I agree with Sonata that I would be afraid of the rock implicating me, and would throw it far away....I hope Hellman and his jury probe these details as much as you do....

and I hope this bit about Hellman on Frank's Perugia Shock is indicative of how cautious and exacting he will continue to be:

HELLMAN SAYS NO

...Many times they were cornered by the questions of Comodi (who was speaking on behalf of Stefanoni and lectured by all prosecution experts).

But there to solve all impasse — there was Hellmann.

As for the precautions in the lab, especially the one of the negative/positive controls (which, as we remember, was not documented they were done) Comodi/Stefanoni, as we predicted, brought the argument of the ‘of course’: If Stefanoni didn’t take note of the controls, it’s because you don’t take note of things you always do. Just like the surgeon who doesn’t write in the report of an operation ‘I washed my hands’, ‘I wore the gloves’, ‘I sterilized the lancets’…
But Hellman came in to help and explained that a surgery room doesn’t have anything to do with DNA… And he stopped the attack.

http://perugiashock.com/2011/07/30/hellmann-says-no/

 

[wasnt_me]

:bananalama:

You're welcome. I just think at this juncture, we need to concentrate on what we know and throw out the garbage, and then we need to stop debating the garbage, because, well, it's garbage.

there's been a 4 year long debate about somethings that really just don't even need to be brought up anymore at all. Like the man talking about AK was at his store at 745am. Like someone saw her a laundrimat washing clothes. They tested the machines there, right? No MK or AK evidence, right? Like the washing machine was warm. There's no way in the world that could be possible for FR to feel an HOUR after AK and RS set their "master plan" in motion. If they were setting it up, once they decided to make the first call, they'd completed everything they were going to do to stage anything. Because it's illogical to assume they'd alert people to the crime before they were ready for it to be found. So if the first call went out at 1207pm and FR arrived at the cottage after 1pm, the washer was NOT warm. PLUS whatever was in the washer apparently didn't even have anything to do with the crime. So we let that go.

I know there's other stuff, and i'll think of it, but rehashing things that just don't fit into either scenerio or are just plain wrong or misstated facts in no way helps us at all. Debating a rumor or a red herring only takes time from debating the real stuff that does support one side or the other.

 

[SMK]

:bananalama:

You're welcome. I just think at this juncture, we need to concentrate on what we know and throw out the garbage, and then we need to stop debating the garbage, because, well, it's garbage.

there's been a 4 year long debate about somethings that really just don't even need to be brought up anymore at all. Like the man talking about AK was at his store at 745am. Like someone saw her a laundrimat washing clothes. They tested the machines there, right? No MK or AK evidence, right? Like the washing machine was warm. There's no way in the world that could be possible for FR to feel an HOUR after AK and RS set their "master plan" in motion. If they were setting it up, once they decided to make the first call, they'd completed everything they were going to do to stage anything. Because it's illogical to assume they'd alert people to the crime before they were ready for it to be found. So if the first call went out at 1207pm and FR arrived at the cottage after 1pm, the washer was NOT warm.

I know there's other stuff, and i'll think of it, but rehashing things that just don't fit into either scenerio or are just plain wrong or misstated facts in no way helps us at all.

Yes, agreed and thinking along the same lines. See what I added in my post above, Frank Sfarzo on Hellman, because he may also have similar attitude about "throwing out the garbage". :waitasec:

 

[wasnt_me]

Yes, SMK, and Hellmann did the same thing when she came up trying to introduce her piece of paper that she suddenly had the controls. Then she didn't have the paper afterall, and he was like that paper don't even matter because contamination could have happened before the lab!

I love that he was thinking like that and not getting distracted. Because she could have introduced her paper and tried to advance that because contamination didn't happen in the lab, it didn't happen at all. Which is not logical.

It reminds me of a Dave Chappell skit, where he was pretending to be a witness and they asked him a tough question. His answer was "some people like cucumbers better pickled." the prosecutor said, "What?" and David Chappell replied, "Huh?" And the whole court became distracted. Cumcumber and pickle distracts need to be tossed out of MK's case.

 

[Nova]

Just wanted to say thank you to wasnt_me for your wonderfully committed posts. Really great stuff.

I agree. I appreciate wasn't_me identifying speculation where it occurs, but her scenario makes more sense--given the evidence--than anything else I've heard.

 

[Nova]

One question I'd like answered is where the rock came from.

If AK and RS did select this rock, I doubt they went very far to find it. There should have been a ground impression somewhere around there. I'm not sure I'm believing RG carried around a 9lb rock, just in case, either, so did investigators find where this rock came from?

You mean the investigators who didn't even interview the woman who claimed to have heard a scream and three sets of footsteps running away?

I'll be very surprised if they got out of their chairs long enough to look for a rock impression.

 

[wasnt_me]

As for Rudy and the break-in. If they are innocent, I am giving examples of why he logically would have acted in a way that fits the evidence. I am, however, aware that the explanation that fits the evidence requires a more complex argument. The evidence for the break-in requires us to find a burglar who would scale a wall, break a window, and steal few items. A burglar who would hang out in the house, eat a little food, and leave a dump in the other toilet. I believe Rudy Guede exactly fits such a strange profile.

But while I don't think it's difficult to believe he chose a less suitable route to break-in, I cannot for certain say what his decision making process was. Perhaps he was simply waiting for the boys to show up, and on the spur of the moment decided to break in, using the closest window that presented itself.

I second every bit of this. Thanks!

And I believe it's one more place where the cucumbers and pickles question can be eliminated. The truth of the matter is, this is the window we are discussing. Whether anyone feels he didn't break it, based upon the desirablity doesn't even matter, because this is the window in question. From here, it's a matter of whether the evidence supports that he actually broke in that way or if it were staged, because the same questions arises during the staged break-in. Why in hell would Ak and RS pick the undesirable window to stage the break in, if everyone else in the world believes it should be the balcony or the kitchen? What makes AK and RS the idiots who picked the wrong window? I think him picking the "less desirable window" is more proof that it's real.

 

[wasnt_me]

You know,

I am almost venturing to guess that two crimes occured that night in the area. I seriously am. I don't know what the second crime was, but I went back to those statements I provided for Nova of what other people "heard" that night. Then, if you add to it that the couple who'd gone to the movies saw a black man run by them and almost knock them over---BUT they apparently said he was NOT RG, and you add the bloody tissues found in the street, etc, I'm guessing two crimes occurred.

One crime was related to a scream at a different time, the "animated arguing," the unidentified black man running, the others running up the street (where the tissues were found), and the tissues.

The other crime was MK.

I don't know. I say that because I still think it's impossible for Nara to have heard MK scream. She was across the street, in the cottage with all the doors and windows closed, except maybe FR's window. Her room is in the back of that cottage, and sound gets more muffled as it has to go through walls, and glass as it travels.

Anyways, I find it bizarre that the couple saw a black man push by them, but they did not identify him as RG, but HIS running--whoever he was--could have been what Nara and the other person heard--or they might not have heard a dang on thing. I don't know.

I also don't know about tow trucks in italy, but here, they have yellow lights, and you can hear them jacking up a car. I'm surprised that no ear witnesses mentioned this, even if they looked out the window, I'd think they'd see flashing lights.

And I still find it odd that many witnesses confused the night of Halloween with the night of Nov 1st, so it's not a stretch that some of this really did happen on Oct 31st.