Meredith Kercher murdered - Amanda Knox convicted, now appeals #5

[dgfred]

Of the ten (zillion) phone calls Raffaele's father made to him that evening - the only thing I clearly see is no wonder Raffaele turned his phone off

Ha, so true.
It seems that RS's dad had/needed to keep quite a short leash on RS. :waitasec:
RS sure did know if he did not want to be disturbed, he would have to turn off his phone. Why was his landline also not 'unplugged' I wonder?

 

[dgfred]

Claiming to eat over two and a half hours later than in reality seems like a lie to me. A convienient one at that.

For most this matter has already been decided from testimony.
Making up possibilities of other scenarios does not seem productive in any way IMO, since no statements by the accused and no testimony at all backs up any of these 'possible' possibilities. :seeya:

 

[SleuthyGal]

Claiming to eat over two and a half hours later than in reality seems like a lie to me. A convienient one at that.

In the scheme of the case is the dinner an important detail? I don't know. They said they stayed in all night. Thus the time of dinner isn't as relevant because if they were in the apt all night, then that's the bigger point. If they were, in fact, home at RS's all night they weren't committing murder even if they change their story about dinner time every 30 min.

The police estimated MK's time of death but that's not exact either.

The fact that RS talked about a spill before there was ever a murder, is more telling, than what actual time they ate dinner.

 

[otto]

Of the ten (zillion) phone calls Raffaele's father made to him that evening - the only thing I clearly see is no wonder Raffaele turned his phone off

Raffaele's father phoned him several times each day, and was closely monitoring his activities. Not only did Raffaele have problems with drug abuse, but there were greater concerns that may have caused the closer monitoring of father regarding son:

"He enrolled at the faculty of informatics and chose Perugia because of the presence in the city of the ONAOSI college (see statements by the father, Francesco Sollecito, page 15, hearing19.6.2009) where he was boarding from 2003 to 2005. He was "taciturn, introverted, shy.... watched many films‛ and educators at the boy’s ONAOSI college were shocked by a film ‚very much hard-core ... where there were scenes of sex with animals‛ at which next they activated a monitoring on the boy to try to understand him. (p.130 and 131, hearing 27.3.2009, statements by Tavernesi Francesco)."

Ref: pg 61 of Motivation Report
http://www.westseattleherald.com/si...ttachments/MasseiReportEnglishTranslation.pdf

 

[otto]

What time did RS say he (and AK) ate dinner?

Who was on the phone with RS's dad? (hint: it wasn't AK).

AK didn't pay attention to the time they ate dinner. Maybe she lied. Maybe she didn't lie. We don't know for sure; we only know she didn't have or give the exact time. If they didn't both say "11pm" then we know one thing: they didn't compare stories on this to try and match it up for when they were asked.

Raffaele told his father that he and Amanda had just finished a dinner of fish and salad during the phone call with his father at 8:42 pm. He also mentioned that while washing dishes, the drain to the sink had malfunctioned and there was a water spill on the floor. Amanda also mentions the dinner of fish, and comments on the blood on Raffaele's hands from cleaning the fish. Amanda's description of the water spill is a "flood" of water. The two of them, not having a mop, decided to leave the water on the floor until the following day because there was a mop at the cottage that Amanda would bring to clean up the water. There is no further mention from either of them, when asked what they did that evening, of preparing additional meals ... or of cleaning up the water on the floor.

When Amanda was asked about what time they ate dinner, she gave some time during questioning. We don't know what time she gave during that witness statement as it is not admissable. In her voluntary "gift" statement, she said that she was "definitely sure" that they ate late, around 11, but then says, in the same sentence, that she is unsure. Other times that Amanda has offered for having dinner are 9:30 and 10.

The point that is understood by the courts regarding this changing dinner time is that Amanda is attempting to give herself an alibi later and later into the evening on the night that Meredith was murdered. After Raffaele's father's statement, the dinner time was fixed at prior to 8:42. It is also worth noting that this dinner was also prior to Amanda leaving for work. It was while she was on her way to work that she received the text message from Patrick saying she was not needed at work. After receiving this text, she met with Raffaele and they turned off their phones. Amanda should have been able to figure out when she normally left for work, remembered that she ate dinner before leaving for work, and been able to refine the dinner time more accurately.

Another lie of Amanda's was that she did not leave Raffaele's and that she received the text from Patrick while she was at Raffaele's, but cell towers proved that she was on her way to work at the time, and not at Raffaele's place.

Within the context of Amanda's claims about the dinner time, and where she was when she received the text, we have two lies ... both of which appear to be attempts to demonstrate that she was at Raffaele's while Meredith was being murdered, and both of which have been proven to be false.

 

[otto]

In the scheme of the case is the dinner an important detail? I don't know. They said they stayed in all night. Thus the time of dinner isn't as relevant because if they were in the apt all night, then that's the bigger point. If they were, in fact, home at RS's all night they weren't committing murder even if they change their story about dinner time every 30 min.

The police estimated MK's time of death but that's not exact either.

The fact that RS talked about a spill before there was ever a murder, is more telling, than what actual time they ate dinner.

The problem is that the dinner was used to explain what they did at Raffaele's apartment on the night of the murder. If they ate at 11, then that pretty much precludes them from committing the murder. Since there is independent testimony placing dinner at about 8:20 or 8:30, that leaves the rest of the evening without an explanation. Amanda later tries to explain that she may have been intimate with Raffaele, but doesn't remember. I believe she also said something about reading her book, having a shower, and other things. Because it is on record that she appeared to attempt to give false information that would account for the time, and then followed those lies with other "I don't remember" claims, it was concluded that she has no alibi. I think there were other claims about watching Amelie, but computer records also show that was earlier in the evening. Basically, the time from turning off their cell phones until about 6:30 the following morning is unaccounted for. Amanda and Raffaele claim they woke up around 10 or 10:30 the following morning, but that is also contradicted by cell phone and computer activity at 6:30 am.

 

[otto]

Regarding the question of crime rates, or murder rates, in Perugia, I wasn't able to find any stats. It is a university town with two universities, and a huge influx of foreign students. My understanding is that it is a very safe place, with a lower crime rate than most of Italy and best known for it's Chocolate Festival.

Going from memory, I recall reading about an unsolved case in the area where a woman was found dead in her car down an embankment, and the boyfriend was being investigated. I believe this happened prior to the murder of Meredith, but haven't been able to locate any articles about this. Other than this incident, I haven't come across any murders in Perugia, and I am under the impression that it is very rare.

 

[miley]

Otto: Another lie of Amanda's was that she did not leave Raffaele's and that she received the text from Patrick while she was at Raffaele's, but cell towers proved that she was on her way to work at the time, and not at Raffaele's place

which cell tower?

 

[otto]

which cell tower?

Both video and transcripts can be found at the link

Testimony:
CP: When you answered Patrick's message, where were you?

AK: In the apartment of Raffaele, I think. Yes.

CP: What did you answer?

AK: That I, okay, let's see, I said "Okay, see you later". Which means--

CP: Did you also write "Buona serata"?

AK: Yes.

CP: How much later did you answer? At what time more or less?

AK: I believe I responded as soon as I noticed I had received the method.

CP: I appears that you answered 25 minutes later. Why all that time?

AK: I don't remember right now.

CP: It seems from cell pings that you were out of the house when you
answered, in the center. Where were you?

http://perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=165

My understanding is that her phone registered that she was at Via Aquila when her phone received the text.

 

[otto]

This map more or less shows where Amanda was when she received the text ... in relation to La Chic, where Patrick was, and Raffaele's apartment. I will look for additional information to verify this. It should say "location of Amanda's phone when receiving Patrick's text" rather than "Patrick Phone call".

Additional information about locations related to this case can be found here (this was put together by someone else that apparently followed the case from the beginning):

GialloDiPerugia-pt1 - Fullscreen

 

[Malkmus]

Any fault in memory on Amanda and Raf's part is a sign of guilt, yet when it's pointed out that everyone else in this case is guilty of the same thing it's disregarded.
Why should it matter if they can't remember exactly what time they ate when Filomena can't remember if she closed the shutters to her window? Why should it matter where Amanda was when she received a text from Patrick, when we know Patrick's cell pings placed him near the cottage and he was actually at his bar? Why is it a lie when Raffaele speculates that the DNA ended up on the knife during a cooking session at the cottage, yet when Inspector Batistelli is caught lying about entering the murder room he is forgiven for his bad memory? Why is it a lie when Amanda says she overheard what Meredith's injuries were from other eyewitnesses at the scene, yet when Filomena's testimony about telling Amanda to call the police is contradicted by Paola Grande it's considered a normal lapse in memory?

Apply said logic to what they did say and did write. NO EXCUSES.

What was Patrick accused of remembering wrong?

The time he opened his bar and saying he was at his bar when his cell phone pinged near the cottage.

The time in jail has to do with NOT LYING the entire time, while AK and RS both LIED after only a few hours.

Patrick did NOT: Tell the best truth he can think of, including vision fragments and flashback confusion. AK did. RS just told 'rubbish'.

The fact that Patrick didn't succumb to police pressure and confess has no bearing on whether Amanda would or wouldn't.

 

[Malkmus]

Another lie of Amanda's was that she did not leave Raffaele's and that she received the text from Patrick while she was at Raffaele's, but cell towers proved that she was on her way to work at the time, and not at Raffaele's place.

Patrick was accused of the same thing. Saying he was at the bar when his cell pinged near the cottage. Yet we know he didn't lie.

 

[Malkmus]

The problem is that the dinner was used to explain what they did at Raffaele's apartment on the night of the murder. If they ate at 11, then that pretty much precludes them from committing the murder.

Stating they were at the apartment all night precludes them from committing the murder, not that they were eating dinner. This is why the specifics of what they were doing at home don't matter.

 

[otto]

Stating they were at the apartment all night precludes them from committing the murder, not that they were eating dinner. This is why the specifics of what they were doing at home don't matter.

Yes, Amanda claims that she was at Raffaele's apartment all night. Raffaele has said that he can't confirm this. The specifics of what they did between 8:45 pm and 10 am are extremely important because their claims have been proven false, leaving them with no alibi. When their claims were proven false, Amanda claimed that she "doesn't remember". Amanda's story about what she did has changed several times. Nothing of her claims can be corroborated.

If they were together in the apartment all night, their stories should match perfectly, but they don't. That is a huge problem for both Amanda and Raffaele.

 

[otto]

Patrick was accused of the same thing. Saying he was at the bar when his cell pinged near the cottage. Yet we know he didn't lie.

Have you been able to locate the cell phone records? I haven't found them yet, but I know they're on the net somewhere.

 

[Malkmus]

If they ate at 11, then that pretty much precludes them from committing the murder.

From her trial testimony:

AK: Um, around, um, we ate around 9:30 or 10

It seems 9:30 is the best time she could remember once she'd had time to really think about it. 9:30 can't really be looked at as any sort of excuse, nor is it very far off from the actual time they ate. But as I've stated, none of it matters because they're alibi was that they were at home all night.

 

[Malkmus]

Have you been able to locate the cell phone records? I haven't found them yet, but I know they're on the net somewhere.

Here!

Calls from November 1 after 18:00

Time Length Type From To Location (Content Summary)

20:18:12 1sec SMS Patrick Amanda via Ulisse Rocchi (You don't have to come to work tonight)
20:35:48 1sec SMS Amanda Patrick corso Garibaldi ("Ci vediamo piu tardi. Buona serata.")
20:42:58 221sec Call Dr Soll Raffaele corso Garibaldi (Raffaele mentions washing dishes, leak under sink, trip to Gubbio)
20:56:?? 1sec Call MeredithUK Arline via della Pergola (Call didn't go through)
21:58:?? 1sec Call MeredithUK ans. serv. via della Pergola (Call didn't go through)
22:00:00 1sec Call MeredithUK Abbey via della Pergola ("Abbey" dialed without international prefix, didn't go through)
22:13:19 9sec GPRS Internet WAP MeredithUK via della Pergola (Aborted connection of undetermined type)


Calls from November 2

Time Length Type From To Location (Content summary)

00:10:31 1sec Call ? Meredith UK via Sperandio

06:02:69 1sec SMS Dr Soll Raffaele corso Garibaldi (Buona notte, SMS sent by Dr Soll at 23:14 on Nov 1)
09:24 248sec Call Dr Soll Raffaele (Absent from mobile records, no cell tower mentioned)
09:29 38sec Call Dr Soll Raffaele (Absent from mobile records, no cell tower mentioned)
09:30:42 41sec Call Dr Soll Raffaele corso Garibaldi (Haven't you left for Gubbio yet?)
12:07:12 16sec Call Amanda MeredithUK corso Garibaldi (Ringing no answer)
12:08:44 58sec Call Amanda Filomena corso Garibaldi (Saw worrisome things in the house, door open, traces of blood)
12:11:02 3sec Call Amanda MeredithIT corso Garibaldi (Voice mail)
12:11:54 4sec Call Amanda MeredithUK corso Garibaldi ( Automatic voice saying "out of service")
12:12:35 36sec Call Filomena Amanda corso Garibaldi (Unsuccessful?)
12:20:44 65sec Call Filomena Amanda corso Garibaldi (Unsuccessful?)
12:34:56 48sec Call Filomena Amanda via della Pergola (Broken window, room ransacked...)
12:35:08 135sec Call Raffaele Vodafone via della Pergola (credit recharge)
12:38:17 1sec SMS Vodafone Raffaele via della Pergola (confirm recharge)
12:40:03 67sec Call Dr Soll Raffaele via della Pergola
12:47:23 88sec Call Amanda Edda via della Pergola (There are some strange things here)
12:50:34 39sec Call Raffaele Vanessa via della Pergola (Call to Vanessa for advice)
12:51:40 169sec Call Raffaele 112 via della Pergola (first 112 call)
12:54:39 57sec Call Raffaele 112 via della Pergola (second 112 call)
13:24:18 162sec Call Amanda Edda via della Pergola ("A foot")
13:27:32 26sec Call Amanda Chris? via della Pergola (Another Seattle number)
13:29:00 296sec Call Carabinieri Amanda via della Pergola (Asking for directions to cottage)

 

[Malkmus]

Jusr realized you were probably asking for Patrick's cell phone records of which I have never seen. One of the articles regarding it here though:

As forensic experts veer towards the theory that Ms Kerchner was killed several hours earlier than the original midnight to 2am estimate, police said they had found a signal "trace" of one of the mobile phones belonging to Mr Lumumba "in the vicinity of the murder scene" at 8.38 pm on the night she died. They were also conducting tests on a "sweat soaked T-shirt" belonging to him, and on "medium length" hair mixed with his own hair.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2851266.ece?token=null&offset=0&page=1

 

[Nova]

Raffaele told his father that he and Amanda had just finished a dinner of fish and salad during the phone call with his father at 8:42 pm. He also mentioned that while washing dishes, the drain to the sink had malfunctioned and there was a water spill on the floor. Amanda also mentions the dinner of fish, and comments on the blood on Raffaele's hands from cleaning the fish. Amanda's description of the water spill is a "flood" of water. The two of them, not having a mop, decided to leave the water on the floor until the following day because there was a mop at the cottage that Amanda would bring to clean up the water. There is no further mention from either of them, when asked what they did that evening, of preparing additional meals ... or of cleaning up the water on the floor.

When Amanda was asked about what time they ate dinner, she gave some time during questioning. We don't know what time she gave during that witness statement as it is not admissable. In her voluntary "gift" statement, she said that she was "definitely sure" that they ate late, around 11, but then says, in the same sentence, that she is unsure. Other times that Amanda has offered for having dinner are 9:30 and 10.

The point that is understood by the courts regarding this changing dinner time is that Amanda is attempting to give herself an alibi later and later into the evening on the night that Meredith was murdered. After Raffaele's father's statement, the dinner time was fixed at prior to 8:42. It is also worth noting that this dinner was also prior to Amanda leaving for work. It was while she was on her way to work that she received the text message from Patrick saying she was not needed at work. After receiving this text, she met with Raffaele and they turned off their phones. Amanda should have been able to figure out when she normally left for work, remembered that she ate dinner before leaving for work, and been able to refine the dinner time more accurately.

Another lie of Amanda's was that she did not leave Raffaele's and that she received the text from Patrick while she was at Raffaele's, but cell towers proved that she was on her way to work at the time, and not at Raffaele's place.

Within the context of Amanda's claims about the dinner time, and where she was when she received the text, we have two lies ... both of which appear to be attempts to demonstrate that she was at Raffaele's while Meredith was being murdered, and both of which have been proven to be false.

Not everyone has a clear sense of time. I generally do, so I'm surprised that some people are so vague about what time it is. But then I also have a clear sense of geography and am often surprised to find that many people have only a vague sense of where they are relative to well-known landmarks.

The supposed "lie" about where she was when we received PL's text message seems to serve no purpose. So why do we assume it was a lie rather than a mistake?

 

[SleuthyGal]

Who was it saying that there was a 1 second call from AK to MK?

I see 3 calls listed from AK to MK in a 4 min period.

16 sec (ringing, no answer)
4 sec (voicemail)
3 sec (out of service)

Doesn't look so hinky when you see it in B&W and the correct info is published.