WARNING:GRAPHIC PHOTOS Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #9

[sherlockh]

Haha, that is the pic of the guy on the small window...lol.. I find that so funny. I am pretty sure somebody helped him up there. Why not show the first part?

The arrow to a 'scuff point' is proof of somebody climbing in? Did the defense forget to show this important piece of evidence?

The dust on the clothes are interesting but not decisive one way or the other. You are claiming it as fact that this is dust from the wall, but I am pretty sure that that is just your opinion. One side says a guy came up through the window and put the dust there. The other side says a guy/girl just went outside to get a big rock and the clothes were on the floor before breaking the window. The 2nd scenario is confirmed by the girl who actually lived in the room and testified on the situation in her own room.

All JMO.

 

[Malkmus]

There was no blood according to her before the murder. When would this blood of her's get there? She also 'attributed' to maybe being from Meredith's menstrual cycle too... I think. It didn't worry her too much it seems, either there or the blood on the bathmat.

There's a difference between knowing there was no blood the day before Meredith was murdered and seeing blood after the fact when there was much more of it in the sink. She noticed Meredith's blood in the sink, she didn't notice her one drop of blood which could have been left on the facet a day or two earlier.

 

[Malkmus]

I actually agree with that. If only they had known. I can only speculate on it but I think AK figured it out that morning when she said she noticed blood on the bathmat and made up a story of stepping on it and sliding down the hall way. Maybe she thought it was her footprint? Anyway, easy to say what they should or should not have done now we know all the evidence. She should have thrown the Q-Tip box away as well. I guess they were not thinking all that clearly after their first ever murder. I am surprised they even came as far as they did with their plan. JMO.

No matter what way you toss it, whether she thought it was her footprint or Raf's, it makes no sense to clean every other trace of themselves then call the police and specifically notify them of the blood in the bathroom if any of it could be traced to them. As far as throwing away the q-tip box, if she's innocent then there'd have been no reason to get rid of it.

I am still surprised anyone would believe any of her story. The door is open, there is blood, and she takes a shower. She notices the blood on the bathmat and thinks it is from her roommate menstruating. But never mind that, she steps on it and slides down the hallway naked. She claims to have touched dried blood, and clean her ears and that is supposed to explain for stains on the Q-Tip box? I don't know but how can anyone not be at least a little bit suspicious after such a story?

She went back to her boyfriend and told him about what she found. Are you 100 percent sure that every single person person would expect the worst based on what she found, and call the police first, or that some people would tell the person they were closest to first about it and then see what they should do?

 

[Malkmus]

What I am missing from the defense is a video showing somebody climbing up to that window. They made a video of a rock going through a window. I saw a pic of somebody standing on the small window, but somebody actually climbing up is what I am missing. It is a small window to climb up to and pretty high from the ground. About half way I am guessing. I don't even know how one should pull themselves up on such a small window. Maybe it is possible by jumping up the window and then slamming your face into the wall..lol.. The window next to it (AK's) seems even easier to climb up as that window below is long and starts from the ground. It is not so strange that even from the AK support sites I see explanations like RG came swinging in from the side (where the front door is) or even RG came swinging in from the roof

The window climbing isn't such a bizarre feat when you consider he'd done the same thing at the lawyer's office break-in. What I find stranger is those that believe that AK and RS coincidentally mimicked Rudy's mode of operation in staging the burglary. So was it a huge coincidence? Or did Rudy just break into the cottage the same way he broke into the lawyer's office? Occam's razor strikes again.

 

[sherlockh]

No matter what way you toss it, whether she thought it was her footprint or Raf's, it makes no sense to clean every other trace of themselves then call the police and specifically notify them of the blood in the bathroom if any of it could be traced to them. As far as throwing away the q-tip box, if she's innocent then there'd have been no reason to get rid of it.

They luckily didn't clean all their traces. I am not sure why they left blood traces in the bathroom. This is all pretty much speculation territory. Maybe it was a rushed clean job and they left some traces. Maybe they thought the break in by itself wouldn't be enough reason for the police to break open MK's door. Maybe they thought it could be explained away by repeating over and over 'it is all normal because I live here'. I don't know. I only know that their plan wasn't perfect and that they made plenty of mistakes. JMO.

She went back to her boyfriend and told him about what she found. Are you 100 percent sure that every single person person would expect the worst based on what she found, and call the police first, or that some people would tell the person they were closest to first about it and then see what they should do?

I didn't say anything about expecting the worst or other people. Just thought why people buy such a bizarre story and not be at least a little suspicious? This is websleuths after all

 

[sherlockh]

The window climbing isn't such a bizarre feat when you consider he'd done the same thing at the lawyer's office break-in. What I find stranger is those that believe that AK and RS coincidentally mimicked Rudy's mode of operation in staging the burglary. So was it a huge coincidence? Or did Rudy just break into the cottage the same way he broke into the lawyer's office? Occam's razor strikes again.

I still haven't seen any proof of RG breaking into that lawyers office. No history of breaking an entry, breaking windows, or carrying knives. All just internet gossips. Why not request proof for RG in the same way you do for AK+RS?

 

[SMK]

. . . She went back to her boyfriend and told him about what she found. Are you 100 percent sure that every single person person would expect the worst based on what she found, and call the police first, or that some people would tell the person they were closest to first about it and then see what they should do?

Exactly!!!In retrospect, one knows it was a murder scene, so judges. But as Amanda says, that did not enter her mind. Consider this: I knew someone in Pittsburgh in the early '90s, he had just worked an all night shift. He came home to his rental that he shared with his roommate. The front door was slightly a jar, but he figured his roommate left it that way. There were coins on the stairs, and a gold chain, but he figured his roommate had dropped coins and that maybe his girlfriend had dropped her necklace. There was blood in the hallway, but he thought his roommate had cut himself. He went to lie down. It was not until he went to go take a shower, and found his roommate fully clothed in the tub with his throat cut, dead, that he realized a burglary/murder had occurred and went to call 911.

 

[SMK]

I still haven't seen any proof of RG breaking into that lawyers office. No history of breaking an entry, breaking windows, or carrying knives. All just internet gossips. Why not request proof for RG in the same way you do for AK+RS?

Internet gossip???? I am so stunned I can barely think.

1. They admitted in court he had broken into the nursery school and law offices, and had a knife in his backpack and stolen goods such as laptops.

1. An elderly couple testified that he had brandished a knife when robbing their home.

1. He was found with 2 knives, a kitchen knife , and a smaller switchblade. He also carried a rock in his backpack and had used it to gain entry by breaking windows. The prosecution admits all this, then says "but he knew the boys downstairs so we doubt he would choose such a place to rob". Maddening, sickening!!! I will find it, believe me, this is right in the judges report!

1. It is obvious he was a police informant, which is why he had a free pass. Hence your "no history of this, that, blah "---a girl is dead due to this free pass! His confidence grew and grew, no wonder he could sit on the toilet, until Meredith surprised him by coming home early. A British reporter found he had committed 6 serious crimes in 33 days. He had no reason to lie, he himself expressed amazement. This is NOT gossip.

1. The rents were due the next day, when he went to the cottage: Filomina was known to keep their monies in an envelope in her room. He was facing eviction. His prints and DNA are all over the crime scene. Also, he was sexually aggressive enough with females that he had to be asked to leave certain clubs for harassing them. the list goes on and on. Recall that Mignini, when he first suspected Amanda and Raffaele, did not yet know Guede was involved.

 

[SMK]

The problem is, there's a story claiming that RS went in the house and sneaked to call the police AFTER the PP arrived. I think that the time stamps are showing that this conspiracy theory is not possible, because he had called the police before the PP arrived. Whether he happened to see them driving around is another story, BUT with this time clock fix, we can rule out the notion that he sneaked away to call the police while amanda was distracting the Postal Police.

Right---and I really do NOT think the postal police would have to drive around looking for the residence. Being who they were, they would have known the location and arrived swiftly and smoothly.

 

[sherlockh]

I am only asking for proof. Not some journalist claiming some kind of hearsay. Lets start with proof of the break in in the law offices.

 

[SMK]

I am only asking for proof. Not some journalist claiming some kind of hearsay. Lets start with proof of the break in in the law offices.

How about the Massei or Machelli Report, where they speculate that, given his robberies, they still do not think he would choose that cottage, as he "knew the boys downstairs"? Also , the journalist at the Daily Mail surely would have been fired by now if he was making up all these reports on Guede.

 

[SMK]

Just a beginning here:

In justifying a guilty verdict for Amanda and Raffaele, the Court was faced with an elephant in the room; Rudy Guede is clearly guilty of the murder. He had a history of repeated break ins; he knew that the students would have rent money, in cash, on that day of the month; he was in desperate need of money since he likely faced imminent eviction; he was known to carry large knives (and small ones); his presence at the scene of the crime was indisputable; and he fled the country shortly after. The case against Rudy Guede was overwhelming. How then, to diminish Rudy’s role and substitute Amanda, a kid who had no criminal or violent history and no motive, as the architect of this horrific crime?
The Motivation begins this delicate process by attempting to dismiss the import of three of Guede’s previous break ins that were testified to in the trial (there were others). These break ins took place in just the month before he committed the murder. They were at a nursery in Milan, a law office in Perugia, and at the Tramontano home in Perugia. Incredibly, it downplayed the obvious similarities between these prior crimes and the Kercher murder while highlighting a trivial difference.

It is instructive to review these break ins, as reported in the Motivation itself, not only as a window to understanding Rudy Guede’s criminal history but for insights into just far the Court went in its interpretation of events to get the result they sought.

“…on the morning of October 27, 2007, a Saturday, as she entered the nursery school at via Plinio 16, Milan, of which she was the principal, she noticed coming out of her office a person whom she didn’t know, later identified as Rudy Guede…. Rudy Guede had a backpack inside which was a computer. Called at once, the police made him open the backpack, in which they found a 40cm kitchen knife. She recalled that there were other objects in the backpack: a bunch of keys, a small gold woman's watch, and a tiny hammer of the type found in buses to smash windows. The police told her that the computer had been stolen from a law office in Perugia.”
P-45

Rudy had a great excuse for breaking into the nursery school. He claimed that someone at the train station in Milan had told him he could stay there, for which service Rudy said he paid the man 50 Euros. So, the police naturally let him go. I could sell bridges to clients like these.

Just 6 days before the murder of Meredith Kercher, Rudy Guede made this unlawful entry into a nursery school where he was found with a very large kitchen knife and breaking and entering tools, and was subsequently questioned by the Polizia. And they let him go on an utterly unbelievable excuse. Why?

And what about the computer that was stolen from the law office?

On the night of October 13, 2007, just over two weeks before the murder, a law office in Perugia had been broken into.

“The thief or thieves had entered through a window whose panes had been smashed with a rather large stone; the glass was scattered around, and they had found some of their clothing on top of the glass…”
P-46

Rudy Guede later went to the attorneys to apologize for having been captured with their stolen laptop, claiming to have purchased it legally. Why he did that is a mystery, one of many strange things Rudy did that seem to make no sense whatever. None of this makes sense unless there was something else going on that we don’t know about. Rudy’s relationship with the Polizia is an important anomaly, an unanswered question that we will revisit in a later chapter.

Rudy broke into the office by throwing a rock through a window, the same entry method use in the cottage break in. There was even a grill beneath the window to climb up, just as with the cottage:

“…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-46

Finally, Rudy broke into the home of Cristian Tramontano and threatened him with a jackknife when Cristian tried to make Rudy leave his home. This break in also took place in the month before the murder. During it, Rudy “…tried to exit the house and, finding the door locked, pulled out a jackknife with which he threatened Tramontano….” P-46

Any objective person reviewing this evidence would conclude that Rudy Guede was an active burglar, that his modus operandi was varied, and included throwing rocks through windows and climbing up lattices to gain entry, that he broke into places that were occupied and had threatened the occupants with knives. Any objective person would therefore be not the least bit surprised to hear that Rudy broke into the cottage at Via della Pergola by similar means, with a more tragic outcome.

But what did the Court conclude? The exact opposite. [. . . ]



[. . . ]

Clinging to the slenderest of threads, the Court observed that while Rudy was not acquainted with the occupants of the nursery school, the law office, or the home, he was acquainted with the boys who lived downstairs at Via dela Pergola. This trivial distinction is given uncanny weight and cited as near proof that Rudy would not have broken into the cottage.

“Even if one accepts that Rudy was the burglar who broke into the law office of the lawyers Brocchi and Palazzoli and into Tramontano’s house, it must be observed that Rudy was not known by these, nor by the director of the nursery school in via Plinio, Milan; this situation is entirely different from the one at via della Pergola…”

Entirely different? Because he played basketball with the guys downstairs? Rudy had shown no compunction against breaking into a nursery school. A nursery school. He had thrown a rock through a window and climbed into a law office. He had threatened a home’s resident with a knife. The Court even cited a number of differences between these prior break ins, showing that Rudy didn’t always do the same thing. All this (and more, actually) in just the month before the murder of Meredith Kercher. http://www.sciencespheres.com/

 

[sherlockh]

Why do you think Massei says: "Even if one accepts that Rudy was the burglar"? Because it is not proven he was the burglar in those law offices. He was caught with stolen property and booked for that. Nothing more nothing less.

So now Rudy already had 2 knives, a rock in his backpack (where does that even come from?), he is threatened an elderly couple (huh?), and last but not least, without any proof whatsoever...he is a police informant..lol... Just a little trick by the defense so they don't have to proof any of his burglary history which was all covered up since he is a police informant which also doesn't need any proof since after all how can you proof that? Keeping the rumor alive.

You are mainly copying large parts of propaganda sites supporting the Knox PR campaign. There is nothing objective about these sites. There are full with falsehoods, rumors and yes gossips I think it would be much clearer if we just stick with topics that are actually being discussed during the trials. JMO.

 

[SMK]

Why do you think Massei says: "Even if one accepts that Rudy was the burglar"? Because it is not proven he was the burglar in those law offices. He was caught with stolen property and booked for that. Nothing more nothing less.

So now Rudy already had 2 knives, a rock in his backpack (where does that even come from?), he is threatened an elderly couple (huh?), and last but not least, without any proof whatsoever...he is a police informant..lol... Just a little trick by the defense so they don't have to proof any of his burglary history which was all covered up since he is a police informant which also doesn't need any proof since after all how can you proof that? Keeping the rumor alive.

You are mainly copying large parts of propaganda sites supporting the Knox PR campaign. There is nothing objective about these sites. There are full with falsehoods, rumors and yes gossips I think it would be much clearer if we just stick with topics that are actually being discussed during the trials. JMO.

Well, I do not think it is propaganda, for a number of reasons. For me, it weighs very, very heavily.

 

[SMK]

In any case, it can all be turned around to support the prosecution's theory as well---i.e., no proof= no reason to consider that Guede may have been doing a robbery which turned murder. The "Knox PR Campaign" is an accusation against a scientist who is not known to have ever been dishonest in his career: Why should he choose to do so now? Oh, he is being paid by the PR Machine, well, where is the proof of THAT? I think one ignores all this about Guede and ignores how VERY odd the wording of the motivation report about Guede is, because one wants to. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. There is no proof this is dishonest propaganda - it is a huge leap and a conjecture to call it such. How about concerned educated people who are seriously questioning the case? To dismiss out of hand is just an easy way out. The appeal is ignoring the huge questions, and focusing on tiny details that will NOT change anything.

 

[SMK]

Haha, that is the pic of the guy on the small window...lol.. I find that so funny. I am pretty sure somebody helped him up there. Why not show the first part?

The arrow to a 'scuff point' is proof of somebody climbing in? Did the defense forget to show this important piece of evidence?

The dust on the clothes are interesting but not decisive one way or the other. You are claiming it as fact that this is dust from the wall, but I am pretty sure that that is just your opinion. One side says a guy came up through the window and put the dust there. The other side says a guy/girl just went outside to get a big rock and the clothes were on the floor before breaking the window. The 2nd scenario is confirmed by the girl who actually lived in the room and testified on the situation in her own room.

All JMO.

where is the indication that someone helped him up there??? Are you saying that retired professionals now decide to become dishonest and throw integrity out the window? proof???

 

[SMK]

Yeah, the front door sounds good, too, but RG has a history of throwing rocks and climbing in, so not sure why he didn't use the front door at the other place, either.

I was reading something very important about the contamination of the crime scene. It's as follows:

One last note about the contaminated bra clasp. I have read some very interesting details about the protective suits that the investigators are wearing in the video. The most important information pertains to the shoe covers. The bra clasp was found on the floor. The shoe covers actually work like dust mops. This would mean that all of the DNA throughout the apartment would have quickly been spread from room to room. Shoe covers are designed to protect floors from shoe contamination. This means that they keep dirt from transferring to the floor from the shoe. However, any dirt on the floor will adhere to the bottom of the shoe covers. The covers quickly become dirty. The investigators in the video do not change their shoe covers as they walk from room to room, thus causing even more contamination of the crime scene.

I didn't even think that the footies could have messed up the crime scene. But this theorist has a valid point. It could explain how AK's DNA got up in FR's room mixed with MK's DNA or blood.

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

See this dude below outside on the balcony, touching the rails with his footies on. What did he track into the house? And did he change his gloves? See the dude in the doorway behind this investigator? The one with NO protective gear on? What did he track around the house?

Excellent points, and why the idea of contamination ought to have been taken very, very seriously.

 

[sherlockh]

where is the indication that someone helped him up there??? Are you saying that retired professionals now decide to become dishonest and throw integrity out the window? proof???

Lol..good one It is a defense lawyer by the way who is climbing up there. I have no problem accepting the break in was easy but just show it. It is so obviously deceiving to show a guy who is already half way. If it is so easy to climb up there then where is the first part? Show how he steps up the small window, show how he holds himself onto that small window and somehow gets up vertically to reach to Filomena's window without falling backwards.

 

[SMK]

Lol..good one It is a defense lawyer by the way who is climbing up there. I have no problem accepting the break in was easy but just show it. It is so obviously deceiving to show a guy who is already half way. If it is so easy to climb up there then where is the first part? Show how he steps up the small window, show how he holds himself onto that small window and somehow gets up vertically to reach to Filomena's window without falling backwards.

Point taken. But I do not presuppose that the defense, or those on Knox's side, are willing to be dishonest or deceptive about their true belief that the prosecution got it wrong. That said, the prosecution likely sincerely believe in their own theory, and are not just conspiring against the defendants. But I take the questions and gaps very seriously, in the name of justice, really do not care about any of the characters in Perugia as I do not know them, including MK.

 

[SMK]

To qualify: It is doubtful to me that these educated persons of long-standing careers are merely part of some "Knox PR Machine"---nor do I think that they are enamored of Amanda and Raffaele. I think they are trying to serve justice, impartially.
Guede fled to Germany as it dawned on him that he had killed a University student, and his luck had run out in Perugia. AK and RS stayed, and dealt with the police at the cottage. Very telling, IMO.