1112 users online (153 members and 959 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 3 of 66 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 53 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 985
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    954
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
    Amber29 wrote, “The argument of no "evidence" of AK and RS in the murder room is constantly used as proof they didn't do it. Well if we are back to using that logic, then RG is not guilty of breaking Filomenas window,crawling in a glass fill windowsill, and ransacking her room all while leaving NO trace of himself there. If the argument can't be used both ways then it is an invalid argument.” (I copied this from the previous thread and merged three paragraphs into one to save space)

    I agree with part of this and disagree with part of it. Let us assume that there was no murder for a moment, just a broken window, etc. If that were the case, I would infer that there had been vandalism and possibly a break-in. There is broken glass consistent with a rock’s being thrown as Pasquali demonstrated. There is a possible hair and possible blood substance (Reps. 198 and 199, respectively). However, there is nothing which ties Rudy uniquely to Filomena’s room. In other words, if no murder had taken place, there is not enough evidence to find him or anyone else guilty of vandalism or whatever.

    I am not surprised that no DNA of his was found in her room. If he wore gloves, then nothing he would have done would obviously leave DNA; if he did not wear gloves, then one would have to make an educated guess about what he touched and swab there.

    On the other hand, the not-yet-dried blood in Meredith’s room ties Rudy to the crime in two central ways, namely the handprint found beneath her and the shoe prints. Rudy had to be in the room before the blood dried, on the bases of both the hand print and the shoe prints. If Amanda and Raffaele were in Meredith’s room at the same time, then where are there bloody shoe prints, hand prints, or footprints? Where are their bloody clothes? It is not just the lack of such evidence; it is the lack of it when there is so much evidence of Rudy.

    The evidence that puts Rudy in the flat is why I think that Rudy was in Filomena’s room. To extend this idea, let’s reconsider the bloody footprint on the mat. It should not be used as evidence against anyone, because there are no distinguishing marks. However, Rudy probably made it, because there is no good evidence of anyone besides him being there on the night of 1 November. Could someone else be responsible for the bathmat print and for tossing the rock? Yes, but there is no evidence of that other person.
    Yes and I also think you can get to a RG conviction with alot less evidence, you do not need the rock throwing, all you need is RG admitted being there at the time of the murder and he left DNA inside the victim as well as the bloody palmprint. That seals it for him - other DNA is just gravy.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    954
    What strikes me as utterly odd about this new toilet fight motive is the fact that it was not even MK bathroom. Why would she be in there? I suppose the smell could have attracted her but I also think she was polite and non confrontational. Would she really have interrupted AK w her boyfriend and a guest and chide her then? no, she would have flushed the toilet and raise it the next morning. If guests were there and it was not AK bathroom, why assume it was AK? It could have been either of the 2 men. Why would MK raise a big stink (literally) about it that night if 1) she would not have known it was AK; 2) I doubt she was the type picking fights with roommates when guests are there let alone high.

    Indeed, I would think a better motive is the 3 were loud, Mk asked them to quiet down and they kill her. Still ridiculous, but it is more plausible than to think MK would raise a toilet fight that night.

    Also re the knife: by the prosecution dismissing this was premeditated it makes their knife story ridiculous. Who carries a knife from their kitchen drawer around with them? What did RS just coincidentally carry a knife around w him just in case his GF wants to murder? If he was a knife collector, he would not carry around an ordinary kitchen knife, he would have used a nicer one, like Swiss army.

    Why didn't AK just use a knife from her own drawer? The only way the knife makes sense is if you think they went there to kill MK, they went back to RS to get the knife, then headed to the cottage.

    In addition, the knife has a big problem bc it has no evidence of blood. If the knife was cleaned w bleach, it would have tested positive for luminol. Also, you would not have been able to clean that knife w bleach and still find the low copy DNA there. In addition, they never proved it matches the cuts.

    Prosecution needs to tie her to that room and by making this a DNA case, they have to deliver. But some of the things they argue just sound ridiculous, first, a murder weapon that has no blood on it; then this toilet story. They would have been better off going w their weak circumstantial case w the sex motive.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,961
    Quote Originally Posted by Yellow View Post
    Not sure, but I also do not know when the shower was last cleaned. It is also the case that it would be just traces of cleaning products, that could leave that residue, as can water that has rust in it. I am not sure what the water quality is there.

    MK strikes me as more tidy than AK, I do not see her wondering around the place barefoot. She might have worn flip flops so she did not track it

    I also do not know how long such residue last after cleaning,

    I never thought there was a Knox boot print anywhere, and especially not in the murder room

    One cannot merely go by just 4 pieces of DNA either. Some DNA is more probative than others, like the DNA in the body. Also 4 pieces of DNA could be oodles of DNA stuff, like the DNA in the body, that could have been a lot as opposed to DNA on the purse which might have been a speck. The mixed DNA of RG and MK in the murder room leaves no doubt he was involved in the murder.

    This is not a who done it. It is whether you believe a 20 year old girl with no known history of psychological problems or law problems nor any evidence she had this horrible temper(no fights in school, etc) would suddenly decide one night to kill her roommate over who did or did not flush the toilet. Sorry, but IMO, you would need to place her in that murder room and there is no evidence of her involvement in the murder.

    The footsteps do not make sense because even if blood, why is not in MK's DNA? If RG tracked visible prints, RS and AK should have do. So what did they cleaned up? Well, either they cleaned up then they used bleach and that is why the luminol light up killing MK DNA. However,the tests were negative for blood. I also think if they were using bleach, they probably would have needed to nave footorints in the murder room and so there would be luminol in there too. but there is not. how could they not clean bloody prints in the murder room yet there be no evidence of bleach.

    The other scenario is that they are blood, but why doesn't it match Mk DNA? Or the third scenario is that it is cleaning products or rust from water acquired in the shower with AK running around barefoot

    Remember defense need not prove any of these scenarios. But with prosecutors not even tying AK to the murder room the prosecution need to prove that those prints were MK's blood, done with AK's feet or that it was AK who cleaned those prints. Without testing positive for blood or MK DNA, it raises the possibility of the reasonableness of the defense scenario.
    BBM
    Tweets from trial on Monday:

    Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki 1m
    Crini believes the shoe prints on the pillowcase are from a female's shoe as suggested by police

    La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 58s
    Meredith trial, Prosecutor Crini: "On Meredith's pillowcase bloody footprint"

    La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
    Process Meredith, the bloody footprint on the pillowcase is Amanda's

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    954
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    Thanks. So it's like a finger print, but it's a palm print. So Guede's palm print has been connected to the pillow case. The shoe print has been connected to Knox's shoe size. Were they both there, or was it Guede and someone else with the same shoe size as Knox?

    Four DNA evidence items connect the culprits to the victim's bedroom.

    • single sample of Guede due to sexual assault
    • single sample of Sollecito on Meredith's bra
    • single sample of Guede on Meredith's shirt
    • single sample of Guede on Meredith's bag.


    Four samples of DNA does not usually mean that DNA should be dismissed. It usually means that they got lucky, found four samples and now can look for justice for the murder of Meredith Kercher. Most murders are lucky if there is one DNA sample, yet in this case, the room is expected to be raining DNA?

    There's also a complete absence of Knox DNA on her possessions in Meredith's bedroom ... this is what Knox has said in her defense. There is oodles of DNA from Guede and no DNA from Knox, so she must be innocent, but that isn't entirely true. There are three Guede samples, one Sollecito sample, prints belonging to all three if we include the bathmat and more evidence in the hallway, living room, large bathroom and Filomina's bedroom. Evidence of Guede is no more or less than evidence against Knox and Sollecito.
    There is alot more evidence against RG bc he should never have been there. You only need to have him there at the time of the murder (which he admits) as well as DNA inside her and the bloody palmprint. Other DNA just seals it further. Them you can believe or not believe his story of why he was there.

    Indeed, I think the DNA inside the body as well as him admitting he was there would be enough for him.

    As I mentioned, we also do not know if there are oodles of DNA cells involved in each of these spots. The contaminated RS has just a speck.

    There is also RG DNA on her clothes, on her shirt.

    As one expert said, if three murderers, RG should have been 1/3 of the DNA, not 3/3.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    954
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    BBM
    Tweets from trial on Monday:

    Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki 1m
    Crini believes the shoe prints on the pillowcase are from a female's shoe as suggested by police

    La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 58s
    Meredith trial, Prosecutor Crini: "On Meredith's pillowcase bloody footprint"

    La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
    Process Meredith, the bloody footprint on the pillowcase is Amanda's
    Did they ever bring this up before? Did they match the shoe w one of AK? A partial man print could also look like a female print (smaller).

    W RG's prints, they matched it to a type of shoe he admitted he wore, just the make of the shoe, not the actual shoe. What did they do hear w these supposed bloody footprints? Do they contradict the footprints of RG?(ie. make it clear that it had to be a second shoe)

    How do they know it was not made by one of the police or technicians? Maybe bc blood would have dried by then, but I think they would need to prove that, show blood would not have left prints so many hours later and they also need to match it to AK foot size as opposes to just being a female shoe. They need to show it is not RG (show it is a second make separate from the first make)

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    954
    I was thinking how MK must have suffered, I read in the write up of her father's book that a boy had proposed marriage to MK months before she went to Italy, but she refused him. I wonder how that boy feels now, he must feel so bad. I so wish she would have married him and then never been in Perigua. That guy must have really loved her bc as far as I know he never sold out to the tabloids, I don't think (maybe others know if he did or not).

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,961
    Quote Originally Posted by Yellow View Post
    There is alot more evidence against RG bc he should never have been there. You only need to have him there at the time of the murder (which he admits) as well as DNA inside her and the bloody palmprint. Other DNA just seals it further. Them you can believe or not believe his story of why he was there.

    Indeed, I think the DNA inside the body as well as him admitting he was there would be enough for him.

    As I mentioned, we also do not know if there are oodles of DNA cells involved in each of these spots. The contaminated RS has just a speck.

    There is also RG DNA on her clothes, on her shirt.

    As one expert said, if three murderers, RG should have been 1/3 of the DNA, not 3/3.
    I understand that four DNA sources were discovered in Meredith's bedroom and I've listed them. If I missed any, I'd like to add them to the list, as I think it is important to understand whether the room is covered in DNA, or whether there are two sources from Guede related to the struggle, and one related to Sollecito.

    This relates to the discussion yesterday, where there was some concern that the absence of Knox's DNA meant that she could not have been in the room and definitely could not have been involved in a struggle. At the same time, we know that Guede was in the room and involved in the struggle, and only three sources of DNA relate to him, while only one relates to Sollecito. That so little DNA was found makes it less likely, in my opinion, that Knox's absence of DNA means anything.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,961
    Quote Originally Posted by Yellow View Post
    Did they ever bring this up before? Did they match the shoe w one of AK? A partial man print could also look like a female print (smaller).

    W RG's prints, they matched it to a type of shoe he admitted he wore, just the make of the shoe, not the actual shoe. What did they do hear w these supposed bloody footprints? Do they contradict the footprints of RG?(ie. make it clear that it had to be a second shoe)

    How do they know it was not made by one of the police or technicians? Maybe bc blood would have dried by then, but I think they would need to prove that, show blood would not have left prints so many hours later and they also need to match it to AK foot size as opposes to just being a female shoe. They need to show it is not RG (show it is a second make separate from the first make)
    The shoe print on the pillow case is nothing new. The print is size 35, same as Knox. I suppose that means that either Knox, or someone with her shoe size, was in the room at the time of the murder.

    The likelihood that the bloody print on the pillow case belongs to investigators is equal to the likelihood that the palm print on the pillow case and all the other foot prints at the crime scene belong to investigators. Investigators wore white booties, and the print is that of a shoe, so, in my opinion, not very likely.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    258
    Quote Originally Posted by Yellow View Post
    What strikes me as utterly odd about this new toilet fight motive is the fact that it was not even MK bathroom. Why would she be in there? I suppose the smell could have attracted her but I also think she was polite and non confrontational. Would she really have interrupted AK w her boyfriend and a guest and chide her then? no, she would have flushed the toilet and raise it the next morning. If guests were there and it was not AK bathroom, why assume it was AK? It could have been either of the 2 men. Why would MK raise a big stink (literally) about it that night if 1) she would not have known it was AK; 2) I doubt she was the type picking fights with roommates when guests are there let alone high.

    Indeed, I would think a better motive is the 3 were loud, Mk asked them to quiet down and they kill her. Still ridiculous, but it is more plausible than to think MK would raise a toilet fight that night.

    Also re the knife: by the prosecution dismissing this was premeditated it makes their knife story ridiculous. Who carries a knife from their kitchen drawer around with them? What did RS just coincidentally carry a knife around w him just in case his GF wants to murder? If he was a knife collector, he would not carry around an ordinary kitchen knife, he would have used a nicer one, like Swiss army.

    Why didn't AK just use a knife from her own drawer? The only way the knife makes sense is if you think they went there to kill MK, they went back to RS to get the knife, then headed to the cottage.

    In addition, the knife has a big problem bc it has no evidence of blood. If the knife was cleaned w bleach, it would have tested positive for luminol. Also, you would not have been able to clean that knife w bleach and still find the low copy DNA there. In addition, they never proved it matches the cuts.

    Prosecution needs to tie her to that room and by making this a DNA case, they have to deliver. But some of the things they argue just sound ridiculous, first, a murder weapon that has no blood on it; then this toilet story. They would have been better off going w their weak circumstantial case w the sex motive.
    These are excellent points.
    It wasn't Amanda's poop and it wasn't Meredith's toilet yet somehow they got into a fight to the death over it and Amanda just happened to have brought Raffaele's knife with her from his kitchen.
    Oh and in the great clean up they didn't bother to flush the toilet - the cause of the whole thing to begin with.

    It really is a matter of looking at the big picture and asking if it makes sense at all.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    954
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    The shoe print on the pillow case is nothing new. The print is size 35, same as Knox. I suppose that means that either Knox, or someone with her shoe size, was in the room at the time of the murder.

    The likelihood that the bloody print on the pillow case belongs to investigators is equal to the likelihood that the palm print on the pillow case and all the other foot prints at the crime scene belong to investigators. Investigators wore white booties, and the print is that of a shoe, so, in my opinion, not very likely.
    Here is the defense case on that pillow print. As I suspected, they argue that it is a partial print of RG and the expert testified that it matches RG. This is probably something the court should have had an independent expert also evaluate to buttress that conclusion.

    http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/footprints-04.html


  11. #41
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    258
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    I understand that four DNA sources were discovered in Meredith's bedroom and I've listed them. If I missed any, I'd like to add them to the list, as I think it is important to understand whether the room is covered in DNA, or whether there are two sources from Guede related to the struggle, and one related to Sollecito.

    This relates to the discussion yesterday, where there was some concern that the absence of Knox's DNA meant that she could not have been in the room and definitely could not have been involved in a struggle. At the same time, we know that Guede was in the room and involved in the struggle, and only three sources of DNA relate to him, while only one relates to Sollecito. That so little DNA was found makes it less likely, in my opinion, that Knox's absence of DNA means anything.
    Don't forget that there was DNA from multiple other unidentified males on the bra clasp.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Wilmington, NC
    Posts
    600

    Vinci demolished this myth

    Quote Originally Posted by Yellow View Post
    Did they ever bring this up before? Did they match the shoe w one of AK? A partial man print could also look like a female print (smaller).

    W RG's prints, they matched it to a type of shoe he admitted he wore, just the make of the shoe, not the actual shoe. What did they do hear w these supposed bloody footprints? Do they contradict the footprints of RG?(ie. make it clear that it had to be a second shoe)

    How do they know it was not made by one of the police or technicians? Maybe bc blood would have dried by then, but I think they would need to prove that, show blood would not have left prints so many hours later and they also need to match it to AK foot size as opposes to just being a female shoe. They need to show it is not RG (show it is a second make separate from the first make)
    The idea that two parallel lines could be extrapolated into Amanda's shoe print originated with Rinaldi. The defense expert witness Dr. Vinci demolished this idea with some nice photos of actual outlines of shoes. One doesn't even need to read his presentation (available at Injustice in Perugia), although a machine-translation helps. He pointed out that the shoes do not have areas where the outer edges run parallel (they curve around). Massei did not take Rinaldi's side on this question. IMO one of the many reasons not to pay much attention to Rinaldi's analysis of the bloody print on the bathmat is his slipshod work with respect to this putative print.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,961
    Quote Originally Posted by whoanellie View Post
    These are excellent points.
    It wasn't Amanda's poop and it wasn't Meredith's toilet yet somehow they got into a fight to the death over it and Amanda just happened to have brought Raffaele's knife with her from his kitchen.
    Oh and in the great clean up they didn't bother to flush the toilet - the cause of the whole thing to begin with.

    It really is a matter of looking at the big picture and asking if it makes sense at all.
    Here are tweets related to motive:

    Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki 59s
    Rudy was not sober, quite high, a bit annoying, and was acting the same disgusting way he behaved downstairs days before.

    Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki now
    Meredith was the one triggering an argument because of the 'inpolite' invasion and behavior. She accused Knox.

    Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki 11s
    Crini cites Laura Mezzetti about the 'annoyance' caused by Knox on house cleaning issues.

    La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
    Meredith process, Prosecutor Crini: "The contrast between Meredith and Amanda comes to matters of hygiene and cleanliness in the house."

    The Nation @ 1m qn_lanazione
    Meredith trial, Prosecutor Crini: "The conflict between Meredith and Amanda explodes when Rudy left the dirty bathroom"

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Land of Ago
    Posts
    15,627
    Just had a thought, don't know if it's been posed before - could RG have killed her first and then attempted sex? The prosecution said in autopsy there was no tearing of the skin 'down there' and that may make sense if she was already incapacitated or dead. Might explain the pillow under her as well, and her being moved to the center of the floor where there was more room. Granted speculation but it makes sense of some of the scene.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,961
    Quote Originally Posted by whoanellie View Post
    Don't forget that there was DNA from multiple other unidentified males on the bra clasp.
    How does that relate to the fact that Sollecito's DNA was on Meredith's bra?

Page 3 of 66 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 53 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 943
    Last Post: 01-31-2014, 10:01 AM
  2. Replies: 1026
    Last Post: 01-12-2014, 08:07 AM
  3. Replies: 1064
    Last Post: 01-05-2014, 12:29 AM
  4. Replies: 1013
    Last Post: 12-19-2013, 05:30 AM
  5. Replies: 1011
    Last Post: 11-12-2013, 12:34 AM

Tags for this Thread