tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post678624712519533806..comments2024-01-31T03:00:37.150-05:00Comments on View-from-Wilmington: Why I believe that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are innocentChris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comBlogger63125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-76121191382918439472013-12-23T15:29:47.258-05:002013-12-23T15:29:47.258-05:00I don't know if you read the comments on your ...I don't know if you read the comments on your old post or not but wish to point out one little point I've never heard anyone else make. The claim of a staged break-in is supposed to implicate Knox, but to me it could also implicate Guede. Guede could reasonably suspect the cops would look closely at everyone who knew Kercher if there was no break in, and he knew he'd been caught burglarizing a place very shortly before, with a knife yet. So he had strong reason to try to make the cops think it was a random burglary. If it was a random burglary they would not be looking closely at everyone who knew the victim. By the way, either talking his way in because Kercher recognized him, or accosting her at the door, the same principle applies, lead the cops away from people who knew the house. Speculation but considering how much has been put into this staged break in idea -- and by the way, if Guede did it with someone else who knew the house, even more motive to lead the cops astray, and explains the two perpetrator theory.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-15339198412919151272013-07-18T10:26:51.275-04:002013-07-18T10:26:51.275-04:00Former FBI profiler John Douglas and Mark Olshaker...Former FBI profiler John Douglas and Mark Olshaker wrote, "Moreover, for any well-trained and experienced homicide investigator or an FBI profiler, determining whether a crime scene represents one or multiple offenders is one of the most basic skills. Few scenes are ambiguous on this point, and this was not one of those." Mr. Douglas believes that Rudy Guede is the sole perpetrator. I think that the man whose bloody handprint is under the body is the culprit.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-50539686019692537572013-07-18T09:17:47.740-04:002013-07-18T09:17:47.740-04:00If you wish to discuss the DNA evidence, that is f...If you wish to discuss the DNA evidence, that is fine, but please do it as I do, with appropriate references. The same goes for the luminol-positive areas.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-15144823470746878272013-07-18T07:08:16.363-04:002013-07-18T07:08:16.363-04:00If you want to see images of the crime scene photo...If you want to see images of the crime scene photos you can go to the website www.murderperugiafile.org<br />You will have to become a member to see all the photos.<br />Once you see the photos you will be able to tell which stories about this case were created with false information.<br />There is a lot of scientific information and also information about the DNA test that you seem to think is false. The method has been used and accepted in other cases and they are referenced.<br />Sorry you don't want to believe that Amanda and Sollecito are somehow involved. The appeal is happening. Her family can waste more money fighting extradition. Sollecito's father is no longer financing his defence. That has to tell you something. Sollecito's book didn't sell, he is asking for donations, he is unemployed. I wonder if he will give up and tell the truth of that night.<br />Still think they are guilty has laid out some very hard facts in the discussion. I feel sorry for Amanda's grandmother. Do you know she mortgaged her home so Amanda's family could mount a defence? Shouldn't happen like that. America is not a nice place to be old and without a roof over your head.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-241536831182933332011-10-15T08:03:51.768-04:002011-10-15T08:03:51.768-04:00all the phone records are found about this case: &...all the phone records are found about this case: "Perugia murder file" web page. Go there to: "timelines", for example.Also page "true justice for Meredith Kercher" has ccell phone activity timelines.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-75288019806851000162011-10-15T07:34:43.495-04:002011-10-15T07:34:43.495-04:00Halidas: you also constatly say: I don't belie...Halidas: you also constatly say: I don't believe eyewitnesses are telling the truth. You say: I don't believe Filomena was tidy like everyone are saying...and so on.These eyewitness have nothing to lose by telling the truth, usually people don't lie when it comes to murder investigation, because if they do, they would be part of it in the eyes of God.And they would be later in trouble by law.It's illegal to lie to police, you assume ALL lie, as habit.I find that atttitude dishonest from your part. Normally people don't lie when it comes to something there is no reason to lie.You don't even believe when police say the glass WAS on top of messed clothes, then why do you even bother to read about this case or anything if you automaticly believe that EVERYBODY lies and EVERYBODY in the world are dishonest(newspapers, police, csi,eyewitnesses,neighbourghs, etc)You shouldn't then believe AK or RS either if you don't believe anyone else too, that would be logical.It's hopeless to try to discuss with someone who says sworn testimony is a lie, as if you were there and know better, that's slander by the way, and you are looking for slander charges against you if you keep saying that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-36713284919787361062011-10-15T07:15:55.717-04:002011-10-15T07:15:55.717-04:00to halides: You think you are smarter than profess...to halides: You think you are smarter than professional CSI investigators? Isn't that rather arrogant attitude to take. You wrote that you don't believe that the shop owner saw Amanda buying two bottles of bleach in the morning after the murder. That makes you a lier, because these eyewitnesses usually testifies in court and they swear their testimony on the Bible. And you have the arrogancy of saying; I don't believe him. It's also stupid to say:if the other person in that shop didn't see Amanda, it MUST mean either the other saw. You must know that is ridiculous. if you go to a shop, and one person sees you, and the other doesn't, what is your conclusion of it: simply that the first person didn't look at you, but you still were there, and other one DID see you, he was paying attention on you. Your way of thinking is very dishonest and unlogigal.A&R lied thousand times to police and investigators, that's all I need to know about this case, since innocent don't lie when you have to swear on Bible and you have nothing to lose.They go back to prison very soon.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-74145461212982795862011-09-26T19:54:23.127-04:002011-09-26T19:54:23.127-04:00Galooli,
I think that it is unlikely (but not imp...Galooli,<br /><br />I think that it is unlikely (but not impossible) that RG would have staged a burglary. Therefore, if the burglary could be conclusively demonstrated to be staged, then that would be strong evidence against AK and RS. However, the evidence for staging is pretty thin gruel. I think that there are two possible reasons why things were not taken from Filomena’s room. One, RG needed cash for rent (and he had not had much luck fencing stuff, anyway). Two, I think Meredith came back shortly after his break-in and while he was on the toilet. The claim of glass on the clothes means very little with no photographs. We do know that Filomena inadvertently altered the distribution of glass when she went to retrieve her computer. We also don’t know with certainty which of her clothes were in the open before the break-in. Testimony to the effect that she was a tidy person is worth almost nothing.<br /><br />ILE damaged the hard drives and inadvertently lost some meta-data, such as the time that Stardust was previously accessed. My definition of alibi is that it is one’s account of where one was when a crime was committed. Therefore, even if I agreed with you that AK and RS lied about what they did on the morning of 2 November, it would be irrelevant to their alibi. Meredith was dead by 10:00 at the very outside, more likely closer to 9 than to 10. There was an undisputed interaction on Sollecito’s computer at 9:08, and the defense argue that there was the opening of the Naruto file at 9:26 or thereabouts.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-47786518718454425022011-09-26T19:18:43.123-04:002011-09-26T19:18:43.123-04:00Good post,Chris. I too thought Amanda may be innoc...Good post,Chris. I too thought Amanda may be innocent until I really delved into the details of this case. I'm curious, since you wrote this, have you come around to concluding her guilt? <br /><br />One of many key things that convicted her was her <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/08/kercher-trial-knox" rel="nofollow"> Flatmates testimony. </a><br /><br />I think the key to understanding the Kercher murder is realizing that the break-in was staged. This alone is damning, but combined with the cell phone and computer records that destroy Raffaele and Amanda's alibis and you've got your conviction. <br /><br />And to top it off, we have Raffaele and Amanda's own testimony and attempts to hide the truth that have ultimately sealed their fate.<br /><br />While DNA collection should be scrutinized closely, in this case there's so much additional evidence to corroborate the findings from the scientific evidence that, let's face it, these convictions will and should stand.Galoolinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-49319523438280942562011-09-21T17:03:30.975-04:002011-09-21T17:03:30.975-04:00Still Convinced,
I don't believe that you hav...Still Convinced,<br /><br />I don't believe that you have read my replies very carefully. Quintavalle's testimony contradicted his own previous account, as well as being at odds with his assistant. As far as I am concerned, his testimony is discredited. The question I asked you was if you came to the same conclusion, what further inferences would you draw?<br /><br />Nothing I wrote is name-calling with respect to the Italian judges.<br /><br />The prosecution's timeline ignores basic human physiology. Once you correct for that, there is just not enough time for Knox and Sollecito to get high on drugs, find Rudy and murder Meredith.The issue of the pipe is basically unimportant. It does not matter whether they ate first then watched movies or vice versa, because they were at his flat the whole time.<br /><br />The real murderer (Guede) is already in prison, but not for as long as he should be.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-81700678123273005892011-09-21T13:51:54.489-04:002011-09-21T13:51:54.489-04:00Still Convinced,
Would you mind answering my ques...Still Convinced,<br /><br />Would you mind answering my question?Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-33029787619369912962011-09-21T13:08:02.419-04:002011-09-21T13:08:02.419-04:00Hypothesis and opinion. Still. I find a lot of t...Hypothesis and opinion. Still. I find a lot of the comments have "I think" and "If" - we can all think a lot of things, but it's a guess. Your personal opinions of the Judge amount to nothing - but really, name calling now? This is what you're using for your own personal 'evidence'?. That sure helps to illuminate your mind set however.<br /><br />"I think" that the pipe was an ongoing problem. But you don't know. "If" they washed dishes twice that evening, then it probably leaked twice. "If" it could be shown conclusively that Quintavalle were wrong - but it hasn't been shown.<br /><br />'I think' and 'If'. Opinion. Hypothesis.<br /><br />Quoted excerpt: "Raffaele, after having eaten, had washed the dishes, but a break in the pipes had occurred under the sink. And water was leaking, with flooding on the floor. Since they didn’t have a mop, they decided that they would do the cleaning the next day with a mop that she could get from her house. She added that they were very tired and that it had to have been quite late at that point: her next memory brought her to the morning of November 2, around 10:00 am, when she woke up and took a plastic bag in which she placed her own dirty clothing to take home." <br /><br />This is not "I think", it's verbatim.<br /><br />You could take every single court case from anywhere in the world, at any time in history and dissect it and second-guess it to death.<br /><br />It's very plain that you simply do not want to hear it. Maybe if Amanda gets off on appeal, she can join up with OJ Simpson (once he gets out), and they can both search for the 'real' murderers.Still Convinced of Guiltnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-75326750151943150662011-09-17T12:07:18.937-04:002011-09-17T12:07:18.937-04:00Still Convinced,
If it could be shown conclusivel...Still Convinced,<br /><br />If it could be shown conclusively that Quintavalle were wrong, what conclusions would you draw?Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-49220946459013105942011-09-17T11:40:20.718-04:002011-09-17T11:40:20.718-04:00Still Convinced,
Do you think that Meredith was k...Still Convinced,<br /><br />Do you think that Meredith was killed after 11:30 PM? I don't, and that is why Nara's testimony is irrelevant.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-57270892472994792342011-09-17T11:37:35.097-04:002011-09-17T11:37:35.097-04:00Still Convinced,
I think that the pipe was an ong...Still Convinced,<br /><br />I think that the pipe was an ongoing problem. If they washed dishes twice that evening, then it probably leaked twice. However, suppose for a moment that it could be conclusively proved that AK and RS had an early dinner that night. I don't see what difference it makes. They said that they were home the whole evening, so the order of events is secondary to that fact.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1234298/Amanda-Knox-The-troubling-doubts-Foxy-Knoxys-role-Meredith-Kerchers-murder.html#ixzz1YDzAFcbS" rel="nofollow">Tom Rawstorne reported</a>, "He knew Sollecito and Knox by sight and was interviewed by police days after the murder, telling officers they had not been in his shop on the morning after the killing.<br />Seven months later, he told a newspaper reporter he had, in fact, seen Sollecito and Knox in the shop that morning and recalled them buying two bottles of bleach, which the prosecution alleged had been used as part of the clean-up of the murder scene.<br />However, another of the shop assistants that day was Marina Chiriboga, who also worked part-time cleaning student apartments.<br />She was able to refute Quintavalle's new version of events because she was also in the shop on the morning of November 2, 2007, and did not see Sollecito or Knox."<br /><br />I think Quintavalle has convinced himself that he saw Knox, but I do not believe that he did. We know from the Willingham case that witnesses' memories sometimes change over time, to become more aligned with their beliefs about guilt or innocence. Others may be less charitable in their interpretations of his comments.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-88225023293852013922011-09-17T11:22:56.859-04:002011-09-17T11:22:56.859-04:00Unknown,
If Judge Hellman's court finds them ...Unknown,<br /><br />If Judge Hellman's court finds them innocent, it will change my opinion of the average acumen of Italian judges, but it will not change my opinion of the case. At this point there is enough information available to anyone who wants it, to form opinions about the case. Judge Massei's reasoning was flawed, and this can be discerned just by reading his report.<br /><br />I am not sure whether or not you are an American, so I don't know how much my examples would mean. However, I think that courts got the Mixer murder, the Norfolk Four case, and the Billy Wayne Cope case completely wrong, just to name a few. My recollection is that a total of eleven reviews of the Cameron Todd Willingham case were done over about a ten-year period, and he was still executed, despite what is now seen as a complete lack of evidence of arson. So for me to say that the Massei court got this case wrong is not much of a leap.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-35092430212868072302011-09-17T08:37:23.798-04:002011-09-17T08:37:23.798-04:00Here is what the Amazing Mignini hisself said abou...Here is what the Amazing Mignini hisself said about Curatolo:<br /><br /><i>The prosecutor Giuliano Mignini called the homeless "One of the key points and most important of the evidence. Credible credibilissimo absolute trustworthiness and reliability of ... ... proof, full circle, full stop. "</i><br /><br />BWAHAHAHAHA, Too funny.<br /><br /><a href="http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=it&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oggi.it%2Ffocus%2F11-2010%2Famanda-altra-verita-ecco-perche-devono-essere-assolti-knox-sollecito-20588850589.shtml" rel="nofollow">Maniac Mignininini</a>Rosenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-56708799077268291442011-09-17T08:32:24.505-04:002011-09-17T08:32:24.505-04:00LOL. Massei is not only biased , he is an idiot. ...LOL. Massei is not only biased , he is an idiot. Does he ever say what those circumstances were that Amanda told her Mom? Nope. It sure must have been something that made her guilty though.<br /><br />Amanda's Mom was perplexed because Amanda forgot about the phone call. She did remember the one later that afternoon.Rosenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-16087992259534431952011-09-16T12:40:57.233-04:002011-09-16T12:40:57.233-04:00So now we come back to Curatolo.
Rafaelle's o...So now we come back to Curatolo.<br /><br />Rafaelle's own father gives information that contradicts his son's alibi. As far as we know, he, like the shop keeper, is not a heroin addict either, nor is he 'confused. In fact, the phone records correlate and confirm the time of the phone call and to who it was made.<br /><br />The previously mentioned shop keeper provides information about Amanda being at his shop early in the morning.<br /><br />Both of these people contradict the information given the Amanda and Rafaelle.<br /><br />Curatolo's information is between them both, and his information accurately correlates with other information, including the time of the murder and the timings given by witnesses who heard Meredith scream. We're willing to believe that the before and after information (Rafaelle's father and the shop keeper) is fine, that the witnesses who heard the scream are fine, but the information from Curatolo must be wrong?Still Convinced of Guiltnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-39396598240713657032011-09-16T12:16:49.361-04:002011-09-16T12:16:49.361-04:00Part 2
The question of washing dishes you raise a...Part 2<br /><br />The question of washing dishes you raise about possibly being before dinner is not the issue - the water leak is the issue, however the fact of it being after dinner is made out by amanda and rafaelle themselves in their version of events. Firstly, both Amanda and Rafaelle said the water leak happened after dinner, and in his phone conversation with his father he told him about the water leak - ergo it had to be after dinner, according to their own story. Secondly, they went on to say they didn't bother with cleaning up the leaked water at that time because it was so late at night. (about 11:00 p.m.) This was part of their alibi to show they were still at rafaelle's place when the murder was being committed. Of course his Father's phone call at 8:42 p.m. is almost two and a half hours before their story says it happened - this undermines their alibi of still being at home washing dishes at 11:00 o'clock at night. Amanda waiting outside the shop just before 7:00 a.m. for it to open the next morning is not someone getting up to urinate or turn on the TV or being awake but still in bed - she is dressed and in the public street three and a half hours before she said she left the house - so much for sleeping in until about 10:30 a.m.<br />The shop keeper is one of the other witnesses I referred to besides curatolo. Is the shop keeper a heroin addict too? Is he also magically 'confused'? He is a business man who opens a shop in the morning, and he has nothing to gain by making up stories about Amanda waiting outside his shop for him to open.<br /><br />In the totality of the circumstances, no part of the information given by Amanda and Rafaelle holds up under close scrutiny.Still Convinced of Guiltnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-5784436895759524202011-09-16T11:57:24.190-04:002011-09-16T11:57:24.190-04:00I see the comment about the parsing of words, but ...I see the comment about the parsing of words, but that is what all of you are doing as well. Things taken to extreme like urinating in the middle of the night are just that - things taken to extreme. If I say I was surfing the net until one in the morning that's not the same as getting up in the middle of the night for a few moments to use the washroom. If I say we slept in until mid-morning (about 10:30 they said) and didn't leave the house until then, and a shop owner sees me at his front door before 7:00 a.m., that's not the same as sleeping in but not being asleep the entire time. You are offering explanations along the lines of this 'may' be why such and such an event occurred, and refer as well to areas where you think there may be confusion. Hypothesis and opinion. An awful lot of things are being watered down with claims of confusion. (by the way, none of the room-mates are 'confused' about where they were that night, or about whether Meredith usually locked her door - they should all be as traumatized as Amanda about the event, but none of them have falsely accused an innocent person, none of them have given incorrect information, and all of their information has withstood investigation - only Amanda's and Rafaelle's has not.)<br /><br />'Amanda called her Mom for the same reason Raffaele called his sister, for advice.' How exactly do you know that's why she called her? Of course you don't. Hypotheses and opinion. And even if that is why she called her, her own mother observed that Amanda gave information at that time before she possibly could have known it, saying “But this was before anything happened…” She phoned her mother at 12:47 p.m., the police did not even arrive until 1:00 p.m. – so thirteen minutes before the police arrived, and however many minutes before they discovered the body, Amanda was giving her mother facts she should not have known. From the judges written decision: "However, the perplexity shown by the mother indicates that in this phone call Amanda had told her of circumstances which, if she was a stranger to what had occurred, she could not have known."<br /><br />(Part 2 to follow...)Still Convinced of Guiltnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-73504778398360613592011-09-16T11:41:09.601-04:002011-09-16T11:41:09.601-04:00At the end of the day, all of us are referencing w...At the end of the day, all of us are referencing whatever material we have at hand. None of us knows for sure who said what or who did what. The police have first hand information, so do the room-mates, so do the lawyers, so do the accused for that matter. So did the judge who found their was enough evidence for an arrest warrant and to commit them to trial, so did the judges who actually tried the case, so did the members of the jury. Somehow it is to be believed that they all got it wrong.<br /><br />Oddly enough, if Amanda's appeal is won, those who wanted to believe her innocent will believe that everyone else got it wrong, but somehow this judge got it right. Those who believe she is guilty will in turn believe that the appeal judge got it wrong.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02781779989382461734noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-44476005243840895602011-09-10T14:06:07.214-04:002011-09-10T14:06:07.214-04:00I answer a phone or turn on the TV before I get up...I answer a phone or turn on the TV before I get up many times, I still consider the time I got up to be the time I left the bed and started my daily activities. I sleep in sometimes but i am not asleep the entire time. This is just a parsing of words trying to show some sign of guilt and means nothing.<br /><br />Amanda called her Mom for the same reason Raffaele called his sister, for advice. Much had happened, including the discovery of the real actual HTG break-in committed by that nefarious bumbling window breaking bathroom messing knife carrying, help your selfing to the fridge dude, Rudy Guede.RoseMontaguenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-13579440602257994092011-09-10T13:14:00.809-04:002011-09-10T13:14:00.809-04:00With respect to the details of Raffaele's call...With respect to the details of Raffaele's call to his father, I don't have the details. Does anyone have a good source?Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-50626315625998160382011-09-10T12:47:17.694-04:002011-09-10T12:47:17.694-04:00Unknown,
If there is computer interaction during...Unknown,<br /><br /><br />If there is computer interaction during the time of the murder, then it clears one of them, and this holes the prosecution’s case below the waterline. Moreover, if Raffaele really were working on his computer that night, it strikes me as unlikely that he would say otherwise to protect his girlfriend of less than a week. He could have denied her an alibi in front of Judge Matteini and possibly walked, but he did not.<br /><br />With respect to Rudy’s story, he has been given an extraordinarily lenient sentence for murder and sexual assault (he received mitigation in addition to the reduction from the fast track trial). Why should he tell the truth, when lying has served him so well. I am not certain that if he admitted that he took part in the killing and Amanda and Raffaele were not there (which I believe would both be true statements), whether or not he could face legal repercussions, but I think it is conceivable. Moreover, it may be psychologically easier for Rudy to claim innocence than to face the world for what he is.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com