Thank you, Steve!
Steve,
Thank you. Your are/have been simply incredible to give us a place to discuss this case. Thank you!
SB,
Bonjour a vous. Ca va toujours?
Thank you Steve!
beep:
Ca va très bien, merci! Le printemps arrive!
SB,
N'est-ce pas! Dans la poesie, c'est le moment de la naissance.
Thanks very much Steve for the brand new thread!
Cool!! Thanks Steve! This will sure make Traduco happy... for a little while anyways.
Michael UK
Hey friend, did you read my posts concerning your last post on the old thread?
Beep -
"If I may, I would like to point out two other things as well. Assuming Rudy Guede is not lying, he did say that that Meredith was upset about losing her money and that she became furious. Several people have pointed out here that Meredith's anger would not have subsided so easily and that it would have precluded any kind of romantic evening. Additionally, it is my understanding that Meredith suffered three wounds, one of which was fatal. RobertM and others have pointed out I believe that these were 'intimidation wounds' with the final one being in my opinion one of rage. A botched drug deal would have meant a single wound in the heart or some other vulnerable body part. In my opinion, the wounds inflicted on Meredith are 'intimidation wounds' with one 'rage wound'. I could be wrong on this, but whenever I look at criminal acts like Meredith experienced, I just see rage. Criminals in general are must better than we think in exterminating their enemies. They do not like to leave behind a lot of evidence. In this case, you see a whole lot of evidence; which implies that whoever did do this were complete amateurs. I agree with others here who have said that after the crime was committed, a 'uh oh' moment occurred."
Perhaps not, but she may have been glad of the company...in fact, some ladies crave 'closeness' when they are upset. As for the wounds....they indicate at the least....that the person with the knife was playing with it around her neck in an intimidatory fashion...it would have not taken much more for a slip with that knife or a burst of anger or panic to draw it back and puch it through. I don't think those who did it saw themselves as 'criminals'...I think rather they were 'playing' at being criminals (which at the end of the day renders them into the same thing)...these were indeed amateurs. I certainly agree there was an 'uh oh' moment...although I imagine that it was some rather heavy expletives used in place of 'uh oh'. I responded to your 'doorbell' post on the previous blog.
Skep, Minotaur -
"It is true that Goofy Abdar was the source for that rumor, and was probably the person who planted it on Frank's blog. Frank shares your view on this aspect of the case. So maybe the more interesting question is why Goofy Abdar planted the idea, and why he has hinted at access to unpublished police reports to back his claim?"
This is a very good point. Either this character is telling the truth...in which case the 'Hash Robbery' is indeed a valid theory, as valid as any we have to date. Or, they are planting misinformation on the back of some very big claims. Considering the closeness of this individual to the family of one of the suspects this would be most interesting and would require further investigation. Therefore, either way, this is an interesting development 'worthy' of scrutiny.
"It is only after Lalli was gone that we see words like "rough" sexual intercourse".
Hi Sparrow
Actually, the Italian press has reported that from the very beginning.I have to dig out the reports, but I clearly remember
that there has always been uncertainty as to Meredith had been violated, because only bruises were found on the body even at the preliminary stages of investigation-not so severe to justify rape, but enough to hypothesize "rough" intercourse-
However, I don't think that lack of extreme violence marks on the body is enough to rule out sexual assault. Victims can be paralized by fear or just remain passive in order to avoid further damage (self-defense technique), which would result in objective findings of "rough intercourse" only. This is also prosecution reasoning.Actually,they have hypothesized non-consensual intimate touching (the bruises) and even if "standard penetration" has not occured, this is still considered sexual assault,which is a crime under the law.As a matter of fact, the trio is being held for complicity in homicide and sexual assault, not rape.
Unfortunately, Meredith cannot tell us how it really went, so investigators are trying to figure out the most reasonable hypothesis,by evaluating not only the visible signs of violence on the body, but also other circumstances such as testimonies of Meredith's friends.
: Is Rudy going to be heard by the PM?
A: I wish Rudy could be heard by him. The others have been questioned so many times while Mignini never really interviewed him. He had just a couple of questions during the GIP interrogation. But Mignini is such a good person and an excellent PM.
from Franks blog, Perugia Shock.
I just wanted to put Biscuit's words into perspective. If RG wanted to speak to the PM, Biscuits would just have to notify La Procura and the PM would go listen.
Open Question -
One thing that has been bothering me is the mobile phones (again). We have evidence of Rudy going into Meredith's bag , his DNA as well as Meredith's blood being found inside...we have him in the murder room. However, I recall 'no' mention of any traces of blood being found on the mobile phones....only mention of fingerprints. Why are there no micro traces of blood on the phones, which I think we can agree weren't bleached?
Damien,
Good work. I guess that puts an end to Rudy Guede telling us just who the attacker was that killed Meredith. It is amazing about the stonewalling that is currently going on between the people in custody. We were lucky to get those diaries/stories/tall tales/explanations/ whatever from them.
I guess if Rudy Guede is either unwilling or unable to identify the attacker of Meredith to the Authorities, then his story must be considered false; because after all, the real killer could then be found. If both Raffale Sollecito and Amanda Knox are also done talking as well, then the Authorities can only fall back on the motive of an either premeditated or un-premeditated sexual attack on the person of Meredith Kercher.
This might explain Rudy Guede's lawyer threatening to sue, and indeed, already has, anyone who claims that his client murdered Meredith. But Rudy Guede does/must know who did it. I do not think it was just his cowardice that made him flee the scene; he must have been an active participant up until the 'uh oh' moment.
Michael UK
There have been several theories put forward here about the phones. I personally do not believe that Rudy Guede was responsible for getting rid of the phones. And these are the reasons why. He fled the scene of the crime too quickly. He did not have the time to think about the phones. He was definitely in the bathroom at some time. He was only inside the house for about 40 minutes time. Later, he went to see his friend Alex I believe and even laments in his diary, that he did not have a phone. He was also seen later that night seen at the Discoteque. In his mind, he did not commit the crime so he could probably disassociate himself from it. One of Kermit's theories is that the phones were thrown from the road by someone else, most likely, the clean up crew. I prefer that theory because indeed, if we think of his three abandonment theory, the perpetrators locked Meredith inside her room to die and probably thought it would not be a good idea to have them inside for fear she might try to call someone. Later on, they realized they had them in their possession and just simply had to get rid of them. What better place then the ravine outside the city walls. It so happens that they arrived in the garden of the only home in that general area. The perpetrators could have easily cleaned the phones, thus erasing their fingerprints.
When you have 5 minutes, watch and learn:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=WkLHXKHb1Vc
Anonymous -
"When you have 5 minutes, watch and learn:
"
Firstly, I'll point out that all the supsects in this case are 'adults'...not 'children'. Secondly, I think we are all well aware that 'sometimes' people make false confessions...just as we are well aware that people 'often' make true confessions. What 'confession' discussion is that you are responding to? What is your point...what is it exactly that we need to 'learn'?
bpcl -
Thank you for your response. I'm in complete agreement with you about the phones.
"When you have 5 minutes, watch and learn:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=WkLHXKHb1Vc
Anonymous | 03.18.08 - 5:11 pm | #"
And when you have five minutes, give yourself a handle so you can join the discussion here and we can reply to the points you might want to make. If you look at earlier threads, you'll see that the issue of Amanda's confession (if that is what you are referring to) has been dealt already. I think we've pretty much covered that one, but if you have new information or insight we're all ears, provided you give yourself a handle.
Incidentally, if you're interested in the topic of false confessions, it was raised again recently on another Meredith Kercher related blog, in connection with a book on the subject.
Firstly, I'll point out that all the supsects in this case are 'adults'...not 'children'. Secondly, I think we are all well aware that 'sometimes' people make false confessions...just as we are well aware that people 'often' make true confessions. What 'confession' discussion is that you are responding to? What is your point...what is it exactly that we need to 'learn'?
Michael (UK | 03.18.08 - 5:56 pm |
Ok just remember it. Nothing more to say:
Anonymous
"Nothing more to say."
I didn't think you had.
Steve....we appreciate you allowing us to have this open thread! Thanks so much!
"I do not think it was just his cowardice that made him flee the scene; he must have been an active participant up until the 'uh oh' moment."
bpcl | 03.18.08 - 4:16 pm | #
Beep...I SO agree with you!
"It is easy to see that he wouldn't want to talk about what they did sexually out of respect for her." Sparrow | 03.18.08 - 2:13 pm
Hi Sparrow.... As soon as I read the part of his diary claiming there was nothing more than a kiss, my first thought was, "I bet when is/was confronted with the fact that his DNA was found inside her, he will probably claim(ed) that he only lied about it at first because he didn't want to dishonor her." not for a moment do I believe that he is that sensitive. Plus if Rudy really believed he was writing a "private diary" that no one else would read, this wouldn't make sense. (Though I am aware that he may never have thought of it as a private diary). If he wants the authorities to believe he thought his writings were private though, I doubt they would give an excuse by him such as being sensitive to her reputation any credence at all. If he didn't kill MK himself, he admittedly left her to DIE! Although a lot of Rudy's words can be touching,I think he is absolutely a liar, and take everything he says with a grain of salt. Maybe I should be more sensitive to his BS, but I'm not. First of all his story of being on the potty is such a load of crap (no pun intended). How convenient for him. I'm also convinced he had to know there was a phone available based upon the time line (MK's call with her Mom). AND I believe that two phones lying around would be hard to miss if he truly wanted to make a call. If they weren't out in the open, then they were in her purse, which he appears to have gotten into. People jusr don't put their cell phones away in a drawer, as service is lost at that point. If RG gave a damn about Meredith, and if he honestly didn't think there wzs a phone available, he would have run as fast as he could directly to a pay phone and called the police anonymously, instead of going to dance with his buddy.
Indie...Thank you sooo much for the valuable links you posted for me! I had never been able to find the one on Disqus, and there were lots of posts there! Thanks to your links, I realized that I had saved the rest of the Haloscans correctly though. That was so kind of you to go to the trouble to post all of that. I really appreciate it!
Oceania I too, enjoy reading your theories! We definitely need to look at this from every possible angle. I'm glad you stuck around.
Question for all....re:Meredith's purses. If I remember correctly, the one on the bed was found to have blood and Rudy's fingerprints?? The one they gathered recently from the closet also had blood on it, and it is the one she was actually carrying at the time? It probably doesn't matter, but it seems strange to me that the one she was using would be put away (closet I think?) and the one she was not using, on her bed. Am I just over-analyzing this?
I am really not good at condensing my thoughts.....sorry....again....for the long post. 
Uh-Oh! I didn't mean to leave bold on above....
Stacey,
The points you make about Rudy Guede are precisely the reasons why he doesn't speak anymore about the topic. He knows who the killer is because he was there and even admitted fighting with him. The fact that he has clammed up so to speak means that he is as involved in this crime as the others are, whomever they might be.
As disappointed as others might be in Amanda Knox, I am disappointed in Rudy Guede. All of the seemingly kind words he has mentioned about/for Meredith Kercher simply do not wash with me because he is not fulfilling his responsibility towards her by telling all that he knows and identifying the assailant against whom he says he fought. The time line for Rudy Guede is just too small. He says he arrived at the cottage to meet Meredith at 8:38 pm. She arrived at about 9:15 pm. We know Meredith started a phone call with her Mother at 9:30 pm. Assuming she finished the call at 9:45 pm gives Rudy Guede precisely 40 minutes or so to do all that he said he did in his diary. As his guardian said about him, Rudy Guede is a 'fantastic liar'
Sparrow,
I just read over my last post, and my response to you sounds so mean. I'm sorry! The rude way it was written is not directed at you. I just get ill thinking about what RG did. I hope you won't take it personally.
Beep,
What do you think about Meredith's two purses? Or am I remembering something wrong?
re:purses.....I didn't mean to say Rudy's "fingerprints," but his DNA. I was in a hurry but should have proofed before posting it anyway...
Stacey,
Actually, I have not really studied Meredith's purses as of this moment. Sorry about that.
Mr Huff, our collective thanks for allowing us, a rather disparate group of individuals from around the globe, to continue to discuss this fascinating murder mystery.
Rhonda and Stacey, hi, thankyou both for your supportive posts recently.
Michael, your open question re blood on the phones, this is such a good point and one that really puzzles me. Maybe it's just that we don't have any of this kind of analysis leaked (so to speak) of the phones as yet, and you're right about being unable to clean the phones thoroughly as most phones have all sorts of little crevasses around the numbers etc it would impossible to clean them completely of any blood or organic matter. Maybe also the phones had not been in a place at the crime to receive any DNA fallout and/or maybe the hands of whomever disposed of them had been cleaned of any blood, or as an accessory did not have any blood. Was it ever reported or established whether the phones were switched on or off when they were found ? I seemed to remember in a very early report that Sra. Elisabetta
heard one of the phones ringing either before or just after she had picked it up and it was an abusive call, it may have just been another piece of over enthusiatic reporting. I always thought if the phones were switched on the investigators may have been able to work out what time the phones moved from the cottage as a key way of marrying up what witnesses supposedly heard and saw etc. If only phones could talk (scuse the pun!).
I know I have seen it.
Could somebody point me to the reference made to Meredith's phone conversation with her mother on the night she died?
Could somebody point me to the reference made to Meredith's phone conversation with her mother on the night she died?
Brian S. | 03.19.08
The only reference I can spot is contained in this article. It’s not clear where or how they got this info?
http://www.repubblica.it/2007/11...rdo-
amanda.html
“The circumstances acclarate say that the last person to listen to the voice of Meredith before meeting his murderers (or his murderess) is the mother in England. Meredith la chiama alle 21.30 del 1 novembre. Meredith calls to 21:30 on 1 November.’
Plus if Rudy really believed he was writing a "private diary" that no one else would read, this wouldn't make sense. (Though I am aware that he may never have thought of it as a private diary).---Stacey
Hi Stacey, I didn't think your post sounded mean at all. But this "diary" was not a true diary and never meant to be private. It's Rudy's statement. It was obviously meant for the world to see, because he's talking to people in it. The first 2 pages, which we didn't translate, are a letter to his basketball coach and and the coach's family. On those two pages he tells them how much he appreciates the kindness they showed him, how they made him feel like a part of the family, etc., etc. And the last two pages, which we also didn't translate, consisted of messages to friends, including at least two women who were mother figures to him, as well as childhood friends who had nicknames for him.
I just wanted to put Biscuit's words into perspective. If RG wanted to speak to the PM, Biscuits would just have to notify La Procura and the PM would go listen.
damian | 03.18.08 - 3:42 pm | #
Maybe it's not that Rudy has anything new to say to the PM. Maybe Biscotti wants the PM to question Rudy, so Rudy can defend his story, but mostly so Biscotti can get a feel for what the PM is thinking in regards to Rudy.
One thing that has been bothering me is the mobile phones (again). We have evidence of Rudy going into Meredith's bag , his DNA as well as Meredith's blood being found inside...we have him in the murder room. However, I recall 'no' mention of any traces of blood being found on the mobile phones....only mention of fingerprints. Why are there no micro traces of blood on the phones, which I think we can agree weren't bleached?
Michael (UK | 03.18.08 - 3:55 pm | #
This is such a great observation. They may have evidence from the phones they haven't revealed. But if not, this helps rule Rudy out as the phone thrower.
Sorry to go back again but this has been puzzling me for a while; why did the judge write that AK and RG were in the different bathrooms at the same time? Could it be that the drop of mixed blood was 'dated' and found to have been left at the same time as RG claims he was in the other bathroom? Is there another, more plausible explanation for the judge's words? I presume that the police know when the blood was left there. How precise is the dating of blood again...are we talking hours or minutes? (Sorry if this has been covered)
why did the judge write that AK and RG were in the different bathrooms at the same time?---Damian
I've never seen this discussed here. It's the first I've seen of it.
Ciao Passerotto,
Judge. '..le tracce ematiche della Knox in un bagno, e i segni inequivoci della presenza in contemporanea, nell'altro bagno, di Guede.'
The judge says AK and RG were in the different bathrooms at the same time.
Anonymous | 12.23.07 - 8:10 am | #
That was me forgetting to sign in at Christmas.
...because of the source and the wording, I thought it was interesting. I guess it depends on how long it took to 'date' the drop of blood and how accurate that dating is. It has been discussed here briefly and the 'concensus' seemed to be that it wasn't important...
...because of the source and the wording, I thought it was interesting. I guess it depends on how long it took to 'date' the drop of blood and how accurate that dating is. It has been discussed here briefly and the 'concensus' seemed to be that it wasn't important...
damian | 03.19.08 - 4:47 am | #
Hi Damian. Maybe Nicki has an answer. It seems incredible that they could determine that the blood and poo were deposited at the same time, during the same minutes, however. Could "contemporanea" in this case be interpreted as being a more general time frame? Like that night, or within a three hour time frame? It seems not the best way to use the word, but maybe?
I guess I end up asking the same question you are, Damian. Nicki will come to the rescue, I'm sure. I've gotta go. Ciao.
I also thought that maybe we had lost something in translation but in this context, I really think it can only mean 'at the same time.' In Italian, the meaning is clear. Since RG's business can't be 'dated' with any accuracy, but the blood can, I'm assuming that the forensic analysis of the blood ties in with RG's statement. Of course, I may be wrong, but only if those fornsic results weren't in at the time. (In my humble opinion) Either way, if that drop of blood has been dated to the evening of Nov 1, I guess that would be bad news for AK's team.
Damian,
They can say that both blood and feces were deposited in a similar time range, I think the "contemporanea" is an inference of the judge from blood and feces heving apparently been deposited at a similar time.E.g.Rudy mught have left his traces at 1030 pm. and Amanda at midnight...that wouldn't put them in the bathrooms at the same time.
Hi Nicki...but if that is what he meant, wouldn't he have written that? What he wrote is very clear, why he wrote it less so. Would you exclude the possibility that the dating of the blood ties in with RG's statement (or something else) and as a consequence he wrote that they were in the different bathrooms at the same time?
Not news as such, but Il Messaggero dell'Umbria is talking about the summit meeting again today...in March or the start of April.
The dating of the blood can tie in with RG ìs statement, but only approximately. e.g.we can't say that blood has been deposited exactly at 1135 p.m., only that it was deposited between time X and Y. Amanda's blood has been dated to be "fresh" enough to have been deposited much later than when she claimed she left home.
thanks Nicki...any idea what kind of gap there is likely to be between x and y? (cioe, how exact is the dating of blood?)
The only reference I can spot is contained in this article. It’s not clear where or how they got this info?
http://www.repubblica.it/2007/11...rdo- amanda.html
“The circumstances acclarate say that the last person to listen to the voice of Meredith before meeting his murderers (or his murderess) is the mother in England. Meredith la chiama alle 21.30 del 1 novembre. Meredith calls to 21:30 on 1 November.’
DLW | 03.19.08 - 1:17 am |
DLW
OOps don't know what happened there
Thanks for the info.
I wonder if this is any more accurate that the phantom phone calls which didn't happen between AK and RG.
I wonder if this is any more accurate that the phantom phone calls which didn't happen between AK and RG.
Brian S. | 03.19.08 - 7:37 am
Brian S, You're right, possibly not true at all. Thanks for pointing that out. I experienced first hand how inaccurate some media can be, and am normally diligent about checking sources as soon as I read anything, but I didn't on this one. I had in my head it had been pretty well confirmed, but I should know better than to trust my memory these days.
You add a lot to this board. Thank you!
Brian S, '...the phantom calls which didn't happen between AK and RG.'
Do we know they didn't happen?
Amanda's blood has been dated to be "fresh" enough to have been deposited much later than when she claimed she left home.
nicki | 03.19.08 - 6:07 am | #
Do you have a source for that nicki? I guess that would be significant...
Il Giornale dell'Umbria reported on Saturday that the results from the analysis of the computers are due in this week. We'll see if any of them are leaked...
bcpl - I am thinking of a statement made by Amanda Knox in which she said to her parents, "I cannot lie, I was there that night".
-----------
I think we've already 'established' more than once that her comments were taken out of full context. Her mother claims Knox was referring to being at RS's house that night and not the cottage. Not that I'm defending Knox, I'm not - but if we're trying, as you say, to separate fact from fiction, then her comments shouldn't be taken as fact if they were taken out of context (which appears to be the case).
As far as both their phones being switched off at the same time, let's not forget that Knox says they were together that evening, and RS says they were not (at least not for the whole evening.) If they WERE together, why WOULDN'T they switch their phones off? There doesn't seem to be anything sinister in that at all. Once again, I am NOT defending either of them (since I feel they're both guilty of something, even if not the actual murder) - but it makes it much harder to piece together if their phones (and Knox's comments in jail about 'being' there), keep being bought up as 'significant' points - when I don't feel either of them are, particularly Knox's comments you refer to.
Same thoughts regarding what you said about Knox's dna being on the knife along with Meredith's dna. It doesn't prove a thing from everything I've read about it. It was 'news' released by the police months ago, but nothing substantial has been made of it.
P.S Accidentally posted this in the 'old' blog!
Something else to bear in mind:
Meredith Kercher's killers may have faked sex attack
From Nick Pisa in Rome
Last Updated: 1:54am GMT 04/02/2008
The killers of Meredith Kercher, the British student murdered in Italy three months ago, may have faked evidence of a sex game to cover their tracks, it has emerged.
Pathologist Luca Lalli who carried out the original post mortem has now indicated to prosecutors that â€sexual violence Meredith suffered may have been simulated.â€
Dr Lalli
’s original inquest concluded that Meredith, a Leeds University student from Coulsdon, Surrey, was the victim of "sexual violence."
However a fresh examination of his notes requested by the examining judge Claudia Matteini has revealed that he now believes the violence may have been "simulated to make it look as if she had been the victim of a sex attack."
Sources said that Dr Lalli had reached this conclusion because no â€bruising consistent with a rape was found on Meredith’s body.†He also added that the â€depth and size of the wound to Meredith’s throat mean she may also have choked on her blood.â€...
The Telegraph
I just wanted to put Biscuit's words into perspective. If RG wanted to speak to the PM, Biscuits would just have to notify La Procura and the PM would go listen.
damian | 03.18.08 - 3:42 pm | #
_________________
Maybe it's not that Rudy has anything new to say to the PM. Maybe Biscotti wants the PM to question Rudy, so Rudy can defend his story, but mostly so Biscotti can get a feel for what the PM is thinking in regards to Rudy.
Sparrow | 03.19.08 - 4:14 am | #
_________________
As disappointed as others might be in Amanda Knox, I am disappointed in Rudy Guede. All of the seemingly kind words he has mentioned about/for Meredith Kercher simply do not wash with me because he is not fulfilling his responsibility towards her by telling all that he knows and identifying the assailant against whom he says he fought.
bpcl | 03.18.08 - 10:45 pm | #
________________
Is it possible that Biscotti's message in the interview with Frank is that Rudy is now ready to tell the PM more than what his ultimately self-serving 25-page document revealed?
The late March-early April summit meeting could be very important, I think. This is where the various contradictions and inconsistencies will be brought together and examined with the three suspects and their legal counsel all together in the same room. I'm surprised it hasn't already happened.
"We know Meredith started a phone call with her Mother at 9:30 pm. Assuming she finished the call at 9:45 pm...
bpcl | 03.18.08 - 10:45 pm | #"
Remember, there is only one source for this information so far. When we first discussed it more than one month ago, it was in the context of Lalli's autopsy report, which showed that Meredith had a BAC reading consistent with a glass of wine, which was at odds with statements from her friends Robyn and Sophie that no alcohol was consumed during their evening together, which ended at 9 pm. So we have one source, and that source does not say how long the call lasted. It may have been 15 minutes; it may have been more; it may have been less. So we don't know how much time anyone had to do anything. The article also noted that Meredith was alone when she called her mother. This too has to be taken with a grain of salt before we use it to prove anything. One point Frank made recently, a propos the press reports that followed the 40-minute search and seizure last week, is that the top priority of journalists is sometimes to fill space. They get a two-sentence press release and turn it into a full column. I think all that extra column filler should be examined but mainly treated as "chaff" until it is further substantiated.
Damien
Among others, there's Van Zandt report:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/2233...d/22332240/
page
/5/#storyContinued
Ciao
Among others, there's Van Zandt report:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/2233...d/22332240/
page
/5/#storyContinued
Ciao
nicki | 03.19.08 - 11:51 am | #
Van Zandt describes the droplet as "basically fresh blood." He doesn't say anything about how precisely it's dated, although he does seem to be convinced that it was fresh enough to put Amanda in the house on the night of the murder.
But if they use the degree of drying as a yardstick (as Van Zandt mentioned), Amanda's showering in that bathroom might have affected it. Bathroom fixtures are subject to condensation. Would the presence of moisture complicate attempts to date the blood deposit?
With time the blood cells shrink and blood coagulates according to specific labs parameters that allow forensics to determine if blood has been deposited a few minutes, hours or days before. I gather if investigators claim that the blood was deposited during the night, they have run the appropriate tests. It's their job.
'Analysts are confident that the fresh drop places her in the house the night Meredith was murdered.' (Nicki's link above)
This could be just jazzing up the article...filling space.
Like alot of the reporting in this case, it's a bit vague, but certainly pointing in the direction you mentioned nicki. Has anything similar appeared in the Italian press? Sorry to labour this, but if the forensics say that drop of blood was left there on the evening of nov1, won't that be a little difficult to explain away?!! What do you say?
However a fresh examination of his notes requested by the examining judge Claudia Matteini has revealed that he now believes the violence may have been "simulated to make it look as if she had been the victim of a sex attack."
If you examine the crime scene photo's of Meredith's bra, it is obvious that she "bled down" onto the straps.
It is obvious that she was still wearing the bra when the blood poured from her neck.
Liquid goes down hill.
Therefore TSTM, that the bra was cut from her body AFTER the death blow was made.
What male indulges in a sex crime without leaving their semen.
SB,
I agree with you in principle but this much I do know. Meredith did not reach the cottage until at least 9:15 pm. This time would include getting to the cottage, getting out the key, entering the cottage and so forth. You do agree that a call was made to her Mother do you not? Let's say she made the call exactly at 9:15 at the earliest and it only 5 lasted minutes, the minimum amount of time and it ended at 9:20 pm at the earliest, for the benefit of doubt. We know Rudy Guede ran out of the house by 10:30 pm. Assuming this time, Meredith had to be in the death throes before. Let's take the minimum amount of time for this, say 5 minutes. This would mean that the fatal blow was struck at 10:25 pm at the earliest.
This best case precise timing, to the benefit of Rudy Guede, would give him approximately 65 minutes to do all that he said he did with Meredith Kercher; and have romantic sex because his DNA is there on her body, whether it was forced or not. IMHO, he does not have enough time to do all of what he said. IMHO, he said he arrived at the cottage at 8:38 pm to give himself some more time. Unfortunately for him however, Meredith's friends can vouch that she left their home at 9:00 pm. Rudy Guede is lying on just about everything he said in his statement and he is protecting others who were involved.
What male indulges in a sex crime without leaving their semen.
Brian S. | 03.19.08 - 1:19 pm | #
One who wears a condom. One who is impotent. One who uses something else to assault... many options. But what your wrote in the first part of your post is very important. The bra was cut from her AFTER she was stabbed. It's pretty obvious. And Rudy said she was clothed when he left.
he said he arrived at the cottage at 8:38 pm to give himself some more time.---Beep
Beep, he never said he arrived at 8:38. This is something we got from way back, and I don't know where, but where is the source? He didn't have a watch or a phone (with a clock). In his own writing he believes he left the Kebap at approximately 8:30, but he doesn't know for sure. He was eating and talking before that. And he is habitually late. I don't think the precise time of 8:38 is one to be relied upon. A guy who doesn't have a watch, and is always running into friends and stopping to talk... he cannot be relied upon to give an accurate time. I really liked Michael (UK) description of what he believed to be Rudy's different way of experiencing time.
Beep
I have to agree with Sparrow on the timeline issue. Rudy is no world authority on time and, as for the two other suspects, they have some serious time issues as well. They have been wildly divergent on some issues according to their written statements. (Raffaele says they left the cottage on Nov 1 around 4 or 5, went to town and got home at 8 or 8:30; Amanda says they left the cottage at 6 and went back to Raffaele's to watch a movie, etc.) The only certainties we have to date as far as times go are those from cellphone and other digital records. My point is really that we shouldn't say such things as Meredith talked to her mum for 15 minutes because we have no basis whatsoever for saying this; we can't even say for sure that she did. This was reported exactly once.
And I have to question your statement that Rudy is lying because he wouldn't have had time to do all those things. All what things? A conversation about childhood can take five minutes; a sexual encounter can begin and go wrong in minutes; a sip from a container of apricot juice takes seconds. The one thing I am pretty sure of is that Rudy did not have time to flush the toilet (or simply forgot to) and, if the witness who saw someone like "him" is correct and he left at 10:30 pm, he probably didn't have time to do a clean-up of the magnitude that has been suggested. (Note that Biscotti hinted the other day that he will challenge this witness, who he says did not get a good look at the "black man" in question). But Rudy did have time to kill someone, or to participate in someone's demise. He is certainly lying about a number of things, but I'm not sure he's consciously lying about time, insofar as he didn't really seem to care too much about it. At this stage, given what little we know for sure and all that we don't know yet, I doubt we can solve this crime by looking at times. It is important to have a timeline, with confirmed times and suspect-generated times, and see how they link up and so on, but I don't think we can build a case on fuzzy times.
Sparrow,
Hello to you! Okay, let's give Rudy Guede the benefit of the doubt and say he arrived at the cottage at 9:15 pm along with Meredith. That still does not give him sufficient time to do all the things he said he did in the cottage that night. IMHO, he has between 40 and 65 minutes. That is simply not enough time. And we know that his DNA is in and on the body of Meredith. And from everything we know about Meredith Kercher, she was not a person to just offer herself any man she met just like that, so their encounter would have to have been extremely brief.
IMHO, Rudy Guede just does not have enough time to do everything he said in his statement and still have consensual/forced sex. I said yesterday that if Rudy Guede refuses to identify his attacker, then the authorities will have no choice but to fall back on the sexual violence angle. Once I see the entire version of his statement, I will develop a time line for everything he said he did at the cottage that night and I am sure you will see that he is basically lying, not only for himself, but others as well.
Sparrow:
Are you happy with "succhia gonne" being the right term (instead of "gomme")?
Beep:
What am I missing here? All what things? Please tell.
Sparrow,
I do believe too that there were others in the cottage that night. I do believe that Rudy Guede was telling the truth when he said he arrived there at 8:38 pm. This time coincides with certain times of others in custody. As Frank said the other day, Amanda Knox has a whole lot of explaining to do on certain, key evidence, as well as does Raffale Sollecito. I am a believer of what the Police authorities are saying happened to Meredith.
"I do believe that Rudy Guede was telling the truth when he said he arrived there at 8:38 pm."
Beep:
Here's my big problem. The 8:38 reference, as far as I know, does not come from Rudy. Every reference to it on the previous thread (I just checked) is from you or from Xin's timeline. But I don't know where it came from. I think Sparrow and Michael are right about Rudy's relationship to time.
And whether or not you believe all three were involved, it would be a bad idea to have that hanging on the very weak thread of Rudy's statement that he got there at 8:38--especially since he may never have said that.
1. MK's mother:
The report that MK phoned her mother in England on 1st November at 21.30 comes from La Reppublica of 7th November (http://www.repubblica.it/2007/11/sezioni/cronaca/
perugia-uccisa/ricordo-amanda/ricordo-amanda.html) . It is very convincing. The journalist is clearly not padding; he takes the trouble to say that 'Le circostanze acclarate dicono' that the last person to hear Meredith's voice was her mother. On the other hand he says 'Verosimilmente (la circostanza non è ancora accertata), Meredith in quel momento era sola.' So he is clearly distinguishing between what he has been told for certain and what is speculation.
Like all times, 21.30 is likely to be an approximation; if she made the call from her mobile, she may even have made it while walking home from Sophie Purton's. One may speculate that it was not a long call: MK's mother was ill, and she probably phoned briefly every evening to check on her. Phone calls are expensive, and MK is known to have been prudent with money. I suspect a routine call of no more than a few minutes: "had dinner with friends, just got (or am going) home; will email you full account of Halloween over the weekend; see my Facebook for photos. Bye Bye". [Remark: when judging Facebook contents, don't forget that parents also have access, though perhaps not to everything.]
2. MK's phone-calls to the murderer:
On Tuesday 6th November the Telegraph reported that the police 'were thought to be closing in on the killer yesterday after discovering his phone number on Meredith's mobile phone. His fingerprints were discovered on the handset as well in the bedroom and front door handle of the student house she shared with three other female friends.'
This does seem to be journalistic padding, and probably derives from a report in La Stampa on Monday 5th November (i.e. before AK and RS were pulled in) which says:
'Ma è nel portatile di Meredith che si nasconde la chiave del giallo. Informazioni decisive giungeranno dall'analisi dei files, che potrebbero addirittura contenere il nome e cognome del killer, e dall'esito dei tabulati telefonici dei due cellulari della vittima. Cè poi un super-testimone, sebbene non oculare. Sophie Purton, l'amica del cuore di Meredith, che durante l'interrogatorio-fiume cui è stata sottoposta avrebbe rilasciato dichiarazioni determinanti. '
All that says regarding phone-calls, is that 'decisive information "will be retrieved' from her mobile'.
HOWEVER, the reference to Sophie Purton (who has had the very good sense to keep her mouth firmly shut) is very interesting. We have no idea what her 'determining evidence' might have been; and its existence has, I think, not been remarked on this blog. Did someone phone MK while she was dining with Sophie? And if so who?
That is a crucial question.
3. Rudy's mobile phone:
RG's existence, and the fact that the police were looking for him (which they had been since 2nd or 3rd November, his fingerprints having been found) was first reported on 19th November, when his name was still unkonwn to the journalist, who refers to him as 'R.H.' . The report says:
'L'ultima volta il suo cellulare ha squillato una settimana fa. La chiamata è rimasta senza risposta, ma il tabulato ha svelato che si trovava a Milano. È lì che adesso si cerca R.H., l'ivoriano accusato di concorso nell'omicidio di Meredith Kercher' (http://www.corriere.it/cronache/07_novembre_19/
sarzanini_delitto_perugia_meredith_quarto_uomo.sht
ml)
It has frequently been said on this blog that RG didn't have a mobile phone at the time of the murder. But this implies that he did, and that it rang in Milan 'a week ago', i.e. on 10th or 11th November. Who was phoning him? Probably the police. And how did they find his number?
4. AK-RG phone-calls
If I remember correctly. at least one Anglophone newspaper reported that that AK and RG had telephonic contact both before and after the murder. Does anyone have a reference to this? It must have been a report postdating 20th November, but I cannot now find it.
5. The owner of this blog
has asked, concerning posters: 'if you express suspicion of who they really are, what their purpose is, please have a grounded, rational reason."
Several persons on this blog seem to believe that the poster signing him/herself 'cmellas' is a member of AK's extended family.
Can anyone here provide a documented instance of him or her posting something that was not already in the public domain?.I have already demonstrated (and been criticised for) the fact that anyone can post here under anyone else's name.
6. Damian:
Your snippets are invaluable. Please keep them coming.
SB,
8;38 pm Rudy Guede arrives at the
cottage (according to him)
8:47 pm Meredith arrives (according to Rudy Guede)
9:15 pm Meredith arrives at the cottage (from the girls testimony)
9:20 pm Pleasantries exhanged; enter cottage
9:25 pm Rudy asks for a drink;
9:30 pm Meredith calls her Mother
9:30-9:45 pm Meredith talks to her mother
9:45 pm Meredith realizes her money has gone (acc to Rudy Guede)
9:45-9:55pm The look for the stolen money (according to Rudy Guede)
9:55-10:10pm Meredith settles down; They have a chitchat.
10:15pm Phone call from Meredith's phone
10:10-10:20 pm Meredith and Rudy Guede have consensual sex (acc to him)
10:20-10:25pm (Rudy in bathroom:according to him)
10:25 pm Rudy Guede hears doorbell (according to him)
10:26pm Meredith stabbed
10:27pm Rudy Guede fights with assailant
10:30 pm Rudy Guede runs out.
If you look at these times, and if we make them better here, you will see that it is absolutely absurd that he did all of this and more while he was in the cottage that night
If Rudy is indeed telling the truth, then the other two in custody cannot be involved. If he is lying, then based on the forensic evidence, something other than what Rudy Guede said, happened at the cottage that night.
Beep:
Rudy at 8:38 -- What is the source for this? I mean other than the time line.
And I still need to know what all this stuff is. I'm not being nasty; I just want to understand what you're saying.
Start with 8:38: source?
SB,
I am looking for it now. Rudy Guede is the one who said it I am sure. I will need some time. And I know you are not being nasty with me. You must and have every right to question anything I post here.
SB,
Whilst Guede admitted that he had been with Meredith on the evening of the 1st November and that they had entered the house at about 8.30pm together, he denied being responsible for death.
http://www.everything2.org/
index...node_id=1923930
Section 8
Guede said he had met Meredith a month before her death and that they met again at a Hallowe’en party on the eve of her death. He said he and Meredith, who came from Coulsdon, Surrey, “flirted” at the party. She agreed to meet him at 8pm the following day, November 1.
Guede told the friend that he arrived at the cottage near the centre of Perugia nine minutes late. “We kissed each other a bit, we touched each other a bit, I didn’t rape her,” he said. He then felt a pain in his stomach and went to the bathroom.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol...icle2937144.ece
Minotaur -
"If I remember correctly. at least one Anglophone newspaper reported that that AK and RG had telephonic contact both before and after the murder. Does anyone have a reference to this? It must have been a report postdating 20th November, but I cannot now find it."
Here:
"Police believe Ms Knox accused Mr Lumumba to cover up for Mr Guede, the third suspect in the case, whose bloody fingerprints were on Ms Kercher's pillow and who has admitted being at the cottage during the murder while denying he committed it himself. Sources close to the investigation said it was striking that Ms Knox never mentioned Mr Guede at all, "as if he did not exist", when in fact they knew each other and had exchanged mobile phone calls before and after the killing."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol...icle3067558.ece
"5. The owner of this blog
has asked, concerning posters: 'if you express suspicion of who they really are, what their purpose is, please have a grounded, rational reason."
Several persons on this blog seem to believe that the poster signing him/herself 'cmellas' is a member of AK's extended family.
Can anyone here provide a documented instance of him or her posting something that was not already in the public domain?.I have already demonstrated (and been criticised for) the fact that anyone can post here under anyone else's name."
Minotaur:
If you go back to the first days of Chris Mellas posting, you'll see that Steve confirmed that the IP address was registered to a Mellas. As for your question about whether or not he has provided anything not already in the public domain, the answer to that is no. He learned about Lalli's second report before it was announced in the mainstream press, but that could be from wire services. However, I think he is Chris Mellas. The more fundamental question for me is why he decided to post here. He has not answered any of our questions about the case, except to say that Amanda Knox had on occasion used drugs (What else could he say? Her entire alibi is based on the fact that drugs addled her brain and memory.), that she had never bought them, and that she "knew of" Rudy Guede as opposed to "knowing him." He was questioned on the last two points and never responded to those questions. He has not responded to any of the questions he has been asked. Most recently, I asked him to say whether the diaries had been released by the defense counsel as opposed to being leaked--well, if you care to, you can see how he avoided replying. Don't waste your time, though. He once again avoids answering the question.
Is he who he says he is? Probably. But what is he doing here? Wasting our time, and giving the appearance of being open to our questions and doubts.
Is it rational to challenge his identity? If we have the right to expect answers to certain questions, especially ones that could easily be answered without jeopardizing the case, then maybe the answer is yes.
Oh, and one more thing. He used this board as a forum to deny (vehemently) any link between the Knox family and Joe Tacopina, just before Biscotti filed suit against Tacopina. What was that all about?
Michael UK
The lawyer for Rudy Guede stated on Frank's blog that there were absolutely no calls made between Amanda Knox and Rudy Guede. I believe that Chis Mellas has pointed this out as well. Now it may be that there was, but the authorities have not released anything to the Public that I am aware of.
Beep:
Judging from the two sources you provide, I am more convinced than ever that it would be foolish for us to base any timeline reconstruction on what Rudy says about time!
Here Rudy says they had a meeting at 8pm and that he arrived at 8:09 (late), whereas in his diary he arrived first and she was late. Meanwhile, she left her friend's flat at around 9:00pm, not one hour earlier!
SB,
I do not mean to inundate you with this information. This is the final one and the most specific. I was basing my information on these quotes and I know they must be taken with a grain of salt.
He is the only suspect to admit he was in the house on the night. He claimed he arrived at the house at 8.38pm, and was alone with Miss Kercher.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/
...meredith125.xml
Re Minotaur (and Michael):
Here is what Biscotti actually said. The bold emphasis is mine.
Q: Are there messages or calls between Rudy and Amanda that night?
A: Absolutely not. I have not been notified of any messages or calls between Rudy and Amanda or Rudy and Raffaele. Not that day nor on other days. From what I know, Rudy did not have a cellphone any more at that time.
Q: Why, did he have to sell it?
A: Maybe
Beep -
I was simply responding to Minotaur's request for a media reference...there was no intention on my part to make any statement on the truth of it.
SB,
You are absolutely correct in saying that it would be foolish to base a time line on Rudy Guede's version of time. That being said then, we cannot trust anything he says in his statement. You have said before that it contains lies, half-truths and maybe some truth. I just want to find what the 'truth' is, in it.
Beep,
So now we have at least three different times! According to this article, Rudy is indirectly quoted as saying (who was he speaking to?) that he got there at 8:38 pm. But elsewhere, he has given other times.
This article also contains other information that is dubious at best, including a phone call from Meredith's cell to her bank at around 10 pm. My conclusion is that there are few items that can be put on a hard and fast timeline at this point.
Michael UK,
I know you were guy. It is just that it had been established before and I thought I would just put out a reminder. In no way did I wish to contradict your statement.
You and loyal others come here and know these things, but every once in awhile someone comes here, that has not been here for awhile and we have to explain these things all over again. Respect.
SB,
I was hoping that you would see the time differences in what he said. That is precisely why I posted those three. I hope that Nicki, Sparrow, and Traduco can produce a pdf file of Rudy Guede's statement. At that point, I think I can discuss it better.
And what I guess I am trying to say, is from what I have gleaned from what has been posted here concerning his statement, that IMHO, he is lying about the consensual sex part. I asked Nicki a few times about how one can determine whether a woman has been raped. She reread the Pathologist's report and said that she could not give me a definitive answer on the question of whether or not Meredith was raped. IMHO, and I know you think it is a bit premature on my part, I just do not believe that any intimate behavior between both Meredith and Rudy Guede that night was not consensual. The time just is not there. And I know you could say that the attempt between the two could have failed. Call it a guy thing if you will, but I believe that Rudy Guede is lying through his teeth on this and was involved on a sexual attack on Meredith, as the Police have stated.
Biscuits...'I have not been notified of any calls or messages between rudy and amanda...'
mmmm. With the risk of sounding really boring, the PM doesn't have to (and won't)tell biscuits, or any of the other lawyers involved, anything. They are half way through the preliminary investigation and don't have to reveal anything to anybody until it is over. All the lawyers have is what the PM decided to give to the judge in order to keep their clients in prison. They will know the findings of the preliminary investigation, only when it is over. (August...September...October?)
Beep,
Rudy is lying about a lot of things, and so are the others as far as I can determine from their written statements and verbatim transcripts we have seen already. There is a lot of this sort of thing we haven't seen, and the rest--i.e., what is reported in the press--has to be taken with a large grain of salt. For me, this would also include the times provided by the papers and supposedly based on Rudy or anyone else's statements but not in quotation marks. On the other hand, I think it is interesting to look back at some of the earliest press reports and see what has been forgotten that might look more important now.
damian | 03.19.08 - 5:10 pm | #
I agree with you. That's why I posted that part of the interview. Biscotti doesn't actually deny that any calls took place. He just says he has not been informed. The same is true for Rudy's so-called lack of cellphone.
Looks like nobody's talking right now, and anyone who says they have access to any information other than what was used to keep the suspects in custody should be looked at with a great deal of suspicion.
SB,
Okay, we are in sync then. What I also find interesting in Rudy Guede's statement is the fact that he speaks to Amanda Knox as though she slept in the cottage on the night of the murder and not at the flat of Raffale Sollecito. He could not have known really that Amanda Knox had changed her story from being at the cottage and blaming Patrick, to being at the flat of Raffaele Sollecito(for he questions her alibi of saying Patrick did it). So the only logical place for Amanda Knox to have been that night for him was indeed, at the cottage. In other words, he was trying his very best to script his story line as well.
I fear this is 'starting' to go round in circles...(not that it really matters what happens here)
What do we believe? Stuff from the Italian broadsheets? the local press? the english papers? sources close to the police? the lawyers??? only stuff that has been nicked by various papers from another? stuff that's been repeated or reported only once? the suspects diaries? the relatives?
This is why the little parts of the judge's reports which have been released have particularly interested me. I think this is the most reliable source that we have and I think that the judge wrote what he wrote for very good reasons. My question from before stands; why did the judge say AK and RG were in the different bathrooms at the same time?
SB,
And so you are right to say that all three story lines are fraught with lies and cannot be trusted. And indeed, as you say, no one is talking now
Damian,
So good to see you back here and with your comments.
"This is why the little parts of the judge's reports which have been released have particularly interested me. I think this is the most reliable source that we have and I think that the judge wrote what he wrote for very good reasons. My question from before stands; why did the judge say AK and RG were in the different bathrooms at the same time?
damian | 03.19.08 - 5:23 pm | #"
Damian:
I have been thinking about this since you asked and have no good answer yet. I think that what the judges have said in their reports justifying continued detention is both critical and reliable. I also think that the summit meeting could be ver important. Have you heard any more about that? Who would call this session? Do the suspects have the right to refuse to attend and/or answer questions?
Beep -
"And what I guess I am trying to say, is from what I have gleaned from what has been posted here concerning his statement, that IMHO, he is lying about the consensual sex part. I asked Nicki a few times about how one can determine whether a woman has been raped. She reread the Pathologist's report and said that she could not give me a definitive answer on the question of whether or not Meredith was raped. IMHO, and I know you think it is a bit premature on my part, I just do not believe that any intimate behavior between both Meredith and Rudy Guede that night was not consensual."
I see a great deal of confusion on this matter....how it can be shown mediaclly or not. I shall try to explain. I'm trying to find a delicate way to do this....so please bare with me.
Take a flower. Now, when a flower is nice and happy her petals open up and the bumble bee is able to come along and collect pollen. Now say the flower is unhappy or scared or hurt...she remains closed. The only way Mr Bumble Bee can collect the pollen is to force his way in...but in so doing he 'bruises' the flowers petals...because she is not happy and therefore not open for him, she's not 'physically' receptive. For the petals to be open the flower has to be happy first.
Cheers bpcl, (and Minatour) you're very kind.
SB. It's the PM's call, the suspects must be present, with their lawyers, but obviously, they can refuse to respond.
Way OT. Allow me my first Poirot game; I hope you don't mind Michael, but are you from the west country?
My question from before stands; why did the judge say AK and RG were in the different bathrooms at the same time?
damian
I’m not entirely sure, but there was some question as to why Rudy would use the bathroom at the other end of the flat, maybe dripping blood along the way, when there was a bathroom right around the corner from Meredith’s room he could have used. Unless that bathroom was occupied at that time. That may be part of the judges reasoning, along with the forensic evidence?
"That may be part of the judges reasoning, along with the forensic evidence?
DLW | 03.19.08 - 5:49 pm | #"
Like the mixed blood of AK and MK, for example?
I think the 8.38pm time which keeps being referred to as the time RG claims he entered the house, is more likely to be a misprint by the newspaper. They probably got confused with the time Knox's phone was pinged that night - 8.38pm? And it's not unusual for newspapers to mix things up. The odds on RG entering the house at 8.38 AND Knox's phone being pinged at 8.38 is virtually nil.
-------------
Soozie:
That's what I'm thinking....I doubt he ever said it. In this same article, the cellphone call to the "bank" is given as around 10 pm. This information was readily available, since there would have been an electronic trace of it, and yet they got it wrong.
Michael (UK | 03.19.08 - 5:37 pm
Thanks Michael, this is a tasteful and gentle explanation for a very sick crime.The point is,medical science cannot say for sure if a person has been raped or not, but only evaluate the seriuosness of the injuries and any other useful finding and speculate what could be the most likely hypothesis. This is exactly what investigators have been doing. I may sound boring, but I'll write it again a woman doesn't need to be disfigured and beaten up to death to show that rape has occurred
Just a little note on the local press. I'd be very surprised if these journalists didn't have contacts inside ILE. I'd also be very surprised if they were worried about giving the wrong impression to jazz it up a bit. Most of what I've read (and put up here) has later been 'confirmed' by the national press; the other day for example, about the things taken from the house last week, or the prick with the knife, which 'came out' a couple of weeks later. As far as I am aware however, there are two things which I've read which haven't been confirmed anywhere else. One is the summit meeting and the other concerns the luminol, 'bare' footprints, stone that broke the window etc... I used to write 'make of it what you will' after reporting what these papers say, but am not sure I want a ruddy catchphrase. I'm sorry I can't give a link for this stuff, but it's not on the web. After being here a while, I have no doubt you all have sufficent salt. I write here what I read. For what it's worth, the distinction between broadsheet and tabloid isn't as clear as it used to be for me.
Cheers DLW, nice to see you. I'd forgotten about that, you may be right...(you too SB)
Damian,
You don't need to provide any links; I think everyone here is grateful for the information. And you're right about the local papers not having the need to jazz things up.
The line between broadsheet and tabloid is getting blurrier for everyone, but I think a line still exists.
Nicki's comment "a woman dosn't need to be disfigured and beaten up to death to show that rape has occurred" is very true and may prove be very relevant in this case.
The rape issue was discussed on the PortaPorta programme. They had a female judge from Padova who specialises in rape cases and she said that in 90% of the rape cases these days the victim does not have any signs of the brutality that would normally be associated with rape cases of even 5 to 10 years ago. She said that most rape victims these days are more likely to
go along with everything the attacker wants, they accept their fate, esp if they have a gun or knife at their throat and are only concerned with
coming out of it alive.
My question from before stands; why did the judge say AK and RG were in the different bathrooms at the same time?
damian
Hi Damien, Maybe the judge drew this conclusion because the reports from the ILE said that RG had left his
calling card in one bathroom and a droplet of AK blood had been found in another bathroom, and that according to the ILE report, the blood spot was thought to have been left there during the time frame that the murder occurred. The blood spot will of course be hotly contested by the AK defence team and their forensic experts as circumstantial and whether the ILE has a really strong case re exact scientific proof that can give the blood spot an exact date and time
remains to be seen, personally I have my doubts in this case. It may be that luminol or other scientific products used in the investigation at the scene may have destroyed or contaminated characteristics of that partuicular bloodspot. One of the problems with luminol, although it can test for the presence of blood it may prevent any further testing for other qualities, I also understand that household bleach can give the same reading as blood with luminol.
Does anyone know of the link to the Skype conversation Rudy Guede had while he was in Germany?
Beep:
Frank has some of it verbatim on his website (look in the entries for November/December 2007). There is also an article in the timesonline with highlights from the conversation. If you go to timesonline and keyword "Rudy Guede," you'll find it.
Beep:
Check timesonline Nov 21 for an excerpt.
If they can't estimate the time of death more precisely than a seven hour range, how can they determine the age of a blood droplet? If it's easier to determine the age of the blood droplet, why didn't they use that technique on droplets of blood in Meredith's room to determine her time of death?
All that talk is mumbo jumbo meant to baffle the public, most of whom are happily ignorant.
Hi Pinecone. Who is trying to baffle the ignorant public with mumbo jumbo?
PS. Do you know how accurately blood can be dated?
Pinecone -
"If it's easier to determine the age of the blood droplet, why didn't they use that technique on droplets of blood in Meredith's room to determine her time of death?
"
Because at best, that would only give them the time she 'started' bleeding. Part of the problem is knowing exactly how long it took her from that point to die. However, nobody has suggested that a bloodspot will give you a time to the 'hour' in any case...it would be a window of at least a few hours.
nicki: "A woman doesn't need to be disfigured and beaten up to death to show that rape has occurred"
-------
nicki, I completely agree. Submitting to sex through sheer fright is common among rape victims, especially when threatened with a weapon. I would imagine Meredith was quite literally paralysed with fear during most of her ordeal - although she obviously tried to fight back at some point, or how did she manage to grab a handful of hair?? That must have been during some sort of struggle (a tragically futile struggle, but a struggle all the same).
Also: "Dr Lalli has indicated to prosecutor Giuliano Mignini that there are "no markings or bruises" on Miss Kercher's body that indicate she was raped or sexually assaulted. However Dr Lalli said that there did appear to be evidence of "some form of sexual activity" and that he could not rule out that she had been forced to take undergo a sex act "under the threat of violence."
******
I'm confused about this: there were no markings or bruises? What about the report that stated she had bruises on her cheeks which were consistent with having her face "forced to the ground"? And the bruising to her gums?
Does Dr Lalli mean there were no bruises as in "internal injuries"? Are there normally internal injuries when a rape is committed? I wouldn't have thought it was common if the victim was compliant through fear. Surely the other bruises would confirm nothing at all was consensual about any of this?
-----
Time of Death -
Part of theor problem in rounding down TOD as I understand it...was the broken window (from the feigned break in) which effects the ambient temperature of the body. In a sealed environment this remains more consistant...allowing a more accurate TOD to be given from the gradual loss of temp of the body over time and how that loss of temp effects the corpse at different stages.
This may be redundant, but I just want to put it here for the record. I know it will take up space too. I will have to accept SB's hypothesis that the time Rudy Guede arrived at the cottage based on this conversation is unknown. If Rudy Guede did publicly say that he had an appointment with Meredith between 8:00-8:38 pm he either was mistaken/misquoted or, maybe was trying to line himself up with the call from Patrick to Amanda Knox at 8:38 pm
Rudy Guede's Skype conversation released by the Police, from Frank's Shock Blog
"I had met Meredith the night before, at Halloween party, at spanish people's house. There we took an appointment for next evening. "
"That evening in her house there were other people."
" I tried with her and she accepted it. We didn't do anything, just some oral sex. They talked of sperm but absolutely there couldn't be my sperm. We stopped 'cause nor me neither her had a condom."
"While I was in the bathroom I heard the buzzer ringing. When I heard the noises I came out of the bathroom with my pants still down and I fell, I couldn't stop him while he escaped."
"I couldn't see him well. He had brown hair. Maybe chestnut. I know he's italian 'cause we insulted each other".
"Then I tried to aid Meredith putting a towel on the wound. I don't know why I didn't call the ambulance."
"When I went away the glass of the window wasn't broken and Meredith was dressed. Only Amanda and Raffaele may have done this."
Soozie UK -
"I'm confused about this: there were no markings or bruises? What about the report that stated she had bruises on her cheeks which were consistent with having her face "forced to the ground"? And the bruising to her"
Hi Soozie...I think what he meant was 'vaginal' bruising...which I was tentatively trying to explain in my flower analogy. This should occur even if a woman is taking part under 'threat' ....because things aren't....well, they just aren't receptive....even if in her mind she's trying to obey and not actively resisting. This is a matter of female physiology.
SB,
Merci beaucoup de tous les informations concernant la conversation Skype entre Rudy Guede et son ami (C'est-à-dire la Police)
Also Michael the front door was supposedly left open this could have had a faster cooling down effect as you explain. I was looking at the break in room photos the other day from Kermits PPT and realised that although the smashed internal windows were open the external shutters were closed suggesting a break in feigned from the inside? Im sure you already covered this in very early posts and surely this one easy for the ILE to be accurate on?
Oceania -
"Also Michael the front door was supposedly left open this could have had a faster cooling down effect as you explain.
Well yes....but only if we are to believe Amanda's version of events. The window was broken we 'know'....the open door is only down to a version given by one of the actually suspects. But, certainly...if that is true it would have effected the ILE's ability to acurately determine TOD.
Hi Michael . . . yes, I understand what you're saying about the 'receptive' part. But it's a possibility (a really long shot) that he could have forcibly applied some kind of lubricant gel/ointment, in which case brusing would still not occur. But I suppose that would have been discovered during the autopsy? I'm only guessing at this stage - but if a rapist selected a victim that he knew, then a lubricant would cast some sort of doubt as to whether sex had been consensual or not. I also read (in the same report I posted the excerpt from) - that the possibility Meredith had sex the day before couldn't be ruled out either. That doesn't make sense to me as there's no suggestion RG was with her the night before.
By the way, where in the UK are you?
------
Oceania -
"I was looking at the break in room photos the other day from Kermits PPT and realised that although the smashed internal windows were open the external shutters were closed suggesting a break in feigned from the inside?"
I also saw a picture from inside the room showing the rock on the floor and the window broken....but the shutters were open. Be aware, some of the pictures used in Kermit's PP's were taken before the crime took place....whilst others were taken quite a while after.
Michael UK
I think it is safe to say that Meredith suffered the fatal wound before 10:30 pm. Given that information, the question is, how long would it have taken her to expire? I wouldn't imagine it would take, say more than 1 hour, given the type of wound she received(Opened on both sides of the neck)and the amount of blood loss. What say you?
Soozie UK -
"But it's a possibility (a really long shot) that he could have forcibly applied some kind of lubricant gel/ointment, in which case brusing would still not occur."
Indeed...but as I recall in the ILE's latest raid amongst the stuff they took was a pot of vaseline...although I would imagine the presence of any lubricant would have been discovered in the autopsy as you say. So...either none was found, or it was....and they have kept that part quiet. I'm in Sussex
Blood dating:
Anyone interested in this subject can go to www.ojp.usdoj.gov for a long discussion on the subject that dates from 2003. The person presenting the data (S. Anderson) has since completed research work and written or participated in the writing of several articles on the subject (you have to pay for them). Here is an excerpt from her 2003 talk (emphasis mine):
MS. ANDERSON: Thank you and good morning. Today I'm going to speak about a method to determine the age of a biological sample. First, I want to talk about the specific need for a method to determine the age of a biological sample. Over the past several years, traditional PCR (polymerase chain reaction) has revolutionized the forensic community because it gives us the ability to place a person at the scene of a crime. But problematically, traditional PCR provides no information on when a sample was actually deposited.
That is why we've developed temporal PCR, which will help to estimate the time that the sample was deposited. In combination, traditional PCR and temporal PCR will provide both a spatial and a temporal link to a crime scene.
These methods have potential applications for both military and law enforcement use, specifically in tracking suspects. If traditional PCR can link Osama bin Laden and identify what cave he had occupied, then temporal PCR can help approximate how long ago he had occupied that cave and, if given in a relevant amount of time, we could approximate how far he could have traveled in a given time frame, potentially aiding in identifying his current location.
Temporal PCR can have an advantage when the suspect and the victim have close ties. I'm going the take everybody back to the O.J. Simpson trial. They found Nicole's blood in O.J.'s Bronco, but one problem with this piece of evidence was that the prosecution wanted to say that the blood was 2 weeks old, dating from when the murder had occurred, while the defense was saying that the blood was 6 months old (when Nicole had cut herself in the Bronco). This piece of evidence had to be thrown out of court because they couldn't determine how old the sample really was. But temporal PCR would allow for the identification of an approximate age for this sample.
Beep -
Expiration time would have depended on a number of factors...how much and for how long did the victim move about...so raising heart rate and speed of blood loss (perhaps even increasing damage), how panicked was the victim....the more...the higher heart rate and loss of blood, when was the knife withdrawn...the doing of which while the victim was still alive would have 'greatly' increased blood loss,...what position was the victim in...if in one where blood could have flowed out of her mouth instead of down her bronchia say... would have increased the time to suffocation and just what efforts were made to help her in stemming the flow of blood and for how long....this would have 'increased' the time to expiration...so, it is potentially quite complicated.
Michael: Indeed...but as I recall in the ILE's latest raid amongst the stuff they took was a pot of vaseline.
---------
Vaseline. That could be used as a lubricant of sorts.
You guys are all amazing!
Soozie UK
"Vaseline. That could be used as a lubricant of sorts."
Indeed. I do have to wonder...for what 'other' reason then that would they have taken it?
Here is a list of what they took:
Meredith's purse, 2 guitars, 2 Harry Potter books, a hair-dryer, Amanda's sweatshirt and a little pot of vaseline.
Blood dating:
Skeptical Bystander | 03.19.08 - 9:22 pm
As of now, blood dating by temporal PCR is a dream, and it will not likely become a reliable tool. There are too many variables, including environmental variables. Even if this dream had become a reality, the Perugia folks would not be able figure out the results because of the broken window and open door.
Pinecone,
Thanks for the information. Of course, we don't know for sure that the door was open. However, the window was certainly broken.
So what is the state of the art on blood dating?
Blood dating:
I'm still a little confused. The Michigan State University Forensics department has a link to a website (www.crime-scene-investigator.net) with an article on collection and preservation of blood evidence (George Schiro is the author) that says:
"Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) DNA analysis
Analysis of certain DNA sequences that have been copied multiple times to a detectable level. PCR based testing works well on degraded samples and "small" samples (pinhead size). Currently, it is not as statistically individualizing as RFLP analysis; however, more DNA sequences for PCR analysis are being discovered and in the near future it will be as statistically individualizing as RFLP. PCR based technologies have also withstood rigorous court challenges on its validity. Recently, there has been some concern over the possibility of incidental contamination giving false results in PCR tests. At least one study has shown that if PCR protocols are followed, it is not likely that incidental contamination will give false results. The only way that false results were induced was by direct cross contamination of wet samples. (2)
Presently, the courts do not recognize blood evidence as evidence that can be absolutely linked to an individual, such as fingerprints, bitemarks, broken fingernails, and handwriting. If DNA analysis is utilized, then blood evidence falls into the category of evidence that can be linked to an individual with a high degree of probability. Originally, RFLP DNA analysis was given the misnomer "DNA fingerprinting." The courts have since ruled that a DNA result can only be given in statistical terms. A forensic scientist cannot testify that a bloodstain came from a specific individual. He or she can testify that based on population studies, only one person in several million or billion has a particular DNA profile. He or she can then testify if the suspect or a victim has that DNA profile."
He was asked what his reaction had been when he heard that a young girl had been found dead.
"Initially I said nothing, I did nothing. Then two of the people working in the shack [bar] were called in for questioning. I was told then by another local to stay away and not to say anything," Mannion said.
Michael Mannion told the BBC he left Anjuna on the 23 February and had been travelling around India since, scared for his life.
Rudy 2
‘the Perugia folks would not be able figure out the results because of the broken window and open door‘……Pinecone
I can’t imagine that the front door being left ajar would have much of an effect in Meredith room, particularly since Meredith’s door was closed and locked. Also Amanda said she took a shower there, so it couldn’t have been too cold inside. I wonder if any of the perp(s) had the presence of mind to know that an open window in her room would make the TOD more difficult to determine. Or if the broken window was meant to be an emergency escape hatch if somebody unexpected came to the house at the wrong time, or simply used as a (feint) means of locking the bedroom without a key and breaking out of the house as police initially suspected.
SB: Useful info on pcr replication.
"I can’t imagine that the front door being left ajar would have much of an effect in Meredith room, particularly since Meredith’s door was closed and locked. Also Amanda said she took a shower there, so it couldn’t have been too cold inside."
These are both excellent points.
Can we conclude then that the open window in Filomena's room would have no impact on the house temperature either ? We know it was starting to get quite cold by Nov 1st in Perugia and a house can chill down immensly during the night if you leave doors or windows open. Just how much that affected their ability to tell TOD
we can only guess.
She would have showered in the bathroom, of which she would have presumably closed the door and warmed the bathroom up to some extent with the heat from the shower. The fact she showered dosn't really prove that the house was not cold.
Actually, if I remember correctly the temperature was unseasonably warm on that day. This was explored on an earlier thread. Check temps for the dates in question. If the door had been left open, not to mention windows open, and it was cold, this would be evident. There would be a draft as well. I guess this makes it odd that the signs of break-in were not noticed. Very incoherent, the whole thing.
Until after the shower, I mean.
Very odd.
The break in was only really evident in Filomena's room, the photo I looked at the other day (and I have tried to go back to Kermits link in ThreadII but it seems to be broken)was definitely taken after the event as it had the
'letters' marked where the rock was on the floor etc the windows were open inwards but the external shutters appeared to be closed as the window space was completely black. It was the updated files Kermit reposted late Feb and Kermit said they were lifted from the ILE video of the house which you would presume they took the day of discovery and before anyone tampered with anything. If the shutters were closed then Filomena's room would have been darkened and the rock and broken glass perhaps not obvious unless you entered the room and switched on the light, which according to AK testimony didn't happen until later. If the front door was open, as AK reports, she may not have felt this unusual considering there were other flatmates and friends always coming and going (if AK is innocent she may have thought it could have been Meredith and Filomena didn't seem to be too far away) she may have thought someone had just gone out briefly and this alone did not alert her to anything untoward.
From the other ILE photo's we can see the place looked relatively normal, AK says she noticed some blood spots and the unflushed toilet and thought them strange but basically was preoccupied with showering and changing, putting some washing on, collecting the mop and returning to RS. I guess these are the exact kind of points that make this case so intriguing, the circumstances and much of the evidence all seem to be able to be read either way.
Buona Pasqua a tutti, I hope you all enjoy a very happy Easter with your family and friends.
For what it's worth, RS claimed his reason for staying in the night of:
"We
returned to my house around to the 20:00-20:30 and there I made
another pipe and saw that as it was a holiday, to take myself with
extreme tranquility, without the smallest intention to go out inasmuch
as outside it was cold."
From yesterday's Messaggero dell'Umbria.
L'annuncio arriva da fonte investigativa. Entro il mese di marzo (massimo i primi giorni di aprile) il pm Mignini passera' al capitolo piu importante dell'indagine, quello relativo al confronto diretto tra gli indagati del delitto di Meredith Kercher, gli arrestati AK, RS e RG. Verranno messi uno di fronte all'altro con domande dirette rispetto ai loro alibi e all versioni fornite...
Dal confronto una possibile verita'? L'attesa e' carica di tensione. Sopratutto dalla parte di RG, L'unico tra gli arrestati che certamente si trovava sul luogo del delitto al momento dell'omicidio. Gli altri hanno solo indizi (communque pesantissimi) a loro carico e testimonianze contro. Dal confronto potra' arrivare finalmente quella possibile verita' su chi sia la persona che Guede vede la notte del delitto in quella casa. Lui parla di una persona che ha visto in volto, ma fino ad oggi non ha riconosciuto alcuno. Per ora neanche RS.
Intanto arriva un'altra testimonianza importante nel delitto di Meredith Kercher...Gli investigatori della polizia, coordinati dal pm Mignini, sono tornati nella villetta per sequestare altri oggetti legati in qualche modo al delitto. E probabile che l'urgenza del quarto sopraluogo dall'inizio della vicenda sia stato necessario proprio per riscontare quanto suggerito dal nuovo teste. (The aticle goes on to list the objects taken from the house, specifying that the 2nd guitar belongs to one of the Italian girls, that various items of clothing were taken from various places in the house, that the 'vampire teeth' were also taken, along with the cape and the tub of vaseline, which the journalist says..potrebbe essere collegato al movente sessuale del delitto.
OT The sun has just come out, after five hours of snow...
Sure, it's freezing in the house, there's blood in the bathroom, shit in the toilet, can't find my friend and I am so very worried about her, the door was open when I came home, but you know, I think I'll just take a shower.
I'm sure it would be real easy to mix up two separate drops of blood with that of my roommate (the one I was so terribly concerned about whilst taking my shower in a freezing cold house) Hope little Miss A got that sweatshirt thoroughly bleached. She's going to walk and she is going to be famous. Hugh will offer her 6 figures and she will laugh all the way to the bank. I'm thoroughly disgusted.
From Raffaele's diary: As soon as we arrived in the house I put aside the mop in the entrance
and I directed myself towards the other rooms in order to see what the
devil had happened. Those moments I remember well because I was shaken
and alarmed. I seem to have seen that Amanda had taken the mop bucket
and it carried it in to another room (from the text not shown, but
evidently the mop had been brought back to house of Meredith and
Amanda). The first thing I noticed was that the room of Filomena
(called Molli) had the door wide open. Ah, I forgot, Amanda had opened
the house with the keys (that I have repeatedly asked myself inasmuch
as she had said to me that she had found the entrance door wide open
when she entered before). We saw that Filomena's bedroom was in
completely disorder: broken glass on the floor and the room upside
down, it was an absurd mess. The window was broken on the left side
and was open.
Temperatures in Perugia on Nov 1 and 2:
Nov 1:
min 48 F (11 C)
max 55 F (13 C)
average 52 (12 C)
Nov 2:
min: 46 F (8 C)
max: 59 (15 C)
average: 52 (12 C)
If the door was in fact left open all night, after a day where the temperature was several degrees below average for the period, and given that the walls of the cottage were thick stone and that Filomena's window according to RS was wide open, it is clear that that the apartment would have been abnormally cold. The previous days had been unseasonably cold as well. A draft would have been created by the front door and the window being "wide" open (according to Raffaele). It is unlikely that anyone coming into the cottage with the front door open would have failed to notice that (a) it was very cold and (b) nobody else was home.
I don't know about anyone else, but if I came home and found my front door wide open, I would not go inside or, if I did, I would carefully check each and every room to make sure nobody was lurking before getting in the shower or doing my laundry.
There is something that just doesn't add up here. Why did Amanda not call Raffaele immediately? When did she call her mother? After taking her shower and doing a load of wash?
I don't care about anyone being famous or infamous; I would just like to see this part of the story put into a sequence of micro-events that makes some sense. It is this part of the story that is most incoherent based on the accounts given by the two suspects and the police (as stated in the judge's first report).
When did Amanda take the mop to Raffaele's? In his diary, he says it was the next morning. Does this mean that before returning to check out the wide open front door, Meredith's locked door and the blood spots (Amanda apparently not noticing what Raffaele saw straight away--that Filomena's room was a mess and the window was broken and wide open), and in spite of expressing concern to Raffaele because she could not reach Meredith, that Amanda and Raffaele took the time to mop up at his place? I am now thoroughly confused about the timeline they have given.
"Actually, if I remember correctly the temperature was unseasonably warm on that day."
I miswrote this comment. I meant unseasonably cold. Indeed, the temperatures all around that period were colder than normal/average for the period according the the weatherunderground archives.
Everything, I see, is stasis! Steve H is indeed so good to let it run. Do remember to see the xin timelines at blogpsot. Nice to see you are participating again, damian.
That it IS stasis is interesting all by itself. Would expect prosecutors to try all 3 together under a general conspiracy theory. I'm still thinking, given the American pattern, that there's a break-point before that for someone to detach themselves from the others to be charged separately (my suggested "plea deal" option). Money is still on Rudy. Charging has to come before end of May, I'd say. Got to be a lot of background stuff going on. No really new revelations, I take it.
Can't stay at all. Have to skim T4 completely some other time. (This is T5 isn't it? You should appreciate how UNIQUE this is re Steve's blogs.)
Ciao, per middie.
Robert M.:
Think of it as our own little "eternal return" or "recurrence" if you prefer. Yes, this is T5, aka "universe 5" in an infinite string. Nice of you to stop by!
I think you're right that Rudy is most likely to break the prisoner's dilemma.
Everytime I do this, then go check something else, like Franks' place, then I see that there is NEW stuff!
What can I say about the removal of yet NEW evidence that is really OLD evidence at the cottage that was NEVER processed in November when it should have been? I can say that you can put people in hazmat suits with supervuisors with science degress, but that doesn't make them CSiers. What incompetence. Incroyable!
And boy is Biscotti sucking up to Mignini's "good side" in that interview at Frank's over the Tacopina statements. Why on the basis of what Biscotti's alleges, we all should be checking our mailboxes for law suits. Don't bother going to Italy this year on vacation!
"And boy is Biscotti sucking up to Mignini's "good side" in that interview at Frank's over the Tacopina statements."
Isn't that Biscotti something! You know what they say about the enemy of my enemy is my friend....
As for the new/old evidence, who knows what that's all about. A pot of vaseline? Guitars and books? A certain sweatshirt? Is it incompetence, though? There is sometimes method to what appears as madness. It can't be forensic evidence at this point.
"And boy is Biscotti sucking up to Mignini's "good side" in that interview at Frank's over the Tacopina statements."
Isn't that Biscotti something! You know what they say about the enemy of my enemy is my friend....
As for the new/old evidence, who knows what that's all about. A pot of vaseline? Guitars and books? A certain sweatshirt? Is it incompetence, though? There is sometimes method to what appears as madness. It can't be forensic evidence at this point.
Skeptical Bystander | 03.20.08 - 12:37 pm |
I can't help but saying this:
The investigating authority fires the doctor whose conclusions do not agree with his. Lalli worked with Meredith's body, no second opinion had that experience.
I can't believe that all evidence wasn't taken from the outset, now they find the need to remove Meredith's purse and some guitars.
This investigation sucks
SB,
Can you tell me why TOD is so important? If Rudy Guede ran out of the house at 10:30 pm as he said and a witness has reported this, we know that Meredith had already received a fatal wound that penetrated her neck; i.e., two exit wounds. How much time do you think someone would be able to live with a wound like this? I cannot imagine, given the fact that her blood was found all over the floor, the initial assault if you will, and later a pool of it in the bed, that she could have lived for more than one hour. Let's say she lived for two hours; then that would put her TOD at 12:30 am. What is the relevant point of establishing her TOD to this case?
That she died a painful death?
Brian S.
I think I have an answer to your question. Look at the evolution of this blog. There are very good people here working on trying to understand this case. I have seen brilliant minds at work here. This is my first crime scene blog I have ever participated in. I know there are some veterans here. SB has just posted statements that even up to this moment, she finds incoherency. People here have translated Rudy Guede's and Raffaele Sollecito's statements/diaries. They have done this selflessly. I have been corrected numerous times on points I wished to make after giving great thought to the actions of the individuals involved. Others here have done the same thing. We are not all experts, but collectively, I think we are good. We are persistent. We are vetting everything that is said here. We respect all points of view and are respectful of each others opinions because each of us is in a search for the truth of what happened to Meredith Kercher. We are on the outside peering in, and as SB has said, we are dealing with lies, half truths and some truth. This is our 5th blog arena. We have been faithful to it. That being said, we are no further along from understanding what went on in the cottage that night then when we first started. To be sure we are close, but that doesn't make it any more real.
Now imagine if you will, how the Authorities feel. IMHO, and this is difficult to say, even with all the evidence they may or may not have, they are probably no further along then we are, in understanding what really went on in the cottage on the night of November 1st.
"SB,
Can you tell me why TOD is so important?
bpcl | 03.20.08 - 1:35 pm | #"
I'm no expert but it seems that TOD is important as a point of reference for the main event, which is the TOA (time of assualt). If you put these things on a time line, you have
Time of Assualt
Time of Incapacitation
Time of Death
Time elapsing from Death to Time of Discovery (of the body).
All of these parameters are used to establish the exact cause of death, and are as relevant a part of any police investigation as such things as access, motive, alibi and so on.
In this particular case, if it can be established that the fatal knife wound was accidental (in that the person who did it had something else in mind), but that instead of coming to grips with that and calling for help, the perpetrator(s) fled and left the victim to die, then that has an impact on the charges. The whole thing is part of a picture that emerges and that hopefully helps us to understand what happened. It will not bring Meredith back, obviously, but it is important for her family as well as for the people currently suspected of being involved, to know what happened and when.
"I can't believe that all evidence wasn't taken from the outset, now they find the need to remove Meredith's purse and some guitars.
This investigation sucks
Brian S. | 03.20.08 - 1:18 pm | # "
I think we need to be patient, and wait until we see why these items were taken. If you are rooting for or against someone, I can understand the temptation to say it sucks or it's great or whatever, but in fact we don't know very much about how this investigation is proceeding. The prosecutors have not given us that information; newspapers need to fill space and have reported all manner of things that may or may not be true. We have the statements provided by the three suspects; they are filled will lies, half-truths, inconsistencies, self-serving blather. If this is all the prosecution has to work with, no wonder it is difficult--if indeed it is. It was announced some time ago that the investigation would be wound up by this summer. I don't see any deviation from that so far. It's just that people seem anxious to vindicate or burn the suspects and don't want to wait for things to take their appointed course. This isn't a movie.
SB,
Okay, all very good points. I have to honestly say that I did not really think of those things. Being an engineer has its good points, and of course, it has its weak points as well. Engineers tend to compartmentalize everything at the expense of other equally important things, which is why I would not make a very good detective. Thank you for taking the time to post that.
Beep, and everyone, I'll have a mediafire file for you with the important pages of 11 to 23, later today. After Kermit gets back, you can toss this one, and exchange it for the full document side by side with Rudy's handwritten pages.
OT The sun has just come out, after five hours of snow...
damian | 03.20.08 - 9:44 am | #
Damian, I thought you were in Perugia. Is it true?
Sparrow:
Thanks in advance! I checked the weather after reading Damian's post and it was 39° in Perugia (or is it Perusia?).
Beep:
Now imagine if you will, how the Authorities feel. IMHO, and this is difficult to say, even with all the evidence they may or may not have, they are probably no further along then we are, in understanding what really went on in the cottage on the night of November 1st.
And that is the exact scenario which I dread. We're not professionals but they claim that they are.
Yes Sparrow. We had a bit of a blizzard this morning...the usual weird weather for Easter.
Corrina, it'll take forever, but those responsible will pay. Peace.
I think we need to be patient, and wait until we see why these items were taken. If you are rooting for or against someone, I can understand the temptation to say it sucks or it's great or whatever, but in fact we don't know very much about how this investigation is proceeding.
Skep
What I find hard to believe is that any efficient investigation would find the need to take and examine these items 5 months after the fact.
"What I find hard to believe is that any efficient investigation would find the need to take and examine these items 5 months after the fact.
Brian S. | 03.20.08 - 3:44 pm | #"
I understand your frustration but I think you are mistaken. The article that Damian posted above (in Italian) is instructive. It says at least two important things:
1. The summit meeting, during which the three suspects will be questioned about their respective alibis, will take place at the end of March or in early April at the latest.
2. The return to the cottage last week came about after the emergence of important new witness testimony. Someone said something that the investigators realized could be useful. This happens in investigations.
When a crime scene is processed, not everything is taken.
A criminal investigation can be a very long and involved process. I think you are confusing efficiency with speed. As Damian said above, it will take forever but those responsible will pay. Again, this is not a television show or a movie. It's reality, and that can be messy.
What I find hard to believe is that any efficient investigation would find the need to take and examine these items 5 months after the fact.
Brian S. | 03.20.08 - 3:44 pm |
I don't find it hard to believe.There is no point is transferring the whole content of the apartment to be analyzed at once. It makes sense to me though, that they are returning to seize additional potential evidence, after discovering clues that the public is not aware of.
Sparrow -
"Beep, and everyone, I'll have a mediafire file for you with the important pages of 11 to 23, later today. After Kermit gets back, you can toss this one, and exchange it for the full document side by side with Rudy's handwritten pages."
Great! Thanks a lot for all your hard work Sparrow
sorry if the above was redundant. I hadn't seen Skep's point above,that is expressing my very same toughts in a much better way. I apologize for that.
This investigation sucks
Brian S. | 03.20.08 - 1:18 pm | #
Hi Brian, There certainly is a lot to be concerned about with regards the handling of the investigation of this case and unfortunatley, in my opinion, you need to view what is going on with the prosecution with as much sceptisism and circumspection as the evidence presented of the crime so far. I have posted a lot on my concerns re the integrity of the investigation and not because of any leaning towards guilt or innocence, but as an impartial observer and as someone concerned that neither of the following two things happens:-
a. They incorrectly incarcerate innocent people for this crime.
b. Guilty people walk free because of the mishandling of the case.
The recent finding and removing from the cottage of the famous AK
'missing sweatshirt' and other items from the cottage is just another example of where you have to question
"do these guys know what they're doing?" How long are they going to keep that mausoleum sitting there to dip in and out of collecting 'evidence' months after the event when it was all there to be photographed, catalogued, sealed and stored somewhere to avoid contamination and degradation and analysed from day one. Sure it's a big case and there is a lot to get through but from the outside looking in there is a lot to question.
A criminal investigation can be a very long and involved process. I think you are confusing efficiency with speed...Again, this is not a television show or a movie. Skeptical Bystander | 03.20.08 - 3:53 pm |
As Skep says above...this is not a CSI movie, it's reality.The investigators know more than they have released to the media, that is our only source of news.So although it is not always easy to understand their doing, to me it doesn't mean they are careless or incompetent.Maybe they are, but I think it's too early to decide.Without knowing many of the facts,I reserve this judgemt to later on,in the case they will not be able to solve the case.
Oceania88,
"How long are they going to keep that mausoleum sitting there to dip in and out of collecting 'evidence'"
Always good to have your point of view!
It is also important to note that this crime scene is more complicated because Amanda lived in the cottage. Rafael also spent quite a bit of time visiting her.
Reading the thoughts of my fellow posters often helps lesson some of my frustrations. I can feel our collective hope that the Kercher family will obtain justice for their lovely daughter Meredith.
indie,
Justice will be served in this case. I like SB's response,
It's just that people seem anxious to vindicate or burn the suspects and don't want to wait for things to take their appointed course. This isn't a movie.
Kermit has pointed out more than once that this blog is about understanding what happened to Meredith
I agree with both of them. And we have done a great job here. The proof of it is the translation of the diary of Rudy Guede by Sparrow, Nicki and Traduco. I just cannot imagine any other place where this could have been done really. As difficult as this issue can be for Chris Mellas, even he comes here, so we must be doing something right.
And when justice is served, I think all of us will cry, either externally or internally, because there are no winners in this 'fiasco'. That was a word coined by one of the posters who came here, a word which I think sums up this whole episode.
Does anyone not think that AK and RS's team have finally managed to start working together?!!!
The trouble is, Justice is not an automatic thing and is not always served as we have all witnessed many many times over in thousands of criminal cases around the world.
Take Damians questioning yesterday of what the judge said re AK and RG being in different bathrooms at the same time. How could anyone possibly know this without a surveillance camera with verified timings ? Even if AK and RG both agreed they were in
different bathrooms at the same time we would still never know for sure if they in actual fact were. The judge made this statement we presume as some sort of deduction of the evidence put in front of them, it is of course very damning to AK which is what the prosecution wants. How much should we be concerned about this kind of statement/deduction from a judge when we know what they say is practically impossible to verify ?
Hey guys, re yesterday's discussion of
TOD, cooling down of body, open doors and windows etc, we forgot that Meredith's body was covered with a duvet, hopefully this will have sealed
in a lot of the answers the investigators need to help solve those
important questions.
But I find it interesting to go back and look at the morning of discovery
as we know for fact both RS and AK were there and it's interesting to see if we can find their complicity
in this crime from their statements of that morning.
Damian,
I asked Chris Mellas this question the other day and he pointed out that the Knox team was not working with the Sollecito team; in fact he stated, that he did not believe that it was even legal to do so.
Oceania88,
Given the international notoriety of this case and the public scrutiny that has been attributed to it, I am sure that justice will be properly served. You just have to have 'faith' and let it take its course.
Damian,
I understand that something will be going on with this case on April 1st or thereabouts. SB was talking about it this morning. Do you have any idea what this entails? Will it be a 'show and tell' of something related to the case? Will it be another chance for the people in custody to explain their stated positions? Will the Prosecutor ask them about evidence matter obtained in the case? Pray tell if you know. Will any of what is discussed be released to the public?
bpcl...I think a judge will decide if the law was implemented correctly in deciding to keep the 3 suspects in prison until trial...that's all.
(folk seem to be over at Franks' tonight...mamma mia!)
Damian,
In your opinion then, have the three people in custody been charged with anything?
I'm no expert (it's a pity Eric is no longer with us) but I think the legal systems and procedures in the US and in Italy are so different that it is often difficult to compare. More or less however, I would say it's the equivalent to being charged. I think Frank has explained this particular thing well.
Damian,
I would think that they would have to be charged with something because otherwise, the April 1st meeting would have no meaning and also, why would they then be proceeding to a trial? I realize the two systems are different, however, it can't be a conundrum. Or, maybe they will be charged with something just before the trial. What is your opinion of the culpability of these three individuals? Is it the general sense in Perugia that these three individuals are the only ones involved in the death of Meredith?
Reasons to not believe:
This was described by the police as "a sex crime" on the same day that Meredith was found,
Since then it appears to me that the investigating authorities have pursued
this as their starting point.
What if they're wrong?
February 14, 2008
The pathologist who conducted the post-mortem examination on Meredith Kercher, the British student murdered in Perugia in November, has cast doubt on the prosecution allegation that she was subjected to “sexual violence” before being killed. Luca Lalli says that there is no “physical evidence” of such an attack.
In a report presented this morning to Giuliano Mignini, the chief investigating magistrate, Dr Lalli said that Ms Kercher had had an “incomplete sexual encounter” before her death. He was unable to ascertain “with certainty” whether this was on the evening of the murder or the day before...
Dr Lalli said it was up to Claudia Matteini, the investigating judge, to decide whether the sexual act in which Ms Kercher had engaged was forced on her or had been consensual. There was no physical or biological evidence such as bruising tha could lead him to assert that she had been “violated”...
The Times
Scientist sacked.
Objective scientific opinion "0".
Subjective lawyer's opinion "1"
bpcl, I think we need to remember that the police are half way through the preliminary investigation. (well, I think it normally lasts 6 months, but the pm can then ask for more time if he deems it necessary) Two different judges have already ruled that the 3 suspects must remain in prison until the trial. This decision was based on the 'clues' ('indizi', not proof) and on the possibility that the suspects could re-offend, leave the country or tamper with the evidence. At the end of the preliminary investigation, the pm will show what he has to the judges and lawyers, and decisions will be taken as to how to proceed.
A big court case started in Perugia this week; a man is accused of killing his pregnant wife. This is the news here at the moment, and to be honest, I haven't heard anyone talk about the Meredith case for months. And since RG's arrest, I haven't heard anyone talk about others being involved.
Meredith's bra was cut from her body after she had been stabbed and whilst she was gushing blood.
Damian,
"At the end of the preliminary investigation, the pm will show what he has to the judges and lawyers.."
Will this information be made public?
Reasons to not believe:
This was described by the police as "a sex crime" on the same day that Meredith was found,
Since then it appears to me that the investigating authorities have pursued
this as their starting point.
What if they're wrong?
Brian, for what it's worth, I think you need to take a step back; the 'starting point' was murder. Meredith was murdered. The 3 suspects are also accused of sexual assault and the court will decide if they are guilty.
Damian:
"Meredith was murdered"
This by itself isn't a starting point.
Every murder has a reason, no matter how stupid. You can't ask who without asking how and why.
bpcl, I imagine that if the pm or the lawyers want to make it public, they will.
Summit Meeting. If this does happen, wouldn't that mean that an 'identity parade' involving RS and RG would then not be possible? (I know RG may have known RS and must have seen his photo in the paper, but..) And if that's right, would it imply that it's already happened? (either 'in the flesh' or with photos)
Sorry, too many ifs methinks.
"You can't ask who without asking how and why." Brian.
Yes, and that's what they are doing. But correct me if I'm wrong, if the court ascertains who, but not why, they go down.
Damian:
I've been around long enough to "not" believe automatically what authority tells me.
"The 3 suspects are also accused of sexual assault"
The prosecuting authorities made their mind up on day 1 that this was the "motive" for murdering Meredith.
Their efforts have been expended in proving that this was the case. They've had the crime scene and those people close to it for 4 or 5 months. It doesn't take that long to do a DNA test. Maybe they slid down a snake and can't see the ladder.
"Their efforts have been expended in proving that this was the case. They've had the crime scene and those people close to it for 4 or 5 months. It doesn't take that long to do a DNA test. Maybe they slid down a snake and can't see the ladder.
Brian S. | 03.20.08 - 9:06 pm | #"
Brian,
Do you have access to information and evidence that neither we nor the defense has seen? Are you working with Mignini?
I think effort has been and is being expended to figure out what happened. You seem to want to place the prosecution between a rock and a hard place: if a call is made for the seizure of more data or if someone is fired for leaking information to the press before it was presented to the prosecution, for you that means incompetence. If on the other hand there is no change in the basic theory of sexual assault (and remember, that's more complicated than it looks and according to authorities not always possible to detect), for you that means incompetence.
I guess they just can't win now.
And as for motive, have you ever heard of a thrill kill? Not that this is the case here. Have you ever heard of negligence or threat of harm with no intention of killing that goes too far and nonetheless results in death?
Maybe they have slid down a snake as you say. But I don't think you have any more evidence of that than you did four months ago.
The April 1 date has been on the docket since at least February. The prosecutor said the prelminary investigation would wind up by this summer. What has changed? The process may be slower than you want it to be, but isn't it the real goal to get it right?
Brian,
Do you have access to information and evidence that neither we nor the defense has seen? Are you working with Mignini?
Oh Skep, you take me too serious.
I'm just throwing ideas out here.
I admit I have no idea what really happened on that night.
I've just never heard of a judge firing a coroner who examined a body and then appointing 3 others to go over his notes and come to their own conclusions without access to that body.
Who should I believe? Lalli or Magnini and his new experts?
Brian S,
You should believe that a young girl was brutally murdered on the night of November 1st, left to die, choking on her own blood by her murderers. She was a daughter first, a sister second, a friend third, a girlfriend fourth, a potential mother fifth, and a potential grandmother last. Meredith is not here to tell us what happened to her. Her family is left in the dark while three people in custody refuse to tell the truth of their whereabouts on this night. You should be faulting them and not those who are entrusted with determining the truth, whatever that means. They, like us here, are on the outside looking in a labyrinth of lies deception. In the end, Justice which is always very slow, will be served. We ask for your patience.
"Who should I believe? Lalli or Magnini and his new experts?
Brian S. | 03.20.08 - 10:32 pm | #"
Are you sure it is one or the other? Lalli was fired for leaking information, not for getting things wrong.
In the near future, we'll have a better idea of what the prosecution's case is. We don't know that today. There are a lot of armchair criminal investigators out there who don't know either. There are some armchair experts who think they know what happened or think the police botched it or whatever. They have a chance of being right or wrong. They're looking at the same press reports you are. People are drawing very different conlusions from them, maybe too hastily. Maybe the best course is not to have a stake in being right or wrong but rather to keep your eyes open and wait for an outcome.
I have never seen a PM more silent and yet more speculated upon in my life. For all we know, he may have figured it all out by now. He seems to do a pretty good job of keeping his mouth shut anyway. Maybe his eyes and ears and mind are open.
Hello All,
I uploaded pages 11 to 23 of Rudy's Diary, in polished form, to Mediafire. It was fun! It's a Word file.
Traduco, Nicki and any other Italian speakers... Damian? I changed some things, untangled some sentences, improved punctuation to make it easier for people to read. If there's anything you don't agree with, please tell me and we can fix it for the final file. I'm still not happy with the beginning of page 16, if you want to take another look.
Here's the link:
http://www.mediafire.com/?si2xu8edy3e
Sorry, the intro of the document says it contains pages 3 to 23. That's wrong. It's only 11 to 23. Rats!
Um, I fixed some problems with the first file, of Rudy's Diary. You can dump it, and replace it with this one:
http://www.mediafire.com/?fhzmlcpgynd
Thanks Sparrow,
Great job on the pages! Thanks so much.
I enclose something that might be not so important now - but an observation about 'succhia gomme'. My Italian friend says maybe it's regional slang but not common in any event; most likely it's gomme as opposed to gonne - as seen if you blow it up:
http://thumbsnap.com/v/90I2OaRX.jpg.
Your translation of it as 'loser' is probably right on. He'd be just a 'gum chewer' as seen literally. I don't see it written as gonne, even if he was a skirt chaser with poor penmanship.
Hi May, thanks. "Loser" was one of the first words suggested by Nicki. Later Skep made the post about the "skirt chaser" meaning. But with that, I thought the literal meaning of the word was not important. Even in Italian, "skirt chaser" more generally means "time waster" so "loser" works whether or not it is "gum chewer" or "skirt chaser."
And sorry Skep, I should have gotten back to you earlier. I saw your post asking about the "succhia gonne," but wanted to search back to your original post before getting back to you. But, anyway, I think loser works for both phrases. I like "time-waster" but it's a bit awkward in English.
Sparror,
Thanks for sprucing up the translation and putting it in a single word file. It is so much easier to read. I'm curious to know what happened to the guys that night at "the Red Zone." But first I need to figure out what the Red Zone is!
I think "loser" is the idea: worthless, good for nothing.
A word about downloading the document: I don't know if others will have this problem (a false problem, it turns out), but when I downloaded the file my computer told me it was an unknown file type. However, when I saved it and opened it, it came up just fine as a word file. So if this happens to anyone else, just persevere.
The Red Zone:
I knew I had seen it somewhere. The daily mirror piece by Kate Mansey, in which Meredith's boyfriend "breaks his silence":
Nov 18, 2007)
"He said: "She was lovely. A beautiful girl with a beautiful personality. Her beauty shone out and that's why I was attracted to her. She was the girl-next-door in every way. We are both similar and quite shy so we became friends first but we understood each other and the first time I kissed her I knew it wasn't just a one-off.
"The night we first kissed was at the Red Zone Club. Amanda was there that night, which was unusual because normally Meredith preferred to go out with her English friends."
Sparrow:
Have only two seconds, but wanted to thank you for your work.
About that "succhiagomma" term that we all puzzled over. I really do NOT think it is "succhiaGONNA." (skirt sucker)
Check out these two GOOGLE references for "SUCCHIAGOMME." (plural)
The reason I originally translated it as "loser", was that I *sensed* (but do not know for sure) that the ORIGIN of the term was in reference to someone who practiced fellatio with condom on, BUT, the current meaning was probably just an all-around insult for a person of little value.
Check the usage here...
FIRST EXAMPLE:
"Gente di mer*a, parassiti, succhiagomme di quegli imbecilli che sono i calciatori (tutti)"
(Obviously not a big admirer of football players!!)
SECOND EXAMPLE:
"...ci giocava il Macchia alla macchinetta e stava facendo il succhiagomme a uno che veniva dalla stazione."
Rather than being local Perugia slang..
This may be Roman slang or may be from further down south. (cioe`, Il Meridione) --any case, it's certainly NOT a COMPLIMENT for Rudy!!
Ciao for now...
HI Traduco,
My friend I referred to who gave her opinion of the 'succhia gomme' is from Rome, and she's a translator. Probably local to a group perhaps?
At this point it's rather passato, but look at the blow up of the letters I enclosed earlier (3:30am) and it's a bit easier to see. I think he's just misspelling it at first, then corrects it, and hence those who thought it might say 'gonne'. No skirts there!
Thanks for your efforts, Traduco. All of you have done such a great job, and given those of us who are only able post occasionally a chance to read it and be up to speed.
May
Bear with me while I meander through a few posts which have stuck in my mind. As Brian S reminded us, MK’s bra appears to have been removed after the killing blow, as part of a conscious manipulation of the scene. With RS’s DNA on the clasp of the bra, what led him to (presumably) remove the bra? If present at a sexual assault he would have been aware that that had been what had actually occurred, that traces of RG would be found and that no such further ‘emphasizing’ was needed. However, if RG’s account of consensual sexual activity holds elements of truth, and the denouement occurred thereafter and was not sexual in nature, RS would not have known that traces (I mean the intimate ones) of RG would subsequently be found.
In other words, if RS was involved in a sexual as opposed to a purely murderous assault on MK, why would he try to make it look like that was indeed what had occurred? It’s possible that the motivation was to assist the “stupid policemen” by pointing them in the right direction, but more likely that the intention was to mislead.
Previous posts (I think it was bpcl or michael) were of the opinion that whoever struck the decisive blow must have been in a ‘rage’ at that moment. So which of the 3 suspects had ‘reason’ to be enraged by MK? As a resident of the house AK was the most exposed and also the connector of RS to the house. Is there a better way to cover for a female perpetrator (and thereby yourself) than to stage the sexual assault of the female victim?
Just took a look at that "Red Zone" website, and was struck by the parallel to Rudy's "all that red." I guess we can't help but make connections. Like MK's black choker as a foreshadowing.
"Is there a better way to cover for a female perpetrator (and thereby yourself) than to stage the sexual assault of the female victim?
Nowo | 03.21.08 - 1:22 pm | #"
Wow Nowo.
This is definitely food for thought. I have been thinking for awhile that Raffaele cut the bra off the victim with his penknife (not wanting to touch her), perhaps not realizing that his DNA was on the tip of the blade.
"Is there a better way to cover for a female perpetrator (and thereby yourself) than to stage the sexual assault of the female victim?
Nowo | 03.21.08 - 1:22 pm | #"
Wow Nowo.
This is definitely food for thought. I have been thinking for awhile that Raffaele cut the bra off the victim with his penknife (not wanting to touch her), perhaps not realizing that his DNA was on the tip of the blade.
Skeptical Bystander | 03.21.08 - 1:50 pm |
Good thinking all around. I had thought Raf used a gloved hand (inspired by Amelie and her kitchen gloves perhaps) to pull the bra strap out, so he could cut it, not realizing his DNA (from sweat perhaps) was on the glove.
Rather than being local Perugia slang..
This may be Roman slang or may be from further down south. (cioe`, Il Meridione) --any case, it's certainly NOT a COMPLIMENT for Rudy!!---Traduco
Traduco, thanks for all your research, and cheerufulness, as always. I'll have the full document done next week.
Nice work Sparrow...I don't know what I did the first time I opened it, But it was funky and hard to read then I opened with Word and it's great!!
Thanks again.
Sparrow,
And now we have it; thanks so much for all the work you did. It was a tremendous effort. I have re-read it and still cannot make heads or tails if Rudy Guede is lying or telling the truth.
One interesting thing that I did notice again is that he believes he got to the cottage at 8:30 pm. "With all the running around I did, I think it would have been around 8:30, approximately. Because we were supposed to see each other at that time".
This might imply that it would be correct to assume that Rudy Guede had a date with Meredith at 8:30pm, but when he arrived at the cottage, no one was there.
"I went downstairs to the guys’ place, but no one was there either. So then, I waited in the yard.
This wait of his could have been about 45 minutes long, so it could very well be that Meredith did arrive at the cottage around 9:15 pm and let him inside.
So if we are to believe Rudy, Meredith apparently was 45 minutes late for an "appointment" she set up with him. From the little information I have gleaned from the media, Rudy's description of that night seems so NOT LIKE Meredith.
-Setting up a date for a relatively unknown man when she had a boyfriend.
-Inviting a man to her own cottage on their first "date"
-Arriving 45 minutes late for their first date
-Allowing him in her bedroom for intimate relations within minutes of the start of their date
-Discussing personal childhood "issues" within minutes of finding her rent money missing
I am sorry but I do not believe this scenario one bit. Did Amanda set him up? I do not know but sometimes I wonder if some sort of masks were involved and when the cover was blown Meredith met her tragic end.
If Rudy was NOT a lone wolf then his lawyer can really help him tell the truth and at least feel some sort of spiritual mercy that he did the right thing. However, I am not sure if legally he will be rewarded for the truth.
~~
‘I am sorry but I do not believe this scenario one bit‘….indie.
You capsulated a lot what I don’t believe in Rudy’s story, it just doesn’t add up. Based on his narrative, they barely would have even been on a first name basis on their ‘ first date’
This wait of his (Rudy) could have been about 45 minutes long, so it could very well be that Meredith did arrive at the cottage around 9:15 pm and let him inside.
bpcl | 03.22.08 - 3:58 am | #
A lot of the same things could be said about Rudy meeting Amanda at the flat. And he would have saved himself a little over 25 min in waiting time, if Amanda got there a little before 8:50 pm. He claimed he told Meredith he only waited about 1 min or so, or maybe he was just trying to be polite. But what Rudy says here is in the far reaches of possibilities.
Traduco, Sparrow, et. al.: Special thanks for translation. It’s much easier reading Rudy’s diary when its all in one place. Eye opener to someone barely known.
I wouldn't take any of Rudy's time estimates seriously. Rudy fills nearly all of page 15 describing how he ran all over town looking for the downstairs boys because he was late for meeting them at their house.
He simply can't be taken seriously as far as time is concerned. No, if they had an appointment, MK was not 45 minutes late. Rudy simply didn't know what time it was.
Michael wrote a brilliant paragraph describing what he thinks is Rudy's relationship to time. I'd add that I don't think it's quite linear for Rudy, but that's getting a little complicated.
An interesting aspect revealed by these pages, is how important people are to Rudy. Making that connection, talking to them, he just can't help himself, he needs to do it. I am struck that in the morning when he woke in the flat of the guys downstairs, he made a point of waking the guys up to say goodbye. Maybe it's because he's young... but I wouldn't wake them up. I'd let them sleep, and leave a note, thanking them and saying I'd see them later. Then before he eats at the Kebap, he stops at Alex's house and waits 5 minutes for Alex to open the door. He insisted on staying because he knew Alex was there. If I knew my friend was home, but not answering, I'd think there was a reason he didn't want to answer. Maybe he had a girl in there, maybe he was bathing, or something else. Rudy just has to make those connections. They seem to be very important to him. I can see him spending a lot of time stopping in the street, when he's on his way somewhere, to talk to any friend he sees, and always being late.
Thanks Rhonda, DLW for your thanks. This is a very satisfying project, and it's especially nice working with great partners like Traduco and Nicki.
Beep! I'm glad you finally have it in your hands. But there's more to come. Next week, hopefully. Take your time to digest.
One interesting thing that I did notice again is that he believes he got to the cottage at 8:30 pm. "With all the running around I did, I think it would have been around 8:30, approximately. Because we were supposed to see each other at that time".---Beep
Beep! He didn't say he believed he got to the cottage at about 8:30. He says he believes he left the Kebap for MK's house at around 8:30:
"Then I headed for Meredith’s house. With all the running around I did, I think it would have been around 8:30, approximately."
That's how I read it anyway. If you read the following sentences, he says he was supposed to meet MK at around that time, so he left the Kebap at that time. So this indicates two faulty habits of his in regards to time. First, he doesn't bother to know the correct time (no watch, always approximating). Second, if he were supposed to meet MK at 8:30, he should've left the Kebap before that time, not at that time. But it seems this is his way.
One thing that bothers me is that he doesn't mention the time when he talks about them making the appointment the night before. He just says that she gave him the time and place. We don't learn that he's to meet her "around 8:30" until later, and it's still vague. This might be deceptive, or it might just be an aspect of his foggy relationship to time.
indie:
Setting up a date for a relatively unknown man when she had a boyfriend.
-Inviting a man to her own cottage on their first "date"
-Arriving 45 minutes late for their first date
-Allowing him in her bedroom for intimate relations within minutes of the start of their date
-Discussing personal childhood "issues" within minutes of finding her rent money missing
------------------
These are 5 excellent points why NOT to take anything he says/writes at face value. Meredith would have to be scatty, unpunctual, unreliable, and not "fussy" about who she brought home and allowed into her private bedroom. Everything we know about her contradicts this. He seems to pad out the blanks with the most ridiculous garbage I ever heard!
-----------
I meant 4 excellent points!
Ooops, I meant 5. Ignore me. I've been delirious with an ear infection (
DLW, Sparrow,
I agree with you. I am just trying to reconcile the time frame with regards to Rudy Guede. I put out a time line with regards to Rudy Guede's arrival at the cottage. I assumed 8:30 pm because that is the time that he said vis-a-vis his statement. I think that it is safe to say that Meredith arrived at the cottage at about 9:15 pm. I do not think that anyone can argue that point, say minus five minutes. I think all of us can agree that Rudy Guede fled at 10:30 pm minus five minutes because this was reported by a witness. I think all of us believe that this person seen fleeing the scene was Rudy Guede.
IMHO, if Meredeth makes that call at 9:30 pm, then Rudy Guede has no more than 40 minutes to do all that he said he did with her; i.e., drink the apricot drink, look with Meredith to find the lost/stolen money, calm Meredith down, chitchat about their supposed, common life experiences, have consensual sex, go to the bathroom for three songs, comfort a dying Meredith, use a towel to stop the bleeding, go back and get another one to try again, fight with an assailant and then flee the house.
It would be impossible to all of this, and thus Rudy Guede is lying through his teeth.
Hello, I'm back after a refreshing vacation in Tuscany. Lots has been discussed since I was last here, and we have a new (now a week old) discussion URL ... thanks Steve
Also, thanks to Traduco, Sparrow and Nicki for the Rudy Diary translation effort, now in Word format.
As I had mentioned before leaving, we were planning on driving down to Assisi and stopping in Perugia for a few short hours on the way. We did so last Wednesday (19th).
I was with my family, and our plans were strictly touristic in nature ... I would have been a watered-down version of Charles Mudade had I tried to turn the visit into any sort of fact-finding activity concerning the Giallo.
That said, the old historic part of Perugia is so limited in dimensions that it is impossible to be in any particular location without stumbling across Giallo-related sites, and when I did so, I snapped the odd photo, or made a mental note of what I saw.
I highly recommend this free walking tour guide prepared by the Perugia city hall / provincial commune:
http://www.hotelgio.it/immagini/
...ta_completo.pdf
Even though it is in Italian, the photos, maps, and text are invaluable in understanding the history of the city from a street level perspective.
I've jotted down some disjointed observations and thoughts related to our strolling about:
We parked in the upper level of the carpark by the girls' cottage. The cottage impressed me by its small size. We already knew that from the floor plan, but to see it at your feet on the other side of, and below a narrow street emphasises that fact.
http://img393.imageshack.us/
img3...elowfeetou5.jpg
The place was very closed up. (I didn't realise then that a new house inspection had just taken place). Curiously, there is still a mop and bucket leaning against the "lean-to" pillar of the entrance. They have been in that position since the first images on Nov.1. I hope they don't form part of the evidence pending to be examined.
http://img378.imageshack.us/
img3...edbucketvj2.jpg
The slope on the other side of the house is very steep. If you slipped, you could tumble down into the ravine.
Both when parking in the carpark, and later when leaving, two groups of two or three persons of different ages approached the house. Many flowers near the entrance gate are dried up, although there are some fresh ones too.
The rubbish bins outside of the girls' gate continue to provide a small parking space for a small car. There is a stamped-down "platform" about a metre and a half wide behind the rubbish bins (however, a false step could send you into the ravine).
http://img519.imageshack.us/
img5...ishbins1wm2.jpg
http://img357.imageshack.us/
img3...ishbins2op4.jpg
http://img329.imageshack.us/
img3...platformiq9.jpg
Everything is small here, the horizontal distances are short. The distance from Raffaele's to the girls' house can easily be covered in 5 minutes. The distance from from Piazza Grimana (basketball court) to Patrick's bar wouldn't require the 25 minutes I estimated in one of the presentations (assuming that he may have done that route on Nov. 1, he may well not have been around), 15 minutes is more than enough.
The basketball court is just that, the size of a basketball court, not a sports stadium. Piazza Grimana is correspondingly small. The basketball court was empty when we first walked through the piazza. It was full of American, European and Japanese students later on, playing a pick-up game of basketball.
http://img164.imageshack.us/
img1...univforefw4.jpg
Amanda's estimate of 2 minutes from the cottage to the Foreigners' University is spot on.
http://img164.imageshack.us/
img1...nersunivxo4.jpg
..... (cont.)
(... cont. )
The Tana dell'Orso pub isn't the first bar you come across when you walk up Via Ulysse Rocchi (ie. I was wrong), but it's a couple of metres beyond the first bend.
There are two kebab places in Via Ulysse Rocchi in front of the Tana dell'Orso. One is exactly in front (Kebab Ararat), number 43, and the other is a few metres up (Kebab Doner).
http://img108.imageshack.us/
img1...abplacesht6.jpg
(there are Kebab places all over the place, there are a couple between Raffaele's place and Piazza Grimana)
Up on top of the hill, near the cathedral is an access a semi-covered cul-de-sac to an old Etruscan well. That's also the access to the Shamrock pub (ie. the Shamrock pub is basically on the main square. To be exact, it is basically on Piazza Dante, which is the extension of the main square to the right of the cathedral.
http://img218.imageshack.us/
img2...hamrock1jv6.jpg
http://img129.imageshack.us/
img1...hamrock2ui7.jpg
Walk a couple more steps (metres, not tens of metres), and you stumble onto Amanda's lawyer's office, Luciano Ghirga.
http://img364.imageshack.us/
img3...awofficejl4.jpg
The next door after Ghirga's office - for the Masonic conspiratists - is the hall of the Perugia section of the Grande Oriente lodge.
http://img225.imageshack.us/
img2...onslodgeju9.jpg
Shortly afterwards (within metres, the Dante Plaza turns into another, then into Via Bontempi), on the other side of the street, Robyn Butterworth's building.
We wandered around the downtown streets, following the historic indications of the guide, but bumping constantly into Giallo references. Once we had enough of downtown, we followed Aquaduct street to the area around the top end of Corso Garibaldi. There's a round Templar Knight church there (built on the foundations of a pagan Roman temple, which in turn was built on an Etruscan site, etc.). Walking down Corso Garibaldi, I saw that Porta Sperandio is open for one way traffic (for cars leaving). There is no gate or other impediment, for example at night time, for a person to walk either or both ways through the old city gate.
When we got to Via Canerino (Rudy's street) I took a fast look at the gate in the wall which gives access to the park and footpath outside. It's a big heavy, new metal thing which, if shut and locked at night, clearly prevents movement through the wall. In any case, with Porta Sperandio open 24 hours a day, the closed/open issue of the hole in the wall by Rudy's and Raffaele's place is less important.
http://img391.imageshack.us/
img3...gatewallns7.jpg
Michael (UK), you were wondering some time ago about where Raffaele parked his car. Beside the alley to Rudy's place (and access to the hole in the wall), there's an empty lot where neighbours seem to rent space for parking. It could have been there. (left path to hole in wall, right ramp up to parking area)
http://img390.imageshack.us/
img3...eparkingru2.jpg
Raffaele's building is just a couple of metres down Corso Garibaldi. His name tag is still in the street buzzer.
There's a small franchise laundromat on the other side of the street, just down from Raffaele's place. In principle, this is not the laundromat referred to in the newspaper accounts. However it is interesting that it is just in front of a couple of dumpsters in the street.
I didn't see any obvious mini-market or supermarket in the immediate area of Raffaele's place (regarding possible purchase of bleach). Just the laundromat, a couple of bars, a couple of pizza joints, and a couple of kebab joints.
Having descended the short walking distance required to follow Corso Garibaldi (I haven't included here - apart from the Templar church - any references to the many historical, religious and cultural references on the way on this street and in the rest of our visit to Perugia), on arriving at Piazza Grimana again, I jogged a few metres to the right, entering Via Fabretti, to find THE laundromat. Guermantes, I didn't have to go far, it's at number 7A, and had a number of clients doing their washing.
http://img101.imageshack.us/
img1...fabrettivl5.jpg
Back at the carpark, I gazed a last time at the cottage, another couple of persons approached to pay their respects too.
Driving by Sra. Elisabetta's place, it isn't really obvious from the street that there is a house there, someone in a nervous state could have thought the trees and embankment were just part of the natural foliage and terrain.
Earlier we had enjoyed cappuccino and chocolate in short sleeves in a terrace café in the main square. The next day, as Damian has noted, the whole area was under snow. By then we were back in Tuscany, but had snow in the hilltop town we were in.
Sorry for the length of this posting. Have to run to join the traffic jam home.
-
Kermit's back! Where are the rest of the muppets?
Kermit,
Thank you for all of your input. We are lucky to have someone like you doing this for us here. It brings us closer to the city of Purugia and to the cottage. I was waiting to see if you would visit Sra. Elisabetta's place.
"Driving by Sra. Elisabetta's place, it isn't really obvious from the street that there is a house there, someone in a nervous state could have thought the trees and embankment were just part of the natural foliage and terrain."
I believe in your hypothesis that the perpetrator(s) did exactly as you said they did and that is, throw the phones from the car. I do not believe that Rudy Guede was entrusted with the phones. He ran out too quickly. These phones were handled by the clean up crew.
Thank you so much for all of your input and so glad to have you back here.
WOW....Great pics Kermit! Thanks!
Sounds like you and your family had a wonderful trip. I, for one, am envious.
Yes, wonderful pics, Kermit. Thanks for going through so much effort during your family vacation. Now when we read Rudy's diary, or imagine other scenarios, we can visualize certain things more accurately.
Thank you, Kermit!
Great stuff Kermit. Thank you thank you thank you
-----
Kermit, Thanks for the photos and great commentary. We missed you! All these details really do help visualize the specific places. And, as you say, distances are often smaller than one imagines. Very few people around; was it Spring break there too? Welcome back.
Thanks, Kermit, for the new photo of the laundromat. I wish I could do my laundry there too Jogging is certainly a healthy activity... I was surprised by the square shape of that door (or gate) in the city wall. I imagined it with an oval top. The wall itself looks very uneven (rough); a good climber like Amanda would have had no difficulty in climbing over that wall but, as you said, the open Porta Sperandio would have solved the problem of leaving/returning through that door. What is bothering me in regards to many theories of how the phones could have been ditched is the fact that both Rudy and Raffaele lived very close to Via Sperandio, just on the other side of the wall. Having been residents of Perugia for quite awhile, didn't they know that there were a few homes and people, such as Sra. Elisabetta, living across the road? Usually, residents know their nearest neighbors and surroundings quite well. I cannot imagine R and/or R throwing those phones on that lawn; it's just too close to home. I would imagine that the person who had dumped the phones had not known that there were houses hidden behind the trees in that area. Amanda would fit this description. Or the phones were ditched in the dark and in a hurry. As you said: ...it isn't really obvious from the street that there is a house there, someone in a nervous state could have thought the trees and embankment were just part of the natural foliage and terrain. Anyway, it's just an intuition.
Traduco and Nicki, dove siete andati? Not far, I hope. I did a QAD of Rudy's page 1. Please help me if you can with the parts with which I had trouble. Maybe others can also help with the last one. Near the bottom of the last paragraph, there's a reference to a computer game called "Pro Evolution Soccer." There's a phrase that looks like "la play." Does anyone know what that is? Thanks.
Here's the page:
Paolo Barbini, and Family,
Hello Paulo, dearest Teacher. It is Rudy Hermann Guede, your ex-pupil, and ex-player, writing to you. The reason I’m writing to you, is that here in prison you have a lot of time to think. It’s something that usually escapes us when we are immersed in the ordinary life, not that I didn’t think, or hadn’t thought during those times, but here inside, there’s more "time" to do it. In a few words, you realize how much people have done for you, and that you haven’t ever had the time to thank them.
Here, I spend much of my time to remember, and how could I not remember, the first time I met you. I remember it was during (Elementary School???) at Ponte San Giovanni. (I was number 58???), if I’m not mistaken. From then on, for a beautiful period of time, I began to exist for you, and vice-versa, you for me. This, insomuch as before this time, we didn’t even know of each other.
During that period, I played basketball a little (did he misspell "pocche?"). But with you, I learned to love this sport, quite so. Thanks to you and your son Francesco, I was dedicated. I gave all of myself not to skip even one practice. It came to my mind that when I entered your house the first time, I was shy, and a little embarrassed. But with the passage of time I got comfortable, because I was at your place every time we had practice, in other words, 5 times per week. God, what beautiful times I had with you all, arriving, and enjoying the delicacies that your wife made for me to eat. You know, I still remember when she was cooking the stuffed artichokes and stuffed zucchini. Oh God, they were fabulous! Then I got to know Francesco, and we played "Pro Evolution Soccer." He was (the player???),and always beat me. Sometimes I won, but he let me win on purpose.
Ciao Kermit, I hope you enjoyed your Italian hols...despite the weather.
I'd always assumed the supermarket from which the bleach receipts were taken was the one near the bottom of Corso Garibaldi, on the right as you go down. I maybe wrong, but it was reported that the shop was on C.Garibaldi, so it would make sense.
bpcl | 03.24.08 - 3:11 pm | "I believe in your hypothesis that the perpetrator(s) did exactly as you said they did and that is, throw the phones from the car." ... Remember that's just one hypothesis, one which I give equal probability to as the lower-tech walking/running hypothesis. In addition to being a possibility, maybe I keep it alive due to some Walter Mitty factor in me (how daring, tossing mobile phones from a moving vehicle ...).
--------------------
May | 03.24.08 - 9:41 pm | "Very few people around; was it Spring break there too?" .... Hi May, no, last week was a working week in Italy. It was Easter Week in Madrid (Thursday and Friday off, I took the other three days of the week). I got confused when someone asked me what I was going to do for Easter, then realised the holiday there was yesterday (Monday), when I was already going to be back at work in Spain. In addition to the multinational basketball game in Piazza Grimana (presumably students from the Foreigners' University), there was a good crowd up in the main Piazza IV Novembre, and on the cathedral stairs. Maybe there were not so many people in some of the snaps because we got to Perugia later than planned (it's hard to get up when you're on vacation ...) and part of the visit was during lunch hour.
----------
Guermantes | 03.25.08 - 3:02 am | "I was surprised by the square shape of that door (or gate) in the city wall." .... Yes, the door is definitely modern and only functional in design (to keep people from moving in or out at night). It's not even constructed of iron bars, so persons can't even pass things through it when it's closed.
"I cannot imagine R and/or R throwing those phones on that lawn; it's just too close to home." .... Sometimes after much time thinking we are familiar with things or even with persons, we suddenly become aware of characteristics that we didn't know before. Or, as you suggest, maybe it was another person.
----------
damian | 03.25.08 - 4:19 am | "I'd always assumed the supermarket from which the bleach receipts were taken was the one near the bottom of Corso Garibaldi, on the right as you go down."
I may have missed that due to my crowd control activities. I did notice some small commercial places (pizzerias, kebab places, etc.) on the right and left; maybe I confused the supermarket with one of those, or got distracted as we went past.
BTW, I read "Il Giornale dell'Umbria" avidly while on holidays. Interesting local rag, with news sections on each of the Umbria commune cities. How did you describe it once? "tits and cats up trees"? I saw lots of cat stories, none of the others.
-
Sparrow | 03.25.08 - 4:09 am |
"and we played "Pro Evolution Soccer." He was (the player???),and always beat me."
I would transcribe it as:
"e giocavamo ad "Pro Evolution Soccer" en la play e mi batteva sempre"
"la play" is a reference to the Sony game console "PlayStation", so it would read "and we played "Pro Evolution Soccer" on the PlayStation and he always beat me".
-
POST-PASQUA greetings to all of you!
SPARROWwwwwwwww!! Cara!
Complimenti! Trenta e lode to you!
The same top marks go to KERMIT whose photos were
fascinating and highly appreciated. I was in Perugia just a few years back for a few weeks, but I'd swear I never saw that KEBAB place, or any KEBAB place. And I walked and walked everywhere...well, clearly, not everywhere. I never did go past Pzza. Grimana when I went to the University area.
SPARROW: Re; QAD Page ONE. Here are some suggestions, some answers. Nikki, as always, feel free to add yours, too.
Line 8: I'd say "I spend much of my time REMEMBERING"...
(Kinda sounds to me like the first lines from Fellini's "Amarcord"...
Line 9: Here I'd say "I remember it was BACK IN THE DAYS OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL"
Line 10: I assume this is 5-B. In other words, fifth grade, B class.
So I might say here "When I was in the 5th grade class B,"
Line 11: Here Rudy writes "da li` in poi,per un bel periodo"...and my take is in this instance "bel" means not beautiful but rather "significant", "considerable...as in a similar expression "un bel po` di tempo" which does NOT mean for a beautiful bit of time It means for "quite a while."
Thus, I'd say " FROM THEN ON, FOR QUITE A WHILE, I BEGAN TO EXIST FOR YOU.."
LINE 13: I'd say: "At that time, I had been playing basketball for a short time (i.e., da poco)
LINE LINE 22: I'd say "Then I went *upstairs* to Francesco's place..."
Kermit filled you in on the Pro Evolution ....but as for the
FINAL LINE: I'd say...."he always beat me , sometimes he let me win, but he did it on purpose."
Is this clear? If not, please let me know.
I'm attempting to multi-task at the moment, which often means me doing more than one thing at the same time, but never any of it done particularly well!
Yours distractedly, in a post-holiday torpor,
Traduco
Subjective opinion:
I don't know who killed Meredith Kercher, but I don't believe it was Rudy Guede.
His lies in his Skype phone call etc. etc. are transparently false denials of his presence. If he's always lied that transparently, it would explain his reputation as a liar. They aren't "good" lies with any connection to provable fact. He's bad at it.
But his empathy with other people is undeniable.
He may have tried it on with Meredith , but I cannot relate that to the cold heart which would be required to stick a knife in her neck 3 times and kill her.
His story about 2 towels is undeniable. They were found with Meredith and saturated with blood.
Compare his "diary" to that of Amanda or Solliceto and his humanism is obvious. I don't believe his diary is any attempt to fit with theirs. He names people, thoughts, "times" and places in his description of the night. He wasn't so out of it, he "can't remember".
I would ask Traduco, Sparrow and those others involved to complete the translation of those pages not directly connected to the crime. Your
efforts have exposed far more than any newspaper reoprt.
I would ask Traduco, Sparrow and those others involved to complete the translation of those pages not directly connected to the crime. Your
efforts have exposed far more than any newspaper reoprt.
Brian S. | 03.25.08 - 12:57 pm | #
We're doing that Brian. It was always our intention to publish a translation of the full document, side by side with Rudy's handwritten pages.
It seems RG has a meeting with the pm tomorrow. Maybe he had something to say after all...
FINAL LINE: I'd say...."he always beat me , sometimes he let me win, but he did it on purpose."
Is this clear? If not, please let me know.
It's all clear, Traduco. I know the above is a more direct translation. I guess I went to far, thinking that to "let" on "purpose" is redundant. I went too far! Rudy is being redundant, and I should let him! And I never would have gotten that "la Play" thing. Thanks Traduco and Kermit!
Okay, I'll fix this page, and post a QAD of page 2 later today. Thanks Traduco.
I like Brian's subjective opinion. The person who emerges from this document provides human details, needs people, has bonds with others, tells lies badly. And I am so pleased to hear he's meeting with the PM tomorrow.
Brian S,
The translation of Rudy Guede's statement has, as you say, exposed a whole lot more about the man himself, his relationship with others, and most importantly, has offered us a few pieces to the puzzle about what happened to Meredith Kercher. And you are also right in saying that we would never have gotten anything like this from a newspaper or any other media source.
Damian,
Could you explain further. What does this mean that Rudy Guede is meeting with the PM tomorrow. Is it a 'truth' or 'show and tell' type of meeting? Or is it an interrogative one? What happens in these types of meetings exactly?
As I said a while back, if any of the suspects want to talk to the pm, they just have to ask. So it seems that RG's team have made this request and tomorrow the pm will go hear what he has to say for himself.
Line 8: I'd say "I spend much of my time REMEMBERING"...
(Kinda sounds to me like the first lines from Fellini's "Amarcord"...---Traduco
I see movies, hear music, envision paintings when I read Rudy's words.
He may have tried it on with Meredith---Brian
And she may have liked him. I think that it's hard for some people to see this possibility because we only know him after he's become a murder/rape suspect, and been falsely described as a drug pusher. Meredith would have seen him the way others did, before all this. And there is ample evidence that quite a lot of people liked him.
Brian S I also don't see RG as a killer. Sketchy follow-thy-leader maybe, but not that. Call me dumb or strap me down, but I'm having serious difficulty not seeing...damn I almost said it...
Why can't you say it Nowo?
bpcl, going back to the question of whether AK and RS's team have started working together. I first thought this after having watched the most recent Porta Porta about this case, in which the coughing criminologist (who is working for RS) spent time defending AK. This had not happened before. With regard to whether this would be legal or not, of course it would.
Brian. "His story about two towels is undeniable"
I'm not sure I agree about that, but the fact that he was there is undeniable. If it is true however,(that he left a dying woman to die) perhaps it would shed more light on the type of person he is than the BS that he writes.
Do you folk believe RG hasn't named names? I know his lawyers have said he didn't see this Italian dude well enough to identify him and that the police have said similar stuff, but I'm not sure this necessarily means that this is the case. If it is however, what may that indicate?
Rudy Guede may not be the killer of Meredith Kercher, but he most certainly knows who is.
Yes bpcl. If all 3 are involved, why did RG leave town (because he cut his hand and was thus the weak link?) and the other 2 cover for him? If he hasn't named names, would this suggest that all 3 were in on the plan, that the plan was murder, and that they made a pact?
Again, if all 3 were involved, but the plan wasn't murder, and RG wasn't holding the knife, would this suggest that he has named names?
Damian,
Chris Mellas said to me that the Knox team was not working with the Sollecito team. He is not one to lie. However, things do change, everything is fluid, so it would not surprise me if they are working today. Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were lovers, were with each other that day, and supposedly were with each other that night and the next day; it stands to follow that they would have to defend together since their stories are intertwined.
Do you folk believe RG hasn't named names? I know his lawyers have said he didn't see this Italian dude well enough to identify him and that the police have said similar stuff, but I'm not sure this necessarily means that this is the case. If it is however, what may that indicate?
damian | 03.25.08 - 4:16 pm |
I've always suspected that he may have told the police more, but there's no way of knowing. When he's talking to Amanda in his diary, it seems he asking her to identify the killer. This could be because he's not sure who the killer is, or if he does know, that he's afraid to identify him. He wants her to do it. This latter scenario would mean the killer is none of the three. I don't think Rudy would be afraid to identify Raf, if it was truly him.
But Rudy was under interrogation for 9 hours IRRC, after returning from Germany. The police may have gotten it out of him, but maintained silence for lack of evidence. If Rudy's story is true, then the killer may have been in the girls' house for a very short time, and left very little, if any evidence. This brings me to another question I haven't seen asked. Why take Filomena's guitar?
Did we ever figure out what there was to celebrate? I didn't. I never figured out what there was to celebrate.
http://tinyurl.com/yuocvd
About the meeting tomorrow. This article implies that the pm fixed the meeting 20 days ago. It is however a little ambiguous and could mean that the pm fixed the date after a meeting was requested. I guess Biscuits will clarify tomorrow.
Did we ever figure out what there was to celebrate? I didn't. I never figured out what there was to celebrate.
damian | 03.25.08 - 4:27 pm | #
We made guesses based on rumor. Nothing can be confirmed until something happens, possibly on April 1st. What if Rudy's meeting tomorrow is a pre-emptive strike?
Just waiting to see/hear. Tomorrow, eh? Given all the back & forth, I just don't believe this will amount to much, but as I've been mostly wrong...! But its how much & how fast stuff leaks that will be interesting. Or if its a name not the other two & so leads to a new arrest.
Just waiting. (Hello to everyone.)
Great reading, Kermit. I have to come back and re-savor it.
Damian,
Rudy Guede has in fact given out names. From his Skype conversation,
"When I went away the glass of the window wasn't broken and Meredith was dressed. Only Amanda and Raffaele may have done this."
Rudy Guede ran away too quickly to have been the murderer. And there was a general attempt to cover up the crime(The movement of Meredith's body, the breaking of the window, the locking of her door, the tossing of her cellphones, the washing of her clothing etc). The people who did this cleanup had the most at stake to hide their involvement I believe.
As of this moment, I am not sure whether or not there was a general plan. I have pointed this out before though. This crime was about 'unchecked rage'. There were two intimidation wounds on her neck. Some people have speculated that Meredith might have turned her neck into the knife. This type of action cannot, IMHO, precipitate a knife wound that penetrates the entire neck.
I still get back to Rudy Guede's statement that Meredith was furious that her money had been stolen.
Assume the following if you will. Meredith does indeed have a date of some type with Rudy Guede. Both Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollicito are still at the cottage. Meredith comes flying out to accuse Amanda Knox as Rudy Guede states. The fight begins. There is still the case of the DNA on the kitchen knife to be explained. Or maybe it was Raffaele Sollecito who plunges the knife; he loved knives. Rudy Guede is now caught in the thick of things. He flees, he regrets, he really has no connection with either Amanda Knox or Raffele Sollecito. He asks Amanda Knox why does she sleep in the house while Meredith is there, dying, why did she not help her out. What has happened between these two women over such a short period of time. Maybe Rudy Guede will reveal his story tommorrow.
Hi Robert. I hope you don't mind me pestering you again, but could you shed some light on the formal process of identification. Must it be in the flesh or will a series of photos do? Can it be repeated? If a summit meeting happens, would that mean an identity parade later would not be possible?
RobertM,
We have missed your presence and your input on this blog.
bpcl, if you are right, we can assume that he named names upon his return and that this fact has been kept secret by the police and RG's lawyers. This would involve the two parties (the police and Biscuits) making a deal on this point. I don't think this possibility can be excluded. If this didn't happen however, it would mean that you're scenario is wrong...at least, that's where my logic takes me.
Just to clarify, when I talk about an 'identity parade', I mean RG being asked to identify the 'Italian man' who supposedly attacked him with a knife. I imagine a line of men, one of whom is RS, or did I used to watch too much tv?
Damian,
All good points. All good lawyers will bargain for their clients and keep any pertinent information close to their vest. I have been impressed by Rudy Guede's lawyer. He has protected his client well I think. I think that many of us here believe that this crime against Meredith Kercher was not premeditated. The Police have had difficulty, as we have here too, of trying to find a proper motive. Everything about this crime is amateurish in nature. It was not done by professionals obviously. The closest we have been to the crime has been in Rudy Guede's statement. There are most certainly good clues in it. Rudy Guede was in the house for too short a time to be participating in a planned orgy of some sort. His humanity comes out in his statements and he is very careful about describing things; like how he drank out of the apricot bottle instead of using a glass. Rudy Guede stated that he was never tight with Amanda Knox; you can see this from his descriptions of Meredith, the type of woman he admired and desired. Amanda Knox was not his type, too urban, too superficial for him. Did he know Raffaele Sollecito? Perhaps he saw him around town and knew of him; Raffaele Sollecito was not one of the guys that he would hang out with.
What I am trying to do Damian is resolve the discrepancies in the accounts of each of the three persons in custody. If Rudy Guede was indeed in the bathroom when he heard Meredith's screams, he would not have known which of the two delivered the final blow, so he just may not be able to tell us.
All,
Like Robert M, I am watching and waiting to see what, if anything, will come out of tomorrow's interview with the PM. Interesting or just coincidental that it comes before two bigger events -- the summit meeting at which all three will be present and the April 1st supreme court review?
And no, we never did find out what Chris Mellas was celebrating. Come to think of it, we never did find out much of anything from Chris Mellas.
bpcl, when I mentioned a plan (murder) I was trying to think through what RG may have said to the police. I find it hard to believe that he hasn't named names if he isn't the murderer(or even if he is, come to think of it).
However, I still believe that if the knife taken from RS's flat was used agaisnt Meredith that night, the charges will be M1. I also believe that RG's position, in terms of the law, is by far the worse of the 3. Correct me if I'm wrong, but RG has not said that he saw AK or RS there that night. He has said that he fought with an Italian man. If that man was RS, for what possible reason would he have not said that? If AK was there, why hasn't he said that?
1. They made a pact of silence.
2. He has named names but this has not been released .
3. He doesn't mind being set up for murder.
4. AK and RS weren't there.
Since everyone is chatting about RG, probably because of the translation of his diary, what chance to you think there is of him not passing the next 20 years of his life in prison?
"Since everyone is chatting about RG, probably because of the translation of his diary, what chance to you think there is of him not passing the next 20 years of his life in prison?
damian | 03.25.08 - 6:04 pm | #"
Given what I know with certainty, his chances are somewhere between 0 and 100!
3. He doesn't mind being set up for murder.---Damian
Where does this come from? He is fighting a murder wrap. He will not be set up. His lawyers are steadfast against this. When RS' lawyers try to imply this, they hit back successfully.
4. AK and RS weren't there.---Damian
This is not certain either, if he's named names and it hasn't been revealed, he could have named one or both. I would bet that it would only be AK that he could name.
1. They made a pact of silence.---Damian
Personally, I don't think the three made a pact. Only RS and AK had an agreement. Rudy has always been on his own in this, until Biscotti came along. His statement is his way of telling some truth and scrambling to save himself, and only himself. And there's no indication that either of the two are protecting him either. In fact, RS' team is always trying to turn the finger toward RG. RG knows less about this crime than AK, so let's hope she hasn't lost her mind. RS, I'm now inclined to believe was not involved in the murder, only the cover up, and that, rather than his cold-bloodedness, is why he refers to this crime in a more detached way.
And if 20 years is what Rudy will get for abandoning a person to die, running from a crime scene, etc. then maybe we can surmise why he was so frightened to reveal what he knows. A lot can happen in there in 20 years.
I've been reading this blog for sometime now but don
’t recall posting here before. (I have posted a couple of short blips on other blogs.)
On all the blogs I
’ve read I get really confused with how so many pieces of "evidence" either confirmed, or not, keep getting stated over and over as if there was something new to take from that piece of "evidence". For those pieces that have not been confirmed as true “evidence†they get repeated so many times that they are all believed to be fact by many. There are also so many "theories" that have been repeated so many times that some of you indirectly believe them to be truth. All of this irritates me, but I continue to read this blog to gather any new information I can. (Sadly I’m obsessed with following this story with hopes that the innocent will be free and the guilty will be found.)
Now I'm not posting here to rant and rave nor attack anyone, but to add to this mixture of thoughts and theories going around. In most senses I
’m looking to provide my theory which may be similar to a few already posted, just posted in a different way.
With all the “evidence†floating around to date, if it were all true, could you honestly say that any of these three are guilty for the murder of Meredith? Most of you have your opinions and theories that have been formed from what you’ve read, or know about this murder, but could any of you convict, WITHOUT REASONABLE DOUBT, RG, RS or AK with murder.
I do fully believe both AK and RS were no where near the cottage during the horrific act and had nothing to do with it in any way. The only things shared that ties them to the cottage could have been there at any give timeframe given AK lived there and RS visited her there.
I think Amanda's confession was her giving in to police brutality, after hours of interrogation, some physical (lack of food, no sleep, confinement, foreign language, etc. etc.) but mostly mental (all of which I would assume is typical for interrogation). Her giving in, was providing a story the police may have lead her to tell. What
’s to say they didn’t fill her mind with “theories†or ideas in a way to find someone that might be responsible? They wanted a black man from day one. (Take a look at the early reports before anyone was arrested.) And maybe they found she had contact with PL, in fact, she had talked with him just days after the murder in the piazza, so his identity was fresh in her mind. Who knows where all this could lead, but it’s all theoretical based on the “evidence†I’ve read about.
I don
’t know AK personally, but I still picture her as young and innocent in many ways. Even with all the media (and some on this blog) painting a picture of her being cruel, cold hearted and devilish. I think that is a large stretch from the truth about her personality and qualities. She was just a young college student in a foreign country trying to experience all the good things it had to offer. I.e. new friends, beautiful country, new languages and cultures, amazing and historical architecture, etc, etc. (Yes, I did experience studying in the central Italian hilltowns for a college summer, so I know what it has to offer. It was absolutely beautiful and the people were amazingly kind and giving.)
I know nothing about RS, but I believe him to be as innocent as AK.
As for Rudy, I believe it is an admitted fact that he was present when Meredith was killed. He may not have administered the actual blow, nor been involved with the person who did inflict the wounds, but he is definitely guilty of not calling the police, or anyone for that matter, to help. Whether he killed Meredith or not, it cannot be denied that he did let her die.
Now I don
’t want to beat a dead horse, but most, if not all, of this “evidence†that keeps being used against any of these three have not been proven to be fact. It will all be challenged in court, and I’m sure we will get a lot more within the next couple of months to speculate from.
One of my fears is that once AK and RS are found to be completely innocent, the massive confusion and debacle at the beginning of this case may have clouded and/or eliminated potential evidence that would have lead to the real killer, whether it be RG or anyone else for that matter.
Sparrow, I didn't express myself clearly. What i mean is that if RG saw one or both of the other suspects there that night, I find it difficult to understand why he has not said this to the police, if indeed he hasn't. I offered 4 possible explanations, one of which was clearly absurd.
"And there's no indication that either of the two are protecting him either." I was referring to the fact that neither AK nor RS mentioned his name after their arrests, instead AK accused Patrick.
"RG knows less about this crime than AK" I'm not sure how you know that. I sense a tide of sympathy for RG here, very similar to what happened when RS's diary was translated. Very odd.
"RS, I'm now inclined to believe, was not involved in the murder."
I have problems imagining this conversation. "Hi love, me and my mates have just killed our flatmate. Would you mind helping us tidy up a bit and make it look like something it wasn't?...No worries, I'll be right over.
Again, if what you say about RS is true, I presume he would have told the police this.
Sorry for the lengthy blog, but I felt I had a lot to get out there. If I feel so inclined I may continue to post and will find a better handle.
Thanks to Steve for hosting this blog. It's such a good thing, to have this many people communicating in such a respectful way.
Okay, I gotcha now Damian.
"RG knows less about this crime than AK" I'm not sure how you know that.---
It's just my opinion at the moment.
I sense a tide of sympathy for RG here, very similar to what happened when RS's diary was translated. Very odd.---
What you sense is there, and it's not odd, very natural in fact. There's one difference with Rudy's statement however. He was in a much lower position than RS, when he wrote it. In fact I think he'd nearly hit bottom, and could see the end of his life. This is one reason he can tell more truth, than RS. Another reason is of course that he has to tell more truth given the evidence of his presence there that night. I think he has one last thing that keeps him from telling the full truth. His death is not immediately certain. He knows he'll spend time in prison, maybe a long time. How's that going to go? So there's one last bit he's holding on to (at least in public now) because he's scared. Better for him that AK tells.
"RS, I'm now inclined to believe, was not involved in the murder."
I have problems imagining this conversation. "Hi love, me and my mates have just killed our flatmate. Would you mind helping us tidy up a bit and make it look like something it wasn't?...No worries, I'll be right over.---
Well, I don't imagine it that way either. I imagine it more like AK showing up shaking, in a panic, barely able to tell him what happened. Maybe she didn't tell him the entire truth, maybe she did. But it would involve a very dangerous person, the killer, a person she's afraid of. RS himself is a bit of an odd fellow. But we know he doesn't like or respect cops. We might imagine he thinks it better for AK not to anger the murderer, or get involved with the cops. What if in his arrogance he thinks he's smarter than the cops? And he wants to be a hero to this little, shaking girl, who's in way over her head?
Again, if what you say about RS is true, I presume he would have told the police this.---
Another unique aspect of RS' situation is the suffocating presence of his father. That might stop him from coming clean. But also, if he can get off scott free with no conviction, that's better than admitting to a crime (the cover up). Damian, I have gone back and forth on what I believe in this case a lot. Right now I think that none of the three killed MK, but that they're in very difficult situations. But of late, what I've been trying to do is figure out who these people are, and see how they fit into the picture of this crime, rather than looking at the crime, and fitting the known suspects into positions, whether they fit or not.
Newbie,
"I do fully believe both AK and RS were no where near the cottage during the horrific act and had nothing to do with it in any way. The only things shared that ties them to the cottage could have been there at any give timeframe given AK lived there and RS visited her there.
In your opinion, where were they on the night of November 1st? Keep in mind, that Raffaele Sollecito stated that he was home alone, by himself. Amanda Knox has stated that she was with Raffaele Sollecito the entire time. How do you resolve this apparent contradiction in their alibis?
Assuming they were both at Raffaele Sollecito's flat together, how is it that neither of them have anyone to back this up, and yet physical evidence shows them to be at the cottage( Amanda Knox's blood mixed with Meredith's blood, Raffaele Sollecito's DNA on the Meredith's brassiere clasp). Additionally, Amanda Knox's cell phone was pinged in the vicinity of the cottage, most specifically at 8:38 pm. But she was suppose to be with at Raffaele Sollecto's flat. If they are innocent as you believe, how come they both have so many credibility issues with their alibis?
Sparrow,
Interesting thoughts. How do you resolve the issue of both Amanda Knox's and Raffaele Sollecito's cell phone going off exactly at the same time, 8:40 pm on the night of the murder and turning on at exactly the same time the following morning?
"I don't think Rudy would be afraid to identify Raf, if it was truly him."
Sparrow, isn't the claim that Rudy and Raffaele didn't know each other?
"If it is true however,(that he left a dying woman to die) perhaps it would shed more light on the type of person he is than the BS that he writes."
Damain, perhaps he didn't call because he knew there was still someone else there and assumed they would do something. He asks in his statement how Amanda was able to sleep there while Meredith was dying in her room.
Beep, I don't resolve that at all. That's one of those pieces of evidence that I don't pin too much importance on. I don't know if it's been reported accurately. If that's exactly what happened with their phones. We read earlier that there were phone calls exchanged between RG and AK, but later found this not to be true, so I don't know what to say about the two phones going off at the same time. It may have significance, but maybe not.
Sparrow,
"Right now I think that none of the three killed MK, but that they're in very difficult situations. But of late, what I've been trying to do is figure out who these people are, and see how they fit into the picture of this crime, rather than looking at the crime, and fitting the known suspects into positions, whether they fit or not."
As you know, physical evidence places them in the cottage in rather compromising situations, and they simply do not have credible alibis. No person can be in two different places at the same time. If someone can vouch for their presence somewhere else, then they were not at the cottage. However, if no one can vouch for their physical presence somewhere else, and physical evidence places them at the cottage(as it does) then they must have been at the cottage and nowhere else.
"But it would involve a very dangerous person, the killer, a person she's afraid of."
It seems odd that she has given (as far as we know) absolutely no hint of who this person might be. Or even that he exists. I would think she would have lived the next few days in extreme fear for her life - which she clearly did not, as I think we can agree from all those tabloid photos.
I'm having trouble convicting any of the three of them right now, especially as we've gotten to "know" them a bit as people... but clearly SOMEBODY did it.
I sense a tide of sympathy for RG here, very similar to what happened when RS's diary was translated. Very odd.---
What you sense is there, and it's not odd, very natural in fact. There's one difference with Rudy's statement however. He was in a much lower position than RS, when he wrote it. In fact I think he'd nearly hit bottom, and could see the end of his life. This is one reason he can tell more truth, than RS. Another reason is of course that he has to tell more truth given the evidence of his presence there that night. I think he has one last thing that keeps him from telling the full truth. His death is not immediately certain. He knows he'll spend time in prison, maybe a long time. How's that going to go? So there's one last bit he's holding on to (at least in public now) because he's scared. Better for him that AK tells.
Sparrow, to be honest, I don't understand any of this. It's weird, I normally get where you are coming from but this paragragh is a blip.
Sparrow,
Amanda Knox's cell phone was ping in the vicinity of the cottage at 8:38 pm. She replies to a message from Patrick at 8:40 pm. After that, her cell phone was unavailable until the following morning. From The phone records. This is fact. It is important for the following reason. In order to prove one's innocence, one must have an alibi; someone to say, 'No, this person was with me.' If one cannot say that, then one has a problem. The reason why Patrick Lumumba was removed as a suspect in this case is, as someone eloquently pointed out, 16 witnesses came forward.
"I don't think Rudy would be afraid to identify Raf, if it was truly him."
Sparrow, isn't the claim that Rudy and Raffaele didn't know each other?---kb
kb, I think that is the claim. But by the time Rudy was in jail in Germany, he knew from the news reports who Raf was. His description of the killer can fit Raf roughly, and he went on about the "af, af" thing, and he asked Amanda if the killer was Raf, in his writing. But what does this mean? It could mean that at the time of the murder, RG didn't know RS, and he may not be able to make a positive id. But I think if he were able to positively id Raf as the killer, he would (of course unless they are all involved together as many theories say). There's another possibility that the killer is not Raf however, and that it's someone RG fears, whether or not he knows him.
Sorry, my last post was in response to a quote from Sparrow.
Yes, Beep. I know this lack of an alibi is a problem for RS and AK. I also believe they're not telling the truth. I would need more to help me believe this was a premeditated murder, however. The idea of the phones going off at the same time and being off is intriguing, but I can't say for sure what it means, in this case.
Woopsie, that was me above, anonymous, and I tried to preview but it just published. Sorry!
Sparrow, to be honest, I don't understand any of this. It's weird, I normally get where you are coming from but this paragragh is a blip.
damian | 03.25.08 - 8:07 pm | #
Okay, maybe I'm weird, but I'll try again. The sympathy you sense is there, but I don't think it odd, I think it natural. As people get to know more about others, understand them better, there is more possibility of sympathy. In the rest of the paragraph I guess I was indicating that there was more than just this natural sympathy that made me take much more of what Rudy wrote as truth. I do think he was at the lowest point he'd been in during his entire life, and he was ready to come clean for the most part. In fact he wanted to be honest. But what keeps us from being honest sometimes? It is what we can lose by doing so. I think he's still scared, and that's why if he knows who the killer is, he didn't say it explicitly yet, in Germany, although he may have told the police in Italy later.
well, I totally wrote this long response to newbie and I screwed it up. just forget it all.
Sparrow,
I have never stated that it is premeditated murder. Amanda Knox knew Raffaele for what, two brief weeks. Meredith had never been in the flat of Raffaele Sollecito. So there is absolutely no way that her DNA gets on that kitchen knife; unless that day, Amanda Knox decides to bring it to cook the mushrooms. If it is determined that the knife has great potential to be the murder weapon, then the two people in custody have a serious problem. Additionally, both Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were at the cottage that afternoon. Meredith's money was stolen that day. If it had not been, then Meredith would have made hay of it before. Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were the only ones in the house. You take it from there.
You cannot disregard the evidence that has been presented. Do you honestly think that the Italian Police would be holding an American girl in prison for the last five months without good, probable cause? Do you not believe that her family would not hire the very best lawyers in town to free her?
In summary, if neither Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito can give a credible alibi to properly account for their whereabouts on the night of November 1st, and physical evidence places them at the scene of the murder, then it must follow that they were there, pure and simple.
Jumpy's back!
Sparrow,
"I think he's still scared, and that's why if he knows who the killer is, he didn't say it explicitly yet, in Germany, although he may have told the police in Italy later."
You cannot assume this or anything else about Rudy Guede. All we have are his words and those of the other two people in custody; and what physical evidence has been leaked. That is all that we can go on. We cannot psychoanalyze their behavior patterns.
well, I totally wrote this long response to newbie and I screwed it up. just forget it all.
Jumpy` | 03.25.08 - 8:20 pm |
Oh, I hate when that happens! Do you have time to reconstruct any of it?
"But it would involve a very dangerous person, the killer, a person she's afraid of."
It seems odd that she has given (as far as we know) absolutely no hint of who this person might be. Or even that he exists. I would think she would have lived the next few days in extreme fear for her life - which she clearly did not, as I think we can agree from all those tabloid photos.---kb
Well, some kinds of killers know that when they make an example of one person, they don't need to do anything further. I guess I'm not fleshing the whole scenario out, and maybe I shouldn't. And I could be totally wrong. But like you, I can't fit either of the three as a murderer.
We cannot psychoanalyze their behavior patterns.
bpcl | 03.25.08 - 8:23 pm | #
Oh yes we can. We are theorizing. And by the way, even prosecution and defense lawyers use psychological evaluations in court.
Sparrow,
And I have stated this before. Rudy Guede has only about 40 minutes to be in the in cottage with Meredith; absolutely no more. IMHO, no one here can prove to me that he had any more. There is absolutely no way that he could do all the things he said that he did; it must follow then that he is lying through his teeth; do you detect any sympathy in this statement?
There is absolutely no way that he could do all the things he said that he did; it must follow then that he is lying through his teeth; do you detect any sympathy in this statement?
bpcl | 03.25.08 - 8:30 pm | #
Why do you ask me if I detect sympathy in your statement?
Sparrow,
You are dead wrong. You are psychoanalyzing the case; It will be the suspected individuals lack of credible alibis and physical evidence that will ultimately convict them of the crime of murdering Meredith Kercher. And the reason why it will be this way in the end, is that all three of them are either incapable or unwilling to tell the truth.
Sparrow,
"I sense a tide of sympathy for RG here, very similar to what happened when RS's diary was translated.
This is your statement. I have never expressed any sympathy for Rudy Guede. He is as big a liar as the other two. We are consistently trying to feather out the inconsistencies and lies and half-truths of their individual statements. If any person were to lie about an issue that was so incredibly important to a case, such as this one, then they cannot be believed in any other point in so far as that issue is concerned. All three of the people in this case have this problem; they are not to be believed at all. Therefore, their pattern of lies and deception, and the fact that no one has yet come forward to say that they were somewhere else, and, physical evidence places them at the scene of the murder, will ultimately show that they are responsible.
Sorry bpcl...that was me, not Sparrow.
You are dead wrong. You are psychoanalyzing the case;---Beep
Well, technically I don't know if trying to understand someone's feelings, and theorizing about them can be accurately called psychoanalyzing. But whatever it is, I certainly can do it when I am theorizing about a case, and trying to figure out what happened.
It will be the suspected individuals lack of credible alibis and physical evidence that will ultimately convict them of the crime of murdering Meredith Kercher. And the reason why it will be this way in the end, is that all three of them are either incapable or unwilling to tell the truth. ---Beep
I don't really know what you're trying to say here, but yes it should be evidence that convicts anyone of a crime, but I'm not convicting anyone of a crime. I'm trying to understand what happened. And they may all be liars... well I know they are, but liars can go free, as well as be convicted. I don't know if you're saying in that statement that you believe they will be convicted. I certainly don't know how this case is going to end.
Sparrow, thanks for taking the time to clarify that mysterious paragragh. It was more the stuff about death and comparisons with RS that I couldn't fathom. I don't know what's happened, but I disagree with most of what you are writing today. Maybe it's your new approach, or my Macallan!
About RG's team hitting back sucessfully...I must've missed that. (have you sat through those Porta Porta shows?) Also about this really dangerous dude that everyone is terrified of...it just doesn't strike me as the least bit plausible.
Sorry bpcl...that was me, not Sparrow.
damian | 03.25.08 - 8:41 pm | #
To make it more clear. That was Damian talking to me, not to you, Beep.
I can kind of try this again, on a few points, not that my points matter - ha!
Well, I am really interested to hear about the events of the next few weeks. I have really enjoyed everyone's translations - amazing - and Kermit's pictures help to put things in perspective. Rudy does come about a bit more human, and I do think he has truth and lies throughout, but I am not sympathizing with any of the three. I think all three are serious pieces of trash and that all are involved, heavily. My opinion.
Newbie came up with the old question of how could we even think of convicting on what has been shown in this blog and that made me sleepy. This is not a court, but a blog. We don't have anywhere near the amount of evidence because it is an ongoing investigation. Of course every party is holding cards to the chest. They should. That doesn't even bother me...I want the lawyers for the three to fight tooth and nail for their clients so that when final verdict is given there can be no question. Then the question of interogation came up, and I just want to emphasize that investigators work a puzzle backwards. They questioned many, many people who could explain their whereabouts, etc. but it was over a period of days after discovery which enabled the police to look closely at the statements and actions of those in custody. On a side note, I've never been accused of murder and if I were I wouldn't be writing in my diary about it, just hoping someone might leak it...okay getting off track, but come on.
Another thing, why is it that everyone assumes that just because you go abroad for school you are some type of angel? There are people in all walks of life and ages who commit more attrocious crimes. And these people are not kids either! There are folks their age who are married (or not married) and havin' babies, fighting wars, posing for Playboy, approving people for loans for houses they cannot afford, going to jail, acting and dancing, and whatnot. One hundred years ago Amanda would be considered a spinster. Going abroad is a terrific experience, but it is not really that big of a deal and it doesn't give her a stamp on her character passport.
Well, I suppose that is the end of my rant. Newbie, I didn't mean to jump all over you. I just felt strong to respond, or maybe I just like to see my name.
Oh blimey, it must be the Macallam. bpcl quoted me, thinking it was Sparrow...I said the tide of sympathy stuff...
Sparrow,
This is a circumstantial case. We are seeking to find the truth about what happened to Meredith Kercher. We have three people in custody at this present moment. We/you have done a remarkable job translating one of their statements and it has added another dimension to this case. Judgement of them and their ultimate punishment if there is one, is what is owed to the Kercher family. Everything we do here should be based on facts; that is all we have to go on. We have a right to analyze this information and determine whether or not any of it it will exclude the remaining three suspected individuals. I would say, that after five of these blogs, we have not been able to do so.
Nice rant jumpy, like it.
but I disagree with most of what you are writing today.---Damian
Fair enough!
Maybe it's your new approach, or my Macallan!---Damian
This must be some kind of booze!
About RG's team hitting back sucessfully...I must've missed that. (have you sat through those Porta Porta shows?)----Damian
Well you know more than I. I have just seen what Frank has posted about Biscotti. And Nicki gave a description of a show here. I'm not sure if it's Porta Porta, or Matrix. But the attempt to attribute the shoeprint to Rudy didn't work. Maybe that's just the police doing their work, but Rudy's lawyers are pretty vocal when they try that kind of stuff, aren't they? Hey Damian, tell us more, if you can.
Sparrow,
"I certainly don't know how this case is going to end."
I most certainly do. I hope that justice is found for a young woman and her family.
Oh blimey, it must be the Macallam. bpcl quoted me, thinking it was Sparrow...I said the tide of sympathy stuff...
damian | 03.25.08 - 8:48 pm | #
Ooh, I'm the boozy version of Damian. I never would've guessed, but it puts me in a good mood, somehow...
Beep:
And I have stated this before. Rudy Guede has only about 40 minutes to be in the in cottage with Meredith; absolutely no more. IMHO, no one here can prove to me that he had any more...
Not proof but...
The problem with your 40 minutes Beep, is that it relies on the existence of a 15 minute phone call from Meredith to her mother. The only references to this phone call appear to be "one or two" early press reports. Are they any more reliable than the "numerous" press reports of the phone calls between AK and RG which have been comprehensively denied by Biscotti? It transpires that in all probability Rudy didn't even have a mobile phone.
Meredith's father has himself stated to the British press(Daily Mail interview) that Meredith spoke to him for a "couple of minutes" earlier on November 1st. He also stated that Meredith usually made a quick call to one person in the family "most" days.
Don't forget that Meredith was on a student budget and making regular international mobile calls. 15 minutes???
Kermit -
Welcome back and I hope you enjoyed your trip. Thanks for the in depth report and a great set of photos.
Sparrow, Traduco, Nicki -
Thanks for a great translation job (although still ongoing) and for posting up the Doc. I want to read it through several more times before I comment in depth on the contents.
Robert M -
Good to see you stop by...be great to see you more often though.
Newbie -
Welcome to the blog and thanks for your opinions. I will say just at the moment...to disassociate AK and RS from this crime in my mind....would require a very good explanation of the lack of parity in their respective alibis both to each other and how in their detail each of their stories has changed over time. Thier forensics at the cottage also needs to be explained as does their bleeching and cleaning at the crime scene. This is not behaviour consistant with those innocent of wrongdoing.
Brian S -
I fully agree with your summary...I don't believe Rudy committed this crime as I certainly have difficulty imagining someone stabbing a victim right through the neck and then trying to administer first aid...two towels worth. In addition, the personality that comes out from his 'diary' does not match that of a brutal killer in my view. Whilst he may tell lies in his diary, I don't believe he has the art to deceive us in his nature.
Sparrow -
In the rest of the paragraph I guess I was indicating that there was more than just this natural sympathy that made me take much more of what Rudy wrote as truth. I do think he was at the lowest point he'd been in during his entire life, and he was ready to come clean for the most part. In fact he wanted to...
I agree Sparrow...kind of reads like the letter of the condemned man going to the gallows wanting to make his peace with the World doesn't it? There's something about that you can't fake...or at least, one would have to be a master to do so.
Beep -
Whilst I agree with your summary of the times, I don't agree with your assessment that Rudy would not have had time to do all he said...you'd be surprised what one can pack into 40 mins and aside from his toilet visit, nothing he did was really that time consuming...moments for each...handful of minutes chatting...possibly a few minutes aiding Meredith before fleeing. Does he know more then he's saying though? Certainly!
All -
Since this opinion has been attributed to myself lately I just want to state for the record....I do not and never have subscribed to the view that the final stab on Meredith was one carried out through 'Rage'...I have in the past on this blog on several occassions argued against this being the case and I also wrote of it in my 'Crime Scene Assessment'. I also don't think Meredith 'fell' on the knife or moved at the wrong moment...that may result in knife 'in' neck...but not 'through' neck (I'm with Beep on that one).
(F.K.A Michael (UK)...I thought i could drop the '(UK)' since everyone by now knows where I'm from).
Beep, I just want to be clear on this. You understand that I did not make the statement below, right?
"I sense a tide of sympathy for RG here, very similar to what happened when RS's diary was translated.
That was said by Damian to me. And I have no problem with it.
Ooops...the above was me...sorry.
Brian S,
You are technically right. However, the length of that phone call by Meredith can/will be established. As of yet, it has not. However, even if you gave him an additional 10 minutes, to move it to 50 minutes, it still does not give him enough time to do all that he said he did. He would still has to deal with the consensual sex issue. According to Rudy Guede, Meredith was upset about losing her money. So there is no way that she went from not being able to pay her rent, to just taking off her clothes and saying to Rudy Guede, 'Hey honey, let's get it on!"
Michael,
There is absolutely no way. Please, do me a favor and construct a time line such as the one that I did earlier. We should have one here, just like we have one for the time line for the events of the crime.
Sparrow,
Damian corrected me on that and I stopped the analysis on it. I apologize to you.
Micheal,
Actually, I did not know you were Michael from the UK until you said otherwise. Many people come here from time to time and would not recognize you I would think. Better to leave your name at Michael(UK) so that you can be associated with all the other eloquent posts you have put forth here.
bpcl...everyone agrees that RG tells lies. (like the other 2) I don't see why you need to go on with this 40 minute thing. Just my opinion.
Sparrow, I'll try and dig out the Porta Porta shows tomorrow and point you to the relevant bits. Vespa has shown no mercy with Biscuits, but as ever, I'd like to know your thoughts on it.
Beep -
"There is absolutely no way. Please, do me a favor and construct a time line..."
Well...firstly I don't credit as much time to length of the phonecall bbetween Meredith and her mother as you...I would guestimate at more 4-7 minutes (if a figure is required) and I see no reason why this call also may not have taken place whilst Rudy was in the bathroom...indeed, 'if' it was Meredith who made the call it would have been logical for her to do so then as opposed to whilst Rudy was sitting talking with her. If that's the case and we stick with the estimate for 3 music tracks taking about 12 minutes that would have given Rudy a full 28 minutes (give or take a few minutes) to do all the other stuff.
Beep
However, the length of that phone call by Meredith can/will be established.
Is there any proof that this phone call took place at all? If it did maybe Meredith made it whilst walking after she parted from her friend.
My daughter lives in a fairly dodgy part of Reading in the UK. The closest she can only park her car is 5 minutes from where she lives. Guess when she calls me? I guess it's company on that walk in the dark.
Damian,
The 40 minute issue is important in that it establishes the fact that this crime was not one based on sexual violence as has been stated by the authorities. It also can be used to establish the fact that Rudy Guede played no part in the eventual clean up; also that he probably played no role in the disposal of the phones. It also clearly establishes the fact that there were other people in the cottage even though Rudy Guede's statement does not explicitly state that. It establishes the fact that he most likely did have a rendezvous with Meredith that evening, but something else went terribly wrong and the man split the scene very quickly.
Thanks, Damian. I'm sure everyone would appreciate the Porta Porta stuff. I'm out for now. Ciao!
Brian S
I will look this up. I asked SB sometime back, several times I might add, on this issue and she has clearly stated to me that a telephone call did take place. Now that you question it again, this time I will do my best to research it.
Beep -
"It also can be used to establish the fact that Rudy Guede played no part in the eventual clean up..."
This I fully agree with...nor the feigned 'break-in'.
I guess you're right bpcl...it's just that I think it's pretty easy to get all tangled up in RG's statement...
Anyway, I thought the fact that RG wasn't on the clean up team was already pretty clear...judging by what they left.
Anyway, once again, thanks to lazy journalism, we still don't know who wanted the meeting tomorrow. My guess is still RG, but it's just a guess. Maybe they'll be a consensus tomorrow, or Biscuits will fill us in. Either way, let's hope some light is shed. Ci vuole!
'notte.
Damian,
Respect. I am glad you are here, just like every one else. We have our difference of opinions to be sure, but, in the end, we all have the same goal, understanding what happened to Meredith Kercher. And I honestly believe that we are so close to understanding what happened to her. The translation of Rudy Guede's diary was important in that it helped establish this so called "40/50" minute time frame along with Meredith's arrival at around 9:10/9:15 at the cottage. If we are diligent in understanding this time line, we can determine, IMHO, what happened to Meredith. Meredith Kercher had less than one hour more to live on this planet; her arrival at half past nine and Rudy Guede's abrupt departure at 10:30 pm
Beep -
"It also can be used to establish the fact that Rudy Guede played no part in the eventual clean up..."
This I fully agree with...nor the feigned 'break-in'.
Michael | 03.25.08 - 9:29 pm | #
I agree with both of you in principle. But I can envision a scenario where Rudy was somehow co-opted by someone else to help rearrange the crime scene. I can see Amanda telling Rudy ‘listen I know you are in a hurry to leave but could you do a few things for me in the crime scene, cos there is lots of blood in there & I don’t want my fingerprints or my bf of two weeks in there either‘.
Where Rudy would have found the time to do this, certainly isn’t clear.
Kermit: Thanks for your comments on your trip thru Perugia. Visualizing this event is extremely helpful, and only a click away.
All,
It is hard to keep up at times. Things can move along quickly. I've just read through everything that has been posted today. Newbie, I think you somewhat misrepresent what happens on this board. Speaking only for myself, but probably for many others, I don't think we can be accused of endlessly repeating facts until they become true. Our list of agreed-upon facts is pretty lean (and mean). And we don't all agree on what the facts are at this point. As for our theories, they are just that.
I think I understand where Sparrow is coming from with respect to Rudy. Rudy is the low man on the totem pole--the guy with the least leverage and the most to lose because evidence of his presence at the cottage was left there for all to see. He is also the most rudderless and anchorless of the three. To Sparrow's statement about Raffaele's suffocating father preventing him from being truthful, I would only add that I feel the same way about Amanda's entourage. Both of them have been shut down by the family machine. It will be interesting to see what they have to say when push comes to shove.
I have to agree with Damian (and Michael, I think) about the only 40 minutes to do "all that", Beep. It relies too much on things we don't know for sure. Rudy running from the cottage at 10:30 pm? A witness saw a black man at around that time. From Biscotti's recent interview with Frank, you can bet that he will challenge the positive id on his client. The phone call from Meredith to her mom at 9:30 pm? It was reported in one Italian paper, and has never been mentioned elsewhere or since. How long did it last, if it occurred? We simply don't know. And even if we grant the 40-minute window, any or all of what Rudy says he and Meredith did could be true or false. One thing I do believe, however, is that Rudy did not have a date with Meredith. I'm not saying this because I believe he is unworthy of her in some way. I just don't think it fits well with what we know about Meredith. Why would she say nothing about this date to her two girlfriends? For example, "Gotta go now; I have a date back at the cottage." Rudy had no date with Meredith, but he may have been set up to believe he had a chance. He was there when she died. We know that. We strongly suspect other people were present as well. I believe that all of this will eventually come out in the open.
Whilst looking for reference to any phone call between Meredith and her mother I came across this.
Meredith Kercher was finally laid to rest yesterday, six weeks after she was found dead on her bedroom floor in Italy...
In a eulogy, Ms Kercher’s brother, Lyle, 29, said that she would have been “looking down smiling” on flowers that spelt out her nickname, Mez, because she would have thought that they had kept down the cost by only having to pay for three letters instead of her full name. He said that Ms Kercher, who was spending a year at the University For Foreign Students in Perugia, was notorious for her poor timekeeping. “You could set your watch by her, granted that she would always be 20 minutes late,” he said.
IF, IF they had arranged to meet at 9PM:
Rudy said "after all that running around it must have been around 8:30" when he left to go to Meredith's house. He was making an attempt to be there on time.
If Rudytime was running anywhere near Realtime he should have been there before 9:00.
Perhaps, Meredith showed up at Meredithtime 9:15/9:20?
Sorry:
Link for above quote on Meredithtime
DLW -
"But I can envision a scenario where Rudy was somehow co-opted by someone else to help rearrange the crime scene. I can see Amanda telling Rudy �listen I know you are in a hurry to leave but could you do a few things for me in the crime scene..."
Only problem with that is I don't see Rudy having the 'time' to stick around and help, that was an all night job...there would have been little use in his helping for only a few minutes....the other thing, assuming RS and AK were there of course...I just get the distinct feeling they would have wanted rid of him as soon as possible. He was a liability...he wanted to 'help' Meredith and could do something 'stupid', whilst the others (or at least certainly 'one' of them...the other was just panicking I think) simply wanted to formulate and prosecute a plan to eradicate all traces of 'their' involvement in what had happened, he was 'already thinking 'How do we get out of this?' Also...Rudy couldn't be seen there by anyone 'with' them. I really don't think he was much use at that point, I think his head was pretty screwed up.
I also think Rudy screwed himself up and did them a favour, ironicaly...by trying to help Meredith...it was in doing so he kindly left the bulk of his forensic evidence. I don't think that would have been lost on one of the observers...the cooler headed, colder, more calculating one...frantically thinking...who was standing well back being very careful not to polute the scene with his own forensics. I think there may even have been an argument at this point...the one helping Meredith shouting at the other to phone the emergency services and the other refusing...I think there may have been a tussle/argument over the phones which the cool one took away and when the one helping MK refused to listen to reason...that's when the 'Black man found black man caught' threat was thrown in. Rudy balked at that...I think 'that's' the real reason why he accuses himself of being a coward...because he gave in to that, that was his 'cowardice'.
Old news and rumour about Meredith's money and the timing of the culprit's
flight from the cottage:
Mr Guede...has told police that he met Ms Kercher by arrangement, and that she complained to him that Ms Knox had stolen money from her bedside drawer to pay for drugs. Prosecutors suggest this is a distorted version of what actually happened: that Mr Guede and Ms Knox met at the cottage, that Ms Knox took Ms Kercher's money to pay him, and that Ms Kercher walked in at "the wrong moment". In the ensuing confrontation Ms Kercher was sexually attacked and her throat was cut....
Does this mean the police may have linked the money in Amanda's possession to Meredith? If the reported prosecution speculation holds water it doesn't mean Amanda owed Rudy all 240 euro's. Maybe, she only owed him 20 euro's and kept the rest?
A woman who lives opposite the cottage has told police that she heard screams coming from it at about 11pm, after which "at least two people" emerged and fled "in different directions". She said she had gone to sleep about 9pm or 9.30pm, and had been woken up by the scream and the running. "I didn't look at the time, but I think it was a couple of hours after I went to sleep".
What's the difference between 10:30 and 11:00 in this context?
I've done it again
Link for above
Prosecutors suggest this is a distorted version of what actually happened: that Mr Guede and Ms Knox met at the cottage, that Ms Knox took Ms Kercher's money to pay him, and that Ms Kercher walked in at "the wrong moment"
Can this be related to the dealer Rudy "saw in the car outside" Has he substituted A.N.Other for himself?
Even in this scenario, why would Rudy knife Meredith? He had no argument with her. His argument would have been with Amanda and subsequently Meredith's argument would have been with Amanda.
Nor in this scenario do I believe there is any reason why Rudy and Amanda(plus RS) should have arrived together.
Rudy could have gotten amorous with Meredith anytime between 9:15 and after 10:00 whilst waiting for Amanda to turn up. Maybe Meredith didn't miss her money until the subject cropped up between Amanda and Rudy. (as in where did that come from? I thought you were broke).
Beep,
Such traces of Rudy's DNA as were found inside Meredith would not require undressing. Only loosening of clothes and some heavy petting.
Brian S -
"Prosecutors suggest this is a distorted version of what actually happened: that Mr Guede and Ms Knox met at the cottage, that Ms Knox took Ms Kercher's money to pay him, and that Ms Kercher walked in at "the wrong moment..."
I'm just wondering if anyone recalls the reported 'police informant' who was a dealer and was apparently a friend of Rudy's (perhaps the shifty dealer friend of Rudy's that Oceania was referring to) who stated to police that that Amanda owed 250 euros to Rudy for drugs. I recall him being arrogantly dismissed on another blog because he was a 'criminal' (apparently criminals testifying in court against other criminals is never done)...but is anyone aware if that supposed witness has been actually discredited?
Or did A.N.Other actually exist and Amanda had taken Meredith's money earlier to pay him later. No-one was at home when A.N.Other arrived at 8:30/8:45 so he waited outside until Amanda came along.
She then went back to Raff's for another smoke and she/they didn't actually go to the cottage until after 10:00.
Michael, I remember a press report that wasn't repeated often that said a drug dealer informed police that Amanda owed her dealer money. There was no mention of how much she owed however, and there was no mention that he was a friend of Rudy's or even that Rudy was Amanda's dealer. Those three things, not reported in the press, were all extrapolations and assumptions made on blogs. That's how I remember it anyway.
Michael,
My memory is the same as Sparrow's. There was one report, and the rest is extrapolation/assumptions made on blogs--some of them on this one.
Sparrow, Skep -
Thanks for clearing that up for me.
Regarding Rudy's meeting with the PM today...how much do you rate our chances that we shall hear afterwards what was said? It would be infuriating if it's kept secret since we have had no new news in such a long time.
Not much chance Michael, don't you think? Especially since Mignini has clamped down on leaks? Breath deeply and wait. That's all we can do. I hope Rudy has something to say that will break things wide open though.
Sparrow -
"I hope Rudy has something to say that will break things wide open though"
I too Sparrow...but somehow I doubt it, going on the past track record of the suspects when they have said the 'wanted to talk'...but maybe this time Rudy will shock me.
Hey Traduco, and Nicki, if you're out there... Here's a QAD, or QARD of page 2. The beginning is kind of a mess, and there are one or two mystery words. Please help, and good luck!
Rudy Diary Page 2 QAD:
Then by around 3:30, you’d get the car, the legendary 454, when the weather was bad, and when it was winter. Or the Legendary 125 when the beautiful season was arriving and we made San Girolamo and we arrived as far as the (palazzetto=small building?stadium??). And what to say of the games won and lost together? It was beautiful when we made the transfer with the Legendary (palomino? fulmino?). There was laughter with (segololtri?) on board (he?) called me "Cioccolatino." God, what beautiful (or great?) moments. And Francesco, your son, who in that period played with the no. 1 team, and I went to see the games, and I admired that guy, his style of doing things. Honest, I wanted to be like him, I wanted the no. 8, I wanted also the number that he wore. And I had that number, and I felt like Francesco (il Play- not "la play" from the other page. Does this mean "The Player, as in number one player?) of the team. I remember also, from that time, that I knew that little, all black dog that you found abandoned and took to your house, and that often I took him for a walk. A thanks and a greeting to Iloria, who together with all the mothers cooked for me. What to say Paolo? It would be a lot to remember, but these pages wouldn’t be enough to describe, to remember, to recount all you’ve done for me. In my heart I have wanted to say, I have wanted to be able to say these words in person, and it displeases me not to have done it before. But you all know that I thank you with all my heart. I thank you, Paolo, your Wife, your Son, Your Son Francesco (THE BROTHER I WOULD HAVE WANTED TO HAVE) And that little, all black dog.
THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING
Rudy Hermann Guede
8
...but maybe this time Rudy will shock me.
Michael | 03.26.08 - 3:50 am |
I hope so, Michael. Goodnight.
Traduco, look how Rudy writes the number 8, twice on page 2. I mean look at how he writes it. What do you think? I have an idea... which might mean nothing. I just want to know if you see it too.
Sparrow, looking at what you've written (not the original), I'd say Palazzetto is a reference to the covered basketball court in Perugia. Perhaps the finals of some competition were held there. 'the transfer' is probably an away match.
All the local papers imply that it was the PM who wanted to speak to RG.(sorry if I misled you on that) The interrogation started an hour ago. I hope he's not banging on about abandoned puppies and basketball. I hope he's coming clean, but I doubt it. I also hope that none of it is leaked. I think all these leaks can only reduce the possibility of justice being done. People's frustration here really doesn't matter.
A little question for the forensic experts. Could the results from the most recent 'sopraluogo' be in yet. Just wondering if that may be connected to this mornings' interrogation.
: I wish Rudy could be heard by him. The others have been questioned so many times while Mignini never really interviewed him. He had just a couple of questions during the GIP interrogation. But Mignini is such a good person and an excellent PM.
Biscuits words from Franks interview, put up March 12. Perhaps these words would tie in with the fact that the PM had just fixed the date for the interrogation. (20 days ago...march 5thish...Pure speculation on my part...)
"...Rudy did not have a date with Meredith. I'm not saying this because I believe he is unworthy of her in some way. I just don't think it fits well with what we know about Meredith. Why would she say nothing about this date to her two girlfriends? For example, "Gotta go now; I have a date back at the cottage." Rudy had no date with Meredith..." SB
I tend to agree. I put much more credence on what Meredith's friends say as opposed to RG.(and I seem to remember them being very clear on this point) After all, they knew her well and have no reason to lie. In this sense, I'm not convinced that some of the ideas drawn from the translation are helping us to understand, on the contrary... Likewise, the various witness statements reporting AK's words and behaviour at the police station the day after. I think they are credible because there was no reason to lie.
"He (RG) was a liability." Michael.
I agree with this too, but maybe for different reasons. If more than one person was involved in the attack, it's interesting to think about why RG had to leave town. If he was cut during the attack, this could explain it...
Damian
"I agree with this too, but maybe for different reasons. If more than one person was involved in the attack, it's interesting to think about why RG had to leave town. If he was cut during the attack, this could explain..."
I think he was encouraged to by the others...I think they wanted him to run as then if/when police cut through the other red herrings (fake break-in) he would look guilty for doing so...but, I think they hoped he'd never be caught but if he was...eventually, never mind, the fact he'd ran and the forensics he'd left would convict him...especially him being a 'black man' and all. Nobody would suspect a couple of good middle class white students (in certain peoples minds). I can't see why a cut hand would have made him run though, assuming he didn't cut it himself at a later point to reinforce his story. I believe the latter to be the case since much was mentioned of the forensics Rudy left at the crime scene...but no mention of 'any' of his blood which one would expect, especially if he was using his hands to help Meredith which it looks like he was (bloody towels, his hand/fingerprints on the pillow etc,).
Sparrow -
Goodnight
Yes, you're right...what you say makes sense. I was just thinking that if he had a fresh wound that could be incriminating. But what you say seems much more plausible.
A dopo...
Sorry...the above anonymous was me...the blog's playing up for me today.
Michael | 03.26.08 - 12:22 am | #
I also think what you wrote here in the second paragraph is plausible. If true however, and coupled with the 'lack' of forensic evidence left by the 'others', would this imply they were wearing some type of 'protective' clothing? Thus also implying premeditation? Or is this 'lack' better explained by the 'clean-up'?
Damian -
"If true however, and coupled with the 'lack' of forensic evidence left by the 'others', would this imply they were wearing some type of 'protective' clothing? Thus also implying premeditation? Or is this 'lack' better explained by the 'clean-up'?
Well...there is a 'hash Robbery' theory I put forward...and if by some chance that is correct I doubt they would have performed it not properly dressed for the occassion, just as they were on Halloween night, perhaps with masks too....so if you subscribe to that theory protective clothing may well have been worn. This theory is neat in that it allows for pre-meditation, requires it in fact. If you don't subscribe to that theory, I can't envisage protective clothing being worn in any of the other scenarios as I can't at this point envisage pre-meditation in any of those. But, in either case and any scenario,...standing well back right after the deed had been done...being careful not to become soiled combined with the clean-up after would have done the trick. There certainly was some clothing washing/bleeching on high temps done the next morning and the police believe RS bleeched the soles of his trainers and this would have made certain. Even so, they couldn't help leaving some forensic traces...but considering the time frame they had, they did very well.
Premeditation was first mentioned by the police after they found the bleached kitchen knife at RS's flat with Meredith's dna on the tip. I'm not sure how well this fits with the 'hash robbery' theory, but I reckon it may 'fit' better with somekind of 'thrill kill' theory. The fact that things didn't quite go according to plan, doesn't mean there wasn't one...anzi.
Also, even if the plan wasn't murder, but that knife was used in the attack, I believe they'll be charged with pre-meditated murder. Whether there's sufficent proof to convict AK and RS remains to be seen, but I think that knife is still crucial.
Damian -
"Also, even if the plan wasn't murder, but that knife was used in the attack, I believe they'll be charged with pre-meditated murder. Whether there's sufficent proof to convict AK and RS remains to be seen, but I think that knife is still crucial."
I agree...the only question is whether in court the knife will be able to stand up. You can bet, the defence will be putting forward all kinds of scenarios of how Meredith's DNA may have gotten on the end of that knife innocently, especially as the prosecution appear unable to prove it is the murder weapon at present. Currently, as far as we know, that knife is the only evidence of pre-meditation...unless, the testimony of the 'Albanian witness' (from Halloween) proves reliable.
The defence has admitted that Meredith never set foot in RS's flat. So where does that leave us? Either that knife was taken out of the flat and came into contact with Meredith, or Meredith's dna was somehow transported to the flat and ended up on the tip of the bleached knife. Is the second hypothesis possible? I have no idea but maybe others here do. It certainly seems highly improbable to me.
'RS' offered a possible explanation in his diary. His team however, seemed to backtrack from this cooking story. Since the knife is a simple kitchen knife, it would seem strange if they claim the knife was taken to the girl's flat, where there were numerous knives, to be used in some innocent way. With such a preponderance of evidence, the defence will need to come up with plausible alternative explanations. I believe they will contest the forensics, rather than dreaming up some cooking accident that the judges will find difficult to believe.
If that knife was used in the attack, but is not the murder weapon, would this affect the case for premeditation?
damian | 03.26.08 - 8:50 am |"If that knife was used in the attack, but is not the murder weapon, would this affect the case for premeditation?"
The defense will first contest the forensics (maybe Joe the Sleuth's "privileged sources" will appear and explain the 20% solution - sounds like a Sherlock Holmes spin off).
If the 20% is actually 100% (ie. the knife came into contact with the victim), then they'll have to come up with an alternate explanation, trying first for casual contact (something like: cooking up Bari traditional dishes, South London style - oops, she cut herself -, but more believable).
If no one buys that, then premeditation will hang heavy in the air, and they'll have to admit that somehow, while the knife was used in the murder, it wasn't present in the cottage specifically for that purpose (ie. no premeditation), but was there because (just an example) RS and AK had gone on a picnic in Parco Sant'Angelo with some mushrooms and the knife, and then they went onward to the cottage, and therefore the knife happened to be there when the attack against the victim occurred, and it could have been used in the attack.
The problem with getting to that is that if the knife was present and used in the attack (whoever carried it out), then somehow and at some point it was transported back to Raffaele's place and washed and stored in his kitchen. No one could have picked up the knife from the moment the Postal Police kicked in the victim's bedroom door. In any case it was found in an inspection of Raffaele's place a few days later.
If it gets to that, it brings up the question of when was the knife taken to the cottage and then to Raffaele's. If it was in the evening, well they weren't supposed to be in the cottage then. And when was the sweatshirt left in the cottage (if it's true Amanda was wearing it on the evening of Nov.1)? - in the morning of Nov. 2 when she showered in the cold house, front door supposedly open, broken window, rock on floor, with blood drops about? - or in the prior evening, when she claims she wasn't there?
So, back to the knife, admitting to transporting it would be tantamount to tampering with evidence. And that implies knowledge of the crime, and completely undermines credibility of their alibis (if there is much of that). So they will probably stonewall on that, and look to undermine public confidence in the forensics with Joe the Sleuth's statement (who knows, maybe Joe is right ...).
-
Damian -
"...or Meredith's dna was somehow transported to the flat and ended up on the tip of the bleached knife. Is the second hypothesis possible? I have no idea but maybe others here do. It certainly seems highly improbable to me."
As you say improbable, highly so...but still 'possible' and whilst it's possible the prosecution has a problem as they have to prove 'beyond all reasonable doubt'. Therefore, they really need something else to combine with it if they want to persue pre-meditation. I think this is the route the defence will ultimately go though...'innocently imported and introduced DNA' unless the can discredit the actual DNA testing process used that is.
"If that knife was used in the attack, but is not the murder weapon, would this affect the case for premeditation?"
Certainly, if it's proven to be so...it would then be up to the defence to prove 'murder' was not their intended result...but still there would be pre-meditation to 'harm' and that would make them more culpable in Meredith's death and would be taken account in the sentence handed down. However, I don't think it's possible to be proven to be a knife that was involved but not the murder weapon itself...I take it you mean perhaps if it was used for one of the other two stab wounds but not the fatal one? I think those wounds are too shallow to actually be able to link to one particular knife...you need a fairly deep wound to match it to a particular shape and size knife. An entry wound made by just the point of a knife could potentially have been made by a whole range of knives.
http://www.ansa.it/opencms/
expor...l_42914625.html
2008-03-26 14:44
Headline: MURDERED ENGLISH GIRL, RUDY'S QUESTIONNING HAS FINISHED
The questioning Rudy Hermann Guede - the Ivorian in prison in Perugia, accused of killing English student Meredith Kercher - concluded a few minutes ago . In the course of questioning, according to what has has been learned, Rudy has provided further details concerning the night of' murder. "We are satisfied", said lawyer Walter Biscotti on leaving Prison Capanne, "that Rudy has answered all the questions and reiterated his lack of relation to the crime." The defence team however did not want to comment on the content of the interrogation, which lasted more than three hours.
-
http://www.agi.it/perugia/notizi...012428-
art.html
2008-03-26 14:44
Headline: MEREDITH: QUESTIONNING FINISHED, RUDY'S DEFENCE "SATISFIED"
(AGI) - Perugia, 26 March. -- "Rudy has answered all questions and reiterated his lack of relation to the crime, we are satisfied." Thus spoke lawyer Walter Biscotti, reached by telephone after departing Capanne prison where the questionning of Rudy Hermann Guede finished after three hours.
No other remarks or statements by the lawyer (who attended the interrogation with his colleague Nicodemo Gentile) concerning the content, the possible recognition on the part of Rudy of the image [photo/identification] that could give a face to the author of the crime, as well as other details useful for the reconstruction of the facts. This is material on which the defence will have to work and which could also be useful in view of the appeal hearing on next April 1.
Rudy Hermann Guede is in prison since last November 20, after having been returned from Germany to Italy. Since the [prison?] validation hearing before the GIP Claudia Matteini, he has never been interrogated by PM Giuliano Mignini. (AGI)
Kermit | 03.26.08 - 11:00 am wrote: "In the course of questioning, according to what has has been learned, Rudy has provided further details concerning the night of murder...Rudy has answered all the questions and reiterated his lack of relation to the crime."
Sounds like it's time for cmellas et al to go out for a night on the town again to celebrate - the one guy we know who was there that night has surely exonerated the innocent.
Fly by Night | 03.26.08 - 11:44 am | "Sounds like it's time for cmellas et al to go out for a night on the town again to celebrate."
You're probably right, at least of his own volition, Rudy wouldn't radically change the implicit game plan to date.
However, there's a scenario which allows him to maintain his "innocence" regarding murder (but not so, regarding the abandoning of a mortally injured person) but where he willingly or mistakenly points fingers towards other persons, including the other two suspects.
-
Kermit - thanks for the quick links!
Dun da dun dun...
Dun da dun da dun da dun
Well, May, I think it's actually a little early for us to be thinking of breakthroughs (at least that we the public will be aware of, or even Goofy et al, for that matter). There may be no da-dunning until November, and even then ...
-
Hi, Sparrow:
And to anyone else who may have insights...
Here are some translation tidbits.
Sparrow, as you know, Rudy uses the word "mitica" (legendary) a lot to describe people in this diary. However, just to confuse things, on this page when he refers to the MITICA 125 I believe it's a FIAT model, maybe circa 1970ish. Need to look that up.
Here are some other suggestions, line by line on his page 2--
line 1: "You took the all-terrain (i.e.,the 4x4) Mitica (Fiat?)
line 2-3 "or the Mitica 125 when the weather was nicer and you did San Girolamo"* to get to the (indoor) stadium= palazzetto
** I think, San Girolamo is one of the gates of Perugia. Kermit???
Need to look that up, too.
line 4: "E che dire" could be translated as "what can I say"
line 6: "pulmino"=minibus
line 6: segolini???? sparrow is this seggiolini???no....it's gotta be a kind of person???
line 7: Shall we translate his nickname as "Little Chocolate?"
line 9: When Rudy talks about admiring Francesco, he describes him as "serio" meaning trustworthy, conscientious, here.
line 10: Just to totally confuse 'ya Sparrow (!!!) here, Play means "Point Guard" (of the team=della squadra)
line 15= The name is Ilaria or HILLARY in Italian!!!!!!
line 16=I think it's "Ilaria, together with her Mom who cooked for me."
line 16= What can I say Paolo...
I think that's it...again, I'm in a bit of a rush, so no time to check my work..OH! One last thing, about that 8...actually, those two eights... Could that be the symbol for infinity?? Just a guess... and thus, he's saying Grazie infiniti..or Il Tuo, Per Sempre Rudy... Just a thought because of how he traces and retraces the number.....
Gotta go~ Anyone familiar with the Mitica Fiat, feel free to weigh in. Oh, and Kermit, San Girolamo? Is that on our Perugia map?? Feedback, corrections welcomed.
P.S. Less than a week until April Fool's Day....aka Pesce d'Aprile...
1 April....hmmmmm.
Yes, you're right, Kermit. Maybe just a long drum roll with time outs for other drummers to come in as the originals get worn out. thnx again for your eyes on the info.
This article repeats the sparse information provided by the others. I include a comment which underlines an observation by Damian, from yesterday, which is that today's questioning was requested by Mignini, not Rudy's team:
http://www.fondazioneitaliani.it...d=3729&
Itemid=1
Headline: CRIME IN PERUGIA. Rudy in front of the PM [public prosecutor]: "I remain unrelated to what occurred"
.... the interrogation of the young Ivorian suspected of the crime was ordered by the PM Giuliano Mignini himself, who is coordinating the police investigations concerning the murder of the English student Meredith Kercher. Guede has up until now not been questioned by the public prosecutor. Also present in the prison were the lawyers who defend the young Ivorian, Walter Biscotti, Nicodemo Gentile and Vittorio Lombardo, in addition to the head of the police mobile squad of Perugia, Giacinto Profazio and Inspector Monica Napoleoni, responsible for the homicide department. Starting at 9.30 h., the interrogation ended about three hours later ....
P.S. To Sparrow-- Woops! Footnote here
Re: the number 8 question--
it's gotta be his admiration for Francesco, the son whose jersey number, as Point Guard, was "8". Rudy wants to be Francesco, his better self, il numero otto.
Not to be confused with the film by Fellini "8 e Mezzo" just to throw in another Fellini reference here!
Circumstantial evidence of what?? If anything??
RS was transferred to a high security prison immediately after completion of his degree. This suggests the move was delayed/held until this time.
Neither AK, nor RG has been moved on for administrative reasons.
Traduco | 03.26.08 - 12:35 pm |
"when the weather was nicer and you did San Girolamo to get to the (indoor) stadium= palazzetto"
San Girolamo is both an old city gate and the start of a country road (Via San Girolamo) which starts at the gate (ie. not a city street), on the south east side of Perugia. It's not really close to any of the events or sites we've talked about up until now.
http://www.checifaccioqui.it/ima...te/
girolamo.jpg
-
Chimeing in here on the negative. The PROSECUTING Magistrate is only NOW seeking to question Rudy???? So Ialian LE & justice shoots first & again & again, and only then asks questions???? There's a photo they want Rudy to ID after FOUR (4) months??? And I hark back to the failure to process fully EVERYTHING in the cottage, which totally undermines anything they've said about the crime scene [& doesn't do my early ideas any good either]. How more screwed up could this investigation be?
Trying to read between the lines of what so little has been said does not suggest Rudy's given anything up to displace suspicion from others onto any one new. Biscotti may be pleased but its his job to minimize the legal ramifications his client faces, not get at the truth. Though the later doesn't seem to be the goal of the LE & PM either at this glacial glacial pace.
Whatever LE/PM thinks it has is bubkis (said that before) in that the forensics doesn't all fit very well at all, and there must be major outlier evidences (which we've talked about [M/M CS for one]) that are driving the PM's staff crazy. There's no neat little bow for packaging this crazy-quilt. So we must wait to see what leaks into tomorrow's papers or today's updates.
Re: the number 8 question--
it's gotta be his admiration for Francesco, the son whose jersey number, as Point Guard, was "8". Rudy wants to be Francesco, his better self, il numero otto.---Traduco
Yes, I know. It is the jersey number. I just meant take a look at how it appears. It looks like a lonely person. Even when he writes it in a sentence, where it's obvious he's talking about a jersey number, he sets it apart from the rest of the sentence. It's appearance has a very human quality. And yes, to make it he traces it over, and over again. It's very important to him. Maybe Robert M. would have something to say about this. Anyway, it has nothing to do with the crime, just something I found interesting.
Traduco | 03.26.08 - 12:35 pm |
"... line 1: "You took the all-terrain (i.e.,the 4x4) Mitica (Fiat?)
line 2-3 "or the Mitica 125 ..."
If you type Fiat Mitica into Google, you'll soon see from the response that there is no particular "Mitica" model, but just about every Fiat owner has considered their particular model of car as being "Mythical".
The Fiat 125 (suddenly I'm an expert in this, even though it's not in Wikipedia) is the sedan version of the Fiat 124.
http://xoomer.alice.it/fiat124/
d...derivata_en.htm
As for a Fiat 4x4, it seems that Fiat doesn't have as much historical experience in those models, however there is a relatively new Fiat Panda 4x4. Perhaps Rudy is precipitating himself by calling it mitico.
-
The PROSECUTING Magistrate is only NOW seeking to question Rudy???
This is actually the third time Rudy Guede is being interrogated: 1st by the German magistrate, 2nd upon his arrival in Italy by Judge of preliminary investigation (GIP) Matteini, and Mignini,(Corriere Dec 7, 2007) third today again by Mignini.
http://www.corriere.it/cronache/07_dicem
It seems to me that the problem is not lack of questioning, but rather lack of collaboration on the suspects' side.
As for a Fiat 4x4, it seems that Fiat doesn't have as much historical experience in those models, however there is a relatively new Fiat Panda 4x4. Perhaps Rudy is precipitating himself by calling it mitico.---Kermit
Maybe it's mitico to Rudy because it was always breaking down.
San Girolamo is both an old city gate and the start of a country road (Via San Girolamo) which starts at the gate (ie. not a city street), on the south east side of Perugia. It's not really close to any of the events or sites we've talked about up until now.---Kermit
Rudy was attending school at Ponte San Giovanni, and living in Torgiano (I believe) outside the city walls. Perhaps they took the country road San Girolamo to reach the city, and go to the little stadium mentioned by Damian?
Sparrow | 03.26.08 - 1:54 pm |
"Rudy was attending school at Ponte San Giovanni, and living in Torgiano (I believe) outside the city walls. Perhaps they took the country road San Girolamo to reach the city, and go to the little stadium mentioned by Damian?"
Sparrow, either you have a great capacity for information retention and deduction, or you know things we don't. Here's the geographical relation of the points you refer to (haven't included any stadium, but there are a few about there).
Yes, they do link together.
http://img397.imageshack.us/
img3...xtramurozb7.jpg
-
SB,
Okay, let's throw out the exact time line for a second. And please bear with me on this. Meredith arrived some time after 9 pm that evening. A person of color was seen running from the house at 10:30 pm. There was a phone call made from Meredith's phone at 10:15 pm. Something happened to her between the time she arrived at the cottage and say at the latest 10:20 pm. Okay, I will add on an additional 10 minutes to make it an even 1 hour.
How much can happen in one hour? You say Rudy Guede did not have a date with Meredith. Fair enough. Let us say he did not. That would imply that he could not have known that she was coming to the cottage. Nor the other people in the home as well, and there were other people there for sure. Meredith's money is gone for sure that day. Because the very next day, it was missing. Meredith suffers a brutal knife wound to her neck, for what? Why was she stabbed? All of the evidence that was left behind implies that it was a mistake of some sort, in other words, it was not a drug hit. She suffered two previous wounds to the neck; for what. Those two wounds are intimidation wounds; they had to be just that. The final wound through the neck was done because the person holding her was upset.
IMHO, there are two possibilities; one, Meredith arrives home and within a short period of time, is engaged in a game of sex(Rudy is lying and had no date with her) and dies while fending off the attack. second, Meredith arrives home for a rendezvous with Rudy Guede(Rudy Guede is not lying) and with embellishment, all that he says that happened, did happen.
With either of these two possibilities, we are left without a motive, that is to say, an unintended series of events led to Meredith's demise. If we take this one hour scenario, I still believe that it is impossible for us to believe all that Rudy Guede did say in his statement to have happened. I think I have to say that the first scenario is then the best one, SB, and thus the authorities may be right in their initial assumptions that Meredith died while fending off a sexual attack.
Kermit | 03.26.08 - 2:22 pm | #
You mean like you? No. That information I only got from Rudy's diary. I've been searching blindly for a map that would connect those points. Where'd you get that map? It may be obvious, but I don't use those things much.
So, I guess we can say that Paolo packed Little Chocolate and his friends into the Legendary 125, taking Via San Girolamo to get to the stadium. Bene.
Thank you Kermit, Traduco and Damian!
The PROSECUTING Magistrate is only NOW seeking to question Rudy???
Nicki,
This is actually the third time Rudy Guede is being interrogated: 1st by the German magistrate, 2nd upon his arrival in Italy by Judge of preliminary investigation (GIP) Matteini, and Mignini,(Corriere Dec 7, 2007) third today again by Mignini.
1st by the German magistrate - Was this German questioning done as part of the Italian investigation based on the inside information available to the Italian Authorities at that point or was it mearly to confirm that Rudy accepted his involvement at the crime scene and accepted submission to Italian jurisdiction for the ongoing investigation?
The questioning by Matteini ended rather abruptly when Rudy claimed he did not know the name of a street nearby where the phones were found.
She decided he was being obstructive, but as Frank pointed out on his blog, it's entirely possible that Rudy didn't know that area by that street name. It did not appear it was in regular everyday use.
Even Biscotti has complained that his client has not been offered the interview opportunities of RS and AK.
Micheal UK,
What type of knife in your opinion, made the final wound? How wide is a human neck, 5 inches? IMHO, the fatal wound had to have been made by a big knife, not by some small pen knife. The amount of blood loss suffered by Meredith implies to me that the knife had to be a big one, kind of like the kitchen knife.
"The questioning by Matteini ended rather abruptly when Rudy claimed he did not know the name of a street nearby where the phones were found."
Brian
Maybe it ended abruptly, but I believe it lasted for something like 6 hours.
I know the comparison isn't perfect, but the French and Italian systems are very similar. These systems work differently and more slowly than what Americans (and other Anglo-saxons) are used to. I was closely involved in France in three criminal matters, not directly but through people I knew well. They were not as serious as murders, but were all very high profile. In all three cases, the investigative phase was very long by my only standard of comparison, and I was often surprised by the amount of time between when a meeting was arranged and when it took place. In all three cases, I was also very impressed in the end by how thorough the investigation was.
Confirming what Nicki has said, here is an excerpt from the article that appeared in the Telegraph on December 7, 2007:
"Guede was taken to the airport police station to complete formalities before being driven out again with an escort.
He was due to arrive at Perugia just before 6pm this evening and will be questioned tomorrow morning by Perugia prosecutor Giuliano Mignini.
Giacinto Profazio of the Perugia Flying Squad, who is leading the investigation, was unable to be at Rome airport.
Instead he was at Capanne jail where another suspect Raffaele Sollecito, 24, had asked to speak to Mr Mignini to "clarify matters."
He refused to answer questions and simply repeated his story that he was at home on the night of the murder working on his computer.
But police and prosecutors say that there is no evidence of "human activity" on his Toshiba between 9pm and 6am."
"I still believe that it is impossible for us to believe all that Rudy Guede did say in his statement to have happened."
Beep,
I just don't think it really matters. Rudy clearly wants to add some plausible filler to his story about an arranged date and consensual sexual encounter that went pear-shaped when he suddenly felt the downside of those spicy kebobs and had to spend ten minutes or so in the can (3 songs worth). It is hard for me to imagine that Rudy would hear the doorbell ring but not any of the commotion that would presumably have preceded the two superficial stabs and the one fatal stab.
Rudy's story breaks down, in other words, but for me it isn't because there is not enough time for everything that he claims happened to have actually happened. It breaks down because in the document he wrote, he too is lying about his exact involvement in what actually happened that night. But that doesn't mean he is lying about everything.
I think that when it is all presented, the forensic and other evidence will make it easier to identify what is true and what is false in Rudy's story and in other people's stories.
http://tinyurl.com/yt8drh
Bingo!!!!!!!!!
I guess you already know...I've just got in.
line 16=I think it's "Ilaria, together with her Mom who cooked for me."---Traduco
Hi Traduco. I think Rudy isn't talking about Ilaria's mom (the grandmother here). Otherwise he would mentioned her at the end also. BUT, also because he uses the plural "madri." It makes sense if you look at page 26, where he thanks at least two mother figures. I forgot where else, where he also thanks his friends for taking him into their homes and their families for being nice to him. So I think he's thanking Ilaria on page two, and at the same time including her in that group of mothers who fed and cared for him. Also, the word before "madri" looks like it could be "altra" so I see it as "with the other mothers..." True, if it's altra, it should be pluralized... and the 't' should be crossed, but... e Rudy...
Rg says AK was at the door and RS in the house with the knife in the house. He says RS had a cuffia on. That's a swimming cap for me, but could also be somekind of medical hat type thing.
His decision to finally talk was influenced bt what AK and RS's team have been saying about him...
Much more to come I'd say.
Damian,
Cuffia; could that be headphones?
Well it still fits with Rudy's original story. But why was he "afraid" to tell it was Raf? Why did he want Amanda to do it instead? He already indicated them in a coded manner, why not go all the way? Why encourage them to do it? Damian???
That would be le cuffie Corrina, but you never know with RG's grammar. But I would hope il Corriere got that right. It is vague though...could be a beanie type thing of wool too.
Trouble ahead, trouble behind.
First paragraph of Repubblica article
http://www.repubblica.it/2007/12...udy-
amanda.html
Headline: The interrogation of the Ivorian involved in the murder of the young American [sic]
The student from Bari, that evening, had a knife in his hand
Meredith, Rudy´s accusation: "I saw Amanda and Raffaele"
PERUGIA - Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were in Meredith's home on the evening when the student was killed. The American was at the door of the house while the young man from Bari had headphones on his head and a knife in his hand.
That is the truth of Rudy Hermann Guede in prison for the murder of Meredith, the young American student [sic] killed in Perugia last November. He said he would recognize the boy whom he saw and the girl whose voice he heard as being the other two suspects . A reconstruction was made today during questioning.
Well...this is a development indeed!
Will this effect what happens in court early April?
Michael. No.
That notion just crossed my mind, Damian...
Sparrow. I think the pm waited a while before interrogating RG because he wanted more facts. I think these were presented to RG today, the pm told RG what he had and gave him a choice.
Kermit,
Can you confirm this.
I think la cuffia can be added to the knife in the case for premeditation.
Damian,
What in the 'hay' is happening over there?
But why, if Amanda was with Raffaele, did they ring the doorbell? Part of Raf's fantasy? Much more needs to be cleared up.
I wonder how they knew la cuffia was headphones and not another kind of cap. Or if they only guessed.
Sparrow,
Maybe not. Maybe they did ring the doorbell and maybe they were trying to set up Rudy Guede all along.
Sparrow,
And it would tie in with their turning off their cell phones together at 8:40 pm.
Sparrow,
Can you translate this document first shown here by Kermit?
http://www.repubblica.it/2007/12...udy- amanda.html
Sparrow, Beep -
"But why, if Amanda was with Raffaele, did they ring the doorbell? Part of Raf's fantasy?"
Alternatively, it was a mechanism for Rudy for others...stranger/s... to have gained entry unseen by him so that he did not have to say who the real culprits were.
Who besides Rudy ever said anyone rang the doorbell?
And it would tie in with Amanda Knox saying, "I cannot lie, I was there that night at the cottage." to this effect.
The truth about what happened to Meredith Kercher comes out, slowly, but surely.
Who besides Rudy ever said anyone rang the doorbell?
Skeptical Bystander | 03.26.08 - 4:13 pm |
It was only Rudy of course. And I'm not quoting it as truth. I'm putting it out there as a possible inconsistency that has to be sorted out.
http://tinyurl.com/yt8drh
Bingo!!!!!!!!!
I guess you already know...I've just got in.
damian | 03.26.08 - 3:35 pm | #
There is something good about this today. Something we have all been hoping for.
Rudy Guede would not be saying these things without the support of this three lawyers.
Can you translate this document first shown here by Kermit?
http://www.repubblica.it/2007/12...udy- amanda.html
bpcl | 03.26.08 - 4:09 pm | #
When I click on that link I get a "NOT FOUND" page on the Rupubblica site.
"When I click on that link I get a "NOT FOUND" page on the Rupubblica site.
Sparrow | 03.26.08 - 4:22 pm | #"
Me too.
Is it just the article Kermit did provide a translation for?
If Rudy Guede's story stands up, a case could be made for premeditation.
Sparrow,
Scroll up and click on Kermit's post rather than mine.
Here it is again.
http://www.repubblica.it/2007/12...udy-
amanda.html
"Who besides Rudy ever said anyone rang the doorbell?
Skeptical Bystander | 03.26.08 - 4:13 pm |
It was only Rudy of course. And I'm not quoting it as truth. I'm putting it out there as a possible inconsistency that has to be sorted out.
Sparrow | 03.26.08 - 4:19 pm | #"
I hear you.
Depending on the rest of the scenario, it could still be true.
Or it could be one of Rudy's plot devices for his there by invitation of Meredith story.
SB,
Just maybe, just maybe Meredith did invite Rudy Guede to her house. And as Sparrow eloquently pointed out to me the other day, it was not meant for anything other than a simple chat meeting. He was high on this visit as he said to his friend in his statement.
From the "Resto del Carlino" :
http://qn.quotidiano.net/2008/03...raffaele.shtml:
Briefly : Rudy saw Sollecito attacking Meredith with the knife and heard Knox's voice. Sollecito was wearing a head cap-swimming pool style. I am scanning for more press reports and will keep posting.
HERE'S A FAST TRANSLATION OF THE REPUBBLICA ARTICLE
http://www.repubblica.it/2007/12...udy-
amanda.html
Headline: The interrogation of the Ivorian involved in the murder of the young American [sic]
The student from Bari, that evening, had a knife in his hand
Meredith, Rudy´s accusation: "I saw Amanda and Raffaele"
PERUGIA - Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were in Meredith's home on the evening when the student was killed. The American was at the door of the house while the young man from Bari had headphones on his head and a knife in his hand.
That is the truth of Rudy Hermann Guede in prison for the murder of Meredith, the young American student [sic] killed in Perugia last November. He said he would recognize the boy whom he saw and the girl whose voice he heard as being the other two suspects . A reconstruction was made today during questioning.
Arrested in Germany on November 20 last year the young Ivorian was interrogated on December 7 for about seven and a half hours by the Perugia GIP [Judge Claudia Matteini] before whom he claimed to be unassociated with the murder. Guede had explained to the judge that he was present in the Via della Pergola apartment when Meredith Kercher was killed, on the night between last November 1st and 2nd, but was located in the bathroom when the English student was knifed in her throat.
In three hours of questioning [I have seen references to 6 and also to 7 1/2 hours, regarding the December questionning] Guede retold his truth about the tragedy last December 7. In particular he provided, according to what has been learnt, items to identify better, the persons who were in the house. Elements which in the coming days will be included in the findings.
The Ivorian was also much more accurate on many "not remember" points that he had said in the GIP's interrogation [in December]. The decision to speak, according to what has been learned, would have resulted in the last month, as a result of the attitude of certain lawyers of the other two suspects, who had more or less explicitly accused Guede of being the author of the murder.
-
And the reason why a clean might have become necessary was that Rudy Guede was unexpectedly in the house at the time, something the conspirators did not count on. Once he fought with his attacker, and ran out, the conspirators had no choice but to go back and hide their tracks.
bpcl...me and Kermit have given the facts reported in these articles. What would be interesting to know is why he didn't colloborate in the first interrogation, but did today. There could be various explanations for this. One, I've already given but I think we need to remember that along with many other things, the judge will take into consideration the behaviour of the suspects after the crime when sentencing. This includes RG's behaviour this morning.
I may regret it in the future, but tonight I'm toasting the much maligned Mignini.
A certain photo of a certain suspect springs to mind...
Damian,
If I could be there, I would ask you to allow me to toast with you.
"A certain photo of a certain suspect springs to mind...
damian | 03.26.08 - 4:35 pm | #"
If we're thinking of the same photo, we have the computer in the background (alibi), the meat cleaver in hand and those damn glasses. Reminds me of our discussion on an earlier thread about whether Raffaele wore contacts on occasion or went without corrective lenses altogether. It was Guermantes, as I recall, who found a number of photos of Raffaele "sans lunettes."
Damian,
Yes it does, doesn't it! If his story pans out, which I think it will, it would make the case for premeditation. Amanda Knox's cell phone being turned off at 8:40 pm exactly. Maybe the decision to do that was done because Patrick Lumumba had ping hers with a text message; better not have them on. The knife wound is about 'rage'. I know I am getting ahead of myself, but today is such a good day in this case.
Which photo of which suspect, Damian? I might just toast with you once I'm home from my son's spring concert (yes, he does play guitar)
"Which photo of which suspect, Damian? I might just toast with you once I'm home from my son's spring concert (yes, he does play guitar)
Corrine | 03.26.08 - 4:38 pm | #"
Does he do a mean rendition of Casey Jones?
Whoops. Never mind. That would be the damning photo...
OT
No, but he does do Friend of the Devil and some of Birdsong, Skep. Yeah, his name is Jerry. Couldn't help it; he was born a year and three days after JG died.
Motives according to Rudy (Repubblica article):
"Violent hate between the two girls, who were too different, and a fight regarding money (that evening, according to Guede, Mez found out that 250 euros were missing from the drawer and accused Amanda of the theft)"
Quote from Raffaele Sollecito,
Nov 20 2007
(Raffaele opens the page diary on November 20 with a conviction for
him decisive) today finally they have taken the real murderer of this
story from beyond belief. It is an Ivorian of 22 years, they have
found him in Germany. Papa I saw happy and smiling, but I for the
moment am not calm 100% because I fear that he will invent strange
things.
Nicki, Sparrow,
It would be nice to have a translation of that article, hint, hint.
Apparently today is Raffaeles birthday....That is some present from Rudy!!!
Jools,
Life does have its surprises doesn't it?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/...7/
kercher04.jpg
Sorry everyone,
I found that picture and had to post it.
Beep,
Kermit provided a translation here: Kermit | 03.26.08 - 4:32 pm | #
Another article...
http://ansa.it/opencms/export/
si...l_42949128.html
"No, but he does do Friend of the Devil and some of Birdsong, Skep. Yeah, his name is Jerry. Couldn't help it; he was born a year and three days after JG died.
Corrine | 03.26.08 - 4:42 pm | #"
OT
Good for you. It will please you to know that a friend of mine's mother was a classical guitar instructor and young Jerry was one of her pupils.
I think the 'swimming cap' is a nice touch...it lends credibility to Rudy's story in my view. A swimming cap is a strange thing to invent...mask maybe, headover maybe...even some normal kind of hat. However, I'm not of course convinced he's telling the 'whole' truth at this point.
I wonder...might we expect a police raid on RS's in order to recover an erstwhile ignored swimming cap? We'll see over the next couple of days no doubt.
The question that is in my head at the moment...if what Rudy says is true or even close to it...why???? Why did they do it? What was Amanda doing there just 'watching'? It puts us right back to thrill-kill or sex-kill.
Corinne, Damian, you're right, the reference to "headphones" isn't clear, it could be some other "over-the-head" attire ... like a swimming cap. .... or that head covering in the famous meat-cleaver photo.
-
bpcl, Corrina...it would be a quiet affair. It wouldn't be a big celebratory meal out, it would be a low key thing between friends, to toast a small positive bit of news, amoungst all the sadness, in the hope that those responsible pay for what they did, and to mark a step in that direction. Peace.
Sparrow,
Thanks for that. Nicki added something else about what Rudy Guede's idea of the motive was, and that is what prompted my question.
Kermit it's not headphones.
It is vague though...could be a surgical cap, a swimming cap, a beanie made of wool.
The question that is in my head at the moment...if what Rudy says is true or even close to it...why???? Why did they do it? What was Amanda doing there just 'watching'? It puts us right back to thrill-kill or sex-kill.
Michael | 03.26.08 - 4:56 pm | #
The motive is about what Patrick and others, including Rudy Guede is now saying. She wanted to be the Queen Bee. She was about to be fired. She was loose and fancy with any man she desired. Meredith was everything she wanted to be, but could not be. The accusation of being a 'thief' now could have been the straw that broke the camel's back. Raffaele Sollecito himself said, "If I am here, it is the fault of my girlfriend Amanda," to this effect.
Damian,
Here is a picture of Raffaele Sollecito in full form.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/...7/ kercher04.jpg
...or any sort of "cap" to ensure one doesn't shed...
Damian,
Sorry, one more time.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/...7/
kercher04.jpg
I think "cuffia bianca" is a beanie cap/hat.
http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cac...1&
client=safari
bleached knife with Meredith's dna on the tip, RS wearing some weird head gear, AK on lookout, alibis that don't make any sense, lies, lies, lies. Yes Michael, we're coming full circle.
Translation of the Repubblica Article
Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were at Meredith's home the night she was killed. The American was on the doorway, while Sollecito (the young Barese) was holding a knife and wearing a head cap. This is Rudy's truth, jailed for killing Meredith, the young US (sic) student killed in Perugia last November, he would have said to have recognized the boy he has seen as Sollecito,and the voice he has heard as the one of Amanda Knox. The reconstruction today, during the interrogation.The young Ivorian arrested in Germany on November 20th had been interrogated for 7 hours by the GIP of Perugia on December 7th and had claimed he was not involved in the murder. Guede had explained to the judge he was present when Meredith was killed in the apartment of Via della Pergola,on the night between Nov 1 and 2, but he had reported he was in the bathroom when the student was knifed. During the 3 hours interrogation, Guede has reconstructed his own truth about the night of the murder. Specifically he has reported elements useful to better identify the people who were in the house.Guede has described to investigators specific details about the clothes that Amanda and Raffaele were wearing that evening, details on which further analysis will be performed in the next days. The Ivorian has cleared up the many "I don't remember" pronounced during the GIP interrogation.He explained the motives of the murder and the unleashing factor of the murder as a violent hate between the two girls, who were too different,and a fight for money reasons ( according to Guede that night Mez realized that 250 euro had disappeared from her drawer and she accused Amanda of the theft). The decision to speak out seems to have originated also from the attitude of some of the lawyers of the other suspects, having more or less explicitly accused Guede of the murder.
Damian,
Only one problem for them. Rudy Guede was inside the house. Once they realized that, they were had. The only thing they could do about it was to come back and clean up their tracks. Kermit's three abandonment theory is still in play. The disposal of the phones screwed them up too. The next day, they were obviously going back to the house to continue the cleanup, the washing machine cycle was going on. Only problem there was, the Police luckily arrived at the same time.
Nicki,
Thank you so much for that translation.
Che Rudy volesse parlare, inquirenti e investigatori a Perugia lo avevano capito già da un po': e le parole di un investigatore americano assunto dalla difesa di Amanda Knox, Joe Tacopina, che ha accusato nei giorni scorsi l'ivoriano di essere l'unico responsabile della morte di Mez, hanno fatto capire al giovane che il momento era arrivato.
Oh JOE! Above is from the article posted by Jools. I don't have time to translate the whole thing, but roughly from above:
It says that the words of Joe Tacopina, when he implied that Rudy alone may be responsible for MK's death, was what spurred Rudy to realize that now was the time to tell the entire truth.
Rudy's defense team asked for this meeting on March 5th, right? Or before? Oh my.
"Rudy's defense team asked for this meeting on March 5th, right? Or before? Oh my.
Sparrow | 03.26.08 - 5:18 pm | #"
Tacopina's interview in Newsweek is dated March 4, 2008. Hmmmm.... And according to the article Sparrow just mentioned, this audience was requested 20 days ago--so March 5 would be right.
"Only one problem for them. Rudy Guede was inside the house. Once they realized that, they were had. The only thing they could do about it was to come back and clean up their tracks. Kermit's three abandonment theory is still in play. The disposal of the phones screwed them up too. The next day, they were obviously going back to the house to continue the cleanup, the washing machine cycle was going on. Only problem there was, the Police luckily arrived at the same time.
bpcl | 03.26.08 - 5:10 pm | #"
I think it is a little premature to assume that Rudy is telling the whole truth and that he had a date with Meredith, which just happened to put him in the house. This situation is a bit like a tanker trying to advance in the frozen Artic. I think a bunch of ice just got broken open and that will give rise to further gushings and movement in and from other places.
If Rudy is not lying this explains many things among which the cells switched off,the shoe print, the knife DNA,the attempt to blame another black,the "black man found black man guilty" line resulting in Rudy's flight to Germany,the washer cycle etc. Why hasn't he come up before with his "truth"? Well,I guess one thing is to be accused of obstruction,omission of first aid (Good Samaritan law)and perjury, one thing is complicity or even murder. I just wander what the other two suspects' defense reaction will be to these accusations.
Oooops - I'll call cmellas and tell him that the celebration is off.
That Joe T caused this...now isn't that irony indeed?!!
It's hitting the British papers now.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/...news/
main.jhtml?
Skep -
"I think it is a little premature to assume that Rudy is telling the whole truth and that he had a date with Meredith, which just happened to put him in the house. This situation is a bit like a tanker trying to advance in the frozen Artic. I think a bunch of ice just got broken open and that will give rise to further gushings and movement in and from other places."
Well put.
I think that if anyone is getting any credit today, it should be Mignini, not Joe. He called for this interrogation and his timing seems to have been good. As to why RG decided to speak today, I'll put up some bits of the Italian penal code later which might help to explain it. Stuff about crimes comitted by a group of people, some of whom aren't aware of the intentions of others. What happened today is complex.
That Joe T caused this...now isn't that irony indeed?!!
Michael | 03.26.08 - 5:30 pm | #
Good thing he wasn't drawing a salary. Okay, I gotta go NOW. Ciao.
According to Michael Moore reporting for the Telegraph.co.uk
‘According to sources close to the investigation, Guede claimed in a three-hour interrogation that he arrived at the house and was let in through the front door by Knox.’
The question was asked why has Rudy come forward with this news now as opposed to when he was first arrested
I think Mr Biscut has taken a page from the Knox PR team. At that time he was a running suspect, a black man to be accused by two white people. Too white darlings. Note that he has been putting forth wonderful diary entries which show compassion and fondness for the poor victim.
He had to build up some sort of respect prior to confronting these two. Had he told the story too soon the other two would have have too much time to gang tackle his story, indeed RS had already placed his 'too telling' theory that Rudy would have wild tales to tell.
I agree with Skep. This is just the first of the ice to break. Other stories will now be told, but I am curious as to where the stories of the other two will come from and how they will reconcile to their original alibi(s)
DLW,
I think that may be a mistranslation in the British press. In the Italian press it says:
L'americana era sulla porta di casa mentre il giovane barese aveva una cuffia in testa e un coltello in mano.
The American was at the door of the house while the young Barese (Raf) had a cap on his head and a knife in his hand.
And here's what it says in that Times article:
ccording to sources close to the investigation, Guede claimed in a three-hour interrogation that he arrived at the house and was let in through the front door by Knox.
He alleged that Sollecito was holding a knife.
Ciao!
I think Skeptical Bystander has it absolutely right: this testimony represents a big shift. If Guede's telling the truth, then there will be other supporting evidence that will corroborate what he says. If he isn't telling the truth, then Sollecito and Knox will be able to produce specific evidence that will undermine his testimony.
With a bit of luck, everything should soon become clearer.
Taken from the Telegraph: Investigators have also been able to confirm that Miss Kercher was on her hands and knees when she was stabbed in the throat, and that she was being held from behind.
“She was prone on her knees, with her face towards the wardrobe,†said the forensic report, adding that a reconstruction of the events had been possible because of the position of the blood stains around the room.
Correct me if im wrong, but i thought (on this blog) we came to the conclusion that she was stabbed from the front - ( it was also stated in a report, im sure - where the guy used an envelope or something to act out how Meredith was stabbed?)
Im confused...again
Fast translation of article referred to by Jools at | 03.26.08 - 4:55 pm |
http://ansa.it/opencms/export/
si...l_42949128.html
2008-03-26 21:03
Headline: ENGLISH GIRL MURDERED, RUDY ACCUSES AMANDA AND RAFFAELE
by correspondent Matteo Guidelli
PERUGIA - "I saw them in that house, they were Amanda and Raffaele." Four and a half months after the Meredith's murder and a week before the appeal review which will examine the appeals of the three suspects, the Giallo di Perugia adds a new element: Rudy Hermann Guede, the Ivorian in prison accused together with the American young lady and the student from Bari of killing the English student English on November 1, for the first time has explicitly accused the boyfriend and girlfriend. And his is a story with many details and many elements deemed important to the investigation. Detectives and investigators in Perugia had already understood for a while that Rudy was wanting to talk: and the words of an American investigator hired by the defense of Amanda Knox, Joe Tacopina, who has in recent days accused the Ivorian to be the only responsible for the death of Mez, made it clear to the young man that the moment had arrived.
It is no coincidence that the interrogation today was set twenty days ago and that the news of it transpired only yesterday: a precious silence which served, probably, to allow Rudy to address the meeting with the prosecutor without the pressure of the Press. And this morning, in Capanne prison, Rudy in the three hours of questioning did not disappoint the investigators' expectation. The Ivorian made a much more detailed story of the evening of November 1 to the Public Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini responsible for the investigation, and to the head of the Perugian mobile police squad Giacinto Profazio, not changing his version but providing additional and more accurate details. Giving words to the many 'I do not remember' which he repeated in his declaration of last December 7 when he was interrogated by the GIP [Claudia Matteini], he gave a much more precise idea of events. Guede reiterated that he arrived at the home of Meredith with the young English lady, that he had started a relation [in general, or sexual, at that moment? I suppose he means the latter] with her and then had to go to the bathroom. Then, however, he corrected his aim, calling into question first Raffaele and then Amanda. Last December 7, he said that when he got to Mez's bedroom, he saw a "male silhouette". "I put my left hand on the right shoulder of this person. He was wearing a white cap with a red stripe, had brown hair had a knife." And to the judge [Matteini, in December] who asked him if he had seen this person's face, Rudy replied, "no, I didn't see his face, I didn't see this person well in the face because I had to look to defend myself."
Today, as has been learnt, instead he said that he recalled better the face of that person and to affirm that it was Raffaele. Today, Rudy even spoke about Amanda for the first time, while on December 7 he had declared only that he heard the footsteps of another person on the gravel in the garden of the apartment. "I heard these words", he said to the GIP [in December], "negro found, guilty man found, let's go. I heard more than one in the sense that there was a break out [they ran out] and when one person is walking you hear only one, and when more than one person walks, you hear more than one."
Today, instead, Rudy clarified to the PM [Mignini] that he clearly heard the voice of Amanda Knox, who was at the door of the house in Via della Pergola. But Guede also explained the motive and the reason which triggered the murder: violent hatred between the two girls, each one very different from the other, and a fight for the sake of money (that evening, according to the Ivorian's declaration, Mez noticed that 250 euro had disappeared from her drawer and accused Amanda of the theft). The young man [Rudy] also provided the investigators with different elements to confirm his thesis - especially concerning clothing worn by Amanda and Raffaele that evening - on which verifications will be carried out in the coming days.
If these aspects are confirmed, the situation of the boyfriend and girlfriend will be further worsened. Meanwhile the credibility of Rudy would emerge strengthened. In the coming days we will see if new elements emerge, yet it is certain that Amanda's and Raffaele's situation gets more complicated. And perhaps for the young man from Bari today's birthday gift from his lawyers won't be enough to raise his spirits: a book by Giancarlo Carofiglio, "Unconscious Witness", which tells the story of a witness unjustly accused of a crime.
-
It 'does' bring the Albanian witness testimony back into play I feel and if so..what does that say about Rudy's true invovement?
But I still feel left asking why? If Amanda's motive was a hatred of Mereith...what was RS's? One can also ask the same question about Rudy if he was an intentional part of it.
OK, so Rudy confesses with a story that fits the media. At least that's the information being fed to the media. I agree with SKEP, it's a bit premature to assume the information being shared as truth.
I will continue to beleive Amanda is innocent until there is substantiated evidence that proves otherwise. Also, if the girls hated each other so much, why were they together at La Tana dell'Orso, just a few nights previous? (See article by Mudede in the Stranger, interviewing that bar owner.)
Biscuits is strangely quiet today. He hasn't confirmed what has been reported.
I just got home a few minutes ago and have been catching up on the latest events. Wow, breakthrough or what?? Pity he didn't speak up earlier and save the Kerchers 5 months of additional trauma. . . still, it's a start. What I don't understand is why CMellas would have mentioned a 'celebratory' dinner due to hearing good news, ie; Amanda was totally innocent of any crime and wasn't there on the night, and the truth would come out etc etc?? Does any of that make sense in the light of Rudy's additional testimony?
Pandora UK:
Taken from the Telegraph: Investigators have also been able to confirm that Miss Kercher was on her hands and knees when she was stabbed in the throat, and that she was being held from behind.
---------------
I remember that theory from the beginning, but it was never confirmed/substantiated until today. Although there was always the suggestion that more than one person was involved in the assault, so one to hold her down while the other assaulted, then killed her?? And neither Amanda or RS can accuse each other without each having to admit their own involvement. I wonder what's going to happen next!
----------------------
"Biscuits is strangely quiet today. He hasn't confirmed what has been reported.
damian | 03.26.08 - 7:01 pm | #"
Somehow that doesn't surprise me. It doesn't seem to be his style.
Newbie | 03.26.08 - 6:50 pm |
Hi Newbie, a delayed welcome to you. I don't think that anyone assumes that Rudy's declarations of today before Mignini should be taken as a template of truth.
However, in a case where circumstantial evidence will finally situate some of the "hard" evidence, then breaking an implicit (mutual or one-way) pact by suspects to not implicate each other or even to refer to one another is a step forward.
Even if parts of his declaration may be plagued with partial truths or lies, independently of the details, the wherefores and whys, he is saying that Amanda and Raffaele were there. That is not a detail, it's a major contrast to foundations of their respective alibis. And it seems that there are details he has provided to investigators to support aspects of his declaration. Maybe we won't know those details until months from now, at trial time, if we get there.
I assume that this is a stepping stone for Mignini to move towards a face-to-face between some combination of the suspects. And if the face-to-face can bring up further clarification, then I think you would agree that is a good thing.
Amanda is lucky to have people like you believing that she has nothing whatsoever to do with the Giallo. But the support of persons who have yet have "substantiated evidence" against them should be spread across the board. We haven't seen, no one has seen evidence against one or the other suspects which is better or worse. Rudy claims he has a reason to have been there and for his DNA to be there. Amanda has a reason for her DNA to be there (she lived there). Raffaele has the excuse that his DNA was there because he was Amanda's boyfriend and may have inadvertently touched the victim's bra once when it was hanging to dry. Raffaele has an excuse for the victim's DNA to be on his kitchen knife. Amanda has Joe the Sleuth claiming that the DNA on the knife isn't even the victim's. Amanda has the excuse that her DNA was on the knife because she was Raffaele's boyfriend. They all have excuses for all the currently leaked "hard" (substantiated?) evidence.
That's why Mignini is looking for discrepancies between the suspects, even if they are discrepancies built on lies, as those discrepancies may point to very clear indications of guilt, enough for initiating the trial.
My advice to Amanda and Raffaele is that if they are truly truly unconnected to any Giallo crime, to not worry about preparing for a face-to-face. But if they have any doubts about the results of such an encounter, from a legal posture point of view, they should zip-it and not open their mouths, not even look at Rudy in the eyes. And from a moral point of view, any information they have concerning the Giallo should be immediately offered up, as it seemed they were going to do in December before deciding not to say anything.
-
Unconscious Witness", which tells the story of a witness unjustly accused of a crime.
-
Kermit | 03.26.08 - 6:14 pm | #
The book is actually called "Involuntary Witness" funny that the lawyer chose that book to give to RS...
http://www.eurocrime.co.uk/
revie...ry_Witness.html
Jools | 03.26.08 - 7:22 pm | "funny that the lawyer chose that book to give to RS."
Maybe it gives pointers on how to deal with face-to-face questionning with other suspects....
From what I’m gathering, Rudy id’s Raffaele but doesn’t quite say he saw Amanda face, only he recognized her voice, and her clothing. So this clothing issue comes to the forefront again.
Sparrow: I’m sure your right on this apparent translation snafu in the telegraph piece, that Rudy recognized Amanda at the door vs. Amanda let him in the flat. Appreciate setting this straight. Although I still think A.K. let him in, for now it’s best to stick with what was actually stated.
Frank seems to be hedging a little on this story for now, wants better confirmation.
He explained the motives of the murder and the unleashing factor of the murder as a violent hate between the two girls, who were too different,and a fight for money reasons
Remember that red mark underneath Amanda's chin which is clearly visible in several photo's taken in the days before Amanda's arrest.
I think it fair to ask now:
Was that caused by Meredith' nails?
Have the investigators made a link between Amanda and the organic material and hair found in Meredith's hand?
"Amanda is lucky to have people like you believing that she has nothing whatsoever to do with the Giallo. But the support of persons who have yet have "substantiated evidence" against them should be spread across the board. We haven't seen, no one has seen evidence against one or the other suspects which is better or worse."
Kermit
_______
Thanks for putting it this way, Kermit. I was about to reply along the same lines, in the sense that I'm not rooting for or against anyone (except Meredith, I'm rooting for her), and any skepticism I have works both ways and across the board.
If the substance of today's hearing is confirmed (and I doubt Biscotti will say anything one way or the other), then it means there is at last a crack in the ice. The end result of that crack will be greater clarity all around, and that is an unequivocably good thing.
All of the "substantiated" evidence we have comes from the same limited number of sources, so it is intellectually dishonest to pick and choose what suits us and discard the rest.
In the same way, all of the statements of the three suspects contain truths and falsehoods (at the very least in the sense that when you have "A" and "not A" both cannot be true at the same time), so it would be unjustly partisan to accept what one says as the truth and reject what the others say. It's the residue of truth that will tell the story.
Many on this board have speculated that Rudy would be the first to talk because he had the least to gain by remaining silent. He was initally silent, checking out the landscape, possibly even advised by his lawyer to adopt a wait and see attitude. But in recent weeks, it has become clear that a concerted effort was being made to liberate two and sink one. The gloves came off a few weeks ago, during the Porta à Porta program where Tacopina was the mystery caller, and Biscotti has been suggesting ever since that if the others thought his client would go down alone, they were mistaken. To the extent that this exposes what really happened, it is a good thing.
Kermit,
I appreciate reading your posts and I believe you've put things in a very good perspective without having chosen one path or another, and keeping an open mind. I think many try to do the same (including myself) but we get tied up into providing a new theory as to how all of this took place, only to find out there are wholes in each of those theories, and they have not led us to the truth.
I do hope that more is shared within the next week to put more things to light.
"Frank seems to be hedging a little on this story for now, wants better confirmation.
DLW | 03.26.08 - 7:31 pm | #"
Which is precisely why he is such a valuable source. Plus, as he has said, he isn't rooting for or against anyone. It will be interesting to see what his confirmation yields.
the motives of the murder and the unleashing factor of the murder as a violent hate between the two girls, who were too different
Although they won't know of events that night, the relationship between Meredith and Amanda will have been well observed and understood by Meredith's friends, Filomena and the other Italian girl who shared the apartment.
Understanding the basic relationship between the two will not rely on Rudy's say-so.
The idea that RG decided to cooperate today because of this Joe chap strikes me as absurd. It's ILE that accuse him of sexual assault and murder. Are people really suggesting that Biscuits told him to start talking today because that beastly Joe has been bad-mouthing him. I don't see it personally.
However Mr Guede, who was questioned for three hours yesterday, said he had seen both Ms Knox and Mr Sollecito at the cotttage. He told investigators that he had seen Ms Knox "at the door of the house" and that he had seen Mr Sollecito inside it brandishing a knife. He is reported to have given police a description of the clothes Ms Knox and Mr Sollecito were wearing.
The Times version
Damian,
Are people really suggesting that Biscuits told him to start talking today because that beastly Joe has been bad-mouthing him. I don't see it personally.
Nor do I.
Are people really suggesting that Biscuits told him to start talking today because that beastly Joe has been bad-mouthing him. I don't see it personally.
Something for people in the US to remember. Europe does not have plea bargaining. It carries no advantage
to implicate others.
You can only improve your position by admitting your own part. Rudy has admitted nothing but his presence.
Damian,
I don't think that Rudy started talking because of Joe T. Actually I think that Rudy's defense couldn't care less about him.My impression is that Rudy might have started to realize that he is in serious troubles and he just doesn't want to go down by himself. He has legal counsel, and they don't seem so stupid,so if Rudy has fingered Knox and Sollecito they must be involved somehow. To what extent, I trust it will be determined.
"Mr Guede had decided to speak out against the other two suspects because they had "more or less explicitly pointed the finger of blame at him." "
From Brian's Times link. Was the plan to not cooperate if the other suspects didn't point the finger at him? Am I missing something here?
Of course, my 8;28 post may be completely wrong. Does anyone know what type of law RG's team specialize in?
Damian, Joe is a comic sideshow to this whole story. It's not that big a deal. But in light of Biscotti's suing Tacopina for his comments, the mention of him in that article today is sure to draw comments. When I made my comment, it was with amusement. For a person to say he's "working" for free for one side, then have those people deny it, then to be named as a cause for trouble for that side... it's worth a mention.
soozie UK | 03.26.08 - 7:04 pm wrote: "What I don't understand is why CMellas would have mentioned a 'celebratory' dinner due to hearing good news, ie; Amanda was totally innocent of any crime and wasn't there on the night, and the truth would come out etc etc?? Does any of that make sense in the light of Rudy's additional testimony?"
What cmellas hears and alludes to comes from defense attorney speculations and strategies. My feeling is that the good news was that the RS & AK teams finally agreed to work with each other and agree on a common alibi. What happens next? It's going to get ugly. Clearly, no one is getting out or going home anytime soon.
So this new account of events by RG is certainly bad news for AK and RS.
I had questioned very early on why on earth RG didn't dob AK and RS in and involve them in his story of the events right from the beginning regardless of whether they were involved or wern't. The prosecutors
were convinced they had the right people, there was a ton of (unsubstantiated) evidence being reported about them and their supposed involvement, RG would have been aware of what was going on,all RG had to say was "yes we had a date, yes we had consensual sex but they (RS and AK) killed her", case closed, nice and simple. I found it very hard to believe that these three random individuals of limited previous aquaintance could have formed some sort of 'code of silence' between themselves, in fact they all had much more to gain by pointing the 'he/she killed her' finger at each other.
And certainly in RG's case he would have been much smarter to have added them into his story instead of the
'strange guy ran in' version. He owed those people nothing, he is only concerned with saving his own skin.
But as we all know, he didn't, and it still remains a possibility that he didn't intially say they were involved because they wern't. There is still very much the possibility that it may eventually transpire that since RG has had a long time to sit and think and have long talks with his lawyers that they have been able to make him realise that from where he is sitting now he has nothing to lose and a hell of a lot to gain by implicating those already seemingly up to their necks. His lawyers would have no doubt outlined clearly what his options are from here on in, that he can't go on with not naming the 'real killer' and in order for him to come out of it with the lightest sentence possible it would be in his absolute best interest to tell the prosecutors what they want to hear, "Yes I had consensual sex with her but RS and AK killed her"
Of course, my 8;28 post may be completely wrong. Does anyone know what type of law RG's team specialize in?
damian | 03.26.08 - 8:44 pm | #
I think you know more than any of us about Biscotti, Damian. You said he was involved in a civil suit, representing a widow of a policeman killed by some Red Brigade people. Do you know what was his role with the Clean Hands?
Yes fly by night. I also thought that was the good news. That's what my sarky comment was about the other day. When he was out celebrating, I started to notice signs of collaboration.
Yes Sparrow, a comic sideshow which is being used by certain people for certain reasons. Keep your ears to the ground on your side of the pond for developments on that front. However, who do you think the Times are quoting?
SB,
You may be right about what I have been saying here. But of all three suspects, which one has given us the most information to think about, that has some semblance to reality?
No idea what his involvement in clean hands was Sparrow. A huge number of lawyers were involved in that mess, the majority of whom specialized in civil and commercial law I guess.
Yes Sparrow, a comic sideshow which is being used by certain people for certain reasons. Keep your ears to the ground on your side of the pond for developments on that front. However, who do you think the Times are quoting?
damian | 03.26.08 - 8:54 pm | #
Damian, have they written it in a Times article? I have only seen it in the Ansa article posted by Jools today. From Kermit's translation:
Detectives and investigators in Perugia had already understood for a while that Rudy was wanting to talk: and the words of an American investigator hired by the defense of Amanda Knox, Joe Tacopina, who has in recent days accused the Ivorian to be the only responsible for the death of Mez, made it clear to the young man that the moment had arrived.
If anyone is being quoted, these sentences would imply that the Tacopina reference came from detectives on the case. However, it could just be filler put in by the reporter, because Tacopina's comments were so visible in the press. BUT, Damian, who does this benefit most at this time? Rudy. This would help his lawsuit, don't you think? I don't necessarily think this was planned by Biscotti, although it's possible, but maybe things are just falling into place.
Oh, man... if you ever need a lawyer in Italy, you know who to call. After Rudy gets out of prison, he'll have money in the bank. I bet Biscotti is a chess player.
"Mr Guede had decided to speak out against the other two suspects because they had "more or less explicitly pointed the finger of blame at him." "
Sorry Sparrow. This was the Times quote I was referring to. Nothing to do with Joe. Were they planning to keep schtum if the other 2 didn't point the finger at him?
(the quote is from Brian's link above.
Damian, Sparrow,
I suspect a lot of it is filler. The Times may have gotten its information from the "ansa" article, which had a kind of tabloid-y ring to it. I do think of Joe as more of a sideshow than anything else, but I also think he may have pissed more than a few people off.
Damian, in the Times article they say that "Corriere della Sera suggests" what you've quoted above at 9:16 pm. So I think they're simply basing it on the article from Corriere della Sera. Here is where they get it from:
La decisione di parlare, sempre secondo quanto si è appreso, sarebbe scaturita in quest'ultimo mese anche in seguito all'atteggiamento di alcuni difensori degli altri due indagati che avevano accusato più o meno esplicitamente Guede di essere l'autore dell'omicidio.
http://www.corriere.it/cronache/
...44f486ba6.shtml
I have to learn that tiny url thing.
So, the times doesn't have a source. Anyway, I like what you led me to (mistakenly) in regards to the Tacopina/Biscotti thoughts.
Do you think RG stuck to his original story today and just gave names to the intruders? Is that what he is saying? While he was in the bathroom, AK and RS entered the house and attacked Meredith? What about the fight over the money? Did he witness that? Was he in the house for an hour and a bit alone with Meredith? Is that the story?
It's late. Buonanotte.
Yes, it looks like he's sticking to his story, only he's naming names and filling in more descriptive details. Goodnight.
Re ansa article photo:
Is that a recent photo of Rudy or one that was taken when he was extradited? I don't remember seeing it before. He looks so tired and sad.
oceania88:
His lawyers would have no doubt outlined clearly what his options are from here on in, that he can't go on with not naming the 'real killer' and in order for him to come out of it with the lightest sentence possible it would be in his absolute best interest to tell the prosecutors what they want to hear, "Yes I had consensual sex with her but RS and AK killed her"
How could this lesson his sentence?
If it is found that Rudy had consensual sex with Meredith and was not involved in the killing. He will be innocent of murder but guilty of failing to come to the aid of Meredith.
If he is found guilty of being a party involved in the murder with AK and RS, he still won't mitigate his sentence, despite naming them, because he is still denying his own involvement.
Oh yes..it was right in front of my eyes!!! It really is late. Ciao.
Hi Brian, because the sentence for failing to administer aid to a person in need is a lot less than complicity
in a murder. RG of course dosn't want to be blamed for any complicity in murder and his lawyers have explained to him that by actually naming other people as the killers it will help their case to remove him further from the role of any involvement with the killing and/or as an accessory. It may even be part of some sort of plea bargain as worked out between the prosecutors and RG's lawyers.
According to the source noted below, it's a "cuffia bianca con una striscia rossa" that RS was wearing. " a white cap with red stripe." Sounds like a knit cap, doesn't it?
Check out this 11/07 photo of RS with that yellow scarf on. How very odd it looks on him, especially in this picture. What's he hiding?
http://blog.panorama.it/italia/2008/03/26/
omicidio-meredith-per-rudy-cerano-anche-raffaele-
e-amanda-in-casa/
Also part of Rudy's statement today are details about what Amanda and Raffaele were wearing. Verification of these facts will take place in the next few days.
"Agli investigatori il giovane avrebbe fornito inoltre diversi elementi per confermare la sua tesi (soprattutto sugli indumenti indossati da Amanda e Raffaele quella sera), su cui saranno effettuati riscontri nei prossimi giorni"
The fact remains Rudy deliberately withheld vital information relating to a murder case (for 5 months) - and surely that's a crime in itself?
-------------
oceania88-- there would be an automatic and implicit code of silence if all three were involved and are culpable. one talks, they all go down. i still tend to think ILE had it right or close to right early on. i think rudy was invited in to rape Meredith in a bizarre acting out of Knox's short story. i think the murder may not have been intended but the knife slipped due to the struggle against it. of course i have no idea really, but this has always been the scenario that fills most holes for me. i think they were drugged out kids in search of an extreme experience and who got more than they bargained for; rs's knife obsession met up with ak's twisted jealousy of mk and rg's affection and lust for mk in a catastrophic way. that rudy seems to have some kind of active conscience seems more clear than that the other two do, but it is horribly sad for all.
Hi oceania88
Plea bargaining Italy:
Italy
In Italy, the procedure of pentito (litt. "he who has repented") was first introduced during the "years of lead" for counter-terrorism purposes, and generalized during the Maxi Trial against the Mafia in 1986-1987. The procedure has been contested, as since pentiti received lighter sentences as long as they supplied information to the magistrates, they have been accused, in some cases, of deliberately misleading the Italian justice.
Wikipedia
I agree that he could mitigate his sentence for failing to help Meredith and he has already ADMITTED such.
However, unless the investigators consider him innocent of involvement in the murder and/or any sexual attack on Meredith, he is not "pentito" on those charges when they come to trial. Should he be found guilty his sentence would not be mitigated.
I don’t think it’s any one thing that caused Rudy to go off. Joe T’s comments may have been the last straw, or just a convenient time for his story to change. And he didn’t really change his story that much, only that the fuzzy Italian was Raffaele and the other person was Amanda. This had to be some cumulative effect, plus a lot of time to think. Rudy was probably already very upset that Amanda and possibly Raf helped get him in this mess. Also Amanda’s presence brought a lot of unwanted media attention to this case, helping in his capture. In addition I think the race issue (blacks being blamed for everything), and moral factors including Rudy’s stature may have had a big effect on his decision. In addition Rudy’s decision may not be all about getting a reduced sentence, just a side benefit. Also it can’t be completely ruled out what Oceania alluded to, in that Rudy’s telling more stories.
However, unless the investigators consider him innocent of involvement in the murder and/or any sexual attack on Meredith, he is not "pentito" on those charges when they come to trial. Should he be found guilty his sentence would not be mitigated.
Brian S. | 03.26.08 - 10:07 pm | #
Yes, that's the absolute heart of the matter and some arrangement may have been struck, or is being worked on, between RG's lawyers and the prosecutors regarding their favourable attitude towards him regarding your statement, it cannot be ruled out, in view of RG's latest change in story.
In the same way that Mignini's obstruction of justice charges currently pending against him cannot be ruled out or ignored, it is not legal or right according to Wikipedia etc that a prosecutor should tamper with evidence, but we all know it goes on, in the same way we know 'arrangements' regarding reduced sentences etc occur on a daily basis between prosecutors, lawyers and their clients.
Damian,
Such great news today!
Also it can’t be completely ruled out what Oceania alluded to, in that Rudy’s telling more stories.
DLW | 03.26.08 - 10:14 pm | #
Rudy Guede has a good set of lawyers. Up until this time they have held everything close to their vests. They are not just going to let Rudy Guede go hang himself by telling more lies.
On the subject of 20 days in March but not Joe Topicana:
Italian Coroner: Unclear if Victim Raped
By MARTA FALCONI – Mar 6, 2008
ROME (AP) — A coroner's report on the slaying of a British student in Italy, in which her American roommate is among three suspects, says it cannot be determined if the victim was raped before she was killed.
The report, made available to The Associated Press on Thursday, is one factor that judges must consider as they rule on whether the suspects should continue to be held in the case...
Prosecutors have said she was killed resisting sexual assault...But the new report, issued last month by coroner and prosecution consultant Luca Lalli, said it could not be determined if Kercher was raped. "It cannot be said with certainty if there has been sexual violence or attempted sexual violence," Lalli said in the report.
Though bruises found on Kercher suggest she had at least hurried intercourse, possibly against her will, the evidence was not enough "to remove all doubt," the report said.
Hair and other organic material were found under Kercher's nails, it said...
Associated Press
Prosecutors have said she was killed resisting sexual assault...But the new report, issued last month by coroner and prosecution consultant Luca Lalli, said it could not be determined if Kercher was raped. "It cannot be said with certainty if there has been sexual violence or attempted sexual violence," Lalli said in the report.
Brian S. | 03.27.08 - 12:13 am | #
I had wondered if another reason Lalli got his marching orders was because his evidence didn't fit with the prosecution theory.
Oceania88,
He was fired because he leaked information to the public. From all that I have heard and read, the prosecutor has run a very tight ship. With the exception of Dr. Lalli's statement, nothing else has been leaked by the authorities about this case, notwithstanding the initial information about the case when it first became public.
My real point is that this report was MADE AVAILABLE to the Associated Press on or around the day that the prosecutors made the arrangement for Rudy's interview today.
It wasn't a leak from Lalli who was fired fully 3 weeks beforehand.
Who MADE IT AVAILABLE to the Associated Press on 6 March. The investigating authorities or Rudy's defence team?
Brian S,
That is the exact same report that Dr. Lalli released 3 weeks beforehand.
Brian S,
I discussed that report with Nicki exactly three weeks ago.
Hi bpcl, yes that's why I said another reason. There was only one place the videos of the interior of the cottage, the murder scene still photo's and various other evidence leaks came from and that was the prosecutors office and as
I've posted before, in my opinion, Lalli was made a scapegoat and the gate closed long after all the damage had been done.
I know many people here believe that blurb about Mignini being a good man and an excellent prosecutor but there are also many people who are aware of his dubious prosecuting history and the pending charges against him etc and don't quite see things in the same way.
Oceania88,
It may be true what you are saying, but really, with all due respect, it has nothing really to do with this case. Today was one of the best days for the breaking of this case. The truth about what happened to Meredith Kercher is far more important than the reputation of a prosecutor.
The Associated Press is the backbone of the world's information system serving thousands of daily newspaper, radio, television and online customers with coverage in all media and news in all formats. It is the largest and oldest news organization in the world, serving as a source of news, photos, graphics, audio and video.... AP
It wasn't exactly a "leak". More like a megaphone.
Brian S,
Maybe so, but it was already in the public eye long before, and Dr. Lalli was fired right the day of or after its release. We discussed Dr. Lalli's report here and I specifically asked Nicki to comment on it.
Rudy Guede has a good set of lawyers. Up until this time they have held everything close to their vests. They are not just going to let Rudy Guede go hang himself by telling more lies.
bpcl | 03.27.08 - 12:00 am | #
Excellent point, Beep.
And Brian, I think it was the prosecution that released the report. But you've got a point about the timing, and we might want to congratulate Mignini on that. That report may have been used as pressure on Rudy. If there's a sexual assault charge, he's going to be charged, because it's his DNA on MK. But if he gives them more info that can further their investigation, and if he didn't assault MK, there's a better chance that Rudy can be cleared of that charge.
Maybe so, but it was already in the public eye long before, and Dr. Lalli was fired right the day of or after its release. We discussed Dr. Lalli's report here
Beep,
I know it was leaked before and I was around when it was discussed.
But you'll never convince me it's just a co-incidence that the day that the prosecution make an arrangement to speak to Rudy Guede, this report is MADE AVAILABLE to AP without so much as a squeak from Magnini.
Brian S,
Fair enough. However, even so, why can't you rejoice that this is a great day for Meredith Kercher and her family. The truth about her last moments on this planet are coming to light. The Kercher family have every right to expect that; it is personal to them. It is their daughter.
Rudy Guede has a good set of lawyers. Up until this time they have held everything close to their vests. They are not just going to let Rudy Guede go hang himself by telling more lies.
bpcl | 03.27.08 - 12:00 am | #
According to the prosecution he is not telling lies, that is the 'truth' that they wanted to hear and RG has delivered perfectly, so they're all talking about the 'truth'.. RG's 'truth'...the Prosecutors, RG's lawyers and RG, there are no lies, if you catch my drift.
why can't you rejoice that this is a great day for Meredith Kercher and her family.
Beep
Who says I'm not?
But the gears which produced today's information from Rudy were set in motion on the 6 march.
Who knows what's been going on behind closed doors for the last 3 weeks?
Guede's defense lawyer, Nicodemo Gentile, said Thursday that the coroner's report was "important, but partial" and that further tests were being carried out. He said he expected the court to rule in favor of his client's release.
Lawyers for Knox and Sollecito declined comment.
Prosecutors declined comment on the report's findings, saying only that the charge of sexual assault still stands...
But for how much longer?
Oceania88,
We have had over 5 blogs concerning this case. In all of the conversations we have had here, we have only been able to exclude Patrick Lumumba from not being involved in this crime. Many good people have come here to analyze this case. We have never been able to exclude Amanda Knox, Raffale Sollecito or Rudy Guede. Today, all three are still suspects in the murder of Meredith Kercher. And so nothing has changed really in that regard. Today, we have learned one more piece of this puzzle. All three of these people in custody have changed their stories have they not? You can say that all three are liars and cannot be trusted. Of the three, however, only Rudy Guede has come forward with some semblance of the truth. The other two have not, even though there is as you say, 'unsubstantiated evidence' that links them to the crime. In the days ahead, I am sure that there will be new revelations about this case. But today, finally, without question, one of these suspected individuals has stated something new, something that we have not heard before. The other two people in custody remain silent; unwilling to talk at all, even though everything that they have said before has been contradictory in nature. Maybe now, that Rudy Guede has spoken, maybe now, we might hear from them, about what their side of the story is.
Rudy Guede has good lawyers; so does both Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. They can speak now too. Hopefully they will reveal what is 'truth' and what is 'untruth'.
Brian S,
The wheels of justice are always slow and for good reason. We like the Police, are peering inside a labyrinth of lies and deception. This has been a complicated case. The motive has been difficult to determine. One looks for something sinister in these types of cases. I was never tied to the sexual violence motive. Someone so long ago said that this crime was simple; and it was. It was about jealousy and envy. It only became complicated when the perpetrator(s) decided to taint the crime scene. It behooves the Prosecutors and us here to go down every path, every idea, until we find the right one. This process is also known as, 'the search for the truth'. What did happen to Meredith Kercher?
But you'll never convince me it's just a co-incidence that the day that the prosecution make an arrangement to speak to Rudy Guede, this report is MADE AVAILABLE to AP without so much as a squeak from Magnini.
Brian S. | 03.27.08 - 12:56 am | #
I too have my concerns over the release times of certain 'evidence'
and have wondered about the co-incidence of the release of the bra clip evidence further implicating RG,which was suddenly found one month later. News of this evidence was released one day after a Matrix programme, which went out on national TV in Italy, in which serious doubts were raised about the bloody shoeprint belonging to RS, up to that point the bloody footprint was 'the' clincher
for putting RS at the scene, when that was cast into serious doubt they suddenly pulled something else out of the hat.
But you have to wonder how a team of 'forensic/scientific experts' could miss such a critical and relatively large piece of evidence in a room that was barely a few metres square, only 'finding' it one month later.
And if Rudy Guede's story does stand up, the case for premeditation only gets stronger. And that is something that the lawyers of both Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox should start considering.
I mean no dissrespect to the Kercher family, but how can anyone be so excited over what has been published in the recent information shared? As you may have already gathered only select information is being provided at this time. This information just happens to place the blame where many want that blame to be placed.
IMHO, the info shared thus far just creates more confusion, weather it is truth or lies is yet to be determined, but the hopes would be that the recent information could be the catalyst for more information, leading to the truth.
The breakthrough is yet to be determined.
The important point about today's version of events, true or false, is that Amanda and Raffaele now have a compelling reason to clarify their stories. Isn't that what really matters here?
As for Mignini the Man, the source of these supposed leaks, the timing of evidence release and so on, that is all part of the speculative sideshow. How you feel about it depends on where your loyalties lie. But isn't the goal to find out what happened? If Mignini is the guy who manages that, who cares? What harm is there in that?
Amanda and Raffaele have excellent legal defense teams, and so apparently does Rudy. Let's not worry too much about them being railroaded. I doubt anyone will let that happen. They will all have their day in court.
"IMHO, the info shared thus far just creates more confusion, weather it is truth or lies is yet to be determined, but the hopes would be that the recent information could be the catalyst for more information, leading to the truth.
The breakthrough is yet to be determined.
Newbie | 03.27.08 - 1:36 am | #"
How does it create more confusion?
As I just said, if nothing else, it will provoke more disclosure, so we should all be feeling good about that.
Please excuse my typos. It's getting late.
Newbie,
The Kercher family has every right do know every aspect of what happened to their daughter, no matter how difficult it may seem to us. It is personal; they have a right to know the 'how and why' she was murdered. Any new aspect that moves this case forward will bring them closer to that reality.
oceania88 | 03.27.08 - 1:03 am wrote: "so they're all talking about the 'truth'...there are no lies, if you catch my drift."
Oceania88, you are making too long of a jump to conclusions. During the 3 hours interrogation it was said Guede reconstructed his own truth about the night of the murder, not changing anything but now reporting elements that better identify the people who were in the house.
Many people believe there are serious problems with RG's testimony as we know it today. There is reason to believe that this story is being retold by the RG camp to negotiate the telling of the entire truth - a truth that seems very likely to involve 3 co-conspirators. So, it now comes down to, "how morbid were the motives?" Because of the way this is coming out, it is probably very bad.
Rudy's defense is saying, to the effect, that he is the only one telling the truth. Well, that's exactly what I would pay my lawyer to say. Perhaps we should interpret this as, "he's the only one even coming close to telling the truth."
What on earth gives you the idea that prosecutor Mignini thinks RG is telling the entire truth here? I think Mignini is merely satisfied that he now has what he can call an eyewitness to the murder. Everything else aside, that carries a hell of a lot of weight. We'll start narrowing in on the "truth" when the other two start talking again. Between RG and the forensics I think it's come down to a simple matter of time and that this thing may not even need to go to trial.
What should be very interesting is the reaction of the other two defense teams in the next couple of days, especially the smiling team. The implication of RS is HUGE! He puts the knife in his hands. You know they will have to say something, Papa is probably writhing to speak now. As SB says the ice has broken, I feel the flood will soon be upon us.
Rhonda,
It is a good day for Meredith. Rudy Guede is not going to disappoint her any longer.
How the recent shared information creates more confusion:
So far, what I've gathered is that Rudy is now walking into a house with Raffaele, Amanda and Meredith present, and already in conflict. Following the conflict without the death of Meredith, he just so happens to have an intimate encounter with Meredith then visits the bathroom whilst Raffaele and Amanda bust in, stab Meredith in her throat, then bail, knowing full well that Rudy knows them.
Oh yeah, that's right, maybe Amanda and Raffaele weren't there when Rudy arrived, but he made it in to meet with Meredith, and while he was in the bathroom Raffaele and Amanda bust in and throw the blow to Meredith. He didn't previuosly recognize Amanda nor Raffaele, but all of a sudden that's who it was.
Or..........
I could keep going, but it just keeps getting more confusing depending on what you read into the information shared thus far. Would you not agree.
I do agree Skep that we can only hope this "will provoke more disclosure" but if Amanda and Raffaele are innocent they have no more info to share, all they can do is disprove the current information being presented.
Fly by Night,
What if Rudy Guede is telling the truth and was in the bathroom as he says he was? Does that make him a co-conspirator to the murder? If we assume that both Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito went to the cottage to inflict harm on the person of Meredith, how would they have known that Rudy was there? They could not have known that. Rudy Guede's unexpected presence changed the entire landscape for them.
Newbie,
Both Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito could be facing murder with premeditation. That is now serious business.
bpcl
Are you conviced that the three being held are all responsible in some way for the murder of Meredith? That it's unlikely one or more may be completely innocent?
bpcl,
It has always been serious business, it did not just become serious business.
I do agree with you that the Kercher family does deserve to know the truth. It should end no other way.
But placing blame based on today's information regarding the recent revelation from Rudy does not provide the truth.
bpcl: Yes, there is still room to believe that RG could be a mere pawn in all this - unlikely, in my mind, but possible.
Good Evening everyone,
I hope you are all enjoying the show.
You are all right about one thing. We are going to be talking more. Apparently the high road, and not leaking things, and respecting people does not get you anything in italy.
We will be releasing a statement to the news wires tomorrow but I doubt it will be picked up.
Who has questions?
Lets get the obvious ones out of the way.
Who did it? Rudy.
Why? I don't know.
Were others present? I don't know and neither does amanda since she was not there.
Did Amanda have anything to do with this? not at all. She was with Raff that evening.
Would Amanda have stolen from Meredith? Never. She had thousands in her bank account and had withdrawn money, just like the other girls in the house just before this all happened, in order to pay her share of the rent.
Why is this report out? Because Migninin can't be in the supreme court to sway things so the only way he has to get to the judges in rome is through the press.
Evidence in the case? Rudy's handprint, in Merediths blood, on the door of the room, the inside, on the handle. Also on the door of the house.
Bleach reciepts for a clean up? they do not exist. There was never a clean up.
Stories that change from amanda? she was interrogated, and hit, and threatened and by the end of it, they were basically telling her to write things down, and she did it. It took her a full 2 weeks to come to her senses after the ordeal they put her through. She was mentally screwed with. Tortured. Physically and mentally.
Amandas handprint on merediths face? red herring. It is not in the medical examiners report and it does not exist.
Handprint on Merediths throat? It is real and it is from a large hand, like that of a basketball players.
I dunno but I bet if you placed a certain someones hand on that area, with the wounds being where they are, I bet it matches the wound that he has on his hand.
The knife...the one that is supposedly used in the murder is a straight edged knife and the one that inflicted the wounds on Meredith are from a serrated knife, so the report says. Mignini used our willingness to be quiet and our respect for the process to use this detail against us. He never corrected this error in the public domain because it helped him.
That is all changing now.
We will not be quiet, we no longer respect him or the process because it is flawed.
Watch the 48hrs show on April 12th to see just how flawed it is.
Mignini's butt is on the line. He has to look good in this case or else. His Supreme court hearing is the day after Amandas. She has not been charged, she is just a suspect. Mignini has been charged. He is more than a suspect and he is in deep for what he did to the judges in Florence.
So, ask me and if I know, I will tell you. I am done with amanda being accused of a crime she had no part of and I am done keeping quiet.
Newbie,
We have studied this case for a long time. The 'unsubstantiated' circumstantial evidence links all three to the cottage on the night of November 1st. None of them have an alibi that will stand up in court. I am convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that all three played a role in the demise of Meredith Kercher. Therefore, it is unlikely that they are innocent. The question that is critical right now for both Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox is to answer this statement by Rudy Guede. Today, you did not hear their lawyers for example, shouting out, 'My client is innocent of this crime. My client is being falsely accused. My client had nothing to do with this.' Sometimes in life, silence speaks volumes. Rudy Guede has stated that he did not kill Meredith. Amanda Knox has stated that she did not kill Meredith. I have never heard Raffaele Sollecito say that he did not kill Meredith. All three of them have a problem with credibility precisely because all three have lied so consistently.
Let's assume that Rudy Guede is telling the truth, which I do believe he is, with embellishment. He is still guilty of not reporting a crime to the Police and not aiding a victim, and running away from the scene of a crime. If Raffaele Sollecito yielded the knife and Amanda Knox was there, then they have a much more difficult struggle to overcome. Their actions imply premeditation with intent to kill and really, this is something which is far bigger than you and I. This has huge implications for both of them. I cannot stress that enough. I think their lawyers are stunned. Maybe both Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito did not tell them everything. I do not know. But today, I think they are stunned by the words that have come from Rudy Guede.
Chris
With all due respect, I'll just wait for the formal channels and trial for information.
You have never answered a single question I have asked, except about what high school Amanda would have gone to. You haven't even aknowledged my questions, or anyone else's for that matter.
So go ahead, please, say whatever you have to say. I'm all ears. But no more questions from me, unless you want to take the time to go back through other threads, retrieve the questions and answer them. I feel that, so far, the interaction with you and Goofy has been a waste of time.
I mean no disrespect. Just calling it like I see it.
Newbie | 03.27.08 - 2:12 am wrote: "But placing blame based on today's information regarding the recent revelation from Rudy does not provide the truth."
That's right - today's news comes as mere frosting on the cake we have been baking for the past 5 months. We still need to figure out how many candles to stick in it before we eat it, and don't forget we've been burning one for Meredith all along.
Chris:
What do you make of the text messages Guede sent to his friend while in Germany (a long time ago) implicating Rudy and Amanda when he had no idea this was being monitored.
Implicating Raffael and Amanda...
Fly By Night,
Thank you for that memory of Meredith. I am sure she would appreciate it greatly.
bpcl,
I beleive appologies may be due from you by (but most likely before) the end of this. You have implied many times over in the guilt of those that have not been proven to be guilty. You keep implying that Amanda and Raffaele have so much more to share, but if they are innocent (which I beleive they are) there is nothing more for them to share.
Chris, it is refreshing to see your post.
Newbie,
Read through past threads and you'll see that bpcl has been asked many times by Chris and Goofy to apologize for his views. He is entitled to them. Let's stick to the case rather than go after bpcl. It's been done.
As for the post from Chris Mellas, we have seen many like it before. It would be nice to have some genuine input, but I for one am not expecting any at this point. There is no real dialogue. If that changes, I'm all ears.
It would be refreshing to have some answers to the questions asked here, repeatedly.
Newbie: Amanda and Raffael don't remember anything, and that is creating huge problems for everyone.
Mignini's butt is on the line. He has to look good in this case or else. His Supreme court hearing is the day after Amandas. She has not been charged, she is just a suspect. Mignini has been charged. He is more than a suspect and he is in deep for what he did to the judges in Florence.
So, ask me and if I know, I will tell you. I am done with amanda being accused of a crime she had no part of and I am done keeping quiet.
Chris Mellas | 03.27.08 - 2:14 am | #
Chris,
Then I guess if Mignini's butt is on the line, Mignini will either be removed after the hearing, or make sure that all of the "i's" are dotted and the "t's" crossed in the investigation of Meredith's murder. As you said, he has to look good. I would think that microscope that will be on him would be an advantage to you in finding the truth of Amanda's innocence, if that is the case.
Skep -
"Chris
With all due respect, I'll just wait for the formal channels and trial for information.
You have never answered a single question I have asked, except about what high school Amanda would have gone to. You haven't even aknowledged my questions, or anyone else's for that matter.
So go ahead, please, say whatever you have to say. I'm all ears. But no more questions from me, unless you want to take the time to go back through other threads, retrieve the questions and answer them. I feel that, so far, the interaction with you and Goofy has been a waste of time.
I mean no disrespect. Just calling it like I see it.
"
Well said Skep....you have spoken for me in this regard also, saving me the trouble.
Newbie,
You are entitled to your opinion on this case. Like you, I study the case. Neither you nor I will have any say in its eventual outcome. What we say here are merely hypotheses. You believe in their innocence based on your knowledge of the case. I do not based on my knowledge of the case. It is just a difference of opinion. Many people here have corrected me on statements that I have made and I have always tried to own up to something that I have said that has been incorrect or false, or based on faulty analysis. I will admit that I am stunned too by the words that came from Rudy Guede today. I will admit that they were unexpected, and took me by surprise. But they are stunning nonetheless. Are they the 'truth'? I do not know, but they will be vetted, that is for sure. They will be scrutinized by good people here, you can count on that.
You posed the question to me about their innocence. I answered you with my reasons. I think that after today, this case has changed dramatically. More dramatically then either you or I can imagine. The stakes are enormous for both Amanda Knox and Raffaele Guede; that is all that I can really say at this moment.
"Then I guess if Mignini's butt is on the line, Mignini will either be removed after the hearing, or make sure that all of the "i's" are dotted and the "t's" crossed in the investigation of Meredith's murder. As you said, he has to look good. I would think that microscope that will be on him would be an advantage to you in finding the truth of Amanda's innocence, if that is the case.
Rhonda | 03.27.08 - 2:39 am | #"
Good point, Rhonda. I don't see how framing two innocent people would make him look good.
Just one more reason to do it right.
SB,
I am tired of your whining. Honestly, do you ever say anything else? You want your questions answered? Then YOU go get them and ask away.
If I know the answer, I will tell you. No holds bared. If not then respect those that do want answers.
SB,
Quel jour! Je suis fatigué de tout cela. Ayez-vous un bon reste de la nuit!
"Good point, Rhonda. I don't see how framing two innocent people would make him look good."
Because he implicated them in the beginning.
Because he had a bunch of black persons hair in merediths hand and amanda, working for a black person and a text that said "see you later"
So he had it wrapped up. Remember that? Mignini implicating patrick amanda and raff before DNA was even back?
Chris:
What do you make of the text messages Guede sent to his friend while in Germany (a long time ago) implicating Rudy and Amanda when he had no idea this was being monitored.
As far as I know, it does not exist. BUT, Mignini has witheld alot of evidence from us regarding him. But again, it goes against everything he has said up till this day. Rudy has also said that Amanda was not there...so what about that?
Chris:
So what was it - was Amanda with Raffael all night the night of the murder, or by herself? We now have an eyewitness who is pointing the finger at Raffael as being the murderer, not to mention also saying he heard Amanda's voice.
What will Amanda's position be in court next Tuesday. Will it still be that she was in a deep sleep at Raffaels and that he must have quietly snuck out and murdered Meredith, if that's what the evidence indicates? Or do they now intend to say that they were, without a doubt, together with each other at Raff's for the entire night.
"SB,
I am tired of your whining. Honestly, do you ever say anything else? You want your questions answered? Then YOU go get them and ask away.
If I know the answer, I will tell you. No holds bared. If not then respect those that do want answers.
Chris Mellas | 03.27.08 - 2:50 am | #"
I have lots to say, actually. But you never answered my questions. So I'll just wait and keep note of your continued unwillingness to go the extra mile and answer them. It speaks volumes. If that makes me a whiner, so be it.
If others have questions, they are free to ask.
Your answer to Rhonda makes no sense.
But now I have a pretty good idea where the rumors of conspiracy and torture are coming from. So you have inadvertantly answered at least one question--however, it wasn't on my list.
P.S. If you are tired of what you call my whining ,then don't read my posts.
Fly by Night, bpcl, and any others ready to claim others guilt.
If any of these three are released will you believe that he or she is innocent? Or do you need him or her to be proven without a reasonable doubt to be innocent?
Because he implicated them in the beginning.
Because he had a bunch of black persons hair in merediths hand and amanda, working for a black person and a text that said "see you later"
So he had it wrapped up. Remember that? Mignini implicating patrick amanda and raff before DNA was even back?
Chris Mellas | 03.27.08 - 2:54 am | #
Then it would appear that Amanda's attorney will have a lot to work with at the hearing. I would certainly think it would be more productive then Amanda's last hearing.
Chris Mellas | 03.27.08 - 2:54 am wrote: "So he had it wrapped up. Remember that? Mignini implicating patrick amanda and raff before DNA was even back?"
Chris: argumentum ad hominem is not going to win your case.
"Newbie,
Read through past threads and you'll see that bpcl has been asked many times by Chris and Goofy to apologize for his views. He is entitled to them. Let's stick to the case rather than go after bpcl. It's been done."
SB,
I really have no idea what your problem is. BPCL and I have come to terms and I think that he is a respectful person, unlike you.
I don't think that BPCL, or you, are on the right track but then you all have no idea what is going on...you only know what is in the public domain which is either wrong or embelished upon for the most part.
I am now opening up. No longer keeping quiet with the details. So this is your chance for a peek at the inside.
FBN
your point?
I was just bringing up a fact. One that is the root of this, like it or not.
Newbie,
It is not up to me to decide whether or not any of the three people in custody are guilty or not of the crime of murdering Meredith Kercher; that is up to the courts of law to determine. I have my opinions on the case. I only want justice to be given to the Kercher family. You must understand, it is their daughter; it is personal; they have a right to know what happened to her down to her final moment. This blog is dedicated to finding the truth about what happened to her. We are not here to decide whether or not someone is guilty or not. I understand that there is a feeling of hurt because in our analysis we are touching the lives of people who may or may not have been involved. But you must understand, this is a search for what happened to her. You must let us go about doing that without finding fault.
Chris,
How far apart are the real alibi's of Amanda and Raffaele?
let me expand upon my post for those that cant follow, SB.
""Good point, Rhonda. I don't see how framing two innocent people would make him look good."
Because he implicated them in the beginning.
Because he had a bunch of black persons hair in merediths hand and amanda, working for a black person and a text that said "see you later"
So he had it wrapped up. Remember that? Mignini implicating patrick amanda and raff before DNA was even back?"
He said it was all done, wrapped up, whatever. Then it all unraveled. He didn't have it wrapped up at all. Then he got a summons to appear at court to be charged, and he was, and now he has to answer for it. These same judges are reviewing another of his cases that is a less than stellar example of keen investigation.
One builds on the other...
Newbie -
"If any of these three are released will you believe that he or she is innocent?"
Sure, if they've adequately answered the evidence agianst them. The fact is...up to now they have 'consistently' failed to do that.
"I beleive appologies may be due from you by (but most likely before) the end of this. You have implied many times over in the guilt of those that have not been proven to be guilty. You keep implying that Amanda and Raffaele have so much more to share, but if they are innocent (which I beleive they are) there is nothing more for them to share.
Actually they won't, as whatever the outcome the suspects have brought this all upon themselves by their lack of co-operation and their numerous lies and inconsistencies. They certainly 'do' have something mmore to share, since their stories don't match at 'least' one of them is lying....and the constant change in 'detail' in both their accounts shows them 'both' to be dishonest. Whilst there is plenty of evidence showing they have a case for which to answer, your defence of them amounts to nothing more then 'blind faith'....or is it something deeper? I would like to see your sentiments for AK and RS extended to Rudy Guede however, some 'uniformity' would be nice.
Chris,
How far apart are the real alibi's of Amanda and Raffaele?
Newbie
They are in line 100% as they were in the beginning.
The only time they supposedly diverged was during the time of interrogation by the police, when they were told lies and pitted against eachother and beaten, etc.
As for SB's statement regarding this, We have a complaint lodged against the dept for this, as well as a complaint regarding all the leaks...you hear tons about all that and see the results of it all the time.
Newbie: DNA tests have repeatedly demonstrated that there are innocent people in jail and guilty people walking the streets. The lay person will come to a conclusion of innocence or guilt using an ounce of fact and a pound of either faith or gut intuition.
While most people here may have gut intuitions (or simple faith that the Murder of Meredith will not go unsolved) any and all theories are tested before a very large panel diverse opinion where the sole purpose is to somehow get at the truth - whatever that may be. If crow is served let crow be eaten, but there are some very smart people hanging out here and if you somehow think this is a let's-hang-Amanda party then you need to go back and read through 5 months of blogging.
bpcl,
I really can't figure you out. You came to terms with Chris before, and in reading those posts back then I gained a lot of respect for you at that time. But in your recent posts I didn't feel the same. As I felt you were placing blame based on Rudy's claims, or at least those claims that have been shared thus far. You've continually brought about evedince over the last few days that has not been proven to be pertinint and or fully accurate. (Yes, you can place both Amanda and Raffaele in the cottage at some point in time, they were there when the police showed up and Amanda lived there when she wasn't with Raffaele.)
I could keep going, but I'd rather back up and gain more respect for you as this works itself out.
Chris Mellas | 03.27.08 - 3:06 am | "I am now opening up. No longer keeping quiet with the details. So this is your chance for a peek at the inside."
Hi Chris. Does Amanda know anyone by the name of "Jovanovic" (maybe he's Italian, maybe he's Serbian / Yugoslavian, maybe something else)? Maybe not "know" as in best friends, maybe just a neighbourhood acquaintance. Specifically, did she speak with a person by this name on the evening of Nov.1? Maybe she knew him by a nickname.
Thanks.
-
Chris wrote: FBN - your point?
The point is that argumentum ad hominem is a well known folly, and you're engaging in it.
Chris,
Earlier you had said that you had reason to celebrate and were in fact going to do that. Was the finding of Amanda's sweatshirt the cause for that celebration or was it other good news??
Chris:
So what was it - was Amanda with Raffael all night the night of the murder, or by herself? We now have an eyewitness who is pointing the finger at Raffael as being the murderer, not to mention also saying he heard Amanda's voice.
What will Amanda's position be in court next Tuesday. Will it still be that she was in a deep sleep at Raffaels and that he must have quietly snuck out and murdered Meredith, if that's what the evidence indicates? Or do they now intend to say that they were, without a doubt, together with each other at Raff's for the entire night.
Fly by Night
FBN,
Amanda was never anywhere else but at Raffs house. We have NEVER said otherwise. Amanda has never said otherwise, while coherent and not under extreme conditions.
As for a position on April 1st? Nothing changes for us...why would it since it is thr truth. Not that we will be allowed to speak of it. The April 1st hearing is not about evidence. It is about rights and procedure and if they were observed. It is not an evidentiary hearing.
Chris,
Earlier you had said that you had reason to celebrate and were in fact going to do that. Was the finding of Amanda's sweatshirt the cause for that celebration or was it other good news??
Rhonda
Rhonda,
We were celebrating our anniversary AND we had heard a rumor that Rudy was going to confess.
We were hoping that this nightmare was about to be over.
Kermit,
RE: Hi Chris. Does Amanda know anyone by the name of "Jovanovic"
I dont know. I have only seen the name here.
If I miss a question, tell me. This is going pretty fast and I am scanning the previous posts to see if I miss one but everytime I look I see that I am more behind.
Chris Mellas | 03.27.08 - 3:29 am |"RE: Hi Chris. Does Amanda know anyone by the name of "Jovanovic" ... I dont know. I have only seen the name here."
Thanks for your reply. Actually, we didn't dig it up, but it comes from Frank at Perugia-Shock
-
Mr Mellas -
"They are in line 100% as they were in the beginning."
Alright. I'll bite and ask...although it's rare I change my mind when I have decided on an action. They are 100% the same as what? The first account made by RS of that night to Kate Mansey in a 40 minute interview with Kate Mansey of the Sunday Mirror? Or, the second different account made by RS to police when first interviewed at the police station? Or, the third account made by RS to police where he admitted the second to be 'BS'? What did both of them do on the day of the murder Mr Mellas...the morning, evening and night of it?
Did Amanda take a shower in the cottage the morning after the murder....yes or no?
Did she inform RS of the state of the cottage by cell or by mouth after walking to his apartment?
Why did she not at this point call police?
Did they, or did they not attempt to break down Meredith's door?
Why did Amanda not inform the police when they arrived that her keys could open Meredith's door?
Has Amanda ever suffered severe memory loss before or after that day?
Was it known to you that Amanda was a toker and how long for?
Those will do for now.
Chris:
What are Amanda's and Raffaels alibis? I only ask because I don't think anyone here, but you perhaps, knows the answer to this question.
Chris: Let me put it this way - can Amanda and Raffael account for each other's whereabouts the night of Meredith's murder?
Fly by Night,
I have been here reading from the beginning, but only recently posting. I've been obsessed with this case from the moment I heard Amandas mom was flying out to see her. I've read most everything on the three major (english language) blogs that I know of. And everything I can find in English from the news.
I am not so new to this, just new to posting.
Chris:
Are you aware if Amanda wore jeans at any point on the evening of Nov.1?
In principle she was wearing a dress (the one supposedly caught by the CCTV image - not the periodistic reconstruction, but the images that may be part of Mignini's evidence). According to press reports, Police have that dress and have examined it ... Did she turn over to Police (or did Italian police actually take in) a dress/skirt?
Does Amanda recognise that dress/skirt as being the one she wore on Nov. 1?
Did she change to jeans at any point?
Does Amanda recognise the sweatshirt which was taken in in the most recent ILE inspection as a piece of clothing she wore on Nov.1?
When did the sweatshirt return to the house?
She she wash it on the morning of Nov.2 (at home or anywhere else)?
-
Chris, you should get some sleep. It's like midnight-0-thirty or something - check you later.
FBN -
Somehow, I don't think Mr Mellas is going to be doing much sleeping tonight.
Did Amanda take a shower in the cottage the morning after the murder....yes or no?
YES
Did she inform RS of the state of the cottage by cell or by mouth after walking to his apartment?
He was there so he knew, previous to that, she caled him and said something was up.
Why did she not at this point call police? She didnt knowhow, she called us and we didnt know how to either. so she called raff and I think he called his sister who is in the police. I think they also called the police and I am not sure which happened first.
Did they, or did they not attempt to break down Meredith's door?
They did and were unsuccessful at it. They managed a crack and thats it.
Why did Amanda not inform the police when they arrived that her keys could open Meredith's door?
Likely because she didnt know BUT I am not sure that is even true! I think that is another press/leak bs.
Has Amanda ever suffered severe memory loss before or after that day?
Nope, nor had she ever been beaten or put through such an ordeal. Though psycologists state that what happened to her is definitely in line with the results of someone experiencing that.
Was it known to you that Amanda was a toker and how long for? I had an idea that she had tried it, she is quite the peacenick hippie so it would not be out of the realm of reason. For how long? maybe a year or so. She had been in school for quite some time and not living at home so it is not like I knew her every move. This was her 3rd year away from home.
Amandas and raffs alabi?
They were together all night, then amanda went home, took a shower and when she got out of the shower, she noticed a drop of blood on the floor mat. Then she noticed another and started to worry, called meredith and the other room mates and spoke to all but meredith. Continued to call her, was worried that she maybe was hurt and left to the hospital or the like.
Then went and got dressed, then noticed more messed with the house and called us. Then called raff, and I covered the rest already.
We were on the phone with her when the cops broke down the door.
We heard them describe, in italian, what they saw and we heard raff translate. Amanda was off and on crying, in shock definitely.
At first they thought it was a dismembered foot. amanda incorrectly translated it as them finding an animal foot, then raff corrected her. Then they went on to say that they found a body, blood, etc.
The first thing out of her mouth after a while...we were all at a loss and just listening at this point, was "I could have been home" sensing her own mortality, I think, then she started crying again and then she realized that perhaps, had she been home, maybe she could have helped and then cried even more.
Then the cops had questions and we asked her to call us as soon as she could and hung up.
Let me clarify this because it looks terrible...
Did she inform RS of the state of the cottage by cell or by mouth after walking to his apartment?
He was there so he knew, previous to that, she caled him and said something was up.
He was there as in, he showed up after amanda called him because of the things she had found.
Are you aware if Amanda wore jeans at any point on the evening of Nov.1?
I have no idea.
In principle she was wearing a dress (the one supposedly caught by the CCTV image - not the periodistic reconstruction, but the images that may be part of Mignini's evidence). According to press reports, Police have that dress and have examined it ... Did she turn over to Police (or did Italian police actually take in) a dress/skirt?
There was a closed door meeting by the judges and council and this CCTV deal was put to rest. There is no CCTV footage.
Anything the police have is because they got it from her house. She had nothing with her when the house was closed down for investigation. Hence the need for underwear, as I have said in the past.
Does Amanda recognise that dress/skirt as being the one she wore on Nov. 1?
She is in prison, how would she? Not like they take things to her in there.
Did she change to jeans at any point?
Dunno
Does Amanda recognise the sweatshirt which was taken in in the most recent ILE inspection as a piece of clothing she wore on Nov.1?
Refer to prison note.
When did the sweatshirt return to the house?
I was not aware that it left.
She she wash it on the morning of Nov.2 (at home or anywhere else)?
Did she wash it or anything else? I don't know.
When I see her, I don't talk about the case. I cherish my 1 hr I get with her and the last thing I want to do is talk to her about this mess.
Mr Mellas -
Thank you for answering those questions Mr Mellas. A few more if you don't mind.
What did Amanda and Raf do together on the day of Nov 1st?
What films did they watch and when?
Did they both turn off their phones at the same time time...where and why did this happen?
On Nov 1st did Amanda have dinner/lunch with Meredith?
On the morning of Meredith being found...what was Amanda washing...was it normal for her to wash clothes on high temps and to do so with bleech? Why was she washing clothes and showering in a house that had blood in it, showed obvious signs of a break-in and which she claims she was afraid to be in? What else did she do during the 40 mins she was in the house?
Considering comments made by Meredith's friends and family...in what condition exactly was the relationship between Amanda and Meredith?
Serrated knife aside, how do you account for the DNA of both girls being on the knife found in RS's kitchen?
Have you read the translations of Rudy's 'diary' on this blog and if so...what are your thoughts on it and him?
What is your 'true' opinion of RS?
Thank You.
Chris: Let me put it this way - can Amanda and Raffael account for each other's whereabouts the night of Meredith's murder?
FBN
Yes, it is easy too...
telling the truth accomplishes this task.
From the moment we were talking to her on the phone while they were breaking down the door, the story was the same. As I have said before, the only time it changed was when they went through the police ordeal.
Amanda had spoken of Patrick before all this and always said nice things about him. I had actually wanted to meet him had I made it over to visit. She always said he was nice and funny.
I can't imagine what they did to her to make her say things about him.
They, the police, will be brought to account for the crap they put her through.
Chris, when the police issued the "case closed" quote, they knew it wasn't closed. They were hunting Rudy. Mignini doesn't need to convict Amanda or Rafaelle if Rudy is the real murderer. If it was his hair under Meredith's fingernails, if you know that, it will come out in court, just as the serrated knife detail will come out in court, if it even gets that far. If Amanda is innocent, then it will all come out eventually.
And newbie, no one needs to apologize for an opinion or speculation on a case known to the public, based on common information. This is a place to discuss things. Everyone is free to discuss and express. If Amanda and Rafaelle are innocent, and they go free, we will all be happy.
Chris:
Your thoughts on why Rudy would stab Meredith in the neck, then continue to remain - now to help her, risking getting caught after the fact with the knife right there and his prints on it?
Regarding the unflushed toilet. If Amanda locked the door after her first visit to the cottage the morning after (she showered and got the mop) leaving the toilet unflushed, how do you reckon that on the second visit back with Raff that the toilet is now flushed?
Chris, it's good to read a greater openness about the case from you.
I notice that you've now stated categorically that Amanda was "beaten" in her interrogation. Do you know if the interrogation was videotaped, or how was it recorded? Will Amanda's lawyers be pressing charges about this alleged assault?
I also notice that you've claimed that Sollecito was also beaten. Do you know why neither he nor his lawyers have mentioned this, before now?
Finally, I asked you a question before which you couldn't answer because of its pertinence to the case, and I wonder if you might revisit it at this point: Was Rudy Guede in the house prior to the night of the murder?
What did Amanda and Raf do together on the day of Nov 1st?
I dunno offhand.
What films did they watch and when?
Refer to above
Did they both turn off their phones at the same time time...where and why did this happen?
From what I hear they did. I could speculate but as for her answer to this? I dunno. I would think to have privacy, to not be woke up at night? They were both together...
On Nov 1st did Amanda have dinner/lunch with Meredith?
I would have to refer to an account that amanda gave to me before this al happened and I dont have it here. if I reember correctly I think they did.
They did socialize together on occasion and so I dont see this as being out of the realm of possibility, though I dont remember offhand.
On the morning of Meredith being found...what was Amanda washing...was it normal for her to wash clothes on high temps and to do so with bleech? Why was she washing clothes and showering in a house that had blood in it, showed obvious signs of a break-in and which she claims she was afraid to be in? What else did she do during the 40 mins she was in the house?
I don't think she was washing anything though I may be wrong on that. I have not asked her.
When she walked into the house, aside from the door not being locked, there was not much that was messed up. The one bathroom was unflushed, the other had two drops of blood that she only noticed after getting out of the shower. Her room was not messed with (aside from being a bit of a mess like it tends to be) and she had not snooped around the rest of the house since she was not suspicious at this time. Only after she got out of the shower did she notice thigs. Only after she tried to see into merediths room from the window in the other room did she notice the broken window.
This is when she freaked out thinking that perhaps she was not alone in the house, especially after the BM in the toilet had disappeared. (apparently it sank and could no longer be seen)
Considering comments made by Meredith's friends and family...in what condition exactly was the relationship between Amanda and Meredith?
They were on good terms. Amanda liked her, said she was very nice and sophisticated and good hearted.
They had even gone to the chocolate festival from what I gather and that was just before all this happened.
Serrated knife aside, how do you account for the DNA of both girls being on the knife found in RS's kitchen?
How? Dunno, I think it is nothing more than a speck of dried skin cells, like we all have flaking off us all the time. I am sure that I have some on me from amanda right now, since I was in her room earlier at the house here in seattle. Had she come home from Italy, I bet I would be able to go find, in her room here, dna from all her room mates. That being said, they did make food that night so amanda had contact with utencils.
Have you read the translations of Rudy's 'diary' on this blog and if so...what are your thoughts on it and him?
Bits and pieces only and from what I have seen, dunno what to think of him.
I find his poetry about her disturbing though.
What is your 'true' opinion of RS?
Raff, I think, is likely a cool person that I hope to meet soon.
I feel sorry that he got roped into this mess. He came to help amanda
and now he is in prison fighting for his freedom.
Chris, it's good to read a greater openness about the case from you.
I notice that you've now stated categorically that Amanda was "beaten" in her interrogation. Do you know if the interrogation was videotaped, or how was it recorded?
I don't know but we aim to find out.
We have only been given a "rough transcript" and it is curiously devoid of questions. They tell her things, they dont ask...and if she denies, what amanda told me, they would hit