A Terrible, Significant month in the Perugia Murder

Two things are happening this month, for those who are still concerned with the brutal Perugia murder.
Firstly, Amanda Knox has finally done what we all expected, given a little time to get organised and deal with outstanding legal complications.
She signed the big book deal, no doubt to be followed by the even bigger Hollywood movie with someone like Carey Mulligan in the starring Knox role, and a floppy haired actor like Zac Efron or Daniel Radcliffe playing Raffaele.
Not necessarily meaning to sound cynical, one has to hand it to you Amanda Knox for brokering a deal with powerhouse literary agent, Robert Barnett, whose stellar client list includes Barack Obama, Tony Blair, George W Bush, Bill Clinton and Sarah Palin.
This is big money talking.
I’m far more concerned, however, with the other thing that is happening this month, and that is Meredith Kercher’s birthday
On 28th December she would have turned 26.
My daughter has just turned 24, and we had a celebration.

But for the Kerchers it will not only be a bleak, dark Christmas, the fourth dark one since Meredith was slaughtered.
But that sharp quite unimaginable pain will continue to 28th December, what is sometimes described as an anniversary reaction.
Amanda Knox’s literary triumph can hardly have helped.
It could only serve to rub salt into their bleeding wounds.
Wounds which will of course never really heal. They will continue to fester until the Kercher family feel that the full guilt or innocence of Knox and Sollecito has been established beyond all reasonable doubt and the case is forever closed.

Whichever side of the fence one is on, it is Meredith’s ferocious, merciless murder that must remain people’s primary focus, alongside the quest for justice.
And this bittersweet month, which falls just after the anniversary of her savage death on November 1st, is also the time when she would have been celebrating the gift of life for another year.
It is all so terribly, woefully sad.

Follow me on Twitter

  


286 Responses to “A Terrible, Significant month in the Perugia Murder”

  1. Liz Says:

    room? Sorry my messages keep getting sent before I finish.

  2. Clive Wismayer Says:

    Liz

    ‘They all had met and I believed smoked pot together at least once. Guede was a dealer so maybe there was a connection there too. Possible Guede even bragged about his break-in to his friends. Probable that most of his peers knew he was a shady character, Perugia is a small town.’

    All the boys from downstairs gave evidence and none of them said anything about such a disclosure by Guede.   I cannot think it is good for business to brag to potential future victims of your dishonest propensities.   One thing going for your small town idea is, though, that Tramontano knew Guede and banned him from the Merlin, where Meredith spent Halloween, so some sort of rumour might have reached her circle that way – but I just don’t buy it.   No one said a word at trial and neither the boys nor Meredith’s friends had any reason to keep such information to themselves.

  3. Clive Wismayer Says:

    And the boys did not mention to the police any suspicions about Guede after the murder, as might have been expected had he been bragging to them about his burglaries (and his MO).

  4. Clive Wismayer Says:

    This is the conclusion on the bra clasp guven in the Conti-Vecchiotti report (available in full on the IIP site):

    ITEM 165B (BRA CLASPS)

    Relative to Item 165B (bra clasps), we find that the technical analysis is not reliable for the following reasons:

    1. There does not exist evidence which scientifically confirms the presence of supposed flaking cells on the item;

    2. There was an erroneous interpretation of the electrophoretic profile of the autosomic STRs;

    3. There was an erroneous interpretation of the electrophoretic profile relative to the Y chromosome;

    4. The international protocols for inspection, collection, and sampling of the item were not followed;

    5. It cannot be ruled out that the results obtained derive from environmental contamination and/or contamination in some phase of the collection and/or handling of the item.

  5. Clive Wismayer Says:

    Liz. Aren’t you being a little hasty in dismissing the possibility of deliberate contamination and/or plain lies? Let’s remember they failed to test the bra itself in a number of promising locations (see Hendry above) and went back to pick up the clasp 7 weeks later amid great theatricality. And Stefanoni was economical with the actualitē at trial on some rather important points.

  6. Liz Says:

    No Clive they were excited about the clasp find for good reason and would have been equally excited if they found it on day one. The clasp had been wrestled with, bent out of shape and cut off. A reasonable place to find DNA. I doubt they had reason to put their reputations and careers on the line. They did make a serious error though, they put it in plastic and it rusted.

  7. Liz Says:

    Chris, I have a problem with the foot cover theory for two reasons. First it would have to be verified that in Filomena’s room people walked in and out with no thought. Secondly for something to track with a foot cover cover or a sock there needs to be a track, that is more than one spot. It makes more sense to me that the drop of blood/DNA came of the hand of someone who had just scrubbed, one drop is possible as rest could be contained in a sleeve.

  8. MrsM Says:

    Frank said “Yet Micheli went an entirely different route, one not supported by evidence, only supposition. This suggests he was predisposed to his conclusion and found a way to make it work, even if it wasn’t even remotely logical or consistent with the evidence.”

    Funny that “Michelli” could easily be replaced by “Magnini” in this comment.

  9. MrsM Says:

    Sharon,

    I don’t understand why you would write an article saying that the focus should be to remember what happened to Meredith, especially during these months of Nov and Dec which for sure are painful months for the Kerchers (the murder, Merediths birthday, Christmas), but once again draw everyones attention, “First, Amanda…..”to things about Amanda that you think she is doing wrong and making her sound evil to boot. ex “Amanda Knox’s literary triumph can hardly have helped. It could only serve to rub salt into their bleeding wounds.”

    I have yet to see you write ONE WORD in Amanda’s favor, yet you claim not to be an Amanda-hater.

    Amanda did not dictate the time of her trail, how long it would take, or when it would end. She did not plan the Oct 3rd release date. It just happened without her having any control. She has now been home for over 2 months (you call it a little time) had time to spend with family, return to her life and readjust. As a journalist, you should know that True Crime is usually written as soon after it happens as possible to have any real impact.

    Two things here: 1) you seem to be faulting Amanda for signing with a publisher in the month of December, as though it is to purposely hurt the Kerchers 2) you have gone off track in what seems to have been an effort to show some sympathy for the Kerchers and remind us of Merediths death but continue to combine that with Amandas faults.

    If as you say, Merediths murder must remain the primary focus..and you really mean that…then I challenege you to write an article just about Meredith without mentioning Amanda Knox or Rafaelle Sollecito and tell all the bloggers not to mention them in the comments.

    I know Mr. Kercher is writing a book about Meredith, but so is Amanda Knox writing a book about herself and what happened, yet Amanda is always the primary focus of your articles.

  10. Clive Wismayer Says:

    Liz

    My recollection of Massei’s account of Stefanoni’s evidence is that they saw the clasp on day 1 but, on the device I am using, I cannot readily access the PDF to give you the page reference. I shall do so shortly.

    Meanwhile, what do you make of Conti-Vecchiotti’s conclusion?

  11. Clive Wismayer Says:

    Liz

    If you look at Massei p.266 you will see the clasp was both seen and photographed on 02/11/2007. Stefanoni knew the clasp was there and seen on that date – she told Profazio, head of the flying squad, as Massei records at p.102 and gave an embarrassing and garbled explanation of why she did not retrieve it in her evidence, which is also in Massei but which I have not had time to find (I have no doubt you will find a way to make me do so, if so inclined).

    So, it was not a triumphant discovery on 18/12/07 but a sloppy and belated retrieval of a key piece of evidence (pretty sure we can agree about that!) and your anti-conspiracy theory needs to take account of this.

    All of which is not directly relevant to the court appointed experts’ conclusions, save insofar as Stefanoni’s negligence increased the likelihood of contamination.

  12. Clive Wismayer Says:

    One more thing, Liz is that the clasp was probably not cut off. Napia5 seems to be right about this. There should have been Raffaele’s DNA at various places on the bra (and elsewhere) if he was manually involved with it.

    See http://injusticeinperugia.blogspot.com/2011/04/how-enraged-killer-ripped-victims-bra.html

  13. Liz Says:

    Agreed that was a mistake on her part , and thank you for that information. It doesn’t mean that anything was planted just human error. I was posting on another of Sharon’s articles and she asked that we take a break as someone may have sent her a nasty virus so I won’t post anymore until I hear everything is o.k.

  14. Clive Wismayer Says:

    Me too.

  15. Sharon Feinstein Says:

    liz everything is OK now, thanks for asking

  16. Clive Wismayer Says:

    Liz

    Can I ask which of these you still ‘believe in’:

    1 the kithen knife
    2 the bra clasp
    3 the staging of the burglary
    4 the clean up

    and what other major indicators of guilt you identify?

  17. Liz Says:

    Clive where do I begin. The cell phones shut within minutes of each other. RS would not say that AK was with him all evening. The shower story in the stone cold cottage. Why not just freshen up with a bidet? Right she never used one on a regular basis. The odd way they both orchestrated someone else finding out what was behind the locked door while they waited in the kitchen. The middle of the night call to her mother , when she had no reason to be so alarmed yet. RS’s similiar call to his sister. It appears that he called the police after the postal police found them. Some

  18. Clive Wismayer Says:

    Some more message on the way hopefully. Great stuff. Please keep it comimg (but remember also my 4 points…)

  19. Liz Says:

    There goes my computer sending off early again. Amanda’s lamp found in Merediths room. It was the only source of light in A’s room so Guede could not have known of its existence in the dark . The staged moving of the body and who would remove the bra after the fatal attack or have reason to. The staged break-in. I recently read that the rock could have been thrown from the inside and sill implant glass in the closed shutters. T,he lack of evidence of Guede in that room, the spot of MK’s blood and DNA in that room. Someone went back in Filomena’s room why? I already said ther is no evidence that it was tracked in. The lack of DNA of Guede’s in the bathroom not on the the blood streak in the Bidet. That is where Ak’s DNA is found.I have explained why this is huge for me as I don’t believe if Guede was rinsing it would be there. The foot print is a better match for Sollecito , there has been nothing to discount this. Large blood drop of A’s on tap not from ears. The evidence that there were right footprints but not left could be from cleaning. The lack of prints on the outside door handle of M’s room, The locked door unlocked odd story . The odd detached behavior , not buying the scared story. She said she was there after 2 hours 45 minutes. She was relaxed enough to stretch ,and no the police did not hit her. i have to sign off now but will add more later

  20. Liz Says:

    The kitchen knife is less clear. There were only 5 cells I believe on it and I really have no firm opinion on this one. I managed to get into a debate on another of Sharon’s blogs about the knife. The question had been asked why would RS take and return the murder weapon to his apartment. I came up with a scenario where it may have not been taken to the cottage for any other intent other to play a prank or scare M. Only after it was used to torment M was it returned. The idea being that S knew it could be looked for as it belonged to the landlord. With this possibility it still did not have to be the murder weapon ,but could have been used as a secondary weapon. So in answer to your question I am more willing to let go of the knife, as I have no way of understanding what the original DNA findings meant. I also wanted to add the evidence of multiple attackers as noted by the almost non existence of defense wounds. She appeared to have been restrained. As well the over kill and the evidence of torture like wounds give weight to multiple attackers with a very different motive than a lone wolf burglar/rapist. I recently watched RS’s interview in Italian on Italian T.V. It was a fluff interview and he was only asked 2 somewhat pointed questions. One was did he use drugs. He answered that he would smoke one joint on occasion. He did the tell tale raised eyebrow when lying move. Why lie like that when everyone knows that is not the truth especially in his first televised interview? The second question was did he touch the bra He would not say no, it was the strangest thing.

  21. Clive Wismayer Says:

    Thank Liz

    I am taking all that away for processing (which means dumping it into IIP and seeing what’s left after the piranha have had a go at it). There is a thread there called ‘I still think they did it’ and you can, if so inclined, follow the debate (or better, join in as you can defend your position better than I can).

    One thing I will try to do is group the points thematically. I think the phones being turned off are linked to the knife and respectfully suggest that you sort of can’t drop the knife and keep the phones. I mean if you’re off for a post Halloween student-style laugh at someone else’s expense there is no need to go off radar is there?

    I agree that there is something not quite right with Raffaele. He did not give evidence in his own defence and he also told a very unwise lie when confronted with the knife evidence, at a juncture when he was not under interrogation. I have had clients like that. You have to sit on them to make them shut up.

    I shall return.

    Regards

  22. Liz Says:

    Thanks Clive, I really didn’t mean to completely discount the knife, it just seems so difficult to use it can’t be tested again and I think only one person saw the result. As well they could have been out looking for drugs when they ran into Guede.

  23. Clive Wismayer Says:

    I think you should discount the knife Liz, based on the conclusions of Conti-Vecchiotti (not to mention the inherent improbability of the while scenario of setting off with the knife in the first place). I know I keep going on about their report but you and I are not experts (well, I’m not) and they were appointed by the court. It did not take them long to completely discredit Stefanoni’s methods and there is no shortage of other reasons to question her competence and integrity.

    Anyway, on the knife they concluded (I have cherry picked):

    ‘in relation to sample B (knife blade: identification code 47330), based on the considerations previously stated about the electrophoretic graph which shows peaks below the 50 RFU threshold and allele imbalance (Hb=φa/φb >0.60) indicative of a Low Copy Number sample (LCN), taking into account that in this specific case none of the recommendations from the International Scientific Community relating to the treatment of Low Copy Number samples were followed, we do not accept the conclusions about the certain attribution of the profile detected in Sample B to the victim Meredith Susanna Cara Kercher since the genetic profile, as obtained, is unreliable in that it is not supported by scientifically valid analytical procedures.

    Neither, as previously explained, can it be excluded that the result obtained from this sample may derive from contamination phenomena occurring at any stage of the collection and/or handling and/or analytical procedures performed.’

  24. Liz Says:

    The knife would have made the prosecution’s case very easy if it were not unreliable. Without it there is still plenty to on.

  25. Clive Wismayer Says:

    Liz

    Regarding all your points:

    1 The cell phones shut within minutes of each other.

    Amanda turned off phone so as not to be disturbed by Lumumba changing his mind and ordering her to come to work and Raffaele so as not to be called by his father [if they were turned off at all, I am not sure it’s accepted they were]

    2 RS would not say that AK was with him all evening.

    He cracked under illegal interrogation rendering this evidence inadmissible.

    3 The shower story in the stone cold cottage. Why not just freshen up with a bidet? Right she never used one on a regular basis.

    She did not like Raffaele’s shower, she needed clean clothes before setting off to Gubbio. Students endure hardships like these all the time.

    4 The odd way they both orchestrated someone else finding out what was behind the locked door while they waited in the kitchen.

    Agreed. I cannot tell whether they were concerned or unconcerned or first one , then the other then back to the first etc.

    5 The middle of the night call to her mother , when she had no reason to be so alarmed yet. RS’s similiar call to his sister. It appears that he called the police after the postal police found them.

    His sister is a policewoman and the timing evidence has been incorrectly interpreted from the false setting of the clock in the car park opposite.

    6 Amanda’s lamp found in Merediths room. It was the only source of light in A’s room so Guede could not have known of its existence in the dark .

    The police most probably moved it to get a better view on or after 02/11/07. Mignini made very little of it at trial and therefore probably knew the police were responsible.

    7 The staged moving of the body and who would remove the bra after the fatal attack or have reason to.

    We agreed already the body was not moved ‘hours’ after the crime. Rudy Guede had reason to move Meredith so that he could sexually assault her.

    8 The staged break-in. I recently read that the rock could have been thrown from the inside and sill implant glass in the closed shutters. The lack of evidence of Guede in that room, the spot of MK’s blood and DNA in that room. Someone went back in Filomena’s room why? I already said ther is no evidence that it was tracked in.

    Not only did the rock create an impact mark on the inner shutter and embed glass there, it also sprayed glass some distance into the room and landed off at the angle you would expect if it had hit the right hand inner shutter (when viewed from outside). If Guede wore gloves and was fully clothed while in Filomena’s room, he would not have left any DNA.

    9 The lack of DNA of Guede’s in the bathroom not on the the blood streak in the Bidet. That is where Ak’s DNA is found.I have explained why this is huge for me as I don’t believe if Guede was rinsing it would be there.

    I defer to others on this but I agree with you that if opening a door leaves your DNA on the handle then so should operating a faucet.

    10 The foot print is a better match for Sollecito , there has been nothing to discount this.

    Au contraire, this is very strongly disputed indeed.

    11 Large blood drop of A’s on tap not from ears. The evidence that there were right footprints but not left could be from cleaning.

    Not sure why it can’t be from ears. If she left blood on her pillow why not elsewhere? I would pierce my own ears 20 times to check this out but am too chicken. Would you try please? I think the right footprint only is explicable by Rudy taking off his shoe and sock and planting his right foot in the bidet to wash blood off his trouser leg, before putting the foot back down on the mat and replacing footwear. That way there is no left foot print and no other bare prints going to or from the bathroom. That’s why it is a watery print too.

    12 The lack of prints on the outside door handle of M’s room,

    Plenty of people touched that door handle before the body was discovered and forensics got to work, smudging existing ones.

    13 The locked door unlocked odd story .

    Rudy probably closed it behind him not realising it had a fault which meant it had to be locked shut. Why did Amanda and Raffaele make this part up? What were they hoping for?

    14 The odd detached behavior , not buying the scared story. She said she was there after 2 hours 45 minutes.

    She’s an oddball. I knew plenty at university. I was (am?) one myself and hardly murdered anyone at all. 2 hours 45 minutes is a long time. 20 years old, under intense pressure, foreign language, no lawyer. Her ‘confession’ is untruthful suggesting its content was prompted and the evidence was ruled inadmissible. No recording has surfaced.

    15 She was relaxed enough to stretch ,and no the police did not hit her. i have to sign off now but will add more later

    American oddball from Seattle QED. She says they hit her. They did not keep a tape (illegally). Why not?

    16 The kitchen knife is less clear. There were only 5 cells I believe on it and I really have no firm opinion on this one. I managed to get into a debate on another of Sharon’s blogs about the knife. The question had been asked why would RS take and return the murder weapon to his apartment. I came up with a scenario where it may have not been taken to the cottage for any other intent other to play a prank or scare M. Only after it was used to torment M was it returned. The idea being that S knew it could be looked for as it belonged to the landlord. With this possibility it still did not have to be the murder weapon ,but could have been used as a secondary weapon. So in answer to your question I am more willing to let go of the knife, as I have no way of understanding what the original DNA findings meant.

    See Conti-Vechiotti or, for a more digestible and entertaining version, Waterbury.

    17 I also wanted to add the evidence of multiple attackers as noted by the almost non existence of defense wounds. She appeared to have been restrained.

    Noted.

    18 As well the over kill and the evidence of torture like wounds give weight to multiple attackers with a very different motive than a lone wolf burglar/rapist.

    Don’t agree about overkill. Joanna Yeates (recent British case) had a similar number of wounds and she wasn’t even attacked with a knife.

    19 I recently watched RS’s interview in Italian on Italian T.V. It was a fluff interview and he was only asked 2 somewhat pointed questions. One was did he use drugs. He answered that he would smoke one joint on occasion. He did the tell tale raised eyebrow when lying move. Why lie like that when everyone knows that is not the truth especially in his first televised interview? The second question was did he touch the bra He would not say no, it was the strangest thing.

    What is a ‘fluff’ interview? I agree that Raffaele did not in all respects help his own cause.

    Sorry for the long post.

  26. Liz Says:

    Clive, I don’t believe A would have worried she would get another call from Lumumba. It should have been a quiet night after Halloween and after all I doubt her would order her anywhere or really want her to work either. I think RS wanted to save himself when questioned and that’s why no alibi. She had had a long shower at RS’s the night before so must have thought it was fine enough, he did have a nicer place after all. I still think she made up the shower clothing excuse as a way to return to the cottage and then find enough evidence to become alarmed and bring RS back to help orchestrate the discovery. There are still 2 very different opinions about when R called police depending on which side of the fence you are on . Ditto for the footprint. The right footprints but no left were in the cottage in a hallway and were interesting if only because what happened to the left foot. I had meant to say lack of blood on the outside door handle. There was blood on the inside. The door was closed after by someone with a clean hand. So the body was not moved hours after, but it was moved after the fatal attack and the bra was removed after in that chaotic time. The panicked Guede who left his bloody prints everywhere would want out of there fast. I think the staggers threw on the duvet to contain the blood and not distract themselves from their task. Guede had no reason to be angry with M so why the overkill. I am not yet familiar with the Yates case. As far as the oddball ,coming from a normal family. We had the horrific case here of Karla Holmoka a beautiful 20 year, normal ordinary family was involved in the murder of 3 teenage girls along with her new husband. She was beautiful and smart and was a convincingly demur in court. The pair had already murdered her sister around the time they were planning their grand wedding. Karla wrote in her diary that she was annoyed her parents might not focus on her wedding due to grief. The pierced ear, I have experience with mine and my daughters. The interview I saw on Quarto Grado allowed RS to talk about his feelings his life in prison and his relationship with Amanda. It was very friendly and no difficult questions other than the 2 I mentioned. That is a fluffy interview.

  27. Clive Wismayer Says:

    I am renaming you ‘Canadian Liz’ 🙂

    I am informed by those who know more about these things that it is not possible to tell when a mobile phone is switched off and that this information came from Amanda and Raffaele themselves.

    Not to get too far into the nitty gritty but a night of or involving sex followed by a shower and change of clothes in the morning (necessitating a return to the cottage – I hate getting into my dirty clothes after a shower, and I’m a guy!) is not so weird, is it?

    I see your point that, after closing and locking the bedroom door, one might have expected there to be something on the handle. I guess Guede could have wiped the handle or closed it using some type of cloth subsequently discarded or others coming along and gripping the handle when forcing the door could have had some effect on whatever was there (including transferring Raffaele’s DNA to the clasp btw.)

    Guede was not panicked, I think. He walked out. And he did various things in and around the body first like searching the purse, placing his knife on the bed while doing so. I have read that first-time killers sometimes do what Guede did with the duvet.

    So the vicious slashing of your and your daughters’ ears gave rise to not much blood? I think you probably live too far north so that it freezes on contact with air. Joke. What about menstrual blood? Does that find its way around bathrooms?

    This is a link to ‘selected’ DNA results and locations in the apartment. Note that there is no blood spot in Filomena’s room. Reps 176 and 177 are relevant. Maybe you can find another Rep in Massei for me to hunt down on the bloodspot point?

    http://www.injusticeinperugiaforum.org/selected-dna-results-t726.html

  28. Liz Says:

    Canada cold its 13 Celsius today! a fluke I know. You have to trust on that ear piercing evidence. Very probable to get a smear on a pillow but they just don’t drip. More likely a tongue bite ,see unexplained mark under her chin. I know Massei determined the blood mixed DNA belonging to M/A happened simultaneously and could not be accounted for in cohabitation. The spot on Filomen’s floor was the blood and DNA mix of the two women. He could not say who’s the blood was. The main point being how it got there in that spot together. I have gone over Massei’s reasoning for the staged break-in . What is very convincing is the lack of footprints and no trampled vegetation. It had been raining where was the mud ,leaves or grass evidence on the wall or sill? I know Chris mentioned he thought there might have been one scuff mark easy to say. Whether the rock was thrown outside later, some distance from the wall, part of the staging is unclear .The defense said the luminal footprints that were found around the cottage were made from rust or juice.Massei said more likely the result of bleach or blood due to the different locations and the number of them. If I don’t post for a while I am starting my Christmas shopping!!

  29. Clive Wismayer Says:

    Christmas shopping in minus 13C? Nothing will stop a woman with a mission! I shall ruminate on your points and revert in due course. Don’t get lost in the snow.

  30. Clive Wismayer Says:

    Sorry, mis-read your post Liz and now see you’re in mid-heat wave. Galloping climate change in the Kyoto treaty-breaking nation is no more than you deserve. Sorry not to be more sympathetic.

  31. Clive Wismayer Says:

    Liz

    How did the Christmas shopping go?   Someone should have told you it can all be done on the internet these days.  Takes about 5 minutes.

    While I am working on your tougher points I thought I might get you to think about two of mine.   The second doesn’t seem to come up much anywhere but I think it’s important.

    One, how come all the screw ups in the case worked against A & R?   I mean, where are the ones going the other way?   There are fried hard drives, lost/non-existent interview tapes, extremely dodgy forensics, confusion about what time the postal police arrived and about the lamp and that’s before you get to all the lies and dodgy PR about Foxy Knoxy, purchase of bleach (don’t forget that one, especially) etc.   It’s a recipe for injustice.

    Two.   OK, let ‘s agree they did it and that A is icy, cold and calculating.  R is weak and untruthful and in her power.   They get caught and have to face the fact that their staging of the burglary has not fooled anyone.   There is compelling DNA and other evidence against them.   The game is up.   Put yourself in their place.

    Surely, over the ensuing 4 years, one or both would have taken Rudy’s route, cut their losses and tried to blame the other, or the known criminal and fugitive Rudy.   Almost a forced move for R, given the huge scope for blaming A’s legendary control over him.   16 years is a lot better than 30.   Would a guilty R have had the strength to hold out after collapsing at the police station so quickly?

    Even better, why not try to get off scot free and each claim the other(s) did it?   Happens all the time (and even has a name – ‘the cut-throat defence’ ironically).

    And how come, given the same assumption, they were not recorded saying anything incriminating in their tapped  telephone conversations after the murder.   They have to get their stories straight, don’t they?  They sure made a poor job if it.

    I offer point 2 as a counter-weight to those who rest their opinions on the sort of profiling reinforced by Sharon’s interviewees.   If A is as described then surely a better fit for her cold, ruthless, cunning personality would have been to put the blame on knife-wielding R from the outset.   Similar considerations apply for R’s supposed personality type.   These highly distorted personality assessments have to be followed to their conclusion is my point.

    And why did the cold, icy, born actress name Lumumba?   

  32. Liz Says:

    Well I almost forgot about the shopping when I read Hellmann had released his report, but I managed to tear myself away. I agree there was some bad police work the receipts for one thing , the late collection of the clasp. I am less concerned about the lack of taping of her witness statement. It can never be pleasant to have to confess to being present at the crime scene, and I would think always stressful. I do not believe she was hit twice and neither does Hellman. She herself testified that she came up with the name Lumumba. I think that is where when lies are told there is evidence of truth revealed. A black man she knew had been present. Guede was the last person she would have wanted police to question. So she simply substituted Lumumba.She could have come to her senses but stuck with the Lumumba story as better to have the police think it was him then to look elsewhere. I think Amanda basically was ready to confess and RS was ready to throw her under the bus. What happened well I think that overwhelming need to not let their parents know the awful truth then became a priority. So no matter how the evidence stacked up they had to remain the innocent son or daughter. R could have been the one happy to act out his manga fantasy and jumped at the chance and Amanda may have gotten caught up in that. We will not know unless Rudy talks and fills in the gaps in a way that fits all the evidence.

  33. Clive Wismayer Says:

    Bit of a logic breakdown there Liz. They staged the burglary to frame Guede having somehow learned his MO, so why break down and name Lumumba? She named him because the police told her they knew he was there. And the failure to record the interrogation and allow legal representation is probably the worst infringement if the lot!

    Anyway, let’s read Hellman.

    Regards

  34. Liz Says:

    Clive Those who staged wanted the police to believe the attacker came in through the window not with a key. One person not 2 or 3. The murder was not planned so the staging was also an after thought. They were also high . Thinking clearly would not be on the table. The police did not know the name Lumumba , she must have mentioned a black man and they asked her do you know a black man? Yes too bad there was no recording of the witness questioning. Lets read Hellmann! from early reports I am disappointed he interpreted her station behavior as stress. Is he as astute as Massei or Micheli? I’ll reserve judgment The debate ends here for me now unless Sharon comes up with something else!

  35. Clive Wismayer Says:

    Duly noted Liz. Thank you, as always. I am rounding up Italian speakers to interpret Hellman as I write.

  36. MrsM Says:

    I guess Judge Hellman did not let the month of December (Meredith’s birthday month) prevent him from releasing his motivation report which clearly proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Amanda and Raffaelle had nothing to do with this crime. He made that crystal clear.

    Shame on anyone who continues to dig up dirt on two totally innocent young people who have suffered enough from this terrible injustice brought about by a very sick prosecuter.

    Read the Hellman Report !