Friday, October 05, 2012

Foolish Claims In Book By Raffaele Sollecito: His False Timeline Conflicts With Other Evidence

Posted by willsavive

[Above and below: The front door of Sollecito’s apartment building on upper Via Garibaldi]

Raffaele Sollecito finally speaks out about the murder of Meredith Kercher and his involvement in the desperate hope that somehow he can gain an advantage.

With all of the highly questionable recollections from Sollecito in this book, and there are many, it seems practical decision to analyze one thread of the book, and compare Sollecito’s new version of events to the plethora of information available.

In this post we look at Sollecito’s story/perspective in regard to the night of the murder. Sollecito’s story sounds somewhat plausibly up until the night of 1 November 2007 (night of the murder).

Knox had stayed over at Sollecito’s flat the night before. She woke up around 10am and arrived home at around 11am. Sollecito arrived at Knox’s apartment at 2pm for lunch. Meredith, Amanda Knox, and Sollecito were the only three in the house at the time.

Meredith left the apartment around 4pm and Sollecito and Knox say they smoked a joint soon after, and then they left the cottage at Via della Pergola at around 5pm and wandered into town for some shopping.

Later that evening they arrived back at Sollecito’s flat.

Soon after, Sollecito’s Serbian friend, Jovana Popovic, rang the doorbell and asked if he’d mind driving her to the bus station at midnight to pick up a suitcase that her mother was sending. Sollecito agreed.

Popovic testified that this was around 5:30-5:45p.m. She testified that she had to leave at that time because she had a meeting at 6pm.

Jovana left, and then Sollecito and Knox began watching the movie Amélie. Sure, everything sounds good up to that point, but here is where Sollecito’s story of fantasy begins.

Sollecito next states that they had to keep pausing the movie as there were several interruptions. First, he states that “Amanda got a text from Patrick (her boss) telling her it was a slow night because of the holiday and he didn’t need her to come into work after all.”

Phone records show that this text was as late as 8:19pm, and Knox replied to Patrick via text at 8:35pm.

Sollecito writes that he received a phone call on his cell from his father at 8:40pm. This is corroborated by phone records and his father Francisco Sollecito’s testimony.

Sollecito then writes that Knox turned off her phone at 8:35pm and he turned off his phone after the call from his father, at 8:42pm, which is corroborated by phone records. He claims they next discussed what to make for dinner.

Sollecito then claims that after the movie ended he went into the kitchen to do dishes. It was at THIS time he claims the pipe under the sink began to leak.

Then he writes”¦”“Don’t you have a mop?” Amanda asked. I did not. She offered to pick one up from Via della Pergola the next morning and bring it round.” After that he claims that they cooked a fish dinner. Then he washed the dishes a second.

However Amanda Knox testified that they ate dinner later at around 10-11pm and THEN just the once he did dishes, at which much later time the pipe began to leak for the first time (Massei, pg. 69). Again, Amanda has made it clear, by stating several times during her testimony, that they “ate dinner, AND THEN, while Raffaele was washing the dishes, from the sink, a leak was noticed: water was leaking below and he looked at it; he turned off the water and then looked below the sink, and this pipe had become loose, so the water that was coming from the faucet was leaking out” (Massei, pg. 69).

However Sollecito’s own father, in contradiction, testified that during the 8:40pm call Raffaele had told him that “while he was washing the dishes he had noticed water leak under the sink that had spilled onto the floor,” and he had specified that he was with Amanda (Massei Report, pg. 63). 

This is highly significant because, one can firmly theorize, that dinner and doing dishes occurred BEFORE 8:40pm.

So by telling this obviously fictional tale of eating dinner and doing dishes later, at around 10-11pm, retroactively more of an alibi is attempted for the couple, as the murder is estimated to have taken place at around or shortly after that time.

By placing the dinner later in the night, the couple would have shattered the theory of the Prosecution. But Sollecito’s own father stopped this dodge.


Great points, Will Savive. And I’ve been thinking about what the lovebirds claimed about Meredith leaving the cottage about 4:00pm without saying where she was going. I think there’s a lie there, not sure what exactly. But the more they yell and firm up a story, the more suspicious we should be. They only state a fact strongly to misdirect those investigating.

Perhaps the lovebirds left the cottage as early as 3pm, that gave them a long afternoon to get into mischief. Perhaps Meredith herself left closer to 5:00pm and told them exactly where she was going: to eat dinner at her British friends’ apartment and to watch a movie there. This would have given the lovebirds knowledge of how long they might have the cottage to themselves, and what precisely Meredith’s plans for the evening were. Knowing this might have ennabled planning a prank, or digging around in Meredith’s room going through her things, maybe even looking at her computer.  Please correct me if I’ve forgotten something that would rule out this theory of leaving the cottage at a time other than 4:00pm.

Posted by Hopeful on 10/06/12 at 12:59 AM | #

Things firmed up only after the Patrick’s sms. Once the plan gelled, they switched off their mobiles. Papa was plain lucky to get to talk to him.

And RG was not in the master plan, he just happened to be present there (or near about) and was used and manipulated very skilfully.

At that point in time, RS has not got any reason to bluff papa. RS is just a puppet, he is still unable to think of the inconsistencies. It is the creative artist who cooked the late dinner.

This is what I understand. Papa is still not in the circuit, he is just trying to save the poor soul.

minus and minus make one plus
the reason for this we need not discuss

Posted by chami on 10/06/12 at 09:44 AM | #

Hi Chami

Yes after four years that is still the scenario that works best for me. The deadly scenario cuts in at 8:45 and after that all their stories are lies.

1) AK is somewhat mentally damaged by the bullying of her mom by her dad at an early age,

2) All her life she is brash and putting people off and unable or unwilling to help herself or to learn.

3) AK doesnt have a lot of other work options in Perugia for as an American she has no work viza.

4) She puts Meredith and Patrick off. Patrick seems intent on giving AK’s much needed job to Meredith.

5) On the night Patrick’s text about no work that night comes in and AK has an enraged WTF moment.

6) She decides to head down to the house and give Meredith a piece of her mind and the phones get turned off.

7) RS and his knives get dragged along - I think a lot of his subliminal text is saying that - and at some point so does Guede.

8) The wee chat with Meredith explodes and a Lord Of The Flies group mentality takes over.

9) Meredith screams and collapses still alive. They head out hurriedly, possibly then with the keys and the phones, and wait.

10) After X minutes or hours they rearrange her body, start to clean up, and take her money as part of the simulated robbery.

I suspect some of the FOA are in the same psychological boat - it’s not that uncommon - and fighting for one of their own.

Cocaine or skunk might have been an element. Here are our other scenarios:

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/06/12 at 01:06 PM | #

I also think AK came rather close to admitting all or part of that scenario, but to save his own skin Curt Knox stopped her.

Admitting to that scenario could have led to lesser (manslaughter) charges, AK emerging with her head held somewhat high having paid her dues, and some understanding and relief for the Kerchers.

We didnt cast her as a she-devil for life - her own father did. For ultimately causing all this, I sure would like to see him serve time.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/06/12 at 01:48 PM | #

RS was reported to have one cleaning lady who also testified in the court. I believe there were two but I have a simple question: how did they managed to clean the apartment without a mop?

My other question, if I understand the leak correctly (the U-shaped plastic tube, called a trap, that connects to the bottom of the sink to the drain, assuming that the drain is in the same side wall), the leak is rather minor - less than about a litre. Perhaps half of that drained onto the floor. Both Americans and Italians are well versed with the use of the household item called “paper towel” and every household has a semi-infinite supply of this modern convenience.

They had something else in their mind - perhaps she wanted to visit the crime scene again- but why?

It is very likely the spill was already dry by the morning. Unless it was a flood that called for FEMA intervention.

Posted by chami on 10/06/12 at 09:59 PM | #

What if there was never a leak? Which would have been a fiction invented to explain why they had carried a mop through the streets at that late hour—just in case.

They wouldn’t have supposed that rinsing the mop would rid it entirely of blood traces.

The early testimony gave me the impression that the leak was described as quite extensive—& yet they chose to neglect it overnight.  Whereas they must get rid of the incriminiating mop.

Just a thought.

Posted by Ernest Werner on 10/06/12 at 11:29 PM | #

@ Will Savive:

You write - “Sollecito then writes that Knox turned off her phone at 8:35pm….”

Honor Bound states:

“We switched off our cell phones, finished watching Amélie, and discussed what to make for dinner.” (Kindle Locations 345-346).

I understand the implication that the phone switch-offs preceded the finish-of-watching-Amelie, which in-turn, occurred at 21:10:32 [MASSEI p 302], but I can’ figure out how you arrived at “8:35pm” as Knox’s turn-off-time.

Please tell.

Posted by Cardiol MD on 10/08/12 at 08:19 AM | #

Solecito states that “they had to keep pausing the movie Amelie as there were several interuptions”.

The computer records showed that the film started to run at 6.27pm. The film is 2 hours long. I can’t begin to guess what interruptions there were until his father’s call at 8.40pm which coincidentally is about the same time as Janova Popovic says that she called round, knocked on the door, and spoke to Amanda to say that Raffaele would not longer need to give her a lift to the station.

Oh, I know! How about pausing the film to cook the fish and eat it? After all Amanda wouldn’t want to go to work on an empty stomach but in the event by 8.35 realised that she didn’t have to.

The film concluded or was stopped at 9.10 so there were 40 minutes in total when it wasn’t running. That makes for a lot of interruptions but on the other hand 40 minutes is more than enough time to cook eat and start doing the dishes.

Posted by James Raper on 10/08/12 at 08:48 PM | #

In all honesty I am reading this little shits scribblings while trying not to throw up in my mouth. The late pages of his self serving garbage are full of such nonsense that it makes me really angry. A short sample is the implication that all the other girls in the house were rehearsed into making the same statement. This by the way, is one of the more benign nasty attempted maneuverability by Sollecito who is of the opinion that the entire Italian court system were out to get him, his sister plus Knox and his entire family. More to follow. Point being that while I have to hold my nose at the obvious lies he tells I am trying to read it in order to expiate the obvious from the small kernel of truth he throws in to try to prove his and Knox’s innocence. His snide smears against Merediths familly are really beyond the pail and anyone believing this self serving little shit is obviously deranged. Anyway as I read this more to follow. The point about the staged burglary through the window is a real hoot. Basically if it wasn’t for the seriousness of the murder by these two then their writings would provide a source of great amusement. Point is that the more these two sick individuals write, the more they dig themselves into a hole from which they will not escape. There is no statute of limitations upon murder and they will eventually pay for their crime to the fullest extent of the law. This is my profound hope and I will do What ever it takes to prove it.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 10/09/12 at 03:48 AM | #

Graham, you just summed up exactly how I felt while reading it (I just finished it a few minutes ago and I’m torn between disgust and anger).  I think “nauseating” is the word all of us have been instinctively reaching for.

What I found particularly revolting was the extraordinary hypocrisy that manifests itself time and time again.

Let’s take the example Graham brought - that of the English girls sounding “rehearsed.”

Superficially, this is just Gumbel taking another cheap and uninformed shot at a group of people who happened to disagree with Amanda and Raffaele.  It’s a little hard to understand Raffaele’s animosity towards them, since they are in no way associated with the Italian establishment he so forcefully despises. However, they were not on his side, so that automatically makes them evil and conniving.

Less superficially, I think that Raffaele finds it jarring and “alien” when someone tells the truth.  He seems incapable of recognizing the fact that when a group of people truthfully remember an event, their versions are bound to be very similar.  This is self-evident to normal people, but clearly not so to someone who has been spending a considerable amount of time manufacturing lies and trying very hard (and quite unsuccessfully) to make things line up. It doesn’t seem to occur to him that the English girls’ versions line up effortlessly because they are telling the truth; for him, it must be rehearsed because he knows from personal experience how exhausting it is to concoct a version that will stand up to close scrutiny.

Anyway, here is a passage which shows exactly how hypocritical he is:

“But my lawyers were deeply concerned she [Amanda] would put her foot in her mouth, in ways that might prove enduringly harmful to both of us. If she deviated even one iota from the version of events we now broadly agreed on, it could mean a life sentence for both of us.”

This is an unintentional admission that a “version of events” had been artificially created.  Mind you, a “version of events” is incompatible with the truth, because the truth is singular - it cannot have versions.  A murder, unlike a conversation, is not subjective or interpretable - it’s an objective event which involves a number of people being at a specific place and performing or suffering specific actions; it does not bear variants. 

“Broadly agreeing” on a “version” of events is code for coordinating lies.  There is absolutely no need to compare notes or compose a “version” if you are telling the truth.  There might be minor differences, but the gist should effortlessly be the same.

So this not only shows that he has been lying (along with many other instances involving misrepresentation or sheer fabrication), but also that he chastises the English girls for something that he and Amanda were also doing.  However, just like with everything else, something is perfectly justified when done by Raffaele or his family and completely monstrous when done by someone else.


On a different note, have Tedeschi and Maori made any public statements with regards to this book? Sollecito is scathing in his treatment of both.  Something he is not considering is that he might have shared certain details with his defense team, and that after this public flogging, they might feel inclined to share some of their knowledge with Galati.

I honestly hope they do.  Regardless of how he felt about the competence of his defense team, publicly smearing them is an absolute disgrace.

Posted by Vivianna on 10/09/12 at 06:18 PM | #

Pete, I agree with you about Curt Knox’s probable moral guilt. Francesco Sollecito is similarly morally turpitudinous, imho. Compare this to the father of the murderer of Annie Le, who admitted his son was guilty and asked the Le family for forgiveness.

Posted by Earthling on 10/09/12 at 07:42 PM | #

Here’s another one. Sollecito maintains that his sister was given the boot from the carabinieri because the local cops she worked with did not like her. (Another example of Sollecito’s rampant paranoia that the entire Italian Judiciary was out to get them) What he does not say is the real reason which was the phone call to their father which was recorded because by that time the local cops had put taps on their phone and she (Stupid Woman) went and told their father what she had done in order to expiate the situation even though Sollecito senior warned her that the phone might be tapped which she dismissed and went right on talking. The entire family must be crazy. No wonder Knox latched on to Sollecito since they are both completely utterly dangerously insane and should be locked away. I’m reminded of how happy Knox was in jail laughing and singing and playing just one chord on a guitar over and over and over. I’ve seen people like this before who will stand in front of a TV so nobody else can see it. This is in order to gain attention. They are both completely insane.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 10/09/12 at 08:16 PM | #

What if there was never a leak? Which would have been a fiction invented to explain why they had carried a mop through the streets at that late hour—just in case.


Posted by Ernest Werner on 10/06/12 at 04:29 PM | #


This is what I think too.  The leak is a McGuffin intended to explain a number of suspicious activities during the evening of 01-NOV and the next morning.  It helps distract from their intention to travel to Gubbio as well as the issues you raised.

As with any poorly-conceived lie, however, the pair couldn’t get the story right.

Posted by Stilicho on 10/09/12 at 10:14 PM | #


“Broadly agreeing” on a “version” of events is code for coordinating lies….


It’s more than that:  it’s an actual admission of lying and any subsequent court will have that in their hands when retrying the case.

I am not so certain that Tedeschi and Maori can reveal anything told in confidence by Sollecito regardless of how ridiculous he makes them look in his fantasy novel.


Great summary of Sollecito’s erroneous timeline.  Now this is funny:  he’s directly contradicted AK’s court testimony and may have to answer for that.  He cannot just blame his ghostwriter.

Posted by Stilicho on 10/09/12 at 10:21 PM | #

Thank you for the excellent postings on RS’s book and the contradictions and fabrications in it.  It’s actually amazing to me that he states broadly that he had to coordinate his tale of that night with Amanda’s version and that he had to figure out just why she couldn’t have left the apartment that night, rather than stating clearly that they were both there all night, end of story.  Also the incredible statement about his knife touching Meredith the week before the murder.  I hope Dr. Galati has read the book cover to cover and has been reading this website.  I hope they retry the case after this and can find some more DNA evidence on her clothing.  There must be something else there.  After watching so many true crime shows, I know they can solve murder cases after 10 years or more with new DNA evidence, so I don’t know why the defense made so much impact with Americans by talking about the bra clasp being found after only six weeks.  If RS and AK are completely innocent, they should not need to coordinate their stories, as some of you already said.

Posted by believing on 10/14/12 at 04:16 PM | #
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Professor Snape Saves 99.9999% Of Seattle From A Pestilent Raffaele Sollecito

Or to previous entry Foolish Claims In Book By Raffaele Sollecito: The Courts Are The Most Reviled Institution In Italy