Sunday, October 20, 2013

Given The Abundant Facts, What Scenario Is The Nencini Court Considering? Probably Not Unlike This

Posted by Marcello

1. The “Innocence/Framing” Campaign

It is rather sad that this case, of the violent murder of Meredith Kercher, has seen a ‘hurricane’ of noise trying to cherry-pick and disprove the more salient facts, and worse, discredit those who investigated, prosecuted and ruled on the case as well as discredit those who continue to emphasize the facts.

Over the past six years there has been a concerted effort by the defendants in this case, and primarily by their families, their “˜groupies’ and their legal consultants, to mount and continue a public relations campaign to frame the defendants as innocent of the crime of murdering Meredith Kercher. This ‘innocence’ campaign has even gone so far as to tarnish the motives of the fine justice officials involved.

The defendants themselves have continuously obfuscated and lied about the more salient facts, albeit inconsistently (their multiple versions fail to match up, and do not match the available facts). Lately Ms. Knox has done a number of (typically unconvincing) interviews, and her parents still seem too intent on defending the fantasy of their daughter’s innocence, all evidence to the contrary.

Mr. Sollecito, for his part, tweets unofficial retractions about statements he made in court. Both have distastefully profited through books that are not much more than a compilation of lies (and which do not offer matching alibis). Meanwhile the legal teams for the defendants have recently leaked “˜favorable’ results from the testing of a new sample on the presumed murder weapon in order to (again) misconstrue the evidence for the general public.

2. Media Misreporting Facilitates

Perhaps the most unfortunate aspect of this “˜innocence campaign’ has been that far too many journalists have dishonored their professional ethics by failing to do the proper research and objectively report the facts. Journalists to this day continue to misreport the facts, leave out corroborating facts, or worse, blindly repeat the distortions or lies promoted by the campaign without proper fact-checking. By and large, journalists (mostly in the US and UK) have ‘anti-reported’ the case.

This is especially grievous given that there are multiple Court Motivations reports (a unique feature to the Italian justice system) readily available in Italian and English online, in searchable PDF format, as well as several websites like this one that have painstakingly sought to illuminate the vast amount of evidentiary facts.

Those journalists who have failed to correctly report the case, and those involved in this ‘innocence’ campaign, have repeatedly disrespected the victim, Meredith Kercher, and her family. By contrast, the Kerchers has shown great dignity throughout these years, remaining patiently quiet and consistently insisting that the truth be revealed by the Italian justice system.

The endless journalistic failures, and particularly the ‘innocence’ campaign, have also disrespected the Italian law enforcement and judicial systems. By contrast Italian law enforcement has demonstrated substantial deference to the defendants, especially when compared to the law enforcement and judicial procedures of other advanced countries. In response, numerous ‘groupies’ have exhibited pathetic jingoism by repeatedly denigrating a country of 60 million people based on rather uninformed attitudes.

And it is very likely that Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito, rather than confess the truth, will continue to obfuscate or lie as much as they can, as well as disrespect the Italian Court and the Kerchers by not being present at the appeal. Their ‘innocence’ campaigns will likely continue to distort or ignore the facts. And worse, journalists and talking-head ‘experts’ will continue to report falsehoods and misrepresentations.

3. All Will Now Be To No Avail

Fortunately, none of the fabrications, ill-conceived scenarios or numerous pieces of unprofessional, sloppy journalism will ultimately matter.

This is because the Nencini Appeals Court will not be listening to any of the noise. The Appeals Court has a very specific program to follow, mandated by the Italian Supreme Court, which has already looked at this case four times (the detainment requests for Knox and Sollecito, the conviction of Rudy Guede and the annulment of the Hellmann Appeals Court ruling). The Nencini Appeals Court program includes:

    1) looking at all the case evidence noted in Judge Massei Trial Court’s Motivations report,

    2) considering the Italian Supreme Court’s Motivations report for the conviction of Rudy Guede, in which Guede was convicted of having a role in Ms. Kercher’s murder, but not the key role of fatally stabbing her, and that he acted in concert with others, and

    3) considering Ms. Knox’s voluntary “˜gift’ statement of November 6, 2007, in which she placed herself at the scene of the crime. (This statement follows an earlier verbal and written statement released to the police during a few hours of interrogation in the early hours of November 6th.)

4. Big Surfeit Of Evidence

The amount of evidentiary facts the Nencini Appeals Court will have absorbed is substantial. Unlike the Hellmann Appeals Court, they cannot cherry-pick the facts. Per the Supreme Court, they must consider all the available evidence as a whole, logically tied together like a mosaic. Significantly, one could even leave out the knife and bra clasp entirely as evidence points because:

    1) Ms. Kercher was murdered by more than one assailant. This is evident from the wounds she suffered, from the evidence in general and has been consistently maintained by three different trial judges and four different Supreme Court reports.

    2) Guede in all his various confessions has consistently hinted and ultimately confirmed the presence of Knox and Sollecito during the crime.

    3) There is no plausible scenario for the crime that involves Guede and two or more unknown assailants.

    4) All the other evidence found at the crime scene points to Sollecito and Knox being present before, during and after the crime in some fashion.

    5) Knox was at the scene of the crime by her own written admission.

    6) The break-in was staged and, by obvious implication, only Knox and Sollecito would have any interest in staging the break-in (see my earlier post listing all the problems with the break-in scenario).

There seems no rational way that the Nencini Appeals Court can logically acquit. And Judge Nencini has not ‘pre-announced’ a non-guilty verdict like Judge Hellmann did by claiming that the defendants “˜appear to be innocent’.

The only remaining questions are what kind of dynamics will the Nencini Appeals Court assign to the participants, and what kind of reasoning will the Italian Supreme Court provide, assuming Knox or Sollecito appeal to the Supreme Court.

Having already read the Massei Motivations report and supporting documentation for weeks, this will already be a highly informed judges’ panel. What scenario are they converging on? The following scenario is based on some of the most significant evidence, and overall seems largely unshakable.

5. Scenario Accounting For The Most Points

The Night Before: Halloween

1) Guede lied about meeting Ms. Kercher on Halloween. (No such meeting was corroborated by witnesses.)

2) Guede lied about his whereabouts in the early evening of November 1, 2007. (His claims of having appointments with friends were not corroborated.)

Evening Prior To Attack

3) Around 8:00 PM on November 1st, Knox left Sollecito’s place to go to work. She received Lumumba’s (her boss) text message around 8:15 PM that she was not needed at work. She responded at 8:35 PM while presumably walking back to Sollecito’s apartment. Then she turned off her phone at 8:35 PM. She was seen at Sollecito’s apartment by 8:40PM.

4) Sollecito received a call from his dad at 8:42 PM. (According to the defendant, they discussed the broken trap in the kitchen sink and how to clean the kitchen floor, and about going to Gubbio with Knox the next day. Significant about this is that the broken trap and clean-up likely happened later. See below.)

5) Sollecito turned off his cellphone at roughly 8:45 PM. (typically, neither Knox or Sollecito turned off their cellphones for the night)

6) Ms. Kercher was last seen by her friend Sophie Purton at roughly 9:00 PM going to her cottage.

7) There was no human interaction with Sollecito’s computer after 9:10 PM.

8) Knox and Sollecito were seen at piazza Grimana, by the cottage, at roughly 9:30 to 10:00 PM, by a homeless man who “˜resided’ at piazza Grimana.

9) Ms. Kercher’s phone made three short calls between 10:00 and 10:15 PM roughly, to check voicemail, a possible attempt to call a bank, and possibly an MMS message.

10) A car broke down near the gate of the cottage at 10:30 PM.

11) Knox and Sollecito were seen at piazza Grimana, by the cottage, at roughly 11:00 PM, again by the same homeless man. He noted they went several times to the railing of the piazza to look down beyond it. (The piazza overlooks the gate of the cottage.)

12) A tow truck came at approximately 11:00 PM to tow the car. The driver of the truck noted a dark-colored car parked in front of the gate of the cottage, which he noted was slightly open. At approximately 11:15 PM the tow truck left and the family in the broken down car departed the area with other friends in a second car. (Sollecito had a dark colored Audi.) No screams were heard and no one noticed Guede, Sollecito or Knox pass through the gate.

13) Sollecito’s dad sent Sollecito an SMS at 11:15PM. The message was not received by Sollecito’s cellphone until roughly 6:00 AM following morning.

The Attack Upon Meredith

14) Knox likely let Sollecito and Guede into the cottage after 11:15 PM, after the tow truck and car had left. Guede went to use the large bathroom and failed to flush his feces. The following is an assumed sequence:

15) Ms. Kercher was restrained in her room and her screams were muffled. (There was bruising on Ms. Kercher’s nose, mouth, lips and chin, suggesting her mouth was covered by one or more persons; only one scream was ever heard from the cottage; Ms. Kercher was familiar with martial arts maneuvers and likely vigorously tried to defend herself)

16) Ms. Kercher was choked and her head likely banged against the wall. (Bruises on Ms. Kercher’s neck suggest she was choked with small hands; Ms. Kercher had bruises to her scalp.)

17) Ms. Kercher’s jeans may have been partially removed to restrain her legs and feet. (There were few bruises to Ms. Kerchers legs and feet, including no signs of ligature. This suggests her legs were immobilized in some other fashion.)

18) Guede held Ms. Kercher’s left wrist, leaving DNA traces on Ms. Kercher’s sweatshirt.

19) Guede likely held Ms. Kercher’s left thigh, brusing it, and left his DNA traces inside her.

20) Ms. Kercher’s sweatshirt was removed and two layers of shirts she had on were rolled up to her neck.

21) Guede left DNA traces on Ms. Kercher’s bra.

22) At least three different types of shoe prints were left on the floor in Ms. Kercher’s room on postcards, papers and the pillowcase. None of these matched Ms. Kercher’s shoes found in her room.

23) A witness heard a man and woman yelling from the direction of the cottage.

24) Ms. Kercher was pricked and stabbed with a small knife in the right side of her neck.

25) Ms. Kercher likely freed her right hand and sustained small cuts. She may have punched Knox in the nose or mouth.

26) Ms. Kercher likely freed her left hand and sustained small cuts. She may have grabbed Knox’s hair, while perhaps ripping off an earring from Knox. (Crime scene photos show blonde hair strands in Ms. Kercher’s left hand)

27) Ms. Kercher was able to scream at the top of her lungs. Two witnesses heard the scream. One witness believed it was around 11:30 PM when she heard it.

28) Ms. Kercher was pricked on her neck and chin with a knife. She was stabbed on the left side of her neck with a large knife. Her neck was roughly 16” off the floor, as suggested by a blood spray pattern on the wardrobe door close to where she was found.

29) A bloody shoeprint fitting Knox’s shoe size was left on the pillowcase. Shoeprints matching Guede’s shoes were also found on the pillowcase.

Right After The Attack

30) Guede may have gone to the bathroom to get two towels to staunch the blood. Guede confessed to this, though no DNA traces of his are found on the towels. Guede’s bloody shoeprints were found around Ms. Kercher’s body, and his bloody hand print was found on the pillow.

31) At this point, Knox may have gone to the small bathroom to check a wound. Knox left traces of her blood mixed with Ms. Kercher’s blood in the bidet, edge of the sink and Q-tip box in the small bathroom. Knox left an additional blood trace on the faucet.

32) Guede handled Ms. Kercher’s purse, leaving DNA traces of himself and Ms. Kercher, likely with Ms. Kercher’s blood. (Traces of Guede’s DNA was found on the zipper of the purse. Because the trace contains blood it was likely left after Ms. Kercher started bleeding.)

33) Guede left bloody shoeprints leading straight down the corridor and out of the cottage.

34) A witness heard someone running on the metal stair of the car park shortly after she heard the scream.

35) The same witness also heard running footsteps on the cottage pebble driveway at roughly the same time.

36) The boyfriend of another witness was bumped into by someone “˜with dark skin’ running up the stone stairs, though the time is unclear.

37) Another witness heard people running in the street that wraps behind the car park.

38) Sollecito likely tossed Ms. Kercher’s cellphones from his car into a nearby garden 1 km away from the cottage at around midnight.

39) Guede was seen at the Domus night club around 2 AM.

Evidence, Manipulated Or Overlooked

Likely sometime later during the night Sollecito and Knox returned to the cottage to eliminate evidence and frame Guede for the crime. In so doing:

40) Sollecito left a partial bloody footprint on the bathmat.

41) Sollecito left his DNA on Ms. Kercher’s bra clasp after removing the bra. (Given blood patterns on the bra, the bra may have been removed after Ms. Kercher had died and certainly after she had been stabbed on the left side)

42) Sollecito left one, possibly two, bloody footprints in the corridor.

43) Knox left two bloody footprints in the corridor. One of these contained her blood as well as Ms. Kercher’s blood. (Knox likely bled during or after the assault and may have stepped in her own blood)

44) Knox left a trace of her blood mixed with Ms. Kercher’s blood on the floor in Romanelli’s room.

45) Knox likely threw Romanelli’s clothes on the floor. She likely used an inordinately large rock to break the window with the outer shutters closed. She likely placed some of the broken glass on the window sill to fake a break-in. (Romanelli and the Postal Police found glass on top of Romanelli’s clothes and laptop, suggesting the room was ransacked and then the window was broken.)

46) Knox, perhaps inadvertently, left a piece of window glass in Ms. Kercher’s room.

47) Knox left a bloody footprint in her room.

48) Knox likely left her only room lamp in Ms. Kercher’s room by accident. (The lamp was found on the floor, by Ms. Kercher’s bed, and it may have been used to exam the bloodied floor around Ms. Kercher’s body to remove evidence, such as perhaps an earring and/or hair.)

49) Knox likely wiped away all her fingerprints throughout the entire house (While a number of fingerprints were found in the cottage and verified belonging to the three other flatmates, no fingerprints were found that could be matched to Knox, not in her room or elsewhere- except for one, on a glass in the kitchen.)

50) Knox and/or Sollecito repositioned Ms. Kercher’s body and covered it with the duvet. (Crime scene photos show from the streaks of blood that Ms. Kercher’s body was moved. There were masses of long hair mixed with blood on the floor, suggesting someone had yanked Ms. Kercher by her hair.)

51) They likely took Ms. Kercher’s wallet, closed her bedroom door and locked it.

Back At Sollecito’s Place

52) Sollecito and Knox returned to Sollecito’s place to clean up. They brought back the large knife and cleaned it with steel wool, and also tried to scrape away build-up/rust by the handle. (The knife was found at Sollecito’s place, with DNA traces of Knox on the handle and by the handle/blade joint, with a DNA trace of Ms. Kercher on the blade, with scratches on the blade and pockets of cleaned stainless steel by the handle.)

53) Sollecito likely disconnected the trap of his kitchen sink, perhaps to clean it. (The trap pipe was found disconnected.)

54) Sollecito and Knox likely used bleach to clean the floor of any blood. (Police observed a strong smell of bleach when entering Sollecito’s apartment.)

55) Sollecito and Knox apparently took a shower. (Knox has recounted a number of “˜ear cleaning’ and ‘shower’ stories.)

56) Sollecito likely put blood stained clothes and shoes into one or more garbage bags and drove in the night to dump them somewhere.

57) Sollecito used his computer at around 5:30 AM and turned on his cellphone at around 6AM.

Events On The Next Morning

58) Knox was seen at a nearby store at around 7:45 AM, just as the store was opening. She was noticed going to the cleaning products section, wearing clothes that were ultimately found on her bed at the cottage.

59) Knox may have traveled back and forth from the cottage with a mop and/or garbage bags. (In her different versions, both verbal and written, she talks about ‘having to fetch a mop from the cottage’.)

60) Knox turned on her cellphone around noon.

The Police At The House

61) Knox and Sollecito were discovered at the cottage by the Postal Police at around 12:30 PM.

62) Knox told the Postal Police that Ms. Kercher sometimes kept her door closed. (This was later contradicted by Romanelli, who insisted Ms. Kercher’s door be broken down.)

63) Knox called her mother in a panic at roughly 12:45 PM. Knox would later forget this phone call in her testimony and in her book.

64) Sollecito called the Carabinieri at around 12:50 PM, confirming nothing was stolen in Romanelli’s room, though he could not have possibly known this for certain.

65) When Ms. Kercher’s door was broken down, at around 1:15 PM, Sollecito and Knox were not with the group that broke the door down, and were not able to see inside the room.

66) Knox panicked when it seemed that Guede’s feces had been flushed by accident.

Later That Same Day

67) At the police station, Knox yelled out that Ms. Kercher “˜bled to death’.

68) At the police station, Knox inveighed against “˜those bastards’ after being fingerprinted, though it’s unclear whether she meant some other killers (and if so, why the plural), or the police.

One Day Later

69) On November 3, 2007, Sollecito lied to a reporter about how the discovery of Ms. Kercher’s body happened, recounting that Knox was the first to discover the body, and that he ‘saw blood everywhere’ even though he could not have seen into the room.

Two Days Later

70) On November 4, 2007, Knox emailed a narrative of the events from her point of view.

71) During the autopsy of November 4th, the prosecutor was convinced by the number and manner of the injuries on Ms. Kercher’s body that there had to be more than one assailant.

72) On November 4, 2007, Knox broke down when police showed her and the other roommates the knives in the silverware drawer at her cottage, to determine if any knives were missing. Knox had to be escorted outside to calm down.

73) Knox would later confess to her parents her concern about the knife at Sollecito’s apartment.

Three Days Later

74) On November 5, 2007, Sollecito failed to back up Knox and changed his alibi when confronted with cellphone records. He maintained Knox left his apartment from roughly 9:00 PM to 1:00 AM.

Four Days Later

75) On November 6, 2007, following Sollecito’s interrogation, Knox blamed Lumumba for the murder, first verbally, then in one written statement, then in a second statement that she offered voluntarily without coercion.

76) Knox failed to make an official retraction of her blaming Lumumba for the murder.

And Subsequentially

77) When first contacted by his friend via Skype, Guede spoke of a man with a knife who was shorter than he, and who had chestnut colored hair (like Sollecito). He also thought Knox was arguing with Ms. Kercher.

78) When Guede was arrested, Sollecito was concerned that Guede might say strange things about him. (If Sollecito was innocent, why be concerned about Guede?)

79) In their multiple “˜confessions’, both Knox and Guede cite Ms. Kercher’s “˜terrible screams’.

80) In court, as a response for finding Ms. Kercher’s DNA on the knife, Sollecito made up a story of pricking Ms. Kercher’s hand while cooking and subsequently apologizing to her about it. But Ms. Kercher had never been to his apartment. Sollecito recently retracted this story on Twitter.

81) Guede eventually confirmed that Sollecito and Knox were with him on the night of the murder.

Some Further Considerations

Ms. Kercher was not promiscuous and had scruples about watering the marijuana plants of the boys residing on the ground floor of the cottage. She had never expressed any interest in Guede to any of her closest friends. Similarly, Guede had never expressed any interest to any of his friends or acquaintances regarding Ms. Kercher.

Some 40+ wounds were found on Ms Kercher’s body. Despite being physically active and knowing martial arts maneuvers, she had few defensive wounds, mostly on the right hand.

She had bruising on her back, her left thigh, lower right leg, both elbows and wrists, the neck, the nose and mouth. She had two significant stab wounds of differing size on opposite sides of the neck, as well as various cuts on face, neck, hands.

No ligature marks were found on her ankles or wrists. She was therefore assaulted by multiple attackers. And as the evidence and trial reports have repeatedly indicated, the attackers were Knox, Sollecito and Guede, with Guede not responsible for the fatal wound.


Excellent work, Marcello.

I am so glad to read such a comprehensive, factual and very clear account.

Thank you very, very much, and I hope journalists who are covering the case will read and absorb these facts.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 10/20/13 at 04:30 PM | #

A highly impressive post with 81 evidentiary points and likelihoods to ponder. Thank you Olleosnep.

Posted by James Raper on 10/20/13 at 04:52 PM | #

Good job well done, Marcello!

I can understand the agony of the parents and I do not blame them much. I can also perhaps understand, with some difficulty, the mob mentality of the fan club.

But what I do not understand is the role played by the PR agency. Did they try to influence the experts, the judges or the public? Why? At what and whose cost?

There was some report that AK deposited more money in her account than what she withdraw few days back. I have never seen that brought up in discussions (well, I did mention it in several posts) and it never figured in the official records.

They cannot recall whether AK and RS had sex on that fateful night but they mention so many details perfectly in their books!

You did not mention about the attempts by the RS family to pervert the course of justice. He is also an equal partner in the crime.

In a shared bathroom, no one keeps towels in the bathroom.

Let us hope that the justice will not be violated.

Posted by chami on 10/20/13 at 05:25 PM | #

Thanks to all for the compliments.

@chami- my knowledge of the case is only from reading the Micheli report, the Massei report, the Supreme Court reports and Follain’s book and some of the transcripts posted at website.

I’ve only been following the case on TJMK and PMF for the past 5-6 months or so, and a little bit in 2009-2011. So I don’t know a lot of the back story of the PR campaigns, or the unsavory people involved in that distasteful operation, or as you point out the attempts by Sollecito’s family to pervert justice. I assume these issues will come out in the obstruction suits Pete has been mentioning… at least I hope so.

Regarding the parents - I can understand up to a point. The problem is they know their daughter has psychological issues, yet they let her travel abroad unescorted. And they have been more willing to perpetuate lies than read up on the court documents- for six years now.

They could have told the PR campaign to stop at some point, or to tone it down, etc. But they haven’t. Within months of Knox’s detention they were okay with the campaign attacking Mignini’s credibility.

I’m sure any parent would want to do the utmost to protect their children. But using unethical or distasteful tactics shouldn’t be a part of that effort.

Posted by Marcello on 10/20/13 at 05:57 PM | #

Olleosnep wrote -

“49) Knox likely wiped away all her fingerprints throughout the entire house (While a number of whole fingerprints were found in the cottage and belonging to the three other roommates, no whole fingerprints were found that could be matched to Knox, not even in Knox’s bedroom.)”

I wouldn’t mind knowing where all the fingerprints were found. Were there, for instance, Meredith’s fingerprints, or any fingerprints, on the glass of water atop her bedside table, and if not, why not? Was the rim of the glass swabbed and tested for DNA?

It does seem rather odd, if not improbable, that this glass was undisturbed by what had been going on in that room.

There was a fingerprint belonging to Knox - the only one that was found - on a glass in the kitchen. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if Knox was suffering from a dry mouth the next morning and had been sipping water. The dry mouth was likely caused by medication/anxiety and relying on breathing through her mouth because her nose was still partially blocked by clotted blood from a nose bleed.

Knox would likely, of course, have been wearing gloves as she went about her housework (!) and perhaps she wiped (or forgot to wipe) the rim before forgetting about the glass and the lamp in her haste to lock the door and dispose of the keys.

I wish I knew more as it seems to me that there were investigative possibilities that may have been overlooked.

Posted by James Raper on 10/20/13 at 06:51 PM | #

Dozens of previous posts accord with Marcello including all our scenario and timeline posts (see right column). These two by James fit nicely; I liked the suspicious “no fingerprints on the two lamps” oddity James notes in comments.

Others may recall one or several previous posts that differed in “melting-pot” ways from all the above. The only one I can think of is our courtroom report on Alessandra Formica’s testimony (scroll down).

Presuming it was Rudy Guede they encountered (she never positively identified the hustling guy as him) that was at about 10:30 which might put the attack before the broken down car, and long before the neighbors above heard the scream.

Hmmm. Not sure I buy that. Judge Massei didnt mention Alessandra Formica by name and everything else seems to point to the later timeline.

I believe the discredited witness Kokomani included a dark car in the drive as well as seeing the breakdown; the rest while amusing was hard to believe though.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/20/13 at 07:09 PM | #

Marcello wrote -

“2) A tow truck came at approximately 11:00 PM to tow the car. The driver of the truck noted a dark-colored car parked in front of the gate of the cottage, which he noted was slightly open. At approximately 11:15 PM the tow truck left and the family in the broken down car departed the area with other friends in a second car. (Sollecito had a dark colored Audi.) No screams were heard and no one noticed Guede, Sollecito or Knox pass through the gate.”

The business about the dark coloured car parked in the entrance to the driveway remains a mystery and only arises because the tow truck driver said he noticed it. On the other hand neither Alessandra Formica ( who says she was bumped into be a black man at approximately 11:00PM as she was walking down the stairs in Grimana Square and who noticed the tow truck) saw it, nor did the family of the broken down car. As you mention that family had friends on hand and I think that if there was a car there it probably belonged to them. I doubt that it was Sollecito’s Audi.

Posted by James Raper on 10/20/13 at 07:30 PM | #

Ah - thanks for that link Peter. So, it wasn’t the tow truck but the broken down car that Alessandra saw, and the time line was earlier.

Posted by James Raper on 10/20/13 at 07:39 PM | #

There was something about the blood splatters on the bra, or lack thereof. Does someone remember?

Posted by mylady007 on 10/20/13 at 07:42 PM | #

Maybe each held a knife on both sides of her throat to keep her still while RG assaulted her. 

Please, let Justice be served.

Posted by mylady007 on 10/20/13 at 07:50 PM | #

I don’t know about the glass. Agatino Giunta’s testimony state they found 46 ‘print fragments’ in Ms. Kercher’s room on November 3, 9 in Knox’s room on November 4th. In total they found 108 prints, 56 of these unusable. 17 were Kercher’s, 15 were Mezzetti’s, 5 Romanelli’s, 5 Sollecito’s, 4 Silenzi’s, 1 from Guede and 1 from Knox on the glass you mention.

Micheli makes the following comment:

Vi sono poi argomenti logici a sostegno di un’attività di pulizia, vista la mancanza di qualsiasi impronta digitale della K. in tutta la casa, come se non vi abitasse (a parte una, in un bicchiere rinvenuto in cucina) e malgrado l’imputata abbia rappresentato di essere andata in giro per le stanze quella stessa mattina, facendosi la doccia a dispetto dei segni di fatti di violenza che avrebbe dovuto notare. Né il rilievo è controbilanciato dalla constatazione che si rinvennero 14 impronte riferibili a soggetti non identificati, come se in altre parole l’ipotetico pulitore avrebbe pulito ben poco; ciò in quanto le impronte in questione, concernenti la stanza della K., si riducono a quella sul cuscino (poi attribuita al G.), a due su una busta di plastica posta a copertura di un calendario cinese (del tutto irrilevanti e certamente fuori dalle normali percezioni di un soggetto interessato a rimuovere i segni della propria presenza da un ambiente) e una in prossimità dello stipite della porta (probabilmente ivi lasciata da qualcuno di coloro che tentarono di buttarla giù, la mattina successiva all’omicidio).

There are then logical arguments to sustain a cleaning activity, seeing as there was missing any fingerprints of Knox in the whole house, as if she did not live there (apart from one, on a glass in the kitchen) and despite the defendant (Knox) sustaining that she went about rooms that morning, taking a shower despite the signs of violent acts which she should have noticed. Neither is the survey counterbalanced by the fact that there were 14 prints of unidentified subjects, as if the hypothetical cleaner had cleaned very little. Because the prints in question, concerning the room of Kercher, are reduced to that one on the pillow (subsequently attributed to Guede), to two on a plastic envelope covering a Chinese calendar (totally irrelevant and certainly outside the perception of someone intent on removing signs of their own presence in the room) and one near the door frame (likely left by one of those who tried to knock the door down on the morning after the murder.)

Posted by Marcello on 10/20/13 at 07:50 PM | #

Marcello, this is great. Thank you for concentrating on the provable facts. You have fresh eyes having come to this subject 5 to 6 months ago. We need that current energy and retention of the essential points to clear away the fog of PR.

Interesting suggestion it was Raf who threw the phones into Ms. Lana’s yard while driving by in his car. That would explain why he didn’t toss them far enough. 

You have worked up an incredibly distilled list of pertinent facts that the Supreme Court will be considering. As you say, they’ve seen this case 4 times in various forms. That’s encouraging. Thanks for a very valuable post.

Posted by Hopeful on 10/20/13 at 08:18 PM | #

Marcello wrote -

“74) On November 5, 2007, Sollecito failed to back up Knox and changed his alibi when confronted with cellphone/ computer records. He maintained Knox left his apartment from roughly 9:00 PM to 1:00 AM.”

I am not sure that the police would have had computer records by then.

However it would not be difficult to understand why Sollecito felt himself under pressure by then. The phone records were the key but also, I believe, the police knew about the interview he had given Kate Mansey on the 3rd Nov, a journalist from a British tabloid, whose article was published the next day. This said that (a) Sollecito had seen into Meredith’s room and had been appalled by all the blood, and (b) on the evening of Meredith’s murder he had been, with Amanda and a friend, to a party.

Kate Mansey still stands by that article although Sollecito disputes it. The question that must have been in the minds of the police is why Sollecito would give one alibi to them and then another to a journalist which, obviously, if true would be verifiable. They would also want to know why Sollecito would say he saw into the room when the information they had was that he did not have that opportunity. Not even from looking through a keyhole.

The police also had the phone records and would have also wanted to know why he was reported as telling the postal police that he had already phoned the emergency 112 number when this did not accord with the phone records and the time of arrival according to the postal police. Whilst the postal police had probably arrived later than they thought, the police were just going on what they had been told.

And, of course, why was there no phone activity during the critical hours?

Sollecito is a rational coward and he could see that the police were on to him. He did the next best thing he could which was to protect himself by cutting himself loose from Knox.

Posted by James Raper on 10/20/13 at 08:36 PM | #

@ James - regarding the car

I myself wasn’t aware of Lombardi’s comment (tow truck driver) until the other day while reading the testimony of three people involved with the car breakdown: the husband and wife of the broken car, and the wife of the second family who sat in the waiting car. From their description, the Toyota broke down in the middle of the intersection where Via Pergola and Viale Sant Antonio meet.

The waiting car was right next to the entrance ramp to the carpark, facing east, likely parked up on the small sidewalk that wraps around the corner of the building. This would be almost directly across the street from the gate. None of these people noticed the car or much of the villa, though the lady in the waiting car did notice the gate.

Only Lombardi noticed the car, but he also noticed the gate was ajar, which is rather interesting detail given that it was night time (albeit with cars going every-which-way).  And with Sollecito hanging over the railing of p. Grimana every few minutes, was the concern that someone might notice his car?  And if it was his car, why did they bring it before the assault?

Someone on PMF (I think) recently mentioned that Sollecito might have tossed the phones in that yard because he might have heard that there had been a police call at that address, via a police scanner in the car, regarding the fake bomb threat.

If Sollecito had a police scanner (and it might be given his sister was a Carabinieri), then he likely had the car after the assault, to toss the phones and perhaps other items. Then the question becomes when did he get the car, after the assault or before. And if before the assault, for what purpose?

Posted by Marcello on 10/20/13 at 08:54 PM | #

@ James,

Thanks for corrections. Updated finger prints and removed computer records, which I confirmed in Follain’s book.

Posted by Marcello on 10/20/13 at 09:05 PM | #

its heartbreaking nd particularly disturbing to imagine what poor Meredith went through at the hands of these animals.

Point (27) above mentions blonde hair photographed in Merediths hand

was this ever analysed ?

Posted by mollythecat on 10/20/13 at 09:10 PM | #

Marcello, your Post is most timely, comprehensive, & brilliant.

WRT your 81-point scenario based on some of the most significant evidence:

4) Sollecito received a call from his dad at 8:42 PM, and they discussed the broken trap in the kitchen sink and how to clean the kitchen floor. Sollecito also discussed going to Gubbio with Knox the next day.

The existence of the call IS unshakeable, but I can find no Independent corroboration that they “discussed the broken trap in the kitchen sink and how to clean the kitchen floor”, and believe this allegation is not unshakeable.

In an absence of independent corroboration, don’t you think the alleged flood-on-the-kitchen-floor-story is likely part of a cover-up to justify the actual RS-kitchen clean-up?

Posted by Cardiol MD on 10/20/13 at 09:19 PM | #

Lombardi aspect was interesting.

Posted by James Higham on 10/20/13 at 09:50 PM | #

Hi Mollythecat..the hair was lost…disappointing for sure.

Thank you Marcello.

Posted by Bettina on 10/20/13 at 10:41 PM | #

By the way, I would think that the presence of the “blond hair” in Meredith’s hand would tend to refute the argument of a single attacker.  Unless, of course, RG had his hair straightened and bleached at that time.

Posted by sherrel on 10/20/13 at 11:42 PM | #

I never heard before that fingerprint fragments attributed to Sollecito were found in Meredith’s room - surely that is very significant as he claimed to never have entered the room?

Posted by believing on 10/21/13 at 01:14 AM | #

Almost an irrelevant note: I think Italy has 60 millions inhabitants.

Posted by Yummi on 10/21/13 at 01:43 AM | #

@ Cardiol

Yes, I agree. It wasn’t clear in my sentence, so I’ve clarified it.

@ Yummi

Correction updated. Thanks!


The fingerprint totals cited by Giunta are for the whole upper floor of the cottage, not just Ms. Kercher’s room.

I don’t know about the hair. I would be surprised if it was lost, given that the hand was bagged in the photo. But, Dr. Stefanoni doesn’t mention it in her report so…..

Posted by Marcello on 10/21/13 at 03:11 AM | #


The presence of the blonde hair was reported by Barbie Nadeau in Angel Face and also that it was lost. The photograph we posted is from the original crime scene photographs and yes, Meredith’s hand was bagged; the hair, including one found in her vagina, was still lost. Since they were never listed in the official list of evidence samples collected at the crime scene, they were not discussed in court.

I was also able to independently confirm when I was in Italy that those hairs had been lost during the rush to collect samples as soon as possible.

Posted by Ergon on 10/21/13 at 08:07 AM | #

How tall was Meredith does anyone know this? I just looked up Meredith Kercher wiki and it does not give this info and what i did read in scanning the page was incorrect information.

The first thing i believe to be incorrect is the timing of Amanda’s calls to Meredith’s phone and the timing of the arrival of the Postal Police.

There was something else also about the disposal of the 2 phones.

But i want to find out how tall was Meredith. I thought she was 5’6” but am not sure can anyone assist with this please.

Posted by Mason2. on 10/21/13 at 08:21 AM | #

Thank you very much Marcello, a very comprehensive overview of the salient facts. Let’s hope that journalists will now take the opportunity to read your post and make amends, even at this late stage,  for what you rightly call their failures in the coverage of the case.

Posted by Odysseus on 10/21/13 at 11:33 AM | #

Thank you Marcello for a detailed and comprehensive overview of the evidence points in the case. The coverage by the media is woeful. And as you point out the Italian Court system takes great care in given a fully reasoned account of their judgment.

However journalists often do not even take the time to read and digest the facts thoroughly.  Many english and american journalists have done a great diservice to the Kercher family.

Your point about Sollecito using his car is very interesting. Was his car forensically examined at any stage? Also Guede’s DNA in Meredith’s purse..I am a bit confused as I thought her money had been understood to have been stolen earlier from her room. Is it likely that it would have been stolen when the assault happened?

Marcello, this list makes it clear that the Nencini appeal can but only find them guilty as charged.

Posted by Olliebear on 10/21/13 at 01:43 PM | #

May i take this opportunity also to say hello to everyone who contributes to this wonderful website. I have been following from the shadows for many years. I think the work you do is amazing, and I am honoured to be able to parley with you.

Can somebody help me…

If a murder victim is found with another persons hair clutched in their hand, couldn’t one hypothesise that it came from the scalp of an attacker, maybe during a struggle ?

Wouldn’t this ‘hard’ evidence be ‘manna from heaven’ for a policeman/woman. 

The expression ‘smoking gun’ comes to mind…

If evidence of this quality is lost, it displays incompetence of the highest order, does it not ?

I go off on a tangent here, but can someone indulge me for a moment on a different topic. Please forgive me if i ask this question in the wrong place on the website.

The subject of ‘choice’ and the rationale of ‘first come first served’

Is it true that Knox both viewed and agreed a tenancy with Laura or Filomena, prior to Merediths arrival in perugia ?

If so, why did she not choose the room Meredith eventually inhabited ?

This question has always lurked in the back of my mind.

If given a choice of bedroom to rent, why wouldn’t one choose the room with the nicest view over the open countryside.

This may seem like an inane question, but we know Knox was seething with jelousy for many many reasons.
Knox knew then, and we all know now, that Meredith was everything she was not, or would ever be.  I can’t help feeling Knox would have been even more jelous that Meredith had such a wonderful view over the valley.

But if she was first to view the property why didn’t she take the nicest room ? was there maybe a difference in price ?

It matters not i guess, I was just curious.

Thanks everyone 😊

Posted by mollythecat on 10/21/13 at 01:58 PM | #

Regarding the hair as smoking gun. I think the Scientific Police might have thought there were a number of smoking guns at the site, with all the blood traces and hair on the floor. But a significant set of traces one turned out to be cat’s blood. They took 12 samples of this in the lower apartment and on the outside steps, all for nothing.

Losing the hair is inexcusable, but I find it curious that Micheli chided the team for leaving the bra clasp at the site until the second visit, but made no mention of the hair even though he certainly saw the crime scene photos and video.

@ Olliebear
They did test Sollecito’s car in a number of places, but found no matches.

@ mollythecat
From Follain’s book it appears Ms. Kercher signed up to rent before Knox, and hence got the ‘room with a view’.

Posted by Marcello on 10/21/13 at 05:17 PM | #

@ Mason2. “…how tall was Meredith…”?

See Massei page 131:” …height was one metre and sixty centimetres…”

A metre = 39.37 inches; 32.39 * 1.6 = 62.992.

So Meredith was 5’3”

Posted by Cardiol MD on 10/21/13 at 05:23 PM | #


39.37 * 1.6 = 62.992.

So Meredith was 5’3” in height.

Posted by Cardiol MD on 10/21/13 at 05:37 PM | #

Regarding the hair as smoking gun. I think the Scientific Police might have thought there were a number of smoking guns at the site, with all the blood traces and hair on the floor. But a significant set of traces one turned out to be cat’s blood. They took 12 samples of this in the lower apartment and on the outside steps, all for nothing.

Losing the hair is inexcusable, but I find it curious that Micheli chided the team for leaving the bra clasp at the site until the second visit, but made no mention of the hair even though he certainly saw the crime scene photos and video.

@ Olliebear
They did test Sollecito’s car in a number of places, but found no matches.

@ mollythecat
From Follain’s book it appears Ms. Kercher signed up to rent before Knox, and hence got the ‘room with a view’.

Posted by Marcello on 10/21/13 at 06:30 PM | #

@Marcello @ mollythecat

I haven’t got Follain’s book to hand at the moment but in his book John Kercher says that when Meredith moved in she was a bit unsure about the amount requested for deposit (so she checked it with him) and she told him “an American girl was due to arrive a month later”.

“In Darkness Descending” it quotes Knox saying “we exchanged numbers. I put down a down payment”. So it seems that Knox did reserve the room without a view before Meredith arrived.I can only assume you are right molleythecat - she chose the room because it was cheaper (we know she was underfunded for her stay). And/or views didn’t rate highly on her decadent agenda.

Posted by Odysseus on 10/21/13 at 06:45 PM | #

@ Cardiol thank you very much for that info. Well if Meredith was 5’3” how tall is Amanda. She seems to be a short person in photos.

@Marcello thank you very much for all your effort and hard work with this presentation. The Court is on track.

We will all be surprised and delighted if an American journalist breaks ranks and starts asking hard questions and just puts them out in the open for everyone to read and ponder.

Am fed up with the rehearsed and practised questions on all the talk shows. You know ‘who is the real Amanda’ etc.,

Posted by Mason2. on 10/21/13 at 06:56 PM | #

Hi Odysseus and others, about the room

Knox booked the cheaper room on the summer visit from Germany with her sister. She did look at the room, and I think the shot with Laura and Filomena outside the front door may have been taken by Knox’s sister then.

If you have read the Knox book, the two girls arrive at the station, and then take hours apparently headed south, to get to their hotel, dragging their suitcases. Finally they get a lift from a kind Perugian who Knox slimes in the book (so what is new?).

The Holiday Inn is across the main freeway headed west and so it would be foolhardy to try to get to (and from) on foot. Put these coordinates into Google Earth:

Station:  43° 6’13.93"N 12°22’32.25"E

Hotel: 43° 6’5.09"N 12°20’35.49"E

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/21/13 at 07:14 PM | #

Marcello describes in Comments above where the broken down vehicle and the visitors’ other car were each parked on the night.

Here is a photoset (click all for larger images) which shows the locations with images here ranging from west (Grimana) to east. The two cars would have been sort of at the center of most shots.

The third shot down (see also below) is looking down the stone stairs. You can see a patch of bright sunlight near the front.

That is the west end of the passage between the first and second row of all the apartment blocks above Meredith’s house, down which Sophie lived.

Rather than take the steel stairs down (the quick route) Meredith walked right by Sophie’s front door, and then on down the stone steps to her fate.


This image below is from Meredith’s gate. (Click for larger image.) It shows the sandy strip with trees above the wall by the basketball court.

It was from up there that witness Curatolo said the perps looked down on the gate about when the broken down car was waiting to get towed.


Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/21/13 at 07:22 PM | #

Re point #16 “Guede rifled through Ms. Kercher’s purse, leaving DNA traces.”

The idea that evidence of Rudy Guede was found inside Meredith’s purse is a long-time FOA myth intended to imply that he was the one to steal the credit cards and money, etc. from the purse. Micheli indicated that his DNA was found mixed with Meredith’s DNA on the zipper of her purse only. (See TJMK, Understanding Micheli #3: How Damning is the DNA Evidence Coming Up?, the first bullet point under “In summary, the biological sources and locations where DNA belonging to the three defendants was found are these:”). There was no evidence of Rudy found within the purse and Micheli found him innocent of theft.

Nikki, who is an Italian/English speaker, was one of the translators of the Micheli report on Guede’s tria for TJMK. She was knowledgeable about DNA, and at the time was the Forensic Moderator of PMF. On January 28, 2009 she posted on PMF this quote from the Micheli report: “Guede’s Dna has been found on the purse zip, more or less in the middle. Since no blood or other biological traces (Guede) have been found inside the purse, it’s logical to think that he gripped the purse to move it, without using the handles.”

Brian S., who summarized parts of the translated Micheli report for TJMK, posted on PMF on March 4, 2009 a quote in Italian from the Micheli reort and a Google translation of same, referencing Guede and the purse. Brian says this about Micheli: “In effect he’s saying that the theft was part of the crime scene staging. He says that there is nothing to indicate Rudy was interested in stealing Meredith’s money. Even where his DNA is found on Meredith’s bag, the position of it’s location indicates it was left where someone would leave it if they picked up the bag to close it or move it. There is no DNA or anything else to indicate that Rudy put his hand inside the bag.”

Marcello, you have done a wonderful compilation of evidence points and this post is in no way a criticism. There are just a lot of misconceptions out there about Rudy Guede—that he was a drifter, convicted of crimes, rifled through Meredith’s purse, etc., etc. After all this time, it is hard to separate truth from FOA fiction—things just get accepted even when they are not true because the lies are continually repeated.

Posted by beans on 10/21/13 at 07:58 PM | #

Marcello’s scenario inclines toward a premeditated hazing of Meredith involving knives as the prosecution always presumed. So did Judge Micheli though softhearted Judge Massei blinked.

The testimony in 2009 on the attack on Meredith was delivered in at least three closed sessions including the autopsy report, the crime scene recreation by Rome specialists (which took a whole day) and the recreation video.

Both of the recreations explained the marks on Meredith’s body and in the room in a fight which lasted FIFTEEN MINUTES up to where the perps laid off.

Then they left her dying, holding her neck on both sides to stop the blood running out, and took her phones and keys and locked the door. 

An astonishing rage. Astonishingly cruel.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/21/13 at 08:03 PM | #

Regarding the room, per Follain at any rate, Ms. Kercher arrived in Perugia in late August, and a week after, rented the room.

Follain has the Knox sisters arriving in late August as well, and Knox renting, presumably, the remaining room.

The timing is left vague, but in Follain’s account, Romanelli and Mezzetti show Ms. Kercher both rooms that were available to rent, while later, Mezzetti shows Knox only the smaller bedroom, not the end one.

Posted by Marcello on 10/21/13 at 08:06 PM | #

Hi Pete

Yes, I’m sure she viewed the room before booking (in case you misunderstood my comment “Knox did reserve the room without a view”. I should have said “Knox did reserve the room-without-a-view”!)

Thanks for the co-ordinates. No wonder they got lost (from the outset, as it were). The kindly Perugian man can thank his lucky stars he was only slimed.

Posted by Odysseus on 10/21/13 at 08:22 PM | #

Hi Marcello.

Seems correct though I had though Meredith was not yet there.

According to Knox, both rooms were still available on 1 September when she went with Laura to have a look. No mention of Meredith. From chapter two:

Laura and her roommate, Filomena Romanelli, led us through the kitchen/living area. The house had four bedrooms, two bathrooms, and a terrace. One of the available bedrooms faced the driveway, with just a sliver of the valley view. The room next to it was slightly larger and had a picture window looking out on the countryside. Both cost the same, but I liked the smaller room better. It had everything I hoped for—¬a bed, a desk, a wardrobe, and a cozy feeling. The rent—¬three hundred euros, or just over four hundred dollars at the time—¬seemed expensive, but the place was close to the university, and a villa. It was worth it.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/21/13 at 08:27 PM | #

@ beans
Thank you for raising the point. I was basing my comment from Dr. Stefanoni’s test results report, and I saw that I somehow swapped trace ‘A’ with trace ‘B’. Trace ‘B’ was found internally, was of a ‘yellow-brown substance’ per Stefanoni’s description and had Ms. Kercher’s DNA.

Trace ‘A’, apparently on the outside of the purse from the B&W photo (and evidently on the zipper per Micheli) contains both Guede and Kercher DNA traces and also containing ‘certainly haematic substances’. So apparently trace ‘A’ was left by Guede when he had Ms. Kercher’s blood on his hands. So this gets revised.

Regarding Guede, it is true that at the time he was not a convicted criminal, he did return to Italy, was willing to take his punishment for his part in the assault, and for failing to assist Ms. Kercher when she most needed help (though he agreed to appeal the guilty verdict). And at least he apologized to the Kerchers. But, he also consistently lied multiple times about events and he has always tried to present a version where he was not carrying out an assault. He still hasn’t given ‘the whole truth’ about that night, and one has to wonder why.

Posted by Marcello on 10/21/13 at 08:35 PM | #

Hi Odysseus

There are many small “wrong facts” in Knox’s book which suggest that Knox’s shadow writer took over (in exasperation?) the writing of the book.

On the hunt for the hotel, the shadow writer obviously didnt have a clue where they were. She goes on about climbing and about a wonderful view.

In fact unless Knox accidentally wandered up some hill (there is one to the north-west) the route from the station to the hotel directly is almost dead-flat.

Just a very gradual slope down.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/21/13 at 08:38 PM | #


I never believe anything AK says (just to be on the safe side).

I think it’s likely that she did covet the larger room with the picture window but it WAS more expensive, despite what she says. From this quote I’d say she was trying to give the impression that she was totally unaffected and simple in her tastes.

Nothing that comes from this woman’s mouth has any truth or authenticity whatsoever. Everything is for effect. I’ll happily be corrected if anyone can prove otherwise.

Posted by Odysseus on 10/21/13 at 08:50 PM | #

I am rather amused at the suggestion that a burglar is stealing credit cards. And mobile phones. Resale value of a stolen mobile must be close to zero!

Yes, I too believe that stealing the credit cards and the phones were part of staging. And the cash was too tempting to be discarded- too dangerous to carry around- but safe to deposit in the bank!

I am still puzzled about how the laptop hard disks were damaged beyond recovery.

Posted by chami on 10/21/13 at 09:13 PM | #

Regarding the room ( sorry to bang on about it )

It makes sense to me that attractive views come at a premium, and hence a higher rental value.

I may be mistaken, but I was always under the impression Knox had first pick, and then left Italy for a while.

It’s a curious thing why Knox didn’t choose the room with a view though, because if i remember correctly, in her diary, she waxed lyrical about the cottage, and how beautiful, it, and the surrounding landscape was.

Having said that, neither Laura nor Filomena chose the ‘room with a view’ and they were resident before either of the foreign girls

In the end analysis I think the room must have been a more expensive proposition.

On the subject of lost hair..

I did not know before i read Marcellos post, that blonde hair was found in Meredith hand. To mislay this evidence is inexcusable.

However to lose a ‘foreign hair’ found in the more private regions of a female anatomy, especially as this was a case of a murder, aggravated by a sexual assault, is gross negligence.

( I must explain that i care deeply for poor sweet meredith, and her wonderful family, and i am uncomfortable talking about her private anatomical parts. Even 6 years years on )

I firmly believe in the guilt of Knox and her depraved ex boyfriend. I sincerely, with all my heart, wish to see them pay for their crimes.

However, given the mistakes made in terms of collection of hair sample evidence, and failure to collect the bra clasp, I do not think the CSI people covered themselves in glory.

Having learned these facts here on TJMK, I feel that Meredith has been let down badly by some pitiful forensic work carried out at the crime scene.

If the hair samples were collected, and in evidence today, these two deranged killers, AK and RS would be

1/ Behind bars still, and the world would be a safer and better place for us all.
3/ Meredith and her family would have received the justice they deserve.

I prey every day for the return to jail of these two sicko lunatics. They’re mere presence among us is an insult to humanity.

Posted by mollythecat on 10/21/13 at 09:18 PM | #


Hear,hear. Agree with your sentiments.

Btw re “...neither Laura nor Filomena chose the ‘room with a view’ and they were resident before either of the foreign girls”.

I understood (maybe wrongly)that the Italian women were renting the whole floor from the landlord and subletting the two rooms. If true it would make some sense for them to forego occupying the room-with-a -view in the interest of achieving better rental income.

Posted by Odysseus on 10/21/13 at 09:35 PM | #

I wasn’t excusing Guede for anything—only trying to have the correct facts. He is guilty of participating in Meredith’s murder, has told numerous lies, and is right where he belongs. The FOA is quite fond of painting him in the worst light possible and they don’t let truth get in their way. We all come to this site to find the truth. Sometimes mistakes are inadvertently made, and when they are, posters here correct them if the mistakes are pointed out. The truth is that Guede didn’t rifle through Meredith’s purse to steal anything, but that doesn’t mean he didn’t participate in the horrible murder of a wonderful young woman or that he has told the truth about what happened that night. And he’s still a convicted murderer.

Posted by beans on 10/21/13 at 09:36 PM | #

@ odysseus

Thank you for your explanation, it makes perfect sense to me now,  achieving a better rental income is indeed a logical thing to do.

Can someone tell me, Were FR and LM resident in the cottage before the boys downstairs ?

My understanding is that both Italian girls were working in the legal profession. Is this correct ?

Does anyone know how long the latch/lock on the front door had been faulty.

Had any attempt been made to correct this ongoing fault ?

If i understand it correctly, the local area around the cottage, and sometimes the grounds of the cottage itself, was frequented by druggies and their dealers, on a regular basis. As a result of this I would be anxious to get this fault fixed ASAP.

Were any steps taken to fix this fault ?

Was the front door lockable at all ?

What about the back door, does anyone know what state of repair that was in ?

Posted by mollythecat on 10/21/13 at 09:59 PM | #

According to Follain Amanda was due to return to Germany the day after she paid her deposit. This was because her uncle had arranged an internship for her in the Reichstag. It didn’t work out to her satisfaction and she returned to Perugia in late September but I wonder how long she would have been away had she not cut short her stay?

It may well have been suggested to her by F&L that if she was going away for some time then it would be better for them if she was to reserve the smaller room - so that they could be free to let the larger whilst she was away - but that if it was still unlet when she got back, then she could have it.

As for a view, both MK and AK had access to the balcony, and Knox wrote that she was delighted enough at the time.

Posted by James Raper on 10/21/13 at 10:04 PM | #

Marcello, many thanks for your meticulous work in creating such a comprehensive evidentiary summary. My hope is that it will attract the attention of mainstream journalists, more likely a single journalist, with the conviction and determination to finally speak truth. This alliance of the lying murderess and the American media must end.

Like you, I came late to this case. But even with the limited facts I had, it was clear that her story didn’t add up. Why are people blind to this?  The sentencing reports blew me away. What a brilliant concept that we could emulate here in the States. I recommended this source to an inquiring friend who was convinced of Knox’s guilt as a result.

Nevertheless, it’s easy to miss or forget things in a case of this magnitude which is another reason your summary is needed. What struck me most was the absence of Amanda’s prints with the exception of one kitchen glass! How can the groupies have the audacity to promulgate their absurd her-DNA-is-everywhere-in-the cottage certainty? They find it perfectly normal that Meredith and Amanda"s mixed DNA blood drops were recovered, yet there’s not a single print of Knox’s even in her own room? 

One final question. Was the missing rent cash ever verified? I believe there was truth to RG’s account of an argument over money. Thanks again, Marcello, and thanks to all of the fine minds here at TJMK.

Posted by CaliDeeva on 10/21/13 at 10:12 PM | #

True, Odysseus. Better not to believe a word Knox (or her shadow writer) writes, including on the price of the room.

Accurate dimensions of the four bedrooms are shown below.  Knox’s is about 3/4 of the total floor area of the three others. That could represent 100 euros less rent if Knox had haggled.


The rent asked could indeed have loomed large in Knox’s mind. She had burned though a lot of her savings to-ing and fro-ing from Germany. 

Knox was badly funded from the get-go, applied for no scholarship help, and really needed the Le Chic job (though she had no Italian work permit and so if she lost it she might not get another at all).

She and Sollecito were believed by cops to be on cocaine on the night. If she was, that habit isn’t cheap. She was burning through her savings and losing that job would have had her broke soon after the New Year.

Knox people say she could always turn to her dad. Sure. “Daddy (sniff sniff) really, I did not blow it all on cocaine. It went on.. will let you know soon. Can I have some more?”

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/21/13 at 10:13 PM | #

@ beans
Agreed, except that we can’t say for certain what Guede did with Ms. Kercher’s purse. He handled it apparently. But, for all we know, he may have opened it and taken Ms. Kercher’s wallet without leaving a trace significant enough for the police to detect. Reading Stefanoni’s report it is rather surprising (to me at any rate) how much of samples taken did not reveal usable traces.

In any event this is a detail. What’s important is the accuracy. Many thanks again for the correction.

Posted by Marcello on 10/21/13 at 10:13 PM | #

@ James Raper

Thank you James,

So not only was Knox in the room without a view ( notwithstanding the balcony ) she also occupied the smaller of the two rooms. I think this would annoy a disturbed individual such as she, despite what she wrote at the time. lets face it most of what she writes, and says, is lies…

Knox was jelous because Meredith was everything she was not.

more hard working
more intelligent
more popular
more studious
more sympathetic
more empathetic
more patient
more kind
easier to get along with
higher moral values
more stable family
more loving
more caring
more sensible

Basically Meredith Kercher was a far superior human being than Amanda Knox, on every level. and to top it all off she had a the nicest and biggest room in the house.

Posted by mollythecat on 10/21/13 at 10:26 PM | #

Follain states the Ms. Kercher’s rent was 270 euros/month. Knox seems to state a similar amount.

It wouldn’t surprise me if Knox held this against Ms. Kercher as well.

It would surprise me if Romanelli and Mezzetti, as lawyers-in-training, would have gotten a tape measure to calculate sublet rents based on room areas. That’s more like ‘Big Bang Theory’ territory.

Romanelli and Mezzetti likely chose the front rooms because of easier access to the bigger bathroom and the laundry. Far more convenient.

Posted by Marcello on 10/21/13 at 10:35 PM | #


And, to add insult to injury, Meredith looked set to take her job, a job she badly needed, as Peter says above. All in all it was too much to bear.

Posted by Odysseus on 10/21/13 at 10:35 PM | #

@ odysseus

And the FOAkers try to imply there was no motive. Goodness me…..

Knox likely felt crushed beneath the weight of this wonderful, beautiful young woman, superior in every department.

What a crying shame this whole sorry business is.

For the love of god, I prey Knox and her lapdog get their comeuppance !!

Posted by mollythecat on 10/21/13 at 10:54 PM | #

@ Marcello,

£270 which would be 300 euros then? Knox’s rent was also 300 euros which she said (in her diary) was fine because she’d seen pokier places for 500 euros. But was she peeved?

@ Calideeva,

“Was the missing rent cash ever verified?”

This from a previous post of mine -

“......... Filomena Romanelli, the flatmate and trainee lawyer. If there was anyone who was going to ensure that the rent was paid on time, it would have been her. She gave evidence that the rent being due very soon she asked Meredith about her contribution of 300 euros and was told by Meredith that all was OK because she had just withdrawn 200 euros from her bank. Filomena assumed from Meredith’s reply that the balance was already to hand” 

Incidentally Knox was also present when this exchange took place.

Posted by James Raper on 10/21/13 at 11:10 PM | #

It is very common for people with an addiction or compulsive habit with drugs or alcohol to take , ‘borrow’ and steal money any way they can, surreptiously or openly too - it is often irrational.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 10/21/13 at 11:42 PM | #

@ James

You know, I took Follain’s 270/month to be euros, but seeing your £ symbol made me realize he likely meant British pounds, which currently is roughly 1.20 euros (not sure what is was in 2007). If 270 pounds, then currently that would be 324 euros/month, so a bit more than 300 euros.

If rent was 300 for the smaller room and 325 for the larger room, a division like that seems reasonable. The rental difference could be easily described due to more amenities for the larger room, without having to get out a tape measure, paper and pencil.

Posted by Marcello on 10/21/13 at 11:47 PM | #

According to Darkness Descending the landlord was raking in 2500 euros a month from the cottage. If that is divided equally between the boys on the one hand and the girls on the other then the girls were liable for 1250 euros. As Meredith and Knox were paying 300 each then obviously F&L were paying 325 each. It’s neither here nor there of course - not enough to kill for - but it looks as if that jammy Meredith got the best deal of all!

Posted by James Raper on 10/21/13 at 11:52 PM | #

@ James

Freaky. I was going to write that if Romanelli and Mezzetti were paying roughly the same amount (625 for both their rooms) then paying a total of 1250 euros/month rental for a 4 bedroom apartment was actually a great price, especially given that location, just outside the historic center, across from the car park, with their own private car park just inside the gate. And if that included electric, gas, water and whatever city taxes, even better.

Posted by Marcello on 10/22/13 at 12:02 AM | #

@ James

Thanks for that info.

@ Seeking Understanding

Meredith was vulnerable in every way with Amanda Knox as a roommate. It speaks to Meredith’s trusting character that her door remained unlocked. While true that RG lied, there seems to be an element of truth to some statements. It’s likely there was a confrontation between the girls as Meredith seemed to be setting some boundaries with AK. I believe AK was helping herself before this, maybe in small amounts MK wouldn’t miss. Amanda clearly underestimated her expenses.

I believe there were one or two final triggering events fueling Knox’s rage. When she brought RS over to the cottage the day after Halloween, she was no doubt brooding about being excluded from Meredith’s plans. AK had no reason to be there. She didn’t pick up a change of clothes. I see this as the time of premeditation after confirming Meredith would be alone that night.  There was a verbal confrontation preceding the attack in my opinion.

Posted by CaliDeeva on 10/22/13 at 12:41 AM | #

Several hairs were collected, from the victim’s berdoom as well as from other rooms and items.

7 “hairs” were found by Dr. Lalli on Meredith’s body, but were given to Stefanoni who anlyzed them at the microscope and found they were wool fibers.

22 hairs were collected by Stefanoni in Meredith’s room, from the duvet covering Meredith’s body and on her blue sweater. Only two were attributed to Meredith from DNA analysis. Some of the others were “blonde” or “light brown”(note: all hairs collected from Knox’s sweater and in the small bathroom are catalogued as “blonde”). Some were “broken” (spezzati); all hairs except the two were all not useful for extracting DNA profiles.

Posted by Yummi on 10/22/13 at 01:00 AM | #

Another thing i’ve long pondered is when, exactly, did Meredith realise her rent money had been stolen ?

Didn’t Guede say Meredith had told him something about 1/ stolen money 2/ Knox being involved

300 euros is a lot of money, and if we assume the denominations were say,  twenties, this would mean there were at least 15 notes. This is quite a sizeable amount of money and takes up a lot of space in the average ladies purse. this kind of ‘wad’ would surely be missed very quickly.

Meredith did not mention stolen monies to her english friends over dinner, surely, if she had known this at the time, she would have told them.  None of the english girls mentioned being informed of a theft.

If we assume Meredith had left her money at home, returned from dinner, checked it was still where she left it, realised it had gone, this would surely prompt an argument with Knox when she returned with RS and RG, which led to…well we know what it led to…..

On the other hand this scenario assumes Meredith left her rent money in the cottage. I’m not convinced that Meredith would leave such a large amount of money in the house. Meredith was far too sensible to do that, especially as she knew the front door was broken, and/or the locking mechanism was unreliable.

It is more likely ( to me ) that Meredith kept the money on her person at all times. If this is true, when would Knox have the opportunity to secretly steal it ? .... she wouldn’t…

i believe it is more likely that Knox stole the money right in front of Merediths eyes, while the attack took place, or shortly afterwards as Meredith lay on the cold floor, bleeding to death.

Heartless, evil, no remorse, no emotion, no regret, no compassion, no humanity. Knox has nothing, she’s devoid of all human feelings.

Posted by mollythecat on 10/22/13 at 01:44 AM | #

@ Yummi,

Very interesting and informative post. Can you confirm that there was a hair that went missing, supposedly from Meredith’s hand, or is this a myth.
Also, are you aware of why no DNA could be extracted from the blond/light brown hairs. Was any other comparison test re. Knox and Sollecito performed with these hairs.

Posted by John Forbes on 10/22/13 at 01:55 AM | #

Mason2 and Cardiol,

Massei English translation p. 175 and p. 177 state Meredith’s height as 164cm in other words 1,64 metres (original agrees with “’altezza di m.1,64”) which equals 5 feet 4.5 inches according to Yahoo, Google says 5’4’‘.

P.131 height comments seem to be just general ponderings around how much a slender girl around 160 cm tall would weigh - Lalli was not able to weigh Meredith so they had trouble using the Henssge nomogram to calculate the time of death:

“With respect to these indications given in Dr. Lalli’s report, Professor Introna stated that Dr. Lalli was not able to weigh the body. He observed that for a girl whose height was one metre and sixty centimetres, weight tables predict a normal weight of slightly over the 55 kilos guessed by Dr. Lalli. He also observed that “two kilos more or two kilos less usually escape attention altogether”, but they have a significant effect in the use of Henssge’s nomogram.”

Posted by Rumpole on 10/22/13 at 02:11 AM | #

This is all very interesting. But to me as I read what these two did to Meredith ie the small cute on the neck while they held her down so that she could be raped and then they knifed her in the neck so that she died in her own blood (see above) is not the stuff of soap opera.

Sorry but I find the detail offensive because with it the actual horror gets lost.

For me it is my fervent wish that these two spend as much time in the worst jail possible.

You see I am proud to be called a ‘Guilter’ because I am very very angry at such sick manipulative inhuman beings as the unspeakable animals who inhabit such places as Ground Report.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 10/22/13 at 04:16 AM | #

How has the horror been lost?  The details of this crime magnify the cold, calculating brutality of the perpetrators.  Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito have persuaded too many people that there is no evidence against them. Here they are exposed as the lying murderers they are. JMO.

Posted by CaliDeeva on 10/22/13 at 05:36 AM | #

@Rumpole thanks for the Massei pp 175, & 177 heights of 1.64 metres.

(Massei page 131 refers to a height of 1.60 metres which corresponds to 62.992 inches.)

1.64 metres corresponds to 39.37 * 1.64 = 64.56668 inches, giving about 5 feet 4.6 inches.

Can we agree that 5 feet 4.6 inches is the closest approximation to Meredith’s height?

Posted by Cardiol MD on 10/22/13 at 06:41 AM | #

@ Yummi
Thanks for the response regarding the hairs. I checked Dr. Stefanoni’s report and skimmed through her testimony and checked her Powerpoint presentation at:

and I found the facts you’re referring to, but in her testimony particularly, Dr. Stefanoni doesn’t specifically mention retrieving the hair from Ms. Kercher’s hand. Perhaps that hair was part of the set of 7 hairs given to her by Dr. Lalli, but it’s unclear.

On the other hand, if that’s the case, then the hair was not lost and this would confirm why Judge Micheli didn’t comment on it (given that he criticized the leaving of the bra clasp as a ‘leggerezza grave’).

Notable in Dr. Stefanoni’s Powerpoint presentation is that Knox’s DNA was found on another of Sollecito’s knives, a switchblade knife. And even more importantly, there seemed to a lot of luminol revealed traces at Sollecito’s apartment, potentially blood spots. A few spots on the floor contain either Knox’s DNA or Knox’s and Sollecito’s DNA.

Guede’s apartment also had a few blood spots.

Posted by Marcello on 10/22/13 at 07:29 AM | #

@ Marcello,

With regards to your last post and the missing hair, I very much doubt this hair was attributed along with those from her clothing. If a blond hair had been found in Meredith’s hand, and preserved, the prosecution would have gone to town, we would certainly have heard more.

Posted by John Forbes on 10/22/13 at 03:06 PM | #

@ Cardiol thanks again for the assistance with Meredith’s height and i would still ask does anyone know how tall is Amanda.

Now that the missing hair has been brought up i remember back in 2007 when i was visiting Italy the case was in the news. There was a report about hair found in the victims’ hand.

I will always remember this Knox character and the boyfriend on TV making out in front of the media as the body was carried out and thinking there’s something not right about that. Who is she.

Then correct me if am wrong i read that during the period that the house was sealed it was broken into twice.

The investigators did make mistakes and this does happen but to lose the hair is a disgrace. And they certainly underestimated Knox and her vile family and what they would be up against in the coming years with a million dollar PR campaign.

The Carabiniere announcing within 2 weeks on TV ‘Case Closed’ was premature to say the least.

Am sure the mistakes are part of the training of the new breed of investigators.

Posted by Mason2. on 10/22/13 at 03:08 PM | #

Hi Mason2

On heights I dont have a reference, but I’ve been told that a surprise in seeking AK is that she is below average height, also that she seemed an inch or two shorter than Meredith.

The house was broken into twice during trial, both times via the balcony and kitchen window. We suspected yet another dirty trick, this one to show how, well, anyone could have hopped in and killed Meredith.

On your complaints about the police, could you check out comments by Yummi and Marcello above. It seems there was no missing hair and this rumor may have been yet another dirty trick.

I’m unclear what you mean, that the investigators “certainly underestimated” the PR. They have strong weapons which work just fine in Italy but the campaign was in another country.

Blaming police for a “premature” announcement is a misleading FOA mantra. Police thought they had what is very rare in such cases: a reliable eye-witness. Perugia was bleedlng students by the hundreds.

Such announcements happen daily in the US. Not all of them get it 100% right either, but they reduce the political and citizen pressures.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/22/13 at 04:03 PM | #

@ Peter in 2007 i was visiting Italy and had a passing interest in this case. The missing hair was something that i remembered reading and only now that it has been discussed in these past days did i think of it.

Like a lot of people i got the info from the media.

Regarding the Police and investigators they have done a fine job but some mistakes were made. The destruction of the hard drives on all 3 computers. Once the operator realised what had happened he did not stop.

The police dealing with a foreign student so young could not have imagined what her family would do to get her off.

The investigators could not have known that they were dealing with a psychopath as at the time of the murder she looked like butter would not melt in her mouth.

Posted by Mason2. on 10/22/13 at 04:27 PM | #

@ John Forbes

It is something impossible to prove, but my inference is that the “lost hair” is a myth. As we see in Stefanoni’s report, there is no “single” hair collected from Meredith’s hand, but there is a series of 20 hairs collected from under the duvet.

There is a video (I saw it with the Italian original audio of forensics talking among them) where an operator (stefanoni?) collects a hair from close to Meredith’s hand, a long light coloured hair and you can hear Stefanoni’s voice saying “it’s blonde”. 

It was impossible to retrieve DNA from those hairs because it’s often not easy to get enough DNA from a hair.

Posted by Yummi on 10/22/13 at 04:29 PM | #

@ Mason

“The Carabiniere announcing within 2 weeks on TV ‘Case Closed’ was premature to say the least”.

Yes it was prematur, but it was not a Carabiniere, it was the Questore, Renzo De Felice.

Posted by Yummi on 10/22/13 at 04:32 PM | #

@ Marcello

You: “Notable in Dr. Stefanoni’s Powerpoint presentation is that Knox’s DNA was found on another of Sollecito’s knives, a switchblade knife.”

Yes, it is a small remarkable detail. The small pocket knife Sollecito used to always carry with him in his pocket, had Knox’s DNA on the handle and Sollecito’s DNA on the blade. Curious isn’t that? 

You:  “And even more importantly, there seemed to a lot of luminol revealed traces at Sollecito’s apartment, potentially blood spots. A few spots on the floor contain either Knox’s DNA or Knox’s and Sollecito’s DNA.”

Yes several blood spots from Knox were found at Sollecito’s apartment, and also several luminol revealed stains that were assumed to be probably blood, many of which had Knox’s DNA.

Posted by Yummi on 10/22/13 at 04:38 PM | #

@Mason2, Amanda Knox’s height as given on her now defunct MySpace page was 5’3” and on the Seattle Noise Ticket Violation was 5’4”.

Posted by Ergon on 10/22/13 at 05:41 PM | #

“... some mistakes were made. The destruction of the hard drives on all 3 computers. Once the operator realised what had happened he did not stop.”

This looks like another red herring. Search “hard drives” on PMF. It is not at all clear that this is what happened, or that there was no booby trap or virus, or that the material (if any) would have made the slightest difference.

No damage to the platters themselves was ever reported so material is almost certainly recoverable, though the prosecution seems to have had no special interest as Sollecito’s incriminating computer movements are reflected on the internet. 

The only thing on the drives RS ever pointed to as of value was some emails. If they happened, they can all be recovered, via his IP provider or those he sent them to. His team could easily have done that but, well, we are all still waiting.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/22/13 at 06:00 PM | #


Excellent ! 

WOW ... 81 points ... I know this was a lot of work.

Thank You for putting together this list.

Posted by MissMarple on 10/23/13 at 12:55 AM | #

Let’s say that two of the damage hard drives were in fact recovered: the content of Sollecito’s Fujitsu hard drive from the Asus laptop was recovered, as well as that of Meredith’s laptop.

This means Sollecito is lying when he writes that the content of his hard drive was lost: both his harddrives were recovered.

The only hard drive not recovered was Amanda’s Toshiba, but that could not contain exculpatory evidence, since it was not used that night.

Posted by Yummi on 10/23/13 at 02:50 AM | #

Thanks Yummi. Excellent. That goes beyond what I posted above. A main post on this seems required.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/23/13 at 04:33 AM | #

Undoubtably a lot of errors were made in the investigation which is unfortunate not only for the sake of the case, but also because they give something for the FOAers to latch onto - they use them to undermine the Italian legal system.

In all honesty, here in the UK the Italian system does have a bit of a reputation for bungling and corruption, and we are European, so god knows what the Americans think of it. Nevertheless, it is a clear open-and-shut case and not the blatant miscarriage of justive the FOAers like to suggest.

On a different note, has there ever been any suggestion that AK committed the murder with RG, and that RS ‘just’ helped her with the clear up? Looking at the evidence, is this possible? Could AK have borrowed RS; knife (either for spurious ‘innocent’ purposes or having told him exactly why she wanted it? I would be grateful to hear the evidence against this, as I am not totally up on the facts.

Finally, it would be no surprise to me in the least if AK felt threatened by Meredith.  To me, admittedly merely as an armchair psychologist, AK’s character shows all the hall-marks of pathological narcissism, and she would have disliked no longer being the queen bee or centre of attention. It is possible she herself did not have the self-awareness to realise this was why she felt antipathy to Meredith.

Posted by Maartje on 10/23/13 at 05:37 PM | #

Hi Maartje. 

I am not sure after years of looking that we see “a lot” of errors. Certainly none fatal. Many or most turn out to be manufactured, and the Italian system itself with its myriad appeals tends to exaggerate how many errors were made - far more “effectively” than the UK and US systems, which almost never surface them.

What we do see is a lot of evidence, multiple times the amount required for US and UK convictions, with an ultra-pro-defendant system rather easy to game spinning out appeals on non-issues for four years now. .

And in recent years the Italian justice system is winning big and is largely impervious now to political and mafia pressures. That has made it both very popular and very effective - Italy has one of the world’s lowest crime rates, and also one of the world’s lowest incarceration rates. That combination takes some beating.

Part of what we try to do here is to move perceptions beyond those out-of-date stereotypes. If the stereotypes you quote are based on present reality then one has a hard time explaining this.

Please spread the word in the UK. It may help some!

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/23/13 at 06:31 PM | #

Regarding a ‘lot of errors’, I’m not sure how one might define a ‘lot’ or ‘error’ as such. There are four disputed items that I know of (there may be more of course): the computer disks, the bra clasp, the hair in Ms. Kercher’s hand and the jailing of Lumumba.

Lumumba was jailed because Knox placed herself and him at the crime scene. She did this verbally and twice more in writing. She never officially retracted her claim. The police would have reasonably his involvement based on what Knox said and on her text message to him which, however ambiguous, could have reasonably been assumed to indicate a reference to future meeting.

As noted by Yummi, Dr. Lalli gave Dr. Stefanoni seven hairs found on Ms. Kercher’s body. Perhaps one of those seven could have been the hair in the hand (and it’s reasonable to assume this since the hand was bagged with the hair and not removed at the time the hand was bagged.) But it’s not cited specifically in Dr. Stefanoni’s testimony (at least not that I could find.) Perhaps she testified to it during the Micheli trial. Without really knowing the detailed procedures, this may or may not be an error.

The delayed retrieval of the bra clasp was cited by Micheli as a ‘leggerezza grave’. Notable about this was that Micheli himself makes the comment in a Motivation Report which is published to the public. So even this ‘oversight’ gets publicly reported by the judiciary.

I don’t know enough about the hard drive situation to know if someone at the police department accidentally fried them or whether perhaps Sollecito did this prior to their being taken for evidence.

Conversely, as Peter states, more than ample evidence was collected to indicate the defendants presence during the crime. This despite a rather complicated and messy crime scene (complete with cat blood in the lower apartment.)

Regarding Ms. Kercher being assaulted by only two people, I don’t believe this would have been possible. Two persons means four hands, two of which are occupied with two different knives. That leaves two hands to restrain Ms. Kerchers arms AND cover her mouth. Even if Ms. Kercher was standing during the whole assault, she would have had more defensive wounds on one of her hands, or someone would have heard her screaming more than once.

The other problem with the scenario that presumes Ms. Kercher was standing is that it doesn’t explain the bruises on her legs. Also, Ms. Kercher certainly would have known how to use her legs and body (from her martial art lessons) to kick the assailants or otherwise throw them off balance.

There are similar considerations if Ms. Kercher was forced to her knees. She would not have stayed passively in that position. She would have fought vigorously to twist around, get into crouching position, pull or twist one or the other assailant, to try and free one or more arms, all the while using any maneuver to uncover her mouth to scream.

Given the number of hands needed (one for each knife, one to restrain each wrist, one (or more) to cover her mouth, I think there had to be at least three assailants. And that is what the pretty much what the evidence shows.

Posted by Marcello on 10/23/13 at 08:17 PM | #

@ Maartje

An interesting case where the “errors” by the Italian and the UK justice systems both play and sum to each other, was the Elisa Claps case.

That case is interesting because you could see both systems in action, and what happened was that the British investigators committed exactly the same mistake made by Italian investigators, that is they released the obvious suspect, the serial killer guy who thus committed further murders.

In fact, the UK prosecutors and judges even convicted an innocent for one of the murders, with no evidence; and they finally released him only after the true serial killer murdered another woman in the identical peculiar fashion, and the suspect was meanwhile identified as Restivo.

Posted by Yummi on 10/24/13 at 04:42 AM | #

You know, it’s very easy to perceive Italy as a place of loose law and corruption, given phenomena such as Berlusconi and mafia wars, the problems and the publicity Italians give about with their governance issues.

But beyond “reputation” in general, when you look close at say the actual errors committed within the UK justice system, they come out as objectively rather appalling, while in technical terms such alleged reliability gap between justice sytems is just not true.

Posted by Yummi on 10/24/13 at 04:54 AM | #

Absolutely, Yummi .
In particular, too, the way in the UK there is a closing of ranks to obscure and /or deny the truth or the facts in a case.

The difficulty an individual faces in raising a legitimate complaint or concern - this is huge. Also the way whistleblowers are often treated, appallingly, as scapegoats.

Witness the spat at the moment between our Home Secretary and the police about the Andrew Mitchell incident.

It’s a cultural attitude, as much as anything. How much is ‘reputation’ just an accumulation of spin ?

Personally, I have nothing but admiration for the professional Italians I have known.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 10/24/13 at 10:45 AM | #

@ Ergon thanks for the info re Amanda’s height but just like her there is more than one truth even regarding her height.

One of my followers on twitter has just come across the Nina Burleigh book The Fatal Gift of Beauty.  The New York Post has published excerpts from book in recent times.

Nina moved her family to Perugia for 8 months in 2010- 11.      ( I wonder who paid for that) and wrote about the sinister satanic side of Perugia. The tiny streets the twisted Prosecutor etc.,  I dont know of any Italian town that does not have tiny streets.

The twisted facts nothing we dont know about already. All i could say is at this point the felons are close to being convicted by the Florence Appeals Court.

The follower was upset as Burleigh’s book was wholly endorsed by Mc Guiness who is a very respected crime writer.

Posted by Mason2. on 10/24/13 at 01:59 PM | #

I meant Joe Mc Guinniss of Fatal Vision 1983 he has wholeheartly endorsed Nina Burleigh’s book The fatal Gift of Beauty.

Posted by Mason2. on 10/24/13 at 02:17 PM | #

Didn’t know that.  Odd.  I liked McGinnis’s book Fatal Vision, and there’s some similarities there—McDonald keeps persuading people that he was unjustly convicted, despite the overwhelming evidence against him—just like Knox.

Posted by Ceylon on 10/24/13 at 05:39 PM | #

@Marcello; I agree. The evidence does point to three assailants. It’s a pity the famous CGI video that was shown in court has not been released publicly, since that seems to have been particularly convincing. The public instead get to see wonky ITV5 “reconstructions” and Sgt. Pasquali’s Amazing Rock Video.

Posted by Ergon on 10/24/13 at 05:57 PM | #

@ Marcello Thanks for your comments in answer to my question about whether AK and RG could have committed the crime without RS.  When you analyse the number of hands etc that is excellent and very convincing to me.

Thanks to all those who answered my remark about how I think the Italian justice system is seen here in the UK.  In all honesty, I think the view is somewhat schizophrenic: there is a view that it is somewhat incompetent and corrupt (of course Berlusconi etc gets a lot of coverage) but then on the other hand it is a European country like us to which we are somewhat similar and feel some kinship. Incidentally, I didn’t mean to suggest the UK system was perfect.  I confess I do not have the knowledge to judge the system there, but was just describing my gut feeling of how I think the system there is perceived.

No matter how the Italian system is seen here, I am not sure the pro-Knox campaign has anything like the traction here that it has in America.  Afterall, Meredith was English, ‘one of us’ and so the reporting I have seen tends to approach the case from that stand point.  In contrast in the USA I assume it is all about the ‘miscarriage of justice’ against ‘their’ Amanda.

Posted by Maartje on 10/24/13 at 07:42 PM | #


Without wanting to be unduly critical, may I gently remind you that it is not such a good idea to use the word ‘schizophrenic’ in this way…. Though I know you were probably using it in colloquial way, not literally, and I’m sure we get your meaning. 

There are a number of misconceptions about schizophrenia which do provide a stigma to those unfortunate enough to be this way…it’s difficult when these kind of words are appropriated into general conversation.

Regarding generalized perceptions of national characteristics…is it not the case that the more people actually encounter and experience another country’s people, systems and traditions, the less they will subscribe to a generality?

Prejudice = pre- judging is inextricably linked to ignorance on the whole. Shame to those journalists who perpetuate it, in any form!

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 10/24/13 at 08:32 PM | #

This is in response to Marcello’s bullet-point post—which I thought/think is a very thoughtful and basically reliable summation of the tragic night of Ms. Kercher’s death. 
On your #63 bullet point- “Knox called her mother in a panic at roughly 12:45 PM. Knox would later forget this phone call in her testimony and in her book.”
I think that these few minutes comprise an undeniable, however technical, proof of guilt. In fact, it was this scenario—that I read on this site, under “cell phone activity,” years ago—that just suddenly and overwhelmingly made me realize, ‘omg, she did it.’ 
Knox called her mother, in a panic, you say at 12:45 p.m..  The CCTV cameras show the Communications Police showing up at around 12:25- 12:30 p.m..  Then this a fact that the Communications Police were PRESENT when Knox called her mother. 
But, according to her mother—who was interviewed by police BEFORE getting to talk to Knox—revealed that Amanda said, “... I’ve just come home for a shower and… things are weird… there’s some blood… Meredith’s room door is locked… the front door was open, etc.” 
Of course her mother suggested that she call the police. 
But the Commumications Police were standing in the living room at the time Knox made the call. They had both of Ms. Kercher’s cellphones.  The Communications Police were an entirely unexpected arrival—and so they “forced” KNox—and Sollecito,too—to just start trying to ad-lib alibis’. 
Edda Mellas told the Italian Police exactly what Amanda Knox said to her that morning… before Mellas was allowed to speak to Knox in a prison conversation,
Knox refused to talk about this conversation in court; she still will not talk about it; and Edda Mellas outright lies about what was said in that phone conversation on all of the American news shows, despite the facts.

Posted by Hellinahandcart on 10/26/13 at 11:44 AM | #
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 The Meredith Case Wiki: A Highly Objective Summation Of The Case From Original Docs And Transcripts

Or to previous entry When You Get In A Deeeep Hole, Best To Stop Digging: Did Anyone Think To Tell Knox?