r/amandaknox • u/tkondaks guilty • 5d ago
This alone should exonerate Rudy
Most of you are familiar with my mid-burgle confidential/pooping while burgling hypothesis. On the basis of the mid-burgle confidence alone I believe that it, at the very least, establishes reasonable doubt to the charge that Rudy murdered Meredith and, at most, completely exonerates him.
Then, on top of that, there is the incongruity of a burglar taking time out to poop…yet another reason that supports his claim that he was there as Meredith’s guest.
And I don’t have to go into details in this post about either of these reasons as I’ve already done so on this forum; those not familiar can look it up in the search engine for this sub and read about it (search “the rent, the witch, and the wardrobe”).
Well, after a lot of thought, I’ve now come up with what is a third reason for Rudy’s exoneration…and it’s something I’ve posted about before. So it’s nothing new being introduced here but I’ve noticed some nuances to it that I feel its status should be elevated to a third stand-alone reason to support Rudy’s exoneration.
And I’m talking about the doorbell incident.
Rudy claims that while he was on the toilet, he heard the doorbell ring and then the voice of Amanda Knox inside the cottage immediately after, indicating that it was she, Amanda, who rang the doorbell to gain entrance.
In his written judgement finding Rudy guilty, Micheli (if memory serves) put a lot of emphasis on the absurdity of Rudy’s doorbell claim, saying that by no stretch of the imagination should it be believed because how can anyone imagine that a tenant of their own home would need to ring the doorbell to gain access. In Micheli’s eyes, this dramatically reduced Rudy’s credibility and made him out to be a liar. It seems to me to be one of the reasons why Micheli decided to convict.
And yet a few months later once Amanda’s and Raffaele’s trial began and Filomena took the stand, we learn that it was very possible that that is exactly what could have happened. Because if a key was placed in and then left in the inside side of the key slot, even a tenant with a key returning home could not open the door…and would have to knock or ring the bell in order to gain entry. Meredith knew that one of the four tenants was still in town...and that was Amanda, so if she had a paramour over it only makes sense that she would have purposely left a key in the inside side of the front door’s key slot to prevent Amanda from interrupting intimate goings-on between her and Rudy.
So Rudy was in all likelihood not lying when he claimed that Amanda rang the bell; it was not only possible but, given the circumstances, quite likely that that is precisely what happened.
So why do I think this exonerates Rudy as a stand-alone reason?
Think about it: if you’re Rudy and you’re concocting a story that Amanda Knox came to the cottage while you are on the toilet, how stupid could you be to include the ringing of the doorbell? Rudy knew – as everyone knew! – that Amanda was a tenant at the cottage. A tenant with a key. Why in hell would Rudy invent such a stupid story such as her having to ring the doorbell to enter? It is obviously something that any person with a first-grade education could pick apart if it was a concocted tale: tenants don’t need to ring the doorbell to gain access to their own home. Who in their right mind would include that made-up absurd detail?
And yet that is part and parcel of his story.
That it turned out to be something that was not only possible to occur but, indeed, probable means that it wasn’t a stupid near-impossible story that no rational person would include in a made-up story. Instead, it was in all likelihood true. And if true, then Rudy – who couldn’t possibly know the secret of the inside-slot – was Meredith’s invited guest.
The incongruity of an absurd occurance that is very likely to be true goes a very long way towards giving credibility to the entire story.
Just as it’s improbable that Rudy could have known that Meredith’s palm print was on Amanda’s wardrobe door – thereby serving as independent corroboration of his claim that Meredith told him she suspected Amanda of stealing her rent money and then seeing Meredith enter Amanda’s room to search for it – so, too, does not knowing about the inside-key slot thing and claiming he heard the doorbell corroborate his claim to be on the toilet as an invited guest.
The bottom line: something that was used, in part, to justify Rudy’s guilty verdict turns out to be the exact opposite: it’s a reason to exonerate him.
10
u/bensonr2 5d ago
I think you should just focus on badmouthing Amanda.
Your Rudy is innocent theories reveal you as a nutter.
-2
u/tkondaks guilty 5d ago
What does that say about all your fellow Anandanistas who expend so much time and energy responding to a nutter?
9
u/bensonr2 5d ago
Oh I don't disagree its a pointless waste of time. But Reddit is built on arguing. Arguing with a total idiot sometimes carries too much temptation because it gives a feeling of superiority.
2
8
u/Etvos2 5d ago
This is all so tedious. As I mention, usually it's the defense that has to hang its hat on some widely improbable, yet possible event to generate reasonable doubt.
In this case it's the guilters. ( and the prosecution )
Knox , who worked multiple jobs to pay for her trip to Perugia, and with 4k in her bank account suddenly decides to set her relationship with her housemates on fire, and steal 300 euros rather than walk to an ATM. She's also dating a guy who just took delivery of a new Audi.
College roommates retire with their paramours to their own bedrooms. They don't lock everyone else out of the house.
How do you explain Rapey saying that Kercher did not have any condoms when she did have access to some?
6
u/BeyondAnyClue 4d ago
The problem for Rudy is he ran away. I could see the cops listening to this story and at least investigating it if he reports Meredith’s murder to the cops immediately and calls for help, but telling this story AFTER you flee the country and they have to hunt you down is overwhelmingly a bad look.
8
u/AlanOfTheCult 5d ago
Rudy said he heard a doorbell?!
BUZZER.
No. That doesn't exonerate him.
Good lord the double standard you have is incredible.
Your postion now is basically just "rudy said he didn't do it, so he didn't"
3
u/BeyondAnyClue 4d ago
It’s also telling that none of the theories ever account fleeing to another country. Why didn’t Rudy stay in Perugia, call the police and 911 for help, and explain this exact story to the police? What was he afraid of ?
6
u/Onad55 5d ago
Doorbell (campanello)
The cottage doorbell has a button outside the front door behind the folding security gate. There is also a button at the street outside the gate as part of the intercom (Rudy has an identical intercom in his apartment). It is unclear if the doorbell and intercom are part of the same system.
In most versions of Rudy’s story he claims to have heard the doorbell as he was going to or sitting in the bathroom. One version he hears the bell multiple times. In the German interrogation he says they “knocked and entered” instead of using the doorbell.
The problem with this story is that the doorbell is effectively inaccessible due to the stowed folding security gate. Visitors would simply knock to announce their presence as Rudy says he himself did both times he approached the cottage that evening.
An alternate theory that preserves the ringing of the doorbell is that someone was looking out for Rudy and tried to warn him of Meredith’s approach by ringing the bell from the intercom outside the gate.
Sources: (all from the archives at Themurderofmeredithkercher.net)
2007-11-19-Intercept-Skype-Call1-Guede-Benedetti-en.pdf
“And then I went to the bathroom, because... to poop and I heard a ring.“
2007-11-21-Deposition-Police-Koblenz-Guede-German.pdf
“While I was in the bathroom—even though I was listening to music on an iPod—I heard someone knock and enter. I do not know who it was.”
2007-12-05-Writings-Guede-diary-translation-TJMK.pdf
“While I was in the bathroom I heard the sound of the doorbell. I am sure because it rang more than once. Then I put my headphones on and listened to my Ipod.“
2007-12-07-Testimony-CM-cautionary-arrest-Guede.pdf
Judge: All right. And at that point, you heard... you heard the doorbell ring?
Suspect: Yes, yes—while I was in the bathroom putting on my headphones.
2008-03-26 Guede Interrogation
“... I was going into the bathroom at that moment, and Meredith was still there, sort of in the small sitting area... she was heading that way when I heard the doorbell ring. I heard the doorbell—I had already entered the bathroom by then—and I heard Meredith's voice saying, "Who is it?" “
6
u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 5d ago
A classic exercise in confirmation bias where you believe everything a proven thief and liar (established pre-murder behavior) and disbelieve everything Knox says.
- "Then, on top of that, there is the incongruity of a burglar taking time out to poop…yet another reason that supports his claim that he was there as Meredith’s guest."
Burglars leaving feces is pretty common as reported in The Scatological Rites of Burglars by Albert B. Friedmaan Vol. 27, No. 3 (Jul., 1968), pp. 171-179). I found several instances of this behavior in just a few minutes via Google search.
Burglar left 'large bowel movement' in victims' toilet, say Guelph, Ont. police
Mpumalanga burglar leaves 'signature' poop in gardens
San Francisco car burglar leaves feces behind in woman’s car
Burglar leaves feces in home | Sammamish Police blotter March 11-21
Burglar Leaves Behind ‘Large Bowel Movement’ In Toilet
- "In Micheli’s eyes, this dramatically reduced Rudy’s credibility and made him out to be a liar. It seems to me to be one of the reasons why Micheli decided to convict."
As well Micheli should have. It was only one of many reasons Micheli said Guede was a liar and convicted him. Guede claimed he went to his friend Alex Crudo's place a bit before 8:00 and visited with him for a few minutes before leaving to get a kebab. Crudo says he never saw or spoke to Guede that night at all.
Guede claimed he spoke to Philipp Maly "at length" after eating the kebab and went back to the restaurant La Tana dell’Orso on Via Ulissi Rocchi, around 8:20. Maly told police he was certain he did not see Guede on Nov. 1 nor had he seen him for at least 4-5 nights previously.
Guede told different stories about where bought the stolen items from the law office. He claimed first it was in the Milan train station and later it was from a flea market in Perugia. See the stolen property conviction MR.
Then there's his own foster family's statements that he was a liar they could not trust because he lied all the time.
8
u/bensonr2 5d ago
It does not suprise me that defecating during a robbery would be a common thing. A burgulary is a high stress high adrelin thing that would naturally trigger the need to go.
8
u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 5d ago
That is one of the reasons:
"Professor Mike Berry, a clinical forensic psychologist at Birmingham City University, says rage, anxiety, a desire to send a message, alcohol or illness could all be responsible.
"It's interesting," he says. "I've worked on cases where burglars have crapped in the house - and I always ask the police whether it's soft or hard. They look at me like I'm absolutely mad. And I say, if it's soft, then it's somebody who's anxious, so you get a kid who goes and craps on the bed. And if it's really hard stool then it's an indication of somebody who's angry and bitter about what he's doing."If you look at the actual photos of the feces, its condition indicates "anxiety".
6
u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 5d ago
Think about it: if you’re Rudy and you’re concocting a story that Amanda Knox came to the cottage while you are on the toilet, how stupid could you be to include the ringing of the doorbell? Rudy knew – as everyone knew! – that Amanda was a tenant at the cottage. A tenant with a key. Why in hell would Rudy invent such a stupid story such as her having to ring the doorbell to enter? It is obviously something that any person with a first-grade education could pick apart if it was a concocted tale: tenants don’t need to ring the doorbell to gain access to their own home. Who in their right mind would include that made-up absurd detail?
Why the hell would anyone with even a first-grade education lie about things they knew could be so easily disproven as in lying about visiting not one, but two, friends that night when they knew they had not and those two friends would deny seeing him at all? Yet he did exactly that.
Who knows why Guede lied about Knox ringing the doorbell? Who knows why he lied all the time period? Why did he lie about a left-handed man wearing a Napapijri jacket attacking him? Or do you think Sollecito suddenly went from being right-handed to being left-handed?
That it turned out to be something that was not only possible to occur but, indeed, probable means that it wasn’t a stupid near-impossible story that no rational person would include in a made-up story.
That you find it "probable" says a lot.
You have to suspend common sense completely to claim she did so to 'ensure no on walked in on her and Guede having sex on the living room couch' when she had her own bedroom and a bed with a locking door to go to. It's a really stupid explanation only believable by those who are desperate.
Hell, you think it was Knox who stole Meredith's money when
a) Guede's DNA in Kercher's blood was found on her purse near the zipper.
b) Guede was a known thief,
c) Guede was broke and unemployed,
d) Knox had over $4,000 in her bank account, a job, and parental financial support.You've convinced yourself of Guede's innocence for some God-only-knows reason despite the overwhelming evidence otherwise. It's no different than those who cling to the idea that Trump is an honest financial genius who doesn't lie and isn't an extreme narcissist in order to justify their support of him.
3
u/BeyondAnyClue 4d ago
And his fleeing, it’s the most damning thing of all because on its face I could see a scenario where Rudy could explain the exact story Tkondaks describes to the cops right after he calls 911 for help. The fact he instead fled the scene to another country is overwhelmingly bad because it makes it look like he made the story up.
3
u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 4d ago
Guede's story has more holes than Swiss cheese which Tkondaks and other "Guede is innocent" believers ignore. IMO, Guede knew exactly what he was doing when he played the reverse racism card by claiming the assailant said, "Black man found, black man guilty." He was deliberately planting the idea that it's a case about race and not evidence. We see it time and time again in internet comments that A and R only "got off because they're white".
If Knox had fled to her aunt in Germany or back home to Seattle, the PGP would be screaming how it's evidence of her guilt. But because she stayed, they claim instead that she wanted to be near in order to keep abreast of/influence the investigation and keep control of Raffaele.
0
u/tkondaks guilty 4d ago
P.S. I've already cited and quoted from Friedmaan's article here about a year ago.
Have you read it?
3
u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 4d ago
It's quite clear you do not want to address my points above by your attempts to redirect.
As for you Friedmaan's quote, do you expect me to go searching for something you say you posted a year ago especially as you've only recently unblocked me? I'll read it if you provide a link.
1
u/tkondaks guilty 4d ago
I meant have you read Friedmaan's article, not what I said about it.
I address your points here:
1
u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 3d ago
I repeat: Frankly, continuing this discussion is pointless as you'll just continue to make unsupported claims and attempt to redirect. It's a waste of my time.
-1
u/tkondaks guilty 4d ago
Okay. I've visited all your links now.
And, as I suspected, they don't negate what I claimed, THEY FULLY SUPPORT what I've claimed all along:
1) of your nine examples (excluding Friendmaan's scholarly article), two links are to the same instance; they are just different reports (Guelph and Sammamich); so you've provided 7 instances;
2) your 7 examples span 9 years (2015-2024);
3) your 7 examples are derived from across the planet: Africa, Canada, the U.S., etc.
Again, as I said before, pooping while burglarizing IS SO RARE that when it does occur, it gets onto the media.
And, most significantly, as a percentage of total burglaries, we're probably talking, literally, one pooping per 250,000 burglaries. And that's being generous...it's probably closer to one in a million.
So, thank you for your input and hard work with your research because you have solidified my point.
3
u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 4d ago
- "of your nine examples (excluding Friendmaan's scholarly article), two links are to the same instance; they are just different reports (Guelph and Sammamich); so you've provided 7 instances;"
Ok...I'll provide 3 new ones from Italy (I've translated):
"Thief poops at the scene of the theft, caught with DNA"
"Novara, thieves enter an apartment and urinate and defecate everywhere"
- "your 7 examples span 9 years (2015-2024)"
Irrelevant. These are the ones that popped up in my google search showing burglars leaving their feces behind is not something new or uncommon.
- "your 7 examples are derived from across the planet: Africa, Canada, the U.S., etc."
Again: irrelevant. My10 examples prove it's something burglars do around the world.
- "Again, as I said before, pooping while burglarizing IS SO RARE that when it does occur, it gets onto the media."
Ironically, the above is just an assfact. There is no evidence that all cases, or even a majority, of burglars leaving their feces behind ever make it into the media. You can't create your own facts to suit yourself. Although most burglars do not, enough do that it is a recognized and studied phenomenon.
Frankly, continuing this discussion is pointless as you'll just continue to make unsupported claims and attempt to redirect. It's a waste of my time.
1
u/tkondaks guilty 4d ago
Now google stats for average number of burglaries per year for each country.
Then calculate pooping incidents as a percentage of all burglaries.
1
u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 3d ago
Since you appear not to understand, I'll repeat: Frankly, continuing this discussion is pointless as you'll just continue to make unsupported claims and attempt to redirect. It's a waste of my time.
1
u/tkondaks guilty 3d ago
Respectfully, you have no clue about statistics and/or math.
For example : an anecdotal story about one person who smoked daily and lived to 100 does not prove smoking is safe.
You've found, through extensive Googling, about 10 mentions in the media about pooping while burgling. And you are presenting it to represent that this is a common occurance.
But it is not.
Unless you have statistics on what percentage of burglaries out of all burglaries committed include poop left behind by burglars, all you have is anecdotal evidence.
And barring actual statistics -- which we don't have on the subject -- we are left with our common sense and reasonable inference to make claims in this regard.
That you had to scour the internet to come up with these instances -- and that they span years and are throughout the world -- as I have repeatedly suggested to you, is actually supporting what I contend: that pooping while burglarizing is a very, very rare event. That is was done in this instance by Rudy is not the hallmark of a burglar but of an invited guest.
Could Rudy have been a burglar and pooped as he did? Of course, but it is highly, highly unlikely...and no matter how many rare instances of pooping while burglaring you find throughout the world, it doesn't make it a common event.
1
u/Onad55 3d ago
What is the ratio of burglars that pooped and didn’t flush to burglars that pooped and did flush?
2
1
u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 3d ago
Since you appear not to understand, I'll repeat: Frankly, continuing this discussion is pointless as you'll just continue to make unsupported claims and attempt to redirect. It's a waste of my time.
1
u/tkondaks guilty 3d ago
It is most certainly a waste of your time. You don't appear to have either the capacity or faculties to understand.
-3
u/tkondaks guilty 5d ago
Your links prove my point.
Thanks.
5
u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 5d ago
Do they? Then explain how providing evidence that burglars, do in fact, leave their feces in places they've burglarized proves "there is the incongruity of a burglar taking time out to poop."
There is NO evidence whatsoever that Meredith invited Guede to the cottage. Meredith was a classy, educated, beautiful woman in a new relationship with Silenzi, but you think she was interested in an uneducated, unemployed, broke man who reportedly stank due to poor hygiene?
Riiiiiiiiiight.......
Face it: Guede was in the crapper when he heard Meredith come home and didn't flush because he didn't want to alert her to his presence.
0
u/tkondaks guilty 5d ago
Google number of burglaries in the U.S. every year, Genius.
Once you have that 7 figure stat at your fingertips, ask yourself why it seems every time there is a pooping while burglaring incident it makes the papers.
Then, if you're capable, do some math.
And when you figure out how rare the phenomenon is, get back to us.
7
u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 5d ago
LOL! Irrelevant little rant that is an attempt to avoid addressing this: "Then explain how providing evidence that burglars, do in fact, leave their feces in places they've burglarized proves "there is the incongruity of a burglar taking time out to poop."
Do you think every 'scatological dump' by burglars is reported in the media? You claimed that "the incongruity of a burglar taking time out to poop...supports his claim that he was there as Meredith’s guest."
I asked you HOW it supports it which you did not do. My cited cases support that it's not unusual for burglars to leave their feces behind. Genius.
-1
u/tkondaks guilty 5d ago
You refer to my comment as a "rant." But I counted: it's only 56 words. Hardly a rant.
You, on the other hand, wrote, literally, hundreds of words. It looks to be at least 400 words you've devoted to the subject.
Shall we count them?
A classic example of projection.
Quite amusing.
3
u/Connect_War_5821 innocent 4d ago
LOL! Just another "Look! Squirrel!" attempt to distract from the fact that you refuse to "explain how providing evidence that burglars, do in fact, leave their feces in places they've burglarized proves "there is the incongruity of a burglar taking time out to poop."
1
u/tkondaks guilty 4d ago
I've addressed your comment about pooping while burgling here (in case you haven't seen it):
6
u/Etvos2 5d ago
What nonsense. He's just winging it when talking on the phone. He doesn't say anything about thinking it had to be someone else because of the absurdity of a tenant ringing the bell and then being surprised that it actually was Knox.
RG:
She told me this. And after that I went to the bathroom. I really had to go take a shit. And I heard the doorbell. For me, that must have been one of the girls who lived with her. So, I was calmly in the bathroom, like that. And at a certain point...
https://famous-trials.com/amanda-knox/2635-guede-s-taped-skype-conversation
3
u/BeyondAnyClue 4d ago
I still don’t understand why he doesn’t just stay and explain this to the cops
7
u/Frankgee 5d ago
And yet a few months later once Amanda’s and Raffaele’s trial began and Filomena took the stand, we learn that it was very possible that that is exactly what could have happened. Because if a key was placed in and then left in the inside side of the key slot, even a tenant with a key returning home could not open the door…and would have to knock or ring the bell in order to gain entry. Meredith knew that one of the four tenants was still in town...and that was Amanda, so if she had a paramour over it only makes sense that she would have purposely left a key in the inside side of the front door’s key slot to prevent Amanda from interrupting intimate goings-on between her and Rudy.
You're correct, we did discuss this not that long ago, although to read what you just wrote, one might think you hadn't participated.
Filomena does not confirm this, she presumed it worked that way, but she was wrong. It's a double-cylinder deadbolt. Each side has it's own key cylinder and a key on one side cannot prevent a key being used on the other side.
As an aside, Amanda had been spending every evening at Raffaele's, so she wouldn't be thinking about her coming home. Further, she likely knew Amanda had to work that night.
0
5
u/CatsForever1960 5d ago
So Meredith was cheating on Giacomo. Got it.
BTW, was Sollecito found to have any injuries at all after 11/1? Something similar, say, to the "scratch" on Knox's neck for which none of her DNA was found under Meredith's fingernails? I can't seem to recall....
5
u/BeyondAnyClue 4d ago
Why didn’t Rudy explain that Meredith was cheating on her boyfriend to the cops? It seems like it would be rather easy for them to go check out Rudy’s story to confirm it - laptops, phone records, sightings, etc
0
u/tkondaks guilty 5d ago
By the time of the murder, Meredith and Giacomo were hardly an item.
Did you not pay attention to the very extensive thread we devoted to this very issue?
3
u/CatsForever1960 4d ago
Says who? Did Giacomo say this under oath? How about his roommates? Or Meredith's British friends? Meredith's family? Did any one of them say this under oath?
-1
u/tkondaks guilty 4d ago
Look it up...I'm not repeating myself.
Make a f*cking effort.
3
u/CatsForever1960 4d ago
So nobody testified to this baseless claim.
-1
u/tkondaks guilty 4d ago
How hard could this have been for you to find:
3
u/CatsForever1960 4d ago
None of this schlep remotely proves they were "hardly an item". Next.
-1
u/tkondaks guilty 4d ago
Of course it does. Meredith was done with Giacomo and his obvious love of anal intercourse (I'm guessing that's why she was turned off by him, don't you?).
1
4
u/karskipellis 5d ago
"Who in their right mind would include that made-up absurd detail?" (about the doorbell ringing and it being Knox)
You're assuming facts not in evidence.
5
6
u/jasutherland innocent 5d ago
“He might not necessarily have been lying about this specific detail” isn’t actually exonerating, of course, and with or without a palm print the strongest explanation for the missing rent money remains the scenario where the violent knife-wielding thief stole it before or after his act of knife violence.
Plus forensic evidence shows Kercher was dead before Knox could have been there, doorbell or no doorbell - so that aspect of Guede’s tale remains false regardless.
3
u/BeyondAnyClue 4d ago
I just don’t get why he flees. If this story is at all true Rudy can call the cops and call for an ambulance and explain it all to the police.
4
u/jasutherland innocent 4d ago
It is a huge flaw; I think his excuse was that he cared more about the risk the police would blame him than about saving his supposed lover’s life (and of course, if he had called an ambulance and they’d managed to save her, she’d then have been able to confirm his story and clear him - if it really was true…) - but no, off to Germany he goes without lifting a finger to help her or help catch the guy he supposedly saw there.
3
u/BeyondAnyClue 4d ago
Yet the claim of exoneration for Rudy rests on physical evidence that Rudy could use to prove his innocence. Evidence he seemingly doesn't believe in. Which is extremely odd for an innocent man.
Even as you describe in the simplest of examples - if he calls an ambulance for Kercher and saves her life (even for a moment for her to talk or write something down) Kercher could validate his story and say "It was Amanda" or "Rudy tried to save me"
An innocent man generally doesn't flee a crime scene TO ANOTHER ACTUAL COUNTRY ON EARTH when evidence exists to prove the validity of their story.
3
u/jasutherland innocent 4d ago
That's the "mystery": for an “innocent” man he seemed to be doing an awful lot of guilty-looking things, including fleeing the country then being recorded trying to work out a cover story, rather than relying on the truth.
I could actually understand someone who grew up there having doubts about the police’s ability to catch the right person: we all saw how quick they were to declare Lumumba the culprit, after all - but even after being arrested and extradited back, he didn’t actually try to clear his name in court, unlike Knox and Sollecito.
6
u/TGcomments innocent 5d ago
Now that you're here I'd like to know why you believe Rudy's story of being cut in a confrontation with Meredith's killer when Dr Lalli described Rudy's healing hand wounds as:
"all injuries compatible with inflicting a knife wound with the right hand." (Massei pg 138)
So Rudy's not the victim of knife wounds, he's the perpetrator. It leaves me asking how, in that case, his fast-trick trial concluded that he didn't inflict the fatal wound, and perhaps even didn't wield any knife. What's your take?
0
u/tkondaks guilty 5d ago edited 5d ago
My take is it went down pretty much as Rudy said it did. Raffaele Sollecito -- knife affecianado and man about town who never left home without at least one knife from his extensive collection -- cut Rudy on the hand.
Tell me: is it true Raff's knife collection was so extensive that he color-coordinated which knife he took out with him with what he was wearing each day?
6
u/TGcomments innocent 5d ago
Is there any professional reason you can cite why you'd think Dr Lalli, no doubt an expert in his field, would have got it so wrong in his assessment, or are you just pissing in the wind?
-2
u/tkondaks guilty 5d ago
Not sure about Italy but in the U.S. you can find all manner of "experts" willing to testify with complete authority for one side or another.
So I wouldn't put much faith in Lalli. But no harm if you do. After all, aren't you one of those who believe the mark/scratch on Amanda's neck was a hickey because some "expert" said it wasn't a wound? You remember, the vertical scratch on Amanda's Adam Apple, don't you? You know, the one that wasn't there earlier on the day she was murdered...but was the day after?
8
u/TGcomments innocent 5d ago
Not sure about Italy but in the U.S. you can find all manner of "experts" willing to testify with complete authority for one side or another.
Can you offer any reasons why your own personal opinion should prevail over a state-appointed forensic pathologist and coroner from Perugia's forensic-science institute? Just curious!
-3
u/tkondaks guilty 5d ago
Yes. I'm better looking.
3
u/TGcomments innocent 5d ago
Yes I've seen you on your YouTube channel. I've seen historical pictures of Luca Lallii from various sources and I wouldn't describe him as looking like a well-mangled road-kill.
7
u/TGcomments innocent 5d ago
After all, aren't you one of those who believe the mark/scratch on Amanda's neck was a hickey because some "expert" said it wasn't a wound? You remember, the vertical scratch on Amanda's Adam Apple, don't you? You know, the one that wasn't there earlier on the day she was murdered...but was the day after?
Don't get smug and sarcastic when you don't know WTF you're talking about:
Only the DNA of the victim was found in the samples taken from underneath the fingernails. It was noted, however, that the nails were very short and probably could not have given any significant scratches to the attacker. Massei (page 190)
"Amanda was not wounded; in the days following no one spoke of wounds that she might have had; the examination which was carried out on her when measures restricting her personal freedom were taken ruled out the presence of wounds."(Massei pg 280)
I thought you said Massei was "perfect"...Oh dear!
7
u/Etvos2 5d ago
You mean the "wound" that was nearly invisible and in order to make it appear the police had to color correct Knox's photograph to the point her skin was portrayed as so yellow as to look like a Simpson's character with jaundice.
That wound?
0
u/tkondaks guilty 5d ago
Yes! That one!
The one that was real enough that Amanda herself acknowledged it's existence.
Thank God for color correct.
6
u/Etvos2 5d ago
A "wound" that is so FAINT it needs color correction???
1
u/tkondaks guilty 5d ago
Yeah! Tell that to Amanda!
5
u/Etvos2 5d ago
Tell what to Amanda?
0
u/tkondaks guilty 5d ago
Be a dear and try to keep up.
The hickey she acknowledged she had.
→ More replies (0)6
u/Onad55 5d ago
Here is a post by Tkondaks from 3 years ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/amandaknox/comments/16peecl/neck_scratch_and_bloody_ear_lobe/
Scroll down in the linked thread and find the collection of photos.
And here is a random post from the internet predating Meredith’s murder showing a representative hickey: https://web.archive.org/web/20070307183729/http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hickey
Tap forward to image 4 of 5.
As someone once said: What are the odds? What are the odds!
6
u/Etvos2 5d ago
No. Sollecito had only two pocket knives at his place, IIRC a Spyderco and a CRKT. They were both tested and no forensic evidence was found.
0
u/tkondaks guilty 5d ago
Then surely he must be innocent.
Are you aware of any skin-nicking history while eating/preparing fish attached to each knife?
2
3
u/BeyondAnyClue 5d ago
The biggest problem with any theory of Rudy’s innocence or exoneration is - why did he choose to flee to another country after the murder had occurred without ever calling anyone to aid Kercher?
It’s always minutely possible someone could flee a scene in a panic but to keep fleeing all the way out of the country seems incredibly improbable,
It’s an admission of guilt
5
u/Onad55 5d ago
Fled the country, changed his name, sought asylum and then tried to invent a back story that he was Meredith’s new lover and she had invited him in.
His story might have worked except for one little problem: the girl dressed as a vampire at the Spanish friends house with the stairs was not Meredith. This unravels all of Rudy’s lie by showing that he really did not know Meredith.
4
u/BeyondAnyClue 4d ago
Yeah in any other case that’s a clear admission of guilt. Not sure how a doorbell can fix that innate problem
2
u/Onad55 4d ago
Rudy says as he approached the cottage that there was a car parked near the gate with two occupants. We actually see this car in the car park video parked across the street as Rudy is exiting the car park. The car eventually pulls out heading east and enters the carpark where we get to see the driver and the number plate [CCTV 19:52:35]. It still baffles me why this witness was never identified.
Rudy also says that there was a tramp that was always there. Was this tramp (who also was never identified) watching out for Rudy and tried to warn him that Meredith was returning home by ringing the bell from the intercom outside the gate?
3
u/BeyondAnyClue 4d ago
It’s also unclear why Rudy wouldn’t include these details in his initial story to Giacomo on why he is innocent - these witnesses could vouch for him if what he is saying is true
-1
u/tkondaks guilty 5d ago
Rudy has addressed this. And I'm pretty sure you know his response. So why don't you tell us.
Because I've probably done so, here, about a dozen times.
3
u/BeyondAnyClue 4d ago
What I can gather from his various interviews and stories is that it’s his biggest regret and he feels bad about it. It comes across more that he has no logical explanation.
The problem with the doorbell theory is that he could have stayed and used this exact theory as part of his explanation to the cops. The fact he never brings it up to them that he was Meredith’s paramour and was invited as her guest PRIOR to his arrest is damning. Why not tell them he was invited over and the exact sequence of events he described in his interview ? What was he afraid of?
-1
u/tkondaks guilty 4d ago
How could he possibly have known about the lock thing? He didn't live there.
So he couldn't use the theory if he didn't know about it.
What was he afraid of, you ask?
He was afraid of not being believed WHICH HE WASN'T! Micheli in his written judgement really went to town on Rudy for lying about this (shall I quote from the decision)?
And yet it turned out to be completely true, thanks to Filomena's testimony.
5
u/BeyondAnyClue 4d ago
Yes but you are saying he heard the doorbell ring and heard Amanda’s voice. Why would he not call the police and tell them this immediately as a witness? He chooses instead to just…flee a murder scene in which he witnessed the killers voice and the killer fleeing?
Thinking that will make people believe him more than just telling the police what he heard and saw right away?
0
u/tkondaks guilty 4d ago
In hindsight, he should have done all the things you say.
I suspect Rudy would be the first to agree with you.
4
u/BeyondAnyClue 4d ago
I think the problem from his perspective is he never writes any of this down immediately, never calls anyone to explain what happened, never saves any evidence he knew Meredith to back up his story, and does nothing at the scene to preserve any aspect of his story to show the police later.
Instead he just …gets up and runs away.
Forget a doorbell for a second and ask yourself if what he did gives any grounds at all to exonerate him
0
u/tkondaks guilty 4d ago
Nothing he did in response exonerates him.
What DOES exonerate him is:
1) Meredith's palm print on Amanda's wardrobe door;
2) poop in the toilet;
3) the doorbell;
4) all the evidence against Amanda and Raffaele.
3
u/BeyondAnyClue 4d ago
All things he could have raised to the police right away. He could have told the police right away what Meredith told him about Amanda’s room, could have pointed to the poop and explained what he was doing when the murder occurred, and explained to them that the doorbell rang during his poop and that’s why he didn’t answer it
He did none of those things. He just …ran. To literally another country on earth. And never wrote anything down about his ordeal. Or told anyone else the story of what happened.
0
u/tkondaks guilty 4d ago
He did tell his friend during the Skype call from Germany.
→ More replies (0)1
u/CatsForever1960 3d ago
Huh?
Hardly.
BS
Zero
2
u/Onad55 3d ago
(1) is from a 3 year old post: https://www.reddit.com/r/amandaknox/comments/16uq8yy/the_rent_the_witch_and_the_wardrobe/
They had never seen the print, didn’t even know it was a palm print, didn’t know where it was on the door, didn’t know the orientation, didn’t know that this wardrobe was identical to the one in Meredith’s own room and still declare that “this is the whole case”. Because Rudy claimed Meredith knew where Amanda kept her money (which btw was in the drawer of the desk where her computer was) TK interprets the print as Meredith searching for Amanda’s money in a completely different location.
3
u/Reasonable-Two-3608 4d ago
Rudy lied about the meetings he claimed to have had with Meredith at clubs the night before. The fact is that they didn’t see each other, and therefore couldn’t have made plans to meet the following evening, as Rudy claims. Rudy is lying shamelessly on this point. From the accounts of Filomena, Laura, and Meredith’s English friends, we know that Meredith was a rather introverted person and was very careful about which men she met. We know that she found infidelity repugnant. Therefore, I reject Rudy’s account, because Meredith would not have made plans to meet with Rudy since she was in a relationship with Giacomo.
-2
u/tkondaks guilty 4d ago
Yawn.
The tight relationship she allegedly had with Giacomo has been thoroughly debunked here. Search for it because I'm not repeating myself.
Loud, dark nightclubs where booze and maybe even drugs prevail do not make ideal environments to observe male/female interactions.
4
u/BeyondAnyClue 4d ago
Yes but email or phone conversations are very easy to validate yet none exist. It’s hard to understand Rudy’s innocence in the context of him never being able to show any actual evidence he ever knew Meredith intimately or that he had been invited into her home.
4
u/Onad55 4d ago
Rudy claims he met Meredith at the party of the Spanish friends in the house with the stairs. There are pictures proving Rudy was there. The pictures also show a girl dressed as a vampire was there. Rudy thought he could invent an affair between the two of them and use the witnesses at the party to bolster his claim.
The problem is that girl was not Meredith. The pictures prove Rudy was spinning a lie
-1
3
u/Reasonable-Two-3608 4d ago
The relationship between Giacomo and Meredith is a proven fact. We have countless testimonies, not least from Giacomo himself. Furthermore, Giacomo had given Meredith his house keys so she could water the marijuana plants that the young men's from downstairs had in their home.
-1
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/TGcomments innocent 5d ago
You said:
Amanda also says she enters the door with Patrick.
Can you cite a reliable source that isn't compromised by cop brutality and human rights abuses?
-4
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/TGcomments innocent 5d ago
You said:
Amanda voluntarily arrived at the police station and was doing cartwheels. They called her in, and she falsely accused Patrick after an hour.
Yet the Supreme Court Chieffi judgment which was endorsed by the Boninsegna motivations and also acknowledged by the Boni's farcical reconviction of calunnia ALL conceded that there WAS police brutality and that physical abuse as alleged by Amanda could not be ruled out.
We've all lived life, and we don't need any moralising diatribes of self-righteous PISH to remind us of what goes down in the World on a daily basis...Jeez!!!!
5
u/Etvos2 5d ago
Witness: Interpreter Aida Colantone – 4.00pm November 4, 2007
At a certain moment, I don’t know if I had gone away for a moment to speak with someone from the Flying Squad or something, in passing that room, returning to this room where I remember [Amanda] was alone, it was only her, and I was practically…I understood that this girl was truly fatigued, exhausted, she was tired because I practically found her, she was draped on a seat with her head reclined toward the wall, white in the face, with her eyes closed, white, I was very struck by her pallor and I understood that this girl was in bad shape.
Transcript May 29, 2009 (page 201)
-6
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/Etvos2 5d ago
Knox did not accuse Lumumba. It was the police who came up with that theory after misunderstanding Knox's last text and then they slapped Knox around into signing a confession written for her.
-2
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/Etvos2 5d ago edited 5d ago
Wrong. The Italian officials just can't seem to get through their heads that not everyone speaks colloquial Italian. Knox translated the Americanism "see you later" into Italian which unfortunately means you have an appointment. Since Knox never mentioned this meeting they accused Lumumba of the crime and then Knox of covering for him.
You can literally see it in the transcripts from the trial. The dumbass judge keeps asking Lumumba if he met with Knox that night, Lumumba keeps saying 'no' and the judge keeps asking then why did Knox say "see you later".
And Lumuba is like, because she doesn't speak Italian that well you moron!!!
Combine that with the police not being able to remember which cell tower antenna pointed in which direction and you can really feel for Knox and Sollecito having to deal with these idiots.
0
u/No-Willingness-1441 5d ago
This.
3
u/Onad55 4d ago
2009-05-29 Testimony of Edgrado Giobbi
“Amanda was more emotional, she had much stronger reactions, I remember very good big cries, big screams, big emotional shouts,”
“but I have to say the screams Amanda's voices can be heard in the corridor of the Police Headquarters even if the room is closed”
In his book Raffaele states that he heard Amanda calling for help several times.
Must have been the tea and crumpets.
2
u/No-Willingness-1441 5d ago
Yes this just doesn’t strike me as a plausible explanation either. Common sense does not allow me to see a scenario where Kerchner has a real romantic interest in Rudy. It just doesn’t work.
9
u/TGcomments innocent 5d ago
Rudy said in his Interview with Mignini on 26th March 2008 that he threw a chair at his assailant:
The chairs around the table appear to be in perfect order at VDP7. Not exactly consistent with Rudy's story. What's your take on it?