Yes and her keys were stolen. The killer would have needed to unlock the front door with a key to as the girls locked it from the inside because it flew open if they didn't.

It was locked and her keys were taken but that is all I know.

How many keys did she have on her keyring? How would Rudy, if he acted alone, know which key it was? Would he really sit there and try to figure it out, or would he just get the hell out of there? He left his feces in the toilet and fingerprints and footprints all over, why would he care about locking her door?

No. The main door was not a deadbolt. It could be unlocked from inside without a key.

Were Rudy's fingerprints found on Meredith's door? Seems they would be if he's the one who closed and locked it.

You can make a good argument that the front door being locked from the inside might have played a part in the confrontation. Rudy wouldn't have been able to sneak out of the apartment because it was locked by key from the inside. In that narrative he'd have known he needed the keys to get out so locking her door would have been a byproduct of him needing them to leave.

No.

Surely he could have just left the same way he came in?

What is your source for that? I'm trying to find where I read it had to be locked via key from the inside from I know I've read that. Here Amanda discusses it in her testimony but she could be talking about from the outside. Still I'm almost certain I read that the key was used from the interior as well.

That's not really the point. If he was in the bathroom when she came home and he tried to sneak down the hall he'd get to the front door before he got to Filomena's room. They're right next to each other pretty much. But the point is if he did try to sneak out that way, which would make more sense than sneaking out a broken window with a 13 foot drop, he wouldn't have known it was locked which would have delayed him.

Once he made eye contact with Meredith he was faced with a choice because she knew him and her boyfriend who lived downstairs also knew him.

Massei, page 29, says it had to be locked with a key; that just pushing it closed wasn't enough.

If Rudy's footprints run straight out of Meredith's room to the front door, how did he lock her bedroom door?

Here we go again.

One of the cars was parked right outside the cottage gates, the other outside the carpark. Total distance of 20-50 metres. Not 200

They go into a cafe lollll What cafe? There is no cafe

So you are saying that Rudy knew the house well enough to know the front door needed a key. This would mean he stole the keys. Locked MK's door and opened the front door with them. Otherwise there would be evidence he had to go back into her room and get the keys. If this was the case there should be 2 sets of his footprint leaving her room.

Either that or AK let him out and left with him like the witness heard.

There was no confession. There was a false witness statement made in the middle of the night without a lawyer typed up in Italian by the police and prosecutor. She didn't speak the language well, was told she'd spend 30 years in jail. Raffaele says in his book he heard her screaming in there. If you can be a little open minded, it becomes obvious they scared the crap out of her. She started the next day retracting her statements and making it very clear she knows she didn't kill Meredith.

The first court was a kangaroo court, jurors slept during it, Mignini had naps and had journalists whispering in his ear when the defence was speaking. One of the jurors after the conviction said "we all know what it's like to have a little wine and drive a car" loll

They police were leaking lies to the media as soon as they were arrested. Barbie Nadeau says they were handing out crime scene photos like business cards.

Here is a list of all the lies that were spead.

http://kermit-analysis.wikispaces.co...and-Press-Lies

lol

Ok, I'll bite

How bout to delay discovery of the body?

It's worth noting they don't actually go right to the front door. They fade with each step to the point where he could have turned around and done anything and we wouldn't know.

Saying she was in the house and heard the scream is not exactly an alibi either.

I don't understand the footprints as being you alls biggest claim of guilt.

Of course there are footprints from her room to Merediths/bathroom etc., she took a shower and apparently has to walk right by it no? Has also mentioned knocking on her door, no?

It's also likely assuming any innocent person who was Amanda or not, walking barefoot into that bathroom, then out could have stepped in any of the small droplets.

Is the guilty assertion here that she walked around the crime scene and made bloody footprints then cleaned them? I'm not sure I understand the evidence of that.

239 has claimed vehemently dozens of times that these footprints are not blood. To the point where he doesn't admit the smallest possibility and won't even consider the footprints as evidence at all, because they're not blood. So what you describe is not possible if he is correct. He's checkmated himself there. If you admit that the footprints are likely blood, then what you say sounds reasonable. It was the kind of explanation I was looking for and one I hadn't considered. But like the staging, 239 can't admit the possibility of that, because it opens the door to guilt. PR 101 is to deny, deny, deny and keep the message simple.

The other problem with your theory is that the footprints go quite clearly from Meredith's room to Amanda's. There are none in the bathroom, none leading from the bathroom through the hallway into Amanda's room, and none elsewhere of the many areas they tested. They go from outside Meredith's into Amanda's room. This is what I'm talking about with the improbability of those particular footprints. Logically, if nothing is cleaned up, footprints should be strongest where a person first steps in blood. Barring a cleanup, they're aren't suddenly going to start appearing outside the murder room if her foot got coated by wet diluted blood in the bathroom. In the innocence narrative, none of these places were cleaned after Amanda came home and showered on the day of discovery. So where are the prints coming to/from the bathroom?

Regarding spots of blood, spots of blood on the foot do not cause full footprints in blood including all the base and toes. They produce, unsurprisingly, spots. You'd have to argue there were diluted blood traces in the bathroom, enough to coat a foot. But only on the day after Meredith died, or footprints would be everywhere and there'd be many sets (say, if there was sometimes menstrual blood).

So murder blood would have to have been cleaned up and diluted in the bathroom. Which is pretty much nearly certain what happened if you look at the very visible bloody footprint matching Sollecito on the mat and no other footprints or blood on the floor. But why on Earth is Rudy cleaning up weak footprints in the bathroom and leading to/from the bathroom, when his sneakers go straight for the door in actual visible blood? You would have to argue he doubled back. But there are no prints of that, visible or luminol.

You would also have to argue that Rudy managed to leave no prints - even luminol - exiting the bathroom in freshly cleaned up blood, but that Amanda somehow managed to get that same blood on her and start depositing it only outside Meredith's door.

It's worth noting that 239 also downplays this possibility (the bathroom cleanup) and gets pissed off that the pink bathroom photo.

I've been trying to find some of the bugged conversations and came across this one from Follain pages 189/199

This is Amanda talking to her dad November 20.

"I saw him first with the neighbours"

Curt asks if she means the guys downstairs.

"Yes.... And also one evening when I was with the neighbours in town.... we bumped into him.... And then I saw him once in the basketball court, and I think I saw him once when I was at work.... but I barely know him..... I dont even know his name. I don't even know him. And the lawyer told me the police says I phone him or something.....but I don't even know him"

Curt Knox: "Because there's his palm print on the cushion which was under Meredith"

Amanda interupts: "And it's his?"

Curt Knox: " Yes, it's his, and it was established that it was his palm print because he's apparently form the Ivory Coast and he was adopted by an Italian family..... so his prints are on file and-"

Amanda: "Ohhh my God"

Amanda's tone incredulous says it's unreal for her.....

"Ohh my God. I mean, just the idea of knowing who might have done it..... I mean I know him, I saw him before, I spoke with him a bit before.... Ohh my God!"

"Ohh my God! What a bastard!"

Here's another one where Follain somehow gets access to private conversations between Raffaele and his lawyer. Page 160/161

Brusco decided to be frank with him: "Listen Raffaele, as I see it there are three possabilites. One you killed Meredith. Two, you didn't do anything. And three, perhaps you arrived on the scene at a later stage to help Amanda and others clean up. Whichever one it is, you should tell us. And if it's number three, you'd better tell us immediately because we're going to have to move fast."

Raffaele listened in silence, his gaze fixed (were they video recording this???) steadily on his lawyer. He replied without hesitation: "No, I wasn't there that evening. And i didn't get involved afterwards"

"And Amanda? Look, let's be frank; she's in it, isn't she?" Brusco asked

"I'm interested only in my position but I dont think Amanda has anything to do with it either," Raffaele said calmly.

Agree. But I think most people assume confessions in murder cases means the person admitted to being the killer.

Yes, that's exactly your reaction when you're innocent and find out proof that a person you knew could be the murderer of your flatmate.

"What a bastard"

LOL

Most people would be shocked and humbled and deeply unsettled that an acquaintance did it, not opining what a bastard the guy was for killing someone. What an innocent person would have said:

Oh my God, I can't believe this...oh my God...are you absolutely sure? Are they sure it's him?

The first overwhelming human instinct in the face of disbelief and shock is to seek confirmation, as they grapple with this huge, world altering new information, NOT to quickly rush to judgment and condemnation.