Truthsayer Hellman is saying there is a clear break as well. He doesn't say the width of the big toe goes down the entire way.

The other argument specifically about the big toe is that there is no break between the foot and the toe as there should be if it were Raf's.

Again at least read the appeal. The fact that you talk about magical arguments knowing there is an appeal written on this specific issue is pretty funny.

Well, for starters, he's asked you to state it about 100 times now.

I am curious: what is the utility of "posting most" of a particular argument - and ad hoc, at that?

Is this some sort of reverse persuasion strategy? I mean, is it your goal to NOT let us all know what all the fuss is about?

In the cbc interview I posted. AK says very clearly that she only ever met Rudy once before the murder. Can you source that she hung out with him more then once?

I'm still struggling to see how a guy who took his shoes off at a murder scene to clean away blood is careless enough to then leave a bloody footprint on the floor and an unflushed **** in the toilet

He was sitting on the toilet when she walked in the door. No flush to avoid alerting her that he was in the house.

Rudy wasn't a regular at Le Chic. There's no evidence he was. Patrick's bar was a failure with mostly older men and his friends as regulars.

Ohh Henry. You're just projecting your own self loathing and life failures onto them.

Henry is being a dunce or lying as usual saying Amanda was out when the 8.18pm text came in except Massei says the cell tower covered Raffaele's place.

Massei page 318

The area around the defendant’s home was reached by a very strong signal radiated from the Via Berardi sector 7 cell, indicated as being the ‚best server cell‛ with regard to Sollecito’s house; furthermore the signals of other cells are also powerful, respectively that with a pylon in Piazza Lupattelli sector 8 and that with a pylon in Via dell’Acquilla-Torre dell’Acquedotto sectors 3 and 9.

− 20:18:12: Amanda receives the SMS sent to her by Patrick Lumumba, which let her off from having to go to work at the ‚Le Chic‛ pub on the evening of 1 November. At the time of receptionthe phone connected to the cell on Via dell’Aquila 5-Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3,

Knox herself admits to twice in her testimony.

Meredith's boyfriend mentions a third outing to the club Merlin but I don't have his testimony. There is also a witness who claims he saw Knox and Rudy together on the 30th but he is iffy.

Knox is obviously lying about only seeing Rudy once at Le Chic. Rudy asked Meredith's boyfriend if Knox was seeing anyone and expressed interest in her. He knows she works at Le Chic and he hangs out there. Obviously he is going to show up.

So he was sitting on the far toilet with his two knives when Meredith came home, catching him by surprise but so far he is undetected... and instead of slipping out the kitchen door he runs past it, deeper into the house and into Meredith's room to kill her?

There was only one door to exit from and that's the front door. It's possible he went and tried to see if he could exit..... who knows. But he attacked her shortly after she had entered her room.

It wasn't the far toilet and only one knife btw.

Fat Tony,

WTF? I know you know the layout of the cottage. Rudy's **** was in Filomena and Laura's bathroom. That bathroom is off the kitchen / living area. The house is shaped like an L so this would be at the base of the L. Meredith's room was at the top of the L. The door out of the cottage was next to the bathroom that Rudy was in. Rudy would need to walk past the door which he could exit through without being seen and intentionally go down the hallway to attack Meredith in her room. If this was an interrupted burglary there is no reason to do this.

It was the far toilet -- Amanda said she went to Laura's toilet to use her hair dryer, and that's when she saw the poo, otherwise she would have seen it when she took the shower. The bathroom has been extensively documented as being the one with the poo.

As to the knives, we know The Knife is too large for the smaller wounds, giving rise to Edda's constant wails that the incompatibility means there is "no murder weapon." The missing knife is thought to be a pocket knife.

So according to you, Rudy magically breaks into Filomena's room, messes it up without taking anything, then goes to relieve himself, with his two knives.





Meredith arrives home.




She goes to the kitchen for a snack, and Rudy-- according to you-- does not flush so as to avoid detection.





At this point he could wait it out another moment and run out the door, with his knives, since it is always between them.





Instead it is your position that someone who so far has made every effort not to be seen, decided instead to chase her down the hall, with his knives, and torture and kill her, like so:

That's the thing -- I can never tell if they say this stuff on purpose or if their information is bad.

No Sherlock. He was in the closest toilet to the front door.

What the hell has Amanda discovering the crap on Nov 2 got to do with Rudy taking a crap on Nov 1 when Meredith walked in the door and going to attack her shortly afterwards?

His previous MO involves making a mess of the toilets. So what if he stole nothing from Filomenas room? He admitted leaning out Filomena's window which is as close a confession as you'll get to him breaking it.

His DNA is on on the purse her credit cards and phones were stolen from.

lol, now you say:

I'm showing you which toilet the poo was in and mapping out what you said happened. I am merely a camera pointed at the scene -- don't blame me that it looks stupid.



You said it wasn't in the far toilet. I showed you why you were wrong. My only question is whether you were wrong deliberately.


I thought his previous MO was being a prolific burglar.


Glad you mentioned the purse -- You accept the purse DNA as uncompromised despite its collection 46 days later, yet point to this same 46 days to impugn the bra clasp. Why so?

What use do someone's cell phones and house keys have to a fleeing burglar?

Poker References diagram is correct. Rudy's **** was in Filomena and Laura's bathroom.

No idea what the **** you are talking about. Amanda was not even mentioned in that recreation. Knox's behaviour with respect to finding the **** is highly suspicious but that is a separate argument.

lol what? I love how you just make stuff up. As far as we know Rudy was caught trespassing once -- no mess on the toilet. He was a person of interest in two burglaries and again no mess on the toilet.

Because taking things is what motivates people who commit B&Es to go through the effort. The search of Filomena's room ignores all the small drawers which would be where items of value would be and instead throws random clothing on the floor. Filomena has two designer bags each worth at least $600 and a laptop. A thief would never leave those items behind nor would he go looking for stuff in a closet of clothing while ignoring the jewelry boxes.

Useless items. The bank cards were never used and the mobile phones were discarded 10-15 minutes after the murder. No thief would steal these items after a murder since they are too risky and connect you to the much more serious crime.

-----------

Switching from Amanda to Jodie we have a fake burglary as well. In this case it was determined to be a fake burglary because the burglar's actions were illogical.

A burglar supposedly broke in and stole one gun -- ignoring the rest of the gun collection -- then proceeded to steal one item from four different rooms. The police knew it was a fake burglary because that is not how thieves behave. They will take the most valuable items they see which they can get away with. They don't walk around the house making sure to steal one item from every room while ignoring more valuable items in the rooms they have crossed off their list.

I would add at this point that the "Rudy attacked Meredith" scenario presented by Bongiorno involved Meredith in her room stripping from the waist down first -- shirt and sweater on, shoes, socks, pants, underwear off, at the moment Rudy pounces with his two knives. No one undresses this way.

Which, Tony, only extends the time Rudy had to escape without being discovered at all.

Your scenario requires Rudy, after making all this effort to abort the burglary and avoid detection, completely changing his mind to something terrible at the exact moment Meredith is undressing in this unusual way precisely required to make your silly scene work.

I think you are all not understanding Fat Tony's argument. It is far too nuanced for our simple minds. I think we should be required to go back and read his posts until we understand the complete argument before commenting further.

Or, if we really want the straight dope, we can read Raf's and Amanda's books.

His new MO was second story window entry breaking the window with a rock just like happened at the cottage but if you listen to Maria Del Prato he made a mess of the toilets.

My scenario (the truth) is Rudy is a sadist and necrophile which is supported by the crime scene photos and Professor Vinci and crime scene reconstruction expert Ron Hendry and ex FBI agent Steve Moore.

The rape/sexual assault occured after he had cut her throat and moved her body into position with the pillow under her hips. She would have been dead within minutes by the time he undressed her and left his semen stain and his bloody footprint on the pillow on top of the semen stain.

lol yes Rudy was the Toilet Pooping Bandit -- what kind of ****'en signature is that?

Ok so an idiot who once worked for the FBI and a profiler who claims that Rudy likely came to Italy after committing crimes in his native country (at the age of 5) are who you rely on.

The semen stain is just fabricated. There was a stain but it was never determined to be semen nor was it on top of the blood.

This is what I mean by racism. You have made Rudy out to be a sadist and a necrophiliac with no evidence whatsoever. Now on the other hand we do have evidence of Raffaele previously attacking a girl with scissors, documentation that he was disciplined and asked to leave the university residence for being a creep, that he fetishized knives, and that he collected excessively violent comics that often depicted rape and murder.

Despite this you claim there is no history or reason to believe Raffaele is capable of something like this but Rudy on the other hand is having sex with dead bodies based on nothing.

You're confusing two different incidents (and totally ignoring the crash and burn of your hypothesis).

The second-story thing was the law office. Del Prato was the nursery.

Del Prato testified:
"I asked him who he was," she told the court, "and he replied perfectly calmly, even though I had caught him red-handed."

Then: The episode that Maria Del Prato recounted in court Friday followed Friday's testimony by Perugia lawyer Paolo Brocchi, who said a computer and cell phone had been stolen from his law offices in October 2007, weeks before Kercher's murder. The computer from Brocchi's office matched the one Guede had brought to Milan.

I don't understand what "MO" you hope to establish with these examples. Assuming he is guilty of these invastions, you are trying to explain Rudy NOT taking Filomena's laptop by pointing out that he had taken a laptop before, and you give an example when in response to being busted he is perfectly calm and non-violent in order to "prove" that he becomes exceedingly violent when he has NOT been detected.