Thursday, December 11, 2008

Primary Timeline: An Hour-By-Hour Guide To The Events In Question

Posted by Michael

[Above: Where Meredith said goodbye to Sophie Purton - perhaps the last friendly face she ever saw.]

This narrative below is our present best shot at listing the events, actual and claimed, surrounding Meredith’s sad fate.

The constantly-updated master version of this primary timeline is posted here on the PMF forum I co-moderate with Skep.  There are some subsidiary timelines which will also appear here soon.

The master version was first posted on the old True Crime MK Forum on Monday 14th April 2008. It built upon an original timeline by Xin, and I have frequently edited it since as the picture grows clearer.

You are really welcome to suggest edits, modifications, and additions, either in Comments below, or in a post below the master version itself.

Kermit’s excellent Powerpoint narrative of many of these same events was previously posted here.

Wednesday 31st October 2007 (Halloween)

Evening  “Amanda…sent [Meredith] numerous SMS messages.” 1900  Meredith responds to her flatmate: “I have to go to a friend’s house for dinner.” The student from Seattle persisted, “What are you doing tonight? Do you want to meet up? Have you got a costume?” She then said that she was going to Le Chic and “maybe we’ll see each other.”

Thursday 1st November 2007 (Day of the Dead in Italy)

1300 AK saw MK at their apartment (per AK)

1400 -1500 MK left

1530 Sophie Purton arrives at Robyn Butterworth’s flat at Via Bontempi 22

1600 Meredith arrives at Robyn Butterworth’s flat

1700 AK, RS went to his apartment (per AK)

1800 Meredith had a meal with her girlfriends “Ms Kercher was known to have eaten an early supper of pizza and ice cream with two British women friends, both fellow students, at six o’clock on the evening of her death. But Sophie Purton, one of the friends, had testified that the meal contained no mushrooms.”

1800 AK, RS left her apartment (per RS)

1836 RS at his computer, had watched ‘Amelie’ whilst also downloading the film ‘Stardust’ to watch later, would be at his computer until 0333 - (per RS & his lawyers). “He was with AK until 1800 when they had both left RS apartment to go into the centre. RS has also said that he spent the evening on his computer working on his university coursework

2018 Patrick sends text message to AK

2030 Patrick’s friend, Swiss Professor Roman Mero had a pizza and then went straight to Le Chic. (had originally claimed he was in Le Chic from 2000)

2030 - 2100 RS “Went home, smoked; had dinner.”

2030 ““ 2100 (AK “left him (per RS), saying to him that she would go to Le Chic, meet friends while he returned to his house”) “”¦ left the house telling Sollecito that she was going to work, [but she], she was at the basketball court of Piazza Grimana.”

2035 AK text message to PL

2038 RG arrives at MK’s (per RG)

2038 PL’s cellphone pings in the area of MK’s house

2040** RS’s father phones him at his apartment on RS’s landline, the call went unanswered and instead went to answer phone. RS did not respond to the message and return his father’s call that night

2040** Young woman, Popovic (Polish after all (?)), arrives at RS’s house to tell him she no longer needed a lift to the station. (She spoke to Amanda via the intercom (?) )

2040** Serbian student, Jovanovic, ‘met’ (Could do with clarification as to whether he simply passed AK, or actually engaged with her in some way). AK on Corso Garibaldi. AK and RS were at RS’s flat at this time and before (per AK/RS)

2040** AK and RS cell phones turned off

2043 AK seen on CCTV entering her house (?)

2046 Meredith arrives eight minutes after RG arrives (per RG)

2050 RS chops up button mushrooms with his knife, and he and AK stir fry them (per Mignini)

2100 AK claimed to meet PL at B-Ball courts and [return] to her house. (per the Judge)

2100 Meredith leaves friend’s house with Sophie Purton to return home, Sophie walks her halfway

2105 Sophie Purton leaves Meredith on Via Roscetto, Meredith continues home alone

2110 Click on RS’s computer, no more activity on computer until following day

2115 Around this time MK arrives home

2130 Meredith commences phone call with mother (What time did it end?)

2141 - 0532 of the night of the crime “is not any human RS apt” (per RS’ computer)

2200 - 2230 Meredith is either dead or dying. A breakdown truck arrives for a broken down car containing a family of three, man, woman and child. The Albanian ‘superwitness’, Hekuran Kokomani, arrives by car at the rubbish bins area a short way down the road from the cottage. HK punches RS, throws a phone and olives at AK, who threatens HK with knife. HK drives further down the road encountering RG who recognises HK and offers money to hire HK’s car, first 50, then offering 250 euros. HK hears banging sounding like ‘wood on wood’ from the house. RG says there is a birthday party at the cottage. HK refuses hire his car, driving off having seen RS in his wing mirror running at him with knife. RS persues him to the lights, where a motorist asks HK for directions. HK has to reverse his car to allow the breakdown truck, which is probably just arriving, to manoeuvre. HK leaves (per HK)

2215 SMS requesting account balance sent from MK’s mobile to her bank balance

2229 First recorded receipts at Le Chic

2230 - 2300 A witness heard “a man and a woman arguing in Italian” inside the cottage “at about 10.30 or 11.00 on the night of November 1,” followed by an “agonising scream”.

2230 “Alessandra Formica, a police witness, said her partner was almost knocked over by a black man running away from scene”. The couple also witness the broken down car and breakdown truck.

2300 (circa) A dark coloured car is seen parked outside the cottage (per garage mechanic witness - Gianfranco Lombardi). “It was about 11pm on the night of November 1, 2007, and I was in the area because I had been called out to fix a broken-down car…When I got to Via Sant Antonio, close to where the house where Meredith Kercher was murdered, I saw a dark-coloured car parked outside and I noticed the gate on the drive was open…I didn’t notice anyone in the car and I didn’t notice anyone coming or going during the eight or 10 minutes it took me to load the broken-down car onto my tow truck.” “The statement is significant because Sollecito has a dark-coloured car, but claims he was not at the house.”

2300 RS reveives telephone call from his father (per RS). Now known to be untrue as the unanswered call via landline was actually made at 2040 and went to answerphone

2300 (circa) Nara Capezalli, the woman who lives opposite MK’s, hears screams coming from the house after which “at least two people” emerged and fled “in different directions.”

2300 - 2330 AK and RS are seen on the baseball court by a sixty-year-old witness, ‘Toto’ (Antonio Curatolo), cuddling, behaving erratically, and looking towards the house…” “...their position of observation on the steps near via della Pergola overlooking the house.” “I saw Amanda and Raffaele around the square in 23-23,30 Grimana the first night of November. I am sure because the next morning the carabinieri were on the streets asking questions. ” AK and RS go down in the direction of the house (possibly joined by a third person (?))

2300 - 0100 RS claims he’s on Internet at his home

Friday 2nd November 2007

0100 AK at RS’s apt (?)

0200 Witnesses report seeing Rudy dancing down the Domus nightclub. Passers-by report loud voices from AK/MK home

0333 RS comes off of his computer and goes to bed, Amanda is ‘not’ there (per RS & his lawyers)

0430 Last sighting of Rudy at the Domus nightclub by witnesses.

0532 Internet activity noted at RS’s computer, (Googling ‘Bleach’ & ‘Blood’ perhaps ?). Phones turned back on?

Dawn Mobile phones switched back on (Would be great to have the actual time for this event)

0745 Witness places AK outside supermarket

0830 Bleach receipt supplied by the market (?) - RS/AK in bed (per RS/AK)

0915 Bleach receipt supplied by the market (?) - RS/AK in bed (per RS/AK)

1000 Woke up at RS’s in morning (per RS)

1030 AK returns to her house to wash; took empty plastic bag (per RS)

1100 AK was back at her house (per AK)

1130 AK back at RS’s house; worried””door open (per RS). Back to AK’s together. AK opens door with keys; went in together. Blood in bathroom. Attempted to break down Meredith’s door (per RS)

0900 - 1200 Lana finds two phones in her garden and notify police, who ascertain that one is registered to Filomena Romanelli at via della Pergola

1226 “Today it was confirmed that the garage video recorded the car of the postal police arriving at 12.26…” and find AK and RS outside (but within the gate), who said they were waiting for the Carabinieri.”

1235 Filomena, having spent the night away with her boyfriend Marco Zaroli, whilst parking their car (with PG and LA) at the ‘Fair of the Dead’ in Perugia, receives phonecall (first of a series of three) from AK “who told me that she had slept at Raffaele’s house and that when she had gone back to our house she had found the door open and blood in her bathroom. She told me that she’d had a shower, that she was scared and that she was going to call Raffaele Sollecito. It seemed really strange to me and I asked her to check that the house was in order and to call the police or Carabinieri.” (Michael: “Going to call” RS when AK and RS claim they came back to the cottage together at 1130?)

1235 - 1245 Second phone conversation between AK and FR

1245 Third phone conversation between AK and FR “she told me that the window in my room was broken and that my room was in a mess. At this point I asked her to call the police and she told me that she already had.”

1250 RS calls his sister in the Carabinieri

1251 RS phones the Carabinieri (for the first time)

1254 RS phones the Carabinieri again

1300 (just before) Filomena Romanelli arrives at apartment with her friends PA (Paola Grande - girlfriend of Luca) and LA (Luca Altieri). M (Marco) was present and “Amanda and Raffaele were in Amanda’s room because at a certain point they came out into the corridor and we introduced ourselves.” (Michael: Evidently, RS and AK failed to notice Meredith’s keys whilst they were hidden away in her room. Why were they in AK’s room when important actions were taking place elsewhere in the cottage, leaving non-resident Marco to deal with the Postal Police? How long were they in there for? ‘What’ were they doing whilst in there - checking it was ‘clean’?)

1305 Postal Police arrive (per RS and his lawyers)

1315 (circa) After listening to Filomena’s remarks, with Postal Police present, LA breaks down door of MK’s room

Evening PG and LA take RS and AK to Perugia police station in their car. PG and LA have stated that during the trip RS was constantly asking them questions regarding the murder and investigation of a manner that caused them to become so concerned and suspicious, they thorougly checked over the interior of the car after RS and AK got out, for ‘incriminating evidence’ they were afraid the pair may have ‘planted’ there. The ‘suspicious’ behaviour of the couple continued inside the police station, which was noted and reported by multiple witnesses

**These times must be very approximate since the 20:40 time slot is ‘very’ congested.


“Friday 0745 Witness places AK outside supermarket”

The witness, possibly the Conad’s manager, was said to have seen AK in the cleaners area, and then headed down Garibaldi, perhaps to her house.

May not be firm enough for you, Michael? You are certainly scrupulously fair throughout - perhaps at the cost of making heads spin trying to reconcile things!

Posted by Fast Pete on 12/11/08 at 08:32 PM | #

Hi Pete. Yes, we believe the manager/owner was a witness at 0745. However, extrapolation of the reports also suggest there was a ‘second’ witness in the shop…a student. We aren’t absolutely certain of this of course.

Timeline Update:

1st Nov, New Slot:

1750 (circa) Jovana Popovic, a Polish girl who worked as RS’ cleaner, arrived at RS’ flat at about 17:50 (she had an appointment nearby at 18:00 and it was before that). She went up and Amanda was alone, Jovana waited for Raffaele to ask him for a lift to get luggage from the station. Raffaele soon arrived and in a cold tone he said “OK”

1st Nov, New Slot:

2040** (circa) Jovana Popovic later got a message that for some reason there is no need to get the luggage and after finishing the violin lesson at about 20:20 she went back to tell Raffaele at around 20:40, and through the intercom she spoke to a laughing Amanda who said that Raf was there and invited her up. She did not go up

1st Nov, EDIT to existing 2040 slot concerning the ‘Serbian’ student ‘Jovanovic’:

2040** Serbian student, Jovanovic, ‘met’ (Could do with clarification as to whether he simply passed AK, or actually engaged with her in some way) AK on Corso Garibaldi. AK and RS were at RS’s flat at this time and before (per AK/RS). NOTE: It is almost certain that the Serbian ‘Jovanovic’ is in fact the Polish ‘Jovana’ Popovic


The fact that Jovanovic is almost certainly Popovic is most useful, since that helps clear some of the seeming congestion of events at 2040 on Nov 1st.

I just wanted to say, that that is a most beautiful picture headlining the article, one that would look wonderful framed on any wall. But truly, here is where beauty and terrible sadness collide, for it was here that poor Meredith was last seen alive by another human being that was not her killer. For me, that picture is therefore one of the most poignant in the whole case.

Posted by Michael on 12/12/08 at 12:19 AM | #

So many wish that we could rewind the clock. Have her head back up those stairs…

Posted by Fast Pete on 12/12/08 at 03:52 AM | #

Michael, it’s your timeline and you can paste in whatever times you want, but the fact is that Amanda called Filomena at 12:08 on Nov. 2, according to the records provided by the phone company.  They spoke four times, not three.  Amanda placed the first call, and Filo placed the other three, at 12:12, 12:20, and 12:34.

Posted by Charlie Wilkes on 12/12/08 at 04:49 PM | #

Thanks for these additions, Charlie. I suspect they are not in Michael’s timeline because they have not been made available to the public, but only Michael can confirm that.

If and when this information is provided, for example during the trial, it can be added to the timeline.

As for Michael pasting in whatever times he wants, I doubt that was his method. Again, his information comes from published sources and is always subject to correction from published sources.

Posted by Skeptical Bystander on 12/12/08 at 07:41 PM | #

Jovana Popovic cannot be Polish.  It is a Serbian name.

Posted by Carol on 12/12/08 at 11:08 PM | #

Both her names are Serbian, I think, Carol? I know a family of Popovic’s and a Jovana in Belgrade.

Michael, Jovana was a music student, who also cleaned for RS, right?

Jovanovic also looks like a Serbian name. I am not sure there are any Polish people involved.

Posted by Fast Pete on 12/13/08 at 12:09 AM | #

Charlie - those times may be true, but at the moment they are coming from only one source, a source which cannot be regarded as ‘independent’. I would therefore like to see verification from at least one independent source before adding them into the Timeline.

On Jovana Popovic - there has always been some confusion about this witness. In the early part of the case it was reported that there was a ‘Polish neighbour’ that had seen Knox entering/leaving Raffaele’s apartment, but no statements were released. Later, there was the story that a ‘Serbian student (Jovanovic)’ had ‘met’ Knox in the street. I am confident now that they are in fact one individual and that errors in reports from the early days of the case made it appear as though there were two individuals. Popovic is indeed a Serbian name and I’m happy to make that adjustment. She has been reported as being a music student, but it has also been reported that she was Raffaele’s cleaner. It is therefore likely that this was a part-time job for her to help fund her studies and would explain the nature of her relationship with Raffaele.

Posted by Michael on 12/13/08 at 08:20 AM | #

Update - New Date, 30th October, with one entry:

1630 - 1700 A new witness, around 40 years old and known only as ‘Fabio’, has given testimony that he saw all three suspects together with Meredith: ’…I used to go to the University of Foreigners and I knew the house in via della Pergola because my friend from Florence lived there a few years ago. I remember that mid-afternoon on October30, more or less between 4′30-5pm, I was in front of the pizzeria Contrappunto because I had just parked my car near the building. I noticed four young people coming out of the gate which leads to the house in via della Pergola. They were walking two by two; …Kercher Meredith with Sollecito Raffaele and behind them, Amanda Knox with a young black man who looked very similar to Rudy Guede, although he was partially covered by Sollecito. I just caught a glimpse of him. I know him by sight because I often used to see him in front of the University for Foreigners while he was handing out fliers for the Merlin pub, I think. This was around three years ago when I used to go to the University for Foreigners. I’m 99% sure that the young black man walking with Amanda on October30 was Rudy Guede. Then, when I got my car, it started raining hard. They were wearing dark clothes, except Amanda who stood out because she was wearing a red, eighties-style coat. I only knew Rudy out of the four. I recognised them without a shadow of doubt when I saw their photos in the papers and on television after the murder. The four came out of the gate and were going towards Piazza Grimana.’

Posted by Michael on 12/16/08 at 06:12 AM | #

Timeline Update:

October 30th, new slot:

Evening Patrick sacks Amanda from working in Le Chic. By Tuesday, October 30, his patience ran out. He told Amanda she could carry on handing out club flyers, but could no longer work in the bar.  “She looked at me blankly and walked away,” he says. “The club was busy and I didn’t see her again that evening.”

October 31st, new slot:

Evening Amanda is in Le Chic. She was attending a Hallowe’en party at the club, knocking back the free red wine. “She was all over two American boys,” Patrick says. “There was no sign of Sollecito and I didn’t see her leave.”

November 1st, new slot:

0300 (Some time after) After locking up Le Chic at 0300, Patrick Lumumba goes to a club where he bumps into Meredith celebrating Halloween “I mentioned the idea of her working for me again,” he says. “She smiled sweetly and said she couldn’t wait, and she’d bring all her friends back to my club for me.”  This is the last time Patrick ever saw Meredith alive

Posted by Michael on 12/18/08 at 03:52 AM | #

I hope your source is not the Daily Mail. This may be true, but would require a better source before it gets put on the timeline!

Posted by Skeptical Bystander on 12/18/08 at 09:00 AM | #

Hello Skep,
Well, as you know, this is actually quite an old interview by the Sunday Mail (the latest updates) and for a long time I wasn’t prepared to enter them into the Timeline. I made the change for two reasons actually.

1) Finally being able to view the Dateline program, it being loaded up Online, Patrick on Camera repeated some some of that information which he gave in the Sunday Mail interview (the firing of Amanda, her flirtatious behaviour etc,.)

2) In consideration, after his interview, Patrick went to some lengths to deny his comments in the mail interview associated with his treatment by the police, yet he did not do so in regard to his comments about Amanda and Meredith. His denials were ‘selective’, rather then of the complete interview.

For a while, I did consider entering the slots with a caveat noting the source and advising caution. I decided against it at the last minute because ultimately the Timeline is intended to be a concise ‘events’ list, not a ‘sources’ list and adding them for certain entries would set a precedent. In an ever expanding Timeline, I’m also becoming a little wary of Timeline ‘bloat’.

However, that said, when I make such a decision it is arbitrary and I’m quite happy to debate how this particular data should be handled, if it should be 1) withdrawn from the Timeline completely 2) Included, but with a caveat stating the source to allow the viewer to decide the value of the data in that particular slot 3) Left as is.

Posted by Michael on 12/18/08 at 04:19 PM | #

Michael, I have been thinking a lot about your question above.

Do we know the precise wording of the text message Patrick sent to Amanda Knox that evening?

I seem to recall that he told her she wasn’t needed but did not actually say she was fired. Patrick’s remarks on the NBC Dateline seems to me to confirm that.

But Patrick could still have met Meredith in the wee hours at a disco, and told her then that she had the job.

If something ticked off Meredith when she came home the night of the murder - yet another strange man (Guede) in the house, or noisy sex, or drug dealing going on, or her rent money missing - it could have been Meredith that told Amanda Knox she was out of a job at Le Chic.

Hearing it from Meredith could have really stoked Knox’s anger demons.

Posted by Fast Pete on 12/22/08 at 01:21 AM | #

Hi Pete, that’s a good question. The wording of the reply text that Amanda sent Patrick has been widely published. However, the exact word for word contents of the initial text from Patrick has not. Rather, we have simply been told that the text was telling her there was no need to come into work that night. It certainly would be useful to have the transcript of that, as it’s all a part of the context.

Another interesting question of course, is what work was it exactly that Amanda was being told she didn’t need to turn up for…working in the bar, or giving out flyers? What work was it exactly that Amanda herself assumed she was going to do that evening?

This is actually quite important, for if one’s going to be working in a bar, it makes it rather difficult to make ‘other’ plans for that evening during the working period. If however, one is working giving out flyers, slipping away for a few hours isn’t really a problem, since it’s unsupervised work. Usually, it isn’t paid in the form of a wage either, rather it’s commission based. Just a couple of days before Meredith’s murder, Amanda was also telling her flatmates that she was going to quit her job with Patrick as he hadn’t paid her. So, there are still some rather important outstanding questions regarding Amanda’s work status.

Posted by Michael on 12/23/08 at 05:49 PM | #

It is a tragic case, but I’m glad that I discovered this website. It presents a wealth of evidence which is not readily available in English. The quantity of evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito does appear to be more substantial than many English language sources would have you believe (this is distinct from the quality of evidence, which I will mention later). So I am considering more seriously the possibility that they had a role in the crime, or in a subsequent cover-up.

But I also feel that many of the authors of this site are exhibiting a bias in favour of the prosecution. When they speculate, the speculation always seems to favour the prosecution. For example, the speculation about what Raffaele was doing on his computer at 0532, or the speculation about why Amanda chose an unconventional way to study abroad.

As a matter of interest, and to balance the speculation which favours the prosecution, I will speculate on two points which I have noticed. There are more than two points on which I could speculate, but I will leave the rest to the defence lawyers.

Raffaele’s father telephoned at 2040 on the night of the murder. The call was taken by Raffaele’s answering machine. To me, this proves very little. Raffaele could have been in the bathroom when the telephone rang and then chose not to call his father back that night. Or he could have been near the phone and just chose not to pick it up, for a number of innocent reasons. This explanation is supported by the click on Raffaele’s computer at 2110. Also, the fact that his father’s call went unanswered at 2040 does not prove that he didn’t speak to his father at 2300. Perhaps his father was out and called Raffaele later from a mobile telephone. There’s a lot of potential doubt here.

Amanda’s housemate Filomena (and also the police I believe) claim that when they arrived at the house, the victim’s clothes were in the washing machine and still warm. I find this odd, as most washing machines rinse the clothes in cold water to save energy, so the clothes come out cold. Now there are several possible explanations. Possibly they have a type of washing machine which rinses the clothes in hot water, although I have never seen one. Possibly they have a combined washer/dryer, out of which the clothes would emerge warm. Possibly there was an error in the translation. Possibly the witnesses made a mistake, and instead should have said that the clothes were wet, or that they heard the machine operating. Finally, there’s the chance that for some reason the witnesses are lying. Again, this piece of evidence needs to be examined carefully, and could turn out to be worthless at trial.

In most high profile trials the prosecution emerges with fewer pieces of credible evidence than they had at the start, whether they win or lose. Think about how strong the case against O.J. Simpson looked at the Preliminary Hearing. It looked like the prosecutors had a compelling case, but it fell apart in court because the investigation had been minimal and the evidence tainted by incompetent and dubious police officers. (I also think the police likely had the wrong man, and if you think O.J. is guilty, I thoroughly recommend the book “O.J. Is Guilty But Not Of Murder” by William Dear.)

So it’s likely that some evidence in this case will be shown to be tainted. It’s also likely that some witnesses will be shown to be unreliable (statistics about the unreliability of eyewitness testimony are quite disturbing). Some witnesses will simply be mistaken, but it’s possible that others may have been deliberately inventing their testimony because they want to be involved in a high profile case. Anyone remember Bill Wasz from the O.J. Simpson case? It was shown fairly recently that he likely invented his story about being hired to kill Nicole Brown, even though he was a career criminal with a number of genuine connections to characters involved in the case.

If the translation of Judge Micheli’s reasons is accurate and represents the complete picture, I disagree with his reason for finding Hekuran Kokomani credible. The fact that he saw the tow truck only proves that he was on the street at the right time. He could have made the rest up (in a similar way to Bill Wasz). His story about throwing the telephone and olives sounds ridiculous, and it sounds extremely fortuitous that he had an encounter with all three suspects. Of course, that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. And the claim that Rudy offered 50 and then 250 Euros to hire Kokomani’s car is interesting, as 250 Euros is the amount of money that Rudy had the opportunity to steal.

One part of the prosecutors’ case that I find very unconvincing is the suggestion that the defendants were walking around barefoot in pools of blood. Who walks around barefoot in pools of blood? The two explanations I can think of are that taking their shoes off was part of some kind of game they were playing with the victim previously, or that they took their shoes off to avoid getting them covered in blood. As they all did the same, it suggests some organisation, and was probably not a silly idea one person had under the influence of drugs. But I don’t find either explanation convincing. Are there any alternative theories?

I hope the court will think about the subtle possiblities in this case, such as the fact that there can be a grey area between innocence and guilt, even if the law only permits “Not Guilty” and “Guilty” verdicts. Perhaps Amanda and Raffaele weren’t responsible for the murder, but tried to alter the crime scene for some unknown reason, or for no logical reason because they were high on drugs. Perhaps they’re innocent but are lying. Perhaps they’re guilty but the police are lying. Perhaps they’re scared because they did drugs and really can’t remember. All these permutations happen in real life. The jury needs to decide the fairest outcome.

Best wishes,


PS: More PDF versions of files on the website would be appreciated. PDF files are more widely compatible than PPS, and updating my version of OpenOffice would take forever (I would use the free PowerPoint Viewer, but they don’t offer it for my operating system).

Posted by Christopher Tidy on 03/01/09 at 05:18 AM | #

Hi Chris,

You wrote:

“When they speculate, the speculation always seems to favour the prosecution. For example, the speculation about what Raffaele was doing on his computer at 0532”.

Raffaele Sollecito using his computer at 5.32am on 2 November is significant because it proves that he lied to the police when claimed that he had slept until 10am.

Sollecito lied from the very beginning; he hadn’t called the police when the postal police turned up at the cottage, and he and Knox weren’t waiting for the police. Sollecito gave three different alibis, and lied deliberately and repeatedly to the police. He wasn’t surfing the Internet from 11pm to 1am, he didn’t speak to his father at 11pm and he didn’t accidentally prick Meredith’s hand whilst cooking at his apartment.

Sollecito admitted in his witness statement that he had lied to the police:

“In my former statement I told you a load of rubbish because I believed Amanda’s version of what happened and did not think about the inconsistencies.” (The Times, 7 November, 2007).

Sollecito was given another opportunity to tell the truth and he chose to repeatedly lie again. He still doesn’t have a credible alibi for the night of the murder. There is only one plausible explanation for Sollecito’s deliberate and repeated lies: he was involved in the murder of Meredith Kercher.

You wrote:

“Also, the fact that his father’s call went unanswered at 2040 does not prove that he didn’t speak to his father at 2300. Perhaps his father was out and called Raffaele later from a mobile telephone. There’s a lot of potential doubt here.”

There is NO doubt whatsover. Sollecito didn’t speak to his father on his landline or mobile phone at 23.00pm. If he had done, there would be phone records to prove it. This isn’t exactly rocket science.

You wrote:

“One part of the prosecutors’ case that I find very unconvincing is the suggestion that the defendants were walking around barefoot in pools of blood. Who walks around barefoot in pools of blood?”

I don’t understand your confusion. There was a bare bloody footprint on the blue bathmat in the bathroom. The trail of bloody footprints leading from Meredith’s room to the bathmat had been cleaned away. Two different sets of bare bloody footprints, which match the foot sizes of Knox and Sollecito, were revealed by luminol.

Yesterday’s revelation that a woman’s bloody shoe print was on a pillow under Meredith’s body and the size is compatible with Knox’s foot size is significant. It is further irrefutable proof that Meredith’s murder was not committed by a lone wolf and that a woman with a foot size compatible with Knox’s was involved. I suspect the significance of this will be lost on you.

The bloody shoe print is not the only piece of evidence that links Knox to the crime scene. Knox’s DNA was on the handle of the double DNA knife, which was used to stab Meredith, and Sollecito’s lawyers claim that Knox’s DNA was on Meredith’s bra.

You wrote:

“It’s also likely that some witnesses will be shown to be unreliable.”

The ONLY witnesses who have been shown to be consistently unreliable and dishonest are Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. A fact which you have conveniently failed to acknowledge.

It would be extremely naive and gullible to believe that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, who have been shown to be compulsive liars, are telling the truth, and that the postal police, officers from the Perugia Flying Squad, Meredith’s friends and her Italian housemates are all lying.

Posted by The Machine on 03/01/09 at 04:11 PM | #


Having looked at the evidence, and given that AK and RS have had 16 months to finally give a coherent explaination of where they were and who they were with on the night of the murder, I hope you would agree that if AK and RS were NOT brought to trial, we would all be demanding to know why?.

Washing Machine

As I understand it, the washing machine was actually running when the Postal Police arrived and had stopped, but was still warm, when Filomena and the other Police officers arrived.

The whole question of what the defendants were wearing on the night of the murder (not just Amanda’s shoes) has yet to be clarified. RS claimed he couldn’t remember if and when Amanda changed her clothes.


It has been established that RS was lying about a call to his landline at 23:00

Who walks around barefoot in polls of blood ?

I would suggest anyone involved in a cleanup. It is much easier to wash blood off your feet than off shoes, which would have to be disposed of later. My cleaner mops the floor in bare feet.


Micheli doesn’t give much wieght to his evidence, however he did know about the breakdown truck, at a time when only the people present knew about it and claimed to know Guede from the agritourism place he worked. As more evidence becomes available, especially about drugtaking, Kolomani may become more important to the case.

Guilty or Not Guilty

Many people on this site have felt that it may be proved that one or both the defendants were only involved in the cleanup. If they are ‘innocent but lying’ there is a simple remedy ... tell the truth.

Posted by Kevin on 03/01/09 at 04:29 PM | #
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Perugia: The Jury Selection Has Now Begun

Or to previous entry Formal Kercher Request That Trial Be Behind Closed Doors