Justice for Meredith A Summary of the Evidence Against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito

1. Justice for MeredithA Summary of the Evidence Against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito (Click to proceed)

2. ClicktoreturntoIndex Introduction Let’s look at the overall picture in the case against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito as they attempt to appeal their convictions for the brutal murder of Meredith Kercher in Perugia on 1 November 2007. In reviewing the charges against Knox and Sollecito, we have the benefit of a full English translation of the Massei Report and also the benefit of an excellent Summary of that Report. They are available on the True Justice for Meredith Kercher website, as well as the Perugia Murder File site. I urge you to read at least the summary of the Massei Report. In the following bullet point presentation I make the case for guilt my own way. Most of the points are of course drawn from the Report but I include observations, evidence and argument not referred to in it, and acknowledge helpful contributions from posters on the TJMK site and others. Many will be familiar with the content but the lively interactive and inclusive format has the extra dimension to unlock closed minds. "There are none so blind as those who will not see." (Adapted from Jeremiah 5.21) The Independent Expert’s Report on the “Double DNA Knife” and the Bra Clasp has now been released, which includes, it appears, some trenchant criticisms. The contents of the Report are being debated and clarified in court at this time. This article is subject to the court’s conclusions. However, this case is much more complex and pervasive than just the Knife and the Bra Clasp: there remains a substantial body of evidence which supports the charges against Amanda and Raffaele. As I see it the only way for the defence to rebut that evidence is to put the pair on the stand. Kermit has helped out with the inclusion of visuals and additional text to illustrate the bullet points. We can both be contacted through the TJMK site. - James Raper and Kermit (Click to proceed)

3. ClicktoreturntoIndex INDEX Introduction • How to handle the evidence. • The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena's bedroom. • Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of AK and RS. Nov. 2- 4 • Evidence as to time of Death and Proximity of AK and RS. • Analysis of Police Questioning, Technicalities and AK's Confession. • Analysis of Physical Evidence at the Cottage and RS's Apartment. • The Hypothesis of a Partial Clean - Up Operation and "No Evidence means Not There". • The Staging or Partial Staging of a Sex Attack. • How many were involved and was there more than one knife? • Rudy Guede's Evidence. • Miscellaneous Evidence. • Some Conclusions. User notes: Ifyouhave time, use thePageDownbuttonortheRightor Down arrowbuttonstoadvanceprogressivelythroughthepresentation. Ifyouwanttogodirectlytoone of thesections in theIndex, moveyour cursor overany of theIndexitems, and leftclick. Fromany of thepresentationpages, you can returntothisIndexwiththe “returntoIndex” button in theupperleft of thescreen.

4. ClicktoreturntoIndex 1. How To Handle The Evidence • It will be seen from what follows that the case against Amanda and Raffaele is founded in logic, evidence and has a consistent, if not complete, narrative. The narrative would be more detailed if we had a clearer picture of the motives involved. • It is true that there are many instances where one can advance a plausible alternative explanation for a piece of evidence. But there are just as many instances where an alternative explanation becomes implausible. • I have put the evidence, evaluation and interpretation into fairly obvious categories, from which it can be seen just how it all stacks up in each, and overall, and how very unlikely it is as a consequence that just because one can argue that this or that is coincidental and may have an innocent explanation, that it is likely to be so. • Above all it is the totality of the evidence that has to be absorbed to form a considered and objective opinion, not just as to the totality but in respect of each individual item of evidence as well. “Occam’s Razor” is a principle attributed to the 14th century English Friar William of Ockham, and can be summarised in these terms :”Of two equivalent theories or explanations, all other things being equal, the simpler one is to be preferred.” In terms of studying criminal cases, we should apply this principle, avoiding unnecessarily complicated explanations for the evidence at hand. Occam’s Razor in practise: If we observe that the suspect had toothpaste on his toothbrush, without any additional evidence at hand, the pictured scenario should not be envisioned in order to explain how it got there.

5. ClicktoreturntoIndex 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom • It is evident from a simple visual inspection of the outside of the cottage that a climb up to Filomena’s window would have been an extremely difficult and hazardous enterprise for even an athletic burglar. Filomena’s window

6. ClicktoreturntoIndex 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom • It is evident from a simple visual inspection of the outside of the cottage that a climb up to Filomena’s window would have been an extremely difficult and hazardous enterprise for even an athletic burglar. • The shutters were not latched but Filomena had said that the shutters were swollen from the rain the day before and that she had closed them as far as they would go with the shutters rubbing against the window sill. Filomena’s window Filomena’s window

7. ClicktoreturntoIndex 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom • It is evident from a simple visual inspection of the outside of the cottage that a climb up to Filomena’s window would have been an extremely difficult and hazardous enterprise for even an athletic burglar. • The shutters were not latched but Filomena had said that the shutters were swollen from the rain the day before and that she had closed them as far as they would go with the shutters rubbing against the window sill. • Four separate operations would be required to enter the cottage through Filomena’s bedroom window: climbing up to open the shutters, climbing down, throwing the rock, and then climbing up to the window again.

8. ClicktoreturntoIndex 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom • It is evident from a simple visual inspection of the outside of the cottage that a climb up to Filomena’s window would have been an extremely difficult and hazardous enterprise for even an athletic burglar. • The shutters were not latched but Filomena had said that the shutters were swollen from the rain the day before and that she had closed them as far as they would go with the shutters rubbing against the window sill. • Four separate operations would be required to enter the cottage through Filomena’s bedroom window: climbing up to open the shutters, climbing down, throwing the rock, and then climbing up to the window again. • Furthermore anyone doing this would do so without knowing whether or not the scuri (the inner wooden blinds) were latched to the inside of the window or not. Had they been so then it would have been impossible to unlatch and open the windows in any event, The presence of the scuri (given that they are of a light colour) would have been obvious at the time of opening the shutters and/or at the time of throwing the rock.

9. ClicktoreturntoIndex 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom • It is evident from a simple visual inspection of the outside of the cottage that a climb up to Filomena’s window would have been an extremely difficult and hazardous enterprise for even an athletic burglar. • The shutters were not latched but Filomena had said that the shutters were swollen from the rain the day before and that she had closed them as far as they would go with the shutters rubbing against the window sill. • Four separate operations would be required to enter the cottage through Filomena’s bedroom window: climbing up to open the shutters, climbing down, throwing the rock, and then climbing up to the window again. • Furthermore anyone doing this would do so without knowing whether or not the scuri (the inner wooden blinds) were latched to the inside of the window or not. Had they been so then it would have been impossible to unlatch and open the windows in any event, The presence of the scuri (given that they are of a light colour) would have been obvious at the time of opening the shutters and/or at the time of throwing the rock. • All the time the person would be clearly visible to anyone passing along the road outside the cottage.

10. ClicktoreturntoIndex 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom • It is evident from a simple visual inspection of the outside of the cottage that a climb up to Filomena’s window would have been an extremely difficult and hazardous enterprise for even an athletic burglar. • The shutters were not latched but Filomena had said that the shutters were swollen from the rain the day before and that she had closed them as far as they would go with the shutters rubbing against the window sill. • Four separate operations would be required to enter the cottage through Filomena’s bedroom window: climbing up to open the shutters, climbing down, throwing the rock, and then climbing up to the window again. • Furthermore anyone doing this would do so without knowing whether or not the scuri (the inner wooden blinds) were latched to the inside of the window or not. Had they been so then it would have been impossible to unlatch and open the windows in any event, The presence of the scuri (given that they are of a light colour) would have been obvious at the time of opening the shutters and/or at the time of throwing the rock. • All the time the person would be clearly visible to anyone passing along the road outside the cottage. • Given the operations required, as described above, it seems highly implausible that Meredith (who was dressed at the time of the attack) would not have heard the intruder going about his business of breaking in and would not have taken such steps as appropriate to forestall the intrusion and/or protect herself.

11. ClicktoreturntoIndex 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom ( • It is evident from a simple visual inspection of the outside of the cottage that a climb up to Filomena’s window would have been an extremely difficult and hazardous enterprise for even an athletic burglar. • The shutters were not latched but Filomena had said that the shutters were swollen from the rain the day before and that she had closed them as far as they would go with the shutters rubbing against the window sill. • Four separate operations would be required to enter the cottage through Filomena’s bedroom window: climbing up to open the shutters, climbing down, throwing the rock, and then climbing up to the window again. • Furthermore anyone doing this would do so without knowing whether or not the scuri (the inner wooden blinds) were latched to the inside of the window or not. Had they been so then it would have been impossible to unlatch and open the windows in any event, The presence of the scuri (given that they are of a light colour) would have been obvious at the time of opening the shutters and/or at the time of throwing the rock. • All the time the person would be clearly visible to anyone passing along the road outside the cottage. • Given the operations required, as described above, it seems highly implausible that Meredith (who was dressed at the time of the attack) would not have heard the intruder going about his business of breaking in and would not have taken such steps as appropriate to forestall the intrusion and/or protect herself. • Rudy Guede had visited the boys’ flat on the lower floor of the cottage on at least two occasions and he would have known that it would have been far simpler to have gained access to the girls’ flat via the balcony on the other side of the cottage, where the entrance to the boy’s flat is, which he could have accomplished with far less chance of being seen or heard in under a minute. From early 2008, the cottage was broken into twice via this route, and not via any other route.

12. ClicktoreturntoIndex 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom (1/2) • It is evident from a simple visual inspection of the outside of the cottage that a climb up to Filomena’s window would have been an extremely difficult and hazardous enterprise for even an athletic burglar. • The shutters were not latched but Filomena had said that the shutters were swollen from the rain the day before and that she had closed them as far as they would go with the shutters rubbing against the window sill. • Four separate operations would be required to enter the cottage through Filomena’s bedroom window: climbing up to open the shutters, climbing down, throwing the rock, and then climbing up to the window again. • Furthermore anyone doing this would do so without knowing whether or not the scuri (the inner wooden blinds) were latched to the inside of the window or not. Had they been so then it would have been impossible to unlatch and open the windows in any event, The presence of the scuri (given that they are of a light colour) would have been obvious at the time of opening the shutters and/or at the time of throwing the rock. • All the time the person would be clearly visible to anyone passing along the road outside the cottage. • Given the operations required, as described above, it seems highly implausible that Meredith (who was dressed at the time of the attack) would not have heard the intruder going about his business of breaking in and would not have taken such steps as appropriate to forestall the intrusion and/or protect herself. • Rudy Guede had visited the boys’ flat on the lower floor of the cottage on at least two occasions and he would have known that it would have been far simpler to have gained access to the girls’ flat via the balcony on the other side of the cottage, where the entrance to the boy’s flat is, which he could have accomplished with far less chance of being seen or heard in under a minute. • None of the vegetation beneath Filomena’s window was damaged or flattened. The ground was wet but despite this there was no sign of any streaks or scuff marks on the wall beneath the window.

13. ClicktoreturntoIndex 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom (1/2) • It is evident from a simple visual inspection of the outside of the cottage that a climb up to Filomena’s window would have been an extremely difficult and hazardous enterprise for even an athletic burglar. • The shutters were not latched but Filomena had said that the shutters were swollen from the rain the day before and that she had closed them as far as they would go with the shutters rubbing against the window sill. • Four separate operations would be required to enter the cottage through Filomena’s bedroom window: climbing up to open the shutters, climbing down, throwing the rock, and then climbing up to the window again. • Furthermore anyone doing this would do so without knowing whether or not the scuri (the inner wooden blinds) were latched to the inside of the window or not. Had they been so then it would have been impossible to unlatch and open the windows in any event, The presence of the scuri (given that they are of a light colour) would have been obvious at the time of opening the shutters and/or at the time of throwing the rock. • All the time the person would be clearly visible to anyone passing along the road outside the cottage. • Given the operations required, as described above, it seems highly implausible that Meredith (who was dressed at the time of the attack) would not have heard the intruder going about his business of breaking in and would not have taken such steps as appropriate to forestall the intrusion and/or protect herself. • Rudy Guede had visited the boys’ flat on the lower floor of the cottage on at least two occasions and he would have known that it would have been far simpler to have gained access to the girls’ flat via the balcony on the other side of the cottage, where the entrance to the boy’s flat is, which he could have accomplished with far less chance of being seen or heard in under a minute. • None of the vegetation beneath Filomena’s window was damaged or flattened. The ground was wet but despite this there was no sign of any streaks or scuff marks on the wall beneath the window. • A large nail sticking out of the wall and which might have impeded or assisted a climber was unaffected. Nail

14. ClicktoreturntoIndex 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom • There was no broken glass on the ground outside. There was broken glass on the outer sill ledge and had a burglar climbed in through the window he would almost certainly have dislodged this glass, deliberately or accidentally, so that it would have fallen outside.

15. Let me introduce DelfoBerretti, a lawyerontheSollecitoteamwho stands a head aboveothermortals and wastaskedwithtryingtoclimb up toFilomena’swindow. He actuallytouchedthestoneledge, whereonthedayafterMeredith’smurder, brokenglasshadbeenfound. He couldnotprogressanyfurther, whatwithhisfootjammed at anawkward, painfulangle in theiron grate of a lowerfloorwindow. HadtallDelfo (oranimaginaryspidermanLone Wolf killer) beenabletoactuallygethishandovertheledgewiththesamebrokenglass as wasfoundthereafterthemurder, itwouldhavebeennexttoimpossibletonotknocksomeglassshards back overtheedge, betweengrabbingaroundtryingtofind a secure, safehandhold, and haulinghisbodyovertheslightoverhang. However, nonewasfound. In any case, theDefenceteamsseemtohaveabandonedtheLone Wolf theory, so perhapstheimplications of Delfo’sunsuccessfuleffortisnow a mootpoint. ClicktoreturntoIndex Let’stake a closer look at theglassontheledge of thewindowframe . . . 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom • There was no broken glass on the ground outside. There was broken glass on the outer sill ledge and had a burglar climbed in through the window he would almost certainly have dislodged this glass, deliberately or accidentally, so that it would have fallen outside. There’s glass “outside” thewindow (thatis, onthestonewindowsill, butinsidetheclosed position of thegreenshutter), butnoneoutsideontheground. The lie of the glass is consistent with the shutters being closed when the glass was broken - further evidence of staging from the inside. Delfo

16. ClicktoreturntoIndex 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom • There was no broken glass on the ground outside. There was broken glass on the outer sill ledge and had a burglar climbed in through the window he would almost certainly have dislodged this glass, deliberately or accidentally, so that it would have fallen outside. • The clothes tossed about the floor had shards of glass on top which would not be the case had the window first been broken to gain entry. This in itself is hard evidence that the break in and burglary were staged. • There were items which had not been touched at all e.g clothing, personal items, the contents of drawers and cupboards, and Filomena’s laptop. • Nothing, as it later transpired, had been stolen or even assembled together for removal.

17. ClicktoreturntoIndex 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom • There was no broken glass on the ground outside. There was broken glass on the outer sill ledge and had a burglar climbed in through the window he would almost certainly have dislodged this glass, deliberately or accidentally, so that it would have fallen outside. • The clothes tossed about the floor had shards of glass on top which would not be the case had the window first been broken to gain entry. This in itself is hard evidence that the break in and burglary were staged. • There were items which had not been touched at all e.g clothing, personal items, the contents of drawers and cupboards, and Filomena’s laptop. • Nothing, as it later transpired, had been stolen or even assembled together for removal. • Although the room was combed for forensic evidence there was not one item of evidence whether DNA, fingerprint or otherwise to show that Rudy Guede had ever made his way in through the window and into the room. • There was no other sign of forced entry to the girls’ flat.

18. ClicktoreturntoIndex Rudy’s DNA Evidence of Rudy is in 4 places in the house, but not in Filomena’s room, location of the staged break-in and non-robbery Rudy’s palm print Rudy’s Nike prints Rudy’s feces 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom (2/2) • There was no broken glass on the ground outside. There was broken glass on the outer sill ledge and had a burglar climbed in through the window he would almost certainly have dislodged this glass, deliberately or accidentally, so that it would have fallen outside. • The clothes tossed about the floor had shards of glass on top which would not be the case had the window first been broken to gain entry. This in itself is hard evidence that the break in and burglary were staged. • There were items which had not been touched at all e.g clothing, personal items, the contents of drawers and cupboards, and Filomena’s laptop. • Nothing, as it later transpired, had been stolen or even assembled together for removal. • Although the room was combed for forensic evidence there was not one item of evidence whether DNA, fingerprint or otherwise to show that Rudy Guede had ever made his way in through the window and into the room. • There was no other sign of forced entry to the girls’ flat. • Rudy Guede came into the picture later but can be discounted as a stager given that he left evidence of himself at the cottage; not just his DNA on Meredith, but his left shoe footprints leading directly from Meredith’s bedroom to the front door, a palm print in blood on a pillow and feces in the large bathroom toilet, none of which he attempted to clear up. Had he thought of himself as someone the police might suspect, then overlooking that and staging a break in makes no sense. Given that he had been involved in a recent break in elsewhere he would simply have been drawing attention to himself. Let’snotbelievethat Rudy left a callingcardlikethis: DearPolizia, I thought I would try tofoolyou, bystaging a crime in theotherpart of thehouse, butleaving my mostintimateremainshere. Sincerely, Rudy Kilroy was not here

19. ClicktoreturntoIndex 2. The staging of a break in and burglary in Filomena’s bedroom • There was no broken glass on the ground outside. There was broken glass on the outer sill ledge and had a burglar climbed in through the window he would almost certainly have dislodged this glass, deliberately or accidentally, so that it would have fallen outside. • The clothes tossed about the floor had shards of glass on top which would not be the case had the window first been broken to gain entry. This in itself is hard evidence that the break in and burglary were staged. • There were items which had not been touched at all e.g clothing, personal items, the contents of drawers and cupboards, and Filomena’s laptop. • Nothing, as it later transpired, had been stolen or even assembled together for removal. • Although the room was combed for forensic evidence there was not one item of evidence whether DNA, fingerprint or otherwise to show that Rudy Guede had ever made his way in through the window and into the room. • There was no other sign of forced entry to the girls’ flat. • Rudy Guede came into the picture later but can be discounted as a stager given that he left evidence of himself at the cottage; not just his DNA on and inside Meredith, but his left shoe footprints leading directly from Meredith’s bedroom to the front door, a palm print in blood on a pillow and feces in the large bathroom toilet, none of which he attempted to clear up. Had he thought of himself as someone the police might suspect, then overlooking that and staging a break in makes no sense. Given that he had been involved in a recent break in elsewhere he would simply have been drawing attention to himself. • The only person with a possible motive to stage a break in and burglary would be one of the occupants of the flat. The immediate suspect became someone with, or with access to, a key to the flat. • Of Meredith’s flatmates Laura and Filomena had, as it turned out, rock solid alibis and Amanda Knox was the only other person with a key.

20. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • Amanda’s alibi is by and large contained in her lengthy e-mail home on the 4th November.

21. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • Amanda’s alibi is by and large contained in her lengthy e-mail home on the 4th November. • Meredith had two mobile phones, an Italian phone given to her by Filomena and her own UK phone. These were stolen by her killers and discarded together near Rudy’s and Raffaele’s flats. However they were found and handed in to the Postal Police who ascertained that the Italian phone was registered to Filomena and consequently two officers were dispatched to the cottage where they met Amanda and Raffaele.

22. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • Amanda’s alibi is by and large contained in her lengthy e-mail home on the 4th November. • Meredith had two mobile phones, an Italian phone given to her by Filomena and her own UK phone. These were stolen by her killers and discarded together near Rudy’s and Raffaele’s flats. However they were found and handed in to the Postal Police who ascertained that the Italian phone was registered to Filomena and consequently two officers were dispatched to the cottage where they met Amanda and Raffaele. • Amanda claims that having spent the evening and night indoors at Raffaele’s flat she returned to the cottage on her own at about 10.30 am on the 2nd November (before the discovery of Meredith’s body at around 1.15 pm) to get a change of clothing, have a shower, blow dry her hair, and to collect a mop and clear up a spill of water at Raffaele’s flat the evening before – which Massei found unlikely given that by her own testimony she had arranged with Raffaele to visit Gubbio that day and had already had a shower at Raffaele’s the evening before, and that furthermore Raffaele employed a cleaner who kept a mop and cleaning equipment at his apartment block.In addition, the manager of the Conad mini-mart shop testified that he saw Amanda waiting outside the store at 7.45 am., apparently waiting for it to open. Photo 1: Washed and Blow-dried? Photo 2: Washed and Blow-dried Skill testing question: which of these two photos depicts Amanda with hair which was washed and blow-dried just 3 hours before? In the other photo, how many hours (or days) ago does it look like her hair was washed?

23. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • Amanda’s alibi is by and large contained in her lengthy e-mail home on the 4th November. • Meredith had two mobile phones, an Italian phone given to her by Filomena and her own UK phone. These were stolen by her killers and discarded together near Rudy’s and Raffaele’s flats. However they were found and handed in to the Postal Police who ascertained that the Italian phone was registered to Filomena and consequently two officers were dispatched to the cottage where they met Amanda and Raffaele. • Amanda claims that having spent the evening and night indoors at Raffaele’s flat she returned to the cottage on her own at about 10.30 am on the 2nd November (before the discovery of Meredith’s body at around 1.15 pm) to get a change of clothing, have a shower, blow dry her hair, and to collect a mop and clear up a spill of water at Raffaele’s flat the evening before – which Massei found unlikely given that by her own testimony she had arranged with Raffaele to visit Gubbio that day and had already had a shower at Raffaele’s the evening before, and that furthermore Raffaele employed a cleaner who kept a mop and cleaning equipment at his apartment block.In addition, the manager of the Conad mini-mart shop testified that he saw Amanda waiting outside the store at 7.45 am., apparently waiting for it to open. • She says that during her 10.30 am visit to the cottage she noticed the blood “smeared” on the sink faucet, drops in the sink, and the bloody footprint on the bathmat. “Ew, but nothing to worry about”, she says. She attributes the blood to perhaps Meredith having “menstral issues” (sic). Left: menstrual issues on the bathroom faucet. Occam would be dismayed to hear how they got there. Right: menstrual issues all over the bathmat, in the rather obvious shape of a foot

24. ClicktoreturntoIndex There are situationswhereshoweringrepetitivelyisn’tsuch a good idea, especiallywhenyoualreadyknowsomethingisawrywhensteppingintotheshower. However, if Amanda actuallyshoweredagainonthemorning of 2 November 2007, sheprobablywasn’t in toomuchdanger. 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • Amanda’s alibi is by and large contained in her lengthy e-mail home on the 4th November. • Meredith had two mobile phones, an Italian phone given to her by Filomena and her own UK phone. These were stolen by her killers and discarded together elsewhere. However they were found and handed in to the Postal Police who ascertained that the Italian phone was registered to Filomena and consequently two officers were dispatched to the cottage where they met Amanda and Raffaele. • Amanda claims that having spent the evening and night indoors at Raffaele’s flat she returned to the cottage on her own at about 10.30 am on the 2nd November (before the discovery of Meredith’s body at around 1.15 pm) to get a change of clothing, have a shower and to collect a mop and clear up a spill of water at Raffaele’s flat the evening before – which Massei found unlikely given that by her own testimony she had arranged with Raffaele to visit Gubbio that day and had already had a shower at Raffaele’s the evening before, and that furthermore Raffaele employed a cleaner who kept a mop and cleaning equipment at his apartment block. • She says that during her 10.30 am visit to the cottage she noticed the blood “smeared” on the sink faucet, drops in the sink, and the bloody footprint on the bathmat. “Ew, but nothing to worry about”, she says. She attributes the blood to perhaps Meredith having “menstrual issues”. • If Amanda’s account of returning to the cottage at 10.30 am is to be believed, then notwithstanding blood in the bathroom (which by Amanda’s own admission was not there when she left the cottage the day before), the front door being open, Meredith’s bedroom door being locked ( when it was usual for it to be kept unlocked), and unflushed feces in the toilet of the large bathroom ( which by her own admission then made her feel uncomfortable with the situation), Amanda did not, according to her account, think of knocking on Meredith’s door before leaving or of contacting her by phone (on the assumption that she had gone out that morning) nor take the decision to notify anyone other than Raffaele for up to an hour and a half, until (at Raffaele’s place) a 12.07 call was made to Meredith and at 12.08 she called Filomena. Does this seem credible?

25. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • The 12.07 call was to Meredith’s ENGLISH phone and lasted 16 seconds but oddly she does not mention that call to Filomena seconds later. Nor, before calling Filomena, does she try Meredith’s ITALIAN phone. The ITALIAN phone was, as Amanda knew, the phone with which Meredith made and received local calls. • Massei infers that there was no need for Amanda to call Meredith’s Italian phone before calling Filomena because Amanda knew that both of Meredith’s phones had been disposed of together. A quickcallto a friend (a good, English, funnyfriend) isworthit, whateveritmaycost. Itmakesyoufeel so close.

26. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • The 12.07 call was to Meredith’s ENGLISH phone and lasted 16 seconds but oddly she does not mention that call to Filomena seconds later. Nor, before calling Filomena, does she try Meredith’s ITALIAN phone. The ITALIAN phone was, as Amanda knew, the phone with which Meredith made and received local calls. • Massei infers that there was no need for Amanda to call Meredith’s Italian phone before calling Filomena because Amanda knew that both of Meredith’s phones had been disposed of together. • When Amanda called  Filomena at 12.08 she told her about the front door being open, the blood on the bathroom mat, and Meredith’s door being locked.  Naturally Filomena is worried and tells Amanda to try Meredith’s phones, which Amanda does. These two calls lasted 3 seconds and 4 seconds respectively. Does this sound like a genuine attempt to get hold of Meredith? If voicemail was activated on one or the other line, did Amanda take the time to leave a message of the sort "There seems to have been a break-in in the cottage. There's blood on the floor. Filomena and I are worried about you, please call."? Just saying that requires more than 4 seconds, in addition to listening to the voicemail recording. 2 “attempts” by Amanda to call Meredith … Even if they were answered by voicemail, many more seconds are required to hear the recorded message then leave your own message. 2 calls by Filomena to reach Amanda. Filomena demonstrates herself to be really interested in locating Meredith, making repetitive phone calls to Amanda with urgency. Although Knox's courtroom testimony states that she returned calls to Filomena, in fact after Knox's first call, the call records show that it was only Filomena who worriedly called Knox (not vice versa)

27. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • On the basis that Massei’s inference is correct, there is now an explanation for the order and length of the calls. The first call to Meredith (immediately before calling Filomena) was 16 seconds long so that Amanda could establish with some reasonable degree of satisfaction that both of Meredith’s phones had not been found, and the two subsequent calls were very short for the obvious reason that Amanda knew that Meredith was dead. Oneringydingy, tworingydingies … oh, she’llcall back ifshe’s in trouble, I’msure

28. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November (2/ • The 12.08 call had alarmed Filomena sufficiently for her to call Amanda twice, at 12.12 (36 seconds) and at 12.20 (65 seconds) but it's not clear if Amanda picked up the calls. In addition, Amanda's confusing trial testimony about the calls doesn't clarify if she was already at the cottage, if she had seen the broken window, or if she was on her way or at Raffaele's flat when the different calls took place. (In Knox's trial testimony, search for: "Before that, when you first realized the window was broken, were you alone" and read onward.) Italianroommategetsexcessivelyworried (avoidprecipitatingherreturn) Whatto do ifPolizia show up unexpectedly w/ phones Memo to me: Pending development – 20 minutes more could give us time to go over Risk Management issues. Hold all incoming calls. • A more than likely explanation for the foregoing is that Amanda and Raffaele were working to a PLAN. Meredith’s body had to be discovered at some point and Amanda and Raffaele did not wish to be associated too obviously with this and thereby make themselves the initial focus for police questions. The PLAN was to induce Filomena, with or without her boyfriend and/or friends, to do this, blundering in and probably compromising the crime scene, buying the break in scenario, calling the police and doing all the explaining. Amanda and Raffaele envisaged limiting themselves to their alibi of having been together all night and to Amanda’s story of having visited the cottage at 10.30 am.

29. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • The plan was disrupted and the pair confused by the early and unforeseen arrival of the postal police and Amanda, subsequently, had to be a little more inventive with her account when she realized she was under suspicion - hence the e-mail. • Alternatively these early phone calls have no significance. However…... • On the arrival of Amanda and Raffaele at the cottage Amanda professes, in her e-mail, to have been in a panic before the arrival of the postal police about the locked door and Meredith’s whereabouts (calling out her name, banging on her door, and running out on to the balcony and leaning over the rail and trying to look through Meredith’s bedroom window), but according to the witnesses showed no particular concern about Meredith when the Postal Police arrived, nor raised any concerns with them, rather quite the opposite, before the discovery of Meredith’s body. Amanda's email to the World, 4/11/2007: at first i thought she was alseep so i knocked gently, but when she didnt respond i knocked louder and louder until i was really banging on her door and shouting her name. no response. panicing, i ran out onto our terrace to see if maybe i could see over the ledge into her room from the window, but icouldnt see in. bad angle. i then went into the bathroom where i had dried my hair and looked really quickley into the toilet. in my panici thought ihadnt seen anything there, which to me meant whoever was in my house had been there when i had been there. as it turns out the police told me later that the toilet was full and that the shit had just fallen to the bottom of the toilet, so ididnt see it. i ran outside and down to our neighbors door. the lights were out but i banged ont he door anyway. i wanted to ask them if they had heard anything the night before, but no one was home. i ran back into the house. in the living room raffael told me he wanted to see if he could break down merediths door. he tried, and cracked the door, but we couldnt open it. it was then that we decided to call the cops. there are two types of cops in italy, carbanieri (local, dealing with traffic and domestic calls) and the police investigaters. he first called his sister for advice and then called the carbanieri. i then called filomna who said she would be on her way home immediately. while we were waiting, two ununiformed police investigaters came to our house. PANIC vs. CALM

30. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • The plan was disrupted and the pair confused by the early and unforeseen arrival of the postal police and Amanda, subsequently, had to be a little more inventive with her account when she realized she was under suspicion - hence the e-mail. • Alternatively these early phone calls have no significance. However…... • On the arrival of Amanda and Raffaele at the cottage Amanda professes, in her e-mail, to have been in a panic before the arrival of the postal police about the locked door and Meredith’s whereabouts (calling out her name, banging on her door, and running out on to the balcony and leaning over the rail and trying to look through Meredith’s bedroom window), but according to the witnesses showed no particular concern about Meredith when the Postal Police arrived, nor raised any concerns with them, rather quite the opposite, before the discovery of Meredith’s body. • One also has to wonder why Amanda did not attempt to call either of Meredith’s two phones when one might assume that, if Meredith was in her room, her phones would be heard ringing there.

31. ClicktoreturntoIndex Possiblythelegs of one of the Postal policemen, at thecottagegates at 12:41 onthe CCTV clock 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • The plan was disrupted and the pair confused by the early and unforeseen arrival of the postal police and Amanda, subsequently, had to be a little more inventive with her account when she realized she was under suspicion - hence the e-mail. • Alternatively these early phone calls have no significance. However…... • On the arrival of Amanda and Raffaele at the cottage Amanda professes, in her e-mail, to have been in a panic before the arrival of the postal police about the locked door and Meredith’s whereabouts (calling out her name, banging on her door, and running out on to the balcony and leaning over the rail and trying to look through Meredith’s bedroom window), but according to the witnesses showed no particular concern about Meredith when the Postal Police arrived, nor raised any concerns with them, rather quite the opposite, before the discovery of Meredith’s body. • One also has to wonder why Amanda did not attempt to call either of Meredith’s two phones when one might assume that, if Meredith was in her room, her phones would be heard ringing there. • Amanda claimed that Raffaele had rung the Carabinieri to report a burglary before the Postal Police arrived. Phone records established that he had made the first 112 call, having just before called his sister, Vanessa, at 12.51 pm, after the arrival of the Postal Police. Indeed he said in a statement to the police later “She (Vanessa) told me to call 112 but just then the postal police arrived”. • Actually the postal police had arrived even earlier since in their own evidence they say that they arrived a little after 12.35 pm and a video camera covering the entrance to the car park opposite the entrance to the cottage detected and timed the presence of a vehicle similar to their’s at 12.25 pm. The video camera clock evidence was disputed by the defence (making it 10 minutes slower) but it does not seem that Massei made any finding of fact in either respect.

32. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • It was noted by witnesses at the scene that prior to the discovery of the body both Amanda and Raffaele would disappear from the growing pack of arrivals to spend moments together in Amanda’s room with the door closed. These additional witnesses were Marco Zaroli and Luca Altieri, and then Filomena and Paola Grande. Since none of the witnesses observed the pair making phone calls it may be surmised that it was during such moments that any calls were made. Amanda’sroom, where Amanda and Raffaeleretiredto prior toFilomena’sboyfriendbreakingdownMeredith’sdoor Living room / kitchenwherephoneswerediscussed.

33. Raffaele’s policestatement as reflected in JudgeMatteini’sinitialreport in November 2007: ”… Upon reaching the destination the [Postal Police] agents found outside the building on Via Della Pergola 7 two youths, identified as Knox Amanda Marie, who lived at that address, and SollecitoRaffaele, who said they were waiting for the Carabinieri military police, called because on that morning they became aware of a window with the glass broken and had suspected a theft.” So, theydealtwiththese new arrivals as Carabinierior as Postal Police? Raffaeleseemstobesayingthatindeed he didknowtheyweren’t Postal Police. 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • It was noted by witnesses at the scene that prior to the discovery of the body both Amanda and Raffaele would disappear from the growing pack of arrivals to spend moments together in Amanda’s room with the door closed. These additional witnesses were Marco Zaroli and Luca Altieri, and then Filomena and Paola Grande. Since none of the witnesses observed the pair making phone calls it may be surmised that it was during such moments that any calls were made. • Amanda claims that she thought that the Postal Police were Carabinieri. Whilst this cannot be discounted it should be noted that, as a native Italian whose sister was in the Carabinieri, Raffaele would have been instantly aware that they were not Carabinieri responding to the 112 call. Something doesn’t add up between Raffaele’s words (above), and Amanda’s words (below) Striped panted Carabiniere arriving at cottage at 13:22 on 02/11/2007 following discovery of Meredith’s body by plainclothes Postal Police already on the scene One of various patrol cars to arrive at cottage on 02/11/2007 Raffaele’s Carabiniere sister Amanda’s trial testimony: “… while we were outside, two people from plainclothes police came up to us and said "Ciao, we're the police". So I immediately thought that they were the people that Raffaele had called, so I said to them, come, come in, there's this door that was open, there's this door that's locked, then there are these faeces which aren't there any more.… (text abridged) I explained this really really fast to the police, half in English half in Italian, because at that point I didn't speak very well … (text abridged) I kept having to go through Raffaele to be understood, and to figure out what they were saying.”

34. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • It was noted by witnesses at the scene that prior to the discovery of the body both Amanda and Raffaele would disappear from the growing pack of arrivals to spend moments together in Amanda’s room with the door closed. These additional witnesses were Marco Zaroli and Luca Altieri, and then Filomena and Paola Grande. Since none of the witnesses observed the pair making phone calls it may be surmised that it was during such moments that any calls were made. • Amanda claims that she thought that the Postal Police were Carabinieri. Whilst this cannot be discounted it should be noted that Raffaele, as a native Italian whose sister was in the Carabinieri, would have been instantly aware that they were not Carabinieri. • Amanda told the Postal Police that Meredith always locked her bedroom door even when she went to the bathroom. This was flatly contradicted by Filomena who said that the only occasion when Meredith had locked her door was when she had returned to visit her mother in England. TheWayWeWere: Happier times, going back tothestart of Amanda’sstay at thecottage. Italianroommate Filomena (left) and Amanda Knox. Theyeachhavecontrastingmemories of Meredith.

35. ClicktoreturntoIndex The Macho Kick-boxer (as he saw himself on his personal page) . . . 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • It was noted by witnesses at the scene that prior to the discovery of the body both Amanda and Raffaele would disappear from the growing pack of arrivals to spend moments together in Amanda’s room. These additional witnesses were Marco Zaroli and Luca Altieri, and then Filomena and Paola Grande. Since none of the witnesses observed the pair making phone calls it may be surmised that it was during such moments that any calls were made. • Amanda claims that she thought that the Postal Police were Carabinieri. Whilst this cannot be discounted it should be noted that Raffaele, as a native Italian whose sister was in the Carabinieri, would have been instantly aware that they were not Carabinieri. • Amanda told the Postal Police that Meredith always locked her bedroom door even when she went to the bathroom. This was flatly contradicted by Filomena who said that the only occasion when Meredith had locked her door was when she had returned to visit her mother in England. • Both Raffaele and Amanda claim that Raffaele tried to force Meredith’s door but despite being a kick boxer with years of training was unable to do so, although one of the witnesses was able to do so relatively easily. . . . but it took another guy to kick in this door (it must be a question of desire)

36. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • It was noted by witnesses at the scene that prior to the discovery of the body both Amanda and Raffaele would disappear from the growing pack of arrivals to spend moments together in Amanda’s room. These additional witnesses were Marco Zaroli and Luca Altieri, and then Filomena and Paola Grande. Since none of the witnesses observed the pair making phone calls it may be surmised that it was during such moments that any calls were made. • Amanda claims that she thought that the Postal Police were Carabinieri. Whilst this cannot be discounted it should be noted that Raffaele, as a native Italian whose sister was in the Carabinieri, would have been instantly aware that they were not Carabinieri. • Amanda told the Postal Police that Meredith always locked her bedroom door even when she went to the bathroom. This was flatly contradicted by Filomena who said that the only occasion when Meredith had locked her door was when she had returned to visit her mother in England. • Both Raffaele and Amanda claim that Raffaele tried to force Meredith’s door but despite being a kick boxer was unable to do so, although one of the witnesses was able to do so relatively easily. • When the Postal Police looked into Filomena’s bedroom Raffaele told them that nothing had been stolen. That was true, as Filomena subsequently confirmed, but how and why would he have known that? RS toThem: Everything’srighttherewhereitshouldbe

37. ClicktoreturntoIndex Amanda can’tseemtorecallphoninghermother, waking up Edda in themiddle of thenighttotellherthatthecottagehadsupposedlybeenbrokeninto. In her trial testimonyshecan’trememberthefirstcall, and in her email totheworldon 4-11-2007 shetellsaboutotherphonecallsbutleavesoutthefirsttwotohermother. 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • It was noted by witnesses at the scene that prior to the discovery of the body both Amanda and Raffaele would disappear from the growing pack of arrivals to spend moments together in Amanda’s room. These additional witnesses were Marco Zaroli and Luca Altieri, and then Filomena and Paola Grande. Since none of the witnesses observed the pair making phone calls it may be surmised that it was during such moments that any calls were made. • Amanda claims that she thought that the Postal Police were Carabinieri. Whilst this cannot be discounted it should be noted that Raffaele, as a native Italian whose sister was in the Carabinieri, would have been instantly aware that they were not Carabinieri. • Amanda told the Postal Police that Meredith always locked her bedroom door even when she went to the bathroom. This was flatly contradicted by Filomena who said that the only occasion when Meredith had locked her door was when she had returned to visit her mother in England. • Both Raffaele and Amanda claim that Raffaele tried to force Meredith’s door but despite being a kick boxer was unable to do so, although one of the witnesses was able to do so relatively easily. • When the Postal Police looked into Filomena’s bedroom Raffaele told them that nothing had been stolen. That was true, as Filomena subsequently confirmed, but how and why would he have known that? • Amanda telephoned her mother from the cottage at 12.47 pm (4.47 am in the morning Seattle time), before the discovery of the body. Why did Amanda wake her mother up at 4.47 am? It clearly was not a mistake as Amanda was aware of the time zone difference. • Edda herself was puzzled as to why Amanda was unable to remember the call when, as she put it in her conversation with Amanda in Capanne Prison, “Nothing had really happened.” Edda’s doubts probably started back in Seattle, provoking her hastily decided trans-continental and trans-Atlantic trip. • Interestingly neither this call nor the second call to her mother at 1.24 pm (after Meredith’s door had been broken down) are mentioned in her e-mail.

38. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • I venture to suggest that the first call was not some calculated ploy, as others perhaps see it, but rather that she had experienced a sudden sense of vulnerability and loss of confidence and was seeking emotional reassurance. This may have been triggered by Amanda's and Raffaele's realization that the postal police were suspicious of the "burglary" scene and by Raffaele's suspiciously "knowlegeable" remark about nothing being stolen.The experience was so damaging to her ego she later blanked it out which is why there is no reference to either call in her e-mail. • Amanda persisted in denying the 12.47 call even with her parents, and in court, but then eventually said that she could not remember it. (see court transcript below:) Prosecutor Manuela Commodi (MC): But if you called her before, why did you do it?Amanda Knox (AK): I don't remember, but if I did it, I would have called to--MC:You did do it.AK: Okay, fine. But I don't remember. I don't remember that phone call.Judge Massei (GCM): Excuse me. You don't remember, but the prosecutor just pointed out to you a phone call that your mother received in the night.MC: At three o'clock at night.GCM: So, it must have been true, it happened. Did you have the habit of calling her at that time? Did it happen on other occasions? At midday in Italy? At a time where in Seattle...people don't usually call each other in the middle of the night.AK: Yes, yes, of course.GCM: So either you had a particular motive, or it was a habit.AK: Yes. Well, since I don't remember this phone call, because I remember the one I made later, but obviously I made that phone call. If I did that, it's because I thought that I had something I had to tell her. Maybe I thought right then that there was something strange, because at that moment, when I went to Raffaele's place, I did think there was something strange, but I didn't know what to think. But I really don't remember this phone call, so I can't say for sure why. But I guess it was because I came home and the door was open, and then --MC: It's strange. You don't remember the phone call, but do you remember the conversation with your mother in prison?AK: I had so many. But yes.MC:This conversation must have been the one of the 10th of November.Do you remember when your mother said "But at 12,nothing had happened yet."AK:I don't remember that.

39. ClicktoreturntoIndex Most middle-of-the-night phone calls are made for special, specific purposes. None of us like to receive or make them unless they are really necessary. Until Amanda recovers her basic memory functions, we’ll never know much about why she first called her startled and worried mother in Seattle. In her mother’s words, “nothing had happened yet”. Or maybe the truth is that everything had already happened. 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • I venture to suggest that the first call was not some calculated ploy, as others perhaps see it, but rather that she had experienced a sudden sense of vulnerability and loss of confidence and was seeking emotional reassurance. This may have been triggered by Amanda's and Raffaele's realization that the postal police were suspicious of the "burglary" scene and by Raffaele's suspiciously "knowlegeable" remark about nothing being stolen.The experience was so damaging to her ego she later blanked it out which is why there is no reference to either call in her e-mail. • Amanda persisted in denying the 12.47 call even with her parents, and in court, but then eventually said that she could not remember it. • Edda says that Amanda mentioned in the call that she thought that someone had been in the cottage and Edda says that she told Amanda to call the police. Amanda did not mention, according to Edda, that the (postal) police were already there. • Finally, there is also a contradiction in Edda’s recollection of the contents of the 12.47 phone call. She testified to the court that just after she told her daughter to phone the police Amanda said Raf was just finishing a call to Vanessa and then was going to call the police. It is noted that the 12.47 call lasted 88 seconds and Raffaele called Vanessa at 12.50, before he called the Carabinieri at 12.51. So clearly Raffaele was not on the phone to his sister at the same time. Either Edda was mistaken or Amanda had lied. In court, after Edda described the extensive conversation that she say she and Amanda had in the 12.47 call, Prosecutor Mignini wryly remarked “All that in 88 seconds?”. Photomontage

40. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • I venture to suggest that the first call was not some calculated ploy, as others perhaps see it, but rather that she had experienced a sudden sense of vulnerability and loss of confidence and was seeking emotional reassurance. This may have been triggered by Amanda's and Raffaele's realization that the postal police were suspicious of the "burglary" scene and by Raffaele's suspiciously "knowlegeable" remark about nothing being stolen.The experience was so damaging to her ego she later blanked it out which is why there is no reference to either call in her e-mail. • Amanda persisted in denying the 12.47 call even with her parents, and in court, but then eventually said that she could not remember it. Letting off some unbearable tension in the days following the murder of Meredith Kercher. • Edda says that Amanda mentioned in the call that she thought that someone had been in the cottage and Edda says that she told Amanda to call the police. Amanda did not mention, according to Edda, that the (postal) police were already there. • Finally, there is also a contradiction in Edda’s recollection of the contents of the 12.47 phone call. She testified to the court that just after she told her daughter to phone the police Amanda said Raf was just finishing a call to Vanessa and then was going to call the police. It is noted that the 12.47 call lasted 88 seconds and Raffaele called Vanessa at 12.50, before he called the Carabinieri at 12.51. So clearly Raffaele was not on the phone to his sister at the same time. Either Edda was mistaken or Amanda had lied. In court, after Edda described the extensive conversation that she say she and Amanda had in the 12.47 call, Prosecutor Mignini wryly remarked “All that in 88 seconds?”. • At the police station whilst Meredith’s English girlfriends were crying and consoling themselves, Amanda and Raffaele were observed smooching and giggling together. Callous, of course, but the simplest explanation is that that were experiencing release from the earlier unbearable tension that only they shared.

41. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • I venture to suggest that the first call was not some calculated ploy, as others perhaps see it, but rather that she had experienced a sudden sense of vulnerability and loss of confidence and was seeking emotional reassurance. This may have been triggered by Amanda's and Raffaele's realization that the postal police were suspicious of the "burglary" scene and by Raffaele's suspiciously "knowlegeable" remark about nothing being stolen.The experience was so damaging to her ego she later blanked it out which is why there is no reference to either call in her e-mail. • Amanda persisted in denying the 12.47 call even with her parents, and in court, but then eventually said that she could not remember it. • Edda says that Amanda mentioned in the call that she thought that someone had been in the cottage and Edda says that she told Amanda to call the police. Amanda did not mention, according to Edda, that the (postal) police were already there. • Finally, there is also a contradiction in Edda’s recollection of the contents of the 12.47 phone call. She testified to the court that just after she told her daughter to phone the police Amanda said Raf was just finishing a call to Vanessa and then was going to call the police. It is noted that the 12.47 call lasted 88 seconds and Raffaele called Vanessa at 12.50, before he called the Carabinieri at 12.51. So clearly Raffaele was not on the phone to his sister at the same time. Either Edda was mistaken or Amanda had lied. In court, after Edda described the extensive conversation that she say she and Amanda had in the 12.47 call, Prosecutor Mignini wryly remarked “All that in 88 seconds?”. • At the police station whilst Meredith’s English girlfriends were crying and consoling themselves, Amanda and Raffaele were observed smooching and giggling together. Callous, of course, but the simplest explanation is that that were experiencing release from the earlier unbearable tension that only they shared. • At the police station Amanda told Meredith's English friends details of the body and wounds (e.g. that Meredith's throat was cut), although but for a foot the body was covered by a quilt and despite both her and Raffaele not being in line of sight when the body was discovered, and not having been told any of the details by anybody afterwards

42. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • I venture to suggest that the first call was not some calculated ploy, as others perhaps see it, but rather that she had experienced a sudden sense of vulnerability and loss of confidence and was seeking emotional reassurance. This may have been triggered by Amanda's and Raffaele's realization that the postal police were suspicious of the "burglary" scene and by Raffaele's suspiciously "knowlegeable" remark about nothing being stolen.The experience was so damaging to her ego she later blanked it out which is why there is no reference to either call in her e-mail. • Amanda persisted in denying the 12.47 call even with her parents, and in court, but then eventually said that she could not remember it. WhileKnox’sfamilyinsistthatitisherwayto cope with stress, manypeopleseeKnox’s post-crimebehaviour as worthy of takingintoaccount in this case. • Edda says that Amanda mentioned in the call that she thought that someone had been in the cottage and Edda says that she told Amanda to call the police. Amanda did not mention, according to Edda, that the (postal) police were already there. • At the police station whilst Meredith’s English girlfriends were crying and consoling themselves, Amanda and Raffaele were observed smooching and giggling together. Callous, of course, but the simplest explanation is that that were experiencing release from the earlier unbearable tension that only they shared. • Amanda told Meredith’s English friends details of the body and wounds, although but for a foot the body was covered by a quilt and despite both her and Raffaele not being in line of sight when the body was discovered, and not having been told any of the details by anybody afterwards. • Amanda, Filomena and Laura were requested by the police 3 days after the murder to accompany them to the cottage to check out some details. On being shown a drawer full of knives Amanda appeared to have a psychotic incident, covering her ears and trembling.

43. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November (5/ • I venture to suggest that the first call was not some calculated ploy, as others perhaps see it, but rather that she had experienced a sudden sense of vulnerability and loss of confidence and was seeking emotional reassurance. This may have been triggered by Amanda's and Raffaele's realization that the postal police were suspicious of the "burglary" scene and by Raffaele's suspiciously "knowlegeable" remark about nothing being stolen.The experience was so damaging to her ego she later blanked it out which is why there is no reference to either call in her e-mail. • Amanda persisted in denying the 12.47 call even with her parents, and in court, but then eventually said that she could not remember it. • Edda says that Amanda mentioned in the call that she thought that someone had been in the cottage and Edda says that she told Amanda to call the police. Amanda did not mention, according to Edda, that the (postal) police were already there. • At the police station whilst Meredith’s English girlfriends were crying and consoling themselves, Amanda and Raffaele were observed smooching and giggling together. Callous, of course, but the simplest explanation is that that were experiencing release from the earlier unbearable tension that only they shared. • Amanda told Meredith’s English friends details of the body and wounds, although but for a foot the body was covered by a quilt and despite both her and Raffaele not being in line of sight when the body was discovered, and not having been told any of the details by anybody afterwards. • Amanda, Filomena and Laura were requested by the police 3 days after the murder to accompany them to the cottage to check out some details. On being shown a drawer full of knives Amanda appeared to have a psychotic incident, covering her ears and trembling. • A day before his arrest, Raffaele told a British Sunday Newspaper in an exclusive interview that on the night of the murder that he was at a party with Amanda and not at his flat. He also said that Amanda had gone back to her flat the next day at midday, and not at 10.30 am as she claimed.

44. ClicktoreturntoIndex Translation of Judge Matteini’s report on Raffaele’s alibi - or lack thereof - for Amanda Knox: “On 5 November 2007, at 22:40, SollecitoRaffaele was interviewed again, and he changed his version of events, saying that on the evening of 1st November, after Meredith left the house, he was with Knox Amanda until 18:00 when they had both left the apartment to go into the centre of town, around 20:30 - 21:00. Knox left him, saying to him that she would go to the Le Chic pub to meet friends while he returned to his flat, where he says he received a phone call from his father on his fixed line at 23:00, and that he was using his computer for two hours while smoking a joint, and that the girl returned around 1 a.m. and that they both woke up at 10:00 when Amanda left the flat to return to Via della Pergola. He retracted his previous statement and justified his conduct saying that it was Knox who convinced him to tell a false version of events.” 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • Having told the police that she had been with Raffaele all night on the 1st November, sleeping with him until 10.00am the next morning, Raffaele then proceeded to destroy the alibi on the evening of the 5th November by telling the police that on that night Amanda had gone out and had not returned to his flat until 1.00 am. Judge Claudia Matteini’s original reportfromtheinitialphase of theinvestigation. As far as we are aware, Raffaele has nevermadeanyeffortsincethentoformallychangehislack of alibi for Amanda from a legal point of view.

45. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • Having told the police that she had been with Raffaele all night on the 1st November, sleeping with him until 10.00am the next morning, Raffaele then proceeded to destroy the alibi on the evening of the 5th November by telling the police that on that night Amanda had gone out and had not returned to his flat until 1.00 am. • Raffaele’s own alibi was not corroborated by computer evidence. He had claimed to have spent the night indoors, using his computer until late and then going to sleep. In fact all human interaction with the computer ceased around 9.15 pm and the computer was not reactivated by him until 5.32 am the next morning when it was used for half an hour for music to be played. ThemovieTheWonderfulWorld of AmelieendedonRaffaele’scomputeraround 9:15 p.m. Beyondthatmoment, thereis no evidence of humanactivityorpresence in Raffaele’s flat duringthe time frame of theattack and murder of Meredith.

46. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • Having told the police that she had been with Raffaele all night on the 1st November, sleeping with him until 10.00am the next morning, Raffaele then proceeded to destroy the alibi on the evening of the 5th November by telling the police that on that night Amanda had gone out and had not returned to his flat until 1.00 am. • Raffaele’s own alibi was not corroborated by computer evidence. He had claimed to have spent the night indoors, using his computer until late and then going to sleep. In fact all human interaction with the computer ceased around 9.15 pm and the computer was not reactivated by him until 5.32 am the next morning when it was used for half an hour for music to be played. • Both Amanda’s and Raffaele’s phones were switched off sometime shortly after 8.42 pm and were not switched back on again until after 5.32 am in the case of Raffaele who activated a text message sent to him by his father late the night before. Investigatorsconfirmedthat in thedays and weeks prior toMeredith’smurder, Amanda’s and Raffaele’srespectivemobilephoneswererarelyturned off. Thisreflectstheyouthethos and culture of moderncommunicationswhereoneisconnectedtofriends 24 x 7. Specifically, in thesixdaysthat Amanda and Raffaelekneweachotherbeforethecrime, theyhadnotneededtoturn off theirphonesforprivacy, in spite of an active sex life. Thenight of 1/11/2007, however, somethingspecial and differentwasgoingtohappen. This new “constantlyconnected“ ethosistreated in studies and bookslikethebookillustratedontheleft. From Prolog to “24/7” by Jarice Hanson:

47. ClicktoreturntoIndex 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November • Having told the police that she had been with Raffaele all night on the 1st November, sleeping with him until 10.00am the next morning, Raffaele then proceeded to destroy the alibi on the evening of the 5th November by telling the police that on that night Amanda had gone out and had not returned to his flat until 1.00 am. • Raffaele’s own alibi was not corroborated by computer evidence. He had claimed to have spent the night indoors, using his computer until late and then going to sleep. In fact all human interaction with the computer ceased around 9.15 pm and the computer was not reactivated by him until 5.32 am the next morning when it was used for half an hour for music to be played. • Both Amanda’s and Raffaele’s phones were switched off sometime shortly after 8.42 pm and were not switched back on again until after 5.32 am in the case of Raffaele who activated a text message sent to him by his father late the night before. • Raffaele’s father had telephoned Raffaele at 8.42 pm and had testified that during the conversation his son had told him that while he was washing the dishes he had noticed a leak of water on the floor. This times the dinner Amanda and Raffaele had as being prior to this whereas Amanda had first claimed that dinner was a little after 9.15 pm and then again it was quite late, perhaps 11 pm (close to the time that Meredith died). If the father is correct, that frees up the couple much earlier than in Amanda’s account. • So whoistellingthetruth? • Amanda v.1 • Amanda v.2 • Dr. Sollecito The other “truth” we have available is Raffaele’s. However since his arrest, and all throughout the last four years of investigation, trial and appeal, he has invoked his right to not reply to questioning, to clarify his early statements that Amanda wasn’t even in the flat.

48. ClicktoreturntoIndex Whatisstrikingabout Amanda and Raffaele in theimages and video of themon 2 November 2007 isthattheydon’t look in mourning so much as totallyexhausted – in spite of supposedlyhavingsleptabout 10 hoursthenightbefore. 3. Analysis and Evaluation of the Alibis and Behaviour of Amanda and Raffaele 2nd – 4th November (6/ • Having told the police that she had been with Raffaele all night on the 1st November, sleeping with him until 10.00am the next morning, Raffaele then proceeded to destroy the alibi on the evening of the 5th November by telling the police that on that night Amanda had gone out and had not returned to his flat until 1.00 am. • Raffaele’s own alibi was not corroborated by computer evidence. He had claimed to have spent the night indoors, using his computer until late and then going to sleep. In fact all human interaction with the computer ceased around 9.15 pm and the computer was not reactivated by him until 5.32 am the next morning when it was used for half an hour for music to be played. • Both Amanda’s and Raffaele’s phones were switched of sometime shortly after 8.42 pm and were not switched back on again until after 5.32 am in the case of Raffaele who activated a text message sent to him by his father late the night before. • Raffaele’s father had telephoned Raffaele at 8.42 pm and had testified that during the conversation his son had told him that while he was washing the dishes he had noticed a leak of water on the floor. This times the dinner Amanda and Raffaele had as being prior to this whereas Amanda had first claimed that dinner was a little after 9.15 pm and the again it was quite late, perhaps 11 pm (close to the time that Meredith died). • Amanda’s claim that she slept in until 10.00 am on 2 November does not fit easily with the fact that Raffaele was playing music on his computer for half an hour from 5.32 am nor with the evidence of Mr Quintavalle, the mini-mart store manager, who says that he saw Amanda when he was opening up his store at 7.45 am.

49. ClicktoreturntoIndex Nowyouallunderstandwhy I wishthatitreallywas true that Dad called me at 11 p.m. 4. Evidence as to the time of Death and Proximity of Amanda and Raffaele • Although there was initially a time frame of between 8.00 pm and 4.00 am, 1st – 2nd November, Massei concluded that the pathology alone made it possible to suggest the time of death was within a range of tens of minutes either side of 10.50 pm on November 1st.

50. ClicktoreturntoIndex Why couldn’t you correct your most recent alibi (5/11/2007) and tell the court that I was in your flat, instead of out in the street? That reeks of hedging your bets by selling out mine. Nowyouallunderstandwhy I wishthatitreallywas true that Dad called me at 11 p.m. 4. Evidence as to the time of Death and Proximity of Amanda and Raffaele • Although there was initially a time frame of between 8.00 pm and 4.00 am, 1st – 2nd November, Massei concluded that the pathology alone made it possible to suggest the time of death was within a range of tens of minutes either side of 10.50 pm on November 1st.