The common sense thread

Re: The common sense thread

Postby Screen Name Pending » Mon May 12, 2014 11:22 am

Look at the result. Rudy did not get life without parole like you would expect would be the punishment for a rape and murder, he will be out in a few years. There was never any good reason to suspect AK +RS did the murder.
I have read some people making a guess that Rudy worked as an informer for the police and stealing that lawyer's computer was something the cops asked him to do, because they wanted the information in that computer.
User avatar
Screen Name Pending
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon May 13, 2013 7:28 pm


Re: The common sense thread

Postby Hans » Mon May 12, 2014 1:17 pm

anonshy wrote:My simple questions to anyone here (my first post BTW) are this:

1. If Rudy' was being intimate with Meridith, why would he walk to the other end of the cottage to use the bathroom when there was a bathroom 2 steps away?

2. How would Rudy have known there was a bathroom on the other side of the laundry room? is it the same layout as the first floor? had he been in the cottage before, previous residents ect.....

3. Does anyone know the exact make and model of the lock on Meridith's door?

4. Door lock seems to have 2 components, a spring lock at the top and a dead-bolt on the bottom, has anyone figured out if the door is the type than can be opened from the inside but remains locked?

5. What was the valley behind the cottage like? was it very steep? paths through the trees?

6. There is a park pathway that leads from the highway directly past Rudy's backyard to the street where the cell phones were found, did this ever make it into evidence?

So much more to add but I feel like Nero learning there is no spoon, lol - if this is covered elswhere forgive me for posting again

Hello anonshy, welcome aboard,
it looks like #1 and #2 have been answered already, on the lock (#3 and #4) it is physically impossible to lock that door first and then shut it, or it being opened from the inside while being locked from the outside (I think Niteangel confused the door to Meredith's room with the front door) once locked you need a key (or brute force) to open that door... Your #5 and #6 are points I've not paid enough attention to...
On the highlighted part "typo alert" :cop: :lol:
And on the last sentence, don't care if it might have been covered elsewhere, if you have questions, just ask them, who could ask a newbie to read up the board history, that would be absurd. Again, welcome aboard :)
He [Raffaele] is collateral damage in the unreasonable, irresponsible, and unrelenting scapegoating of the prosecution’s grotesque caricature that is “Foxy Knoxy”
~ Amanda Knox
Hans
 
Posts: 4544
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Germany

Re: The common sense thread

Postby pmop57 » Mon May 12, 2014 1:55 pm

corksoaker wrote:Look at the result. Rudy did not get life without parole like you would expect would be the punishment for a rape and murder, he will be out in a few years. There was never any good reason to suspect AK +RS did the murder.
I have read some people making a guess that Rudy worked as an informer for the police and stealing that lawyer's computer was something the cops asked him to do, because they wanted the information in that computer.


Life without parole does not exist in Italy and in other European Countries. Every case must be reviewed after a certain time in regular time frames to to look if a person cannot be released.
In Italy the concept of sentencing is, punishing and reinserting into society (also valid for high profile cases). I personally do not oppose the idea of this system, it is similar in my country.
Guede got a life time sentence, a life time sentence is automatically reduced to 30 years.
Because Guede was choosing the fast track trial procedure his sentence was automatically reduced of 1/3, so to 20 years.
Further the Court agreed to with mitigating circumstances of 4 years which further reduced his sentence to finally 16 yeas.
Now the Italian system foresees after a certain time the possibility to agree to week day or weekend release on parole.
I don't see exactly where Guede got a substantial advantage not in accordance with the system, the only I see are parts of the mitigating circumstances and the eventually very early daily release on parole.
I would focus on a Guede the forgotten killer but not on the duration of the sentence (Guede could only have been punished in the legal poisoning time scale).
pmop57
 
Posts: 4867
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:13 pm
Location: Luxembourg (Europe)

Re: The common sense thread

Postby Merlinovich » Mon May 12, 2014 9:04 pm

pmop57 wrote:
corksoaker wrote:Look at the result. Rudy did not get life without parole like you would expect would be the punishment for a rape and murder, he will be out in a few years. There was never any good reason to suspect AK +RS did the murder.
I have read some people making a guess that Rudy worked as an informer for the police and stealing that lawyer's computer was something the cops asked him to do, because they wanted the information in that computer.


Life without parole does not exist in Italy and in other European Countries. Every case must be reviewed after a certain time in regular time frames to to look if a person cannot be released.
In Italy the concept of sentencing is, punishing and reinserting into society (also valid for high profile cases). I personally do not oppose the idea of this system, it is similar in my country.
Guede got a life time sentence, a life time sentence is automatically reduced to 30 years.
Because Guede was choosing the fast track trial procedure his sentence was automatically reduced of 1/3, so to 20 years.
Further the Court agreed to with mitigating circumstances of 4 years which further reduced his sentence to finally 16 yeas.

I don't believe the calculation of the sentence in the last 3 lines is correct. Notably there is no mention of "mitigating circumstances" reduced with 4 years anywhere in the court documents AFAIK.

The ISC motivation was to 16 years and is mentioning it was "re-applying the reduction for fast-track trial" e.g. it was also included in the first sentence of 30 years, and is included in the 16 years. I think that the point is Guede was convicted in the first sentence to life imprisonment, which is reduced to 30 years by a 1/3 reduction. Similarly the 16 years was based on a 1/3 reduction from 24 years. Why 24 years? We can see that 24 years is the base penalty mentioned in the Massei report, which convicted Raffaele and Amanda. However, they were both added 6 months for the alleged staging of the burglary, 3 months for allegedly carrying the knife and 3 months for the alleged theft of the phones, so in total 25 years. Amanda was then added another year for the calunnia (framing Lumumba) to 26 years.

pmop57 wrote:Now the Italian system foresees after a certain time the possibility to agree to week day or weekend release on parole.
I don't see exactly where Guede got a substantial advantage not in accordance with the system, the only I see are parts of the mitigating circumstances and the eventually very early daily release on parole.

I would focus on a Guede the forgotten killer but not on the duration of the sentence (Guede could only have been punished in the legal poisoning time scale).


The obvious reduction was from 30 years (with aggravating circumstances and no mitigating circumstances) to 16 years (with aggravation/mitigation deemed equivalent). The second sentence of Guede was finalized shortly after the first trial conviction of Amanda and Raffaele. I think that the main idea was that Rudy should have the same penalty for allegedly participating in the group attack on Meredith as Amanda and Raffaele - so 24 years as base penalty. And the mitigation for Rudy included that he was the only one "indicating the perpetrators" e.g. Amanda and Raffaele according to the prosecution. But my understanding of that may be incorrect. I look forward to comments from other forum members on the calculation of sentence length.

I don't have any objection to the Italian/European idea that any sentence should be with the objective of reassimilation of the prisoner to society after the sentence - but I am still surprised at the idea of release on parole already after 7 years - I wonder if that is based on that Guede is close to time served of the 16 years based on a "good behavior" mitigation. It certainly is ironic that we reach this point in serving his sentence before there has even been a final verdict for Amanda and Raffaele, especially since most of the evidence points to him alone. If they hadn't done the outrageous act of linking the knife taken from Raffaele's apartment, without *any* other incriminating evidence from that apartment, and only having LCN DNA diminutive trace of Meredith on the knife as a proof that the knife had anything to do with the murder, for instance there was no blood detected on the knife. The same goes for the bra clasp, collected 47 days after the murder in a heap of dust, after the cottage had been "ransacked" by police without using the boots and forensic care of the first days collections. This is such an obvious miscarriage of justice IMHO.
User avatar
Merlinovich
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 5:41 pm
Location: Mexico City, Mexico


Re: The common sense thread

Postby Niteangel » Mon May 12, 2014 10:41 pm

Hans wrote:
anonshy wrote:
3. Does anyone know the exact make and model of the lock on Meridith's door?

4. Door lock seems to have 2 components, a spring lock at the top and a dead-bolt on the bottom, has anyone figured out if the door is the type than can be opened from the inside but remains locked?



on the lock (#3 and #4) it is physically impossible to lock that door first and then shut it, or it being opened from the inside while being locked from the outside (I think Niteangel confused the door to Meredith's room with the front door) once locked you need a key (or brute force) to open that door..



He mentioned Meredith's door, and I was talking about Meredith's door, not the outside door. If I judge by what I can see (I don't know what the exact model is, but it is made by AGB), it is the type that you can lock 2 different ways, and both can be unlocked from the outside with the key (or brute force of course if you don't have the key).

Similar to this one http://www.agb.it/eng/catalogo_locks/fo ... uro-72.php , or this one http://www.zamki.com.ua/eng/megkomnatni ... 02446.html .

You can see the brand on this picture:

Image

You can either lock the upper bolt (this is the part that can be locked and close the door afterward and it will be locked), or you can lock the dead-bolt part (obviously the door has to be closed to lock this part or else you won't be able to close the door). Depending on the model, it might be locked (from the inside) by lifting/turning the handle up, but don't know whether this was possible with this one.

But if I judge by this picture, the dead-bolt part was not broken, nor locked (since it is in the unlocked position, but the key was never found), at least from what I can see of course. So I can't be sure, but it seems it was the upper bolt part that was locked, not the dead-bolt.

Image
'It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.' Sherlock Holmes
User avatar
Niteangel
 
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:15 pm

Re: The common sense thread

Postby Niteangel » Mon May 12, 2014 10:53 pm



Nothing to do with your question but every time I look at pictures I can understand why Amanda fell in love with this place, it is so beautiful. And so sad that her dream, and Meredith's dreams and life, ended because of this sick murderer (Rudy Guede). This thought makes me sad every time.
'It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.' Sherlock Holmes
User avatar
Niteangel
 
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:15 pm

Re: The common sense thread

Postby schmidt53 » Wed May 21, 2014 9:48 pm

Nencini says that had Guede broke into the cottage since he was a professional burglar he would never have went to the bathroom for any reason, never mind not flushing. Then why did Guede after being invited into the cottage by whoever invited him into the cottage did he use the bathroom without flushing? You would think that when you on the job (burglarizing) taking care of business doesn't mean taking a shit. :lol:
schmidt53
 
Posts: 1074
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:10 am

Re: The common sense thread

Postby Niteangel » Thu May 22, 2014 2:44 am

schmidt53 wrote:Nencini says that had Guede broke into the cottage since he was a professional burglar he would never have went to the bathroom for any reason, never mind not flushing. Then why did Guede after being invited into the cottage by whoever invited him into the cottage did he use the bathroom without flushing? You would think that when you on the job (burglarizing) taking care of business doesn't mean taking a shit. :lol:


I think maybe his intention was either to stay there for the night (remember he had nowhere to go), drank some juice at the cottage (as he had done at the nursery, i.e. making himself at home for the night), and/or was looking for money and was surprised when Meredith got home, or was actually waiting for Meredith with the intention of raping her.

Also I guess Nencini has never heard of the fact that sometimes burglars, I guess because of adrenalin, do have an urge to poop during or right after the burglary.
'It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.' Sherlock Holmes
User avatar
Niteangel
 
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:15 pm

Re: The common sense thread

Postby LarryK » Fri May 23, 2014 1:22 am

Niteangel wrote:
schmidt53 wrote:Nencini says that had Guede broke into the cottage since he was a professional burglar he would never have went to the bathroom for any reason, never mind not flushing. Then why did Guede after being invited into the cottage by whoever invited him into the cottage did he use the bathroom without flushing? You would think that when you on the job (burglarizing) taking care of business doesn't mean taking a shit. :lol:


I think maybe his intention was either to stay there for the night (remember he had nowhere to go), drank some juice at the cottage (as he had done at the nursery, i.e. making himself at home for the night), and/or was looking for money and was surprised when Meredith got home, or was actually waiting for Meredith with the intention of raping her.

Also I guess Nencini has never heard of the fact that sometimes burglars, I guess because of adrenalin, do have an urge to poop during or right after the burglary.

Pretty chilling idea that Rudy could actually have been waiting for whoever was first to arrive home in order to attack her...then it was pure luck of the draw that it wasn't Amanda who was killed...but I think it more likely that it was a burglary gone bad when Meredith returned unexpectedly.
The brain is not configured in a way that makes obedience through logical, language-based propositions possible during distress and suffering. -- James Wilder, "Neurotheology and the Life Model"
LarryK
 
Posts: 858
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 9:57 pm

Re: The common sense thread

Postby pmop57 » Fri May 23, 2014 1:39 am

Forget about Nencini, he is a tool of the Cassation. His role was to administrate the case the way his superiors of the Cassation ordered him do and he just acted that way. He did not judge but administrate the case the way he was told to do. Only fools or ignorants can believe that this was a normal "Appeal Trial", this case was reduced to present a narrative (Nencini presented one of the most "absurd" and "foolish" possible) and a guilty verdict. The trial was show for the public to give the fiasco an air of seriousness.

We have a saying here,
All the Prosecutors and Judges can be fools but not all the fools can be Judges and Prosecutors.
pmop57
 
Posts: 4867
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:13 pm
Location: Luxembourg (Europe)

Re: The common sense thread

Postby Gibsie » Fri May 23, 2014 8:58 am

LarryK wrote:Pretty chilling idea that Rudy could actually have been waiting for whoever was first to arrive home in order to attack her...then it was pure luck of the draw that it wasn't Amanda who was killed...but I think it more likely that it was a burglary gone bad when Meredith returned unexpectedly.


I wonder if it had been Amanda who came home first and was attacked, if Kercher would have been convicted of her murder. Imagine the scandalous headlines, "Brit babe growing cannabis for her foreign lover murders sweet American girl over birth control pills row" and "Kercher the Murderer" plastered all over the papers, for example.
Gibsie
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 3:51 pm

Re: The common sense thread

Postby anonshy » Fri May 23, 2014 10:40 am

Gibsie wrote:
LarryK wrote:Pretty chilling idea that Rudy could actually have been waiting for whoever was first to arrive home in order to attack her...then it was pure luck of the draw that it wasn't Amanda who was killed...but I think it more likely that it was a burglary gone bad when Meredith returned unexpectedly.


I wonder if it had been Amanda who came home first and was attacked, if Kercher would have been convicted of her murder. Imagine the scandalous headlines, "Brit babe growing cannabis for her foreign lover murders sweet American girl over birth control pills row" and "Kercher the Murderer" plastered all over the papers, for example.


Nah, John Kercher is a reporter for the Daily Mail, he would have slanted the coverage away from his duaghter with the same vigor he went after Amanda.
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1126
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: The common sense thread

Postby jane » Sat May 31, 2014 12:37 pm

Niteangel wrote:
Hans wrote:
anonshy wrote:
3. Does anyone know the exact make and model of the lock on Meridith's door?

4. Door lock seems to have 2 components, a spring lock at the top and a dead-bolt on the bottom, has anyone figured out if the door is the type than can be opened from the inside but remains locked?



on the lock (#3 and #4) it is physically impossible to lock that door first and then shut it, or it being opened from the inside while being locked from the outside (I think Niteangel confused the door to Meredith's room with the front door) once locked you need a key (or brute force) to open that door..



He mentioned Meredith's door, and I was talking about Meredith's door, not the outside door. If I judge by what I can see (I don't know what the exact model is, but it is made by AGB), it is the type that you can lock 2 different ways, and both can be unlocked from the outside with the key (or brute force of course if you don't have the key).

Similar to this one http://www.agb.it/eng/catalogo_locks/fo ... uro-72.php , or this one http://www.zamki.com.ua/eng/megkomnatni ... 02446.html .

You can see the brand on this picture:

Image

You can either lock the upper bolt (this is the part that can be locked and close the door afterward and it will be locked), or you can lock the dead-bolt part (obviously the door has to be closed to lock this part or else you won't be able to close the door). Depending on the model, it might be locked (from the inside) by lifting/turning the handle up, but don't know whether this was possible with this one.

But if I judge by this picture, the dead-bolt part was not broken, nor locked (since it is in the unlocked position, but the key was never found), at least from what I can see of course. So I can't be sure, but it seems it was the upper bolt part that was locked, not the dead-bolt.

Image


I don't completely understand this explanation. Could the door be locked from outside the room without using a key? In other words, is it possible just to close the door from outside the room and have it lock?

Also, I don't know much about details in this case, but was a key left in the front door? Was Guede ever found with a key?
jane
 
Posts: 2714
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: The common sense thread

Postby pmop57 » Sat May 31, 2014 1:33 pm

jane wrote:
Niteangel wrote:
Hans wrote:
anonshy wrote:
3. Does anyone know the exact make and model of the lock on Meridith's door?

4. Door lock seems to have 2 components, a spring lock at the top and a dead-bolt on the bottom, has anyone figured out if the door is the type than can be opened from the inside but remains locked?



on the lock (#3 and #4) it is physically impossible to lock that door first and then shut it, or it being opened from the inside while being locked from the outside (I think Niteangel confused the door to Meredith's room with the front door) once locked you need a key (or brute force) to open that door..



He mentioned Meredith's door, and I was talking about Meredith's door, not the outside door. If I judge by what I can see (I don't know what the exact model is, but it is made by AGB), it is the type that you can lock 2 different ways, and both can be unlocked from the outside with the key (or brute force of course if you don't have the key).

Similar to this one http://www.agb.it/eng/catalogo_locks/fo ... uro-72.php , or this one http://www.zamki.com.ua/eng/megkomnatni ... 02446.html .

You can see the brand on this picture:

Image

You can either lock the upper bolt (this is the part that can be locked and close the door afterward and it will be locked), or you can lock the dead-bolt part (obviously the door has to be closed to lock this part or else you won't be able to close the door). Depending on the model, it might be locked (from the inside) by lifting/turning the handle up, but don't know whether this was possible with this one.

But if I judge by this picture, the dead-bolt part was not broken, nor locked (since it is in the unlocked position, but the key was never found), at least from what I can see of course. So I can't be sure, but it seems it was the upper bolt part that was locked, not the dead-bolt.

Image


I don't completely understand this explanation. Could the door be locked from outside the room without using a key? In other words, is it possible just to close the door from outside the room and have it lock?

Also, I don't know much about details in this case, but was a key left in the front door? Was Guede ever found with a key?


Jane,
Niteangel is correct,
You have such locks that when you close the door from the the outside it cannot anymore be opened without a key or brute force. Normally this locks are used for house doors leading to the outside but they exist also for inside doors.
The observation of Nitangel is so far interesting that the dead-bolt seem to have remained inside. The problem is that we have no detailed photo of the counter side of the door. There should be some damage if the door was locked by key.
pmop57
 
Posts: 4867
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:13 pm
Location: Luxembourg (Europe)

Re: The common sense thread

Postby jane » Sat May 31, 2014 2:10 pm

pmop57 wrote:
jane wrote:
Niteangel wrote:
Hans wrote:
anonshy wrote:
3. Does anyone know the exact make and model of the lock on Meridith's door?

4. Door lock seems to have 2 components, a spring lock at the top and a dead-bolt on the bottom, has anyone figured out if the door is the type than can be opened from the inside but remains locked?



on the lock (#3 and #4) it is physically impossible to lock that door first and then shut it, or it being opened from the inside while being locked from the outside (I think Niteangel confused the door to Meredith's room with the front door) once locked you need a key (or brute force) to open that door..



He mentioned Meredith's door, and I was talking about Meredith's door, not the outside door. If I judge by what I can see (I don't know what the exact model is, but it is made by AGB), it is the type that you can lock 2 different ways, and both can be unlocked from the outside with the key (or brute force of course if you don't have the key).

Similar to this one http://www.agb.it/eng/catalogo_locks/fo ... uro-72.php , or this one http://www.zamki.com.ua/eng/megkomnatni ... 02446.html .

You can see the brand on this picture:

Image

You can either lock the upper bolt (this is the part that can be locked and close the door afterward and it will be locked), or you can lock the dead-bolt part (obviously the door has to be closed to lock this part or else you won't be able to close the door). Depending on the model, it might be locked (from the inside) by lifting/turning the handle up, but don't know whether this was possible with this one.

But if I judge by this picture, the dead-bolt part was not broken, nor locked (since it is in the unlocked position, but the key was never found), at least from what I can see of course. So I can't be sure, but it seems it was the upper bolt part that was locked, not the dead-bolt.

Image


I don't completely understand this explanation. Could the door be locked from outside the room without using a key? In other words, is it possible just to close the door from outside the room and have it lock?

Also, I don't know much about details in this case, but was a key left in the front door? Was Guede ever found with a key?


Jane,
Niteangel is correct,
You have such locks that when you close the door from the the outside it cannot anymore be opened without a key or brute force. Normally this locks are used for house doors leading to the outside but they exist also for inside doors.
The observation of Nitangel is so far interesting that the dead-bolt seem to have remained inside. The problem is that we have no detailed photo of the counter side of the door. There should be some damage if the door was locked by key.


Pmop, I'm sure that Niteangel is correct. But there's one part of the explanation that I'd like to clarify.

Does it require a key to lock the top lock from outside the door?
jane
 
Posts: 2714
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: The common sense thread

Postby roteoctober » Mon Jun 02, 2014 6:24 am

Usually in that type of door only the lower lock can be locked with a key: the upper one can be always opened with the handle. That is the standard configuration for inner doors in Italy.
roteoctober
Tech Director
 
Posts: 2433
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:01 pm
Location: Turin - Italy

Re: The common sense thread

Postby jane » Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:14 am

roteoctober wrote:Usually in that type of door only the lower lock can be locked with a key: the upper one can be always opened with the handle. That is the standard configuration for inner doors in Italy.


But on Meredith's door, only the top lock was engaged. How could that be done?

Also, on certain views of the door, it appears that there is no dead bolt in the slot where there should be one.

Image
jane
 
Posts: 2714
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: The common sense thread

Postby Niteangel » Mon Jun 02, 2014 3:03 pm

jane wrote:
roteoctober wrote:Usually in that type of door only the lower lock can be locked with a key: the upper one can be always opened with the handle. That is the standard configuration for inner doors in Italy.


But on Meredith's door, only the top lock was engaged. How could that be done?

Also, on certain views of the door, it appears that there is no dead bolt in the slot where there should be one.


Whether a key was needed to lock the door is not what matters (there is many different models, for some you need a key and for some you don't, for any kind of bolt), because either way the attacker likely had the key in his possession (Meredith's keys were stolen and never found). What does matter is the type of bolt that was locked, and in this case, whether the top or the lower part was locked. If the deadbolt part was locked then it can't be locked and the door closed afterwards, if it was the upper bolt then it can be locked and the door closed afterwards (whether a key was needed or not to lock it from inside the room).

About the deadbolt part: when I look at some of the pictures, it seems there was no deadbolt built-in at all, I see an indentation, but no space in the front, like between where the deadbolt would be, and the metal plate (it might be there tho, but I don't see it on the pictures). Even on a close-up like this one I still can't see an actual deadbolt, only some indentations in the metal plate.

Image

About the 2nd picture: on some of the pictures, like this one, it seems they had removed the whole front of the lock.

Image

I can also see a small part in the upper bolt that usually locks a a door (i.e. this small part stops the bolt from sliding back in the door completely, therefore you can't open the door), but I am not sure whether it is really what I think it might be, or if it is just the shape of the bolt itself and not this small locking part. (the part I am referring to is shown / mechanism explained in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4wFsN60-IQ ), and you can see it in this picture:

Image

Of course I'm not certain of anything tho, I'm just trying to guess how it could have been locked.

What I do notice for sure is that the attacker grabbed the handle inside, and the side of the door at some point (and this is something my husband usually does when he locks the door from inside the house (the upper bolt, not the deadbolt), and then gives it a swing to close/lock it behind him as he leaves.
'It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.' Sherlock Holmes
User avatar
Niteangel
 
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:15 pm

Re: The common sense thread

Postby kermit the frog » Mon Jun 02, 2014 4:01 pm

Niteangel, it seems you are confusing house entrance door with interior door lock types. They are usually different, at least in Europe, the interior doors have to be closed before locking them and the key is needed for that.

However I'm curious what type of locks are used in your area - maybe they are basically different in function?
je suis Charlie
User avatar
kermit the frog
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:59 am
Location: Germany

Re: The common sense thread

Postby Screen Name Pending » Mon Jun 02, 2014 4:15 pm

For some reason the cops knew Rudy did it, but they needed to get a shortened sentence in prison for him.
To accomplish this goal Mignnini thought up the multiple attacker theory.
Amanda had a key to the door on Meredith's apartment. Therefore she could sneak in without having to pick the lock.
Amanda was 1 of 2 people which had these keys in Perugia. The other 2 roommates went away for the weekend.
So the crime had to have been done by Knox or people she let in.
You might think that someone could have got in through that broken window, but that window was not really broken, it was made to look that way after the murder.
This was a break in that Amanda staged in an attempt to make it look like someone who did not have a key entered the house.
I guess the jury actually believed this!
Throw in Raffael and you have 3 suspects. I guess that dumbass jury also believed that Rudy and Raffy held Meridith down while Amanda stabbed her with that chef's knife.
They made a deal with Rudy where he confessed to being there if he ratted out the other 2 of the 3 suspects. and got a reduced sentence.
It was lucky for Rudy that the other 2 people were there, other wise he would have had nobody to roll over on.
User avatar
Screen Name Pending
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon May 13, 2013 7:28 pm

Re: The common sense thread

Postby Niteangel » Mon Jun 02, 2014 4:36 pm

kermit the frog wrote:Niteangel, it seems you are confusing house entrance door with interior door lock types. They are usually different, at least in Europe, the interior doors have to be closed before locking them and the key is needed for that.

However I'm curious what type of locks are used in your area - maybe they are basically different in function?


This type of lock can be used for either a main door or an interior door. Like this one http://www.locksnmore.com.my/shop/agb-m ... #!agb/cy1j (look at the description for the AGB SASH mortise lock case). At my house we have double doors, one with a lock like this one (you can lock both parts on my door, but you don't need a key to lock the upper bolt, I don't know if this was the case with Meredith's door tho), and another door with just a deadbolt lock.

In fact, I was looking at the entrance door, and it has a similar type of lock (not the same brand), except the upper bolt was broken

Image

But like I said, I am just trying to guess from what I can see in the pictures, the only thing that is pretty certain is that Guede grabbed the side of the door at some point (you can see the blood).
'It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.' Sherlock Holmes
User avatar
Niteangel
 
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:15 pm

Re: The common sense thread

Postby lonepinealex » Mon Jun 02, 2014 4:44 pm

kermit the frog wrote:Niteangel, it seems you are confusing house entrance door with interior door lock types. They are usually different, at least in Europe, the interior doors have to be closed before locking them and the key is needed for that.


Not necessarily in a house share. In the UK at least, a property which is being let on a room-by-room basis usually has what we call a Yale lock fitted to all the interior bedroom doors:

http://www.powertoolsdirect.com/media/c ... sh-box.jpg
lonepinealex
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:40 pm
Location: UK

Re: The common sense thread

Postby kermit the frog » Mon Jun 02, 2014 5:02 pm

Sure, also for apartments. But that is a cylinder lock and cannot be confused with the simple standard lock from the cottage. You can also distinguish them by the key types.

Image
Image
je suis Charlie
User avatar
kermit the frog
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:59 am
Location: Germany

Re: The common sense thread

Postby Niteangel » Mon Jun 02, 2014 5:41 pm

lonepinealex wrote:
kermit the frog wrote:Niteangel, it seems you are confusing house entrance door with interior door lock types. They are usually different, at least in Europe, the interior doors have to be closed before locking them and the key is needed for that.


Not necessarily in a house share. In the UK at least, a property which is being let on a room-by-room basis usually has what we call a Yale lock fitted to all the interior bedroom doors:

http://www.powertoolsdirect.com/media/c ... sh-box.jpg


See this bolt is also the type that you can lock first, and then close the door, because of its shape, it slides into place as you close the door.

I see what you mean tho. But there is many different types, for many (either deadbolts or not) you don't even need a key to lock it (for example some types of locks that are often used for bathrooms, and you can lock and unlock with a button you either push or turn, same with some locks for main doors - the one on my other main door is like that, its a deadbolt but from the inside you just turn the small handle, you don't need a key to lock it, you only need a key to unlock it from the outside).

It depends which one was locked, if it was the deadbolt (which I can't see in the pictures, where the deadbolt should be it looks like a whole piece of metal with nothing that could stick out), or the upper one, which might have this small part that keeps the door locked (like shown in the video), but I'm not sure about that either, I can't tell for sure from the pictures whether it is the shape of the bolt or if it is this small part that would keep the door locked, or if the bolt can actually be locked).

But for sure, if there was a deadbolt, and if it was locked, then it wouldn't have been possible to lock the door first and then close it behind you, because its shape wouldn't allow this.
'It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.' Sherlock Holmes
User avatar
Niteangel
 
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:15 pm

Re: The common sense thread

Postby kermit the frog » Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:48 am

Niteangel wrote:In fact, I was looking at the entrance door, and it has a similar type of lock (not the same brand), except the upper bolt was broken

Image


I can't see it broken. To me it looks like the latch is stuck in the door, because someone put in a piece of wood, paper or something to block it from falling closed.
je suis Charlie
User avatar
kermit the frog
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:59 am
Location: Germany

Re: The common sense thread

Postby Niteangel » Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:38 am

kermit the frog wrote:
Niteangel wrote:In fact, I was looking at the entrance door, and it has a similar type of lock (not the same brand), except the upper bolt was broken

Image


I can't see it broken. To me it looks like the latch is stuck in the door, because someone put in a piece of wood, paper or something to block it from falling closed.


Yes, I noticed the piece of wood (or whatever it is) in there, they mentioned the lock was broken and they had to lock the door to keep it closed (the entrance door). Maybe the latchbolt would stay in a locked position without this piece of wood or paper, I don't know.
'It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.' Sherlock Holmes
User avatar
Niteangel
 
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:15 pm

Re: The common sense thread

Postby lonepinealex » Tue Jun 03, 2014 6:05 am

Well anyway, this whole key / lock thing is a red herring imo. It's only being debated because of the kerfuffle about the supposed lack of bloody footprints turned towards the door. Well, if you think about the activity in front of that door before they broke it down, I'm surprised there are any footprints worth a damn there at all. How many people had shuffled about in that hallway, directly by the door?
lonepinealex
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:40 pm
Location: UK

Re: The common sense thread

Postby jane » Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:11 am

lonepinealex wrote:Well anyway, this whole key / lock thing is a red herring imo. It's only being debated because of the kerfuffle about the supposed lack of bloody footprints turned towards the door. Well, if you think about the activity in front of that door before they broke it down, I'm surprised there are any footprints worth a damn there at all. How many people had shuffled about in that hallway, directly by the door?


I agree. But it is something that "guilters" focus on as proof of guilt.

I guess it's not possible to determine if the bedroom door could have been locked without using the key just by turning the handle up to set the top lock before exiting the room. There's no doubt that Rudy touched that handle.

It does appear that there is no dead bolt on the bedroom door. The bottom slot, where the dead bolt would be, appears to be empty. See previous photos.

Here's the handle on the inside of the door.

Image
jane
 
Posts: 2714
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: The common sense thread

Postby Screen Name Pending » Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:17 am

There was no reason to suspect Amanda killed anyone, but they needed another suspect so everything would not be blamed on Rudy.
The broken window was evidence that Rudy was there, but Mignini transformed this in to evidence that Amanda committed a serious crime and she had to do the staged break-in to show that there was someone there who did not have a key.
Mignini constructed his case on Amanda being bad.
Amanda told the cops that on Nov. 1 she was over at Raffael's place enjoying marijuana and sex. To many people of Mignini's generation this would be something they would not say even though it was true. They would be too embareassed to admit this.
Because Amanda told this to the police it suggests that she is in favor of pre-marital sex and drugs.
You may think this is no big deal, but there are many older people that would see this as a sign that the devil has come up here to earth.
When Amanda 1st arrived in Italy she tried sexual promiscuity. This was just a little experiment to see if she would like it. To many older people this is unforgivable. They believe you should not have sex with someone you are not married to. So since Rafael was getting high and getting laid this was not unlike he was committing 2 crimes.
So once you get the jury believing AK + RS are immoral people, it is easier to get the jury thinking they are liars. From there you can get the jury thinking that everything they say is a lie.
User avatar
Screen Name Pending
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon May 13, 2013 7:28 pm

Re: The common sense thread

Postby jane » Sun Aug 03, 2014 4:47 pm

Pictures of Meredith's door/lock. Page back on this thread.
jane
 
Posts: 2714
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Previous

Return to Injustice in Perugia Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests