Continuation Part Eight: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[RandyN]

Rudy being on the pot when Meredith returned is the simplest explanation that fits the known evidence.

DNA evidence from the toilet paper tells us that Rudy left the evidence UN the unflushed toilet. The absence of blood traces in that bathroom indicate it was left before the murder. The fact that he didn't flush indicates that something happened that before he had a chance to flush. Meredith coming home is one possible reason.

Next we look at Rudy's original story and his motives for telling it that way. According to Rudy, he was sitting on the toilet when an unknown person entered the front door. Rudy would understand that his story must explain the evidence, but still present a case for being innocent. But he doesn't know exactly what evidence the investigators have found, If he sticks as close to what really happened as he can without being the lone killer of Meredith, he is more likely to tell a story that fits the evidence found by the investigators. So yes, Rudy probably was sitting in the can when someone came in the front door and a fight ensued. But he can't tell us it was Meredith and maintain his innocence. So Rudy puts an unknown stranger in her place.

Yes but Grinder thinks that Guede is a habitual non flusher...and he has some evidence to back that up....an UN-flushed toilet in the lawyers office and in the nursery IIRC. Lets wait to hear what CT has to say about Guedes toilet habits... oh wait...no toilet mentioned there. But wait! No proof Guede was in the lawyers office.

Using Grinders ...we must accept the most remote even if totally blindingly obviously fact fitting explanation seems unsatisfactory for him...we must have doubt and so we will debate a fleas fart vs a smoking pile of RG doo? Sorry those fine and wrong points stink...and so does your tiresome argument Grinder.

Some facts....RG **** in the toilet. Plus he didn't flush, plus he told a story of pants falling down, plus ...so when else did he sit and shi??? Use some of that vast knowledge for something worthwhile how about it? This atom splitting is getting tiresome and boring.

Im starting to hope they lock up Knox and Solecito...perhaps Grinder will get serious about the facts in this absurd case then. Not that Grinder decides the case...but the truth is that like the deceptive "Knox" video, even the major networks and world news reports the story without the proper investigation into the truth....they simply go with the tabloid tripe. And meanwhile Grinder is busy splitting atoms about if RG was standing or shatting.

I'm about done here...its getting boring, absurd, and silly actually.

Outrageous conclusions (Nencini) have now been presented as facts and we are side tracked to discuss RG flush evidence? Only Yummi brings more distractions to and about the important evidence.

I respect your knowledge of the details of this case Grinder. But its like Einstein only ever using his ideas to play Trivial Pursuit. Useless!

 

[acbytesla]

Yes but Grinder thinks that Guede is a habitual non flusher...and he has some evidence to back that up....an UN-flushed toilet in the lawyers office and in the nursery IIRC. Lets wait to hear what CT has to say about Guedes toilet habits... oh wait...no toilet mentioned there. But wait! No proof Guede was in the lawyers office.

Using Grinders ...we must accept the most remote even if totally blindingly obviously fact fitting explanation seems unsatisfactory for him...we must have doubt and so we will debate a fleas fart vs a smoking pile of RG doo? Sorry those fine and wrong points stink...and so does your tiresome argument Grinder.

Some facts....RG **** in the toilet. Plus he didn't flush, plus he told a story of pants falling down, plus ...so when else did he sit and shi??? Use some of that vast knowledge for something worthwhile how about it? This atom splitting is getting tiresome and boring.

Im starting to hope they lock up Knox and Solecito...perhaps Grinder will get serious about the facts in this absurd case then. Not that Grinder decides the case...but the truth is that like the deceptive "Knox" video, even the major networks and world news reports the story without the proper investigation into the truth....they simply go with the tabloid tripe. And meanwhile Grinder is busy splitting atoms about if RG was standing or shatting.

I'm about done here...its getting boring, absurd, and silly actually.

Outrageous conclusions (Nencini) have now been presented as facts and we are side tracked to discuss RG flush evidence? Only Yummi brings more distractions to and about the important evidence.

I respect your knowledge of the details of this case Grinder. But its like Einstein only ever using his ideas to play Trivial Pursuit. Useless!

Well, this is the kind of thing that also bothers me about Grinder. I like that he's tough and stubborn, but clearly there is a pattern.

The not flushing the toilets in his victim's homes/business is not only a pattern it's really something that shows what kind of burglar he is. He's a sexual burglar. He is not only stealing, he is invading his victims. It was only a matter of time that his burglaries escalated to assault or rape or murder. The not flushing is a big F U to the rest of the world.

 

[Desert Fox]

Bad Murder Cases

I hope this is alright posting this here
I started a new thread on bad murder cases because there are other cases that bother me

It is here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10025462#post10025462

Started with Gwendolyn Graham and Cathy Wood

 

[codyjuneau]

Rudy being on the pot when Meredith returned is the simplest explanation that fits the known evidence.

DNA evidence from the toilet paper tells us that Rudy left the evidence UN the unflushed toilet. The absence of blood traces in that bathroom indicate it was left before the murder. The fact that he didn't flush indicates that something happened that before he had a chance to flush. Meredith coming home is one possible reason.

Next we look at Rudy's original story and his motives for telling it that way. According to Rudy, he was sitting on the toilet when an unknown person entered the front door. Rudy would understand that his story must explain the evidence, but still present a case for being innocent. But he doesn't know exactly what evidence the investigators have found, If he sticks as close to what really happened as he can without being the lone killer of Meredith, he is more likely to tell a story that fits the evidence found by the investigators. So yes, Rudy probably was sitting in the can when someone came in the front door and a fight ensued. But he can't tell us it was Meredith and maintain his innocence. So Rudy puts an unknown stranger in her place.

.
Yes, and by sticking as close to the truth as he can without incriminating himself, it is easier for Rudy to remember the story that he is telling so he does not trip himself up.

From all reports, Rudy was a very practiced liar.
.

 

[codyjuneau]

.
Entities that produce a lot of critical data, not only back their data up on-site, they also back it up off-site in order to guard against the on-site data being destroyed by fire, theft, water damage, stupidity, etc. Regular frequent automatic backups are the norm.

If the interrogations of Lumumba, Raffaele, and Amanda were recorded, then whichever organization does the off-site backup would, unless they have deliberately deleted them, have copies, probably multiple copies.

I suspect that the company that installed all the recording equipment at the Perugian Police Station, and received the $180K cartoon contract, also provides the ongoing off-site backup service for a fee. That information would be easy to find out.

Regardless, the off-site backup, not the police station, is where one might still find digital recordings of those three critical interrogations, and the 39 missing wiretapped phone calls. Just saying.
.

 

[MichaelB]

It wasn't Comodi's brother in law who was sole director of the company that made the cartoon but the brother of someone who worked in the prosecutors office. It still stinks.

La Nazione

Meredith Kercher murder trial prosecutor facing disciplinary action over £150,000 'cartoon'

23 Nov 2013 17:21

Manuela Comodi is facing an official investigation into why she commissioned the expensive animated video depicting Meredith's murder
A prosecutor in the Meredith Kercher murder trial faces a disciplinary hearing over a £150,000 animation used in court.

The cartoon, shown in the 2009 trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito – convicted then cleared of killing the British student – depicted the 2007 murder in Perugia, Italy.

The 23 minute high definition animated video, shown during the first trial, caused outrage among defence lawyers who opposed it being screened.
It showed the two defendants as cartoon characters and graphically demonstrated the moment Meredith was murdered.
Defence lawyers said the 'irresponsible' film was based only on the imagination of prosecutors Giuliano Mignini and Manuela Comodi.
Comodi faces the National Council of Magistrates next month. If the complaint is upheld, she could be struck off.

http://www.lanazione.it/umbria/cronaca/2013/11/20/985108-meredith-video-pm.shtml

[Update - 4 December 2013 – The owner of the CGI company that received the $240,000 has a brother who works in the prosecutor's office. And that Comodi at trial attempt to have this expense charged to Amanda Knox. Curiously, though the video was shown to the jury that convicted Knox, it was not placed in the court files and has since disappeared. – Carlofab]



FROM OGGI – “the curse of Amanda”

THEY ALREADY CALL IT THE CURSE OF AMANDA

WHILE UNDER THE NEW PROCESS OF APPEALS THAT SEES THE ACCUSED KNOX AND SOLLECITO SOME PM, POLICE AND LAWYERS INVOLVED IN THE CASE OF PERUGIA MUST DEFEND THEMSELVES FROM VARIOUS TYPES OF CHARGES.

HERE THEY ARE

by Giangavino Sulas
Firenza, Nov. 2013

It was not a surprise the harsh indictment by Alessandro Crini, Deputy Attorney General, before the Assize Court of Appeal of Florence. Not after the premise with which he introduced the 15 points which, for him, are the castle of accusations against the two young [students]. A castle [mountain of evidence] indicated by the written judgment of the Supreme Court which annulled the judgment of acquittal on appeal. Crini has followed those directions, from first to last, retraining witnesses the most controversial and the results of forensic science in the first trial. Now the process comes to an end six years after the murder of Meredith Kercher, the fate of Raffaele and his ex-girlfriend is still hanging by a thread, with the prosecution ever more entrenched in its certainties.
But it is not doing too well either those who had asked for the conviction.

Many of them have to defend themselves.

On December 6, the prosecutor Manuela Comodi who, with Giuliano Mignini, has supported the prosecution asked for life imprisonment for Amanda and Raffaele, will be processed by the CSM (Supreme Judicial Council) for the management of the incident on the video of the reconstruction of the murder of Meredith, projected in the courtroom during the indictment but never deposited in the file and then never acquired the records of the trial. In short, the process for this movie does not exist, yet Manuela Comodi liquidated, the outcome of the consultation, a fee of EUR 182 740 to the company that built it. And in the decree for payment, according to the indictment, "has not explained the reasons and criteria for payment," while the manufacturing company has specified instead of all the activity. For this reason, Comodi must answer for loss of revenue to the state. As early as 2012, the Court of Auditors had put under investigation by Mignini wondering if those 182 thousand euro were a fair spending or a waste of public money. And the investigation of the Court of Auditors is still open.

But there is another very annoying especially: the making of the video was commissioned to society Nventa Id Ltd, whose sole director Luigi Guadagno is the brother of Raffaele Guadagno who works as a secretary to the Prosecutor of Perugia. "Thank you but I do not want to make any comment. I'm just saying that in this affair each will assume his responsibilities, "he told Oggi the magistrate Perugia. In disciplinary proceedings will be defended by former prosecutor Clean Hands Piercamillo Davigo, now adviser to the Supreme Court.

A CYCLOPEAN INVESTIGATION

On January 15 next Giuliano Mignini goes on trial in Turin, with the former Police Commissioner Michele Giuttari, for a series of offenses among which the abuse of office during the investigation into the death of the doctor Francesco Narducci connected Perugia that the Monster of Florence. An investigation mammoth contained in some 100 folders, lasting years, with 22 defendants, including a superintendent, a Colonel of the Carabinieri, some well-known lawyer and journalist Mario Spezi, who was arrested. Gup and all were acquitted by the Supreme Court. For this event in 2010 Mignini and Giuttari in Florence suffered a sentence of 1 year and 4 months and 1 year and 6 months for abuse of office, then the Court of Appeal quashed the judgment for lack of territorial jurisdiction. So the process was moved to Turin. Giuliano Mignini, who asked how he will defend, was terse and somewhat 'cryptic: "I have no comment to make. Talk to those who know the story. "We wanted to ask him if he, magistrate, waive the requirement laid down in the early months of 2014, but it was not possible.

MONICA NAPOLEONI AND RAFFAELE ARGIRO

In Perugia are being investigated for abuse of power and inducement to breach the computer system reserved policewoman Monica Napoleoni, former head of the homicide, and his colleagues Stefano Gubbiotti and Lorena Zugarini, all the protagonists of detention, interrogation and arrest of Amanda and Raffaele.

And in an investigation reached a preliminary hearing is investigating the former deputy commander of the prison guards of Perugia Raffaele Argiro. He is charged with aggravated sexual assault and extortion against an inmate who has sued after reading the statements of Amanda in a British newspaper. The American revealed the strange nightly visits Argirò trying to get her to confess and tormented her with persistent questions about her sexual habits.

PATRICK’S ATTORNEY

Last on the list, but also have serious trouble for him, Carlo Pacelli, defender Patrick Lumumba, who Knox unfairly placed at the crime scene. In his speeches hurled with great vehemence against Amanda calling her "a witch." Now, with fellow attorney Sabrina Scaroni, who was arrested for stealing 300 thousand euro from payments of taxes, is under investigation for cheating patronage, fraud and slander.

They call it the curse of Amanda.

 

[Dan O.]

Grinder may need to be placed on ignore so we can move forward. There is little if any direct evidence that shows exactly what happened that night. We are at the point where we are speculating what might have happened and what is the most likely scenario. This stage involves eliminating those scenarios that don't fit the known facts and choosing a representative from related possibilities using the tools of the trade such as Occom's Razor. It isn't necessary and often not possible to prove every detail.

Grinder interrupts to ask why people think Rudy was on the pot when Meredith returned. I throw this right back at Grinder and ask what alternate scenario he proposes to defend.

 

[anglolawyer]

I hope everyone has read Luca Cheli's excellent article by now. And that the time of death has been noted as just before midnight. So Rolfe, LJ, Kaosium and others are simply wrong. It is possible for no gastric emptying after 5 hours because a judge has said so, it is ridiculous to suppose the whole of Italy is in a conspiracy, this is only an internet forum, who are these guys anyway ... blah blah blah …

Can Monachia be stretched out to midnight for the scream or the much later echo of the scream?

 

[Samson]

I hope everyone has read Luca Cheli's excellent article by now. And that the time of death has been noted as just before midnight. So Rolfe, LJ, Kaosium and others are simply wrong. It is possible for no gastric emptying after 5 hours because a judge has said so, it is ridiculous to suppose the whole of Italy is in a conspiracy, this is only an internet forum, who are these guys anyway ... blah blah blah …

Can Monachia be stretched out to midnight for the scream or the much later echo of the scream?

Most of it.

“inside the cottage, at a certain time after 10 pm, a situation could have ensued in which Amanda Marie Knox and Raffaele Sollecito had gathered in intimacy, also using drugs, Meredith Kercher was in her room and Rudi Hermann Guede was using the apartment like he wanted

It appears he has not studied our dissertation that has Meredith dead by now. Even Grinder has her dead by now....

Nencini is toast right here, unless Lalli is abandoned. But Lalli has never been questioned as to his procedure. It should be all over bar the shouting.

 

[anglolawyer]

WE really should thank Nencini. He is going to keep this and continuations of this thread going for pages and pages. Luca Cheli's article is rich with raw material - such as this:

Nencini moves on to scrutinize Knox’s professed behavior at the cottage that morning and he practically finds everything unbelievable:

1) when she found the entrance door open she should have, if not immediately called the police, at least inspected all the rooms and in this way she would have immediately discovered the burglary, instead she had a shower in such an anxiety-filled environment;

Obviously then, she did not find the door open. Why in that case did she say she did? What was achieved by this lie which she had the whole night to concoct? I do hope Sherlock or Vibio or Briars takes a pop at this.

 

[Grinder]

near

I will answer the second question because that is what I believe likely occurred.

Rudy left evidence in the toilet that he used it. The fact that he did not flush can mean that he was absent-minded again, in a great rush when he rose from the toilet, or that at the moment he arose he was trying to remain silent. He used the toilet before he attacked Meredith; oltherwise he would have left blood spots in the bathroom - enough that even myopic police investigators would have seen it.
Hendry's analysis of the blood spray evidence on the wall by Meredith's bed shows that Meredith was first knifed as she was near the head of her bed standing/rising at less-than-fully-erect heigh.

Her being fully dressed, the fact that she had not yet placed a second call to her mother, had not moved her laundry, or left evidence that she had been in another room lounging or eating indicates to me that she was attacked very, very soon after she returned home.

I believe that liars incorporate truthful elements in lengthy lies. Rudy claimed he was in the toilet when he heard Meredith scream. The detail he provided of rushing out of the toilet struggling with his pants only partially up sounds credible and memorable. It suggests he was in the toilet when he suddenly moved in a rush on Meredith, possibly upon being discovered. If he had not been discovered, he woud not have left the toilet so hurriedly that his pants were not yet fully up and belted.

What DNA or blood other than the one foot print was found in the MK/AK bathroom?

I always find it interesting what elements of Rudi's story the different sides choose to believe.

Had Rudi not told his tale of woe would people think that after his initial cleanup after seeing his work perhaps he then became sick to his stomach and went to the other bathroom.

Maybe Dan O. or another evidence expert will provide information of Rudi's DNA being found in the MK/AK bathroom.

I hope Nonsecini will not now be used here as proof of anything. His opinions are of the same level of value as Massei.

If people here were to write their theories of the crime I'm sure we would get many versions. Some people think Napoleoni recognized Rudi's MO immediately and started framing the kids on the 2nd. Some think that the police deleted the text from Patrick to Amanda. Some think he carried a knife with him. Some think he found one at the cottage like at the nursery.

While motivations provide material for endless debate in a case like this I don't think they are helpful in the long run and are a major cause for the Italian system being so slow.

 

[carbonjam72]

Judicial politics seem relevant too.

It wasn't Comodi's brother in law who was sole director of the company that made the cartoon but the brother of someone who worked in the prosecutors office. It still stinks.

La Nazione

Meredith Kercher murder trial prosecutor facing disciplinary action over £150,000 'cartoon'

23 Nov 2013 17:21

Manuela Comodi is facing an official investigation into why she commissioned the expensive animated video depicting Meredith's murder
A prosecutor in the Meredith Kercher murder trial faces a disciplinary hearing over a £150,000 animation used in court.

The cartoon, shown in the 2009 trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito – convicted then cleared of killing the British student – depicted the 2007 murder in Perugia, Italy.

The 23 minute high definition animated video, shown during the first trial, caused outrage among defence lawyers who opposed it being screened.
It showed the two defendants as cartoon characters and graphically demonstrated the moment Meredith was murdered.
Defence lawyers said the 'irresponsible' film was based only on the imagination of prosecutors Giuliano Mignini and Manuela Comodi.
Comodi faces the National Council of Magistrates next month. If the complaint is upheld, she could be struck off.

http://www.lanazione.it/umbria/cronaca/2013/11/20/985108-meredith-video-pm.shtml

[Update - 4 December 2013 – The owner of the CGI company that received the $240,000 has a brother who works in the prosecutor's office. And that Comodi at trial attempt to have this expense charged to Amanda Knox. Curiously, though the video was shown to the jury that convicted Knox, it was not placed in the court files and has since disappeared. – Carlofab]



FROM OGGI – “the curse of Amanda”

THEY ALREADY CALL IT THE CURSE OF AMANDA

WHILE UNDER THE NEW PROCESS OF APPEALS THAT SEES THE ACCUSED KNOX AND SOLLECITO SOME PM, POLICE AND LAWYERS INVOLVED IN THE CASE OF PERUGIA MUST DEFEND THEMSELVES FROM VARIOUS TYPES OF CHARGES.

HERE THEY ARE

by Giangavino Sulas
Firenza, Nov. 2013

It was not a surprise the harsh indictment by Alessandro Crini, Deputy Attorney General, before the Assize Court of Appeal of Florence. Not after the premise with which he introduced the 15 points which, for him, are the castle of accusations against the two young [students]. A castle [mountain of evidence] indicated by the written judgment of the Supreme Court which annulled the judgment of acquittal on appeal. Crini has followed those directions, from first to last, retraining witnesses the most controversial and the results of forensic science in the first trial. Now the process comes to an end six years after the murder of Meredith Kercher, the fate of Raffaele and his ex-girlfriend is still hanging by a thread, with the prosecution ever more entrenched in its certainties.
But it is not doing too well either those who had asked for the conviction.

Many of them have to defend themselves.

On December 6, the prosecutor Manuela Comodi who, with Giuliano Mignini, has supported the prosecution asked for life imprisonment for Amanda and Raffaele, will be processed by the CSM (Supreme Judicial Council) for the management of the incident on the video of the reconstruction of the murder of Meredith, projected in the courtroom during the indictment but never deposited in the file and then never acquired the records of the trial. In short, the process for this movie does not exist, yet Manuela Comodi liquidated, the outcome of the consultation, a fee of EUR 182 740 to the company that built it. And in the decree for payment, according to the indictment, "has not explained the reasons and criteria for payment," while the manufacturing company has specified instead of all the activity. For this reason, Comodi must answer for loss of revenue to the state. As early as 2012, the Court of Auditors had put under investigation by Mignini wondering if those 182 thousand euro were a fair spending or a waste of public money. And the investigation of the Court of Auditors is still open.

But there is another very annoying especially: the making of the video was commissioned to society Nventa Id Ltd, whose sole director Luigi Guadagno is the brother of Raffaele Guadagno who works as a secretary to the Prosecutor of Perugia. "Thank you but I do not want to make any comment. I'm just saying that in this affair each will assume his responsibilities, "he told Oggi the magistrate Perugia. In disciplinary proceedings will be defended by former prosecutor Clean Hands Piercamillo Davigo, now adviser to the Supreme Court.

A CYCLOPEAN INVESTIGATION

On January 15 next Giuliano Mignini goes on trial in Turin, with the former Police Commissioner Michele Giuttari, for a series of offenses among which the abuse of office during the investigation into the death of the doctor Francesco Narducci connected Perugia that the Monster of Florence. An investigation mammoth contained in some 100 folders, lasting years, with 22 defendants, including a superintendent, a Colonel of the Carabinieri, some well-known lawyer and journalist Mario Spezi, who was arrested. Gup and all were acquitted by the Supreme Court. For this event in 2010 Mignini and Giuttari in Florence suffered a sentence of 1 year and 4 months and 1 year and 6 months for abuse of office, then the Court of Appeal quashed the judgment for lack of territorial jurisdiction. So the process was moved to Turin. Giuliano Mignini, who asked how he will defend, was terse and somewhat 'cryptic: "I have no comment to make. Talk to those who know the story. "We wanted to ask him if he, magistrate, waive the requirement laid down in the early months of 2014, but it was not possible.

MONICA NAPOLEONI AND RAFFAELE ARGIRO

In Perugia are being investigated for abuse of power and inducement to breach the computer system reserved policewoman Monica Napoleoni, former head of the homicide, and his colleagues Stefano Gubbiotti and Lorena Zugarini, all the protagonists of detention, interrogation and arrest of Amanda and Raffaele.

And in an investigation reached a preliminary hearing is investigating the former deputy commander of the prison guards of Perugia Raffaele Argiro. He is charged with aggravated sexual assault and extortion against an inmate who has sued after reading the statements of Amanda in a British newspaper. The American revealed the strange nightly visits Argirò trying to get her to confess and tormented her with persistent questions about her sexual habits.

PATRICK’S ATTORNEY

Last on the list, but also have serious trouble for him, Carlo Pacelli, defender Patrick Lumumba, who Knox unfairly placed at the crime scene. In his speeches hurled with great vehemence against Amanda calling her "a witch." Now, with fellow attorney Sabrina Scaroni, who was arrested for stealing 300 thousand euro from payments of taxes, is under investigation for cheating patronage, fraud and slander.

They call it the curse of Amanda.

Thanks for this great post.

Since so little of the court decisions, including dating back to the original allegations, seem to originate in the facts and observable evidence, I think the things that are happening to the relevant parties - particularly Mignini and the judges involved in the case, may offer insight into the charges and judicial outcomes of these trials, more so then the evidence, arguments and witnesses actually put forward in any of the court proceedings.

For example, Mignini's attempts to involve himself in the Monster of Florence investigations, based on the 'illuminations' of the TV psychic Gabriella Carlizzi relating to the drowning death of Dr Narducci in 1985, and leading to his investigation, allegation, indictment and rejection of his claims against 22 Itlaian people (described in the article segment above), was dismissed by the same Judge Paolo Micheli.

The prosecutor Paolo Canessa of Florence who tried that case on behalf of Mignini's investigation, is the same whom Mignini was convicted of wiretapping, before his conviction was set aside on a technicality of venue.

Mignini's claims of satanic cult conspiracy, broadly sweeping in so many prominent people, were rejected by Judge Micheli in that case, and this case. Yet the direct criminal claims outside of the satanic cult angle, of the more pedestrian criminal involvement were upheld, also against Amand and Rafael peripherally, in the absence of evidence, reason or logic.

The central convictions in the Monster of Florence case, were against 'marginal people', and seemed to fill a need to convict anyone of these embarrassing unsolved horrific crimes occurring over decades, so they chose the least offensive human sacrifices. The same prosecutorial tactics of targeting convenient & vulnerable defendants, fake evidence, bogus witnesses, forced confessions and profound logical fallacy are all on display.

So I don't think its possible to understand the mechanics of these convictions on the basis of the direct court proceedings alone. One has to be able to understand the background, interests, politics and the rules of the game that goes on outside the courtroom as well. The truth of how these convictions have come about, lies outside the facts, evidence, law, and the court proceedings - imo. It seems to be a deeper, longer game than mere court cases and 'motivations'.

Is there any way of accessing Italian court records and proceedings directly, or are they kept on hand written papyrus in the fortress dungeon, only available to the scrutiny of devout monks of a certain secret judicial brotherhood order only at full moon, but not including summer holiday? It's like entering a dark fantasy world of Italian jurisprudence. But I can't shake the feeling that the answers lie on the other side of this almost esoteric divide.

 

[Grinder]

It wasn't Comodi's brother in law who was sole director of the company that made the cartoon but the brother of someone who worked in the prosecutors office. It still stinks.

Thanks. The cartoon should never have been made but the fact that the brother of someone that worked in the prosecutor's office was the director really means nothing. Certainly the person that made the claim that it was Comodi's brother in-law or whatever relative once again moves the discussion to another factoid based one.

 

[anglolawyer]

Thanks. The cartoon should never have been made but the fact that the brother of someone that worked in the prosecutor's office was the director really means nothing. Certainly the person that made the claim that it was Comodi's brother in-law or whatever relative once again moves the discussion to another factoid based one.

It may or may not mean nothing. How do you know? If the cartoon contract was procured by competitive tender and just happened to land in the lap of the brother, that would be one thing. If it was allocated on a nod and wink, 'you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours' that would be quite another.

 

[Grinder]

I hope everyone has read Luca Cheli's excellent article by now. And that the time of death has been noted as just before midnight. So Rolfe, LJ, Kaosium and others are simply wrong. It is possible for no gastric emptying after 5 hours because a judge has said so, it is ridiculous to suppose the whole of Italy is in a conspiracy, this is only an internet forum, who are these guys anyway ... blah blah blah …

Can Monachia be stretched out to midnight for the scream or the much later echo of the scream?

Most of it.

“inside the cottage, at a certain time after 10 pm, a situation could have ensued in which Amanda Marie Knox and Raffaele Sollecito had gathered in intimacy, also using drugs, Meredith Kercher was in her room and Rudi Hermann Guede was using the apartment like he wanted

It appears he has not studied our dissertation that has Meredith dead by now. Even Grinder has her dead by now....

Nencini is toast right here, unless Lalli is abandoned. But Lalli has never been questioned as to his procedure. It should be all over bar the shouting.

Actually I think ALL the evidence points to a TOD not later than 10. Whether or not Lalli did a proper job on the duodenum, she was killed by 10.

 

[Grinder]

It may or may not mean nothing. How do you know? If the cartoon contract was procured by competitive tender and just happened to land in the lap of the brother, that would be one thing. If it was allocated on a nod and wink, 'you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours' that would be quite another.

I'm sure there are many connections in Perugia of the above nature. The accusation made by a poster here that Comodi gave the contract for !80,000 to her brother in-law is of a totally different nature than the owner of the company has a relative in the prosecutor's office.

The significant issue is that ANY cartoon was made by the prosecution. It wouldn't make any difference to me if it had been made by a completely independent of any vague connection to the office or not.

This is just another example of someone claiming knowledge that smears someone in this case.

Instead of apologizing for making the fake claim we will get some cover-up convo that says well maybe it wasn't what I claimed but what about some other unrelated claims.

 

[Bill Williams]

So I don't think its possible to understand the mechanics of these convictions on the basis of the direct court proceedings alone. One has to be able to understand the background, interests, politics and the rules of the game that goes on outside the courtroom as well. The truth of how these convictions have come about, lies outside the facts, evidence, law, and the court proceedings - imo. It seems to be a deeper, longer game than mere court cases and 'motivations'.

Machiavelli, a former poster her, posts this way. There is no such thing as plain-text reading of anything. There is, acc. to Machiavelli, some dietrological reason to make something sometimes be its opposite.

It has led many here on the other side of the Atlantic to grudgingly accept that the case against Knox and Sollecito is not about the evidence that supposedly exists against them. At least it hasn't been since the Hellmann trial of 2011. There is "something else" going on that few of us are privy to.

As an aside - your reasoning is the only way I can explain how "motive" fits in to this as represented by the various motivations reports. We are constantly told that motive does not matter. Yet people like Nencini cannot seem to help themselves to go on, and on, and on, and on about their latest fantasy as to what would compel two normal, non-psychopathological students to suddenly make a "choice for evil".

As Luca Cheli says, Judge Massei's 2010 motivations report is beginning to look like a Rembrandt when held beside Nencini's piece of disorganized fiction. At least Massei would be honest in accounting for what completely stumped him. Even so, his "motive" for the students was Rudy.... Rudy's lust. Rudy and Meredith (acc. to Massei) were making out in one room, while Raffaele and Amanda were making out in another. Rudy's lust got the better of the situation and Amanda and Raffaele were suppoed to have come in because of the commotion, and inexplicably make a "choice for evil" by aiding Rudy against their friend.

Nencini? He has Amanda and Raffaele making out for two hours from 9 pm onwards, while Meredith is in her room, and Rudy has free reign of the upstairs of the cottage. A two hour toilet session no doubt. (The thing that puts the lie to this is that Meredith did not call home during that time.)

Then the three of them completely inexplicably attack Meredith with Amanda the aggressor and initiator, and in the assault Rudy almost by accident digitally penetrates the victim. The initiation of this fantasy is Meredith being the bitch about money - Nencini accepts Rudy's story about the dispute over rent money, a story cherry picked from an account where Rudy also says Meredith let him in.

Nencini's and Massei's accounts are like trying to wade through surface flotsam and jetsam in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, trying to discover where it came from. All the while one is not allowed to talk about tsunamis or earthquakes.....

..... because you don't want to be charged with failing to predict one.

 

[carbonjam72]

Commonality of motivations & rulings

Machiavelli, a former poster her, posts this way. There is no such thing as plain-text reading of anything. There is, acc. to Machiavelli, some dietrological reason to make something sometimes be its opposite.

It has led many here on the other side of the Atlantic to grudgingly accept that the case against Knox and Sollecito is not about the evidence that supposedly exists against them. At least it hasn't been since the Hellmann trial of 2011. There is "something else" going on that few of us are privy to.

As an aside - your reasoning is the only way I can explain how "motive" fits in to this as represented by the various motivations reports. We are constantly told that motive does not matter. Yet people like Nencini cannot seem to help themselves to go on, and on, and on, and on about their latest fantasy as to what would compel two normal, non-psychopathological students to suddenly make a "choice for evil".

As Luca Cheli says, Judge Massei's 2010 motivations report is beginning to look like a Rembrandt when held beside Nencini's piece of disorganized fiction. At least Massei would be honest in accounting for what completely stumped him. Even so, his "motive" for the students was Rudy.... Rudy's lust. Rudy and Meredith (acc. to Massei) were making out in one room, while Raffaele and Amanda were making out in another. Rudy's lust got the better of the situation and Amanda and Raffaele were suppoed to have come in because of the commotion, and inexplicably make a "choice for evil" by aiding Rudy against their friend.

Nencini? He has Amanda and Raffaele making out for two hours from 9 pm onwards, while Meredith is in her room, and Rudy has free reign of the upstairs of the cottage. A two hour toilet session no doubt. (The thing that puts the lie to this is that Meredith did not call home during that time.)

Then the three of them completely inexplicably attack Meredith with Amanda the aggressor and initiator, and in the assault Rudy almost by accident digitally penetrates the victim. The initiation of this fantasy is Meredith being the bitch about money - Nencini accepts Rudy's story about the dispute over rent money, a story cherry picked from an account where Rudy also says Meredith let him in.

Nencini's and Massei's accounts are like trying to wade through surface flotsam and jetsam in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, trying to discover where it came from. All the while one is not allowed to talk about tsunamis or earthquakes.....

..... because you don't want to be charged with failing to predict one.

If I could take a guess at the fundamental agreement throughout the proceedings, options, rulings and motivations, it would be on two points:

1. Rudy did not act alone (so if the police had arrested him, Meredith would still have been killed).
2. Amanda and Raf are responsible for the confused statements that came out of their overnight unrecorded interrogations (the police did nothing wrong).

These seem to me the only constants among all the judges.

 

[anglolawyer]

I'm sure there are many connections in Perugia of the above nature. The accusation made by a poster here that Comodi gave the contract for !80,000 to her brother in-law is of a totally different nature than the owner of the company has a relative in the prosecutor's office.

The significant issue is that ANY cartoon was made by the prosecution. It wouldn't make any difference to me if it had been made by a completely independent of any vague connection to the office or not.

This is just another example of someone claiming knowledge that smears someone in this case.

Instead of apologizing for making the fake claim we will get some cover-up convo that says well maybe it wasn't what I claimed but what about some other unrelated claims.

Point taken but the ins and outs of that cartoon is (are?) something I'd like to know more about. More than anything, I'd like to see it because I want to see the story as Mignini wanted to tell it. Plus, the lamp's in it - as it is Nencini although only incoherently (it was in the room for the clean up but there was no clean up in the room).

 

[Bill Williams]

Point taken but the ins and outs of that cartoon is (are?) something I'd like to know more about. More than anything, I'd like to see it because I want to see the story as Mignini wanted to tell it. Plus, the lamp's in it - as it is Nencini although only incoherently (it was in the room for the clean up but there was no clean up in the room).

This is why some say that this report had more than one author who did not compare their notes. I'm sure someone will come up with some dietrology to explain why someone took a lamp into a room NOT to do a clean-up.