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

[stilicho]

Stilicho - before casting doubt on either Knox's or Sollecito's alibi.... can you venture a guess as to what time they actually needed an alibi for on Nov 1?

They needed an alibi ranging from roughly 12:00 on 01-NOV until roughly 12:00 on 02-NOV. They don't. Their stories don't match and frequently contradict one another. Now Raffaele's cousin is telling the world that Amanda probably lied about not having left the flat.

Can you answer Cristina's question? Why has Amanda never (not even in court!!) talked about this Naruto cartoon that figures so largely in your scenario?

You know what you're edging towards? I think you believe Raffaele only helped with the cleanup but that Amanda hooked up with another of her drug buddies, Rudy, and killed Meredith without Raffaele's knowledge.

 

[stilicho]

This really is clueless. Sollecito HAS NEVER WITHDRAWN the alibi for Amanda Knox. He wrote a book and in that book, he says that he was with Amanda that night. Frankly, I find it interesting that you think that they weren't together. So was Curatolo lying if Sollecito wasn't with Amanda in the Piazza? hmmmmm

Actually Raffaele doesn't support Amanda's story at all.

Raffaele claims that he signed a prepared document at 03:30 and that he had no idea that Amanda had signed anything implicating Patrick over an hour earlier. Raffaele also claims, in his book, that Amanda was screaming "aiuto" in Italian and this appears nowhere in her story (court, prison diaries, book).

Here's what's happening. Raffaele is going to jail. They are going to suggest that he was only there for the cleanup (his abundant DNA on Meredith's underwear). Even though we're past the evidence phase he's doing the same thing Rudy did. He's just trying to get out earlier.

And this is sort of how it works. FIFO. But, then again, I'm an accountant and it all really makes sense to me.

 

[Desert Fox]

Here's what's happening. Raffaele is going to jail. They are going to suggest that he was only there for the cleanup (his abundant DNA on Meredith's underwear). Even though we're past the evidence phase he's doing the same thing Rudy did. He's just trying to get out earlier.

I am calling you out specifically for dishonesty
There is one same of DNA that make be from Raffaele Sollecito on anything other than a bra clasp.
This same bra clasp had been kicking around the floor in a contaminated crime scene for at least a month. The same bra clasp that was picked up by lab techs who had dirty gloves.

 

[Draca]

They needed an alibi ranging from roughly 12:00 on 01-NOV until roughly 12:00 on 02-NOV. They don't. Their stories don't match and frequently contradict one another. Now Raffaele's cousin is telling the world that Amanda probably lied about not having left the flat.

Can you answer Cristina's question? Why has Amanda never (not even in court!!) talked about this Naruto cartoon that figures so largely in your scenario?

You know what you're edging towards? I think you believe Raffaele only helped with the cleanup but that Amanda hooked up with another of her drug buddies, Rudy, and killed Meredith without Raffaele's knowledge.

https://twitter.com/onRage_fr/status/459979716829913088

‏@cri_magnani · Apr 26
@onRage_fr No. I think she is innocent

 

[Bill Williams]

Wow. Stilicho, you have outdone Nencini. You say they need an alibi for a 24 hour period, and you have no timeline for what happened in that period. I posted a graphic upthread with known benchmarks.

You also believe that Raffaele left DNA on Meredith's underwear. By that I hope you're referring to the bra-clasp, because Nencini believes also that two women left y-genetic material on that clasp. That's how spotty that "evidence" is, and Stefanoni herself outlines during the Massei trial four possible routes of contamination.

I will accept that you are an expert on "Amanda's discrepancies" if you say who regards you as that. The .NET, .ORG crowd?

Raffaele was in Austria with his girlfriend, who lives there, when he heard the news. He did not know he had "captors" until that moment, and he came back across the border to that hotel. No one who is fleeing stops at the last hotel in the country. Far from fleeing, he returned to Italy to cooperate with the carabinieri who came by the next morning. If what you say is try, why was Raffaele not jailed as a flight risk?

"The Sollecitos" are described in Raffaele's book. (Treated like "what"?)

Raffaele has never withdrawn his alibi for Amanda, and Amanda had never withdrawn her alibi for him. In fact, unless someone can produce recordings of their interrogations I don't believe they did then either. Read their books. They present "inconsistencies" only in the minds of those who expect perfection from them, but give people like Mignini and Stefanoni a pass for all their, "I don't remembers".

One again, you are presenting a case which was not even presented by Mignini.... Machiavellis has said that the Nencini verdict is the "more perfect" verdict to Massei's. Do you agree with the details of Nencini's motivations?

Do you believe women have y-genetic material, and that Amanda and Raffaele did not need an alibi, strictly speaking for 9 pm to 11 pm Nov 1, as per Nencini's reconstruction?

I actually know nothing about anyone's "cousin" trying to give testimony through Twitter.... it's not the issue about Amanda denying she'd ever left the apartment that night, that is Raffaele's contention too! You fail to mention that, as does this "cousin".

You know what you're edging towards? I think you believe Raffaele only helped with the cleanup but that Amanda hooked up with another of her drug buddies, Rudy, and killed Meredith without Raffaele's knowledge.

The problem with this is that there is no evidence that Amanda EVER hooked up with Rudy. Amanda never communicated with Rudy. Rudy's very first story, told to a friend when Rudy was not under the control of the police, was that Amanda had nothing to do with this.

Where is the evidence that Rudy and Amanda EVER communicated as per what you're alleging? My view is that those who believe in guilt think they do not need evidence.... like Nencini, who you NEVER talk about.

Raffaele's claim that Amanda was screaming during the interrogation is backed up by none other than Giobbi.

 

[acbytesla]

Actually Raffaele doesn't support Amanda's story at all.

Raffaele claims that he signed a prepared document at 03:30 and that he had no idea that Amanda had signed anything implicating Patrick over an hour earlier. Raffaele also claims, in his book, that Amanda was screaming "aiuto" in Italian and this appears nowhere in her story (court, prison diaries, book).

Here's what's happening. Raffaele is going to jail. They are going to suggest that he was only there for the cleanup (his abundant DNA on Meredith's underwear). Even though we're past the evidence phase he's doing the same thing Rudy did. He's just trying to get out earlier.

And this is sort of how it works. FIFO. But, then again, I'm an accountant and it all really makes sense to me.

Yea that makes sense. Rudy the burglar, the guy that pulled a knife on Christian Tremantano, burglarized the law office in Perugia, had broken into the nursery in Milan, who had taken the knife from the nursery. The guy who left a dozen of his shoe prints in Meredith's blood, the palm print in her blood, 5 samples of his DNA including the sample inside Meredith is out in under ten years. And Raffaele, who's DNA may have been found although this hasn't been confirmed by anyone other than the liar Stefanoni on the bra clasp along with 3 other men is going to spend twenty plus years in jail? You should be ashamed.

It is really sad that the day they found this bra clasp was after the Perugians find out that they had screwed up and that their so called shoe print match for Raffaele actually belonged to Rudy. Not only were the Perugian detectives MORONS that couldn't count the rings on a pair of sneakers...but that Raffaele's father actually proved that it matched Rudy Guede!!!

Really Stillcho, the police in Perugia ARE STUPID. And so are the prosecutors. You know the moron Mignini who actually prevented the coroner from taking the body temperature of the victim.

Really, it is the Keystone "corrupt" cops in that town.

 

[anglolawyer]

Curatolo is the bedrock of Ergon's belief in guilt. Is he yours too Stilicho? Presumably not, now that you have blown the case wide open with the observation that Amanda has never mentioned watching Naruto. The possibilities that she forgot all about it, or was not interested enough to care about it or thought they saw it some other night or whatever other perfectly plausible reason there may be don't enter your head because, deploying your skills as an accountant to the full, you prefer to give credence to a CCTV clip of somebody who looks nothing like Amanda walking into the parking garage at 9.03 and the tweets of a relative whose only source can be ... Raffaele. But, as has been pointed out, he has confirmed her presence throughout the night in a book you have yet to read.

Could you please have a stab at saying what this breakthrough means? As in - what actually happened in your opinion. You need to include Popovic placing a friendly and sociable Amanda at Raf's place at about 8.45 p.m. and Curatolo seeing both of them in the Piazza from 9.27 or 9.28 (he was specific about the time).

Also, if she did indeed go out alone, commit the murder with her supplier and somehow prevail upon Raffaele to help with the clean up, why doesn't he just say so? He's done four years already. The sentence for cleaning up can't be so very great. Maybe time served would be acceptable, especially as part of a deal. And why did he put himself through all this anyway? I don't mean why did he help with the clean up because, obviously, he did that out of love or due to being her pawn or whatever, but why stick with his bull **** story after she dropped him in it at the questura, left his bloody foot print on the mat etc?

Personally, I find that hard to believe but, as an expert in all the discrepancies in their accounts, I assume you can construct something reasonable out of the pieces, including the new pieces sourced from twitter. A time of death would be handy if you could squeeze it in somewhere.

 

[Planigale]

Grinder is on the right track here and this should be considered by those championing Knox. One correction: they aren't each other's alibi. Sollecito offered an alibi for Knox, categorically withdrew it, and then refused to answer any further questions. Knox did not offer an alibi for Sollecito (or a confirmation of an alibi): his verification was always the heavily-disputed computer activity.

First the enigmatic CCTV video of an Amanda clone emerged on Italian television. Who did that?

Now, Sollecito's own cousin has emerged on Twitter to spar with Knoxophiles over Amanda's alibi.

Here's a screenshot of one of the essential arguments promoted by the Sollecitos:

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5313/14251794021_1d08c99894_z.jpg

[qimg]http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5313/14251794021_1d08c99894_z.jpg[/qimg]

Keep this in perspective.

Raffaele is going to prison for the rest of his life. Period. Knox has publicly denied she will ever accept a conviction and considers the US a safe haven against extradition.

Raffaele visited the US on three occasions and was even able to secure a promised interview with Microsoft as arranged by Amanda's stepfather. Yet everything (predictably) fell through.

In the meantime, Bongiorno applied vigorously to the Nencini court to allow her client to be judged separately. This was refused. Forlorn, Sollecito returned to his native soil only to attempt flight from his homeland right at the time Nencini was certain to apply the full penalty. An alert hotelier recognised the fugitive and he's not going to get away again.

The Sollecitos have vigorously deployed media resources to portray Knox as absent from his flat. They know the evidence phase is done and we're on to the penalty phase.

For those who want to discuss the emerging new evidence you may wish to follow Cristina Magnani (Sollecito's cousin) on Twitter: https://twitter.com/cri_magnani

There is a growing archive of Twitter screencaps recording the rift. I hope to have a good "one click" resource to help those who are interested.

You do your argument no favours by exaggerating. If you are unreliable in part of your thesis it raises doubts about your general ability to be accurate about the facts. Sollecito was sentenced to 25 years. Given time served and likely remission for good behaviour etc. it is unlikely he will be in prison for more than 12 years if conviction confirmed, and ignoring any appeal. Given his life expectancy is about 80 years and he is likely to be in his early 30s when (if) he is imprisoned there is no way he is going to prison for the rest of his life. Even if he served his full sentence (unlikely cf Guede), this would not be a whole life sentence.

Your claim that they do not provide mutual alibis is illogical. They are both accused of murder, they both claim to be elsewhere with each other - this would be the very definition of a mutual alibi.

It is worth remembering the only (dubious) physical evidence ties Sollecito to the crime - his DNA on the bra hook and his knife.

Without this the case against Knox collapses. Curatalo witness testimony collapses. Sollecito like Guede might refuse to testify against Knox. There is a good reason why the prosecution did not try them separately. Separately there is far less evidence against them as individuals, separately each can provide eye witness testimony (close up and with a definite knowledge as to identity), that the other was elsewhere.

 

[codyjuneau]

I'm really not sure that this argument can be made. While their phones were certainly tapped and many other interviews were recorded, the argument is that the recording equipment wasn't on in those rooms.

Certainly it is fishy that these recordings don't exist but there really is no way to prove that this was something nefarious.

.
I think it would be provable similar to the way Diocletus has shown that forensic data has been witheld. Initially, the police would definitely want to replay the recordings to search for more clues. They were probably not at all concerned that the recordings would one day have to be covered up, like Nixon and the Nixon tapes.

All recordings would be digital, and since they had a coordinated system, each recording was probably assigned the next computer generated sequential alpha-numeric value available, which was then associated with a separate description of the recording. Each recording would also have a date/time stamp. The recordings and the associated descriptions would be available at the police station, but they would also be backed up and archived off-site, probably many times.

If all the off-site records were made available to a public auditor or investigator it would be easy to use the date stamps, sequence numbers, and associated descriptions to determine if the interrogation recordings were deleted or not. It should also be possible to determine if archive files were tampered with after they were officially created because erasing selected data files would leave a trail which would be difficult to hide.

Cody
.

 

[JREF2010]

Being that Amanda seems to be a Hippie Girl™, she likely does not support Getmo. If you were going to target somebody to push the American noses in excrement, she seems like the worst choice.

I mis-posted. Nencini didnt state the Guatanamo comment, it was the other trial and testimony, Rita Ficarra and the interrogation. (although I swear I saw a tweet or something that Nencini mentioned it )
2009
But Inspector Rita Ficarra told the court in Perugia: “She was treated firmly and courteously.”
At that a lawyer cut in angrily, saying: “This is not Guantanamo.”

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/87051/We-didn-t-hit-Foxy-Knoxy-say-police

It does seem that there is a political element that is very large, even Hellman says it exists. Getmo would prove that the anti-US obsessed types is in this "mix".

I think the politics has made this case even more complex, and that Migninni isnt that important anymore, its now about protecting the system as a whole. I cant think of any other reason they would go to so much trouble to convict innocent college kids.

 

[NancyS]

They needed an alibi ranging from roughly 12:00 on 01-NOV until roughly 12:00 on 02-NOV. They don't. Their stories don't match and frequently contradict one another. Now Raffaele's cousin is telling the world that Amanda probably lied about not having left the flat.

Can you answer Cristina's question? Why has Amanda never (not even in court!!) talked about this Naruto cartoon that figures so largely in your scenario?

The only reason why 2 slightly stoned young people would have an exact memory of what happened a few nights previously, would be if they had deliberately ensured their stories exactly matched. I would expect most normal people who were having a relaxed evening to not have much of a clue about exactly what time they did anything or what exactly they watched that night as compared to the previous similar nights. Perhaps Amanda went to the loo whilst Raffaele opens a file on his computer, perhaps it just wasn't an important feature of the evening

I'm always amazed that there are Internet people that comb everything that Amanda or Raffaele have eve said or written - and try to find little discrepancies in their memories and then try to use this as proof of guilt. It shows such lack of insight into both human nature and the inaccuracy of human memory - everytime anyone tries to remember something it will be slightly different. The same people can then completely accept the massive memory lapses of the prosecution witnesses without question - and even more unbelievable, they can accept the extraordinarily detailed memory of a heroin addict who had never previously met Amanda or Raffaele, but was able recognise them from a distance at night and was them able to hold their faces in his memory for up to a year and then remembers that he saw them on an exact date

It's horrific that this kind of evidence is being used to justify sending young people to prison for almost 30 years.

 

[anglolawyer]

I mis-posted. Nencini didnt state the Guatanamo comment, it was the other trial and testimony, Rita Ficarra and the interrogation. (although I swear I saw a tweet or something that Nencini mentioned it )
2009
But Inspector Rita Ficarra told the court in Perugia: “She was treated firmly and courteously.”
At that a lawyer cut in angrily, saying: “This is not Guantanamo.”

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/87051/We-didn-t-hit-Foxy-Knoxy-say-police

It does seem that there is a political element that is very large, even Hellman says it exists. Getmo would prove that the anti-US obsessed types is in this "mix".

I think the politics has made this case even more complex, and that Migninni isnt that important anymore, its now about protecting the system as a whole. I cant think of any other reason they would go to so much trouble to convict innocent college kids.

If she were treated firmly but courteously why would she flip on being shown her message to Lumumba (or hers to him)? I expect Stilicho has a theory. Donnino described the moment - 'it's him'! How did that get her out of the jam that Raffaele put her in? That only placed herself at the scene and told an easily falsifiable lie as well. Oh yeah, protecting Guede and then when he didn't play ball and said they were involved she kept right on protecting him (despite having faked his MO and selectively left behind all but his traces ... riiiiiight).

Moving on, did nobody else find it interesting that Ghirga (I think it was him) implied to Nencini in his closing that there was something fishy about Guede's very light sentence? I quoted it upthread but attracted no comment.

 

[Desert Fox]

I mis-posted. Nencini didnt state the Guatanamo comment, it was the other trial and testimony, Rita Ficarra and the interrogation. (although I swear I saw a tweet or something that Nencini mentioned it )
2009
But Inspector Rita Ficarra told the court in Perugia: “She was treated firmly and courteously.”
At that a lawyer cut in angrily, saying: “This is not Guantanamo.”

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/87051/We-didn-t-hit-Foxy-Knoxy-say-police

It does seem that there is a political element that is very large, even Hellman says it exists. Getmo would prove that the anti-US obsessed types is in this "mix".

I think the politics has made this case even more complex, and that Migninni isnt that important anymore, its now about protecting the system as a whole. I cant think of any other reason they would go to so much trouble to convict innocent college kids.

I was actually not so much arguing the judges and court system here but why so many people have hitched themselves to the pro-guilt side that are not directly tied to the Italian Judiciary.

Seen several people here at the JREF Forums who have been around for years yet seem to abandon all skepticism with regards to Amanda Knox.

 

[NancyS]

If she were treated firmly but courteously why would she flip on being shown her message to Lumumba (or hers to him)? I expect Stilicho has a theory. Donnino described the moment - 'it's him'! How did that get her out of the jam that Raffaele put her in? That only placed herself at the scene and told an easily falsifiable lie as well. Oh yeah, protecting Guede and then when he didn't play ball and said they were involved she kept right on protecting him (despite having faked his MO and selectively left behind all but his traces ... riiiiiight).

More bizarrely Guede is protecting Amanda/Raffaele by only making very vague statements, initially claiming Amanda wasn't involved and blaming Meredith for letting him in. I can't begin to fathom what his motivation for this could be if the prosecution's scenario is even remotely accurate?

 

[Matthew Best]

You do your argument no favours by exaggerating. If you are unreliable in part of your thesis it raises doubts about your general ability to be accurate about the facts. Sollecito was sentenced to 25 years. Given time served and likely remission for good behaviour etc. it is unlikely he will be in prison for more than 12 years if conviction confirmed, and ignoring any appeal. Given his life expectancy is about 80 years and he is likely to be in his early 30s when (if) he is imprisoned there is no way he is going to prison for the rest of his life. Even if he served his full sentence (unlikely cf Guede), this would not be a whole life sentence.

This all sounds very convincing, but you forget Stilicho is an expert!!!

 

[LondonJohn]

This all sounds very convincing, but you forget Stilicho is an expert!!!

Hehe. The level of hyperbole (e.g. "his abundant DNA on Meredith's underwear"), misdirection (e.g. "their stories don't match and frequently contradict each other", "Raffaele is going to prison for the rest of his life"), willful misinterpretation and incorrect inference-drawing from Sollecito's cousin's tweets, and pejorative ascription of terms to pro-acquittal/pro-innocence commentators (e.g. "those championing Knox", "Knoxophiles") lead me to the supposition that this particular "argument" is either a) the product of emotional over-investment in a pro-guilt position, b) the result of an inability to analyse the evidence objectively and with sufficient intellectual weight, or c) both the above.

It bears repeating once again: neither Sollecito nor anyone in his family is attempting to suggest that Knox was involved in the murder while Sollecito was not involved. To an objective mind, what's actually happening is very clear. What's actually happening is that Sollecito and his family are (rightly and correctly) saying that it's judicially improper for the courts to reason that if Knox is guilty Sollecito must also be guilty (and, for that matter, vice versa). And at the end of the day, Sollecito is a) only responsible for his own actions and b) only factually certain of his own position and actions (for example, it's theoretically possible that Knox might have snuck out while Sollecito was sleeping - he cannot say with categorical certainty that this didn't happen, but that's absolutely not the same as him suggesting that it did happen).

And the overarching position of Sollecito (and his family) is the same as it ever was - save for that fateful night of 5th/6th November 2007 when (in my opinion) improper police coercion was applied. The position is that neither Sollecito nor Knox had anything to do with the murder or its aftermath. Period (to borrow a turn of phrase ).

 

[Samson]

Frankly Samson, I think you are misreading Hillary. There really was little that Clinton could do for Amanda while she was Secretary of State. I also don't think she will become President.

I also think you are getting way ahead of yourself. Italy's judicial system is all screwed up, nothing they do surprises me. My gut tells me that they will confirm the guilty verdict, but my gut told me that they would confirm the innocent verdict. There is another part of me that says they will order another review based on how illogical Nencini's decision is.

You are right in one respect, Amanda placed herself present, so she could never be represented as framed in a pure sense.

Election 2016, decimal odds for Ladbrokes who put their money where their mouth is. Barak Obama never rose above 1.70 for reelection, though the American press needed a close race for the Chattering press.

Hillary Clinton
2.50
Marco Rubio
13.00
Chris Christie
13.00
Jeb Bush
15.00
Paul Ryan
17.00
Rand Paul
21.00

 

[anglolawyer]

Why is Rand Paul's name the wrong way round? Whatever.

I am still chewing over the new theory. In this theory Amanda went out and Raffaele stayed in. This is exactly what was put to Raffaele the night of the 5th-6th Nov. The cops told him she went out and suggested he was covering for her and eventually he cracked and admitted he could not vouch for her the whole night. It follows (Stilicho correct me if I'm wrong here please) the cops already suspected they had both been lying up to that point. Why else did they call Raffaele in and start in on that tack? So it further follows their fundamental rights both under Italian law and the human rights treaty were infringed. Can we all agree on that? If so, we are finally on the same side. They didn't get a fair trial and very probably never can get one. Great! Close down the forums. Discussion over.

 

[Samson]

Why is Rand Paul's name the wrong way round? Whatever.

I am still chewing over the new theory. In this theory Amanda went out and Raffaele stayed in. This is exactly what was put to Raffaele the night of the 5th-6th Nov. The cops told him she went out and suggested he was covering for her and eventually he cracked and admitted he could not vouch for her the whole night. It follows (Stilicho correct me if I'm wrong here please) the cops already suspected they had both been lying up to that point. Why else did they call Raffaele in and start in on that tack? So it further follows their fundamental rights both under Italian law and the human rights treaty were infringed. Can we all agree on that? If so, we are finally on the same side. They didn't get a fair trial and very probably never can get one. Great! Close down the forums. Discussion over.

It's not the wrong way round, I think I get you though Anglo, why not Elizabeth Queen? , but one cautionary note, keep your name short to win the race. Now Jeb Bush for brevity, how does that sound?
Has it ever been contested that Raffaele asked for a calendar?
I would like someone to contest this claim, because if it remains uncontested, the pagoda collapses as we build the 13th floor.

ETA that smilie thing was unintended at the top.

http://www.cardgamesplanet.com/card-pagoda.html

I understand 13 stories is a world record

clue plus independent clue plus....13th independent clue

 

[Samson]

Form should always trump function Jackie. (from pmf dot org )In Italy it does superbly.

1) the police did not summon her to the station;

2) the purpose of the interview was to obtain information that could lead to Meredith's killer (Can you write up a list of names for us? Do you have contact info in your phone? What do you know about the short basketball player?);

3) Konx was not confronted with any inculpatory evidence of her guilt (they had none), the focus was on finding the (presumably male) killer;

4) Konx was "freely and voluntarily" giving police information (and, in each of the 3 preceding days, was free to leave the station - why would she see the Monday evening interview as being any different?).

By the way you are misspelling her name.

ETA function should always trump form, I add this because there is no good reason to make critical thinkers think in their spare time reading this forum.