Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[NancyS]

There was also that day's cutlery transfer to attend to.

I don't know why they didn't make more of the fact she did not check her money was not missing. I mean, once they realised there had been a burglary, she didn't check to see her $300 was still in the desk drawer. That cuts both ways because if she were faking a burglary you would think she would have a better story about the money.

And as one of the many motives is stealing Meredith Kercher's rent money, you think she would have been slightly more concerned about the $300 in her drawer

 

[Desert Fox]

In the PMF.org translation of the Nencini report (p.166), the judge writes:

In the first place Amanda Marie Knox has never clarified why, on the morning of 2 November 2007, she would have had to return home to Via della Pergola to have a shower and change her clothes.​

According to the transcript of the interview between Mignini and Knox on 17th December, 2007 as found on the True Justice for Meredith Kercher website the following exchange occurs, regarding the 1st of November:

PM Mignini: Now then at this point the recording resumes at 11:50 am and I repeat the question, what did you do on the afternoon of the 1st of November and during that night between the 1st and the 2nd? Oh and the morning of the 2nd obviously.
Knox: When I had woken up in the morning I was at Raffaele’s house, the 1st of November, and I went to my house to have a shower to change myself, I had already spoken to Raffaele and he had said to me that he would have come over to my place, when he would have woken and everything… So what I did was that I studied and then I put away my linens [whites]…
Then referring to the following day (Nov 2nd) the following exchange takes place
PM Mignini: Why did you go back home?
Interpreter: To take a shower and change her clothes
PM Mignini: Why didn’t you take a shower at Sollecito’s?
Knox: Did you see his shower? … It leaks [drops?] everywhere… It’s a dreadful shower… I hate to use it… and moreover all what I need to have a shower like shampoo is at my home…
Interpreter: Because it’s an ugly place, small, there is little space
PM Mignini: But you took the shower other times, but also during the afternoon you had one…
Knox: I prefer to take a shower at my home
Interpreter: She prefers to take a shower at her home, she also has clothes at home…
Knox: And also all my clothes are at my home…
PM Mignini: So she needed to go home, to take a shower and, let me understand, take a shower and to what?
Interpreter: To change her clothes.​

It seems to me that Amanda has clarified the reasons why she went back to her house on the morning of Nov 2nd.
1) She was accustomed to living in both places and going back to her house to have a
shower was not a one-off (she did it the day before).
2) Raffaele’s shower was dreadful
3) Her shampoo was at home
4) She wanted to change her clothes (this explanation is embedded in the very
accusation Nencini makes!)
5) She prefers to take a shower at home

I am not impressed with Nencini here.

I have to ask if he can really be that dimwitted?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

logical inconsistency about the shower

What I really don't understand, is that people claim she was involved in a bloody murder and didn't shower

Good point. tsig, care to comment?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

not seeing the connection between the two

CoulsonUK seemed to be trying to argue, using his examples, that blacks are being targeted for wrongful convictions. I wanted to show two concrete examples and I can argue several more.

DF,

I agree, but even if one were to grant CoulsdonUK's premise (that blacks are targeted and/or that the United States has an imperfect system), so what? Does that mean that individual US citizens somehow lose the right to comment on injustices in other countries? I don't see why it should.

 

[acbytesla]

Good point. tsig, care to comment?

I swear the guilters want it both ways at every juncture. They say that Amanda and Raffaele did a thorough cleaning of the cottage and yet left all those shoe prints of Rudy's (as if they could easily tell the difference between Raff's shoes and Rudy's shoes that night). They cleaned everything they touched even though it really wasn't needed because it's not a secret that both spent time at the cottage and yet they left the bloody bathmat print and Amanda didn't take a shower??

Really Chris, why does logic go out the window with them?

 

[Desert Fox]

DF,

I agree, but even if one were to grant CoulsdonUK's premise (that blacks are targeted and/or that the United States has an imperfect system), so what? Does that mean that individual US citizens somehow lose the right to comment on injustices in other countries? I don't see why it should.

I want people to criticize the US system. We have problems but one should also be allowed to criticize other nations as well.

One issue though is that the Italian corruption is almost a different style than one sees with wrongful convictions. Like these motivational documents. They are theoretically suppose to be documents explaining the reasoning behind getting a guilty verdict. Instead, they seem to be the practice of obscuration and twisted logic.

 

[Numbers]

I have to ask if he can really be that dimwitted?

Nencini is either:
1) dimwitted,
2) willfully ignorant,
3) misrepresenting, or
4) all of the above.

Take your pick.
In this multiple choice exam, only Nencini knows the answer. And I not sure about that.

 

[lonepinealex]

I've been wondering lately whether all this international attention and condemnation somewhat blindsided the ISC / Perugian police et al.

A system doesn't get this messed up, byzantine and corrupt overnight - they've been getting away with this combination of shoddy police work, egotistical prosecutors and indulgent, self-serving circular reasoning for so long that they probably thought they were doing a good job, and likely most of them still do. The number of Italian cases before the ECHR would be indicative of this.

I wouldn't be surprised if most of them find the international condemnation totally bizarre and uncalled-for. There's that much confirmation bias insulating them from reality.

 

[Numbers]

I want people to criticize the US system. We have problems but one should also be allowed to criticize other nations as well.

One issue though is that the Italian corruption is almost a different style than one sees with wrongful convictions. Like these motivational documents. They are theoretically suppose to be documents explaining the reasoning behind getting a guilty verdict. Instead, they seem to be the practice of obscuration and twisted logic.

There are certainly cases of misconduct by the police and prosecutors in the US. However, in Italy, the misconduct also frequently includes the judges (who act as the jury as well as, by Italian law and the ECHR, the [supposedly] neutral referees of the case).

 

[Desert Fox]

I swear the guilters want it both ways at every juncture. They say that Amanda and Raffaele did a thorough cleaning of the cottage and yet left all those shoe prints of Rudy's (as if they could easily tell the difference between Raff's shoes and Rudy's shoes that night). They cleaned everything they touched even though it really wasn't needed because it's not a secret that both spent time at the cottage and yet they left the bloody bathmat print and Amanda didn't take a shower??

Really Chris, why does logic go out the window with them?

Sometimes I wonder if there is something wrong with my logic, something I don't get.
The problem is that nobody on the pro guilt side wants to discuss it like real people but instead just condescend to me.

 

[Numbers]

I've been wondering lately whether all this international attention and condemnation somewhat blindsided the ISC / Perugian police et al.

A system doesn't get this messed up, byzantine and corrupt overnight - they've been getting away with this combination of shoddy police work, egotistical prosecutors and indulgent, self-serving circular reasoning for so long that they probably thought they were doing a good job, and likely most of them still do. The number of Italian cases before the ECHR would be indicative of this.

I wouldn't be surprised if most of them find the international condemnation totally bizarre and uncalled-for. There's that much confirmation bias insulating them from reality.

I think the Italian police, prosecutors, and judges who are engaged in official misconduct know that they are cheating. They also know that they are very unlikely to be held accountable, because they control the system, and twist the laws and the highly bureaucratic Italian justice system to protect themselves. There is also, I've come to feel, a cultural tendency for Italian officials who are cheating to act clownishly, so that cheating may be seen as "harmless" incompetence.

 

[lonepinealex]

I think the Italian police, prosecutors, and judges who are engaged in official misconduct know that they are cheating. They also know that they are very unlikely to be held accountable, because they control the system, and twist the laws and the highly bureaucratic Italian justice system to protect themselves. There is also, I've come to feel, a cultural tendency for Italian officials who are cheating to act clownishly, so that cheating may be seen as "harmless" incompetence.

Yes, but do they genuinely think it's for the best in their best of all possible worlds? They could be so far removed from reality that they think their cheating is justified. I would expect more whistleblowers and reformers otherwise.

 

[carbonjam72]

Nencini is either:
1) dimwitted,
2) willfully ignorant,
3) misrepresenting, or
4) all of the above.

Take your pick.
In this multiple choice exam, only Nencini knows the answer. And I not sure about that.

or

5) Brutally shrewd - Intentionally planting logical stink bombs throughout his motivation, so that cassione can confirm if they want, or have plenty of grounds for over-turning if they want. In other words, he left them a fixer-upper, that they can remake into any outcome they like. That would leave Nencini in the amoral twilight zone where so many of his colleagues seem to reside.

I do wish people would stop looking for logic in the charges, convictions and judicial motivation reports. Finding them guilty is a desire, not a consequence of logic, reason, evidence, reality, or truth. They find them guilty, because they want to, and because they can.

Italy will need a revolution to rid themselves of these fascist monsters.

 

[Desert Fox]

There are certainly cases of misconduct by the police and prosecutors in the US. However, in Italy, the misconduct also frequently includes the judges (who act as the jury as well as, by Italian law and the ECHR, the [supposedly] neutral referees of the case).

You have Judge David Burnett that pretty much was not neutral and worked to undermine the defense. Still, even many other judges in Arkansas appear to have criticized him so not the whole system.

 

[Desert Fox]

or

5) Brutally shrewd - Intentionally planting logical stink bombs throughout his motivation, so that cassione can confirm if they want, or have plenty of grounds for over-turning if they want. In other words, he left them a fixer-upper, that they can remake into any outcome they like. That would leave Nencini in the amoral twilight zone where so many of his colleagues seem to reside.

I do wish people would stop looking for logic in the charges, convictions and judicial motivation reports. Finding them guilty is a desire, not a consequence of logic, reason, evidence, reality, or truth. They find them guilty, because they want to, and because they can.
Italy will need a revolution to rid themselves of these fascist monsters.

You are probably right. . . .In fact, I am pretty certain you are right. The problem is that I really want some sort of logic to this madness, something which allows me to put reason into the whole farce.

 

[Samson]

You are probably right. . . .In fact, I am pretty certain you are right. The problem is that I really want some sort of logic to this madness, something which allows me to put reason into the whole farce.

That is not possible, but I have come to the conclusion that people do believe this is not a hoax, but a true narrative.
I would like to know if the Kercher family can be counted amongst these people, or are terrified to find they are financially exposed to ruin by Maresca.

 

[Desert Fox]

That is not possible, but I have come to the conclusion that people do believe this is not a hoax, but a true narrative.
I would like to know if the Kercher family can be counted amongst these people, or are terrified to find they are financially exposed to ruin by Maresca.

I am sorry, I don't under that. . . . Let us assume that the Kerchers do not really believe in Amanda and Raff's guilt. . . .Why not just fade away?

 

[moije2]

Yikes. This is how it reads without the fluff:

Let's go into detail about this crime-scene inspection. I am referring to the first crime-scene inspection, because it is the most complex one. The criteria adopted were that the technical procedures that were carried out in the house on via Della Pergola went from the inside of the house towards the outside. This was for two reasons: one was that the body was in the furthest room along the corridor that leads towards the outside - since the victim's room had priority because it was necessary to remove the body, it was necessary to preserve as much as possible everything from degradation, contamination - it was decided to do the crime-scene inspection of the victim's room as a priority and then we would not go back again [to that room], carrying out the procedures towards the outside/exterior.

(Can't abide wriggly writing.)

The problem I see, beyond that she can't utter a straightforward sentence to save her life, is that this is not what happened. They did repeatedly go back into Meredith's bedroom. They tracked blood from the bedroom out into the rest of the flat. They also left behind the bloody jacket that Rudy tore off Meredith, just to name one example of their failure to do what she's describing above.

That was great Kwill. This goes to reinforce a recent point I was pounding on with Machiavelli. Stefanoni shouts incompetence and unprofessional at all turns. This passage you quote from her is a perfect example. What scientist, a supposed professional, speaks in such a way? Peppered with so many unnecessary and judgmental words to convey simple thoughts? She just reeks of bias and unprofessionalism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stefanoni testimony
Now, let's go into a bit more detail about this crime-scene inspection. I am referring above all to the first crime-scene inspection, the initial one, because it is the most complex one in reality. The general criteria adopted were first and foremost that the technical procedures that were carried out in the house on via Della Pergola went from the inside of the house towards the outside. This was for two reasons: one main [reason] was that the body was in the furthest room along the corridor that leads towards the outside, for which reason - since the victim's room had priority because it was necessary to remove the body, it was necessary to preserve as much as possible, obviously, everything from degradation, contamination and what have you - it was [46] decided to do the crime-scene inspection of the victim's room as a priority and then in that way we would not, in effect, go back again [to that room], then carrying out the procedures towards the outside/exterior, at the same point, so that we were in fact going towards the exterior.​

 

[Samson]

I am sorry, I don't under that. . . . Let us assume that the Kerchers do not really believe in Amanda and Raff's guilt. . . .Why not just fade away?

They have the influence, and have exercised it, to steer the case.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

CoulsonUK seemed to be trying to argue, using his examples, that blacks are being targeted for wrongful convictions. I wanted to show two concrete examples and I can argue several more.

I see a lot of parallels between the cases against AK/RS and both the Norfolk Four and West Memphis Three. If you look at the Norfolk Four case, it was an ever changing story from the prosecution. Against AK/RS, it is an ever changing story against them.

Not even sure any more what the official reasoning for them suppose to have done it is. . . .

My main observation would be there is an enormous difference between those who have been proven in court of law as wrongly convicted with the yet uncompleted judicial process in Italy.

Secondary observation would be that those from low economic, low educational background who also happen to be from an ethnic minority are far more likely to experience police brutality and wrongful conviction, than those from a middle class background. Athough not exclusive the former appears to be the norm with the latter the exception.

My post #3932 above refers.

Please point out where I state “blacks” are more likely to be wrongfully convicted? Your post inserts words I did not use.