Continuation Part 11: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Desert Fox]

Machiavelli and Vibio insistence that Lumumba wasn't bugged reminds me of this exchange from one of my favorite movies.

[Vizzini has just cut the rope The Dread Pirate Roberts is climbing up]
Vizzini: HE DIDN'T FALL? INCONCEIVABLE.
Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

I get that feeling a lot when reading Machiavelli

 

[Vibio]

Machiavelli and Vibio insistence that Lumumba wasn't bugged

Will you please show me where I ever said that Lumumba wasn't bugged.

Thanks in advance.

 

[acbytesla]

Will you please show me where I ever said that Lumumba wasn't bugged.

Thanks in advance.

My apologies, I thought you were part of Machiavelli's rooting section.

 

[Desert Fox]

My apologies, I thought you were part of Machiavelli's rooting section.

Vibio posting is sometimes confusing. . . . Seems to state that Amanda was not in the bedroom for the murder yet later seems to agree with Machiavelli that she was in the room.

 

[Vibio]

The problem is that your reading skills are lacking.

 

[acbytesla]

Vibio posting is sometimes confusing. . . . Seems to state that Amanda was not in the bedroom for the murder yet later seems to agree with Machiavelli that she was in the room.

Well he doesn't really discuss the points but tries to deliver what he thinks are clever remarks.

 

[Vibio]

And all you do is lie. I never said that Lumumba's line was not bugged. And neither did Mach.

But that's what the Knoxians do.

 

[Desert Fox]

Vibio posting is sometimes confusing. . . . Seems to state that Amanda was not in the bedroom for the murder yet later seems to agree with Machiavelli that she was in the room.

Well he doesn't really discuss the points but tries to deliver what he thinks are clever remarks.

Always infuriating when you are told you are 'Wrong, Wrong, Wrong" and they don't want to explain why.

 

[Kauffer]

And all you do is lie. I never said that Lumumba's line was not bugged. And neither did Mach.

But that's what the Knoxians do.

So when was it bugged? When would there have been any reason to bug it?

 

[carbonjam72]

Do you think the failure of Lumumba's business had anything to do with the fact that it couldn't trade because the police shut it down? A friend of mine in Italy had her coffee shop closed down a few years ago. She refused to give the local Carabinieri free food and drink so they called the health inspectors who showed up with their own rats, let them go in the kitchens and photographed them for evidence. I kid you not!

I wonder if making a complaint about those health inspectors would be considered calumnia?

 

[Numbers]

Do you think the failure of Lumumba's business had anything to do with the fact that it couldn't trade because the police shut it down? A friend of mine in Italy had her coffee shop closed down a few years ago. She refused to give the local Carabinieri free food and drink so they called the health inspectors who showed up with their own rats, let them go in the kitchens and photographed them for evidence. I kid you not!

I'm truly intrigued by the idea of health inspectors with their own pet rats. Perhaps in some ways that's what we are experiencing here.

 

[LondonJohn]

Vibio posting is sometimes confusing. . . . Seems to state that Amanda was not in the bedroom for the murder yet later seems to agree with Machiavelli that she was in the room.

I would observe that some are posting in this thread merely to agitate and take pot-shots - their object of amusement/vitriol/anger is not the case itself, but rather the commentators and the meta-subject of this thread. I would suggest that such behaviour is rather sad and pointless, as well as being a strong indicator of mental deficiency and anger management issues. But that's just me.......

But back to the discussion of the case itself: the posted testimony certainly strongly suggests that Lumumba's phone was indeed tapped well in advance of 5th November 2007. I would also observe that if we are still wondering whether these references were to Lumumba's phone being bugged or whether they refer to Lumumba's bar being bugged, it's almost certainly his phone that's being talked about. That's because it's a whole few orders of magnitude more difficult for the police to place a listening device in a premises such as Lumumba's bar than it is to tap his phone. To bug the bar itself, the police would have had to gain entry to the premises under some pretence, and place a listening device somewhere in a very crowded space, and all of this without Lumumba's knowledge. By contrast, tapping his phone is as simple as flicking a switch at the mobile network centre.

I am now in little doubt that Lumumba's mobile phone was tapped before 5th November 2007. And the ONLY reason for police to have done so was if they suspected Lumumba of some level of personal involvement. And of course, this all chimes perfectly with Knox "buckling" and telling the police "what (they) already knew to be correct".

 

[carbonjam72]

Vibio posting is sometimes confusing. . . . Seems to state that Amanda was not in the bedroom for the murder yet later seems to agree with Machiavelli that she was in the room.

Well Vibio, care to state your position for yourself?

Do you disagree with Mach that Amanada was in fact in the murder room when Meredith was killed?

Or, as I believe you posted previously, it was your feeling she was in the kitchen while Meredith was attacked?

If the latter, then do you agree Nencini got it wrong by claiming Amanda struck the fatal blow?

It would be great to hear what you think and why, since not many here believe Amanda an Raf are guilty, and those that do can be sometimes, um volatile.

 

[carbonjam72]

I'm truly intrigued by the idea of health inspectors with their own pet rats. Perhaps in some ways that's what we are experiencing here.

Curatolo was in a sense, wasn't he?

 

[Numbers]

And all you do is lie. I never said that Lumumba's line was not bugged. And neither did Mach.

But that's what the Knoxians do.

Mach did say that it was Lumumba's bar that was bugged, and not his phone. And he said it was bugged to catch conversations that Amanda Knox was having there.

Although from Nov. 2, 2007 (when she and Raffaele were to go on a trip, which was cancelled because of the discovery of Meredith's body) to Nov. 5, 2007 (when she went to the police station with Raffaele and was later arrested) she spent about 40 hours at the police station and probably none inside Lumumba's bar.

But for the Migninians, reality is a fabric to be draped to suit their fantasies.

 

[Numbers]

Curatolo was in a sense, wasn't he?

Having read Kauffer's post about the health inspectors with their own rats, I do see a pattern. Mignini and his pet witnesses certainly fit that pattern. I bet this is a common Italian police and prosecution technique. It's done here in the US, too. I've read that there was one crooked cop in Brooklyn with a pet witness, a prostitute-heroin addict, who he repeatedly used to frame people.

 

[LondonJohn]

Mach did say that it was Lumumba's bar that was bugged, and not his phone. And he said it was bugged to catch conversations that Amanda Knox was having there.

Although from Nov. 2, 2007 (when she and Raffaele were to go on a trip, which was cancelled because of the discovery of Meredith's body) to Nov. 5, 2007 (when she went to the police station with Raffaele and was later arrested) she spent about 40 hours at the police station and probably none inside Lumumba's bar.

But for the Migninians, reality is a fabric to be draped to suit their fantasies.

As I said, it would have been incredibly difficult for the police to have placed a bug inside Lumumba's bar without their presence/activity or the bug itself being detected. It's far, far more likely in my opinion that the police bugged Lumumba's mobile phone - an astonishingly easy and undetectable endeavour for the police via the mobile network centre.

Furthermore, what would the police have been reasonably hoping to achieve by placing a bug within the bar? As others have pointed out, the noise within the bar would make it nigh-on impossible to understand any specific conversation. What's more, the quoted testimony strongly implies that it was Lumumba himself - via his mobile - that was the object of the bugging/tapping. Lastly, I would imagine that Bugatti only dealt with telephone intercepts - I suspect it would be a whole different arm of the police that specialised in placing listening devices within a premises (in the UK, for example, it's only Special Branch or the security service (MI5) that do this sort of work).

All the evidence points to it having been Lumumba's mobile phone that was tapped, and that the tap was placed one or more days before Knox's infamous "confession/accusation" on 5/6 November.

 

[carbonjam72]

Having read Kauffer's post about the health inspectors with their own rats, I do see a pattern. Mignini and his pet witnesses certainly fit that pattern. I bet this is a common Italian police and prosecution technique. It's done here in the US, too. I've read that there was one crooked cop in Brooklyn with a pet witness, a prostitute-heroin addict, who he repeatedly used to frame people.

Yes, I think about 50 of his cases are under review, as well as those of his partner. They were referred to as "Batman and Robin", and supposedly had a phenomenal track record in obtaining confessions.

Don't have the link in front of me, but I've posted it before, great series of articles in the NY Times about these two. And it looks like the cases that are being re-examined, even that's just the tip of the ice-berg.

The homeless prostitute was known as "Louie's goto witness" and had testified in four trials.

Curatolo could have been a contender, if he hadn't screwed up at the Hellman appeal trial. Very interesting by the way, that Curatolo was jailed in the middle of the case. Shows that not everyone in law enforcement was on Mignini's side.

The Florence prosecutor, Paolo Canessa, both tried Mignini's 'Narducci trail' cases in Florence, and was subject to Mignini's illegal investigations himself as a target of Mignini, and tried the case against Mignini on his charges for abuse of office! (saying, "Mignini had fallen prey to a delirium").

 

[acbytesla]

And all you do is lie. I never said that Lumumba's line was not bugged. And neither did Mach.

But that's what the Knoxians do.

I acknowledged that you didn't say that. I just noticed that you were following Machiavelli around on this forum like a puppy dog so I assumed you agreed with him.

Am I mistaken? Do you have something pithy to say?

 

[Kauffer]

As I said, it would have been incredibly difficult for the police to have placed a bug inside Lumumba's bar without their presence/activity or the bug itself being detected. It's far, far more likely in my opinion that the police bugged Lumumba's mobile phone - an astonishingly easy and undetectable endeavour for the police via the mobile network centre.

Furthermore, what would the police have been reasonably hoping to achieve by placing a bug within the bar? As others have pointed out, the noise within the bar would make it nigh-on impossible to understand any specific conversation. What's more, the quoted testimony strongly implies that it was Lumumba himself - via his mobile - that was the object of the bugging/tapping. Lastly, I would imagine that Bugatti only dealt with telephone intercepts - I suspect it would be a whole different arm of the police that specialised in placing listening devices within a premises (in the UK, for example, it's only Special Branch or the security service (MI5) that do this sort of work).

All the evidence points to it having been Lumumba's mobile phone that was tapped, and that the tap was placed one or more days before Knox's infamous "confession/accusation" on 5/6 November.

As usual, LJ is sharp and smart. Why bug the bar or the bar phone and not his mobile phone?