pmop57 is doing on IIP with "The Anatomy of the Case", what Numbers is doing here with the CHR. Going through in detail relevancy of various issues; one of which is the issue of the "simultneous turning off of the cellphones at Raffaele's."
Originally Posted by pmop57
The cell-phones switched OFF - Evidence of Guilt?
The evening of the the 1th of Nov. 2007 AK and RS simultanousy switched OFF their cell-phones.
For the Prosecution this was major probative evidence of guilt because it was clearly showing that both intended to avoid their whereabouts to be later traced by the Police, that it was proof that both had planned to commit a crime, that both had planned to murder MK, that the crime was premeditated.
The Prosecution never could present any evidence to support their allegations, no Judge ever ruled that the murder was premeditated. Nevertheless the Posecution continued to proclame that switching OFF the cell-phones was evidence of guilt.
Prosecutor Crini and Judge Nencini definitely ruled out premeditation.
The stating and ruling of the Judges that the murder had not been premeditated, the alleged evidence of guilt became evidence in favour of the defendants because it proved them right and confirmed their version of the why they had switched OFF the cell-phones. This aspect was completely ignored!
The profile of the phoning habits of AK and RS as established by the investigators has clearly shown that both never went offline the months prior to the occurrence of the crime except the evening of the 1t of Nov. 2007.
After it had been established through the facts that the crime was not premeditated why else should they have gone offline but to spent a quite and calm evening without being disturbed by anybody:
- not to be called by PL to nevertheless come to work,
- not be called back another time by RS's father, very much caring and apparently very dominating his
In short, the only possible relevance of the switching off of the phones to this case
is if one presumes premeditation.
No premeditation, no relevance to the action surrounding the phones.
Which is, of course, the implications of all the courts - none of which found premeditation. Massei found it as a last second, "choice for evil" where AK and RS inexplicably sided with Guede over Kercher, and Nencini had an escalating dispute over the rent money.
It's the same as with the phantom-transport of Raffaele's kitchen knife; except that in this case that transport from the apartment to the cottage never happened. But both Massei and Nencini had to address some phantom reason for that knife to be transported, given that neither could see premeditation, even in their fantasy recreation of the crime.
Fortunately, neither does Machiavelli see the phones-switching as relevant to the crime, either, except for his lame point that, "Raffaele lied".
It's worth the read for folks here to go through all of pmop57's points on IIP. If this was a just evaluation of the case, Cassazione itself would go through the issues one by one like pmop57 is doing (or Numbers) and decide accordingly.
However, no one believes Mignini on this point any more - not even Machiavelli. It's good to know that Machiavelli will throw the towel in on something, and not mindlessly defend Mignini on everything.
. Typically knives over a certain length, or concealed etc. are crimes, but I am no expert.
