Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[acbytesla]

There is a part of me that believes that some or one of the authorities in Italy actually planted or destroyed evidence. I'm sure that they did this because they genuinely thought that Knox was guilty.

But I really want to put aside that thought and review this farce as if the actions of the authorities were done in good faith. Because I can't or don't want to think that someone would actually seek to put people in prison that they know to be innocent and who had no hint of criminal activity in their past.

I can truthfully understand why the authorities suspected Amanda and Raffaele's involvement at the beginning and why the became convinced of their guilt. I can also see why they continued to be convinced of their guilt.

It's clear that they made mistakes. It's also fair to expect people to make honest mistakes. I can't help but wonder if it was the honest mistakes that caused the authorities to get locked in on the two innocents. That said, I think human failings, not honest mistakes was the biggest problem with this legal disaster.

For example, I think the biggest mistake the authorities made was the result of one of the most positive a destructive trait, pride. It was pride that made them take a bow and declare the "case closed" and it was pride that kept them from admitting they made a mistake.

They made many other mistakes as well, but I think that was the worst. If they had just arrested them they would have been able to release the kids after it was clear that the shoe prints did not match. That I think was their 2nd biggest mistake. That confirmed their belief that Amanda and Raffaele were guilty. Otherwise, I think they would have released A&R when they let Patrick go. Their third biggest mistake was not to own up to their mistakeep after they found out that the shoe prints belonged to Rudy and not Raffaele. This led to the bra clasp DNA which they refused to believe was possibly caused by contamination.

I wonder if they would have released Amanda and Raffaele if they hadn't discovered the DNA on the bra clasp? Or would they have continued the case with the knife and the weak statements? I actually think they still would have. That they were so afraid of looking like fools that they would stubbornly have gone forward.

 

[Grinder]

This raises an interesting question - before the 27 March exoneration, there was a determined effort to smear Knox and Raffaele with CCTV garage videos of a random woman, claimed to be Knox, a (court?) report printed in sans-serif font with the first names of people claimed to have been drug dealers - one of whom shares the same first name with someone Amanda met on a train..... what was the other one? Oh yes, Raffaele throwing Amanda under a bus, but it turns out the transit schedule was changed at the last minute......

Now? Post facto 27 March 2015? Crickets. Could this be the collapse of the vaunted PR-guilt lobby? Are they busy lawyering up, as would be wise?

You're right - Maresca must have had access to stuff Mignini/Crini was pushing. Why isn't he doing a data dump to demonstrate obvious guilt? It may just be that Section 5 of ISC finally got it right.

Who'd have thunk?

Well as usual we are on the same page. I would hope that insiders at the defense table would let it be known if actions had been taken against .org and/or .net. Hard to see why they wouldn't use the PR of making it public as that would only use a small portion of the PR budget.

Walking on thin ice, I wonder why the Kerchers or at the least through their crack attorney, Maresca, wouldn't divulge all the inside dope that has them so convinced of guilt.

 

[Samson]

The Amanda Knox wiki has been completely rewritten. It is a good introduction to the case for guilters, as they return for remedial education. I bet Jimmy Wales enjoyed the process. I presume he had to sign it off.

 

[Grinder]

Confusion runs deep into your life it creep:

Kokomani certainly felt like he was a potential target. If you read his lawyer's testimony Aiello, you'll see Kokomani came to see him the day he returned from Albania. And his dress upon arriving in court for Massei, with cap, sunglasses and upturned collars, shows he was paranoid.

I believe Kokomani was actually sincere, but he had a distinct language problem that rendered certain parts of his testimony sketchy, particularly the description of the rain.

But what is important about his testimony are the fixed points that he maintains in both Micheli and Massei proceedings: 1) Knox held a large knife with both hands, 2) Sollecito had a smaller knife, 3) both Knox and Sollecito threatened him, 4) Guede was a little distant from K and S and sought to pacify things, 5) Guede asked Kokomani to rent his car, 6) strange sounds came from the cottage.

This is the basic nucleus that Kokomani presents, and this core, by itself, is extremely damaging to all involved. If he was leaned on, it still doesn't affect the core of his story. The scene that Kokomani describes had to occur after the tow truck had passed, since certainly anyone involved in the car breakdown or the tow truck driver would have noticed this skirmish on the road.

If Kokomani actually came upon K and S lying on via Pergola, it is reasonable to assume this was late at night when there would be few cars on that road. The 'restaurant crowds' (like those involved in the car breakdown, or like Formica and her boyfriend) would be leaving between 22-23:00, which is likely when the garage car park would get most use from cars exiting. After 23:00 it is likely that traffic would get extremely sparse on the road.

Monacchia and Capezzali both looked out their windows and reported seeing no one about and that all was still. This would have occurred after the leaving of the restaurant crowds, and certainly after the leaving of the tow truck, and certainly after Kokomani had left as well.

I think Kokomani saw the trio prior to their entry into the cottage, brandishing knives, before they killed poor Meredith. But it had to be after the tow truck. Otherwise, Guede, whom Kokomani saw by the cottage gate, would have been seen by the tow truck driver and by the lady waiting in the car during the breakdown.

But, but Curatolo saw them from 9:30 until just before midnight...

 

[acbytesla]

The Amanda Knox wiki has been completely rewritten. It is a good introduction to the case for guilters, as they return for remedial education. I bet Jimmy Wales enjoyed the process. I presume he had to sign it off.

Which wiki?

 

[Samson]

Which wiki?

Sorry acbytesla the wiki, the one true wiki in heaven

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanda_Knox

 

[Numbers]

There is a part of me that believes that some or one of the authorities in Italy actually planted or destroyed evidence. I'm sure that they did this because they genuinely thought that Knox was guilty.

But I really want to put aside that thought and review this farce as if the actions of the authorities were done in good faith. Because I can't or don't want to think that someone would actually seek to put people in prison that they know to be innocent and who had no hint of criminal activity in their past.

I can truthfully understand why the authorities suspected Amanda and Raffaele's involvement at the beginning and why the became convinced of their guilt. I can also see why they continued to be convinced of their guilt.

It's clear that they made mistakes. It's also fair to expect people to make honest mistakes. I can't help but wonder if it was the honest mistakes that caused the authorities to get locked in on the two innocents. That said, I think human failings, not honest mistakes was the biggest problem with this legal disaster.

For example, I think the biggest mistake the authorities made was the result of one of the most positive a destructive trait, pride. It was pride that made them take a bow and declare the "case closed" and it was pride that kept them from admitting they made a mistake.

They made many other mistakes as well, but I think that was the worst. If they had just arrested them they would have been able to release the kids after it was clear that the shoe prints did not match. That I think was their 2nd biggest mistake. That confirmed their belief that Amanda and Raffaele were guilty. Otherwise, I think they would have released A&R when they let Patrick go. Their third biggest mistake was not to own up to their mistakeep after they found out that the shoe prints belonged to Rudy and not Raffaele. This led to the bra clasp DNA which they refused to believe was possibly caused by contamination.

I wonder if they would have released Amanda and Raffaele if they hadn't discovered the DNA on the bra clasp? Or would they have continued the case with the knife and the weak statements? I actually think they still would have. That they were so afraid of looking like fools that they would stubbornly have gone forward.

I think you have a very idealistic and innocent view of the Italian police and prosecutors (and perhaps others likewise corrupt).

I believe that Amanda was targeted by Mignini as a result of his personal and many would consider pathological obsessions. Also, as a person with a key to the cottage flat, and a somewhat naive, trusting, and innocent 20-year-old American woman, vulnerable.

The police targeted Amanda because she was convenient and they wanted to close the case quickly. They may have taken seriously Giobbi's "behavioral analysis" or that may simply be a convenient cover. They needed Raffaele to be a suspect to destroy Amanda's alibi. I'm not sure why they needed Patrick Lumumba; perhaps a convenient foreign, and dark-skinned supposed "heavy" for their purposes. Or maybe they needed to cover for Rudy Guede.

They could not ever release or let up the prosecution of Amanda and Raffaele because the police had threatened and hit her during the interrogation in order to force her to make a false statement to judicial authorities. This is a violation of Italian criminal law, CP Article 377-bis, punishable by 2 to 6 years imprisonment. The framing (official misconduct to make an innocent seem guilty) was motivated more by that than by pride. Mignini may also have considered himself liable under this law. With Amanda and Raffaele caught in the years-long Italian trial fiasco, the police and prosecutors were safe. Had the authorities them (especially Amanda) free too soon, and the criminal responsibility of the police would be evident.

 

[Bill Williams]

Well as usual we are on the same page. I would hope that insiders at the defense table would let it be known if actions had been taken against .org and/or .net. Hard to see why they wouldn't use the PR of making it public as that would only use a small portion of the PR budget.

Walking on thin ice, I wonder why the Kerchers or at the least through their crack attorney, Maresca, wouldn't divulge all the inside dope that has them so convinced of guilt.

"Small portion of the PR budget"? I'm still waiting for my 2012 Christmas bonus. Not a penny goes towards litigation until I get my cheque!

 

[Bill Williams]

The Amanda Knox wiki has been completely rewritten. It is a good introduction to the case for guilters, as they return for remedial education. I bet Jimmy Wales enjoyed the process. I presume he had to sign it off.

You mean this page?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanda_Knox

 

[acbytesla]

I think you have a very idealistic and innocent view of the Italian police and prosecutors (and perhaps others likewise corrupt).

I believe that Amanda was targeted by Mignini as a result of his personal and many would consider pathological obsessions. Also, as a person with a key to the cottage flat, and a somewhat naive, trusting, and innocent 20-year-old American woman, vulnerable.

The police targeted Amanda because she was convenient and they wanted to close the case quickly. They may have taken seriously Giobbi's "behavioral analysis" or that may simply be a convenient cover. They needed Raffaele to be a suspect to destroy Amanda's alibi. I'm not sure why they needed Patrick Lumumba; perhaps a convenient foreign, and dark-skinned supposed "heavy" for their purposes. Or maybe they needed to cover for Rudy Guede.

They could not ever release or let up the prosecution of Amanda and Raffaele because the police had threatened and hit her during the interrogation in order to force her to make a false statement to judicial authorities. This is a violation of Italian criminal law, CP Article 377-bis, punishable be 2 to 6 years imprisonment. The framing (official misconduct to make an innocent seem guilty) was motivated more by that than by pride. Mignini may also have considered himself liable under this law. With Amanda and Raffaele caught in the years-long Italian trial fiasco, the police and prosecutors were safe. Had the authorities them (especially Amanda) free too soon, and the criminal responsibility of the police would be evident.

There is no naivete Numbers. While I absolutely believe that Mignini targeted Amanda Knox as his prime suspect early on based on his own prudish and crazy biases, I think he did it honestly. By that I mean he really did believe that Knox was involved in Meredith's murder. Just as he probably had convinced himself of his early thoughts on the MOF case. And I do think that there was lot of pressure to solve the case and I do think that was a huge contributing factor.

I don't buy your thoughts on Patrick. I think they were thoroughly convinced that Patrick was involved in the murder. In fact, I believe that he was the primary killer, not Raffaele or Amanda. I think they thought this as a result of Amanda's text and the fact that Patrick showed up at Amanda's college. I'm convinced that they saw that as extremely suspicious.

I'm also not sure I agree that they couldn't have released Amanda and Raffaele when they discovered that the shoe prints didn't match Raffaelejust because Amanda was hit during the interrogation. So what that there is a law against it? They would just deny it and say it was an exaggeration.

 

[acbytesla]

Sorry acbytesla the wiki, the one true wiki in heaven

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanda_Knox

Thanks Samson. Much better. I wonder if this is driving the nutsos exen crazier than they already were. I wonder what will happen when one of them tries to edit it.

 

[Strozzi]

Oh and by the way, does anyone have any news on whether (perhaps) lawyers acting for Knox and/or Sollecito - or law enforcement agencies - might have been in touch with a certain website, precipitating that site's very sudden messageboard closure?

Just sayin'.......

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

LJ, I noticed that too. It was so sudden that I thought perhaps the Perugia Postal Police had fried their laptops.

 

[Numbers]

There is no naivete Numbers. While I absolutely believe that Mignini targeted Amanda Knox as his prime suspect early on based on his own prudish and crazy biases, I think he did it honestly. By that I mean he really did believe that Knox was involved in Meredith's murder. Just as he probably had convinced himself of his early thoughts on the MOF case. And I do think that there was lot of pressure to solve the case and I do think that was a huge contributing factor.

I don't buy your thoughts on Patrick. I think they were thoroughly convinced that Patrick was involved in the murder. In fact, I believe that he was the primary killer, not Raffaele or Amanda. I think they thought this as a result of Amanda's text and the fact that Patrick showed up at Amanda's college. I'm convinced that they saw that as extremely suspicious.

I'm also not sure I agree that they couldn't have released Amanda and Raffaele when they discovered that the shoe prints didn't match Raffaelejust because Amanda was hit during the interrogation. So what that there is a law against it? They would just deny it and say it was an exaggeration.

{Highlighting added to quote.}

If there had been no false statement signed by Amanda, the police might have been able to deny any wrong-doing. But they needed to explain away the coerced statements. Those statements, if not given voluntarily, were obtained in violation of CPP (criminal procedural law) Article 188:

CPP Article 188, Moral freedom of the person during evidence gathering

1. Methods or techniques which may influence the freedom of self-determination or alter the capacity to recall and evaluate facts shall not be used, not even with the consent of the person concerned.

So the police were in a bind of their own making. Amanda had to be be portrayed as guilty of a serious crime, or the false statement, obtained in violation of procedural law CPP Art. 188, and by means of threats and violence intended and resulting in a false statement to a judicial authority, and thus in violation of criminal law CP Art. 377-bis, would incriminate the police and possibly the prosecutor.

How could the police claim that Amanda's statement against them was a lie or exaggeration in the face of the two false statements, written in official police Italian, that she somehow signed, during the interrogation and then Mignini's solicitation of a "spontaneous statement" in the overnight sessions of Nov. 5/6, 2007?

 

[acbytesla]

{Highlighting added to quote.}

If there had been no false statement signed by Amanda, the police might have been able to deny any wrong-doing. But they needed to explain away the coerced statements. Those statements, if not given voluntarily, were obtained in violation of CPP (criminal procedural law) Article 188:


So the police were in a bind of their own making. Amanda had to be be portrayed as guilty of a serious crime, or the false statement, obtained in violation of procedural law CPP Art. 188, and by means of threats and violence intended and resulting in a false statement to a judicial authority, and thus in violation of criminal law CP Art. 377-bis, would incriminate the police and possibly the prosecutor.

How could the police claim that Amanda's statement against them was a lie or exaggeration in the face of the two false statements, written in official police Italian, that she somehow signed, during the interrogation and then Mignini's solicitation of a "spontaneous statement" in the overnight sessions of Nov. 5/6, 2007?

Good point. So you believe that the moment they got Amanda to sign those statements that they were committed to doing whatever it took to avoid losing their jobs or even going to prison themselves?

So, do you believe that at some point they actually knew that the kids were innocent and proceeded any way?

 

[Numbers]

Good point. So you believe that the moment they got Amanda to sign those statements that they were committed to doing whatever it took to avoid losing their jobs or even going to prison themselves?

So, do you believe that at some point they actually knew that the kids were innocent and proceeded any way?

{Highlighting added to quote.}

Of course. The police and prosecutors would have certainly realized that Amanda and Raffaele were innocent at about the time that Lumumba's alibi was established. After all, the police and prosecutor knew that Lumumba's identity as the murderer was the suggestion of the police.

I actually think that the police and prosecutor had received evidence that the perpetrator's DNA found inside Meredith and in the murder room, did not match that of Amanda or Raffaele or Lumumba, and that there was no sign of the three innocents in the murder room, and that therefore they were not reasonably suspected, as soon as Nov. 7 or 8, 2007. The police files, if they are ever made available, should confirm or refute this thought.

 

[Strozzi]

{Highlighting added to quote.}

Of course. The police and prosecutors would have certainly realized that Amanda and Raffaele were innocent at about the time that Lumumba's alibi was established. After all, the police and prosecutor knew that Lumumba's identity as the murderer was the suggestion of the police.

I actually think that the police and prosecutor had received evidence that the perpetrator's DNA found inside Meredith and in the murder room, did not match that of Amanda or Raffaele or Lumumba, and that there was no sign of the three innocents in the murder room, and that therefore they were not reasonably suspected, as soon as Nov. 7 or 8, 2007. The police files, if they are ever made available, should confirm or refute this thought.

They must also have known for various reasons that the perpetrator spent time in the guys' flat downstairs. The scientific police and prosecutor shut down that issue because to investigate it further would have revealed the existence of a (lone) perpetrator as he left the upstairs flat.

 

[Samson]

Good point. So you believe that the moment they got Amanda to sign those statements that they were committed to doing whatever it took to avoid losing their jobs or even going to prison themselves?

So, do you believe that at some point they actually knew that the kids were innocent and proceeded any way?

I think the key is the 7 december interview with Guede. Was that seven hours?
Mignini knew Raffaele and Amanda were in jail for helping Rudy kill Meredith.
Biscotti knew Raffaele and Amanda were in jail for helping Rudy kill Meredith.
Rudy knew Raffaele and Amanda were in jail for helping Rudy kill Meredith.

At the conclusion only Biscotti spoke, there was no one to name.

There must be some fruitful speculation as to what was going on in there.
(I may have some detail wrong)

 

[katy_did]

{Highlighting added to quote.}

Of course. The police and prosecutors would have certainly realized that Amanda and Raffaele were innocent at about the time that Lumumba's alibi was established. After all, the police and prosecutor knew that Lumumba's identity as the murderer was the suggestion of the police.

I actually think that the police and prosecutor had received evidence that the perpetrator's DNA found inside Meredith and in the murder room, did not match that of Amanda or Raffaele or Lumumba, and that there was no sign of the three innocents in the murder room, and that therefore they were not reasonably suspected, as soon as Nov. 7 or 8, 2007. The police files, if they are ever made available, should confirm or refute this thought.

Personally I just think they couldn't accept that Amanda might be innocent given that she'd placed herself in the house: firstly because they probably don't know very much about coerced confessions, and secondly because even considering that it could have been coerced means they messed up pretty badly. Releasing Amanda and Raffaele would've been tantamount to admitting they coerced her into confessing.

Given the existence of confirmation bias and so on, very much easier for them to cling to the belief she and Raffaele were actually guilty than to confront the possibility they screwed up so badly. I think that at least the prominent players among the police and prosecution utterly convinced themselves of Amanda's guilt, and by extension Raffaele's. I'm sure they still do believe in it.

 

[Strozzi]

{Highlighting added to quote.}

Of course. The police and prosecutors would have certainly realized that Amanda and Raffaele were innocent at about the time that Lumumba's alibi was established. After all, the police and prosecutor knew that Lumumba's identity as the murderer was the suggestion of the police.

I actually think that the police and prosecutor had received evidence that the perpetrator's DNA found inside Meredith and in the murder room, did not match that of Amanda or Raffaele or Lumumba, and that there was no sign of the three innocents in the murder room, and that therefore they were not reasonably suspected, as soon as Nov. 7 or 8, 2007. The police files, if they are ever made available, should confirm or refute this thought.

An interesting element in all this is that when Mignini appeared on scene at the police station late at night and received the police-prepared confession of Amanda, he could have taken it, stepped back, evaluated what it really meant and how the confession was obtained, and even gone back to bed. At that point, the interrogation and confession were police-driven and police-derived. Mignini's hands were clean. But Mignini couldn't help himself. He had to step in as "notary" to try to legitimize (re-do) the sketchy confession as a spontaneous, freely-given statement.

 

[js202]

Personally I just think they couldn't accept that Amanda might be innocent given that she'd placed herself in the house: firstly because they probably don't know very much about coerced confessions, and secondly because even considering that it could have been coerced means they messed up pretty badly. Releasing Amanda and Raffaele would've been tantamount to admitting they coerced her into confessing.

Given the existence of confirmation bias and so on, very much easier for them to cling to the belief she and Raffaele were actually guilty than to confront the possibility they screwed up so badly. I think that at least the prominent players among the police and prosecution utterly convinced themselves of Amanda's guilt, and by extension Raffaele's. I'm sure they still do believe in it.

Except perhaps for your last sentence, I'm in more or less full agreement with this. I think this recently surfaced video of Mignini reaffirming his case in the Kercher murder is a fine example of a pompous turd of limited powers, protesting too much. Confirmation bias is still a factor, no doubt. But going back to at least the Drew Griffin CNN piece, Mignini began showing a bumbling, stammering recognition of the gaps in his case against Knox and Sollecito.

Bottom line, it was amateur hour. And I think a certain recognition began to dawn on Mignini that he was out of his depth, even as his provincial pride has repeatedly puffed out his chest.