Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Grinder]

No one has ever presented a reasonable motive for the police to frame the kids before the 6th of November or shortly thereafter. I believe that someone might have helped Raf's DNA find it's way to the clasp. BTW, the evidence gathering in December was streamed AFAIK to defense people in a van outside somewhat explaining the show and tell.

The PLE had plenty to be suspicious about the two kids before the interrogation gave them enough "hard" evidence to declare them suspects and arrest them. They didn't need to list all the suspicious things on the arrest document.

If ECHR is to be cited, please put behind a spoiler as any reference has nothing to do with my points.

 

[Strozzi]

That is just an example since i don't know exactly what camera model Amanda had. Click on each of the images and it says who, when and where. And near the bottom there is a link to "show EXIF data" that will show all of the metadata that the camera tags the photo with including in some cases the camera's unique serial number. If Amanda has records or old photos that identify the serial number of her camera, she could use a similar search to look for new photos taken by her camera which might lead to the recovery of her camera.

One of the photos in the example was the square November IV durring the Chocolate Festival in October 2007.

Can this same camera-tracking technique be used to track the camera (and be used to I.D. its owner?) that took other photos such as the pink bathroom photos or photos of Amanda in Capanne Prison that were given to tabloids? Suppose it could, and it turns out to belong to officer N or prosecutor M. That would be worth knowing.

I am sure, for starters, that it would require that the specific camera used is a model that attaches an identifier in the digital image file and that the image file is then searchable on a public-access image site such as Flicker or TinEye.

Once the camera is identified, additional searches for other photos taken by the same camera might locate photos (with name or personal identifying details) that the owner/user has posted on Flicker and similar sites.

 

[Numbers]

No one has ever presented a reasonable motive for the police to frame the kids before the 6th of November or shortly thereafter. I believe that someone might have helped Raf's DNA find it's way to the clasp. BTW, the evidence gathering in December was streamed AFAIK to defense people in a van outside somewhat explaining the show and tell.

The PLE had plenty to be suspicious about the two kids before the interrogation gave them enough "hard" evidence to declare them suspects and arrest them. They didn't need to list all the suspicious things on the arrest document.

If ECHR is to be cited, please put behind a spoiler as any reference has nothing to do with my points.

{Highlighting added to quote.}

I very much appreciate your dry humor regarding the ECHR.

Why would the police need a "reasonable motive" to frame someone? Framing is often unreasonable or arbitrary. In the US, it has often been associated with racial prejudice.

What was Rudy* Guede's "reasonable motive" for sexually assaulting Meredith Kercher?
* Or, if you prefer, Rudi.

 

[Vixen]

No, they didn't keep changing their stories. Their stories were all compatible outside that night of the 5th/6th when the police changed them, which they then changed back once they got out of their clutches. This is especially important because what they changed to was not compatible with each other or the actual evidence which corroborates the original story. Those statements have (from Raffaele's reflected in Matteini) Raffaele and Amanda parting at the town center at 8:30-9 PM with Raffaele going home and Amanda to Le Chic, and (from Amanda's statements) Amanda leaving Raffaele's as a result of Patrick's text. The computer records and Joanna Popovic disprove the statements signed that night but are compatible with their original and true stories.

Raffaele went in there stoned, he left that part out of his book. They put the hammer down, they refused to let him talk to his father or a lawyer--or for that matter even let him look at a calender--and cowed him into believing they must be right and he remembered wrong. Nothing in Raffaele's statement is incriminating or even something he made up, it's a mish-mash of what he did October 31st and November 1st when they refused to accept his original account that--as it turned out--has hard evidence supporting it as well as an eyewitness. From Raffaele's perspective nothing all that memorable happened those two nights and four or five days later couldn't recall with certainty what happened which night. What was the "smoked" Raffaele supposed to do when they insisted he didn't have it right and wouldn't let him leave? Argue with them?

Amanda gave them the same account over and over again until sometime in the middle of the night with little sleep they convinced her she must have 'blocked' her 'real' memories due to trauma and gave them that confused gibberish I linked above. Later in the day on the 6th, after she's had a chance to sleep, it seemed more 'unreal, like a dream' and she writes that note. By the seventh (go to near the bottom) she's realized none of that ever happened and recants it completely.

The ironic thing is that the police had reason to be suspicious of Amanda and Patrick because of coincidences and mistakes on their part (thinking that window required "spiderman" to climb into was a big one) but it wasn't because of stories changing, that was something that happened under their watch when they refused both Amanda and Raffaele the protections every civilized country offers to suspects because of this very phenomena.

Seriously, is 10:00 - 1:00 am, really "the middle of the night", for students, who by their own account enjoy partying? It's nonsense!

As for Raf turning up "stoned". Not wise?

 

[carbonjam72]

This is where having Machiavelli swallow his pride and keep posting here would be useful.

In most N.A. jurisdictions, scheduled court appearances are on-line. Here we have the Internet, there we mostly rely on Machiavelli.

I'd make a prediction on the probability of an appearance on court by Mignini, but CJ72 would be all over me like a cheap suit.

I can't imagine a scenario where Mignini does not show up in court. The whole exercise is about bullying people into silence, how could he deny himself that pleasure?

Please, let's leave your wardrobe out of this, though I don't doubt your sartorial splendor.

I think Mach isn't coming back because he's been cautioned, and he knows he can't control himself. Same reason alcoholics try to avoid beerfests.

 

[Strozzi]

Informal poll requested among(st) those present as to the truth value.
Grinder?

The story of Rudi pulling a knife while confronted burglarizing a bartender's home at night is unconfirmed and not documented, to my knowledge, in any police report because, again if I remember correctly, no report was actually formally made.

It is somewhat common for someone reporting a crime to the police (or media?) to exaggerate/inflate the actions of the alleged perpetrator in order to get elevated police or media attention. College kids down the street making too much noise late at night? Call the police and tell them that there is too much noise and that the kids are throwing rocks at cars. You will get a quicker police response.

 

[Bill Williams]

No, they didn't keep changing their stories. Their stories were all compatible outside that night of the 5th/6th when the police changed them, which they then changed back once they got out of their clutches. This is especially important because what they changed to was not compatible with each other or the actual evidence which corroborates the original story. Those statements have (from Raffaele's reflected in Matteini) Raffaele and Amanda parting at the town center at 8:30-9 PM with Raffaele going home and Amanda to Le Chic, and (from Amanda's statements) Amanda leaving Raffaele's as a result of Patrick's text. The computer records and Joanna Popovic disprove the statements signed that night but are compatible with their original and true stories.

Raffaele went in there stoned, he left that part out of his book. They put the hammer down, they refused to let him talk to his father or a lawyer--or for that matter even let him look at a calender--and cowed him into believing they must be right and he remembered wrong. Nothing in Raffaele's statement is incriminating or even something he made up, it's a mish-mash of what he did October 31st and November 1st when they refused to accept his original account that--as it turned out--has hard evidence supporting it as well as an eyewitness. From Raffaele's perspective nothing all that memorable happened those two nights and four or five days later couldn't recall with certainty what happened which night. What was the "smoked" Raffaele supposed to do when they insisted he didn't have it right and wouldn't let him leave? Argue with them?

Amanda gave them the same account over and over again until sometime in the middle of the night with little sleep they convinced her she must have 'blocked' her 'real' memories due to trauma and gave them that confused gibberish I linked above. Later in the day on the 6th, after she's had a chance to sleep, it seemed more 'unreal, like a dream' and she writes that note. By the seventh (go to near the bottom) she's realized none of that ever happened and recants it completely.

The ironic thing is that the police had reason to be suspicious of Amanda and Patrick because of coincidences and mistakes on their part (thinking that window required "spiderman" to climb into was a big one) but it wasn't because of stories changing, that was something that happened under their watch when they refused both Amanda and Raffaele the protections every civilized country offers to suspects because of this very phenomena.

Seriously, is 10:00 - 1:00 am, really "the middle of the night", for students, who by their own account enjoy partying? It's nonsense!

As for Raf turning up "stoned". Not wise?

Welcome back, Vixen.

However, true to guilter-form, your comment ignores the context. Amanda's flat-mate had just been brutally murdered. Amanda had not slept since, and was questioned every day about the general circumstances around Meredith's life, for clues as to who might be involved.

The young woman was stressed. She was innocent, and obviously innocent and unlike everyone else neither lawyered-up nor fled and hopelessly naive. She didn't speak the language - most certainly not the Italian-legalese that ended up on the "confessions".

Is all you have these days "drive by" guilt-like snippets?

Are you EVER going to address the issues about Hellmann you've been asked about?

 

[Strozzi]

{Highlighting added to quote.}

I very much appreciate your dry humor regarding the ECHR.

Why would the police need a "reasonable motive" to frame someone? Framing is often unreasonable or arbitrary. In the US, it has often been associated with racial prejudice.

What was Rudy* Guede's "reasonable motive" for sexually assaulting Meredith Kercher?
* Or, if you prefer, Rudi.

I don't perceive any police action before Nov 6 as an effort to frame Amanda. The major example raised in this regard occurred when the police (Giobbi, Napoleoni, and others) took Amanda into her cottage flat on Nov 4 (Monday) to look around and asked her in the kitchen if a knife was missing. Napoleoni reportedly also asked Amanda which of the knives would be good to use to kill someone. That leading question is regarded by some posters here as an effort to get Amanda's prints or DNA on a knife to frame Amanda. I don't see it as that extreme.

I think if it did occur that Napoleoni was testing Amanda - trying to see if she unhesitatingly, directly reached for a suitable knife. Amanda did not do that. She did not reach for a knife. She didn't know which of the knives would make a good murder weapon and she also experienced a traumatic emotional breakdown being admitted inside her home where her housemate had been killed and asked to look in the knife drawer at the type of weapon used on her friend.

 

[Kauffer]

No one has ever presented a reasonable motive for the police to frame the kids before the 6th of November or shortly thereafter. I believe that someone might have helped Raf's DNA find it's way to the clasp. BTW, the evidence gathering in December was streamed AFAIK to defense people in a van outside somewhat explaining the show and tell.

The PLE had plenty to be suspicious about the two kids before the interrogation gave them enough "hard" evidence to declare them suspects and arrest them. They didn't need to list all the suspicious things on the arrest document.

If ECHR is to be cited, please put behind a spoiler as any reference has nothing to do with my points.

Did they? The key event that derailed the investigation was the early dismissal of the burglary as a fake. Then there's the cascade effect that follows. They're almost immediately all standing around at Via Pergola trying to be mentalists and don't understand Amanda's singular combination of grief, stress and desire to be helpful. Everything she does after this, all the behavioural "clues" confirm to these amateur psychs that she must be involved. They were blind, of course, to everyone else's behaviour, so they had no control.

Put all that nonsense together with some real police work which discovers that everyone else has an alibi and was some distance from the cottage, she has keys and was 10 mins away and she and Raffaele are each other's alibis (and therefore Raffaele is at least involved to the extent of covering for her) and she's doomed.

Before the body was found, the postale police thought the break in was an insurance fraud.

But I agree with you that there's no evidence of a frame up taking place before the 6th. They didn't know Amanda was innocent and tried to fit her up. They really thought she was involved. Between the 2nd and 5th, the police were just barking mad incompetent idiots. But all that took on a more sinister hue later.

 

[Kauffer]

Seriously, is 10:00 - 1:00 am, really "the middle of the night", for students, who by their own account enjoy partying? It's nonsense!

As for Raf turning up "stoned". Not wise?

Hello. Have you been away reading up on the case?

10 til 1 eh? How much reading?

 

[Grinder]

{Highlighting added to quote.}

I very much appreciate your dry humor regarding the ECHR.

Why would the police need a "reasonable motive" to frame someone? Framing is often unreasonable or arbitrary. In the US, it has often been associated with racial prejudice.

What was Rudy* Guede's "reasonable motive" for sexually assaulting Meredith Kercher?
* Or, if you prefer, Rudi.

Rudi (as the court system refers to him notwithstanding RW's picture of his signature) motive was to silence a witness to B&E and rape. Honestly the question was an example proving there are dumb questions.

Generally the police don't frame someone until they run into dead ends over time. They do frame perps they've been trying to get. I discount the possibility that Mignini and crew were just waiting to frame an American for murder. There is no doubt that they believed they had solved the murder and had the perps in custody on the 6th.

It is preposterous to suggest that they would have hidden the evidence of Rudi and prosecuted the other three had PL not had an alibi. By the 5th they didn't know if RS and AK had an alibi associated with computer use or something else. They didn't know what forensics would show beyond DNA.

The idea that they would just let a murderer get completely away with Mez' murder in order to get an American girl just doesn't compute.

 

[Kaosium]

Seriously, is 10:00 - 1:00 am, really "the middle of the night", for students, who by their own account enjoy partying? It's nonsense!

Yeah, 1:45 AM is the middle of the night. She spent about 53 of the 89 hours between the arrival of the Postales and her arrest with police, some 17-19 of those hours being actively interviewed/interrogated and she'd gotten up to go to class the morning of the fifth. This was the culmination of less than a week where she'd been up until dawn twice, it all caught up to her.

As for Raf turning up "stoned". Not wise?

He didn't know they were going to call that night, they called late in the evening and asked him to come in ~9:30 PM, he asked to be able to finish his dinner and got there at 10:15 PM.

 

[Numbers]

I don't perceive any police action before Nov 6 as an effort to frame Amanda. The major example raised in this regard occurred when the police (Giobbi, Napoleoni, and others) took Amanda into her cottage flat on Nov 4 (Monday) to look around and asked her in the kitchen if a knife was missing. Napoleoni reportedly also asked Amanda which of the knives would be good to use to kill someone. That leading question is regarded by some posters here as an effort to get Amanda's prints or DNA on a knife to frame Amanda. I don't see it as that extreme.

I think if it did occur that Napoleoni was testing Amanda - trying to see if she unhesitatingly, directly reached for a suitable knife. Amanda did not do that. She did not reach for a knife. She didn't know which of the knives would make a good murder weapon and she also experienced a traumatic emotional breakdown being admitted inside her home where her housemate had been killed and asked to look in the knife drawer at the type of weapon used on her friend.

One sign of a frame prior to Nov. 5/6 was the police planning an interrogation, in accordance with VAQ Dr. Giobbi's testimony, that would be questioning both Amanda and Raffaele at about the same time and overnight. This required attention to police schedules, and probably had to be planned a day or two ahead. One might object that this was merely planning for a routine police interrogation of suspects (one of whom had been perceived by VAQ Dr. Giobbi to have wiggled her hips, and therefore was a prime object of investigation, according to his court testimony). However, the way the interrogation was conducted, in violation of Italian procedural laws CPP Articles 63, 64, and 96 (and 188, although that wording is also in 64), is IMO confirmatory of bad faith = intent to frame.

The people close to Meredith were identified immediately, according to VAQ Dr. Giobbi's testimony, as potential suspects, and Amanda had the weakest alibi. And she had a key to the flat. Therefore, IMO the break-in could be concluded by the police and prosecutor to be staged. VAQ Dr. Giobbi in his testimony states that glass shards from the window were observed on the clothes scattered in Filomena's room.

Is there photographic evidence to support VAQ Dr. Giobbi's testimony on this distribution of the glass shards, or do the photographs show instead that the glass shards are on the floor, adjacent to the clothes? Perhaps Dan O. or anyone else with a strong knowledge of the evidence could comment on this.

 

[JREF2010]

The story of Rudi pulling a knife while confronted burglarizing a bartender's home at night is unconfirmed and not documented, to my knowledge, in any police report because, again if I remember correctly, no report was actually formally made.

It is somewhat common for someone reporting a crime to the police (or media?) to exaggerate/inflate the actions of the alleged perpetrator in order to get elevated police or media attention. College kids down the street making too much noise late at night? Call the police and tell them that there is too much noise and that the kids are throwing rocks at cars. You will get a quicker police response.

Actually it was two people, not one person ...

Interesting how we toss away a normal persons words, and a local known persons words can be deemed non-existent yet we go on and on with for example a Toto heroin bum, supported by a police squad whose been found to be less than respectable and definitely sloppy at their job.

And being open minded I ask what motivation would Christian T. have to get involved? He has no past record of being a flake and creating lies that I know of. He didnt get paid to talk, he wasnt getting a deal cut.

In this case I would probably trust a bar owner over the Polizia like Napoleoni.

So what disqualifies these Christian T. reports? The fact the goofball squad didnt investigate it more and frequently showed poor skills in this case.


The documented in Micheli pg 35? right...(edit)

And also below-
as reported by Frank Sfarzo:

"Meet the "monster"
I just finished speaking in some way with Christian T., who I reached in his hometown. It was a difficult way to speak, with someone in the middle. But that's what Christian said. It was a warm night in September, he was sleeping with his Polish girlfriend Monika in his elevated loft bed. Some noise woke him up. He looked down and he saw a black boy searching in their drawers. The guest had entered through a window they had left open and he wasn't aware that someone was sleeping in the room, since the bed was elevated.

Christian realized it was his neighbor, Rudy, who he knew only by sight. He told him to go away. Rudy thought it would be better to leave the house like a gentleman, through the door and not through the window. But the door was defective and he had trouble opening it.
Christian wasn't very hospitable. He even didn't ask him if he needed to use the toilet. He rushed Rudy and yelled at him to go, which was exactly what Rudy was trying to do. At this point, since Christian was insisting, Rudy pulled out a knife and showed it to him.
Christian just told him not to be stupid because he knew who he was and he could tell the police. Rudy said, "But if the door is blocked, how can I go away?"

So, Christian helped him open the door and Rudy went away. Like this. Without raping his girlfriend, without even killing the both of them, even though he was recognized.

Then Christian says he called the police, and they arrived immediately, in just 2 hours. The police said he could come to the station the next day and report the intruder. But Christian let it go. It must not have been a very frightening experience for him and his girlfriend if they didn't even have the time to file a suit.
Naturally, when three months later he saw that the same uninvited guest was the main suspect in the murder of Meredith Kercher, he took the time to go to the police station and testify.
Is this another megalomaniac or a reliable witness? History will tell us. But this is not a psychiatric case, not a pusher payed by a pre-professional local newspaper, this time. It's just a normal person. Actually, two normal people.

By the way, this episode as confirmed could appear very compromising for Rudy. But if we analyze it, we don't really see the expression of a dangerous nature.
He steals, yes. But who wouldn't steal if abandoned by family and by society? He enters people's houses, he carries a knife, yes. Just like he allegedly did that night at the cottage.
But he didn't use the knife except to leave the place.
Actually he should have used it. He should have stabbed Christian and Monika, because they caught him stealing and they recognized him. He should have eliminated these witnesses. But he didn't.
Why, in the same situation, should he have eliminated the witness, Meredith, who caught him stealing from her drawers?
Christian and Monika saw a thief that night, for sure. But not a murderer."

 

[Grinder]

Did they? The key event that derailed the investigation was the early dismissal of the burglary as a fake. Then there's the cascade effect that follows. They're almost immediately all standing around at Via Pergola trying to be mentalists and don't understand Amanda's singular combination of grief, stress and desire to be helpful. Everything she does after this, all the behavioural "clues" confirm to these amateur psychs that she must be involved. They were blind, of course, to everyone else's behaviour, so they had no control.

Yes they did. They firmly believed the burglary was fake for several reasons. Nothing taken, glass on top of clothes, Raf's 911 call stating nothing taken instead of I don't know, the apparent difficulty of the window relative to other windows, imprecise recounting of the time just 15 hours before, the Mansey story, the fact they discovered the crime and yes her quirky behavior.

Put all that nonsense together with some real police work which discovers that everyone else has an alibi and was some distance from the cottage, she has keys and was 10 mins away and she and Raffaele are each other's alibis (and therefore Raffaele is at least involved to the extent of covering for her) and she's doomed.

yup more reasons and the record of a text she didn't tell them about.

Before the body was found, the postale police thought the break in was an insurance fraud.

Follian?

But I agree with you that there's no evidence of a frame up taking place before the 6th. They didn't know Amanda was innocent and tried to fit her up. They really thought she was involved. Between the 2nd and 5th, the police were just barking mad incompetent idiots. But all that took on a more sinister hue later.

Yes but doesn't fit up mean framed in proper English

 

[Numbers]

Did they? The key event that derailed the investigation was the early dismissal of the burglary as a fake. Then there's the cascade effect that follows. They're almost immediately all standing around at Via Pergola trying to be mentalists and don't understand Amanda's singular combination of grief, stress and desire to be helpful. Everything she does after this, all the behavioural "clues" confirm to these amateur psychs that she must be involved. They were blind, of course, to everyone else's behaviour, so they had no control.

Put all that nonsense together with some real police work which discovers that everyone else has an alibi and was some distance from the cottage, she has keys and was 10 mins away and she and Raffaele are each other's alibis (and therefore Raffaele is at least involved to the extent of covering for her) and she's doomed.

Before the body was found, the postale police thought the break in was an insurance fraud.

But I agree with you that there's no evidence of a frame up taking place before the 6th. They didn't know Amanda was innocent and tried to fit her up. They really thought she was involved. Between the 2nd and 5th, the police were just barking mad incompetent idiots. But all that took on a more sinister hue later.

(Highlighting added to quote.}

PM Guiliano Mignini was in charge of the police investigation once the body was discovered. Why should one expect that the investigation would follow a normal procedural course, given this fact and PM Mignini's history of problematic prosecutions of innocent people?

 

[Sonia]

CT own story was that he fought with the guy who pulled a jackknife in making his escape. He claimed he spotted him at a club where he knew the bouncer and had him banned. IIRC the club was one Rudi went to on Halloween. CT also didn't file the report because the line was too long.

So he identifies a guy that threatened him after breaking into his place and stealing credit cards and 5 Euro but the doesn't bother to report that but when he sees Rudi in the media he comes forward and says he thinks it may be the same guy.

Rudi didn't bring a knife to the nursery the only B&E known for sure, besides the cottage.

Guede either brought a 40cm kitchen knife to the nursery or stole one from the nursery. Whichever the case, he had it with him there in his backpack.

"At the hearing of June 27, 2009, the witness Maria Antonietta Salvadori Del Prato Titone testified that on the morning of October 27, 2007, a Saturday, as she entered the nursery school at via Plinio 16, Milan, of which she was the principal, she noticed coming out of her office a person whom she didn’t know, later identified as Rudy Guede. There were no signs of a break-in. There was some money missing from the money box, but just small change. Rudy Guede had a backpack inside which was a computer. Called at once, the police made him open the backpack, in which they found a 40cm kitchen knife. She recalled that there were other objects in the backpack: a bunch of keys, a small gold woman’s watch, and a tiny hammer of the type found in buses to smash windows. The police told her that the computer had been stolen from a law office in Perugia. The witness stated that she was with her six year old son, with a smith [fabbro] who was there to do some work, and with a rep."

ETA: I think Rudy brought the knife into the nursery with him because his backpack contained other objects that he brought along with him, and because the witness (nursery owner) did not say the backpack contained "her" knife. She just said "a" knife.

 

[Grinder]

One sign of a frame prior to Nov. 5/6 was the police planning an interrogation, in accordance with VAQ Dr. Giobbi's testimony, that would be questioning both Amanda and Raffaele at about the same time and overnight. This required attention to police schedules, and probably had to be planned a day or two ahead. One might object that this was merely planning for a routine police interrogation of suspects (one of whom had been perceived by VAQ Dr. Giobbi to have wiggled her hips, and therefore was a prime object of investigation, according to his court testimony). However, the way the interrogation was conducted, in violation of Italian procedural laws CPP Articles 63, 64, and 96 (and 188, although that wording is also in 64), is IMO confirmatory of bad faith = intent to frame.

It didn't take much planning. It was all hands on board. How long to organize the cased closed press event. The hips is a red herring regardless of what he said. He lied about calling her in so maybe he lied about the hips as well.

Is there photographic evidence to support VAQ Dr. Giobbi's testimony on this distribution of the glass shards, or do the photographs show instead that the glass shards are on the floor, adjacent to the clothes? Perhaps Dan O. or anyone else with a strong knowledge of the evidence could comment on this.

Glass is in both places. Glass sticks to clothes and many have speculated F lied about the neatness of her room.

 

[Bill Williams]

No wonder one of the PMFs is now behind an iron curtain.

For the McCann libel cases, it started at the top.... and who knows how far down it will go.

Madeleine McCann's parents win libel damages in trial of police chief

Gonçalo Amaral, who led investigation for missing girl in Portugal in 2007, is found guilty of libelling Gerry and Kate McCann and ordered to pay €500,000.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/28/madeleine-mccann-parents-win-libel-damages-goncalo-amaral-trial

A former Portuguese police chief has been ordered to pay the parents of Madeleine McCann €500,000 (£357,953) in libel damages after accusing them of faking their daughter’s abduction.

Gonçalo Amaral, who led the botched police search for the three-year-old in 2007, has been on trial at Lisbon’s Palace of Justice over claims he made in a book about Madeleine’s disappearance.

Gerry and Kate McCann told the trial last year of their “devastation, desperation, anxiety and pain” at being accused by Amaral of hiding their daughter’s body.

It looks like the rest of the haters aren't even selfish enough to follow Peggy's lead. Good on them!

 

[carbonjam72]

Framing AK/RS, when and why.

I don't perceive any police action before Nov 6 as an effort to frame Amanda. The major example raised in this regard occurred when the police (Giobbi, Napoleoni, and others) took Amanda into her cottage flat on Nov 4 (Monday) to look around and asked her in the kitchen if a knife was missing. Napoleoni reportedly also asked Amanda which of the knives would be good to use to kill someone. That leading question is regarded by some posters here as an effort to get Amanda's prints or DNA on a knife to frame Amanda. I don't see it as that extreme.

I think if it did occur that Napoleoni was testing Amanda - trying to see if she unhesitatingly, directly reached for a suitable knife. Amanda did not do that. She did not reach for a knife. She didn't know which of the knives would make a good murder weapon and she also experienced a traumatic emotional breakdown being admitted inside her home where her housemate had been killed and asked to look in the knife drawer at the type of weapon used on her friend.

If you go back and read WTBH on this point, sorry I don't have the page offhand, but its been listed before up-thread, Amanda was asked to pick out a knife that could have been used in the murder, and she did reach into the draw and moved a few utensils around, and at that point, had an emotional break down.

I would argue that breakdown at just that moment is her gut telling her that these people are trying to trap her, and the break down was a defensive non-conscious response. Her body knows she's in danger, but she doesn't consciously grasp the situation.

Obviously that's my interpretation, but you've substantially denuded the facts of the argument. Its fine to disagree, but we have to at least agree on the facts, or acknowledge that we don't.

As for Giobbi coming up from Rome, he arrived on the first day of the crime scene investigation on Nov 2. He had to have been called almost immediately from the discovery of the body, in order to do that. Who made that call, if not Mignini? What I want to know, is did Giobbi ever work with Giuttari, and or Mignini, on the Narducci trail inquiry?

While Giobbi's unit SCO is supposed to provide services for localities, its also notable that he had posted Amanda's picture on the wall within a few months, among the worst criminals in Italy. Giobbi's unti deals with serious crime, meaning serial killers, terrorists and mafia. If Giobbi doesn't bag a serious criminal, not much point in his being there, doesn't really help his career. He found what he needed to advance his own career, a trophy criminal, whom he recognized by her doing an Italian 'Mossa' dance move, and her eating of pizza.

Giobbi should b jailed for stupidity, along with Mingini and all the rest.

Call it what you want, but the suggestion that the break-in was staged, doesn't hold water for me as an honest mistake. YMMV.

Napoleone admitted Guede was known to police from previous burglaries. 5 days earlier, Perugia helped get Guede released from Milan police. You dismiss a lot with a hand wave, where I would advice moving slowly and with the greatest caution before drawing conclusions either way. MOO, as always.

People seem attached to the idea that framing requires malice against the targets. Its not necessarily the case. Mignini, Giobbi, and the police may all have had motive to grab anyone but Guede, and solve the crime asap, and vilify whomever they ultimately would pin the crime on. And destruction of evidence and faming, seems to be SOP for them. You can't always take these things personally.