-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Continuation Part 15: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito
- Thread starter carbonjam72
- Start date
- Status
anglolawyer
Banned
If the police framed someone for a crime (i.e. a person they knew or believed to be innocent) the most obvious charge would be 'conspiracy to pervert the course of justice'. I bet there would be other charges that I can't think of at the moment. To confuse matters, the same charge would lie if the police fabricated evidence against someone they believed to be, or even in fact was, guilty.
You are right that abuse of public office would probably be in there too, but perverting the course of justice hits the nail squarely on the head.
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 12,981
to frame
frame 7. [Slang], to falsify evidence, testimony, etc. beforehand in order to make (a person) appear guilty. Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language (1953)
IMO you can frame people you believe to be guilty or who in fact are guilty.
frame 7. [Slang], to falsify evidence, testimony, etc. beforehand in order to make (a person) appear guilty. Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language (1953)
IMO you can frame people you believe to be guilty or who in fact are guilty.
Last edited:
RoseMontague
Published Author
Yes. Cops, prosecutors, judges, and even witnesses can convince themselves it's OK because they are doing a public service. At some point with this case many of those that may have done this had to realize they were in fact participating in a conviction of two innocent defendants, and yet continued to participate in the injustice anyway.
carbonjam72
Master Poster
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2014
- Messages
- 2,324
Framing? Yes; when, why, and how.
Numbers, your post #1626 was terrific. I'll try to address a few points you've raised, along with others.
First thing on the highlighted point anything happening before Nov 5.
For one thing, there was the trip to the cottage with Amanda on November 4, where Napoleone asked her to pick out a utensil that could have been used in the murder. As I've argued before, the fact that Stef was able to generate Meredith's profile on the blade from Raf's kitchen knife, suggests she could have done the same with any knife Amanda had picked out.
If you doubt getting Amanda's prints or DNA on a knife wasn't the point of that Nov 4th visit to the cottage, then what reasonable alternative explanation is there for asking Amanda to handle a utensil that "could have been used for the murder"?
If you doubt this is an example of "FRAMING", under any definition, then please answer that question.
SECONDLY - You've reviewed Amanda's book, WTBH. Now add in information from Raf's Book, Honor Bound. Raf says he was warned by a police woman outside the questura, and I believe that is either Nov 3rd or Nov 4th (I think its the 4th), that "he would need a lawyer for sure".
That's an indication RAF was officially a target of the police at that point in time. By deduction, it means Amanda was a target of the police at that point in time as well, because Raf has no other connection to the case.
THIRDLY - Also from Raf's book - When the knife at Raf's apartment was seized the morning of Nov 6th, Raf writes Officer Finzi selected the knife at random and asked if it was ok, and the senior officer (I forget who) responded, "it will do".
That statement seems unambiguous in representing that the police are selecting the knife as a prop, and do not genuinely believe it is connected with the murder. Moreover, that they have confidence that knife can be useful to the prosecution in some way, either to try to bluff a confession, or that evidence can be manufactured in the lab to create a "murder weapon" finding that will satisfy the courts.
FOURTH - MIgnini arrived at the crime scene at about 2pm, IIRC. Napoleone got there around 1pm (IIRC). When Mignini arrives, he is greeted by Zuagarini and Napoleone when he gets out of the car (its on a video clip I've seen somewhere). He appears to thank Zugarini, by my viewing and recollection.
Guede was known to the police for burglaries in Perugia prior to the kercher murder, as per testimony from Napoleone. Guede was caught in Milan five days before the murder with items from the burglary of the lawyers office in Perugia, in a second story entry with a rock thrown through the window. Also, neat piles of glass on the window sill or lawyers desk, a set of tools laid out neatly (IIRC), the office trashed with files overturned, made himself at home turning up the heat and (IIRC) eating food or drink. In short, similar characteristics to the Kercher crime scene.
Guede was released from Milan after a phone call with the Perugian authorities, according to a policeman from Milan quoted in an interview (Not sure where, maybe Dempsy, Burleigh, or Graham?).
So the Perugian police knew Guede from Burglaries in Perugia. Knew 5 days before the Kercher crime that he had been arrested in Milan, with another unauthorized entry, while carrying a knife intended according to Guede, "for protection", and in possession of items stolen from the Perugian lawyers office in a 2nd story robbery utilizing a rock through the window.
Steve Moore claims the Perugian police recognized Rudy's "Methodology" at the kercher crime scene, and Judge Nencini actually agreed in his motivation report.
FIFTH - Stephen Bonassi gave a statement to police on Nov 3/4 that they had had a visitor, who they played basketball with, who had left an unflushed turd in the toilet, having fallen asleep on the toilet. From this information (IIUC) the police conducted interviews and were able to adduce Rudy Guede's identity, which they then confirmed by matching his immigration records of his palm print against a bloody palm print from the murder scene.
So the police were looking for 'the baron', by Nov 4th at the latest. This means they were chasing Rudy Guede because of Bonassi's statement, not Patrick Lumumba.
SIXTH - There were hairs and blood found on Filomena's window, apparently (per Rose M) tested positive for blood, but no DNA typing could be done.
However, the hairs or DNA analysis performed, may have indicated a variety of African heritage.
Although I'm uncertain of this statement, its been reported here that a policeman saying Lumumba's phones were tapped within two days (either November 4, or 8, depending on whether you count two days from Nov 2 or Nov 6th arrest. Nov 4th seems more likely date Lumumba's phones were tapped.
SEVENTH - Mignini had just been indicted for his excesses in the Narducci trail, a transparent effort to insinuate himself into the MOF killings, which he had been pursuing since 2002 (or 2001). His theory was provided by Michele Giuttari, who was indicted along with Mignini. The claims Mignini alleged as sex orgy gone wrong and "rites of Halloween", are virtually identical to Giuttari's descriptions of the use of the female sex organs stolen from the female victims (post mortem) in the MOF killings. Winning a case on similar grounds would be undoubtedly be helpful to Mignini in salvaging his collapsing career.
Further:
Mignini and the Perugians may have felt vulnerable for having (possibly) helped Guede get released from Milan and returned to Perugia. Also vulnerable for not having prosecuted Guede for previous burglaries, which by Napoleone's testimony we know they were aware. Vulnerable because Guede may have been a low level informant, as speculated by Steve Moore and Bill Graham, and acknowledge by Mignini in Graham's article that Guede may have been an informant since his background was of the kind the police would normally use for an informant - a fact Mignini revealed to Graham 4 months after the original Dec 2009 convictions.
And Giobbi capturing a "serious criminal" is better for Giobbi's stature than capturing a minor criminal. Giobbi's attitude from the start was to over interpret "psychological evidence", rather than relying on real evidence.
EIGTH - The question keeps coming back to what the police actually believed, and when. I think the point that they didn't all believe the same thing at the same time, is true.
Paul Ciolno (?) described Mignini as "believing his own lies". So if Mignini is lying, but believes his own lies, then what is the state of his knowledge as to whether Amanda and Raf are actually innocent?
The question assumes a normal rational thought process for Mignini, and I don't think that assumption is justified.
Did the police frame a suspect? The question assumes the police have an ethic to begin with, that they care whether someone is guilty or innocent, not simply whether they can make a case. I think that assumption is also contradicted by the experts Rinaldi, Stefanoni, the postal police who destroyed the computers, the pathologist who said it had to be a multiple perps assault, and the judges who refused to allow and require full and fair discovery.
Was there framing? I think this is a cultural question that doesn't translate. There is an inherent corruption in Italian police culture that is not compatible with modern western democratic society expectations.
My answer Anglo: Yes there was framing. At first to sort out who would be framed, which took from Nov 2 and 3 at the latest. They had Bonassi's ID of Guede leaving a turd ion the toilet on Nov 3, they must have noticed the similarity of the unflushed turd at that point.
The only explanation is Mignini wanted Amanda, and he wanted her because he needed a girl for his orgy fantasy, to save his career. He knew this on day one. And he also knew on Day one that no matter what, it couldn't be 'poor Rudy'.
Best I can do. My suggestion is take the points one at a time, or any response will bloat beyond comprehension, such as we have never seen or heard before in our lives. (emoticon free post).
Numbers, your post #1626 was terrific. I'll try to address a few points you've raised, along with others.
First thing on the highlighted point anything happening before Nov 5.
For one thing, there was the trip to the cottage with Amanda on November 4, where Napoleone asked her to pick out a utensil that could have been used in the murder. As I've argued before, the fact that Stef was able to generate Meredith's profile on the blade from Raf's kitchen knife, suggests she could have done the same with any knife Amanda had picked out.
If you doubt getting Amanda's prints or DNA on a knife wasn't the point of that Nov 4th visit to the cottage, then what reasonable alternative explanation is there for asking Amanda to handle a utensil that "could have been used for the murder"?
If you doubt this is an example of "FRAMING", under any definition, then please answer that question.
SECONDLY - You've reviewed Amanda's book, WTBH. Now add in information from Raf's Book, Honor Bound. Raf says he was warned by a police woman outside the questura, and I believe that is either Nov 3rd or Nov 4th (I think its the 4th), that "he would need a lawyer for sure".
That's an indication RAF was officially a target of the police at that point in time. By deduction, it means Amanda was a target of the police at that point in time as well, because Raf has no other connection to the case.
THIRDLY - Also from Raf's book - When the knife at Raf's apartment was seized the morning of Nov 6th, Raf writes Officer Finzi selected the knife at random and asked if it was ok, and the senior officer (I forget who) responded, "it will do".
That statement seems unambiguous in representing that the police are selecting the knife as a prop, and do not genuinely believe it is connected with the murder. Moreover, that they have confidence that knife can be useful to the prosecution in some way, either to try to bluff a confession, or that evidence can be manufactured in the lab to create a "murder weapon" finding that will satisfy the courts.
FOURTH - MIgnini arrived at the crime scene at about 2pm, IIRC. Napoleone got there around 1pm (IIRC). When Mignini arrives, he is greeted by Zuagarini and Napoleone when he gets out of the car (its on a video clip I've seen somewhere). He appears to thank Zugarini, by my viewing and recollection.
Guede was known to the police for burglaries in Perugia prior to the kercher murder, as per testimony from Napoleone. Guede was caught in Milan five days before the murder with items from the burglary of the lawyers office in Perugia, in a second story entry with a rock thrown through the window. Also, neat piles of glass on the window sill or lawyers desk, a set of tools laid out neatly (IIRC), the office trashed with files overturned, made himself at home turning up the heat and (IIRC) eating food or drink. In short, similar characteristics to the Kercher crime scene.
Guede was released from Milan after a phone call with the Perugian authorities, according to a policeman from Milan quoted in an interview (Not sure where, maybe Dempsy, Burleigh, or Graham?).
So the Perugian police knew Guede from Burglaries in Perugia. Knew 5 days before the Kercher crime that he had been arrested in Milan, with another unauthorized entry, while carrying a knife intended according to Guede, "for protection", and in possession of items stolen from the Perugian lawyers office in a 2nd story robbery utilizing a rock through the window.
Steve Moore claims the Perugian police recognized Rudy's "Methodology" at the kercher crime scene, and Judge Nencini actually agreed in his motivation report.
FIFTH - Stephen Bonassi gave a statement to police on Nov 3/4 that they had had a visitor, who they played basketball with, who had left an unflushed turd in the toilet, having fallen asleep on the toilet. From this information (IIUC) the police conducted interviews and were able to adduce Rudy Guede's identity, which they then confirmed by matching his immigration records of his palm print against a bloody palm print from the murder scene.
So the police were looking for 'the baron', by Nov 4th at the latest. This means they were chasing Rudy Guede because of Bonassi's statement, not Patrick Lumumba.
SIXTH - There were hairs and blood found on Filomena's window, apparently (per Rose M) tested positive for blood, but no DNA typing could be done.
However, the hairs or DNA analysis performed, may have indicated a variety of African heritage.
Although I'm uncertain of this statement, its been reported here that a policeman saying Lumumba's phones were tapped within two days (either November 4, or 8, depending on whether you count two days from Nov 2 or Nov 6th arrest. Nov 4th seems more likely date Lumumba's phones were tapped.
SEVENTH - Mignini had just been indicted for his excesses in the Narducci trail, a transparent effort to insinuate himself into the MOF killings, which he had been pursuing since 2002 (or 2001). His theory was provided by Michele Giuttari, who was indicted along with Mignini. The claims Mignini alleged as sex orgy gone wrong and "rites of Halloween", are virtually identical to Giuttari's descriptions of the use of the female sex organs stolen from the female victims (post mortem) in the MOF killings. Winning a case on similar grounds would be undoubtedly be helpful to Mignini in salvaging his collapsing career.
Further:
Mignini and the Perugians may have felt vulnerable for having (possibly) helped Guede get released from Milan and returned to Perugia. Also vulnerable for not having prosecuted Guede for previous burglaries, which by Napoleone's testimony we know they were aware. Vulnerable because Guede may have been a low level informant, as speculated by Steve Moore and Bill Graham, and acknowledge by Mignini in Graham's article that Guede may have been an informant since his background was of the kind the police would normally use for an informant - a fact Mignini revealed to Graham 4 months after the original Dec 2009 convictions.
And Giobbi capturing a "serious criminal" is better for Giobbi's stature than capturing a minor criminal. Giobbi's attitude from the start was to over interpret "psychological evidence", rather than relying on real evidence.
EIGTH - The question keeps coming back to what the police actually believed, and when. I think the point that they didn't all believe the same thing at the same time, is true.
Paul Ciolno (?) described Mignini as "believing his own lies". So if Mignini is lying, but believes his own lies, then what is the state of his knowledge as to whether Amanda and Raf are actually innocent?
The question assumes a normal rational thought process for Mignini, and I don't think that assumption is justified.
Did the police frame a suspect? The question assumes the police have an ethic to begin with, that they care whether someone is guilty or innocent, not simply whether they can make a case. I think that assumption is also contradicted by the experts Rinaldi, Stefanoni, the postal police who destroyed the computers, the pathologist who said it had to be a multiple perps assault, and the judges who refused to allow and require full and fair discovery.
Was there framing? I think this is a cultural question that doesn't translate. There is an inherent corruption in Italian police culture that is not compatible with modern western democratic society expectations.
My answer Anglo: Yes there was framing. At first to sort out who would be framed, which took from Nov 2 and 3 at the latest. They had Bonassi's ID of Guede leaving a turd ion the toilet on Nov 3, they must have noticed the similarity of the unflushed turd at that point.
The only explanation is Mignini wanted Amanda, and he wanted her because he needed a girl for his orgy fantasy, to save his career. He knew this on day one. And he also knew on Day one that no matter what, it couldn't be 'poor Rudy'.
Best I can do. My suggestion is take the points one at a time, or any response will bloat beyond comprehension, such as we have never seen or heard before in our lives. (emoticon free post).
Last edited:
I wonder if Ross Grantham and James Pang are tangled in this web in the Mark Lundy case.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Even the NEW YORK TIMES and THE TELEGRAPH you have to subcribe to view. I subscribe to each.
<snip>
Edited by Loss Leader:
Edited for Rules 0/12
Last edited by a moderator:
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
We know Amanda was not alarmed, as any normal person would be. We only have her word the door was even open. Having told Filomena she had had a shower and now was worried, she had to think of a way to get Filomena concerned. You note, she didn't tell Filomena at any time her room had been ransacked or burgled.
So, on the one hand, she tells police she noticed all sorts of "strange" things including a long smear of blood on the bathroom floor, blood on the tap, blood on the mat, faeces in the toilet, but then, to explain why they were not reported, we have a wholly contradictory story of not being too concerned as "I thought maybe someone was emptying the trash", or, "I thought it must be from my earrings", when any fule kno ear lobe blood doesn't drip as there are no major arteries there.
Kevin_Lowe
Unregistered
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2003
- Messages
- 12,221
You're reading an awful lot into not very much here.
Wouldn't you rather talk about the time of death? Guilty Amanda or innocent Amanda could behave in ways you personally happen to find unexpected, but if it's impossible for Amanda to have been present when the murder happened that would mean she was definitely innocent. Wouldn't that save a lot of time?
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
We had the Guildford Four case. Very political. On the whole, the police pull rank and protect themselves (cf Jean Charles de Menez shot by the police at Stockwell; noone has taken responsibilty).
anglolawyer
Banned
Equally, it would save time if Vixen got her facts straight. This is untrue, for example. See WTBH location 871.Kevin_Lowe said:
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
That is completely wrong, which is why I objected to "rogue juror" Bellerina babblings.
We have a problem in England & Wales as juries tend to feel so sorry for the guy in the dock, they only convict in one-third of cases.
Commit rape, and you have an excellent chance of walking free.
Noone considers the victim.
Last edited:
anglolawyer
Banned
anglolawyer
Banned
No one.
Where did this come from? Since the threshold for the merits test for the CPS to prosecute is a 50% chance of success, winning two-thirds of the time suggests they are getting it right and that the claimed rate of acquittals (citation please) is in line with expectations.
ETA correction - I misread your post as saying the CPS convicts in two thirds of cases. I bet you are dead wrong and anyway that you are talking about not guilty pleas. The hit-rate if guilty pleas are taken into account is probably in the 90s in percentage terms. It's your claim, however, and you are free to back it up with any credible source (such as the CPS, which has the figures on its web-site I believe).
Last edited:
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
I was on a jury and the defendant actually testified he was carrying a cosh as a weapon (a long bag full of coins) and a baton. He confirmed he actually hit somebody with it when the person accidently bumped into his girlfriend on the underground. My fellow jurors insisted on finding him, "not guilty", as they just wanted to get home.
anglolawyer
Banned
Right, that would explain it …
What was the charge? Possession of offensive weapon, assault, GBH, loitering with intent, bowling a hoop or beating carpets on a Sunday … ?
carbonjam72
Master Poster
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2014
- Messages
- 2,324
CJ72's Simplified Scorecard on "Framing":
1. Getting Amanda to reach for knife on Nov 4, 2007 = Framing, Yes or No?
2. From Raf's Book - Raf warned by Policewoman outside Questura to call a lawyer on Nov 4(?) - Framing, Yes or No?
3. Knife seized from Raf's kitchen at random on Nov 6th - Police knew stef could manufacture a match no matter what knife chosen? Police knew knife had nothing to do with murder, but could make use of it anyway? - Framing, Yes or No?
4. Mignini, Zugarini and/or Napoleone recognized Rudy Guede's style of breaking and entry: Framing, Yes or No?
5. Stefan Bonassi's statement to police on Nov 3/4 of non flushing visitor to cottage, sets police off to ID Rudy Guede (while thy were tapping Patrick's phones) Framing Yes or No?
6. Blood and hair on Filomena's window - positive for blood, delayed testing, suppressed profiles & data? Framing, Yes or No?
7. Mignini shaping Kercher murder into mirror of his previous claims in Narducci trail, excesses for which he had just then been indicted - Framing, Yes or No?
8. States of mind, differs in Mignini from normal people (is he a high functioning psychotic)? Differs in police (are they hopelessly endemically corrupt)? Are "what did he" or "they Know" not a straightforward question, without answering whether they are 1 Sane or 2 corrupt. Framing Yes or No?
9. Carbo-conclusions: Yes there was framing. At first to sort out who would be framed, which took from Nov 2 and 3 at the latest. They had Bonassi's ID of Guede leaving a turd ion the toilet on Nov 3, they must have noticed the similarity of the unflushed turd at that point. The only explanation is Mignini wanted Amanda, and he wanted her because he needed a girl for his orgy fantasy, to save his career. He knew this on day one. And he also knew on Day one that no matter what, it couldn't be 'poor Rudy'.
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 15,713
We do? Why then did Amanda phone Filomena, her mother and Raffaele phoned his sister? Why did RS and AK invite the postals inside to inspect the condition of the cottage?
Grinder
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 10,033
In order to take the temp the body needed to be moved and a thermometer inserted in a part of the body that could have been violated in a rape. As you remember a print ot two was found under the body.
I'm saying it was clear she had been dead for quite some time from the state of rigor and touch temp. If correct, a temp at after 2 in the afternoon wouldn't provide a narrow TOD because of the vagaries of ambient temp and when the duvet was put on.
Also the pros
o) couldn't get there for hours from RomeVixen
Penultimate Amazing
What page no. is that, please?
- Status