Continuation Part 16: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[MichaelB]

Hi Zotz,
I gather from reading abit today that we only get to read or hear about 11 minutes of a 3 hour long recorded Skype call.

3 hours!?!

I really want to read an English translation of what Rudy Guede said over 3 hours!

Add this to my request to someday read an English translation of Rudy's 7 hour long 1st Italian Interrogation from Dec. 7, 2007, after he was extradited from Germany.


Listen to the Skype call,
you can tell it's been edited and is missing parts.
But you can't really tell this just by reading the transcribed Skype call transaltions.


Heck, the part that Grinder was harping about has Guede saying he wasn't even there,
yet then soon afterwards, he's describing his date with Meredith.

Giacomo must have coaxed it out of him:
"Come on Rudy, everyone knows you were there, quit lying" or something like that.

Listen also to his tone of voice,
he's yackin' away as he tries to explain things, yak, yak, yak, yak, yak!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAq7c7SjxYA&feature=youtu.be

Maybe much of the recorded and partially released call that we the public get to listen to is from later on during the 3 hour talk. For the dude doesn't sound that scared to me at all.
My opinion only,
RW

PS - By the way,
welcome to The Group!

This 55 pages of Skype call transcript is different to what's on the audio. We just don't have it translated.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Rudy-Guede-Skype-Call-Transcript-OCR.pdf

ETA: And that 55 pages is different to what's on Ergon's fake wiki. So it's a third part of a 3 hour conversation.

Also I don't believe the Skype Call was entered into evidence and I saw Maresca object to it being admitted in the defense motions debate on Oct 9, 2009. Only the chat was admitted and you see it quoted in the Hellmann Report.

 

[Numbers]

This 55 pages of Skype call transcript is different to what's on the audio. We just don't have it translated.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Rudy-Guede-Skype-Call-Transcript-OCR.pdf

ETA: And that 55 pages is different to what's on Ergon's fake wiki. So it's a third part of a 3 hour conversation.
Also I don't believe the Skype Call was entered into evidence and I saw Maresca object to it being admitted in the defense motions debate on Oct 9, 2009. Only the chat was admitted and you see it quoted in the Hellmann Report.

The Skype call document begins on page 47 and continues to page 92. Is there any information on what was on the pages before page 47? Could it have been more information about Guede? Is you meaning that this part is the last part of a conversation that begins on an earlier page, such as page 1, and continues through page 46?

 

[Annella]

The Skype call document begins on page 47 and continues to page 92. Is there any information on what was on the pages before page 47? Could it have been more information about Guede? Is you meaning that this part is the last part of a conversation that begins on an earlier page, such as page 1, and continues through page 46?

I have just skimmed some of the first pages and was very surprised to read Guede left Italy sans 'documenti'...I am assuming the same documents I had when I lived there. Carta d'identita ( Identity card) and Codice Fiscale. Seems he fled in a BIG hurry. Now why would that be??

 

[LondonJohn]

Lol. Mignini is in complete denial. Desperately trying to turn back the clock.

It's extraordinary isn't it? And still some people try to refute the idea that he's a vindictive megalomaniac..........

 

[MichaelB]

It's extraordinary isn't it? And still some people try to refute the idea that he's a vindictive megalomaniac..........

Why would Mignini give this to Peter Quennell? I assume that's who it gave it to since FastPete was posting snippets on both .nut and .org.

 

[katy_did]

Ah sorry - I wasn't meaning to snipe or nitpick. It's just that the term "remand" has a very specific meaning in English judicial language: it concerns the retention of a person in custody (usually prison). On the other hand, the term "remit" means to send the case back to trial in a lower court.

And since there was talk that if the Marasca SC had remitted the case back to another appeal level trial, Sollecito (and, theoretically at least, Knox) might have been remanded back into custody pending that new trial, I just wanted to avoid any confusion. In the event of course, the SC was sentient and sage enough to throw the whole case out on its (abject lack of) merits, so the question of remand never needed to arise.

I think "remand" actually has two meanings, the one you describe, and to send a case back to a lower court for review. I remember checking it during some translation or other, as I wasn't sure myself! See the dictionary.com definition for example:

Law.

(a) to send back (a case) to a lower court from which it was appealed, with instructions as to what further proceedings should be had.

(b) (of a court or magistrate) to send back (a prisoner or accused person) into custody, as to await further proceedings.

Possibly there are regional differences in the frequency with which one or the other is used, with "remit" being more common in the UK.

(Catching up on my phone so apologies if I've missed some earlier context)

 

[Kauffer]

I think "remand" actually has two meanings, the one you describe, and to send a case back to a lower court for review. I remember checking it during some translation or other, as I wasn't sure myself! See the dictionary.com definition for example:



Possibly there are regional differences in the frequency with which one or the other is used, with "remit" being more common in the UK.

(Catching up on my phone so apologies if I've missed some earlier context)

Yes, "remand" can be used in either sense.

http://web.archive.org/web/20100205121001/http://www.thelawencyclopedia.com/term/remand

 

[Kauffer]

It's extraordinary isn't it? And still some people try to refute the idea that he's a vindictive megalomaniac..........

Yep. But you can understand why he's furious. The article quoted by them in this alleged suit is devastating:

"a sadistic dogged obstinacy against two young people whose only fault was to know the victim ...”"

What astounds me is that he repeats some of the mythology of the case - mixed blood, for example, and refers to his impartiality as a prosecutor - the idea of the schizophrenia associated with the role you have referred to before - part of Italian legal culture.

His reputation is trashed - it may be destroyed when the motivation emerges. I do understand how he feels. For us, this is schadenfreude!

Perhaps of more long term interest, in denying, comprehensively, the legitimacy of the fifth section's decision in the case, it will trigger much opinion amongst Italian jurists and focuses our attention on whatever justifications the court may offer in its report for the action it has taken. Mignini clearly believes that 530(2) is a weak acquittal.

 

[Strozzi]

Is there anyone who Mignini has NOT brought charges against? Like most bullies, he appears very insecure.

How can anyone defend this man?

Machiavelli should be able to answer this. However, he has not posted here since shortly after the late March judgement by the ISC exonerating the two defendants.

 

[Strozzi]

I have just skimmed some of the first pages and was very surprised to read Guede left Italy sans 'documenti'...I am assuming the same documents I had when I lived there. Carta d'identita ( Identity card) and Codice Fiscale. Seems he fled in a BIG hurry. Now why would that be??

He was in a hurry. Rudi wasn't thinking clearly. Leaving his documents behind indicates that he was in a panic.

Are these documents wallet-sized? If so, wouldn't they normally be carried by a man in his wallet? Why were they not in his wallet?

 

[carbonjam72]

Yep. But you can understand why he's furious. The article quoted by them in this alleged suit is devastating:

"a sadistic dogged obstinacy against two young people whose only fault was to know the victim ...”"
What astounds me is that he repeats some of the mythology of the case - mixed blood, for example, and refers to his impartiality as a prosecutor - the idea of the schizophrenia associated with the role you have referred to before - part of Italian legal culture.

His reputation is trashed - it may be destroyed when the motivation emerges. I do understand how he feels. For us, this is schadenfreude!

Perhaps of more long term interest, in denying, comprehensively, the legitimacy of the fifth section's decision in the case, it will trigger much opinion amongst Italian jurists and focuses our attention on whatever justifications the court may offer in its report for the action it has taken. Mignini clearly believes that 530(2) is a weak acquittal.

Is there a link to the article itself, or is this from Mignini's law suit document?

Sounds pretty accurate and fair to me.

 

[Annella]

[/HILITE]

He was in a hurry. Rudi wasn't thinking clearly. Leaving his documents behind indicates that he was in a panic.

Are these documents wallet-sized? If so, wouldn't they normally be carried by a man in his wallet? Why were they not in his wallet?

They are the type of documents ALWAYS carried in a purse or wallet.

 

[carbonjam72]

Mignini's Gambit

Yep. But you can understand why he's furious. The article quoted by them in this alleged suit is devastating:

"a sadistic dogged obstinacy against two young people whose only fault was to know the victim ...”"

What astounds me is that he repeats some of the mythology of the case - mixed blood, for example, and refers to his impartiality as a prosecutor - the idea of the schizophrenia associated with the role you have referred to before - part of Italian legal culture.

His reputation is trashed - it may be destroyed when the motivation emerges. I do understand how he feels. For us, this is schadenfreude!

Perhaps of more long term interest, in denying, comprehensively, the legitimacy of the fifth section's decision in the case, it will trigger much opinion amongst Italian jurists and focuses our attention on whatever justifications the court may offer in its report for the action it has taken. Mignini clearly believes that 530(2) is a weak acquittal.

I had a chance to read more of this, and I get the sense that this is Mignini attempting to position the coming Marasca motivation report by emphasizing how much support for his theories he has "collected at every stage" of the 7+ years legal process.

Mignini is saying that he cannot be criticized, without also criticizing all the judges who have supported his beliefs at each stage of the prosecution, and highlighting his most notable triumphs - like multiple attackers confirmed by ISC.

There still seems a kind of desperation to all this. And a lot of Mignini's arguments could literally vanish in Marasca's report.

What if Marasca finds there is only certain evidence a a single attacker, and that all the autopsy experts except one supported that belief? What if Marasca goes back to Hellman's claim that the break-in was real? Or acknowledges the DNA evidence is flawed, and even more, that the underlying data was concealed?

I don't think this is Mignnini trying to win a case, but rather to tamp down public opinion against him, keep his adversaries on the defensive, and position himself in a defensive posture for Marasca's report by aligning himself with all the judges and favorable judicial conclusions he has gathered along the way.

This Mignini does not disappoint. I still think he's toast. But he really does stick to his guns. He's like a japanese zero flying a Kama Kazi law suit into a courtroom.

 

[acbytesla]

Wow, this is a real catch all.
"Against those responsible for the conduct described in the current document, that is Advocate Luca MAORI, Alberto LAGANA’ and Bruno BRUNORI, in their roles above indicated, to identify fully and against anyone who may have been an accessory in the publication of the article"
I note this includes a criminal case so those named and anyone else is potentially subject to imprisonment, as well as damages. Mignini certainly generates a lot of collateral court places. I wonder if this is usual in Italy or if he is an outlier.

The problem is court cases are expensive. The magazine may feel it is cheaper to strike a deal rather than fight. Even if they do fight it, given how slow the court system flows it may be a long time before we see Mignini on the stand nice as it would be to see him subject to a detailed examination.

This really strikes me as a petulant self justification. The danger for Mignini is it lays him open to examination and will allow the defendants to claim access to lots of documents around the process of the examination. The other danger is that the media will pile in against Mignini, since all these allegations can be reported.

It is interesting how much weight Mignini puts on the fast track trial of Guede to justify the case against Sollecito and Knox;
"proceedings have concluded with the conviction of Rudy for offence in company with another two subjects (in the judgment Ms Knox and Mr Sollecito are themselves indicated) in the murder and other matters but not in the staging of the offence." Even a student lawyer should be able to see the danger of using a case in which individuals are not defendants to justify a criminal conviction.

Mignini is a perfect example of a vexatious litigant. Lawyers in the U.S. Can be disbarred for this. That Mignini is an official of the state makes this my he more abusive.

Vexatious litigation is legal action which is brought, regardless of its merits, solely to harass or subdue an adversary. It may take the form of a primary frivolous lawsuit or may be the repetitive, burdensome, and unwarranted filing of meritless motions in a matter which is otherwise a meritorious cause of action. Filing vexatious litigation is considered an abuse of the judicial process and may result in sanctions against the offender.

I thought Mignini was not going to have to answer for his abuse of power. Now, I'm convinced he must be taken down.

 

[Strozzi]

They are the type of documents ALWAYS carried in a purse or wallet.

OK. My question then is why did Rudi leave Perugia without these two forms of ID?

• Did he as a matter of habit not carry his ID's in his wallet?
• Did he remove his ID's from his wallet after the murder because he had to wash his wallet?
• Did he leave his wallet behind when he left for Germany?

 

[Grinder]

Hi Grinder,[/

Source:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Rudy_Guede's_Skype_Conversation
There is much more info from the Skype call in there.

Quite a find and from a source no guilter is allowed to use.

Listen, you know I knew those girls, I knew them both, Meredith and Amanda, but nothing more, you know that. I've been to their house twice, the last time a few days before all this business, but I didn't do anything. I have nothing to do with this business. I wasn't there that evening. If they have found my fingerprints it means I must have left them there before.



Here's CD's version -

“Listen, you know I knew those girls, I knew them both, Meredith and Amanda, but nothing more, you know that,” Rudy told a friend during a long Skype call on Nov. 19, 2007, several weeks after Kercher’s brutal slashing. He was sleeping rough in Germany, where he’d fled after the murder. Even though police had found his bloody handprint on the victim’s pillow, he insisted: “I’ve been to their house twice, the last time a few days before all this business, but I didn’t do anything. I have nothing to do with this business. I wasn’t there that evening. If they have found my fingerprints it means I must have left them there before.

It would seem CD got the translation from PMF, unless you think that two people did identical translations.

I'm impressed with your find and expect that when the amandaknoxcase people get around to it that it will be similar.

I will be particularly interested in the total context.

At this moment I will concede CD's account of this was correct but not that she isn't loose with the truth. Even here she seems to insert the part about his bloody palm print which I didn't see in the Thoughtful translation.

Thanks again for finding the actual source of something, in this case Thoughtful.

 

[Strozzi]

Mignini is a perfect example of a vexatious litigant. Lawyers in the U.S. Can be disbarred for this. That Mignini is an official of the state makes this my he more abusive.


I thought Mignini was not going to have to answer for his abuse of power. Now, I'm convinced he must be taken down.

In 2007 an administrative law judge in Washington DC was removed from the bench because he filed a lawsuit against a dry cleaner for losing his suit pants. The dry cleaner offered payment for the lost garment, but the judge sued for $67 million damages and kept the case going for years with appeals to higher courts. It showed the judge lacked judicial temperament (or that he suffered mental illness). See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson_v._Chung

Do you see parallels with Mignini?

 

[carbonjam72]

OK. My question then is why did Rudi leave Perugia without these two forms of ID?

• Did he as a matter of habit not carry his ID's in his wallet?
• Did he remove his ID's from his wallet after the murder because he had to wash his wallet?
• Did he leave his wallet behind when he left for Germany?

Great questions. Did Rudy take Kercher's credit cards or cash, and was worried about blood residue on his wallet?

 

[carbonjam72]

Mignini is a perfect example of a vexatious litigant. Lawyers in the U.S. Can be disbarred for this. That Mignini is an official of the state makes this my he more abusive.


I thought Mignini was not going to have to answer for his abuse of power. Now, I'm convinced he must be taken down.

Looking at Mignini's lawsuit again, I think he can't help but respond to a published article that basically calls him out on all his crap.

The article accused him of an "orgy of power", and the suit specifically complains about the use of the word, "orgy".

The suit is pretty interesting in that it complains not just about what was being said, but that the author was especially rude about it.

If MIgnini didn't reply to it, then it would be like publicly admitting the article was correct.

Still wish I could find the original article in case anyone has a link. I couldn't find it.

 

[MichaelB]

Looking at Mignini's lawsuit again, I think he can't help but respond to a published article that basically calls him out on all his crap.

The article accused him of an "orgy of power", and the suit specifically complains about the use of the word, "orgy".

The suit is pretty interesting in that it complains not just about what was being said, but that the author was especially rude about it.

If MIgnini didn't reply to it, then it would be like publicly admitting the article was correct.

Still wish I could find the original article in case anyone has a link. I couldn't find it.

I can't find the article. It's not online. I did find this one from last July from the same magazine.