Continuation Part 17: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here's another gem, fresh from twitter:

-------------------------
Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 2h2 hours ago
Nearly a dozen witnesses to testify in Sept #amandaknox calumny trial: interpreters, Aussie-Italian English-speaking cop & others.
--------------------------
(courtesy demarcation line to keep Bill from falling out of his chair again).

Looks like a party of the prosecutor, who's bringing the party hats?

Is this a criminal trial, or civil? I can't even keep this crap straight anymore.

What are they crying about? Amanda said that they "hit" her or that they violated her rights?

Do they know that Amanda won't be there?
 
Is this a criminal trial, or civil? I can't even keep this crap straight anymore.

What are they crying about? Amanda said that they "hit" her or that they violated her rights?

Do they know that Amanda won't be there?

I think this is a criminal trial, but I may be wrong.

Mach might know, much as I hesitate to invoke the name of he who mustn't be named.

It may be there are criminal and civil aspects to the case. But if the statute of limitations run out, it may be that only the civil elements would apply in any judgement that gets issued. I really don't know. It's a confusing mess, with summers off.
 
Here's another gem, fresh from twitter:

-------------------------
Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 2h2 hours ago
Nearly a dozen witnesses to testify in Sept #amandaknox calumny trial: interpreters, Aussie-Italian English-speaking cop & others.
--------------------------
(courtesy demarcation line to keep Bill from falling out of his chair again).

Looks like a party of the prosecutor, who's bringing the party hats?

Do you think they'll produce the recordings to show how professional they were?
 
Amanda should hire some bum off the street (Curatolo if he was still alive) as her defense for $5/hour to save some money.
 
There's an episode of Air Crash Investigation (it's called Mayday in the US/Canada I think) about the "Ustica Massacre" incident (the downing of Itavia 870) which has just been shown here in the UK. It shows vividly just how inept the investigation and inquiry was - at every level from the air accident investigation to the various judgements in the highest courts in the land. It also pointedly shows widespread corruption and misconduct at various levels within the Italian military (surprise surprise!), and how the court system routinely abuses the statute of limitations to "make problems go away".

In addition, the programme's main thrust is that the authorities decided upon a particular theory (that the aircraft was brought down by a military missile) without any evidence to support this theory. Furthermore, when competent investigators (including one from the UK AAIB) found solid evidence suggesting that the flight had been brought down by a bomb that had been planted within the aircraft, this was rejected by the authorities (up to and including the Italian SC) on the apparent basis that they "preferred" to stick with their own a priori theory of missile strike.

The resonances with the Knox/Sollecito trial process are many and various. The Italian "justice" system is a manifest failure which is totally unfit for purpose. One of the interviewees in the programme was David Learmount, who's a highly respected British aviation expert and journalist/broadcaster. He said something that rang so true with respect to the Knox/Sollecito trial fiasco that I had to rewind to capture the words correctly. He said this:

"I'm sorry, but Italy is a dreadful place to have an aviation accident. If you want the truth, you're less likely to find it there than just about anywhere else in the World"


And all it requires is to substitute "to have an aviation accident" for "to be accused of a serious crime".

Italy's a sad, corrupt, inept joke. I love the country, (most) of its people, its culture, its architecture, its scenery, its climate and its food. But I would never in a million years do business there if I had any personal financial or reputational exposure, and I sure as heck would never want to risk ever getting involved in any sort of civil or criminal investigation.

And perhaps another good thing to have come out of the trauma, tragedy and farce of the Knox/Sollecito trials might be that more people now realise that Italy is to be avoided for anything more than limited tourism and admiration from afar - until and unless they sort out their horribly broken justice system.
 
Is this a criminal trial, or civil? I can't even keep this crap straight anymore.

What are they crying about? Amanda said that they "hit" her or that they violated her rights?

Do they know that Amanda won't be there?

Criminal. Hitting would be a criminal act.
 
Reading the comments on Rudi's blood reminded me of Massei's logic on the clean-up. You know stuff wasn't there so it must have been cleaned up. In this example he must have bled so they must have found it or at least it must have been there. It made me wonder at what point Stef decided to stop producing evidence for the unknown perp and how she covered up what was found after that perp was in custody.

Also looked at the knife cut photo montage at amandaknoxcase.com and wondered who would ever hold a knife as shown. It is upside down. Either it would be gripped for a puncture wound with the hand wrapped around the handle or a slashing/wave cut - in neither case would the cuts result where they found them. Also the cuts could not have occurred in one instance yet they appear to be exactly parallel. I say self inflicted to look like defensive wounds. And since we all get to use our own examples - I cut my thumb with a box cutter (undoing a sofa packaging) and used hydrogen peroxide and rubbing alcohol on it, both of which delay healing, yet a week later almost healed. When it was fresh it was quite noticeable.

Vinci-Guedesrighthandinjuries.jpg


I'm surprised no one yet has commented on the odd coincidence that the knife in the nursery so resembled the "murder" knife found at Raf's. I'm sure Prato and the Milan LE must have been in on the framing.

ETA - Oh and the defense experts said the knife had a hilt and left a bruise.
 
Last edited:
Isn't the point that Guede had healed cuts on his hand and said he cut himself defending from the attacker's knife during the murder? So Guede either connected his coincidental hand wounds to the murder for no reason, or he was cut and they didn't find or didn't release evidence of it.
 
.

Certainly possible nellie, but I think the wounds on Rudy's hand are also compatible with a right handed person trying to parry a knife held by another right handed person.

What I am trying to account for is the viciousness of the attack. Is Rudy capable of such an attack without anger?

I feel that substituting Meredith for the unknown stranger in Rudy's re-creation of the confrontation that happened when he came out of the bathroom might be closer to the truth.

My speculative scenario is that Meredith was in the main living area when she sensed that someone was in the second bathroom. She grabbed a sharp knife from the kitchen drying rack as a precaution and cautiously went towards the bathroom. Rudy appeared with his pants half down, per his story, and Meredith instinctively thrust the knife forward to deter him. Rudy, probably not even realizing she was holding a knife, grabbed for her hand as a token of friendship and was cut by the knife. The injury combined with the implicit rejection of him as a friend, illogical as it sounds, sparked his rage.

As I say, pure speculation. but how do you account for the viciousness of the attack? To me it resembles the violence too often inflicted in a fit of rage by jilted and jealous lovers.

Has anybody every tried to match the bed sheet knife print with one of the kitchen's knives?

Cody
.

There is another scenario where your theory of Guede's anger at his cut hand led to a more vicious attack could be right. If Guede stabbed Kercher first, wounded his hand, became enraged or panicked this might have led to the slicing cuts on Kercher's neck. I'm basing this conjecture on the idea that the order of the cuts isn't known, but if it is perhaps this possibility could be ruled out.

The actual details of this aren't one of the things that interest me much about this case, but it is on the periphery of the question about why Guede murdered Kercher. Based on what we know of his background the murder does not seem to be an expected event. What was going on in Guede's head that led to this? Perhaps it was drugs, perhaps it was just massive despair at the way his life was going or perhaps it was just out of control fear when he realized that he had broken into a house where somebody was present that could recognize him and report him.

In a more normal investigation of a murder, there would have been an investigation that focused more on the actual murderer than in this case and there is the chance that questions about the motivations of the murderer and his mental state at the time of the murder might have been investigated. At this point, it seems unlikely that any more information relevant to the actual murderer and the actual murder will ever be released.
 
Isn't the point that Guede had healed cuts on his hand and said he cut himself defending from the attacker's knife during the murder? So Guede either connected his coincidental hand wounds to the murder for no reason, or he was cut and they didn't find or didn't release evidence of it.

It is possible that he was cut and bled at the cottage and they didn't find the blood in a way to identify it or that they for some reason didn't acknowledge finding it. There is no reason to believe he only bled on the purse and sweater. If they found it before Rudi was known it is hard for me to believe they would have suppressed that, as they did release the palm print and DNA on the toilet paper.

It is also possible that Rudi in making up his story cut his hands in a place that would line up as defensive wounds would.

Others vehemently disagree but I find it very difficult to believe with wounds that would still be visible 3 weeks later that he would go out dancing or at least without a double Michael Jackson impersonation.
 
It is possible that he was cut and bled at the cottage and they didn't find the blood in a way to identify it or that they for some reason didn't acknowledge finding it. There is no reason to believe he only bled on the purse and sweater. If they found it before Rudi was known it is hard for me to believe they would have suppressed that, as they did release the palm print and DNA on the toilet paper.

It is also possible that Rudi in making up his story cut his hands in a place that would line up as defensive wounds would.

Others vehemently disagree but I find it very difficult to believe with wounds that would still be visible 3 weeks later that he would go out dancing or at least without a double Michael Jackson impersonation.

Well I don't agree or disagree, I'm just going by what seems the more plausible story. Rudy is certainly dumb enough to think making up defensive wounds he never received would help his case, but perhaps he's also dumb enough to go dancing with a wounded hand. I don't think the story is capable of confirming anything with the case though in regards to corruption vs incompetence.
 
Reading the comments on Rudi's blood reminded me of Massei's logic on the clean-up. You know stuff wasn't there so it must have been cleaned up. In this example he must have bled so they must have found it or at least it must have been there. It made me wonder at what point Stef decided to stop producing evidence for the unknown perp and how she covered up what was found after that perp was in custody.

...

You do understand the difference between idle internet speculation and making a judicial finding that is supposed to be based on evidence?

If your response meant to apply to an earlier post of mine then I think you missed my point entirely. I don't think I can make it any better than I did before so I will just link to it:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=10813725#post10813725

If you decide to read it please take note of the fact that I am not making a judicial finding and I openly acknowledge that I could be wrong.

One more comment on the hand injury. I mentioned earlier that I had cut myself accidentally on many occasions in the course of doing general renovation work. At times the cuts have been fairly deep and they bled a lot. But duct tape is your friend for this kind of thing. In an hour or so you can take the tape off and the bleeding has stopped and if the cut was a clean slice people are very unlikely to notice it. As to your comment about how long it would take for a wound to heal: I wasn't sure but I wondered whether any cut I'd ever had would have been as noticeable as the cuts seem to be in the pictures of Guede's hand after three weeks. Maybe you're right, three weeks was a long time for those cuts to be as noticeable as they were.

Once again it would have been nice if the people investigating this murder had focused a bit more on the person that actually did the crime. In this case, getting a qualified individual to look at the wounds and provide a rough estimate as to when they occurred would be about the minimum that I would have expected of any police force investigating a murder.
 
Once again it would have been nice if the people investigating this murder had focused a bit more on the person that actually did the crime. In this case, getting a qualified individual to look at the wounds and provide a rough estimate as to when they occurred would be about the minimum that I would have expected of any police force investigating a murder.

It's actually kind of funny that the Italian police managed to inadvertently solve this crime in spite of their best efforts not to. But if you think about it, if they had actually investigated the murder and the murderer in a proper and thorough way, none of us would have heard of it or Guede.
 
It's actually kind of funny that the Italian police managed to inadvertently solve this crime in spite of their best efforts not to. But if you think about it, if they had actually investigated the murder and the murderer in a proper and thorough way, none of us would have heard of it or Guede.

I did think of that.
 
Is this a criminal trial, or civil? I can't even keep this crap straight anymore.

What are they crying about? Amanda said that they "hit" her or that they violated her rights?

Do they know that Amanda won't be there?

This is, AFAIK, a continuation of the criminal trial for calunnia against the police based on the charges first brought against Amanda Knox following her testimony about her interrogation in Massei's court in 2009. Since she repeated her statements that police had hit her and otherwise violated her rights in each of her trial appeals, the charge against her now is aggravated continuing calunnia. The "aggravation" relates to the allegation by the prosecution that she committed calunnia against the police to help cover up her alleged calunnia against Patrick Lumumba.

There is, AFAIK, also a civil action from at least some of the police officers involved in the interrogation that is joined to this court case.

It is unlikely that the case will reach any conclusion; most likely it will run out of statutory allowed time.
 
...
It is unlikely that the case will reach any conclusion; most likely it will run out of statutory allowed time.

A bunch of police who had questionable standing and an even more questionable basis to bring a suit but liked the idea of winning some money, a prosecutor that did no known investigation of the Knox's claim with regard to this in any sort of timely way and one or more policemen that probably did hit her. This certainly seems like a golden opportunity to use the run out the clock strategy for the Italian courts.
 
This is, AFAIK, a continuation of the criminal trial for calunnia against the police based on the charges first brought against Amanda Knox following her testimony about her interrogation in Massei's court in 2009. Since she repeated her statements that police had hit her and otherwise violated her rights in each of her trial appeals, the charge against her now is aggravated continuing calunnia. The "aggravation" relates to the allegation by the prosecution that she committed calunnia against the police to help cover up her alleged calunnia against Patrick Lumumba.

There is, AFAIK, also a civil action from at least some of the police officers involved in the interrogation that is joined to this court case.

It is unlikely that the case will reach any conclusion; most likely it will run out of statutory allowed time.

Numbers, I'm sure you posted a case before with regard to the ECHR's position on unrecorded interrogations where claims were made by the applicant of abusive treatment. How has the court resolved this, particularly with regard to art 3 claims where the country concerned has been unable to adduce any evidence other than that of the interrogators' testimony as a defence?
 
Here's another gem, fresh from twitter:

-------------------------
Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 2h2 hours ago
Nearly a dozen witnesses to testify in Sept #amandaknox calumny trial: interpreters, Aussie-Italian English-speaking cop & others.
--------------------------
(courtesy demarcation line to keep Bill from falling out of his chair again).

Looks like a party of the prosecutor, who's bringing the party hats?

This Aussie/Italian cop, as I understand it, was the source of numerous off the record inaccurate briefings to the media in the whole case - aka leaks. Is Donnino going to show up? The whole list of these "witnesses" should be analysed in order to better understand the circumstances of the last interrogation - the nature of the extraordinary planning involved to routinely question the not-a-suspect, Amanda Knox.
 
...

In addition, the programme's main thrust is that the authorities decided upon a particular theory (that the aircraft was brought down by a military missile) without any evidence to support this theory. Furthermore, when competent investigators (including one from the UK AAIB) found solid evidence suggesting that the flight had been brought down by a bomb that had been planted within the aircraft, this was rejected by the authorities (up to and including the Italian SC) on the apparent basis that they "preferred" to stick with their own a priori theory of missile strike.

... He said this:

"I'm sorry, but Italy is a dreadful place to have an aviation accident. If you want the truth, you're less likely to find it there than just about anywhere else in the World"


...

No reason to doubt the conclusions of the programme, but it raises parallels not just with the Kercher murder case, but with the Lockerbie bombing in the UK. Official cover-ups and bogus "judicial truths" are a feature not just of Italy.
 
No reason to doubt the conclusions of the programme, but it raises parallels not just with the Kercher murder case, but with the Lockerbie bombing in the UK. Official cover-ups and bogus "judicial truths" are a feature not just of Italy.
Grotesquely true. Scores of beautiful examples in NZ alone, judges who are infantile in slavish devotion to sanctity of wrongful jury convictions at the appeal level, judicial reviews by pet serial offenders leading to denials of royal prerogative of mercy, and so on. Until Knox, I would not have looked or believed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom