Continuation Part 18: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Vixen]

Didn't she have some sort of falling out with the family and write that Amanda was, "not a very nice person." I suppose that was just a clever ruse to appear more objective.

At any rate her book didn't even contain the most damning indictment from Rudy's past, which was the official testimony from the law office break-in describing the state of the scene. It could nearly be substituted for the break-in at the cottage verbatim without losing any veracity.

Burleigh is a very good writer. It just a shame she stands on a soap box.

This idea of Amanda being the victim of anti-American sexism is so much crap.

Even Amanda's step dad called her a '********' on public media, so maybe she's not a very nice person.

 

[Vixen]

I know exactly the accent......!

Eh, 'eck, bah gum, lad. On Ilkley Moor b'aht 'at, down at t'mill.

 

[bagels]

This idea of Amanda being the victim of anti-American sexism is so much crap.

I agree. Amanda was the victim of a bunch of old cops thinking no man alive could climb into a window more than knee height above the ground, using themselves as a model no doubt.

 

[Ken Dine]

She was his fiancée, not wife. And she had been named as beneficiary to insurance worth about $250k.

Thanks, It's been awhile since I read the article, so I guess I thought they were married since she was going to inherit the insurance money. Likely, that insurance pay-out was what had raised suspicions with the cops?

There is not a shred of evidence she took out the drain plug from his kayak, her lawyer is claiming it had been missing for some time, and the kayak was found floating, so it didn't sink the kayak in any event.

The prosecution is out their minds, and they had a medical examiner who just essentially fabricated a cause of death report that Stefanoni could love, as reported in the article link provided.

It is indeed a very weak case with obvious confirmation bias at play.

 

[davefoc]

Only at the eleventh hour when they safely knew that judge was bound to dismiss the late application.

Ah, the PGP mind. There is an obvious semen stain near the body of a raped and murdered woman. The fact that it wasn't tested is the defense's fault.

Situation normal in PGP land. An unexplained action by the prosecution that could have absolutely proved their case against Sollecito, could have proved the prosecutor's contention that there were multiple murderers or just provided more evidence to the case that Guede brutally raped and murdered Kercher by himself and it doesn't cause even a moment for reflection on how ridiculous this is.

In normal people land, it is pretty clear that either somebody tested that stain and the results weren't reported or Mignini chose not to test that stain because he knew Sollecito was innocent. Either way Mignini chose not to release evidence about the semen stain because it didn't support the sick fantasy that he was pushing. And the PGP go to ridiculous lengths to create silly theories about why the stain wasn't tested because actually objectively assessing contrary information is impossible when your brain is consumed with confirmation bias.

 

[Dougm]

Didn't she have some sort of falling out with the family and write that Amanda was, "not a very nice person." I suppose that was just a clever ruse to appear more objective.

At any rate her book didn't even contain the most damning indictment from Rudy's past, which was the official testimony from the law office break-in describing the state of the scene. It could nearly be substituted for the break-in at the cottage verbatim without losing any veracity.

Yes. She wrote that she originally thought Amanda must be guilty, but got over there, investigated, and changed her mind (sound familiar?). But in writing the book, she gave a lot of opinions about the people involved, few flattering. I think she misread Amanda and her family, and although she thought she was innocent, viewed the naivete and self absorbtion that was typical of a 20 year old more negatively than I think she should have. Had some negative things to say about Curt Knox also.

But NB is the only one that did much digging into Mignini's past, and also did some pretty thorough investigation on Guede, none of which has been refuted. I think the parts about Rudy's childhood, with it's history of abuse, etc. are by themselves worth reading the book for. She also talked to some of Rudy's friends, and we learn more about some very unusual behavior from Rudy in the time prior to the murder.

 

[Methos]

Darkness Descending came out before the spin doctors got their clammy jaws into the case. Recommended.

I like this "summary" from Garofano at the end of "Darkness Descending":

As a lawman, the independent forensics expert Luciano Garofano should have been satisfied that justice had been done. Having retired from the Carabinieri as a Major-General a fortnight earlier, he shoud have been relaxing. But niggling doubts disturbed his peace of mind. Had the police been duplicitous at the start by treating the ‘unofficial’ suspects, Amanda and Raffaele, as plain witnesses? Had they bypassed the law in order to elicit a false confession? Had the seasoned detectives thrown them enough rope, knowing that they would hang themselves – especially without a lawyer being present? Sollecito was questioned as a witness but his knife and shoes were taken away as though he was a suspect. Both were kept in solitary confinement without proper documentation. The Supreme Court had quashed convictions for much less.But Garofano’s misgivings about procedure were less significant than his doubts about evidence that seemed to be flawed. There had never been a full explanation of how such a small quantity of Meredith’s DNA on the knife could produce such a clear electropherogram. The blade’s outline on the bed was different from that of the alleged murder weapon. The fortyseven-day delay in recovering the bra clasp was sloppy. The inability to test the towels for Guede’s DNA, to prove that he had shed blood in his own defence, was shocking. While Mignini’s reconstruction of events was closer to Guede’s story and to Garofano’s findings, there was no guarantee that a judge on appeal would take the same line.
The hierarchy of doubt was building. The apex represented the sharpest criticism: the motive was simply illogical. Knox and Sollecito had known each other for little more than a week. Profilers and experts, Garofano included, found it hard to imagine them attempting to rape a woman of the same age, at knifepoint, aided by a man they barely knew. Despite a last-minute change, the prosecution’s motive had always seemed to dodge the obvious reasons why people kill each other, such as robbery. No one had ever fully explained the role, if any, of the drug addicts who used Meredith’s garden as a stash and her path as carparking space. Or of the desperate dealers she had complained about a few days earlier.

Just for the record...

 

[Bill Williams]

Only at the eleventh hour when they safely knew that judge was bound to dismiss the late application.

Lol!

Let me guess. You don't like Raffaele very much! You'll ascribe bad motive to anything!

 

[Machiavelli]

Good for them. That's then another thing Follain forgot to include. Who knows, maybe it was because Zugarini was slashing tires for Napoleoni in the latter's nasty divorce.....

Set the record straight. Zugarini was not accused of slashing tires. She was accused of accessing a database without authorization (this is the only "charge" she was accused of).

 

[Bill Williams]

Set the record straight. Zugarini was not accused of slashing tires. She was accused of accessing a database without authorization (this is the only "charge" she was accused of).

Ah, er, ok. Who slashed the tires?

 

[Bill Williams]

Eh, 'eck, bah gum, lad. On Ilkley Moor b'aht 'at, down at t'mill.

‘Ear all, see all, say nowt. Eat all, sup all, pay nowt. And if ever thou does owt fer nowt – allus do it fer thissen.

 

[Machiavelli]

Can't agree with you about Palestine. I was in Israel ten months ago and got to chat to lots of Palestinians, notably in Bethlehem, where they had subtle posters up ('Welcome to Bethlehem, free Palestine') and Jericho, where the bedouins have been banned from roaming around in their nomadic lifestyle. I have buckets of sympathy for them. However, the Israelis have established Israel as an official state, and they are entitled to live there and expect safety. They are surrounded on all sides by Muslim states, so understandable they are very defensive about terrorist attacks, for example, destroying the homes of perps.

What we need in the Middle East is peace, my friend.

In my opinion there is no solution of the MO conflict that could include Zionism and the Palestinian identity. They are ideological opposites. One is the denial of the other. A "two state solution" with mutual recognizing is a delusion. This is my opinion, but doesn't belong to this forum thread.

 

[Machiavelli]

The highlighted part was my experience with posting to TJMK in the fall of 2011, just after the first acquittal. I cannot remember if this was before or after joining IIP/IA, but I was only half aware of who this Bruce Fis(c)her guy was at the time.

To be honest, I was fast becoming embedded in the "innocence camp", but was unaware of the emotive force behind guilters using terms like "FOAKers" pejoratively. My posting history at TJMK lasted 7 posts and then suddenly my log-on info did not work. I'd been saying that "Kermit's powerpoint" about the break-in was completely wrong; it was doable..... etc., and thn "click", TJMK hung up on me!

Other posters wondered where I'd gone, some said they'd seen me "scurrying back to Bruce Fischer's site". I'd been unaware of any "scurrying", but the use of that pejorative was illuminating! I thought of myself at the time, rightly or wrongly, as simply going where the conversation was. Peter Q. himself denied logging me out, and made the same sort of comment about all of these "Bruce Fischer minions".

WTF!? WTFWTAA? (.... was that all about?) I then spent way, way too much time looking into what was in late 2011 a well established hatred between the PI and PG camps; that I was coming to new. Wow.

Re: Marasca's motivations report - I am beginning to understand that Machiavelli, perhaps, does have grounds, at least, to put things the way he does in this thread. Truly, this is not the report which 100% sticks it to the PLE, prosecutions, Stefanoni's, prosecutors of the case who are otherwise implicitly condemned in its 52 pages.

Between the Google-translates I can manage, as well as Italian speakers who've been commenting - clearly Marasca's report does continue that tradition of ISC-uniformity with the attempt to not be seen to be completely out of step with what has gone on before......

....... all the while, while still condemning the out of control judicial process which led Marasca's division to acquit without remand.

I'm told something, which also makes sense with regard to the Italian media coverage: the Italia media almost universally "gets" that this is the most harsh condemnation of a wrongful conviction that an Italian court can manage.....

..... that this is still a report which levels a broadside at the usual suspects to us, the embedded innocentisti. Those people know how to read between the lines - even with the bones thrown in, like Hellmann did by convicting Knox of calunnia, yet she was able to leave the country - and everyone has something.

Yet it remains - in Italy among the Italian language press and media - they know what this means. We can argue Machiavelli's points here, in English on an obscure webservice all we want - once again, maybe I'll even join Machiavelli in his conspiracy thinking..... which would get the biggest "who cares" that one can imagine.

It seems that in Italy everyone knows what Marasca's report means and what it signals, and it does it in such a way as it does not trigger what needs to happen in Italy.... a change to the systemic reason why Mignini's madness could go on for 8 years until someone called a halt to it.

Maybe that's all we get out of this, and the rest is just arguing on webservices because we have too much time on our hands!

Bill, a motivations report is supposed to mean what is written in it.
That Amanda Knox was inside the house and that Guede killed together with others, is something the SC report emphasizes. They say they agree with Nencini on this. They had no need to write this.
A SC report is not supposed to "signal" things. The fact that it is completely inconsistent and foolish, however, signals out just political interference.

 

[Machiavelli]

I also would like more information from Mach about the background of his ideology. The authors he listed are or were all anti-Mafia activists. I think Mach has acknowledged in the past, too, that he is a member of the Communist Party in Italy.

I would like to know how those he considers his enemies influenced the judicial processes for this trial, and I would like to know how aggressive foreigners took advantage of it.

I have never been a mamber of Communist parties. I have been a member of the European Greens.

 

[anglolawyer]

Bill, a motivations report is supposed to mean what is written in it.
That Amanda Knox was inside the house and that Guede killed together with others, is something the SC report emphasizes. They say they agree with Nencini on this. They had no need to write this.
A SC report is not supposed to "signal" things. The fact that it is completely inconsistent and foolish, however, signals out just political interference.

Mach, serious question: how do you tell which of your judicial decisions is the result of political chicanery or just, detached and reasonable deliberation?

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill, a motivations report is supposed to mean what is written in it. That Amanda Knox was inside the house and that Guede killed together with others, is something the SC report emphasizes. They say they agree with Nencini on this. They had no need to write this.
A SC report is not supposed to "signal" things. The fact that it is completely inconsistent and foolish, however, signals out just political interference.

Have it your way.

Once again, I can only repeat.... the Italian-language media in your country seems to beg to differ. They seem to "get" the message, and are ignoring the stuff which interests you. They are actually writing about how this case was marked by a rush to judgement by incompetent, amnesiac prosecutors, etc. You know the drill. I simply cannot believe you've not read any of the coverage.

I truly believe that the Marasca report means it when it writes that Ak and RS are innocent.

ETA - even the police union representing the Perugian cops is blaming the prosecutors, rather than citing Marasca for inconsistencies. Sheesh.

 

[Machiavelli]

Hi Machiavelli,
So, ah did your Italian investigators ever discover
who it was that stabbed and Miss Meredith Kercher?

http://images.teinteresa.es/sucesos/agonica-muerte-Meredith-Kercher_TINIMA20110907_1137_18.jpg


Might it be the same person whom left seminal fluid,
err, presumed seminal fluid on a pillow placed underneath Miss Kercher's naked body?

In my opinion it's not seminal fluid. Unfortunately my guess cannot be verified. I think it's vaseline (petroleum jelly).
There are reasons why I think so. One of the reasons is that Meredith had an empty vaseline tub on her table. Now, I just don't think she would keep an empty tub. The vaseline must be somewhere.
Petroleum jelly is typically luminescent under UV light.

Don't look at this video
(snip)
unless you want to see what we are really discussing
in this brutal rape + murder case we discuss.

As MichaelB put it:
It certainly puts things in perspective.
Don't look if can't stomach it....it's graphic.

You can see Meredith Kercher's body lying on the floor of her bedroom
with that semen stained, err presumed seminal fluid stained pillow
lying underneath her in this preview of a 2013 German documentary about the case.

I've seen much more than this about this case. The video doesn't tell anything.

I've seen a lot about the physical murder scene, what I've seen has lead me to the solid conclusion about multiple perpetrators. I think there no single-perpetrator scenario possible that could be built based on the physical scene.

 

[Vixen]

Lol!

Let me guess. You don't like Raffaele very much! You'll ascribe bad motive to anything!

A trial has a very dull dry set procedure. You make sure your case is presented at the hearing. Not at some ad hoc appeal.

 

[Vixen]

I like this "summary" from Garofano at the end of "Darkness Descending":

Just for the record...

It goes to show how balanced Darkness Descending is.

 

[Vixen]

‘Ear all, see all, say nowt. Eat all, sup all, pay nowt. And if ever thou does owt fer nowt – allus do it fer thissen.

Shut t'gob, pin back t'lug'oles and put t'brain in gear. ~ Yorkshire proverb