Continuation Part 21: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Numbers]

The cellphone became crucial evidence, that's why it was sequestered. It was sequestered because of Amanda's reaction of shock to the see you later message and her outburst at naming Patrick as soon as a cop outside the room was overheard saying Raff had withdrawn his alibi for her.

Police, border and security staff are trained to spot the signs of extreme nervousness, such as heavy perspiration, agitation, emotional outburst and such a person will often be stopped and have their luggage or person searched. These bodily reactions are not consciously controllable and a good indicator of above normal stress. Criminal activity is highly stressful and police and border are trained to be alert to this.

Another entertaining post, Vixen.

So, this statement of yours is that Amanda was a suspect before her first statement. According to Italian procedural law and ECHR case-law, then, as soon as she made the outburst (in your version of the events), obviously giving a sign that would make police conside her a suspect, the police were obligated to stop the questioning/interrogation, tell her she was a suspect - a person under investigation, and advise her to get a lawyer (CPP Article 63). The police could not then resume the interrogation without her lawyer present and she was informed of the right to remain silent and warned that anything she said could be used against her (CPP Article 64).

Sure. See you later. Good evening!

Or in Italian, according to Google translate:

Certo. Ci vediamo piu tardi. Buona serata!

{This latter message, in Italian, was the text that the Italian police found on Amanda's cell phone that allegedly led them to believe that she had murdered Meredith with Patrick Lumumba.}

 

[Bill Williams]

The other interesting thing about the 5:45 memo is that it doesn't say anything about Lumumba killing Kercher. The 1:45 has Knox saying that she confusedly remembered his killing her. That's rather a significant difference in detail don't you think?

It also says it doesn't know how Raffaele fits in. The whole reason for this statement is to at least get "see you later" correctly as English idioms go, as well as to make the point that Amanda wanted to spontaneously declare all this.

That part virtually proves Knox did not author the statement. Which perp when confessing say, "I want to spontaneously say.... " which is the exact language Mignini needs to make it admissible.

 

[Vixen]

LOL. The source is the records of the Perugia police department headquarters.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Vixen]

It also says it doesn't know how Raffaele fits in. The whole reason for this statement is to at least get "see you later" correctly as English idioms go, as well as to make the point that Amanda wanted to spontaneously declare all this.

That part virtually proves Knox did not author the statement. Which perp when confessing say, "I want to spontaneously say.... " which is the exact language Mignini needs to make it admissible.

That is standard template, just as is the rejoinder at the bottom, 'this is a true statement to the best of my knowledge, blah, blah'.

It's de riguer and not an idiomatic quote by Amanda.

 

[acbytesla]

That is standard template, just as is the rejoinder at the bottom, 'this is a true statement to the best of my knowledge, blah, blah'.

It's de riguer and not an idiomatic quote by Amanda.

And that maybe so..for Machiavelli. But it certainly doesn't mean the statement actually should be considered spontaneous as clearly it was not.

 

[bagels]

Anybody can file an application to ECHR. As long as the complaint you are filing is timeous, you have a defendant's name and address, can cite a relevant section of the European Rights Act and hand over the fee, you, too, will get your claim accepted by the ECHR.

It does not mean the ECHR has a favourable view of your case.

What they are doing at this stage is assessing whether there is jurisdiction to hear it.

Just because CDV claims there were 'tag teams of police every hour for 53 hours and that she was brutally tortured by police', it doesn't mean the ECHR will uphold it.

Incidentally they have given it Category 3: minor legal point.

Her case is a slam dunk, so sorry but it's over. The Perugian police beat a statement out of her in the middle of the night without a lawyer or even neutral interpreter because they stupidly thought a 20 year old geeky girl from Seattle stabbed and raped a girl actually killed by their own resident local burglar who left his calling card all over the cottage.

 

[acbytesla]

Her case is a slam dunk, so sorry but it's over. The Perugian police beat a statement out of her in the middle of the night without a lawyer or even neutral interpreter because they stupidly thought a 20 year old geeky girl from Seattle stabbed and raped a girl actually killed by their own resident local burglar who left his calling card all over the cottage.

I'm really curious just how many Italian tax dollars will have been wasted on this farce? 4 million plus maybe? Or am I low balling it?

 

[Bill Williams]

That is standard template, just as is the rejoinder at the bottom, 'this is a true statement to the best of my knowledge, blah, blah'.

It's de riguer and not an idiomatic quote by Amanda.

I believe you mean "de rigueur".

It is up to you to prove it is a template.

Besides, the 1:45 am statement begins:

"In addition to what has already been reported via the preceding statements rendered here at this
Office, I wish to explain that I am aware of other persons whom I frequent and who have frequented (if
occasionally) my residence, who have also made the acquaintance of Meredith, and whose cellular
phone information [relative utenze cellulari] I [hereby] provide.​

The 5:45 statement begins.....

"I wish to spontaneously report what happened because this case has deeply disturbed me and I am
very afraid of Patrick, the African owner if the pub called 'Le Chic' on Via Alessi where I occasionally
work. I met him on the evening of the first of November, after having sent him a message replying to his,
with the words 'see you' ['ci vediamo', lit. "we'll see each other"].​

Do you wish to revise your statement, and admit you pulled the "standard template" claim out of thin air?

 

[acbytesla]

Delete

 

[Kauffer]

LOL. The source is the records of the Perugia police department headquarters.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Vixen should have a big whiteboard, which she should hang on a wall. At the top, she should write, "Things I have been taught by ISF".

For yesterday Vixen, you can write up the following:

1) "I learned that Amanda Knox really was a suspect in the murder before she said anything to the police on November 5th and that she should have had a lawyer present. I learned this because I was directed to the Italian Supreme Court statement, which said that she was a suspect and should have had a lawyer."
2) "I learned that Amanda Knox really was interrogated by the police on November 5th, when she was a suspect in the murder see 1). I learned this because I was directed to the testimony of police officers who were there and who told Amanda that she no longer had an alibi and insisted she knew who the murderer was."
3) "I learned that Amanda Knox was interrogated for 53.45 hours between November 2nd and November 6th. I learned this because I was directed to the records of the Perugia Police department who reported it."

 

[LondonJohn]

Funny, though that the Italian Supreme Court said she was a murder suspect, was being interrogated and should have had a lawyer.

Indeed. And at the very least, it's patently clear that Knox was a suspect of a serious criminal offence from the very moment she entered the interrogation room that night - it's pretty definitively clear that the police had already concluded that she had lied to them up to that point about having spent the whole evening/night of the murder in Sollecito's apartment, and that instead Knox had met up with a man (whom the police may or may not have identified by that point as Lumumba) to take him to the girls' cottage whereupon the man had assaulted and killed Kercher. So at the very least, the police considered Knox a suspect of serious crimes related to lying to police, perverting justice and/or assisting an offender, and at most they suspected her of direct participation in the murder itself. Either way, Knox should have been declared a formal suspect the moment she walked into that interrogation room, informed of her rights and provided with a lawyer, and been only questioned by a PM in the presence of her lawyer from then on.

Vixen's post to which you replied also starkly (and amusingly) illustrates her ignorance and misinformation about what happens when someone makes an admission of a criminal offence "out of the blue" (which is not what happened in Knox's case, but let's run with this for a moment.....).

Vixen writes: "You walk into a copshop to report a Cabriolet crashing into a Saab. The cops will take your statement, get you to sign it." Now, first of all, crashing one car into another is not a criminal offence in and of itself, so Fail 1 to Vixen on this point alone. I therefore suggest changing the scenario to this: "Mr A walks into a police station to report that he has just killed his wife through manual strangulation. The cops will take his statement, get him to sign it."

Well no, Vixen, that's not what would happen at all. What would (should) happen is this:

1) Mr A walks into the police station and reports that he's just killed his wife.

2) The police officer takes a note of this admission in his pocket book (or computer equivalent these days).

3) The police officer immediately confers with senior officers, and the man is arrested and detained. He is informed of his rights - chiefly the right to silence and the right to a lawyer (in E&W this latter is voluntary, but in Italy it's compulsory).

4) The police invite the man to make another statement under caution, having consulted a lawyer if he so wishes.

5) If the man agrees to make another statement, it is this statement which is then typed up and given to the man to sign.

What categorically does NOT (should not) happen is that the police officer, at step (2) above, goes away and types up the man's confession for him to sign.

Ignorance is bliss, someone once said.........

 

[Annella]

Indeed. And at the very least, it's patently clear that Knox was a suspect of a serious criminal offence from the very moment she entered the interrogation room that night - it's pretty definitively clear that the police had already concluded that she had lied to them up to that point about having spent the whole evening/night of the murder in Sollecito's apartment, and that instead Knox had met up with a man (whom the police may or may not have identified by that point as Lumumba) to take him to the girls' cottage whereupon the man had assaulted and killed Kercher.... ........ ........

Not forgetting that that the Perugian police triumphantly declared that same day that Amanda had buckled and ' told us what we already knew'. How damning is that?

 

[Annella]

Not sure if this link will work but.....over an hour long, this audio is of Amanda's first meeting with her mother after she was arrested. Settles some facts that have been debated here, but in favor of those who really do/did know. * Hint: Not the Perugians*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6uGdPpkqEI&feature=youtu.be

 

[LondonJohn]

Not forgetting that that the Perugian police triumphantly declared that same day that Amanda had buckled and ' told us what we already knew'. How damning is that?

Exactly. And there's also the evidence that the authorities were rushing to get sufficient "evidence" to arrest Knox before her mother arrived in Perugia and took her back to the US..........

 

[Vixen]

Indeed. And at the very least, it's patently clear that Knox was a suspect of a serious criminal offence from the very moment she entered the interrogation room that night - it's pretty definitively clear that the police had already concluded that she had lied to them up to that point about having spent the whole evening/night of the murder in Sollecito's apartment, and that instead Knox had met up with a man (whom the police may or may not have identified by that point as Lumumba) to take him to the girls' cottage whereupon the man had assaulted and killed Kercher. So at the very least, the police considered Knox a suspect of serious crimes related to lying to police, perverting justice and/or assisting an offender, and at most they suspected her of direct participation in the murder itself. Either way, Knox should have been declared a formal suspect the moment she walked into that interrogation room, informed of her rights and provided with a lawyer, and been only questioned by a PM in the presence of her lawyer from then on.

Vixen's post to which you replied also starkly (and amusingly) illustrates her ignorance and misinformation about what happens when someone makes an admission of a criminal offence "out of the blue" (which is not what happened in Knox's case, but let's run with this for a moment.....).

Vixen writes: "You walk into a copshop to report a Cabriolet crashing into a Saab. The cops will take your statement, get you to sign it." Now, first of all, crashing one car into another is not a criminal offence in and of itself, so Fail 1 to Vixen on this point alone. I therefore suggest changing the scenario to this: "Mr A walks into a police station to report that he has just killed his wife through manual strangulation. The cops will take his statement, get him to sign it."

Well no, Vixen, that's not what would happen at all. What would (should) happen is this:

1) Mr A walks into the police station and reports that he's just killed his wife.

2) The police officer takes a note of this admission in his pocket book (or computer equivalent these days).

3) The police officer immediately confers with senior officers, and the man is arrested and detained. He is informed of his rights - chiefly the right to silence and the right to a lawyer (in E&W this latter is voluntary, but in Italy it's compulsory).

4) The police invite the man to make another statement under caution, having consulted a lawyer if he so wishes.

5) If the man agrees to make another statement, it is this statement which is then typed up and given to the man to sign.

What categorically does NOT (should not) happen is that the police officer, at step (2) above, goes away and types up the man's confession for him to sign.

Ignorance is bliss, someone once said.........

Nice attempt to change the subject.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen should have a big whiteboard, which she should hang on a wall. At the top, she should write, "Things I have been taught by ISF".

For yesterday Vixen, you can write up the following:

1) "I learned that Amanda Knox really was a suspect in the murder before she said anything to the police on November 5th and that she should have had a lawyer present. I learned this because I was directed to the Italian Supreme Court statement, which said that she was a suspect and should have had a lawyer."
2) "I learned that Amanda Knox really was interrogated by the police on November 5th, when she was a suspect in the murder see 1). I learned this because I was directed to the testimony of police officers who were there and who told Amanda that she no longer had an alibi and insisted she knew who the murderer was."
3) "I learned that Amanda Knox was interrogated for 53.45 hours between November 2nd and November 6th. I learned this because I was directed to the records of the Perugia Police department who reported it."

Kauffer, darlink, do try not to say anything incriminating whilst in the presence of uniformed officers.

Do try to adopt a sceptical attitude to propagandists who would have you believe Amanda was waterboarded and subjected to Chinese torture.

Do add up your own sums. The total hours add up to seventeen hours.

 

[analemma]

Anybody can file an application to ECHR. As long as the complaint you are filing is timeous, you have a defendant's name and address, can cite a relevant section of the European Rights Act and hand over the fee, you, too, will get your claim accepted by the ECHR.

It does not mean the ECHR has a favourable view of your case.

What they are doing at this stage is assessing whether there is jurisdiction to hear it.

Just because CDV claims there were 'tag teams of police every hour for 53 hours and that she was brutally tortured by police', it doesn't mean the ECHR will uphold it.

Incidentally they have given it Category 3: minor legal point.

Watching guilters squirm is sooooo much fun.

 

[analemma]

Not really. When people say, 'I think' or 'I imagine', those are superfluous to the meaning. Do you know what I mean? You know?

I think, when she says, 'I confusedly think/imagine in my head' these just signifiers of a liar, who chucks those phrases in just in case they are found out to be liars later.

In my head, I confusedly think that is what she was doing.

In your head!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My god!!!!!!!
"In your head" must be a fantastic place: Even for you.
All that spouts from head is an endless stream of readily apparent untruths, or unsubstantiated accusations, or clumsy insults directed at two ALREADY PROVEN INNOCENT VICTIMS of an officially admitted Italian witch hunt by the out of control Italian police and prosecutors.

 

[analemma]

In your head!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My god!!!!!!!
"In your head" must be a fantastic place: Even for you.
All that spouts from head is an endless stream of readily apparent untruths, or unsubstantiated accusations, or clumsy insults directed at two ALREADY PROVEN INNOCENT VICTIMS of an officially admitted Italian witch hunt by the out of control Italian police and prosecutors.

Poor, Poor Rudy is released.
Mignini will be dancing in the street over this news.
Now Rudy is free to burglar again and jam his knife into the throat of the current recipient of the "Meredith Kercher Memorial Scholarship"
http://www.thelocal.it/20160524/kerchers-killer-granted-36-hours-of-liberty

 

[analemma]

Poor, Poor Rudy is released.
Mignini will be dancing in the street over this news.
Now Rudy is free to burglar again and jam his knife into the throat of the current recipient of the "Meredith Kercher Memorial Scholarship"
http://www.thelocal.it/20160524/kerchers-killer-granted-36-hours-of-liberty

Rudy
“ I thank everybody who has had faith in me,” he added.