Continuation Part 22: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Vixen]

None of that is evidence in support of your claim that

"A very strong near full profile on an ample amount of material showed Raff's DNA at 44 out of 47 loci."

Are you going to provide a proper source for those specific numbers, or are you going to withdraw that particular claim?

Until I find the primary source, I'll withdraw it. I think it may be a typo, 'four' mistaken for a 'one'.

All parties, including the defence, all the courts and even Conti & Vecchiotti agree it is Raff's DNA beyond any reasonable doubt.

 

[bagels]

Vixen the reason Raff's DNA on the bra clasp isn't enough to convict BRD is because of the following circumstances:

1. Rudy Guede, a known burglar, was caught on CCTV snooping around the cottage before Amanda and Raff knew their evening would be freed up, so we have to believe that Rudy is coincidentally snooping the empty cottage like a burglar for no reason, coincidentally on the same night he will, on completely unrelated terms, be participating in the random rape party at.

2. The break-in is remarkably consistent with Rudy's previous idiosyncratic break-in at the law office, raising doubt that the students managed to stage his precise MO.

3. Raffaele had never met Rudy and had no known communication lines with him, raising doubt they were rape buddies.

4. The murder was consistent with a single assailant using a single small penknife.

5. Meredith's digestive system, cell phone activity, and eye and ear witnesses that were directly outside the cottage for a significant chunk of the late evening, constrain the murder to happening between 21:00 and 22:00, shortly after Meredith arrives home. Raising doubt due to Raffaele's potential computer alibis combined with the logistical implausibility of rushing over to do a rape party spontaneously with random people he didn't know on a moment's notice.

6. The students all were in relatively close proximity of each other, within a close proximity living space, increasing the likelihood of innocent DNA exchange.

7. The mysterious circumstances of the bra clasp collection, combined with it being mysteriously destroyed before it could be re-examined, combined with it being contaminated with other unidentified male profiles.


The prosecution was never going to overcome this with lying bozos like Quintavalle or Curatolo, but they always had the option of offering Guede a cushy deal in exchange for testimony against the accused. They opted against this, and brought Quintavalle to trial instead, and silenced Guede. I wonder why?

 

[Vixen]

Which chamber was Chieffi part of that ruled Quintavalle was reliable despite repeatedly lying because he saw blue eyes in court? That's a bad one imo.

'Prima Sezione Penale'.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen the reason Raff's DNA on the bra clasp isn't enough to convict BRD is because of the following circumstances:

1. Rudy Guede, a known burglar, was caught on CCTV snooping around the cottage before Amanda and Raff knew their evening would be freed up, so we have to believe that Rudy is coincidentally snooping the empty cottage like a burglar for no reason, coincidentally on the same night he will, on completely unrelated terms, be participating in the random rape party at.

That does NOT cancel out Raff's DNA on the bra clasp.

2. The break-in is remarkably consistent with Rudy's previous idiosyncratic break-in at the law office, raising doubt that the students managed to stage his precise MO.

It does NOT match the lawyers office break-in. If it was Rudy's MO he would have climbed up the balcony on the dark side of the house, much easier and with the balcony rails to grip. If it was Rudy's MO, he would have used the lightweight aluminium glass-breaking hammer (stolen from a train emergency equipment?) he was found with at the Milan nursery, not a 4.4kg boulder.

3. Raffaele had never met Rudy and had no known communication lines with him, raising doubt they were rape buddies.

The common point of reference is Amanda.

4. The murder was consistent with a single assailant using a single small penknife.

That is not what Massei and Nencini ruled, after hearing ALL of the experts in this.

5. Meredith's digestive system, cell phone activity, and eye and ear witnesses that were directly outside the cottage for a significant chunk of the late evening, constrain the murder to happening between 21:00 and 22:00, shortly after Meredith arrives home. Raising doubt due to Raffaele's potential computer alibis combined with the logistical implausibility of rushing over to do a rape party spontaneously with random people he didn't know on a moment's notice.

6. The students all were in relatively close proximity of each other, within a close proximity living space, increasing the likelihood of innocent DNA exchange.

7. The mysterious circumstances of the bra clasp collection, combined with it being mysteriously destroyed before it could be re-examined, combined with it being contaminated with other unidentified male profiles.


The prosecution was never going to overcome this with lying bozos like Quintavalle or Curatolo, but they always had the option of offering Guede a cushy deal in exchange for testimony against the accused. They opted against this, and brought Quintavalle to trial instead, and silenced Guede. I wonder why?

Pure conjecture. How anyone can make up excuses for some of the most infamous cold-blooded crimes of our time is beyond me.

You know what the evidence is. You have read the court documents. You fully and knowingly deny what is established fact.

 

[bagels]

That does NOT cancel out Raff's DNA on the bra clasp.



It does NOT match the lawyers office break-in. If it was Rudy's MO he would have climbed up the balcony on the dark side of the house, much easier and with the balcony rails to grip. If it was Rudy's MO, he would have used the lightweight aluminium glass-breaking hammer (stolen from a train emergency equipment?) he was found with at the Milan nursery, not a 4.4kg boulder.



The common point of reference is Amanda.



That is not what Massei and Nencini ruled, after hearing ALL of the experts in this.




Pure conjecture. How anyone can make up excuses for some of the most infamous cold-blooded crimes of our time is beyond me.

You know what the evidence is. You have read the court documents. You fully and knowingly deny what is established fact.

The crime wasn't all that infamous, the prosecution was. There's a difference. If Rudy was picked up before the 5th, none of us would know the name Meredith Kercher. Just another unfortunate victim of an out of control career criminal (who, IMO, should have been locked up before the murder, safely out of reach of Meredith).

Mignini and friends thought they cracked the case when they realized the only person who could have staged the break-in arranged via text a secret meeting with an African immigrant she denied ever meeting that night. They were so confident Patrick killed Meredith they didn't even bother to conduct legally sustainable interrogations, just rushing to get a quick arrest knowing the interrogations would be thrown out, but not worrying because they were 100% certain the rapekit would match Patrick. They didn't even bother to check his alibi, in fact, they were so certain that he didn't have any alibi (because he was murdering Meredith) that they typed up a false statement from a false witness that his open bar was closed. The PGP forget this. Most of the PIP forget this. I don't forget this.

When the Patrick theory imploded on them (after they had patted themselves on the back for closing the case so quickly as heroes of the city) they quickly improvised a simple swap of one black man for another, even though the timelines no longer worked, there was no line of communication or even a common language, and their staged break-in was identical to this burglar's genuine break-in a couple blocks away just two weeks earlier, wow amazing.

They were incredibly lucky to get 4 years out of their pile of garbage case, and you really should be thankful for that rather than worrying about mafia judges and backroom deals. IMHO.

 

[Vixen]

The crime wasn't all that infamous, the prosecution was. There's a difference. If Rudy was picked up before the 5th, none of us would know the name Meredith Kercher. Just another unfortunate victim of an out of control career criminal (who, IMO, should have been locked up before the murder, safely out of reach of Meredith).

Mignini and friends thought they cracked the case when they realized the only person who could have staged the break-in arranged via text a secret meeting with an African immigrant she denied ever meeting that night. They were so confident Patrick killed Meredith they didn't even bother to conduct legally sustainable interrogations, just rushing to get a quick arrest knowing the interrogations would be thrown out, but not worrying because they were 100% certain the rapekit would match Patrick. They didn't even bother to check his alibi, in fact, they were so certain that he didn't have any alibi (because he was murdering Meredith) that they typed up a false statement from a false witness that his open bar was closed. The PGP forget this. Most of the PIP forget this. I don't forget this.

When the Patrick theory imploded on them (after they had patted themselves on the back for closing the case so quickly as heroes of the city) they quickly improvised a simple swap of one black man for another, even though the timelines no longer worked, there was no line of communication or even a common language, and their staged break-in was identical to this burglar's genuine break-in a couple blocks away just two weeks earlier, wow amazing.

They were incredibly lucky to get 4 years out of their pile of garbage case, and you really should be thankful for that rather than worrying about mafia judges and backroom deals. IMHO.

Yes, and look who accused 'the African immigrant', as you call Patrick, in the first place. Amanda Knox.


Speaking of false criminal racist accusations:

This article, by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Nick Chiles had much to say:

When the University of Michigan law school and the Center on Wrongful Convictions at the School of Law at Northwestern University in Chicago collaborated to create the National Registry of Exonerations, the researchers found that Blacks accounted for nearly half (47 percent) of all known exonerees in 1989, and whites made up nearly 39 percent of all known exonerees. But when they got to the year 2012, they found that the number of exonerations involving Blacks had risen to 57 percent. Of the 1,525 exonerations currently listed on the register as of Jan. 7, 2o15, a total of 715 involved Black people. Because of America’s tragic racial history, even today many of the exonerations involve white people wrongfully accusing Black people of committing crimes — and the accusations being enough to send them to jail for much of their lives. These are some of the most outrageous cases of Black people being falsely accused by whites...

... 1) Amanda Knox: When Knox was accused of murdering her roommate, Meredith Kercher, in Perugia, Italy, her first response was to implicate Diya “Patrick” Lumumba, a Congolese-born resident of Italy who owned a bar in Perugia named Le Chic where Knox worked part time. Lumumba was promptly arrested. Knox told Italian police in a written statement that she saw Lumumba enter Kercher’s room on the evening of Nov. 1, 2007. She later admitted that this version of events was made up, but she implied that it was made up under duress. Lumumba spent two weeks in an Italian jail before Knox’s story fell apart.

[/quote]

Source: http://perugiamurderfile.net/viewtopic.php?style=6&f=1&t=461&start=7250


Amanda variously claimed she had been interrogated 53 hours which led up to her false accusation (a proven complete PR lie and perpetuated by Amanda herself), she had problems differentiating between her memory and her imagination until she had a revelation a couple of weeks later, 'Doh! Of course he must be innocent as I was not at the cottage so how can I possibly know he was there?' <fx Brummie accent: yes, mate!>

I couldn't even explain to myself why I had these images in my head, because I didn't know if they were memories or not. And I want to say that if I made these declarations, that they asked me to sign and everything, I did it, but I wanted in the memorandum to explain my doubt, this fact that I wasn't sure about it, because no one ever wanted to listen when I said listen, I don't know.

The flashback consisted in this image of Patrick's actual face, not that I imagined an actual act, I imagined his face. Then I had this image of Piazza Grimana, then an image of Patrick's face, then I always had this idea that they wanted to say: these images explain the fact that you met him, and you brought him home, and maybe you heard something and covered your ears, and it was always like this, not that I actually imagined having seen Meredith's death. It was these images that came by themselves, to explain...

But then, when I was able to rethink the facts, it became clearer and clearer that it didn't make sense, that it was absolutely ridiculous that I could have thought that or imagined it.

FM:On the 5th and 6th, you considered him guilty. When did you change? AK: I imagined that he could be--FM:I 'll ask you later about imagination. Now tell me when you changed your mind about Patrick Lumumba.AK: changed my mind when I realized that my imaginings were not really memories, but just imagination. FM: When? When? AK:The more time passed, the more I felt sure. But definitely, when I was in prison and alone in my cell, I had so much time to rethink about all the facts I remembered, and about the fact that I remembered not having

I needed time to think. I don't know the precise moment where bing! but it was this continuous evolution of asking myself: So, what did I actually do? If I didn't do these things with him, then he's probably innocent, but I only know the things that I actually do know, about what I myself did. About what I actually said about him, it was not true. It was a mistake. But -- I don't know -- I don't know anything any more In fact, the thing that was important for me was to know whether I myself was there or not, and when I remembered that I wasn't, that was the important thing which I wanted to say, and also the fact that what I had said about him was a mistake.

According to me, it depends on the situation. I can only talk about my own experience, which was, that I had to, forced myself -- because they told me that I had to remember something else -- to recall something else, so I forced myself so hard, that I was trying to imagine the reality that I had apparently forgotten, and I got confused as to whether the things I had imagined were really memories or just imagination. Because they were fragmentary. They were just images of things I had seen in my life, for example Piazza Grimana, that I saw every day, Patrick, whom I saw almost every day. These things, which were fragmented, I didn't know if they belonged to that evening, to that sequence of events, or that line of reasoning. I didn't know, and not knowing what was reality and what was my imagination, this was the state of confusion.

They asked me what Patrick was like? Was he violent? I said no, he's not violent. But are you scared of him? And I said yes, because thinking that he was the person who killed her, I was scared. Also because in those days I was thinking generally that there was a murderer, and I was frightened.

, "I'm at the Questura now, after a long day telling how I was the first person to go to the house, and find my roommate dead. How strange. The only thing I want to do now is to write a song about it. I would be the first song I ever wrote, and it would be about [at this point, Amanda starts getting increasing help from the interpreter] someone who died horribly and for no reason. How morbid is that? I'm starving. I keep wanting to say [little laugh] that I could kill for a pizza, but that doesn't seem right. Laura and Filomena are really really" -- how do you say this? ********** up--
Interpreter [almost inaudibly]: Are ********** up. Si sono ******* il cervello. }}

From public domain court testimony http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Main_Page

So, bagels, what's your opinion?

1. 53 hours of police interrogation made Amanda hallucinate 'the African immigrant'.
2. Amanda had a problem with amnesia.
3. Amanda had a problem with her imagination.
4. Amanda had visions which presented themselves of 'the African immigrant' going into Mez' room and raping and killing her.
5. Amanda made it all up to save her skin.
6. It's all complete BS and no wonder she was convicted of calumny and upheld by both the Second Instnace court (appeal x 2: Hellmann and Nencini) AND the Fifth Chambers Marasca Supreme Court.

Or are you going to keep up your faux innocence stance?

 

[bagels]

The police obviously saw Patrick as "just another criminal African immigrant." Which is why they threw him in jail and beat him up despite having zero evidence against him. Are you scare quoting to insult the police? Go for it. I can help you out with further details of police racism: they also called Patrick a "dirty black" and that in the US he would "get the electric chair" which is what he "deserved."

As for Amanda's interrogation, it's not what I think it's what the police themselves admitted to, which is telling Amanda that she had amnesia from witnessing the trauma of the murder after meeting up with Patrick, and any images she had in her head that aren't Patrick being at the house during the murder are lies. That's why the interrogation was tossed out of court, and why the ECHR is going to rule against Italy for a basic human rights violation.

 

[Bill Williams]

Wow! Corrupt Supreme Court judges??!!! Sounds like you're saying the Italian criminal justice system is horrifically broken and has zero legitimacy

It's well-known there are sectarian - if that's the right word - wars being waged between the Catholics, the Freemasons and the Mafia.

Rare common ground. There is a tendency among Italian judges to be swayed somewhat but what judicial "party" they align themselves with. Judge Hellmann also spoke about this when his acquittals were annulled. Regardless of which "side" you align yourself with, the one commonality is that there is this sort of stratification among judges in Italy.

It is clear Bongiorno pointed the case to the politically appointed judges of the Fifth Chamber, who never deal with murder cases, and away from the expert First Chamber, who do.

This is hogwash on both counts you claim. If it were "clear" you'd provide a cite to sustain the clarity. Otherwise it remains a common guilter factid that is pulled out of thin air when the facts don't line up.

In addition, the first appeal - now expunged - was diverted away from a senior criminal judge to the business law judge Hellmann, who, as you saw, simply opened the cage door and let the birds fly away.

No it wasn't the judge in question was interviewed some time later who said he wanted a sideways transfer to youth court. It had nothing to do with the Machiavellian conspiracy which was claimed yeas ago in this very thread on JREF.

This case is closed. No less than the Kercher lawyer, Maresca, said as much after March 27, 2015. Andrea Vogt - no friend to innocence herself, said so when a private citizen tried to take a case of judicial corruption about the March 27 exonerations into a Florence court.

He was laughed out of court. Vogt said he belonged to a group of arm-chair detectives who continue to argue for guilt of the exonerated, and corruption in the judiciary - with the only real effect of extending the pain of the Kerchers.

 

[Vixen]

The police obviously saw Patrick as "just another criminal African immigrant." Which is why they threw him in jail and beat him up despite having zero evidence against him. Are you scare quoting to insult the police? Go for it. I can help you out with further details of police racism: they also called Patrick a "dirty black" and that in the US he would "get the electric chair" which is what he "deserved."

As for Amanda's interrogation, it's not what I think it's what the police themselves admitted to, which is telling Amanda that she had amnesia from witnessing the trauma of the murder after meeting up with Patrick, and any images she had in her head that aren't Patrick being at the house during the murder are lies. That's why the interrogation was tossed out of court, and why the ECHR is going to rule against Italy for a basic human rights violation.

So how come all the other housemates and Mez' British friends had similar long interviews and yet never once had the same visions of 'African immigrants' raping and killing Mez.

As for the police calling Patrick 'a dirty black': who informed the police it was him in the first place? An American student claiming she was scared of him.

 

[Stacyhs]

That does NOT cancel out Raff's DNA on the bra clasp.

No, it doesn't. But the fact that the DNA of other unidentified men was also found on the same tiny hook does. Just how does the DNA of multiple men get on a tiny hook and not on any other part of the clasp including the material it was sewn on or the other hook? Unhooking a bra clasp, whether by force or not, requires more than touching a single tiny hook.

It does NOT match the lawyers office break-in. If it was Rudy's MO he would have climbed up the balcony on the dark side of the house, much easier and with the balcony rails to grip. If it was Rudy's MO, he would have used the lightweight aluminium glass-breaking hammer (stolen from a train emergency equipment?) he was found with at the Milan nursery, not a 4.4kg boulder.

Yes, it does.
• Using a rock to break a second story glass window and scaling the wall to gain entry;
•Selecting a window with a grate underneath that could be used as a ladder;
•Tossing clothes on the floor;
•Stealing a cell phone;
•Taking a drink from the fridge
•Making himself at home

The balcony doors were heavy wooden doors that were locked. As the front door and all (thought to be) accessible windows were protected by grates, the owner of the property obviously did not see the balcony door as a possible point of easy access.

Just why would Guede need to carry a glass breaking hammer around in his backpack? They are carried in cars and trains for obvious reasons, not in backpacks. And, as far as I'm aware, Guede had no car.

It was more logical to throw a rock from the parking area; if any lights came on, or someone appeared, at the window he could run away immediately. He couldn't do that nearly as easily or quickly if he was hanging onto the window sill several feet up the wall.

Nice touch with the 4.4 kgm (9.7 lbs) "boulder". Boulders are at least 25.6 centimetres (10.1 in) in diameter. This rock was just 10 centimeters (7.9 inches) in diameter. Let's call it what it was; a rock.

The common point of reference is Amanda.

Amanda had no communication lines with Guede either.


That is not what Massei and Nencini ruled, after hearing ALL of the experts in this.

They were overturned, remember? It doesn't matter what Massei and Nencini found.


Pure conjecture. How anyone can make up excuses for some of the most infamous cold-blooded crimes of our time is beyond me.

Meredith's murder was cold-blooded and I see no one here making excuses for her killer; Guede.

You know what the evidence is. You have read the court documents. You fully and knowingly deny what is established fact.

Yes, we do know what the evidence is and what the court documents say. So do the ISC. Which is why Marasca correctly called the evidence unreliable and acquitted them.

 

[bagels]

So how come all the other housemates and Mez' British friends had similar long interviews and yet never once had the same visions of 'African immigrants' raping and killing Mez.

As for the police calling Patrick 'a dirty black': who informed the police it was him in the first place? An American student claiming she was scared of him.

lol a witness statement is the same as an all hands on deck middle of the night interrogation with manipulative stories about traumatic blackouts and slaps and threats every time a question is answered "wrongly." get real!

Why on earth were the police so willing to conduct an unrecorded undocumented illegal interrogation, that was obviously illegal even under Italian law, against a random American girl, when the only evidence they had up to this moment was unidentified male DNA from a rapekit, and an unidentified male hand and footprint? What made them so confident that pushing this clueless girl to the breaking point would crack the case?

On November 5th 2007, what overwhelming evidence made Amanda such a strong suspect that they were willing to do what they did in that interrogation room? IMV there's nothing except they were already convinced Patrick was the killer, and seeing her text with him that night only confirmed it.

The press conference after the interrogations leaves no ambiguity. The police tell us the case is closed, that the search for the killers is over, and the only phase left is compiling the evidence and bringing them to court. All before they've even compared Patrick's DNA against the rapekit.

There just isn't a lot of mystery with this case. It's so straight forward.

 

[Stacyhs]

So how come all the other housemates and Mez' British friends had similar long interviews and yet never once had the same visions of 'African immigrants' raping and killing Mez.

As for the police calling Patrick 'a dirty black': who informed the police it was him in the first place? An American student claiming she was scared of him.

Oh, good lord. Could it have anything to do with
1) Laura and Filomena having lawyers present during all their interviews?
2) the police never suspecting any of the British girls from the get go as they have admitted they suspected Amanda immediately?
3) the others not being screamed at, told they were liars, slapped, told they had "amnesia", told they had evidence against them, etc?

Nah, couldn't be for any those reasons.

As for who informed the police it was him in the first place, the text message they saw identified the caller as "Patrick". Patrick who they ask? Lumumba. Oh, my, an African name! A "black hair" was found in Meredith's hand! Let's play connect the dots.

 

[LondonJohn]

So how come all the other housemates and Mez' British friends had similar long interviews and yet never once had the same visions of 'African immigrants' raping and killing Mez.

Because the police hadn't become fixated on any of the other housemates and friends. The police hadn't become fixated on any of the other housemates and friends because they all had robust alibis, particularly the two other housemates. Knox, on the other hand, had no alibi other than her boyfriend. And Knox had been acting in ways that the police felt were inappropriate. So once the police/PM convinced themselves - wholly improperly - that the break-in was staged, they inferred (wrongly, again) that only a keyholder would have a motive to stage a break-in. And, in the way that 2+2=5 when one is riddled with confirmation bias and tunnel vision, the police/PM quickly convinced themselves that Knox was the one who must have been involved.

And when they directed their focus onto Knox, they started to misinterpret everything from within this fog of confirmation bias and tunnel vision. They placed visual surveillance on Knox, and saw her meeting with Lumumba outside the university on 5th and having a conversation with him. This they feverishly misinterpreted as Knox and Lumumba holding a conspiratorial "catch-up" meeting to check on whether they were in danger of being discovered by the police. And when the police learned that Knox's mother was arriving in Perugia on 6th November, they determined that they had to "get" Knox before her mother put her on a plane back to the US. Hence the carefully choreographed dual interrogation on the night of 5th/6th November. "Witnesses" simply do not get called in to the police HQ for questioning at 10pm.

Once the police had pressured Sollecito to make a confused conflation of dates, they got Knox in. They soon discovered the now-infamous "see you later" text message from Knox to Lumumba. They thought this was the holy grail. They (thought they) had evidence of Knox arranging to meet up with Lumumba on the night of the murder - quite contrary to her repeated and unequivocal assertions that she was alone with Sollecito all that evening/night.

The police/PM were now utterly convinced that they had solved the crime. Knox had met up with Lumumba, had taken him to the cottage, and had let him in, whereupon Lumumba had assaulted and killed Kercher. Knox had cleaned up the crime scene and staged the break-in in order to deflect attention from her, and had lied to protect both her and Lumumba. And Sollecito had lied to protect the girl with whom he'd developed a whirlwind infatuation. Simples!!

The penultimate task for the police that night (penultimate to arresting Lumumba) was to get Knox to "buckle" and admit that the police's version of events was the truth. So that's exactly what they did. They used an unlawful mixture of coercion, threats, lies and "Sophie's Choice" tactics to break Knox into making her confused "confession/accusation".

That's how and why.

As for the police calling Patrick 'a dirty black': who informed the police it was him in the first place? An American student claiming she was scared of him.

Nope. The police knew that the recipient of Knox's "see you later" text message was the killer. That contact was stored in Knox's phone as "Patrick". Knox might technically have been the first person in that room to say the word "Lumumba", but only in response to the police asking who "Patrick" was. And it appears that the police told Knox - as part of their unlawful coercion strategy - that one of the reasons why it was so important for her to "remember" was that Lumumba was a very dangerous man who might well seek to silence the only living witness to his crimes, so if Knox could help the police to arrest Lumumba and place him in custody, she would be far safer herself.

 

[Bill Williams]

And when they directed their focus onto Knox, they started to misinterpret everything from within this fog of confirmation bias and tunnel vision. They placed visual surveillance on Knox, and saw her meeting with Lumumba outside the university on 5th and having a conversation with him. This they feverishly misinterpreted as Knox and Lumumba holding a conspiratorial "catch-up" meeting to check on whether they were in danger of being discovered by the police. And when the police learned that Knox's mother was arriving in Perugia on 6th November, they determined that they had to "get" Knox before her mother put her on a plane back to the US. Hence the carefully choreographed dual interrogation on the night of 5th/6th November. "Witnesses" simply do not get called in to the police HQ for questioning at 10pm.

Once the police had pressured Sollecito to make a confused conflation of dates, they got Knox in. They soon discovered the now-infamous "see you later" text message from Knox to Lumumba. They thought this was the holy grail. They (thought they) had evidence of Knox arranging to meet up with Lumumba on the night of the murder - quite contrary to her repeated and unequivocal assertions that she was alone with Sollecito all that evening/night.

The police/PM were now utterly convinced that they had solved the crime. Knox had met up with Lumumba, had taken him to the cottage, and had let him in, whereupon Lumumba had assaulted and killed Kercher. Knox had cleaned up the crime scene and staged the break-in in order to deflect attention from her, and had lied to protect both her and Lumumba. And Sollecito had lied to protect the girl with whom he'd developed a whirlwind infatuation. Simples!!

The penultimate task for the police that night (penultimate to arresting Lumumba) was to get Knox to "buckle" and admit that the police's version of events was the truth. So that's exactly what they did. They used an unlawful mixture of coercion, threats, lies and "Sophie's Choice" tactics to break Knox into making her confused "confession/accusation".

That's how and why.

This.

 

[Welshman]

They did not rule Nencini's court was against the law. Marasca is the one with the wheels coming off. Having decided BEFORE the supreme court hearing (cf Bruno comment about no certainty except Mez' death) they were going to acquit and giving Bongiorno two and a half days worth of court time to present her skeleton (more like a morbidly obese rotting malodorous cadaver) when all other parties were given twenty minutes, it is obvious they were simply cutting and pasting from Bongiorno's rambling script to try to justify it.

As bent as a nine €uro note.

Vixen accused the supreme court of being bent whilst slavishly defending and supporting corrupt police/prosecutors who committed numerous abuses as detailed below. Yet another example of Vixen's hypocrisy.

* Violating the rights of Amanda and Raffaele during the interrogtions.

* Telling numerous lies by feeding false information to the media about the puchase of bleach receipts, the washing machine running, showering in a bloody bathroom, the Harry Potter book and telling lies in court such as prosecutor Crini saying Raffaele's knife matched the bloody imprint on the bed when it did not. Stefanoni committed perjury by saying the footprints had not been tested with TMB when in fact they had been tested and turned out negative.

* Engaging in the massive suppressiong of evidence and falsifying documents as detailed below :-

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/lab-data-suppression/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/bra-clasp-contamination/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/meredith-kercher-perjury-corruption/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/evidence-destroyed/

* Lying to Amanda she had HIV.

 

[Welshman]

No, it shows how corrupt and incompetent they were when (a) they quoted Hellmann extensively, and Bruno's opening words were strikingly similar (something about Mez' death being 'the only certainty').

Massei is an incredibly sharp judge who bent over backwards to accommodate the kids (the daps, the time of calling the police, the ringleader, et cetera, et cetera).

Nencini was professional and businesslike in his handling of the case.

Both judges found it an inescapable conclusion the pair were guilty as charged. Unlike the netflix producers, they DID see and hear ALL of the evidence, not just Friend of Amanda sycophant, Stephen Robert Morse's innocence fraud spin.

Vixen praises Nencini but conveniently forgets that Nencini lied in his report as detailed below :-

http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=85&t=3011

Vixen constantly attacks Amanda for lying but defends a judge who wrote a motivation report with lies. Could Vixen explain why Nencini had to resort to lying in his report if the case against Amanda and Raffaele was such a slam dunk?

 

[Bill Williams]

Vixen praises Nencini but conveniently forgets that Nencini lied in his report as detailed below :-

http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=85&t=3011

Vixen constantly attacks Amanda for lying but defends a judge who wrote a motivation report with lies. Could Vixen explain why Nencini had to resort to lying in his report if the case against Amanda and Raffaele was such a slam dunk?

By far, as noted by a poster on that thread, is Nencini noting that Raffaele's DNA was found on the knife.

Even Vixen calls that one a typo.

And one no longer has to wonder why Marasca/Bruno came to the following conclusion about "the evidence" used to convict Raffaele and Amanda at Nencini's florence trial:

9.4.3. It can easily be observed that the conclusion that there was a lack of an evidentiary framework consistent and sufficient to support the prosecution’s hypothesis regarding the more serious case of murder certainly reverberates on the residual, secondary accusations, listed here, d) theft of cellular phones and e) simulation of a crime.

10. The intrinsic contradictory nature of the evidence, emerging from the text of the appealed verdict, in essence undermines the connective tissue of the same, leading to its annulment.

In fact, in the presence of a scenario marked by many contradictions, the referral judge should not have come to a verdict of guilt, but - as previously observed – should have reached a verdict of not guilty​

 

[Vixen]

Vixen accused the supreme court of being bent whilst slavishly defending and supporting corrupt police/prosecutors who committed numerous abuses as detailed below. Yet another example of Vixen's hypocrisy.

* Violating the rights of Amanda and Raffaele during the interrogtions.

* Telling numerous lies by feeding false information to the media about the puchase of bleach receipts, the washing machine running, showering in a bloody bathroom, the Harry Potter book and telling lies in court such as prosecutor Crini saying Raffaele's knife matched the bloody imprint on the bed when it did not. Stefanoni committed perjury by saying the footprints had not been tested with TMB when in fact they had been tested and turned out negative.

* Engaging in the massive suppressiong of evidence and falsifying documents as detailed below :-

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/lab-data-suppression/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/bra-clasp-contamination/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/meredith-kercher-perjury-corruption/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/evidence-destroyed/

* Lying to Amanda she had HIV.

Amanda and Raff were not the only ones brought in for questioning. What makes you think they're so special? Sophie and Filomena were subjected to the same sort of grilling, as was 'Shaky'.

Unfortunately, it is not against the law for newspapers to report on a case in Italy, whilst it's sub-judice, unlike in the UK, therefore cannot be a legal point of appeal.

All prisoners are tested for HIV. It's for their benefit. Amanda was told 'not to worry' as she confirmed by her own hand, and that it was 'probably a false negative'. That doesn't sound like a doctor lying to me. They are expected to be transparent with their patients.

Yet another PR lie bites the dust.

 

[Stacyhs]

Amanda and Raff were not the only ones brought in for questioning. What makes you think they're so special? Sophie and Filomena were subjected to the same sort of grilling, as was 'Shaky'.Unfortunately, it is not against the law for newspapers to report on a case in Italy, whilst it's sub-judice, unlike in the UK, therefore cannot be a legal point of appeal.

All prisoners are tested for HIV. It's for their benefit. Amanda was told 'not to worry' as she confirmed by her own hand, and that it was 'probably a false negative'. That doesn't sound like a doctor lying to me. They are expected to be transparent with their patients.

Yet another PR lie bites the dust.

Nonsense. Mignini has admitted himself that he "knew" it was an "inside job", the burglary was staged, and that Amanda was his immediate suspect from the very beginning. Filomena, Sophie, and Shaky were never considered suspects and therefore, never subjected to the same sort of grilling as Amanda and Raff.

 

[Vixen]

Yes, we do know what the evidence is and what the court documents say. So do the ISC. Which is why Marasca correctly called the evidence unreliable and acquitted them.

You contradict yourself. On the one hand you claim Rudy's glass-breaking hammer proves he's a burglar and then you confirm the burglary at the house was performed with clumsy amateurish 4.4 kg boulder.

A boulder is classed as any rock with breadth, width or diagonal of 12". The rock qualifies at 11.78", at its widest point, bearing in mind, a sizeable chunk broke off during the impact with the inner shutter.

I a not sure why you keep talking about the evidence. It was settled by all valid courts as a fake, staged, burglary, beyond any reasonable doubt.

As for the balcony door, please think about it rationally. A random burglar at 8:00 pm outside the cottage at ground level on a dark November night with little lighting has absolutely no way of knowing whether the door is penetrable or not.

You claimed Rudy was a career burglar, so a wooden door would not present a problem. If he was there to burgle, he would have brought along a crowbar, together with his other toolkit. From the driveway, there is no way he could know whether Filomena's window was locked by a latch from the inside before shinning up a 12'4" sheer wall. So once again, your argument is totally illogical.

Can you not do something about your 'quote' formats?

Marasca did not 'reject all the evidence' . The only evidence it rejected was the DNA evidence, which was only a small, corroborating, part of a whole pile of evidence.