Continuation Part 22: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[bagels]

I watched that CBS special on the Jonbenet Ramsey murder because I can't stay away from trashy tabloid cases. Anyway it's similar to the Knox case in that the police and a good chunk of the public believe the whole crime was staged, there was no intruder, and the Ramsey family is responsible for the murder. But like I've mentioned before the evidence is the opposite of the Knox case. In this case they have matching traces of LCN touch DNA in Jonbenet's under garments on two different items of clothing, but the DNA matches an unknown male not in the family. So to support the theory that the parents did it, this DNA must just be random contamination or innocent transfer. And it's fascinating to see people convinced in the Ramsey's guilt fervently reject this DNA evidence. On the show they had a forensic expert claim there's a million ways DNA can transfer around, and it can even transfer from one item of clothing to another in the laundry.

It's funny to imagine a Ramsey PGP ardently explaining how unreliable LCN touch DNA is as evidence because it's so easy to transfer and contaminate, then switch gears as a Knox PGP and say the LCN DNA proves beyond a doubt that Knox is guilty because it is easier to move a mountain than to contaminate or transfer LCN DNA.

Anyway the Jonbenet case will probably remain unsolved, I have no idea what happened. One thing is clear though, if Jonbenet's body was surrounded by bloody footprints of a known criminal trailing away from her, with this criminal's bloody handprint next to the body, and her genitals had this criminal's DNA in them, the case against the Ramseys would clearly be closed and in fact it seems absurd to possibly argue otherwi...errr wait that didn't help Amanda Knox

 

[Welshman]

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.

When Amanda and Raffaele were being questioned on the night of the 5th of November it is blatantly obvious they were being treated as suspects which means they should have been given access to lawyers, told their rights and the interrogations taped which the police did not do. They were denied access to lawyers right up until the preliminary hearings.

The issue I raised was not that the media in Italy have freedom to say what they want before trials but the prosecution using the media to spread falsehoods as detailed in my post. Vixen and other PGP constantly attack Amanda for lying but defend corrupt prosecutors who told numerous lies. Vixen admires Stefanoni who committed perjury whilst condemning Amanda for lying. If as Vixen claims the prosecution had a mountain of evidence and a strong case, why did the prosecution have to resort to telling numerous lies, supressing evidence and falsifying documents? Vixen attacks Hellman, C&V and the supreme court for being corrupt whilst slavishly supporting corrupt prosecutors who committed numerous abuses. How does Vixen explain this hypocrisy?

Vixen claims Amanda was not lied to she had HIV and the test was a false positive. There is an article from Nigel Scott which demolishes this claim. An important point made in his article is that false positives are extremely rare. If a genuine test was carried out why have no details emerged of the time, date and location that Amanda's blood was tested? Why has no documentation emerged for this test? In view of the numerous abuses committed by the prosecution and the massive level of corruption by the prosecution, would lying to someone they have HIV exactly the sort of thing you would expect from a bunch of corrupt scumbags?

 

[Vixen]

The "kind, gentle boss" who lied about firing her and who lied about Amanda's behavior at work. He admitted he lied and his court testimony is vastly different from the scurrilous story he told to the DM.

Mignini admits himself that he suspected Amanda from day one in the Netflix docu interview and it was solidified on Nov 3 when she fell apart at the cottage after being taken back.
http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...r/news-story/e2a439f33c056920a151d973325aef90

Out of his own mouth. How are you going to spin that one?

You really don't understand what is meant by suspect in Italian law.

 

[Vixen]

1). Filomena and Laura were not "peasant" girls, as you well know. They were interns in a law office, studying to become lawyers themselves. They knew they needed lawyers even though they were innocent and had quick and easy contacts to lawyers due to their work.

2) It most certainly is true they suspected Amanda and Raff from day one. From the new Netflix docu's interview with Mignini:

Mignini told the documentary when he looked at the crime scene, he began to speculate what happened to Meredith.

“Why was the girl covered with a blanket? A woman who has killed tends to cover the body of female victims, a man would never think to do this,” he postulates.

The thing he said stuck out most to him at the crime scene, was the smashed window.

“Nothing had been stolen and there was no evidence somebody climbed the wall (to get to the window).

“Immediately I could tell it was a staged break-in. It could have no other function than this. To throw off suspicion from someone who has a connection to the house.”

Mr Mignini began to suspect Amanda was guilty of the crime when he saw her cuddling her boyfriend outside the crime scene.

“They were comforting each other with an affection inappropriate for the moment,” he told the documentary.

Out of his own mouth. So much for the ridiculous lie that he didn't suspect Amanda from day one.

2) I was referring to the "negroid hair" that turned out to be a textile/wool thread. But the police didn't know that on Nov 5/6 because they didn't bother to wait for the forensic results. They thought it was a black man's hair.

What? Police found a black fibre, so that's all right for Amanda to finger Patrick, as he was, as bagels calls it, 'an African immigrant'.

Terrible logic.

 

[Vixen]

When Amanda and Raffaele were being questioned on the night of the 5th of November it is blatantly obvious they were being treated as suspects which means they should have been given access to lawyers, told their rights and the interrogations taped which the police did not do. They were denied access to lawyers right up until the preliminary hearings.

The issue I raised was not that the media in Italy have freedom to say what they want before trials but the prosecution using the media to spread falsehoods as detailed in my post. Vixen and other PGP constantly attack Amanda for lying but defend corrupt prosecutors who told numerous lies. Vixen admires Stefanoni who committed perjury whilst condemning Amanda for lying. If as Vixen claims the prosecution had a mountain of evidence and a strong case, why did the prosecution have to resort to telling numerous lies, supressing evidence and falsifying documents? Vixen attacks Hellman, C&V and the supreme court for being corrupt whilst slavishly supporting corrupt prosecutors who committed numerous abuses. How does Vixen explain this hypocrisy?

Vixen claims Amanda was not lied to she had HIV and the test was a false positive. There is an article from Nigel Scott which demolishes this claim. An important point made in his article is that false positives are extremely rare. If a genuine test was carried out why have no details emerged of the time, date and location that Amanda's blood was tested? Why has no documentation emerged for this test? In view of the numerous abuses committed by the prosecution and the massive level of corruption by the prosecution, would lying to someone they have HIV exactly the sort of thing you would expect from a bunch of corrupt scumbags?

Amanda writes in her own prison diary on the same day she was told it was likely a false positive and not to worry. It is a complete lie and PR myth that she was forced to list her sexual partners. She listed (some) of them all of her own idling volition.

 

[Vixen]

1) I do not contradict myself as I explained why throwing a rock from the parking area made more sense than using the glass hammer that night. You just choose to ignore the logic of it. You also never answered the question as to why Guede would even carry a glass hammer in his backpack. What innocent reason would he have for that? And Rudy was an amateur thief.

2) The size of the rock included the broken chunk, so your point is irrelevant.
A boulder qualifies as such at just over 25 cm or 10 inches. " boulder greater than (>) 25.6 cm" (Water Wells and Boreholes
By Bruce Misstear, David Banks, Lewis Clark, pg 262)

3) Please think about this logically regarding the balcony door. The balcony was easily scaled and it would take mere moments to discern that the heavy wooden doors were locked and to decide to look for an easier point of entry.

4) I never claimed Guede was a "career burglar". Stop putting words in my mouth. It became boorish a long time ago. He was an amateur thief.

5) A heavy wooden door would certainly present a difficulty. So much so that the owner of the cottage failed to provide a grated security door for it unlike the front doors upstairs and downstairs and the windows.

6) Perhaps a professional burglar would have brought a crowbar, but Guede was no professional. He was a two-bit amateur.

7) Guede did not need to "shinny up a 12' 4" wall to test whether the shutters were closed. All he had to do was stand on the grate below and reach up as shown in the video and the picture taken by the defense. So once again, your argument does not address the facts.

8) I'll format my response as I want. Can you not do something about putting words in my mouth that I never said?

9) I never said he rejected "all" the evidence. Once again, stop putting words in my mouth". However, he rejected more than the DNA evidence, contrary to your claims. He also rejected the idea she or Raff could have participated in the crime and left no evidence of themselves in the bedroom. He also rejected the idea there could have been a selective cleanup. He rejected more but why bother? It makes no difference to you.

You have been told the boulder was 11.78". What don't you get?

 

[Vixen]

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.






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.

Would. Could. Should. All highly conditional.

 

[Annella]

Amanda writes in her own prison diary on the same day she was told it was likely a false positive and not to worry. It is a complete lie and PR myth that she was forced to list her sexual partners. She listed (some) of them all of her own idling volition.

You up for further enlightening us Vixen? It is obvious you know more than we do...so please. In your own time of course.

 

[Annella]

Deleted

 

[Wilson85]

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.

Is there a source for the weight of the rock? I often read about 4.5kg but can't find the weight or measurement in the Massei report. In an interview RS is saying it has never been analyzed and the weight and measurement is unknown. Does somebody know more about it?

 

[Wilson85]

It is untrue the police 'suspected Amanda immediately'; they suspected a whole range of people. On the night Amanda made her evil accusation of rape and murder against Patrick, as of that point, Raff was far more of a suspect to them. So much for the ridiculous PR lie that Mignini had some misogynist agenda against the American girl.

See here at 15:25:
youtube.com/watch?v=EMeGDgPEUxQ&feature=youtu.be&t=923

 

[Bill Williams]

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.

When Amanda and Raffaele were being questioned on the night of the 5th of November it is blatantly obvious they were being treated as suspects which means they should have been given access to lawyers, told their rights and the interrogations taped which the police did not do. They were denied access to lawyers right up until the preliminary hearings.

The clincher on this - a clincher Vixen will never address - is that Mignini's own peers sanctioned/censured him for denying Sollecito his rights.

Keep track of the things vixen never addresses - like never being able to find one peer reviewed forensic-DNA expert who supports Stefanoni's work. Keep track of the times Vixen actually changes what you say in a post, and then she argues with that changed version!!!!

When does this stop?

 

[bagels]

You really don't understand what is meant by suspect in Italian law.

I remember some PGP on the IA forum tried to argue that AK wasn't a suspect because she was called in as an innocent lying witness of the murder. I asked how this doesn't create a loophole to question any suspect they want under any circumstances without having to follow any suspect protocol as long as they say they're not suspected of the crime, just of being at the crime at the time of the crime and lying about it for innocent reasons? No response of course just like you wont have.

The ECHR will have the final word and then you'll get your workout for the day moving those goal post.

 

[Stacyhs]

Amanda did not become a suspect until she maliciously named her kind, gentle boss, Patrick, and spitefully claimed she was scared of him, to manipulate the police.

You really don't understand what is meant by suspect in Italian law.

Oh, please. Are you really going to play the semantics game of legal suspect vs suspect in reality? Of course you are because you can't deny the words straight of Mignini's mouth proving otherwise.

 

[Stacyhs]

What? Police found a black fibre, so that's all right for Amanda to finger Patrick, as he was, as bagels calls it, 'an African immigrant'.

Terrible logic.

What? Police found a black fiber, so that's all right for the police to assume it's a black man's hair and finger Lumumba without bothering to wait for the forensic results or even find out if Lumumba had an alibi before arresting him?

Wow. You should work in a pretzel factory with your gift of being able to twist things.

 

[Stacyhs]

You have been told the boulder was 11.78". What don't you get?

False. "In this case the choice of rock was a 7.9 inches/20 cm wide rock"
What don't you get? Or is your site TMOMK wrong (yet again)?

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Staged_Burglary

 

[Stacyhs]

Is there a source for the weight of the rock? I often read about 4.5kg but can't find the weight or measurement in the Massei report. In an interview RS is saying it has never been analyzed and the weight and measurement is unknown. Does somebody know more about it?

Your question made me go look at TMOMK again to see what their source was for their claim that "In this case the choice of rock was a 7.9 inches/20 cm wide rock weighing 10 lbs/4,5 kgs.[15]"

However, when I go to their #15 source, the Massei report pg 49, there is absolutely nothing about the rock on that page nor on several of the preceding or following pages. I also looked at the English version of the report and could find nothing giving the weight or dimensions of the rock. Could it be possible that TMOMK could be less than honest? Nah.....

 

[Vixen]

False. "In this case the choice of rock was a 7.9 inches/20 cm wide rock"
What don't you get? Or is your site TMOMK wrong (yet again)?

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Staged_Burglary

As you can see, the boulder is quite rectangular in shape and if the width is 20cm, then we can see with the eye, the length is also 20cm. When width = 20cm and length = 20cm, the diagonal is 28.28cm = 11.13in.

This is a minimum, because when we did this exercise before, the answer was 29.92 = 11.78".

You yourself asserted a boulder is a rock which is >25cm (or, >10").

Q.E.D. ::

I find it amusing you have no idea what its dimension are, yet feel the chutzpah to make bold declarations that TMOMK is 'false' when truth is, YOU are actually in the wrong.

This is evidence of your being obtuse, rather than debating fairly.

It is an established fact the weight of the boulder is 4.4kg.

Please do not argue just for the sake of it.

 

[Bill Williams]

As you can see, the boulder is quite rectangular in shape and if the width is 20cm, then we can see with the eye, the length is also 20cm. When width = 20cm and length = 20cm, the diagonal is 28.28cm = 11.13in.

This is a minimum, because when we did this exercise before, the answer was 29.92 = 11.78".

You yourself asserted a boulder is a rock which is >25cm (or, >10").

Q.E.D. ::

I find it amusing you have no idea what its dimension are, yet feel the chutzpah to make bold declarations that TMOMK is 'false' when truth is, YOU are actually in the wrong.

This is evidence of your being obtuse, rather than debating fairly.

It is an established fact the weight of the boulder is 4.4kg.

Please do not argue just for the sake of it.

Perhaps you could follow your own standards - first would be to supply the name of one forensic-DNA expert who agrees with Stefanoni's work.

You are very picky about who you criticize.

 

[Vixen]

Perhaps you could follow your own standards - first would be to supply the name of one forensic-DNA expert who agrees with Stefanoni's work.

You are very picky about who you criticize.

Stefanoni is an employee of the Rome Forensic Police. Why on earth would anyone write a research paper on her? Research papers are to do with analysing academic theories and hypotheses.