Continuation Part 22: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Bill Williams]

Plainly I'm in the minority, but I found myself won over by Pisa's disinclination to believe his own ********. A refreshing contrast to Mignini, if nothing else.

That just makes it worse. "It's not my fault you believed me. It's not my fault I made money off of this."

 

[kwill]

Plainly I'm in the minority, but I found myself won over by Pisa's disinclination to believe his own ********. A refreshing contrast to Mignini, if nothing else.

I would agree with you if he'd shown the thinnest film of remorse for what he clearly eventually knew had been the utter public destruction of a helpless 20-yr-old who didn't even speak the language. Instead, he shrugs it off. That's the business!

To me he seemed only mildly disgusted with the police/prosecutors who had been lying to him. There were journalists who got it right, in real time. I wish one of them had been in the movie, too.

 

[Sergei Walankov]

Yeah, but everybody loves a bad boy. And he does wear a very nice suit.

 

[Bill Williams]

I would agree with you if he'd shown the thinnest film of remorse for what he clearly eventually knew had been the utter public destruction of a helpless 20-yr-old who didn't even speak the language. Instead, he shrugs it off. That's the business!

To me he seemed only mildly disgusted with the police/prosecutors who had been lying to him. There were journalists who got it right, in real time. I wish one of them had been in the movie, too.

Frank Sfarzo was the hero of Winterbottom's, "The Face of an Angel".

 

[Sergei Walankov]

Speaking of Frank Sfarzo/journalists who got it right in real time, he relates the following article by an Italian magistrate which concludes that we may be "consola un poco" that "our courts of last instance have been able to get rid of the loud noise created around the death of Meredith Kercher and have looked at the reality for what it was", but that this nonetheless occurred only after "a real investigative and evaluative disaster".

http://www.filodiritto.com/articoli...zioni-sullassassinio-di-meredith-kercher.html

 

[bagels]

Plainly I'm in the minority, but I found myself won over by Pisa's disinclination to believe his own ********. A refreshing contrast to Mignini, if nothing else.

I was won over by his two finger typing. How endearing

 

[Bill Williams]

Speaking of Frank Sfarzo/journalists who got it right in real time, he relates the following article by an Italian magistrate which concludes that we may be "consola un poco" that "our courts of last instance have been able to get rid of the loud noise created around the death of Meredith Kercher and have looked at the reality for what it was", but that this nonetheless occurred only after "a real investigative and evaluative disaster".

http://www.filodiritto.com/articoli...zioni-sullassassinio-di-meredith-kercher.html

One must remember that Sfarzo started out rubbing shoulders with all the early tabloid writers. Even though Sfarzo got his stuff into Oggi periodically, his real contribution was being an English-language blogger. The English language world was otherwise at the mercy of the tabloids or Vogt or Nadeau.

As Simone (the Nadeau character) in Winterbottom's film tells Thomas, "We'd all have to read Edoardo's blog every morning just to keep up." Edoardo was the Frank-character, in composite with others. They even got the trade-mark Frank-snark correct when Simone introduces Thomas to him, with Edoardo looking straight at Simone, but saying to Thomas, "Be careful of this one; she's nice enough when you meet her, but when she writes she's a real bitch."

Sfarzo's early entries in Perugia Shock had his trademark snark aimed directly at Amanda and Raffaele, as like the rest he was being fed police leaks. But unlike Nick Pisa's own admission in the Netflix documentary ("If you fact-checked, you'd lose the story and someone else would get the headline") Sfarzo started asking questions.

From what I remember when accessing Perguia Shock through the WayBack service, was that it didn't add up for him that the police admitted not even trying to search the forested area below the cottage for a knife. He blogged that he'd been told, "Why search, we already have the knife from the boy's apartment."

Then at the 2009 trial, the two-knife theory had been floated by the prosecution, to explain why the large kitchen knife could not have made all the wounds, and did not match the blood outline of a knife on the sheet. It began to occur to Sfarzo that the police/prosecutor were busy manufacturing a case, rather than be led by the (lack of) evidence.

For the second trial, Mignini (IMO) went to war against Sfarzo, and managed the almost unprecedented feat of getting Google (I believe it was Google) to have Perugia Shock pulled. The Committee For the Protection of Journalists protested that act!, to no avail.

But in the beginning it was as nearly ALL the early writers said - incl. Sfarzo - there'd be a leak from the police, and they'd all go to the wine-bar at night to argue their theories or brag about who'd had a paycheque from a headline back in Britain or America. To all appearances their friendships are still fairly intact - Andrea Vogt has circled back from actively feeding the guilt websites, to now criticisizing them for extending the Kercher's pain, by not accepting the March 2015 exonerations.

Someone should do a documentary on the journalists - Winterbottom's film was partly that, but it was such a miserable failure at the box office.

This documentary, though, is a gamechanger. It was heartening seeing Mrs. Kercher basically say that the Italians botched things, and one can only imagine the heaviness in her heart when she says that.

 

[Stacyhs]

What disgusts me is the police and Mignini, whom the Marasca MR rightly hauled over the goals for doing a deplorable investigation, received medals or a promotion for that investigation. Mamma mia.

 

[Bill Williams]

What disgusts me is the police and Mignini, whom the Marasca MR rightly hauled over the goals for doing a deplorable investigation, received medals or a promotion for that investigation. Mamma mia.

The deplorable investigation was this:

They intuited what the break-in meant, not bothering to do even preliminary forensics - eg. no one tried to see if they could scale the wall or toss a stone:

The nicks on the victim's neck were interpreted as taunting, thus the "game" part of Mignini's theories. No one consulted with outside experts who would have said that those nicks were also the sign of someone who'd never done this before - hesitations.

Mignini admits that his intuition about the placing of a comforter over the victim meant it had to be a female killer..... once again, no data submitted, just asserted; he then goes on to say that he suspected Amanda because she freaked out when seeing the knives in the drawers back at the cottage. So much for the lies he told to Drew Griffin in the 2010 CNN interview when he said she was not even a suspect until, "she named Lumumba", who - BTW - turned out not to have had anything to do with this.

Read - false confessions are known because they confess to the wrong things; and there was no reason to try to protect Rudy, if she'd known he was involved.

Then the DNA comes in and it seems like a slam dunk. So why even bother with a thorough investigation?

Then Lumumba has an iron clad alibi, that the police are very, very slow to admit. Then Rudy is found, and says via Skype, "Amanda had nothing to do with this." Then the DNA evidence falls apart. Ooooooops, they hadn't really investigated anything else - not really. But, dammit, his reputation as a small town hero was on the line - would anyone in town shake his hand and say, "Bravo" any more?

 

[Stacyhs]

The deplorable investigation was this:

They intuited what the break-in meant, not bothering to do even preliminary forensics - eg. no one tried to see if they could scale the wall or toss a stone:

The nicks on the victim's neck were interpreted as taunting, thus the "game" part of Mignini's theories. No one consulted with outside experts who would have said that those nicks were also the sign of someone who'd never done this before - hesitations.

Mignini admits that his intuition about the placing of a comforter over the victim meant it had to be a female killer..... once again, no data submitted, just asserted; he then goes on to say that he suspected Amanda because she freaked out when seeing the knives in the drawers back at the cottage. So much for the lies he told to Drew Griffin in the 2010 CNN interview when he said she was not even a suspect until, "she named Lumumba", who - BTW - turned out not to have had anything to do with this.

Read - false confessions are known because they confess to the wrong things; and there was no reason to try to protect Rudy, if she'd known he was involved.

Then the DNA comes in and it seems like a slam dunk. So why even bother with a thorough investigation?

Then Lumumba has an iron clad alibi, that the police are very, very slow to admit. Then Rudy is found, and says via Skype, "Amanda had nothing to do with this." Then the DNA evidence falls apart. Ooooooops, they hadn't really investigated anything else - not really. But, dammit, his reputation as a small town hero was on the line - would anyone in town shake his hand and say, "Bravo" any more?

That pretty much sums it up.

 

[analemma]

Plainly I'm in the minority, but I found myself won over by Pisa's disinclination to believe his own ********. A refreshing contrast to Mignini, if nothing else.

The confused and baffled look on oisas face during the segment when it was announced the DNA was contaminated was a masterful piece of filmwork: Very Effective.
It was if he was surprised that everything was a frame up.

 

[analemma]

What disgusts me is the police and Mignini, whom the Marasca MR rightly hauled over the goals for doing a deplorable investigation, received medals or a promotion for that investigation. Mamma mia.

The idiot was probably booted upstairs where he could push papers: he could do no harm pushing papers.

 

[Vixen]

The deplorable investigation was this:

They intuited what the break-in meant, not bothering to do even preliminary forensics - eg. no one tried to see if they could scale the wall or toss a stone:

The nicks on the victim's neck were interpreted as taunting, thus the "game" part of Mignini's theories. No one consulted with outside experts who would have said that those nicks were also the sign of someone who'd never done this before - hesitations.

Mignini admits that his intuition about the placing of a comforter over the victim meant it had to be a female killer..... once again, no data submitted, just asserted; he then goes on to say that he suspected Amanda because she freaked out when seeing the knives in the drawers back at the cottage. So much for the lies he told to Drew Griffin in the 2010 CNN interview when he said she was not even a suspect until, "she named Lumumba", who - BTW - turned out not to have had anything to do with this.

Read - false confessions are known because they confess to the wrong things; and there was no reason to try to protect Rudy, if she'd known he was involved.

Then the DNA comes in and it seems like a slam dunk. So why even bother with a thorough investigation?

Then Lumumba has an iron clad alibi, that the police are very, very slow to admit. Then Rudy is found, and says via Skype, "Amanda had nothing to do with this." Then the DNA evidence falls apart. Ooooooops, they hadn't really investigated anything else - not really. But, dammit, his reputation as a small town hero was on the line - would anyone in town shake his hand and say, "Bravo" any more?

The subtitles were a mistranslation. Mignini did not say 'a man would not cover up his victim'. He said 'an unknown man would not cover up the victim'.

Hello? You are a random burglar: you have just horrifically raped, mutilated, and butchered your victim and you hang around to cover her with a duvet?

Or you are her housemate whom you last exchanged pleasantries with and now you are in deep ******

 

[Vixen]

To be fair, I think there are very few people who hold any illusions about tabloid journalists--especially British tabloid journalists, I'm sorry to say. We're not talking about investigative journalists like Seymour Hersh here. These unscrupulous tabloid hacks are legion.

When I lived in Europe, I would pick up some of those British rags and just marvel at the lies and fantasies contained therein. Publishers of those awful rags (all the red tops, The People, The Daily Fail, and so on) were constantly having to pay damages to this person or that person for printing damaging items that simply were not true. The publisher would have to pay a pile of money in damages, print a tiny retraction in their horrible fishwrap, and then go on his merry way.

There's no such thing as fact checking in those tabloids. As long as a story is attributed to somebody like "an unnamed source" or "a friend," the tabloids will rush to the presses with it. Any resulting lawsuits are considered just part of the cost of doing business. Nick Pisa is a slimy opportunist, but so are the rest of his kind (in the UK anyway).

Are you sure 'it's just the British hacks'? One of my favourite Oscar-nominated films last year ( or was it the year before?) was this one (Nightcrawler, about a journalist so eager to be first with a story, he choreographs his own crime scenes so his tv channel can be first with the news):

When Louis Bloom, a driven man desperate for work, muscles into the world of L.A. crime journalism, he blurs the line between observer and participant to become the star of his own story. Aiding him in his effort is Nina, a TV-news veteran. (117 mins.)
Director: Dan Gilroy
Stars: Jake Gyllenhaal, Rene Russo, Bill Paxton, Riz Ahmed

Oh. Hacks are the same the world over.

 

[Bill Williams]

The subtitles were a mistranslation. Mignini did not say 'a man would not cover up his victim'. He said 'an unknown man would not cover up the victim'.

Hello? You are a random burglar: you have just horrifically raped, mutilated, and butchered your victim and you hang around to cover her with a duvet?

Or you are her housemate whom you last exchanged pleasantries with and now you are in deep ******

It's amazing you make excuses for Mignini and Rudy. Rudy was not an unknown to Meredith - his story was that he was in the cottage that night for a date with her that included him claiming consensual sex!

Mignini is now a confirmed liar. Compare his statements about when they were considered suspects - between his statement made to CNN in 2010 and this documentary. Both cannot be true.

Mignini is caught by his own words. Both cannot be true, and demonstrates the goalposts being moved by the prosecution. There's no way around it.

 

[Sonia]

The subtitles were a mistranslation. Mignini did not say 'a man would not cover up his victim'. He said 'an unknown man would not cover up the victim'.

Hello? You are a random burglar: you have just horrifically raped, mutilated, and butchered your victim and you hang around to cover her with a duvet?

Or you are her housemate whom you last exchanged pleasantries with and now you are in deep ******

But Meredith wasn't a stranger to Rudy. Rudy met her at least once in a pleasant context, downstairs in the apartment of the four Italian boys who invited him in and knew him as "The Baron." Amanda was with Meredith on at least one occasion when Rudy was socializing downstairs with the boys. The boys testified that "The Baron" admired both girls.

When he met Meredith, I'm sure he was impressed by her as a sweet and lovely English girl, just as everyone who met her was impressed. After the crime, no doubt he felt horrible about what he'd done to a blameless girl. I'm not surprised he tossed a duvet over her before he stole her phones and money.

He may have felt that he had to kill her primarily because she knew who he was.

 

[Vixen]

It's amazing you make excuses for Mignini and Rudy. Rudy was not an unknown to Meredith - his story was that he was in the cottage that night for a date with her that included him claiming consensual sex!

Mignini is now a confirmed liar. Compare his statements about when they were considered suspects - between his statement made to CNN in 2010 and this documentary. Both cannot be true.

Mignini is caught by his own words. Both cannot be true, and demonstrates the goalposts being moved by the prosecution. There's no way around it.

How are cops supposed to solve crimes unless they consider everyone at the crime scene as a potential suspect? <fx gets into listening pose>

 

[Vixen]

But Meredith wasn't a stranger to Rudy. Rudy met her at least once in a pleasant context, downstairs in the apartment of the four Italian boys who invited him in and knew him as "The Baron." Amanda was with Meredith on at least one occasion when Rudy was socializing downstairs with the boys. The boys testified that "The Baron" admired both girls.

When he met Meredith, I'm sure he was impressed by her as a sweet and lovely English girl, just as everyone who met her was impressed. After the crime, no doubt he felt horrible about what he'd done to a blameless girl. I'm not surprised he tossed a duvet over her before he stole her phones and money.

He may have felt that he had to kill her primarily because she knew who he was.

Then it's unlikely he broke in if all he had to do was knock on the door and say, hello.

You yourself confirm he knew the boys downstairs, in which case he would have been aware of far easier ways to break in and enter than the presumed 12'4" wall in full view of the road and passing traffic.

You could say the same applies to her roommate. quote: He may have felt that he had to kill her primarily because she knew who he was

 

[Bill Williams]

How are cops supposed to solve crimes unless they consider everyone at the crime scene as a potential suspect? <fx gets into listening pose>

The issue is - when did Mignini consider them suspects?

Read the transcript of his CNN interview with Drew Griffin in 2010 . Contrast with what he told Netflix in 2016.

They are differing accounts of when he, the PM spoken from his own mouth, regarded them as suspects.

Both of his statements cannot be true. Was he lying in 2010 or in 2016?

 

[Vixen]

The issue is - when did Mignini consider them suspects?

Read the transcript of his CNN interview with Drew Griffin in 2010 . Contrast with what he told Netflix in 2016.

They are differing accounts of when he, the PM spoken from his own mouth, regarded them as suspects.

Both of his statements cannot be true. Was he lying in 2010 or in 2016?

Come, come, Bill. You know perfectly well the netflix film is carefully edited.

You don't know what lies on the cutting room floor.

Given how overwhelming the evidence is against the pair, it's no wonder the PIP prefer a PR commercial than an objective trial in a court of law.