Cont: The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 27

[Numbers]

And of course it's entirely impossible that the wikipedia page for Mignini might have been *ahem* selectively edited by one or more people with a certain agenda........?

The dysfunctional and often corruptly self-serving Italian judicial system let Mignini escape accountability. He has not been the only police officer or magistrate who has benefited from the practical impunity granted to persons in authority by the Italian judicial system.

Here's an interesting article on the Mignini role in the MoF (Narducci) case and its influence on the Knox - Sollecito case by Douglas Preston:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/oct/04/knox-acquittal-only-possible-verdict

Excerpt:

"The overturning of the murder convictions of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito for the murder of British exchange student Meredith Kercher in Perugia, Italy came as no surprise. The appeals trial showed that virtually all the crucial evidence used in the original trial to convict Knox and Sollecito was faulty, erroneous, worthless, or manipulated.
....
The story begins almost a decade ago, long before Meredith Kercher's murder, when the pubblico ministero (public prosecutor) of Perugia, Giuliano Mignini, opened an investigation into the mysterious death of a doctor whose body was found floating in Lake Trasimeno in 1985.

Mignini believed the doctor was connected to a satanic sect, which had murdered him because he was about to go to the police and reveal its many crimes. Mignini believed this shadowy cult was connected to infamous murders committed by a serial killer known as the Monster of Florence. ...."

 

[Stacyhs]

In the linked article above, Preston writes:

An enduring mystery is why Guede was repeatedly released after committing serious crimes, such as breaking and entering while in possession of a knife.

As far as I'm aware, the only time the police released Guede prior to the murder was when he was arrested for breaking into the Milan nursery school. What other "serious crimes" did he commit that the police were aware of and then released him? They were unaware of the Tramontano break-in until after the murder and had not connected him to the Perugia law office break-in until he was found in possession of items stolen from it when arrested in Milan.

 

[Numbers]

In the linked article above, Preston writes:



As far as I'm aware, the only time the police released Guede prior to the murder was when he was arrested for breaking into the Milan nursery school. What other "serious crimes" did he commit that the police were aware of and then released him? They were unaware of the Tramontano break-in until after the murder and had not connected him to the Perugia law office break-in until he was found in possession of items stolen from it when arrested in Milan.

Unfortunately, no reference citations were attached to Preston's article.

Here's another excerpt from that article:

"About 50% of all criminal convictions in Italy are reversed or greatly modified on appeal. Knox and Sollecito join the 4 million Italians since the war who have seen their lives ruined by false criminal charges, only to be proclaimed innocent after many years of agony and imprisonment."

 

[Bill Williams]

Unfortunately, no reference citations were attached to Preston's article.

Here's another excerpt from that article:

"About 50% of all criminal convictions in Italy are reversed or greatly modified on appeal. Knox and Sollecito join the 4 million Italians since the war who have seen their lives ruined by false criminal charges, only to be proclaimed innocent after many years of agony and imprisonment."

A surprising source which confirms this fact is Barbie Nadeau. As bad as she had been as an author - spreading sexualized factoids as facts ......

.... In Dec 2009 she appeared as a CNN correspondent from Perugia at the time of the 1st Instance conviction of Raffaele and Amanda. On screen she summarized things this way: "The case against the pair was weak, but the defence was weaker. This could very well get overturned at appeal." IIRC it was she who later in that report reiterated that about half of first instance convictions are overturned at the required second instance trial anyway.

 

[sept79]

A surprising source which confirms this fact is Barbie Nadeau. As bad as she had been as an author - spreading sexualized factoids as facts ......

.... In Dec 2009 she appeared as a CNN correspondent from Perugia at the time of the 1st Instance conviction of Raffaele and Amanda. On screen she summarized things this way: "The case against the pair was weak, but the defence was weaker. This could very well get overturned at appeal." IIRC it was she who later in that report reiterated that about half of first instance convictions are overturned at the required second instance trial anyway.

Is one to deduce that first instance trials are not taken very seriously except by the accused?

 

[Numbers]

A surprising source which confirms this fact is Barbie Nadeau. As bad as she had been as an author - spreading sexualized factoids as facts ......

.... In Dec 2009 she appeared as a CNN correspondent from Perugia at the time of the 1st Instance conviction of Raffaele and Amanda. On screen she summarized things this way: "The case against the pair was weak, but the defence was weaker. This could very well get overturned at appeal." IIRC it was she who later in that report reiterated that about half of first instance convictions are overturned at the required second instance trial anyway.

Is one to deduce that first instance trials are not taken very seriously except by the accused?

I don't dispute that about 50% of first instance trials in Italy are reversed, but one shouldn't take this statistic as true without some confirmation based on an analysis of actual reliable data.

Comments by journalists, unsupported by reliable data from meaningful sources, may be misleading. Take, for example, the statement by Barbie Nadeau that in the first instance trial, the defense case was weaker than the prosecution case. What is the factual basis for this value judgment?

Based upon my reading of the Massei court motivation report, I believe that the defense adequately established strong doubt, one that any reasonable person would accept, that the prosecution case did not prove any guilt on the part of Knox or Sollecito. However, the Massei court consistently interpreted evidence arbitrarily to favor the prosecution case and thus judged Knox and Sollecito guilty based on an arbitrary and unreasonable probabilistic evaluation, contrary to Italian law. Italian law, CPP Article 533, requires that a conviction must be based on the establishment of guilt by proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

And if Nadeau stated that an appeal (second instance) trial is required in Italy, that only displays a lack of knowledge on her part, which infects her readers with misinformation. The second instance or appeal trial only happens if there is an appeal by the accused or the prosecutor; it is not required otherwise.

Thus, for example, the Boninsegna court first instance trial, which acquitted Amanda Knox of aggravated continuing calunnia against the police, was a final and definitive trial, because the prosecution did not appeal the judgment.

 

[sept79]

Why did the "Massei court consistently interpret evidence arbitrarily to favor the prosecution case and thus judge Knox and Sollecito guilty based on an arbitrary and unreasonable probabilistic evaluation"? Was Massei charged with finding Knox and Sollecito guilty by some 'higher' authority knowing that an almost automatic appeal trial would right the wrong? It seems like Italian 'justice' trivializes incarceration.

 

[Stacyhs]

I agree that Nadeau's statement regarding the "weak" defense is unsupported. Remember that Marasca-Bruno found that they should never have been convicted on the evidence presented at any of the preceding trials.

 

[Bill Williams]

Why did the "Massei court consistently interpret evidence arbitrarily to favor the prosecution case and thus judge Knox and Sollecito guilty based on an arbitrary and unreasonable probabilistic evaluation"? Was Massei charged with finding Knox and Sollecito guilty by some 'higher' authority knowing that an almost automatic appeal trial would right the wrong? It seems like Italian 'justice' trivializes incarceration.

The 2015 Marasca/Bruno report was aimed as squarely at Massei as it was at Nencini.

It was Massei who made himself an expert of the experts. Massei even wrote that it would have done no good allowing independent experts to review Stefanoni's work.

Why? Because, he reasoned, even if thos independent experts disparaged the prosecution's DNA evidence, massei said it'd still be up to him to break the tie.

Seemingly it would have bothered him not that an independent expert would contradict the police!!

So from there, Massei simply arbitrarily "put R and A in the room". From there he simply built a scenerio that must have been true, not that any individual one of those items had ever been demonstrated.

 

[sept79]

The 2015 Marasca/Bruno report was aimed as squarely at Massei as it was at Nencini.

It was Massei who made himself an expert of the experts. Massei even wrote that it would have done no good allowing independent experts to review Stefanoni's work.

Why? Because, he reasoned, even if those independent experts disparaged the prosecution's DNA evidence, Massei said it'd still be up to him to break the tie.

Seemingly it would have bothered him not that an independent expert would contradict the police!!

So from there, Massei simply arbitrarily "put R and A in the room". From there he simply built a scenario that must have been true, not that any individual one of those items had ever been demonstrated.

So why did Massei proceed in this manner? He wasn't concerned about discovering the truth? A higher authority 'made it worth his while' to find Knox/Sollecito guilty? He didn't wish to go against the prosecution? He didn't wish to go against Italy's finest scientific 'experts'? He is anti-American? He thought it was better for his career to pass the case along to the appeal process?

If nothing else, Massei looks the part of a judge and has the demeanor (i.e., ego) of a judge.

 

[LondonJohn]

So why did Massei proceed in this manner? He wasn't concerned about discovering the truth? A higher authority 'made it worth his while' to find Knox/Sollecito guilty? He didn't wish to go against the prosecution? He didn't wish to go against Italy's finest scientific 'experts'? He is anti-American? He thought it was better for his career to pass the case along to the appeal process?

If nothing else, Massei looks the part of a judge and has the demeanor (i.e., ego) of a judge.

IMO a significant (perhaps majority) explanation for this is one of the other institutionalised defects in the Italian criminal justice system: judges* - particularly, it seems, in first-instance trials - appear to have an inherent bias to the prosecution case. I believe this partly harks back to the old inquisitorial system, where PMs were (and, IMO, still largely ARE) seen by first-instance judges as unbiassed "truth-seekers", and that therefore the PM's version of events is taken as the de facto "truth" of the matter unless/until the defence can actively disprove the PM's case. And (IMO) it also partly arises because PMs are members of the judiciary and are close colleagues of judges. This is a system which is set up for failure and unjust outcomes. The Knox/Sollecito trial before Massei manifestly lived up to expectations in this respect......


* Oh, and anyone who bleats something along the lines of "But there are only two actual judges and six lay "jurors" on the judicial panel trying the case, so the lay members are in the majority etc etc etc" has probably been smoking plenty of the type of herb that was lovingly home-cultivated by Kercher's boyfriend. The two judges control the views/verdicts of the six lay members in virtually all cases. That ought to be easy to understand to even the most stupid pro-guilt commentator, for reasons which should also be childishly easy to divine.

 

[LondonJohn]

I agree that Nadeau's statement regarding the "weak" defense is unsupported. Remember that Marasca-Bruno found that they should never have been convicted on the evidence presented at any of the preceding trials.

Uhhh...... Nadeau is, let's say, not quite up there on the Bernstein/Woodward/Hersh level of investigative journalism or intellectual rigour....

Any journalist with even an inkling of a) unfettered objectivity, b) commitment to truth and accuracy, c) intellectual reasoning skills, and d) commitment to truth over salacious clickbait-style journalism should easily have seen this case for what it was during the Massei trial. It was absolutely clear to anyone who possessed those attributes that the prosecution "case" was a toxic mess - and that at the very least, the required BARD hurdle for guilt was a huge way from being crossed. And therefore when the Massei "guilty" verdicts came in, there should have been immediate questions asked.

But, remember, every single one of the "journalists" covering this case/trial on an ongoing basis in Perugia was entirely in the pocket of Mignini: he clearly cultivated them deliberately by holding court with them regularly and drip-feeding them juicy bits of information (most of which turned out to be either gross distortions/exaggerations or flat-out falsehoods); and the "journalists" in turn were either too stupid to realise they were being played like fiddles, and/or they became addicted to the heady thrill of access to Mignini and the regular provision of authority-fed juicy tidbits for their reports.

 

[Stacyhs]

It's been a whole 3 weeks since his last e-book. Shouldn't Nick van der Leek et Cie have a new, researched in-depth crime novel out on Knox?

 

[Bill Williams]

It's been a whole 3 weeks since his last e-book. Shouldn't Nick van der Leek et Cie have a new, researched in-depth crime novel out on Knox?

Like us, Nick van der Leek is still waiting for the apology that Peter Quennell promised - one made to Mignini. A strange hoped-for promise to be sure, since Sollecito and Gumbel actually won.... or more properly, Mignini's defamation case and claims against them for what had been in Honor Boundhad been thrown out of court.

Mignini then withdrew his parallel civil suit.

But ever the optimist, Peter Quennell said that this had not really been a disaster for Mignini - Pete said that the next week would see an apology from Gumbel/Sollecito.

"Next wee" never came.

It's one less thing Nick van der Leek can cut and paste into his monthly e-books. He'd taken a break from the Kercher case to cut and paste one on the Peterson murder, where van der Leek solved the case!!!!!

 

[Stacyhs]

Like us, Nick van der Leek is still waiting for the apology that Peter Quennell promised - one made to Mignini. A strange hoped-for promise to be sure, since Sollecito and Gumbel actually won.... or more properly, Mignini's defamation case and claims against them for what had been in Honor Boundhad been thrown out of court.

Mignini then withdrew his parallel civil suit.

But ever the optimist, Peter Quennell said that this had not really been a disaster for Mignini - Pete said that the next week would see an apology from Gumbel/Sollecito.

"Next wee" never came.

It's one less thing Nick van der Leek can cut and paste into his monthly e-books. He'd taken a break from the Kercher case to cut and paste one on the Peterson murder, where van der Leek solved the case!!!!!

Oh, don't worry about that apology! It's coming. It's coming. Slick Pete has told us so and everything he's ever told us will happen has come to pass.

Regarding his solving the Peterson murder, it's a wonder he hasn't been snapped up by the South Africa Police Services.

 

[Stacyhs]

Poor Slick Pete. His campaign of hate is not having the results he wanted. Roanoke College has announced:

Truth Matters: A Conversation with Amanda Knox: Jan. 24th at 7:30pm

(LOCATION CHANGE TO OLIN THEATER - due to the popularity of this event)

https://www.roanoke.edu/events/amanda_knox_documentary …


Nothing much going right for the old gang over at TJMK. The only thing that has gone their way in the last 3 years is Raffaele being denied compensation. Other than that, they've done nothing but strike out. I'll see if I can muster up some sympathy....

Nope.

 

[Bill Williams]

Poor Slick Pete. His campaign of hate is not having the results he wanted. Roanoke College has announced:


https://www.roanoke.edu/events/amanda_knox_documentary …


Nothing much going right for the old gang over at TJMK. The only thing that has gone their way in the last 3 years is Raffaele being denied compensation. Other than that, they've done nothing but strike out. I'll see if I can muster up some sympathy....

Nope.

Truth matters to Roanoke, Quennell doesn't.

 

[Stacyhs]

This article about how the #metoo movement has pretty much failed in Italy helps explain the attitude there about Amanda Knox and Meredith Kercher.

Twenty-five-year-old Arianna Pavoncello believes that is because in Italy, "there is always this thought of the female who provokes, and so boys will be boys."

Feminist author Lorella Zanardo says Italians' double standard has roots in centuries of Catholic education.

"Either you are a good wife, a sort of saint," she says. Or "you behave very freely and you are considered not a very serious girl, let's say."

Italian conservatives are not alone in attacking the #MeToo movement. Many leftist intellectuals are convinced that it threatens sexual freedom.

Author Chiara Barzini says this leftist view reflects snobbery against America, a society many Italians see as puritanical and having a take-no-prisoners mindset.

https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2018/01/18/578562334/in-italy-metoo-falters-amid-public-scorn

This is the attitude that helped color Italians' view of the Kercher case:

1. Amanda = slut for daring to have a sex life outside a "boyfriend" relationship which makes sex acceptable
.
2. Meredith = saint who only had sex with a "boyfriend". No mention of her past sexual history was ever mentioned although she had one.

3. Amanda seduced RS with her foxy ways and manipulated him and Guede into killing Kercher in a sex game gone wrong.

4. RS and Guede were helpless against the foreign vixen "leader" and it was all her idea.

5. "Snobbery against America" influenced how Italians viewed Amanda.

 

[bagels]

TJMK: The Italian judicial system is corrupt, incompetent, dishonest! Read their report to see them directly contradict themselves!

Colleges/Law Schools: Yeah we know...that's why we invited AK....

 

[Stacyhs]

Whiney Slick Pete's latest on TJMK Front Page:

Breaking news. Hoaxers have apparently poisoned Roanoke College minds. So professional promoter of bigotry Amanda Knox will once again, in person and on film, make the same ******* crazy claims about Italy and Italians you can read below. Paid for without their consent from students' fees.

I'd say the college has a pretty good idea of who is making the ******* crazy claims...and it sure ain't the people not bombarding them with crazy emails whining about Knox speaking there.