The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 29

[Samson]

I think there are some similarities, the obvious difference from many other cases is there is no 'confession'. A similarity is the lack of forensic evidence. With modern forensic science, not just DNA but fibre analysis, the lack of evidence of the presence of the alleged assailant at the scene of the crime should cause some doubt about guilt. In addition once musical or literary tastes are included as evidence of a bad character then one thinks the prosecution are a bit desperate. On the other hand a boy friend killing a girlfriend is not uncommon, the idea of three minimally acquainted people entering into a murderous conspiracy as is alleged in the Kercher case is unusual.

I am not convinced of Mitchell's innocence; but I can understand that there may be questions.

Planigale,
It would be interesting to see a well constructed case for Luke Mitchell's guilt on that thread, I am not sure that there was any less of a confession than Knox. I never saw her "confession" in the vein of say Brendan Dassey, Jessie Miskelly or Teina Pora, all easy cases to get overviews of.
Pora claimed to witness a murder in pursuit of money, Dassey was royally led as redacting the police questions clearly shows, result he stated he witnessed specific acts. Jessie Miskelly did a Pora Dassey combo. In no way do I see anything similar happening with Knox.

 

[Rolfe]

I think there are some similarities, the obvious difference from many other cases is there is no 'confession'. A similarity is the lack of forensic evidence. With modern forensic science, not just DNA but fibre analysis, the lack of evidence of the presence of the alleged assailant at the scene of the crime should cause some doubt about guilt. In addition once musical or literary tastes are included as evidence of a bad character then one thinks the prosecution are a bit desperate. On the other hand a boy friend killing a girlfriend is not uncommon, the idea of three minimally acquainted people entering into a murderous conspiracy as is alleged in the Kercher case is unusual.

I am not convinced of Mitchell's innocence; but I can understand that there may be questions.

I think it's interesting that in both cases the Reid technique was used, and in one case they got a "confession" of sorts and in the other they didn't. Then look at the consequences. In the case of Knox that so-called confession was probably the main thing that led to her being jailed. In the case of Mitchell, when the outrageous police questioning was led as a ground of appeal the decision was, well he didn't confess so it didn't make any difference.

Heads they win, tails you lose.

On the other hand a boy friend killing a girlfriend is not uncommon...

This point would probably be better in the appropriate thread, but I was wondering about this. Sure, women being murdered by a current or former intimate partner is shockingly, appallingly, tragically common. (I'm actually taking part in a sponsored bicycle run next month to commemorate these victims.) However, at the age of fourteen? Child murderers usually go after random victims or people (often other children) they dislike, as far as I can see. I'm struggling to think of an intimate partner murder where the murderer was a child.

 

[Rolfe]

Planigale,
It would be interesting to see a well constructed case for Luke Mitchell's guilt on that thread, I am not sure that there was any less of a confession than Knox. I never saw her "confession" in the vein of say Brendan Dassey, Jessie Miskelly or Teina Pora, all easy cases to get overviews of.
Pora claimed to witness a murder in pursuit of money, Dassey was royally led as redacting the police questions clearly shows, result he stated he witnessed specific acts. Jessie Miskelly did a Pora Dassey combo. In no way do I see anything similar happening with Knox.

I think the requirement to be convinced of someone's innocence is a high bar to clear. There was no evidence against Mitchell so they just made something up. They decided his alibi was lying. If that's the standard for not being convinced someone is innocent then any one of us could be framed for just about anything.

The main similarity that strikes me with the Knox/Sollecito case is the immediate decision that the person who found the body was the murderer, then they sat back and waited for the forensics to confirm that with DNA evidence. Then when the DNA evidence came in with no trace of their suspect but DNA from someone else they were too far in to row back and pressed on with a manufactured case against the original suspect.

 

[TomG]

Ostrich?????

I guess that's a matter of opinion. I've been struck by many similarities. However, getting cocky about "it couldn't happen here" is ostrich territory. The system is different and we don't have inquisatorial prosecutors, so the prosecutors who are "at it" in respect of getting innocent people convicted work differently. But they do it, and the end result is the same.

I didn't say we don't have miscarriages of justice, so I resent the "ostrich" remark. I said "It's inconceivable that a court case such as the one we are discussing could exist in Scotland, simply because our national DNA and psyche is incapable of breeding and cultivating such a "bamstick" https://www.urbandictionary.com/defi...?term=bamstick as Mignini." IMO Mignini is a criminal in judicial robes, he was facing a jail term of 16 months for misconduct from a previous investigation, he terrorised the author Douglas Preston out of Italy, he slapped slander charges against anyone who dared criticize him, he was the orchestrator of the framing of two innocent people and the financial ruin of their families. It's inconceivable to me how any civilised country could accommodate this kind of judicial aberration but Italy did. Remember the petition from Rocco Girlanda and 11 other lawmakers who addressed the then Italian PM regarding the the way that Mignini had conducted the case, what happened to all that? Nah! Mignini and Italy are made of different stuff, it's beyond my cultural understanding.

Hoots

 

[Rolfe]

I dispute your interpretation. The legal system is different, therefore prosecutors who cobble together improbable and falsified cases against innocent people operate in different ways. It's not the national psyche that prevents Mignini clones operating, it's the adversarial system. We're just as capable of breeding and cultivating bamsticks as anywhere else.

I'm far more concerned by the far greater intransigence seen in Scottish courts of appeal. Turning round and saying yes we agree the lower court made a complete pig's ear of it all is practically unheard-of, especially in a high profile case where the police and the COPFS have been subject to heavy criticism. We're worse than bloody England in that respect. And as a corollary to that there's no chance at all of eleven (or even two) lawmakers making an official complaint that a prosecutor is a nutcase. They cover each other's arses.

 

[TomG]

I dispute your interpretation. The legal system is different, therefore prosecutors who cobble together improbable and falsified cases against innocent people operate in different ways. It's not the national psyche that prevents Mignini clones operating, it's the adversarial system. We're just as capable of breeding and cultivating bamsticks as anywhere else.

You said the legal system is different. OK maybe the Italian system is more able to accommodate and nurture such a character as Mignini and perhaps his politics too. Remember Judge Hellman saying when his 2011 acquittal was annulled, "I expected that the decision of the Supreme Court would be the annulment and a new trial. The influence [party] of the Prosecutors is very strong in the judiciary." Did you ever have a look at the discussion on Umbria TV https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbOjYpH1WdM&t=2918s ? Prosecutors Mignini and Comodi lament the fact that M/B's decision didn't go their way. The discussion also included writers and a lawyer involved in the case. The argument is exclusively pro-guilt with no pro-inncense representation. The result is that whopping great lies go unchallenged and go directly into the bloodstream of the watching public. This is the sort of thing I'm referring to. The bottom line is that Scotland has never had a case anything like the Kercher case and never had a national buffoon such as Mignini.

Hoots

 

[Samson]

You said the legal system is different. OK maybe the Italian system is more able to accommodate and nurture such a character as Mignini and perhaps his politics too. Remember Judge Hellman saying when his 2011 acquittal was annulled, "I expected that the decision of the Supreme Court would be the annulment and a new trial. The influence [party] of the Prosecutors is very strong in the judiciary." Did you ever have a look at the discussion on Umbria TV https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbOjYpH1WdM&t=2918s ? Prosecutors Mignini and Comodi lament the fact that M/B's decision didn't go their way. The discussion also included writers and a lawyer involved in the case. The argument is exclusively pro-guilt with no pro-inncense representation. The result is that whopping great lies go unchallenged and go directly into the bloodstream of the watching public. This is the sort of thing I'm referring to. The bottom line is that Scotland has never had a case anything like the Kercher case and never had a national buffoon such as Mignini.

Hoots

But looking at the cases the Scottish case is worse because it has resisted correcting by at least three courts, and is now uncorrectable without political intervention. How could you possibly say Mignini is worse?

The result is that whopping great lies go unchallenged and go directly into the bloodstream of the watching public. This is the sort of thing I'm referring to.

you write of Mignini and the Italians. I can show this quote to people who have worked tirelessly in New Zealand on the Lundy case for two decades and they will think you wrote it for that case! Unfortunately the most comparable Italian case for plumbing the obscene depths of the Bamber Mitchell and Lundy cases is the Sarah Scazzi murder. Knox and Sollecito won first division lotto in comparison.

 

[Rolfe]

Scotland doesn't have a national buffoon like Mignini because the legal system doesn't allow buffoons like Mignini to strut their stuff. This is true of many other legal systems also. In Scotland the prosecutors who are hell-bent on convicting the innocent simply work in a different way, a way that seems more cerebral and measured and so is less easily perceived by the public as being an outrage. Rather than being excoriated in public by their peers, people like Turnbull are made Lords and Senators of the College of Justice.

As Samson says, whopping great lies go uncorrected and work their way into the bloodstream of the public. Like Luke Mitchell was obsessed by the Black Dalhia murder and that he went straight to Jodi Jones's body without his dog doing anything to guide him. It's exactly the same thing as regards effect, even though the personalities and presentation are different.

And which system as a whole managed to correct the errors and which system has locked someone up in a maximum security prison for half his life and may never release him? The absence of a Mignini buffoon figure doesn't mean our system is better. It's arguably worse. A lot worse.

 

[Vixen]

Scotland doesn't have a national buffoon like Mignini because the legal system doesn't allow buffoons like Mignini to strut their stuff. This is true of many other legal systems also. In Scotland the prosecutors who are hell-bent on convicting the innocent simply work in a different way, a way that seems more cerebral and measured and so is less easily perceived by the public as being an outrage. Rather than being excoriated in public by their peers, people like Turnbull are made Lords and Senators of the College of Justice.

As Samson says, whopping great lies go uncorrected and work their way into the bloodstream of the public. Like Luke Mitchell was obsessed by the Black Dalhia murder and that he went straight to Jodi Jones's body without his dog doing anything to guide him. It's exactly the same thing as regards effect, even though the personalities and presentation are different.

And which system as a whole managed to correct the errors and which system has locked someone up in a maximum security prison for half his life and may never release him? The absence of a Mignini buffoon figure doesn't mean our system is better. It's arguably worse. A lot worse.

What dreadful gibberish. Mignini was only the prosecutor for the first merits court. It was Crini and Commodi who took over at the appeals.

Oh don't tell me: 'all Italian prosecutors are in a conspiracy to frame Amanda Knox'.

 

[Samson]

What dreadful gibberish. Mignini was only the prosecutor for the first merits court. It was Crini and Commodi who took over at the appeals.

Oh don't tell me: 'all Italian prosecutors are in a conspiracy to frame Amanda Knox'.

Sollecito was framed with the bra clasp, Knox was only implicated with the starch fragment on the knife that could have been anything before it was consumed in testing. That is my understanding. Mignini persisted doing interviews to help his home supporters misunderstand the case.

 

[Vixen]

Sollecito was framed with the bra clasp, Knox was only implicated with the starch fragment on the knife that could have been anything before it was consumed in testing. That is my understanding. Mignini persisted doing interviews to help his home supporters misunderstand the case.

Absolute and utter nonsense. It is the court who decides matters. A prosecutor has to present a case that demonstrates to a residing judge just and probable cause to hold a suspect on remand, in the case of judge Matteini, who is responsible for remanding the pair, who were not even charged until some eight months later.

A prosecutor has to produce solid evidence that the suspicions are sound and justified.

The nutter-PIP claims that Mignini 'fixed' it for reasons best known to himself, which would ipso facto includes hundreds of detectives, police - of all grades - the Carabinieri (the military arm) and the whole department of forensic scientists in on a sinister conspiracy to frame a loony American woman and a reputable Italian doctor's son. Gosh, Mignini mut be a genius to manage all of that. He must have hypnotist skills. It's a shame he was never exposed and jailed.

 

[Bill Williams]

The nutter-PIP claims that Mignini 'fixed' it for reasons best known to himself, which would ipso facto includes hundreds of detectives, police - of all grades - the Carabinieri (the military arm) and the whole department of forensic scientists in on a sinister conspiracy to frame a loony American woman and a reputable Italian doctor's son. Gosh, Mignini mut be a genius to manage all of that. He must have hypnotist skills. It's a shame he was never exposed and jailed.

Yawn. Yet another post claiming that wrongful convictions never happen. Would it do any good to post, yet again, the myriad of studies which show HOW wrongful convictions happen?

Probably not.

Back to lurking.

 

[AnimalFriendly]

which would ipso facto includes hundreds of detectives, police - of all grades - the Carabinieri (the military arm) and the whole department of forensic scientists in on a sinister conspiracy to frame a loony American woman and a reputable Italian doctor's son.

The guilter lunatics have no problem believing that the U.S. State Dept., the Mafia, etc., etc. cared enough to intervene with Italy's Supreme Court such that the latter acquitted this "loony American woman" and "reputable Italian doctor's son". Largely because said lunatics are emotional cripples who never grew up and learned to admit when they were wrong.

It's a shame he was never exposed and jailed.

He's been exposed alright but, yes, it's a disgrace that he's not sitting in a jail cell right now.

 

[Bill Williams]

He's been exposed alright but, yes, it's a disgrace that he's not sitting in a jail cell right now.

What other lurkers may not know, is that Mignini himself took part in the 2009 trial while he himself was facing charges of abuse of office. He was later cleared of these charged on the grounds that the court in question had no jurisdiction.

Mignini was also formally censured by his own prosecutor's association for misconduct in the Sollecito/Knox prosecutions. He also sued Gumbel and Sollecito for claims in the book "Honor Bound", as well as took part in the parallel criminal action. Both actions were eventually dropped.

Each time Mignini launched a predatory, parallel action - like against the West Seattle Herald as well as Knox's parents - he exposed himself for his conduct.

 

[Vixen]

What other lurkers may not know, is that Mignini himself took part in the 2009 trial while he himself was facing charges of abuse of office. He was later cleared of these charged on the grounds that the court in question had no jurisdiction.

Mignini was also formally censured by his own prosecutor's association for misconduct in the Sollecito/Knox prosecutions. He also sued Gumbel and Sollecito for claims in the book "Honor Bound", as well as took part in the parallel criminal action. Both actions were eventually dropped.

Each time Mignini launched a predatory, parallel action - like against the West Seattle Herald as well as Knox's parents - he exposed himself for his conduct.

In Italy it is illegal to libel the police and the justice system. This was a law brought in to control the nefarious activities of the mafia, one of whose favourite tactics was to do just that.


Edda's and Curt's PR campaign to blacken the name of the Italians was not only contemptible and self-serving but also amounted to breaking Italian law.

A prosecutor has no choice but to prosecute whenever the law is broken. That is the job description of a prosecutor.

 

[bagels]

Edda's and Curt's PR campaign to blacken the name of the Italians was not only contemptible and self-serving but also amounted to breaking Italian law.

Didn't they say there were abuses in the unrecorded middle of the night interrogation? They weren't the only ones that said that either. I seem to recall some other relevant entity mentioning it. Some minor entity maybe, I forget, a court or some such. Maybe an international one, trying to put my finger on i.....oh yeah the European Court of Human Rights.

Is there any argument you make that isn't really stupid?

 

[Bill Williams]

Edda's and Curt's PR campaign to blacken the name of the Italians was not only contemptible and self-serving but also amounted to breaking Italian law.

A prosecutor has no choice but to prosecute whenever the law is broken. That is the job description of a prosecutor.

Lol! One more trip around this merry-go-round!

Edda and Curt were quoted by John Follain in the Sunday times, "Amanda says she was hit at interrogation."

You're quite correct, a PM's job is to investigate all allegations of crime. It is a crime to hit someone at interrogation.

Did Mignini investigate that? No.

Did Mignini charge either John Follain or the Sunday times? No. John Follain wrote stuff for the British press favourable to Mignini, so even though Follain was the publisher of the libel, Mignini chose not to prosecute. You say it was mandatory that he do so.

Did Mignini get the quote wrong? No one knows, Mignini never investigated. Mignini never pursued this past his charging them with a crime. Mignini was serving notice, "fool with me and you'll never see your daughter again."

People who give cover to Mignini on internet forums always leave out the part that the charges lapsed. Why? Because Mignini had never intended to carry through.

But thanks for bringing this to the fore, for one more reminder of Mignini's actions. Give it six months - you'll be claiming the same factoid again.....

Back to lurking.

 

[Numbers]

What other lurkers may not know, is that Mignini himself took part in the 2009 trial while he himself was facing charges of abuse of office. He was later cleared of these charged on the grounds that the court in question had no jurisdiction. Mignini was also formally censured by his own prosecutor's association for misconduct in the Sollecito/Knox prosecutions. He also sued Gumbel and Sollecito for claims in the book "Honor Bound", as well as took part in the parallel criminal action. Both actions were eventually dropped.

Each time Mignini launched a predatory, parallel action - like against the West Seattle Herald as well as Knox's parents - he exposed himself for his conduct.

I had thought that the charges against Mignini were dropped because the statute of limitations for the charges (abuse of power) against him had passed. This is apparently not unusual in Italy, especially when office-holders are on trial.

While in the US the statute of limitations only limits when a person may be charged, in Italy it limits both when a person may be charged and when the trial must end. And of course, in Italy, trials take a very long time.

The particular issue with Mignini's trial for abuse of power in Florence, if I recall correctly, was that one or more judges attached to the Florence judiciary were among the persons he had allegedly wrongfully accused or whose rights he had otherwise abused. The incredibly competent Italian judicial authorities only recognized this conflict of interest when the trial before a Florence tribunal was nearly over, thus assuring that the charges against Mignini would be dismissed due to the statute of limitations running out.

If I am in error in any of this, please provide corrections with citations. (And, yes, I have left out any citations for this post.)

 

[Stacyhs]

Mignini used lawsuits, or the threat of lawsuits, as an intimidation tactic.

The Committee to Protect Journalists, an independent, nonpartisan organization dedicated to defending the rights of journalists worldwide, is deeply concerned about local authorities' harassment of journalists and media outlets who criticize the official investigation into the November 2007 brutal murder of British exchange student Meredith Kercher in the central Italian city of Perugia. CPJ is particularly troubled by the manifest intolerance to criticism displayed by Perugia Public Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini, who has filed or threatened to file criminal lawsuits against individual reporters, writers, and press outlets, both in Italy and the United States, in connection with the Kercher murder investigation as well as the investigation into the Monster of Florence serial killings.

https://cpj.org/2011/04/journalists-threatened-for-reporting-on-murder-cas.php

But I'm sure the CPJ is 'bent' and controlled by the mafia, Masons, and/or Illuminati.

 

[Numbers]

I had thought that the charges against Mignini were dropped because the statute of limitations for the charges (abuse of power) against him had passed. This is apparently not unusual in Italy, especially when office-holders are on trial.

While in the US the statute of limitations only limits when a person may be charged, in Italy it limits both when a person may be charged and when the trial must end. And of course, in Italy, trials take a very long time.

The particular issue with Mignini's trial for abuse of power in Florence, if I recall correctly, was that one or more judges attached to the Florence judiciary were among the persons he had allegedly wrongfully accused or whose rights he had otherwise abused. The incredibly competent Italian judicial authorities only recognized this conflict of interest when the trial before a Florence tribunal was nearly over, thus assuring that the charges against Mignini would be dismissed due to the statute of limitations running out.

If I am in error in any of this, please provide corrections with citations. (And, yes, I have left out any citations for this post.)

So here's an account of the relevant court actions from Wikipedia (reference citations numbers omitted for clarity):

In 2006, a Florence prosecutor, Luca Turco, in return charged Mignini and the head of the Florence Mobile Squad, Michele Giuttari (the department which had provided Mignini with the recording) with a number of counts, including the alleged fabrication of a false audio recording, plus a number of counts of abuse of office for allegedly ordering the illegal wiretapping of the phones of various police officers and journalists involved in the Monster of Florence case. Some newspapers called the escalation a "prosecution office war". Florence prosecution accused Mignini of carrying on a "parallel investigation" in order to cover up for Giuttari's alleged fabrication of a false recording of Canessa's conversation, and ordered a police raid of his office. Perugian newspapers alleged that in fact Florence ordered the raid in the Perugian office in order to put their hands on the Narducci - Monster of Florence file.

The Florence Prosecution office accused Mignini of taking part in forging a fake audio recording, of abusing his powers as he investigated the head of Florentine police Giuseppe De Donno, and for having wiretapped phone calls of three journalists and two police officers, allegedly for unjustified reasons. Mignini objected that the Florence Magistrates had no jurisdiction on him because of their office's conflict of interest and requested that the investigation be moved to Turin. Preliminary judge Dania Mori turned down his request. In January 2010, a Florence court chaired by judge Francesco Maradei acquitted him of the first three counts of fabricating fake evidence, as Mignini and Giuttari managed to prove that the audio recording was authentic, but found him guilty of the remaining four counts of exceeding the powers of his office. He was given a 16-month suspended sentence. Mignini appealed the conviction, saying "My conscience is clear, I know I did nothing wrong." He remained in office through the appeal process, as Italian law does not consider convictions final until all appeals are exhausted, but delayed taking a post at the Procura Generale where he had been already appointed. According to Rome-based journalist and author Barbie Latza Nadeau, even if Mignini were convicted, offenses such as this are rarely grounds for removing a prosecutor from office.

In November 2011, a Court of Appeals accepted his preliminary objection and annulled the previous conviction, also declaring the prosecution by Florentine magistrates illegitimate - since some of the Florence prosecutors were also the offended parties - and sent the investigation file to a prosecutor in Turin. The Prosecution General of Florence appealed against the decision at the Supreme Court, so factually blocking the transfer to Turin for at least another year. In February 2013 the Florence office lost their appeal and the Supreme Court ordered the investigation be moved to Turin. Mignini said "It took me 7 years to be right". In 2016, the court of Turin dropped the remaining charges due to statutory terms expiration.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuliano_Mignini